Corporarion vs Government

The goal and purpose of a corporation is to make a profit and increase shareholder value. To do so they need employees.
The purpse of a goverenment is to protect and serve the best interests of its citizens.

A corporation has employees and a government has  citizens. While it is true most employees are citizens not every citizen work for a company. Therein lies an enormous differecen bewtween the two organizations. If a company fears it might lose profit it tends to shed employees. If a merger takes place within an industry the objective is to reduce duplicaiton in tasks which means shedding more employees. When the discharged employee has left and his separation time frame and beneifts are finished the coproariton has no longer any respnichulity nor interst in that particualr employee.

A gobernment can not get rid of

In both instances I could say, based on how well they are run, how organized they are and how completely they respond to me, as a customer, why not call them in the event of an emergency?

I could go on with dozens of examples of stores and companies we visit or buy from that are all so well run they are literal models of efficiency, quality and service. Apple is a great company. Maybe I should call them the next time my house is broken into. Or Google, for example is probably the single most data driven company on earth. They know more about me than even I do. So should I call them in the event I need someone to teach my children or stay with an ailing parent?

What I am getting at is seemingly obvious but there is a point here. Why do so may people believe, even people with an advanced education, that having a business person running the United States is such a good idea? It is something I always hear around election time. So and so is a better potential candidate because they started a business or they have been successful in a business or they have become immorally wealthy because they know how to buy and sell businesses.

In the minds of most Americans there has always been a confluence of business and government as though they are interchangeable, indistinguishable from one another.  If they are indistunguishable then a successful person in one is certain to use the same skills and be successful in the other.

I beg to differ and, as always,  I like to start at the beginning. What is the point, the purpose, of a corporation and what is the point,  the purpose, of a government?

According to the Preamble to the Constitution the purpose of the federal government is to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

According to the Milton Friedman doctrine, for a corporation there is one and only one social responsibility, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase profits.
Said differently, they are seen essentially as a vehicle for maximizing the wealth of their shareholders, to maintain the good will with their stakeholders and most most of all, to maximize profits.

Now do those two purposes seem to align? No. To begin with a government has citizens and a corporations  has employees. In all cases citizens and employees are the same. Most corporate employees are citizens but not all citizens work for coporations.  If a corporation, in pursuit of its primary purpose, needs to reduce expenses they look to what is usually their largest expense, employees,  and to increase their profits they do so by reducing their number of employees. Governments, on the other hand,  have citizens and cannot get rid of them. All American, as long as they are alive, are citizens and cannot be removed by any means. In a corporation when a citizen applies for a job, he/she must demonstrate qualifications to become an employee. Credentials, schooling, background all count in decisions made for employment. In government there are no entrance exams to be a citizen save for the process immigrants need to go through to be granted citizenship. If you are born here you do no cognitive testing. You are not required to do or to know anything.
Not all citizens begin at the same starting line either. Most have diverse backgrounds some of which are fortunate, others, not so. Stagger the start of any race, give an advantage to one over the other and the outcome is almost set in stone. So too as a citizen. We did not all begin with equal opportunity and have a different road to travel to achieve a level of success.

Look at the org chart of a company. They have production, distribution, marketing, finances, governance and legal. They all adhere to  a single mission statement and follow the same guidelines to manifest the corporate mandate.   On the other hand a government has 15 different departments, agriculture, energy, interior, state, education, defense, treasury etc. Within each cabinet level department there are many sub departments all with the same goal as defined by the Director. Not all of them are the same because they have different mandates but their overall objective is the security and well being of the citizens of the country. In government research and development, science, education and security are all investments made by most of the departments to plan for the future. Most companies are focused on a 3 month calendar cycle that is required by Wall Street and investing in new products, research, on going education can be expensive and costly when measured against profit goals. They need to be risk adverse.

When a company goes off shore to lower costs they deprive many Americans of those jobs. When they lay off employees by the thousands they leave untold levels of despair in countless families. Yet corporations are referred to as job creators.

