> The attacks crippled the economy, not the president.
The attacks were a blip on the economy. A giant tax refund and 2 wars put the nation into a massive deficit, and the global banking crisis devastated the economy.
Did you sleep through 2008?
Uh... If anything, Bush showed all the terrorists of the world that one successfully attack is sufficient to cripple the US economy and bleed us through involvement in several foreign wars. Those wars demonstrated that invading and occupying a couple of small middle-eastern nation was sufficient to over-extend and tax our huge military, while simultaneously draining our budget. They also sapped US will to get involved in other theaters.
"You go the war with the army you have, not the army you want." Anyone remember that? What about sending the reserves into battle? Multiple tours of duty with PTSD soldiers? Inability to provide proper veterans care? Lowered recruitment standards?
Devil's advocate: an individual sets a fire in a sub. A company designs a defective product that kills consumers. If it's company policy that causes the harm, the company is at fault, and the C_O is not held responsible.
Is that the way it should be?
Maybe. I think a bigger problem is tort reform. Punative damages were never designed to be a get-rich-quick scheme; they were a tool designed to punish companies that knowingly cause harm in such a way that they will be reluctant to do so in the first place. When a company can gain more from the harm then they will ever pay as punishment, there's no incentive to be honest.
Imagine if we punished bank robbers by fining him $100, and only punished robbers if they were successful in their crimes?
As the Baby Boomers slowly are forced to give up their passion / hobbies due to age, sickness, etc the rate of exit is significantly >>> the rate of entering.
:-/ Liability (getting sued) and Risks (crashing) are seen as "not worth it" by the younger crowd. Like any community, you need enough "new blood" to sustain it and that isn't happening. Is that a bad thing? I don't know, but we can see trends and it looks like our world is changing. I guess that is the million dollar question: Is it changing for the better ?
I'm guessing you're in you're 30s.
I'm actually a member of the motorcycling community, and both my wife and myself have looked into the cost of obtaining pilot training and buying a share of an airplane. Risk and liability has very little to do with it. Major changes have been significantly increased costs, combined with lowering discressionary income, and reduced willingness to purchase on credit.
The motorcycling community is trending older; mostly mid 20s to late 40 year olds who have successful careers and disposable incomes. This is a group of people who have been responsible in their lives, and have enough money to pay the cost of entry. As a result, a lot of the industry growth has been at the high end. In the motorcycling community, top-of the line Japanese, German, and Italian imports are selling well. Mid-range is suffering somewhat. Low end has been trending towards more premium offerings.
10 years ago, the community was mostly early 20-somethings that would buy new bikes on fairly insane loans. That market is drying up; more and more folks are either buying used, paying cash, or leveraging their good credit for favorable rates.
The front page of Slashdot just doesn't have the value it used to have.
Real Users never know what they want, but they always know when your program doesn't deliver it.