Wednesday, July 11, 2012

I'm glad that FORD Motor Company's not making any PINTOs in this day-and-age.
I can imagine, upon discovery of the defective rear-engine design, that the most they'd be required to do  in these days of deregulation, is simply put out a "consumer notice" advising owners to "try to avoid rear-end collisions".
Right...just use your psychic powers to telepathically communicate with the driver behind you to "slow it down a bit" and to "not tailgate" lest the worst happens upon wacking your rear-end.

I can understand personal responsibility in terms of taking care of one's own domestic obligations
...but these days one is expected to be accountable for things they sort of...have no control over

...we're expected to take care of our own health and welfare---yet how many of us have any kind of extensive medical knowledge?
...and we still have to depend on whoever grows, packages, and distributes the food and drink we consume---how many of us are able to grow our own garden and raise our own livestock? many of us would even know how, even if the opportunities to do so did arise?
...and, if we should succumb to the effects of food poisoning, is it our fault that health-and-safety standards are either lax or not enforced when we have neither the knowledge or license and authority to see to it that such standards are both adequate enough and well-enforced?

We're forced into codependency par-for-the-course for the simple reason that we're forced to be part of some society
...and the very nature of being part of a society is that of assuming a submissive demeanor to "the system"---accepting it's paternal/maternal nature and being one of it's "children", obedient to whatever expectations it has of us return society's expected to "take care of us" to a large extent:  provide police departments to deal with those who "violate" us in some way;  provide a fire department to deal with overwhelming infernos and to rescue us from any impossible situation we get ourselves into that we can't get ourselves out of on our own;  government regulators who write laws to ensure our health and safety...

Since most of us are not geniuses and have a limited scope of knowledge and aptitude---only specializing in one field or two---we wind up codependent on those who have whatever knowledge and abilities we don't
...if you're "all thumbs with two left hands", obviously you should not be engaging in any kind of "home repair" or "home renovation" projects---nor be attempting to sew your own clothes, or anything else involving manual dexterity of any kind.  Which means you're stuck with hiring persons who are professionally trained at (or have natural aptitude for) such tasks.

The problems arise when we have to be vigilant about "not being taken advantage of" alongside still "being responsible for" seeing to it that certain things are done
...being responsible for operating a safe motor vehicle, for example:  if you know nothing about cars and have to depend on the services of a mechanic---and he/she overcharges you for shoddy workmanship, and the result is a mechanical failure that causes a fatal wreck, the laws can still stipulate that you're partially "at fault" because it's still your vehicle and technically you're still responsible for ensuring it's in sound condition and safely operable
...but, if you have no knowledge of or aptitude for auto mechanics, how would you be able to determine whether or not the mechanic did the job you paid them to do properly?

It's this way with everything:
***Banks don't invest in acquiring thorough and comprehensive security systems that would protect the accounts of their customers.  (Too expensive and could be disruptive to their normal day-to-day functions in the event something transpires that could cause such a system to temporarily tie up or affect any of their other systems.)  They pass the responsibility onto those who have accounts with them.  You have to peruse your bank statements, you have to bring everything to the bank's attention if something looks amiss...
***And what about Internet Service Providers?  How come THEY don't have antivirus filters as a part of their services?  Why do the PC users themselves have to purchase their own, and with no guarantee some crafty hacker might still get through even the best cyberdefenses?
***And even with all the "anti-crime" tips the authorities give the average person, if you are attacked and have to resort to some kind of physical counterattack, even to ward off the other person just long enough to get away, you still stand to also be legally charge with "aggravated assault" the same as the person who initially attacked you.
It stands to reason the only REAL way to be able to protect and defend yourself is to be  granted some kind of recognized offical authority of your own (officially "deputized"?) and to recieve adequate training in the ins-and-outs of the ethos of self-protection.  Of course who among the collective citizenry would society ever allow to have the kind of unbridled authority it grants it's designated officials?

Society expects us to be responsible, but then doesn't allow us any authority to be able to do so, doesn't enlighten us enough so that we would know what we were doing anyway, and doesn't train us in what we would need to know in order to pull off our efforts without looking ridiculous and having everything backfire on us.

A small percentage will learn specific trades and professions
...and the rest of us will have no choice but to just trust such persons and hope they know what they're doing and that they're of good character and not the kind to subvert their duties and just "take advantage of" others and circumstances.

One more note:
How come, in the 21st century, are there still mailboxes on front porches?
Shouldn't it be all solid wood front doors with mail slots instead?
How are we supposed to ensure our mail doesn't get tampered with?  Stand guard outside on our front porch  day and night "Buckingham Palace" style?

No comments:

Post a Comment