When those laid off or terminated and run the course of their severance package they are no longer a problem to the coprpartion. They don't even exist any longer. Corporations don't have to pay attention to the drug use, divorce rate, criminal acts, suicides, homelessness and general malaise that overwhelms the unemployed. But. The goverrnemnt does. The government has to be there at the lowest level of a persons welfare and dignity. The government has to provide resources and incentives to lift people up and get them back into a productive life. When an industry is decimated by new technology such as coal, manufacturing jobs or retail work the government must step in and offer eduction, guidance and hope to those displaced people. The corporations that were most affected by the technical revolution are downsizing as fast as they can. They do not take any responsibility for those who are inducted-ividually left behind. This is where a real government comes into play.  Can you imagine a corporate CEO with decades of experience running a profitable business based on eliminating all un necessary costs having the empathy or sensitivity or even the skills to step up and take care of the people left behind?

We currently have a president who ran a small company. I would imagine not one single Fortune 500 company would ever consider donald trump a candidate to run their business yet he was elected to run a vastly different, overwhelmingly larger and more complex organism than any business enterprise and one can see, based on his first three years in office, he clearly knows nothing about running a country. The various agencies have been hollowed out of career professionals. probably a good move for a CEO but for a country? We have political contriubtuots in most of the positions of authoruugty, with no relevant knowledge other than they contributed money to get someone elected. Is that in our best interest

CORONA VIRUS: March 1, 2020

I have been intrigued all these years about the debate on climate change. Not so much about the efficacy of it but the sheer certainty of those who don't believe in it nor have any background in any science that would support their belief. But that lack of expertise does not slow them down from their dogmatic certianty to their opinion.

We dropped out of the Paris Accord because of our lack of agreement on its mission. But were we right to drop out? How can anyone with no background be sure? They can't.

Next the world has become obsessed with nationalism as a positive and globalism as a negative.
Globalism came about because the corporate world realized their were suppliers and customers in other parts of the world that could have a measurable impact of their revenues and profits. So they bought into the concept, hook line and sinker. Find cheaper sources of supply, good for lowering manufacturing and employment expense and find a far larger source of additional revenue from new overseas customers. Both very good ideas from a corporate point of view.

But most recently we have decided as have many other advanced nations that we must think of us first and the others last. We are not our brother's keeper any longer. Why should we spend our money on the welfare of others, outside our borders. Nationalism has become the new trend. The outcome has to divide the country by ideology, by economics, by philosophy, by inequality, by religious belief, by age and demographic.  We are truly divided as a nation and there does not seem to anyone in office or on the horizon that can bring us together.

I think our basic human nature must take over. We have to devolve back to our original purpose of being alive. In a word. SURVIVE. That is the number one priority of every living organism.  We have lost all contact with the idea and replaced it with an untold number of personal interest, prejudices, opinions and priorities, none of which mean anything when compared with our own survival.

What will bring all of us together? What will make us all realize we are in this together and no one has a free pass? A major catastrophe. Well it looks like we are getting one, whether we want it or not or like it or not.

Corona virus is descending on us. Time will tell how it manifests itself but right now it is the first subject on the global news, in the entire world and it is the most significant thing anyone is thinking or talking about. We will find out if it is powerful enough to replace the preoccupation we have with our own view of the world with a more concerted, communal, worldview, should of our situation. We are in this together. We are no longer nationalists. We have to be all in on this or we will all lose.

Maybe it will influence all of us to realize the survival of our home, the planet earth, is more important to us individually and collectively and  is not defined, like a virus by arbitrary borders.

PORN IMAGES EXPLODING

Interesting facts from the NYT article. 9/28, 2019

Photos and videos posted on line of children being sexually abused or tortured have increased from around 3,000 in 1998 to 45 million in 2018.

Legislation was passed in 2008 to deal with the subject but was underfunded and was not given proper authorization. Its authority is under the justice department but has not been assigned a full-time administrator.  A budget of $60miillion was budgeted but half of it has never been allocated. Homeland security took $6 Billion from the funds for border issues.

