Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 120 posts

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#111

Post by rayiner »

wallawe wrote: post #107
rayiner wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The size of the federal bureaucracy has hovered around 2m +/- 10% for the last 50 years, even as the U.S. population has increased by over 70%.

I highly doubt the employee headcount of the federal government is a good indicator of efficiency. I would say not at all. There could be 10 total government employees but that wouldn't signify more well-oiled machine. My initial assertion stands true. The government is bloated, inefficient, and wasteful (now more than ever). TSA is merely a good microcosm for the system as a whole. Side note: it's appreciated (expec…

Re: source, see: http://www.opm.gov/feddata/html/ExecBranch.asp

I think the headcount of the bureaucracy, relative to the size of the country being managed, is a very relevant metric of the efficiency of the system. I mean after all, in a private company it would be pretty impressive if the company nearly doubled in size without adding substantially to the number of managers.

The point isn't that the federal government isn't large, it's that it's a complete mispreception to assert that the TSA is a good microcosm of the federal government. The TSA is a traditional bloated bureaucracy, with tons of government employees doing not much of anything. That's not what most of the federal government looks like. I've worked in a federal agency and in the private sector, and if anything the federal agency was better run and more leanly staffed.

In reality, 95% of federal expenditures are just checks to other people. Checks to farmers to subsidize agriculture, checks to states to subsidize highway construction, Social Security checks, Medicare reimbursement checks, etc.

The fact is that people rant up and down about how bloated the federal government is, but nobody can ever point to non-trivial ways to reduce spending. And the reason is that it's not a matter of simply firing a bunch of bureaucrats that sit on their ass doing nothing--there just aren't very many of those people. Rather, it's all about not writing those checks. Writing a $20 billion check to subsidize suburban commuters instead of $40 billion, cutting grandma's social security check by 20%, etc. That's where all the money goes.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#112

Post by pdonis »

mseebach wrote: post #110
pdonis wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither the shoe bomber flight nor the underwear bomber flight originated in the US, so TSA did not screen passengers for either one.

Security on flights to the US is to the same standard, if not carried out by the same organisation, as flights in the US.

For airports in Europe (which is where the two flights in question originated), this is basically true. For airports in other parts of the world, not so much.

In any case, that doesn't change the fact that it's incorrect to blame TSA for incidents on flights that TSA wasn't responsible for screening. The relevant factoid for the point the person upthread was trying to make would be how many such incidents have occurred on flights originating from a US airport.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#113

Post by pavel_lishin »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #88
geuis wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like most of what you say. However the first sentence about being unfair to the TSA seems out of place. You're right about self preserving organizing but that doesn't mean we're being unfair. TSA is a horrible organization that needs to be dismantled.

Oh I dislike them, but lets have a holistic view of this stuff. Just picking out the TSA is unfair. They're no different than most bureaucracies.

They are absolutely different from most bureaucracies.

Name another bureaucracy that slid its hand up my leg until it encountered The Resistance, or a bureaucracy that prevents me from bringing my favorite deodorant when I travel, or one that can arbitrarily say that I am not allowed to fly across the country.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#114

Post by r00fus »

pmb wrote: post #19

The whole trick of designing institutions is to make sure that when they act for their own self-preservation (as they will and do) they will simultaneously be achieving the goal we want them to be achieving.

The TSA has acheived this goal, if by "we" you mean the military/security industrial complex that employs millions and costs tax payers trillions.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#115

Post by cwp »

codex wrote: post #32
cwp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That. Or, perhaps, the TSA is objectively awful. Tell you what. Post an article that sings the praises of the TSA and I'll upvote it. Then we can have a discussion about bias.

A fair point. I spent only about 30 seconds on this, but found: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4943959 , "Surprise Gallup Poll: People Think TSA Does A Good Job". This is a poor article: it's merely reporting on a public poll of the TSA. I didn't expect the public to be so approving; I expected views of TSA to be like views on taxes: they're necessary, but everybody still hates them. But perhaps the public is so…

Ok, I've upvoted two articles. This link (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4944163) gives me a blank page. Also, I'll note that the second article is also pretty faint praise. It's the travel agency industry association praising a TSA pilot program to allow pre-screened frequent fliers to go through security more quickly. In other words, to make the experience of flying less awful for their best customers. They don't say the TSA is doing a good job, only that this program will be an improvement.

Now, on to bias. Having an opinion is not bias. An honest examination of the facts can lead to a conclusion that isn't neutral with respect to a given issue. Do you think the HN community is disregarding important facts in coming to it's anti-TSA position?

Also, yes, it's self-serving to want less waste of government money, and less hassle in flying, but only insofar as HN members are also members of the public. I don't think anyone here holds the position that we should reduce security for their personal convenience, on the theory that a successful terrorist attack would probably kill someone else.

So, by all means, post information that might challenge the opinion of the community. We might learn something. But also, let's keep forming opinions and defending them. That's the point of all this discussion, right?

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#116

Post by toyg »

drcube wrote: post #86
toyg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish you didn't use that sneering tone. Class warfare by the upper class is a real thing, but trivializing every item as "pet issue" of this or that class doesn't help anybody and makes you look like a loony. Airport security in the US is now significantly worse than anywhere else, and it has nothing to do with class.

