Interview With TSA Screener Reveals 'Fatal Flaws' 582
OverTheGeicoE writes "Jonathan Corbett, creator of the video showing that TSA's body scanners can't see metal objects on our sides, has a new video out. This time he's interviewing an experienced TSA screener identified only as 'Jennifer,' and her allegations point to 'fatal flaws' in TSA and its procedures. Worse, TSA's screeners are well aware of these flaws. According to Jennifer, body scanners frequently fail to detect objects on passengers, and this flaw is well known to the screeners on the job. People with visible items in their pockets can pass through scanners without detection, even when the items are simulated weapons or explosives. Jennifer also alleges that training for screeners is severely lacking. Screeners are directed to operate body scanners, even the X-ray scanners, without any training whatsoever. The manual of standard operating procedures often can't be found at the checkpoints, let alone read. Jennifer was so alarmed by what she experienced that she wrote her congressional representative to complain. She was ultimately fired as a result, effective yesterday."
Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
How come people in the US can get fired for reasons other than incompetence or stealing? Why can a person get fired simply by raising an issue? I never hear about this here in Europe. It's in fact very difficult to fire a person here if he is a good worker.
She's missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the USA is run by Big Business, who can give unlimited money to candidates for office. You can be fired here for no stated reason at all.
Re:Standard security (Score:5, Insightful)
You'll find that's true of pretty much any job that combines low pay with repetitive or tedious work. If there's no incentive to do a good job, then most people won't bother. This was one of the big issues with communism.
A bad interview from a bad source (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, I dislike the TSA as much as anybody, and I've complained about it to my representatives, and I hope it dies as quickly as possible, but everything about this story annoys me.
A guy with an obvious bias against an entity interviews a recently-fired employee, and uncovers terrible details about that entity! Oh no! Who could have guessed?
The ex-employee's letter to Congress was the reason she got fired - in a time span of one week. Right. I'm sure the Congressman has their interns sorting mail, looking for disgruntled employees, notifying the appropriate chain of supervisors, and working hard to get people fired - and they can get that done in under a week.
No SOP manual? Hey, at least you know one's been written somewhere. You could ask your supervisor, or move up the chain to their supervisor, and so on, until you find out where you can get one. There's no sign that that was attempted, just an "I don't know where it was" statement.
As much as I want to see the TSA dismantled, this interview isn't going to help. It sounds like a muckraker interviewing someone incapable of navigating office politics, who's skirting the system because she got fired, looking to become a martyr for self-justification. This isn't journalism.
"Jennifer" (Score:5, Insightful)
inb4 "Jennifer" is identified and prosecuted under the espionage act for blowing the whistle on national security matters that are to dangerous for us to know.
And depending on how we feel, throw Corbett in there too. At least ruin his life for daring to criticize authority.
Disclaimer: There would be a time where this joke would be obvious.
No flights for you! (Score:4, Insightful)
So in this case where the government behaves (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
I prefer the government treat me as an adult.
It's not a matter of children vs. adults; it's a matter of individuals vs. employers, which sometimes are large corporations. Do you really think there can be a fair discussion between an employee and their employer? Do you really think the employer won't exploit the employee, particularly in times of high unemployment?
If your system is so great, how come it leads to so much social inequality?
Adults or not, there are still bullies in the world, and letting them go unchecked will only lead to trouble.
Re:She's missing the point (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:2, Insightful)
Because the US is a liberal federation as opposed to the leftist welfare states of Europe. Both systems have their ups and downs.
Re:Firing in US (Score:3, Insightful)
When a businessman cannot hide behind a legal fiction to protect him from liability in tort and for debts, he is being treated like an "adult".
When the law does not arbitrarily assign monopolies on natural resources, ideas and expressions to particular men and then give them men in uniforms to protect these things, then they are being treated like "adults".
This is different from most countries in Europe, where the law basically assumes that the employer-employee is in a exploitative relationship with the employer exploiting the employee.
That's reality. Either it's a worker cooperative or, by definition, the employee is being exploited. Not saying whether it's right or wrong, functional or dysfunctional, just how it is.
dumb-ass, no-brains child that needs to be protected against cruel and terrible employers
No, it's just a compromise. The employer gets to exploit you, but only under certain terms. No matter how childishly and emotionally you want to misrepresent how the democratic process works, you're still wrong.
France is an example, have laws that are literally insane, where employers can basically not fire anybody for any reason whatsoever.
No, but carry on making a fool of yourself.