Tech companies have not been helpful and reporting of violations are mired in understaffing, old technology and little cooperation.  Reports, if there are any, are late, delayed or non-existent. 

Less than 2% of the on-line infractions are even investigated.  

The technology used by the offenders is state of the art and the technologies used by the defenders, law enforcement, the government, is old and out dated. It is not even close to comparable. The offenders use the many sites to learn how to avoid detection, to find new sources to share and how to stay encrypted.

Facebook Messenger was responsible for 12 of the 18 million images in 2018. 

There are individual sites like Love Zone that deals in this material. They have 30K subscribers.

A site, Tumbler, is one of the biggest offenders, with 450 million subscribers, not all involved in pornographic imagery but a huge number of perpetrators are thought to be on this platform.

The dark web has instructions for how to make the videos, how to photograph and how to encrypt the images for self-protection and sharing the material by the perpetrators. 

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, established in 1984 was launched to locate missing children and has worked in this area of photos and videos. They prioritize their own activities by age of those offended but have little money and virtually no support to continue their efforts. There is an ugliness to this issue that causes people to not even want to deal with it.

Those who are offenders are thought to be people who did not mature past the age where they first found arousal. So, if a boy was first aroused by a ten-year-old girl he would continue throughout his life to be aroused by girls the same age. The ages most preyed on are from 6 years to 17 years. 1 – 4% of men and women participate. There is an expression “people don’t choose what arouses them, they discover it”

Root cause of child abuse is thought to develop in a prenatal stage. It is not genetic. But if abused in childhood the data no longer supports that they will be involved in hands on abuse as adults.  Rather, the abused are more inclined to drug and alcohol abuse, stress and criminality. 

But those who are physical abusers will participate in on line abuse at rates often as high as 60%-80% of the time. 

For the overwhelming number of on-line abusers (the 45 million) there is about a 5% chance they will advance to physical abuse. These abusers are referred to as “virtuous pedophiles” They look at material, share it but do not progress to hands on abuse. They have gone underground due to the heightened level of scrutiny and the opportunity to encrypt their activities. The medical profession has been interested in studying them because they appear to have control of their needs without going to the next step.

Pedophiles will participate in on-line abuse. On line abusers probably will not.

This is a problem that is not going away. 

PERSONHOOD

Like most people I have an opinion on the frenzy of state adoption legislation that has gone viral in the last several months. My opinion is based on freedom. Freedom to choose, freedom from oppression and freedom from governmental intervention, whenever it wants or whatever it wants. 

Here are a few of my thoughts on the subject with, what I hope will be suggestions on how to mitigate the overbearing burden imposed by the states in question.

A few facts: Not everyone who gets pregnant wants to have a baby nor can afford to have one. Not every parent can afford to raise a seriously deformed child. Many women would prefer not to raise the child of a family member or stranger who raped them 

Many potential parents are classified as poor, below a certain poverty line and may not choose to have a child and will treat said child as unwanted.  Visit any detention facility in this country and ask how many of the residents could be considered unwanted. Probably most of them. The foster care system, jail, gangs, detox centers, homeless shelters are full of unwanted children. 

While there seems to be a serious effort in many states, mostly by white males, to control the lives of women, an oddity from a party that is so obsessed with keeping government out of their lives, I felt I could offer a few suggestions states might consider “adopting” as codicils to the newly minted right to life, anti-abortion legislation.

So here they are, in no particular order. They may seem draconian but keep in mind a born child is a living American human being and should be entitled to all the benefits available to all Americans. 

From conception every child, who qualifies, will be assigned legal counsel to look out for the child’s interests, at the state’s expense, until the child reaches 18 years of age. The child must have their rights protected by a requirement that the health behavior of the parent must be consistent with a normal healthy birth. If the parent is on drugs or demonstrating any behaviors that could risk the health of the unborn child the state must step in and provide full coverage and service for the mother and her health, to assure a healthy birth, at the states expense. If the mother is on welfare, food stamps, Medicaid or other state benefits the child automatically goes on them at the moment of conception, provided by the state. If there is no health insurance in the household the state has to provide it for the child at the state expense. The child is also counted at conception in the population. The child is represented until 18 years of age, if the parent cannot care for him/her. The child cannot be given up at birth, or sent to adoption without the child’s legal counsel consent. If such a choice is desired by the parent, the state has to pay for the care until such an acceptable, suitable arrangement can be established. The state cannot do anything to the child unless the child’s legal counsel agrees. The state pays for all legal-council expenses. The mother is allowed in the HOV lane with her unborn person.

