Skip to main content

Revenue from Distraction

Attention Deficit in Americans is driving the state revenue coffers. State of California senator someday passed a law banning the use of cellular telephone while performing the act of driving. Banning leads to fines. Thence the revenue. People being people continued to ignore or evade the new law and do their part to contribute revenue to cover the budgetary shortcomings. After all we want our kids to go to school so they can learn that distracted driving is not good for health and wallet. These schools need money. But the fallacy of such a law is that it tends to single out only one form of distraction and that too allowing the enforcement police to be subjective of what constitutes the use of cell phone. I tend to use mine to scratch my back when driving on occassion and so am not convinced if I should be cited. What about the ones that eat and drink and do other activities while driving? I have never driven in Germany but anecdotal evidence suggests that the Germans are very serious about their driving and do not have accouterments in their automobiles that would encourage distraction of any sort. No cup holders as an example. So no Big Gulp slurping and then getting distracted when the cold liquid tends to drip on your pants and making you look down while you go crashing into the wall. On the contrary the next generation of American automobiles are arriving with more gadgets to make IBM proud. It is a mobile computer on wheels. You can now check weather, trade stocks, eat your breakfast, shave, catch up on other trivia while updating your facebook wall while crashing into a real wall. No worries there are 89 air bags to take the impact and also a soothing attendant to dial out for help while you update your status about how a deflated air bag smells.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

But What If We're Wrong?

I attempted to read this book by author Chuck Klosterman backward to forward but it started hurting my brain so I decided to stop and do it like any other publication in the English language.  Start from page 1 and move to the right. Witty, caustic and thought provoking this is a book you want to read if you believe that the status quo might, just might be wrong. At times bordering on being contrarian about most things around us it tries to zero in on the notion of what makes anything believable and certain in our minds.  The fact that there is a fact itself is ironic.  Something analogous to the idea that you can never predict the future because there is no future. Many books and movies have tried to play on this concept - best that I recollect (I think I am) was 'The Truman Show'.  This book by Klosterman attempts to provoke the reader to at least contemplate that what they think they know may be wrong. He uses examples like concept of gravity, and how it ...

You are important to us

Followed by piano music.   Followed by 'we are experiencing heavier than usual call volume'.  Sounds macabre like bleeding during menstruation or after a ghastly attack with a weapon on a hemophiliac.  Sorry Mrs. Johnson but it appears little Gertrude here has been bleeding heavier than usual what with her night time activities competing with the woodchucks in your neighborhood. Some services even go as far as to pick a random day to say - 'if you were to call us during the Chinese lunar month when the moon is axiomatically hugging the polar star with Jupiter intravenous when call volume is light'.  Well I will be damned.  I thought  I had checked with my astrologer before I placed this well focused call but  I guess this is what you get for listening to a quack. Umph! I am not sure which marketing genius came up with this personal touch concept of informing the caller that you are really a jackass for actually calling the customer serv...

Of Jims and Johns

Here is another essay on the subject of first names. As in birth names. Or names provided to an offspring at birth. While the developed world tends to shy away from the exotic like Refrigerator or Coca Cola for their new production there is a plethora of Jims and Johns and Bobs or Robs. Speaking of which I do not think there is a categoric decision point at the time of birth if a child will be hereafter called as Bob. I mean have not yet met a toddler called Bob or Rob for that matter. At some point though the parental instinct to mouth out multiple syllables runs out and they switch from calling the crawler Robert to simply Robbie to Rob. Now speaking of - it is strange that the name sounds like something you would not want Rob to do - i.e. Rob anyone. Then why call someone that? After all Rob Peter to Pay Paul is not exactly a maxim to live a young life? Is it? Perhaps Peter or Paul might want to have a say in it? Then there is this matter of going to the John. Why degrad...