The European system is a major contributor to the current problems in Europe
As someone who regularly bounces between Europe and America, Europe has been and continues to be the better choice for living. It's not that the US isn't full of wonderful people - it's just that it's firmly controlled by cunts and the experience reflects it. You know this, otherwise you'd be in America.
innovation, development and other important functions haven't worked in Europe since before WWII
What?
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Tell me that next time you're arrested for crossing a perfectly ordinary road (even with zero traffic on it), or "failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign", or any of a thousand and one ridiculous notions of what adults shouldn't be allowed to do.
The US is really no better or worse than Europe. The biggest problem with the US is that they DON'T REALISE THIS.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a government job. If it was private sector, there's whistleblower laws and the likes to make employers at least try to find another excuse to fire people.
AFAIK, "Whistleblower" laws apply to government jobs, and ESPECIALLY government contractor jobs, like most of the TSA worker jobs.
This person has a pretty good lawsuit against the fuckface contractor she worked for, employment-at-will or not.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, I'd say the US has a pretty massive deficiency compared to the Europe - we have socialized healthcare, they have inhumanity.
Fired for writing to her congressman? (Score:5, Insightful)
Could this actually be unrelated? I'd be more readily convinced that the sick leave was related. This would be a problem in itself perhaps but not a security problem.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Because the US is (mostly, there are obvious and absurd exceptions) governed in a way that assumes consenting adults can engage in mutually beneficial relationships without a nanny telling them what to do as if they were five year old children. In Europe most laws are written to the point where they assume the ordinary citizenry are mentally handicapped five year olds that needs to be monitored, watched and told what to do at all times by responsible adults.
I prefer the government treat me as an adult.
Are nanny analogies now the new car analogies on Slashdot?
Anyways, here's what's wrong with that picture:
Let's ignore the massive differential in power between a corporation/employer and an employee for a second and accept for the sake of argument that your assumption of both parties being consenting adults is valid. Of both parties in this case, only one acted responsibly, and that is the employee. The TSA chose to throw a tantrum worthy of a five year old and go "Lalala, I can't hear you!". At that point, I'd like to have a mechanism in place to make both parties behave responsibly. And that, pretty much, is the definition of a law (to lay down what "responsible behavior" is) and this subsequently implies it must be enforced by an impartial entity (judge, jury, whatever is customary in your local law system).
Isn't that the way it's supposed to work even in the USA? Why is everybody so afraid of laws and regulations when time and time again experience shows that especially those with a lot of power act like 5-year-olds any time they can get away with it?
Re:Firing in US (Score:2, Insightful)
If I hire a programmer at 60K per year, you can be certain that he's worth 75K to me, and I get to keep the 15K per year per programmer - I have enough of them that I can afford a pointy haired boss to keep them all going in the same general direction and still pocket a nice sum at the end of the year.
Welcome to profitable business, where is it any different? There may be differences in title, but nothing else.
Re:She's missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in other words. The terrorists were more successful than they ever could have dreamed.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
no, that's not what life is about. i pity you for not understanding that.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the USA is run by Big Business
Nope. Because the US is (mostly, there are obvious and absurd exceptions) governed in a way that assumes consenting adults can engage in mutually beneficial relationships without a nanny telling them what to do as if they were five year old children. In Europe most laws are written to the point where they assume the ordinary citizenry are mentally handicapped five year olds that needs to be monitored, watched and told what to do at all times by responsible adults.
I prefer the government treat me as an adult.
This ignores the fact that most people are powerless against their employers. That is why laws exist in Europe. There used to be laws like that in the US too, but they have changed over time.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
This is different from most countries in Europe, where the law basically assumes that the employer-employee is in a exploitative relationship with the employer exploiting the employee.
Or, in other words, like the way it really is...
I am with you that some laws in Europe are pretty silly (and, BTW, Europe certainly isn't alone in that regard. All one has to do is examine U.S. drug policy for some real knee-slappers); and that some of the European employee-protection law go a little far; but "employment at will", which ignores the inherent inequity of the employer-employee relationship, is certainly not grounded in "reality" or "adulthood" or even that illusory "freedom" we Americans used to be so proud of, either...
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, who could forget when hundreds of thousands of professionals, all wearing their big-boy pants, marched on Washington and demanded the right to be fired for no reason. Corporate bigwigs, reluctant to let their little darlings flee the coop, were nevertheless powerless to stop this people-powered onslaught, and they shed a collective tear as they realized that the American Worker was all grown up now and ready to go out and start making minimum wage.