With every decision there are consequences.  If states are to define, control and mandate how people live their lives then those very same states must put up the resources to guarantee the unborn are provided the same rights to a healthy life, as any other citizen in the state. If the family can’t pay for the services then the state must. 

I wonder which state will begin this process.

  

Open Letter to Tiger and Everyone Else

I recently wrote an open letter to Tiger Woods on winning the Masters, his 15th major golf event and his first win in 11 years. I thought what was left out of the massive media coverage of his comeback was the effort it required from him to get to such an exalted place. He did what he had to do and he did it on his own. If we think about what he had to do to get back, realizing how rich he is, how famous he is and how little he needed to do in order to continue his popularity, one might wonder "would I do such a thing"? Or, would any of our leaders, our politicians, our business CEO's do what he did? I am very doubtful which is why I was so impressed with what he endured in order to fulfill his own personal goals. We need to be more mindful of what is required to be successful. It is not money or power but rather the characteristics we all recognize as essential, the ones I articulate in the letter to Tiger. Enjoy.

Dear Tiger. 

Congratulations on your incredible Masters victory. I know you have received accolades from around the world, as you should. You deserve every ounce of praise that was heaped on you. like millions of other fans, I read as much as I could about your victory and its impact on golf.   The victory was witnessed by a record setting number of TV fans, the wall to wall coverage focused on your victory, the amazing comeback, and your potential of exceeding Jack’s record number of Majors.  I felt only one thing was missing in the ocean of media coverage. What was left out was the journey you had to endure getting to that very moment of victory. Few, if any, have any concept of what you had to go through, had to sustain, on what must have been a lonely, frustrating and exhausting path to get to that final putt on Sunday.   

My take on your comeback is different and, I felt, was not given the attention it deserved, which I guess is why I am writing this letter.  Your comeback had nothing to do with gender, sponsors, nor behavior, but has everything to do with resolve, sacrifice, patience, commitment and courage. 

Let’s start with your sport, golf. If one wants to win in golf it is best not to get old and by all means don’t ever get injured. Those two things alone are career enders for most professional golfers. While you age in golf and sustain injuries your competitors get younger, stronger, healthier and better. You suffered from both. You got older and was seriously injured. There are many who speculate that your previous questionable behavior might have had something to do with the injuries you sustained, as humiliation can have an emotionally debilitating effect on anyone, but regardless, while you were dealing with your many injuries, whatever their cause, unfortunately you were also aging at the same time.  

Next, left out of most discussions is golf is not a team sport. It is an individual sport. You play it alongside many others but you play it alone. The best players have trainers, managers, agents, psychologists, therapists, etc., literally an army of supporters to help them get better, especially if they have money. But when standing over the ball, ready to drive, chip or putt no one hits the shot, but you. The shot is up to the player, not his supporters, or team members. Every shot is on him. No one gives him a mulligan for being injured, an extra stroke due to his age or an exemption due to his personal foibles. It is on him to hit the shot or not. Amplify that single shot by 18 holes, four days in a row, alongside the world’s best players, all of whom have the ability to hit that shot as well, if not better than you and it only magnifies by a factor the challenges facing all golfers at all levels

In your case, add 11 years to the drought. If now 43, eleven years ago you were 32, the absolute prime of every golfer’s life, when you last won an event, let alone a major. At that stage of your career you were already a legend, having accomplished more than anyone had in the past and no doubt would in the future. 

You had nothing to prove. Nothing. You could have put down your clubs and would never have lost your many records of accomplishment. But you chose to pursue your passion the only way you knew how. 