Dude, poor people don't fly. It absolutely has to do with class. The systems set up to serve the poor are significantly worse than the TSA in every way, and I say this as someone who hates the TSA with a white hot passion. But the blogosphere isn't filled with tirades about how stupid, ineffective, wasteful and absurd the process is for obtaining food stamps, for example. Or getting a menial job, or getting adequate…

Reread what I wrote: Class warfare by the upper class is a real thing, but trivializing every item as "pet issue" of this or that class doesn't help anybody and makes you look like a loony.

I'm not saying it's not true that some topics get more attention because they affect a certain class, but that if the problems are real (and we agree the TSA is a problem) and do not depend on class divide (and the TSA does not, at this point, depend on that), in strategic terms there is no point in bringing up the topic.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#117

Post by snogglethorpe »

jonnathanson wrote: post #89
pavel_lishin wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just about every organization becomes self-preserving as its primary function. But when they prioritize self-preservation over their intended goal, that's bad .

I think the real issue arises in organizations where self-preservation is actually at odds with, or at least orthogonal to, the organization's stated goal. Take the TSA, for instance (and many government agencies, departments within large corporations, nonprofits, etc.). The supposed goal of the TSA is to efficiently and effectively protect travelers and the country from criminal and terrorist actions. In theory, if…

I think most people are resigned to the existence of bureaucracies, despite such problems as rent-seeking, inefficiency, etc, as long as they meet a few basic criteria:

(1) they serve some reasonably obvious positive purpose

(2) the negative effects of what they do aren't too noxious, in particular when compared with (1)

The TSA, it would seem basically fails on both points. Despite the good intentions with which it was formed, it's pretty clear that they don't improve safety in any significant manner (you might find people some disagree about this, because they believe the security theater, but I think the number is dropping). The negative effects of their existence, of course, are legion, (I suspect it's quite hard to find anybody that disagrees on this point!).

So I'd suggest the public probably on average doesn't support the TSA to the same degree they might other bureaucracies, even those that they find annoying.

Unfortunately, of course, the public's opinion on the matter is of little importance once the system is in place...

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#118

Post by greyfade »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #88
geuis wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like most of what you say. However the first sentence about being unfair to the TSA seems out of place. You're right about self preserving organizing but that doesn't mean we're being unfair. TSA is a horrible organization that needs to be dismantled.

Oh I dislike them, but lets have a holistic view of this stuff. Just picking out the TSA is unfair. They're no different than most bureaucracies.

Most other bureaucracies weren't created out of a misguided attempt to solve a problem that didn't actually exist and aren't an undue financial burden on an already financially strained system.

I realize almost all bureaucracies waste money to some extent, but the TSA is a waste to the tune of $8bn USD per year with no measurable benefits and no evidence that it was ever needed.

Imagine if that money were redirected into social programs, NASA, and educational programs! We could have a major, tangible positive effect in spite of bureaucracy, instead of pissing $8bn into an organization that behaves like an organized crime syndicate.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#119

Post by greyfade »

d2vid wrote: post #81
toyg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish you didn't use that sneering tone. Class warfare by the upper class is a real thing, but trivializing every item as "pet issue" of this or that class doesn't help anybody and makes you look like a loony. Airport security in the US is now significantly worse than anywhere else, and it has nothing to do with class.

Getting annoyed by airport security has everything to do with class - you need to fly often enough to find it annoying. We don't talk about stop and frisk over and over again on HN because most of us don't live in areas where we are subjected to that police behavior every time we go out for a walk.

I find it annoying, and I haven't flown since before the TSA was founded.

Re: The TSA's True Focus Isn't Safety - It's Self-Preservation

#120

Post by greyfade »

codex wrote: post #49
mseebach wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There have been no terrorist attacks (excepting the shoe bomber, but there have been no shoe attacks since shoes started to be inspected), but does that prove the TSA is effective? Hard to say. No, really, it's not. Of prevented terror attacks since 9/11, TSA has prevented exactly 0% of them. The shoe bomber was on the plane with the bomb when he was subdued by fellow passengers. The underwear bomber also made it o…

One could make the counter argument that some terrorists are discouraged by the difficulty and no longer try. For example, how many plane bombings have their been since Lockerbie? None. Does that mean that we should stop inspecting luggage? Probably not.

I find it more likely that terrorists don't think it's worth doing in the first place, security or no. Killing a few dozen people in mid-air might startle a bunch of people on the ground and ground a few flights for a while, but it doesn't actually accomplish anything. The only people that would actually do that are mentally-unbalanced, suicidal people who are just trying to kill themselves in the most spectacular way they can; i.e., not a terrorist.

I think "terrorists" of the "trying to kill us all" variety are trying to bring forward some kind of message or dispense some kind of "justice" under their belief system. To achieve any of that with violence requires there to be an intense, sustained effect on the public and a way to link it back to their concept of justice. The 9/11 attacks accomplished that, but the shoe bomber and underwear bombers wouldn't have if they had succeeded. Their explosive charges were too small and too incompetently assembled to cause the kind of mass panic that "terrorists" are after.

Instead, we have a different breed of terrorists: the "keeping you scared because it benefits them directly" terrorists. The TSA and Homeland Security. The true terrorists in this plot. Keeping people afraid of some vague, non-specific threat because it profits them and those they support.

Post reply on HN