The minimum wage is next! Power to the grown-ups!
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Explain to me where "Jennifer" was obviously fired because she wasn't pulling her weight. She raised important flaws within the organisation which could consiquently be resolved. That sounds pretty fucking valuable to me.
Seen it first hand... (Score:5, Insightful)
Security theatre? You bet. We need to do this like the Israelis do; they catch this kind of stuff in the parking lot before the culprits even get IN the terminal. But then again, they don't have the added burden of politcally correct calls against "racial profiling". But they also don't have long security lines...OR any security scares in their airports.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, nice. Latching on to the one thing I've neglected for the sake of argument, and for that sake only. Thanks for biting.
This is where the power differential kicks in. Your relationship with your employer is not symmetric. The potential impact on the employer is much lower than on the employee. That's why you need an impartial arbiter or a union (yeah, I know, good luck with that...)
And since you mention the word "friend" here, let me say that you'd be a pretty crappy friend who dumps someone you care about without trying to help him first, which is exactly what the agent tried to do in this case. Also, in this case, this is not only a matter between the employer and employee, because the safety of a third party is affected. As such, it becomes a matter of public safety and an ethical issue. Responsibility also means not just walking away from a bad situation.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:She's missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you read that Obama is pushing a law to allow the IRS to restrict people from leaving the US if they suspect that they might owe taxes? There would be no need to actually accuse the person of owing taxes, or even going before a judge to show documentation for that suspicion, just the IRS saying that they suspect that this person owes back taxes.
Re:Firing in US (Score:3, Insightful)
Indivuduals that are profitable to retain are retained, those that aren't are not - that's what business (and life) is about. This isn't about exploitation - if you think that any company is going to pay you 100 units of currency a day when they only scrape 50 off of your back, you are mistaken. If I hire a programmer at 60K per year, you can be certain that he's worth 75K to me, and I get to keep the 15K per year per programmer - I have enough of them that I can afford a pointy haired boss to keep them all going in the same general direction and still pocket a nice sum at the end of the year. Welcome to profitable business, where is it any different? There may be differences in title, but nothing else.
And thus we are reduced to "human resources". So you think paying someone worth $75k $60k isn't exploitation? It seems in Europe people believe the government has a place in encouraging a society that is dignified and equitable for the public at large. In America your worth and place in society is based on your value to someone else.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
An alternate interpretation here: Europeans understand that the relationship between an employer and employee are inherently unequal. An employer without a particular worker can usually get along just fine for a while until a replacement is found. A worker without a particular job can often last only a few weeks without a paycheck. While a worker is working for an employer, they have to follow orders from the employer or expect to be fired.
Some of the effects of that relationship in the US:
* In any area with "at-will" employment (like most of the US) people regularly go in for work and discover they no longer have a job, while there's still an expectation that employees give at least 2 weeks notice before leaving a position.
* Employees are willing to put up with pay cuts, wage theft, unpaid overtime, workplace violence, sexual harassment, and other illegal activities by employers.
* Unions are a non-factor in most sectors of the economy, in large part because those trying to form unions tend to get fired. The employer will come up with alleged unrelated reasons for the firing to get around the labor laws that specifically say you can't do that.
* If you are fired, you're eligible for public assistance in the form of unemployment insurance, but if you quit, you are not.
If you're somebody who (like me) has a high-paying white-collar job and a couple years' expenses in the bank, it's much easier to stand up to your employer and treat it as a relationship between equals, because you can in fact leave when you want to with reasonable certainty that you'll be OK until you find another job. If you're like a majority of Americans and living on 0 or negative savings, then it's basically impossible to do so.
Re:Land of the free (Score:4, Insightful)
I take it you've never been to Bush International Airport in Houston. Over the speakers they actually threaten arrest to anyone who criticizes or makes a joke about security.
Of course, we were so floored by that that we were making jokes about it until we left (as that's human nature for totally bizarre situations), but still. I'm saddened that whoever made that decision hasn't had a massive judicial slap down yet.
Re:Firing in US (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So in this case where the government behaves (Score:3, Insightful)
The people. That is why the US has the second amendment.
Re:Firing in US (Score:3, Insightful)
AC: First - I don't know anything about Jenny, didn't even read the article, I was replying to a specific anti-business thread. However, if one of my employees were to go to the newspapers or TV and complain about how I do business before discussing it with me, he'd be impacting my business in a negative way and get canned - it's in the contract.
evilRhino: I'm not a programmer, but I need programming done to advance the product I sell, the PHB is an intermediary that keeps them on point and me informed - I have the time to seek out more work for everyone and so everyone gets something - how many really competent programmers have you met that also excel at sales?