Where were you and what were you doing during those seemingly lost 11 years? Subsequent to all the front page, bad press concerning your personal behaviors we also read about your four back operations, watched you collapse and withdraw during a PGA event due to debilitating back pain, watched you miss several cuts, drop out of events due to injury and lose several times after coming close. In fact, several of the majors did not even invite you because you either did not qualify nor make the cut after two rounds. That had to be massively humiliating and depressing. After all you are Tiger Woods, for crying out loud. At one point I don’t think you were even ranked in the top 200 players in the world. The tour players, now competing with you, probably all grew up with you as their idol.  During those 11 years they were walking the same courses, competing in the same events, watching you, not playing poorly but pathetically. It is hard to imagine how humiliating that must have been for you. 

While underperforming at every level, nothing about your game, swing, short game, putting and preparation or your life in general were exempt from scrutiny. Everyone in the sport had an opinion or advice and never hesitated to weigh in on what they thought was wrong with you and what they thought you had to do to recover.

That was only the public part of your golf life. The part we could watch on TV or read about in the papers and magazines, but none of it had anything to do with what actually was going on behind the scenes.  The commitment you had to make, that none of us could see or hear. What it was you actually did, that we were all unaware of, to get to that 18^thgreen, in Augusta, at the Masters, needing only three putts to win your fifth jacket and 15^thmajor? That story can only be told using the above words, sacrifice, patience, resolve, work, commitment etc. 

Every golfer at every level knows axiomatically that he has to practice every day, if they want to continue to get better. And, they all do. That means they hit balls, putt, chip, hit sand shots, practice difficult shots and reproduce just about every conceivable situation they may face in a tournament and practice all of them, relentlessly. I mean hitting thousands upon thousands of shots, day after day after day. And that is only the golf part. You also had the surgery recovery part. The physical therapy, the pain, the stretching, the weight regimen and the setbacks. Who would be alongside you during all those practice and rehabilitation hours or years? Not the media, occasionally a coach for a few hours, not a therapist, nor agent, nor sponsors. Maybe not even Joey. No one can practice for you and no one can help you, simply by being there.  Golf, like most sports at the highest level, is about repetition, over and over and over again. By yourself, alone with no one watching, no applause, no encouragement and no sponsors standing there giving you money and praise for all your efforts. It is just you and your own personal commitment, resolve and passion. If rich beyond measure, no one needs to sweat like that, nor suffer the anguish of the debacle that might have been your last event, the one you could not finish, let alone win. And you Tiger, are beyond rich. 

Faced with the early overwhelming level of public distain for your personal choices you could have easily dropped out of competitive golf and lived a good life with you two adorable children and found a number of areas in golf where you would be not only welcomed but celebrated. Why should you subject yourself to the scrutiny of a turned off public, a less than acceptable game when it would be so much easier to just disappear, skip all the scrutiny and rest on the past laurels. It takes a monumental measure of courage to do what you chose to do.

Who would do such a thing? And why? And, for eleven years? I maintain, only you, Tiger. 

Your victory at the Masters has to be recognized as a metaphor for the characteristics we so admire but have in recent times seemingly overlooked in this country. The characteristics of hard work, effort, sacrifice, perseverance. Your accomplishment, in the face of such personal adversity and physical challenges, should be held up as a model to young people, boys and girls, that to compete at the highest levels, let alone win, one must be willing to sacrifice a great deal to achieve a dream. 

Currently we read about parents paying to get their kids into college, bribing coaches, hiring others to take SAT tests. Where were these students in the process? How hard did they work, how much did they sacrifice or did they just expect their parents to buy it for them? What about athletes who use drugs to get an edge over those not on drugs but might be faster, stronger or, even yes, better?  Is there an easier way than doing the required hard work? Lying, cheating, bribing, threatening, cutting in line all seem to be new and added choices. These are the behaviors we read about more and more on a daily basis not only from our athletes but from our elected officials, our highly compensated corporate executives and our leaders.  If the end result is not what is imagined, they blame it on something or someone else. Everyone wants miracles, the easiest way possible. We don’t want to do what we have to do to succeed. It is just too hard. If we can’t get what we want, are unwilling to put in the hours of effort required, then money is the tool we use to buy what we want.  Find the easy way and pay for it. That is what we are coming to

