Florida Workers' Comp
Musings of David Langham on the workers' compensation world
Thursday, May 9, 2024
Hubris and Petulance
Tuesday, May 7, 2024
Surreptitious Recording
Sunday, May 5, 2024
$1.7 Million Toilet
"$115,500 on construction, $91,800 in project management fees and $90,000 in architecture and engineering fees"
I previously wrote about a contest to design a new garbage can. These are the Good Old Days (December 2022). That noted a city (coincidently San Francisco again) holding a contest for what would replace its 3,000 street-side garbage cans. The city spent more ($500,000) on that contest than it spent on the recent toilet. It could have had 2.5 toilets, at a ridiculous price, instead of a trashcan contest. One of the entrants in the can contest was a unit that cost $20,000 each. Imagine the hubris that comes with a refuse container at that price.
The contest concluded with a decision to buy the "Slim Siloutte," a unit that cost less than $19,000 to prototype. The good news is that with mass production, these can be built and delivered for only $3,000 each. According to Mission Local, there was an alternative that cost "only" $630 per unit. Apparently, the city has picked the $9 million alternative ($3,000 x 3,000)(that is equal to 6 public toilets at $1.7 million or 45 toilets at the still ridiculous price of $200,000 each). But, the can replacement may be on hold because of "fiscal constraints."
Comedians have apparently been critical of the new San Francisco toilet. Is there any feeling of fiscal constraint in the marketplace? How many unhoused might have a charitable bed for $20,000? $200,000? Or, how much might taxes be reduced on the rest of society if less were spent on folly and failure?
The USDA estimates you can feed a person for a day for about $4.00. San Francisco estimates it has about 7,754 experiencing unhousedness. So, perhaps alternative uses of the folly money would be to feed those people, for this many days:
$20,000 can cost = .6 days
$500,000 can contest = 16 days
$1.7 million toilet = 55 days
$9 million replacing waste cans = 290 days
Or, the city could pay someone to scrape the feces off of its sidewalks? Or, it could enforce the law and stop people from defecating on the sidewalks. Or, is it cruel and unusual to punish people for defecating in public?
A challenge may be that those who have money tend to find ways to spend it. Google "city lowers taxes" and see how many news stories pop up. There will be a few stories about decreases in state taxes in the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. But, for whatever reason, there are no stories about municipalities lowering taxes. Google "municipalities spending on ridiculous things" and for some reason, there are multiple examples. In fairness, that query returns local, state, and federal folly and absurdity.
The idea that banning camps of the unhoused, is cruel and unusual is at best anachronistic. See Conflicting Rights (April 2023). Where Justice Kagan gets off the path is not in her contention that sleeping is as fundamental as breathing. The departure from reality is that anyone has any fundamental right to do anything particular in the public domain. There is nothing untoward about building a public restroom, but overpaying for it is senseless.
Rights Collide (February 2016) in society. That you have a fundamental right to sleep or to breathe does not mean it persists everywhere at every time. I suspect that Justice Kagan would not agree that the unhoused have a fundamental right to do either in her living room or even her front yard. If she believes that they do have such rights, and those people, in fact, do stay with her family, Google has produced no evidence of such accommodation.
Urinating is a lot like breathing, but we still restrict where people may or may not do so.
Procreation is a lot like breathing, but we still restrict where people may or may not do so.
Defecating is a lot like breathing, but many of us still restrict where people may or may not do so (the City by the Bay proves Jung's hypothesis of rules).
When people are constrained in their activities, fined, or jailed for violating society's laws, is it "cruel and unusual" because their activities are fundamental? May we dictate where people go, exclude them from certain buildings, or constrain their activities there? Is speaking your mind a lot like breathing? As Justice Kagan suggests, is the fundamental test whether one's activity is "like breathing?" Perhaps, or maybe that is an oversimplification?
Why are the rights of some exalted at the expense of others? Who is to make such decisions? Will it be the same people who see no excess in the $1.7 million toilet or the $20,000 (or even $3,000) garbage can?
Wednesday, May 1, 2024
Dopey
- the employee's workers' compensation claim is denied on the premise that the dope caused the accident.
- The employee is separated from employment on the premise that marijuana is illegal.
- Sleepy,
- Happy,
- Grumpy,
- Doc, or
- Dopey?
Tuesday, April 30, 2024
Another Contract(ion)
- "Does a pizza delivery company derive its revenue mainly from pizza or delivery?"
- "Do companies like Amazon and Walmart—which both sell products of their own and transport products sold by third parties—derive their revenue mainly from retail or shipping?"
Sunday, April 28, 2024
The Baby and the Bathwater
Freedom of contract is the ability of parties to bargain and create the terms of their agreement as they desire without outside interference from the government. It is the opposite of government regulation.
Thursday, April 25, 2024
Conflicting Rights
“President Shafik’s violation of the fundamental requirements of academic freedom and shared governance, and her unprecedented assault on students’ rights, warrants unequivocal and emphatic condemnation,”
There are perhaps broader issues than enforcement of school policies and enforcement of laws.
"Everybody can do what they want, But they just can't do it here"
"I fight authority, authority always wins, Well, I fight authority, authority always wins"
"You say that I lack maturity, Stop actin' like a child."
Tuesday, April 23, 2024
CS/CS/HB 433
"prevents local governments from establishing, or requiring employers to establish, heat exposure requirements that are not otherwise required under state or federal law."
Sunday, April 21, 2024
Forum 2024
Thursday, April 18, 2024
AI in Your Hand
"An object which is falling through the atmosphere is subjected to two external forces. One force is the gravitational force, expressed as the weight of the object. The other force is the air resistance, or drag of the object. The motion of a falling object can be described by Newton's second law of motion (Force equals mass times acceleration -- F = m a) which can be solved for the acceleration of the object in terms of the net external force and the mass of the object."