Re:Personal experience with new scanners - crappy (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel safer because I know that if some asshole stands up with a knife he's going to get stomped to death by a dozen or so passengers. The TSA isn't one tenth as effective as an aircraft full of people who think they're all about to die.
Re:Firing in US (Score:3, Insightful)
And as usual in these situations, the ideological battle lines are drawn, yet the most ideal solution lies somewhere on that patch in the middle, obscured by smoke and impact debris.
The US solution places all the power in the hands of the employer, making employees little more than bitches, with the exception of those who are truly unique and gifted and can't be done without.
In the EU, depending on the country, it is extremely difficult to get rid of useless jackasses, hence demoralizing the other folks working there and making employer more and more hesitant about offering long-term contracts.
There is a balance somewhere between the extremes, where both parties get what they want out of the deal without screwing over the entire system. When either employers or unions get to run rampant, the balance breaks, and everyone is worse off.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
You are entirely out to lunch. Private medical insurance agencies have the JOB of protecting their bottom line OVER TOP of any motivation to protect your health. You are often disqualified for insane reasons and still end up paying out of pocket to be reimbursed later.
How's your car insurance agency treat you when you have a claim? The Health Insurers in the US run by the same playbook. Don't try to paint roses over a cemetery.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
So, it's easy to get rid of the TSA?
Sweet! Tell us all how!
Re:She's missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in other words. The terrorists were more successful than they ever could have dreamed.
Yes, and the terrorists aren't even who we've been told they are.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
You're being as hyperbolic as the GP is. The reality is somewhere in the middle. Most American's get pretty good health care and they pay a lot of money for it.
IMHO, the biggest problem with the system is the number of uninsured people. I think that kids especially should be guaranteed access to health care. I would enthusiastically support any politician that proposed a single-payer health care similar to but better than Canada's.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Explain to me where "Jennifer" was obviously fired because she wasn't pulling her weight. She raised important flaws within the organisation which could consiquently be resolved. That sounds pretty fucking valuable to me.
... and this is where the argument for the free market breaks down. That is massively valuable, but a stupid boss won't see that. Pure free market business can work efficiently only with the assumption that people are well informed and make intelligent decisions. Many to most aren't and don't. This is why many business do many inefficient and unprofitable things. Sometimes they support this by legislating out competition, or bullying (patent trolling e.g.), or sometimes there just isn't an efficient competitor (finite people and resources). It is amazing that the myth of free market caught the religious fervour of anyone ...
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
If an employer was loading guns at random, and paying you to point them at people and pull the trigger, could you just walk away? Or would you feel a responsibility to stop them?
That is what happened in this case. The TSA is NOT making sure everyone who goes onto a plane is not a terrorist, resulting in plane-guns that are randomly loaded, or not, with terrorists.
You want to just walk away and ignore the situation entirely.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
To be fair, Germany is making Greece fire people because Greece went just a little too far in the bread and circuses department and thought they could borrow their way to happiness. Now the Greeks are upset because their life has been radically altered, but was there any situation where that could have continued indefinitely?
Look, if you have the economy to support the massive jobs and social programs, and have a long term plan to deal with economic issues, go for it. If you don't, just say "no". Really. The thought behind it was a nice one, but really, do the math. Good times are usually followed by bad time in a cyclical way. The best things you can do, over all, are invest during the good times so that the bad times aren't has bad as they could be. If you are lucky, you even advance society that way.
As for the actual firing in the article, this is concerning, not because the screener was fired, but because she worked for a government agency and got fired, after happening to be a a whistleblower.
Of course, just because she's a whistleblower, doesn't mean she's a good employee. However, I'd say an automatic investigation is warranted to see what really happened. Big Business may, or may not be able to do certain things, but this isn't Big Business, it's the government. That means a lot of stuff should be applying to it that doesn't apply to the private sector.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Because the US is (mostly, there are obvious and absurd exceptions) governed in a way that assumes consenting adults can engage in mutually beneficial relationships without a nanny telling them what to do as if they were five year old children. In Europe most laws are written to the point where they assume the ordinary citizenry are mentally handicapped five year olds that needs to be monitored, watched and told what to do at all times by responsible adults.
I prefer the government treat me as an adult.