In effect we were not willing to go deep into that metaphorical cave, where there is only us, and practice until our hands bleed, or watch videos for hours to find that one flaw in our swing and go back to the cave and practice more. We might have wanted to attend that social event, taken a weekend off, gone on vacation and enjoyed ourselves as most of us do. Not you, Tiger. You stayed on the range, practiced your shots and then practiced some more. Courage? That defines courage. 

I maintain we might always acknowledge your personal indiscretions, don’t need to condone nor excuse them. But we must accept them and deal with them as you have. Going forward we must highlight the massive effort, the overwhelming sacrifice that went into your come back and hold that up as an example to all people. If you want to win, you want to be a champion you are going to have to work for it. Tiger, your comeback redefines the word work You earned it, like very few others. Your strength, resolve and your commitment are metaphorical for what this country was founded on and is something we need to get back quickly. You can be our best example.

Sincerely

A fan

DEFINE THE WORD

Throughout his excellent book FANTASYLAND: HOW AMERICA WENT HAYWIRE, Kurt Andersen refers to Puritans, Pilgrims, Mesmerists, Fundamentalists, Rationalists, Supernaturalists, Empiricists, Relativists, Creationists, Christians, Protestants, Pentecostalists and Charismatics. How many people in this world would have a single clue as to what any of those terms actually reference. Even if we included the difference between Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists and Presbyterians. Would we really know? But they all do have one thing in common: they are all some variation on the continuing evolution of Christianity. Why do I mention them? Because in reading Andersens book I was forced to go to my IPAD word reference, more than once, for the definition of these terms and then think of how that term fit into the theme of his book. Had I not taken the time to look them up, more than once per term, I would not have been able to understand his book. I did look them up, felt I understood his point and therefore could agree with him on almost everything he posited. Had I not taken the time, I would still be in the dark.

Today, as I watched Maureen Sullivan interview John Hickenlooper, former governor of the State of Colorado and a recently announced presidential candidate, I was reminded of these terms in Andersen's book. About religion? No. She asked Hickenlooper if he was a capitalist or a socialist. She asked it in such a way that presumed everyone watching her show, including Hickenlooper, had the same definition of the two words.

When he responded he told her that he had started upwards of 20 businesses, was primarily interested in inspiring  others to raise money and start their own businesses, creating new jobs in the process. It sounded pretty Capitalistic to me. But no, she pressed on,  but would you "say" you are a capitalist? I have no idea how he could answer such a stupid question beyond the fact that he has demonstrated a career as a capitalist, which most of the other candidates can't claim.  She then proceeded to push him on his credentials vis a vis socialism. His response was in the state of Colorado, the vast major of citizens are on some form of universal health care. Now I am not certain but I believe the people who have extended care coverage in his state are quite happy with it and do not need to refer to it as socialism. So why push him on that? He clearly has an interest in the well being of his citizens, without reducing it to a single word.

My point? in the 60's and 70's I developed a theory I have used the theory thought my life. I call it my "accelerator word theory". It means that when a person hears a commonly used word they do not feel the need to have it defined, they simply accelerate to their understanding of what that word means to them. They literally "jump" to their own understanding of the word, forgoing all the possible nuances inherent in the word. When the same words, being used, have different meanings to two or more people then any chance of communication between them no longer exists. From the first mention of such a  word, they are on different planes, therefore have no change of ever agreeing. Take words like, socialism, capitalism, immigrants, muslims, gays and even today expand the concept to terms like patriot, freedom or even religion itself. The variety of meanings that have attached themselves, over the last many decades, to these terms, are so wide and dispirit they have lost their intended purpose in enhancing any form of communication. They have all become pejoratives to some and aspirations to others. But, definitely not the same thing.