That's funny, because I have found the opposite. Moving from the US to Europe for me meant no more silly laws about wearing bike helmets, picking up dog poo, drinking in public, smoking pot, constantly having to show my ID for not having quite enough grey in my beard... Where I live, they have this concept of "personal responsibility" and have no need for stupid laws about what time you can go to a public park. Oh, and traffic laws? Those are more like suggestions; no macho asshole cop pulling you over for an "illegal lane change" and then searching your car for the fun of it. In fact, for just about anything short of a violent crime, the police treat you like a rational adult and politely ask you not to do it again... They have a phrase for that... Oh, "the benefit of the doubt," but that is clearly because mentally handicapped five year olds are always acting in good faith. However, unlike the parents of small children, who can lay down arbitrary laws like "bed time," employers here can't fire you without cause. (But they can still lay you off to save money.)
Maybe you just lived in a European country populated by mentally handicapped five year olds? Was it Belgium? That would explain why everyone makes fun of them.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
But it's not an open market in this case, it's a monopoly where the vendors (various security contracting organizations) and the customers (elected officials) are basically a single group using the public's money. The objective of this group is to get as much money as they can while still giving a reasonable appearance of providing a service to the public. This particular employee tried to interfere with this relationship.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not what *LIFE* is about... but it is what *BUSINESS* is about.
... and going back to the story, you are now less safe flying in the US as a result. See why only thinking about profit gives you me, and everyone a bad outcome now?
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Everything you said was false. US is ranked 38th in the world in healthcare. The ER is not socialized medicine. You get a bill. Our expensive healthcare goes to the pockets of rich people, its not an efficient or an ethical system. The drug companies exploit the American consumer on drug prices, we don't subsidize anything. The for profit system makes sure we pay the most the market will bear. The socialized system negotiates prices with drug companies. Stop making shit up.
oh for some mod points. I can only believe that those who didn't want it to be true modded this down. I'd suggest it is simpler - if you take profit from health, it costs more, and some priorities are taken from just health. Capital markets aren't more efficient, but they sure can pay for generations of advertising to claim it.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
No she didn't. She raised flaws that are directly opposed to the TSA revenue model. The TSA gets no benefit from operating well. It gets funded by lobbying and generating fear.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, I love the ignorance of dumb Europeans. They (should be "we" since I live in Europe) think that our health care system is great and that the one in the US is really, really bad. Here is some interesting news for you: The US has, by a very significant margin, the best health care system in the world if you can afford it.
Europeans thinks that because in the US one needs insurance, that people without will not get treatment. That is not true. A hospital that received a sick patent in an ER is required to treat that patient, insurance or not and then dump them in the street with no follow-up care. ERs in the US equals socialized health care except that an ambulance ride alone will set you back $1,500, it is just that nobody, Dem or Republican, will admit to that. Will they get the very best treatment, no, but they will get significantly less treatment than a European on a waiting list for an operation that may or may not come before he dies, but of course that rarely happens, just as American surgeons rarely amputate the wrong limb.
In the US, if you have insurance, which the vast majority of the employed US population actually does have, the treatment you will get is significantly better than in any country in the world, unless you're poor. This--and the enormous profits of private health insurance companies--is a major reason that the US spends significantly more per person in health care than any other country. Well, that and the absurd amount of malpractice insurance American docs need to defend against frivolous lawsuits and ambulance chasers.
Also, and very importantly, US citizens, through taxes and insurance, sponsors to a great degree health care in Europe. They do this by paying for medications developed by US companies in full, not at cut-rate prices, because European pharmaceutical companies are too busy working on cancer therapies to cure restless leg syndrome. In this way, the people in the US pays for development and testing, and advertising of often over-prescribed drugs that Europeans get access to. Europe is hardly in the forefront of perfunctory pharmaceutical development and outright abuse of patent laws to keep generics off the market.
FTFY
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
The reason the people in the US hate regulation is because it is imposed by a government at a level that people in Europe only come into contact when they start dealing with the EU as a whole.
Let's be clear, government closer to the local level is government that will generally work better. What Europeans don't understand is that the vaunted regulations and policies that they have are created by governments that are the size of a mid to large sized US state government. Even the EU apparatus has almost nothing on the monstrosity that which is the US Federal Government.
When people in the US are talking about the election to the presidency, they're talking about a level of government that Europe would have last seen under Caesar Augustus, or maybe Napoleon or Hitler. What states rights activists want is actually more locally responsible government that has a better chance at creating workable laws and programs... like in Europe.
I keep hearing about the great socialized medicine in countries that have a fifth or less of the population of the US. Sure it works better... its probably not snowed under with rampant bureaucracy and power brokers three steps removed from their constituents.