If you are on different sides of an argument and want reconciliation, the definitions of the words being used must be agreed on, BEFORE the substance of the discussion can even begin. The biggest offender of this is the media. Maureen Sullivan, in her attempt to appear forceful should have asked the governor if,  "with this as its definition, would you agree you are a Capitalist"? If he agreed with her definition he could clearly claim to be one, or not.  If he did not agree with her definition he could have provided his own and then answered her question.

If media took that tack in their interview process, the interview, which  might take longer, would better inform the viewer and move people closer to a common understanding of the issues and maybe inspire us to be a less divided nation..

PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC FATALITIES

In 2017 19% of all auto fatalities included a pedestrian. Imagine 5,977 pedestrians were killed in auto accidents, a 45% increase, says a recent news report. The auto industry answer? A new pre collision braking system technology, currently being tested. That is one good suggestion but not the only one.

Although the average weight of a car has dropped from over 4,000 pounds to slightly more than 3200 pounds due to more advanced materials, I think the average still exceeds the weight of the average human, who reports in at 137 pounds, (certainly not here in the USA), but still far less than the average automobile on the road.


Why are so many more of these type of accidents and deaths happening now? The quick answer is distractions. The driver is talking or texting on his phone. The average car today has more on-board electronics at the finger tips of the driver than most television sets and the attraction to using them can be overwhelming.  The walker is doing the same thing. More and more "both" are equally distracted. The result? More accidents and more pedestrian deaths.

I know if I am going to step out into a street, even when there is a well lit, painted cross walk I am going to look out for something that is traveling far faster than me and weighs more than 29 times as much as I do. I don't stand a chance in such a scenario.

But there is a different way at looking at this statistic and one that goes beyond the pedestrian involved accidents. That is, we have lost, or never fully understood, the social contract we accept every time we step out of our house.

Our house is our castle. Inside, alone, there are  no rules.  We can do pretty much whatever we want.
Once we walk outside of the house we join countless others in the public arena where the rules of engagement are vastly different from what they were when we were inside. The goal for all of us is to get back inside, safely and alive. I'll bet the 5,977 above pedestrian statistics  had the exact same goal in mind, when they left their house.

When we leave our house,  we join countless others;  walkers, drivers, shoppers, joggers, bikers and virtually every other known mode of transportation.  We also are subject to every other conceivable distraction that has begun to command more and more of our attention. Phones, friend notifications, retail text messages,  news alerts, all demanding immediacy are the new constant.

We have to come to grips with the fact that we are no longer in total control of the environment or of anyone or anything else we encounter, when we enter the public. Every person out there has their own reasons for being there. Add to the escalating chaos and distractions, the weather, the traffic, the time of day, our location, the rules of the road and numerous other unforeseen variables, it is clear no one has the attention span to take it all in. One could not possibly imagine the number of unpredictable encounters we are subject to every time we leave our house.

How does this relate to the pedestrian fatalities in cross walks? Simple. At every intersection there are two people, a driver  and a walker. The above mentioned pre collision braking system is one answer for the driver. What about the walker? As a walker we must accept responsibility, that when crossing a well lit, lined, cross walk we can be entering a potential danger zone. As walkers we cannot change how drivers act. But we can take responsibility for how we act. True, the law says we are entitled to cross a street, where properly marked, without being hit by a motor vehicle. That is a privilege.  But if we believe that is our right and we are entitled to that right the very moment we step off the curb, we may end making that argument in the morgue.

Have we checked the cars on the road, estimated their speed, looked into the drivers eyes to see if they are even there, taken an inventory of how many cars are yet to come, can we wait another 10-15 seconds. Once we begin the crossing are we actually crossing or are we still on the phone, is this a cross walk or a stroll down a country path, am I alone out here, are others crossing? The questions we should be asking are numerous and they are all intended to keep us safe. Our safety, is our responsiblity.

The world has gotten faster, our attention span has gotten shorter.  That combination alone should be ample evidence that when in public we have to take a much greater share of responsibility, for our own safety.

That is one way we can lower the rate of pedestrian deaths. Take responsibility.