If there is one thing I hear Europeans bitch about consistently, it is certain EU regulations. If you want to compare the EU to the US, adopt a modern version of the US constitution and subordinate your countries to become constituent states of a very powerful federal EU government. Give it 50 years for the idealists to die off and then let's talk about why socialized medicine on a federal level is a scary prospect.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
He didn't say pulling their weight, he said profitable. It's not profitable to have the procedures manual at every TSA station. It's also not profitable to actually train the employees. "Jennifer" was being unprofitable by going to her congressman to ensure the TSA did these things.
As a side note, I do not agree with this outlook, just can understand it from a business perspective.
*CAPTCHA: untested
Ya. The TSA's "profit" is their funding from Congress. The employee was questioning the effectiveness of the organization, and thus jeopardizing its profits.
Congress wants the TSA to make Americans feel safe-ish without spending too much, that's their motivation, to look like they're doing a good enough job to get re-elected.
The US people might profit the most from the TSA if the organization protected life and property at a reasonable cost, but most people wouldn't understand this concept, so they settle for the illusion of "safety".
So that brings us right back to the problem of someone who breaks the illusion. The solution, as seen by the parties involved, is to get rid of the person pulling away the curtain.
Re:Firing in US (Score:5, Insightful)
Regulation is likewise seen as a means for the government to stifle business or innovation. As the banking industry indicates, the regulations were in place for the good of society as a whole.
Both unions and regulation are necessary to keep capitalism in check. I am not a socialist, but 'pure' capitalism produces the inequality you speak of. As long as my government lets me unionize and properly regulates business, you can have your social equality, all without being treated like a child.
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
Horse$#!t.
Go spend some time in Europe. My experience in Germany and Austria has been that that the government produces regulations that assume you can make your own decisions and be responsible for your own actions. If you screw up, you pay the price. Slip on a puddle and hit your head at the water park? Your fault - everyone knows water parks have slippery spots. Be more careful next time. A lawsuit is out of the question.
It is your fault. Of course you break your arm while doing it, you get free medical treatment - we all cock-up occasionally.
In the U.S. you'd be left with a 5 figure bill. Of course people will have to sue, otherwise they're selling their house.
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
*In this case, however, it is not truly a free market, because the government has a monopoly on airport security, to some extent. Airports were supposed to have the right to opt out of TSA security and to hire private firms instead if they so chose, but IIRC, TSA has stopped allowing airports to do that. Even if that were not the case, it still would not truly be a free market since even the private security firms providing airport security still have to follow TSA guidelines (i.e., AIT scanners, pat-downs, etc.).
The arms race (Score:5, Insightful)
the man with a pistol on his hip is not the one you need to worry about.
...spoken by a man with a pistol on his hip.
Re:So in this case where the government behaves (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the second amendment is to make it so that when the mentally handicapped republican 5-year-olds throw a temper tantrum, they can actually leave dead bodies in the process.
The larger problem today is that we haven't had adults in the Republican party in over 40 years, ever since they started running on the "Southern Strategy." Some of their stupider ideas are the kind of "omg brilliant" that only works with Enron Math.
Case in point: "balanced budget amendments" in republican states, that never, ever, every can possibly work unless they rely on Federal emergency funding to close the gaps on countercyclical needs like unemployment benefits, medicaid for the poor, and job search/training programs during an economic downturn... meanwhile they get to bitch about "we balanced our state budget why doesn't the federal government balance theirs."
Enron math, brought to you by the republican retard squad. And they're dumb enough to fall for it.
Re:Firing in US (Score:4, Insightful)
Your fixing didn't go far enough...
In the US, if you have insurance, which the vast majority of the employed US population actually does have, the treatment you will get is significantly better than in any country in the world,
Actually, even that's rubbish. If you live an area with mediocre hospitals (I did, but was lucky in not needing them) then you get medicore treatment. If you live in an area with good hospitals, then you get good treatment. The USA is like everywhere else in this regard.
It's also important to emphasize the employed part even more.
If you are employed and get really ill, you tend to lose your job. And then your insurance with it. Then, no matter how careful you have been, unless you are amazingly rich then you are completely and utterly screwed.
Re:So in this case where the government behaves (Score:4, Insightful)
The people who wrote the Second Amendment probably feared that it would be easy. Thank goodness it's difficult to get TSA employees to body scan Americans, or get law-enforcement officers to strip search their fellow citizens. Also, how morally difficult is it to kill people using Predator drones?