After an accident in which distracted driving was the harbinger, the people involved typically pay medical bills, legal fees if there is a court case, and increased insurance rates. Furthermore, one out of every five accidents that occur are due to distracted driving, and over 40 billion dollars are spent on car accidents each year. With those numbers in mind, the people in the United States spend on average over 8 billion dollars annually on accidents caused by distracted driving (No Author Listed, 2017). In addition, accidents not only cause monetary problems but emotional distress to any individual involved. For example, in a study recently conducted in Europe, 36% of people admitted into intensive care for an injury due to an accident also exhibited symptoms of anxiety disorders (Papadakaki, 2017).
Hence important to balance and work put an optimal level of speed which would minimise cost and reduce accidents .Tullock pointed out that no one has performed these calculations due to the unwillingness to put a value on deaths and injuries as to be compared to the material costs of delay. The statement “lowering the speed would reduce the death toll” has been sidelined and showed great reluctance too as frightened to use a conversion ratio in which lives are worth some “finite amount of inconvience.” Tullock put the above in numerical values and assumed that one fatal accident worth $500000 in inconvience to drivers Some important features of the law are- 1.Use of simple limit law is dictated by the problems of
There should not be an increase in minimum wage because it is unhealthy to the economy in the long run and it will be the major cause of job loss, increase in inflation, competition, and the price level of goods and services. Many argue that an increase in minimum wage will help guide low skilled workers out of poverty and assist them into having a better career. That is not necessarily true, Many economists can agree that minimum wage jobs such as cashiers, host or a hostess are not jobs that meant to support a family. If anything by raising the minimum wage, it will put more people in poverty than guide them out of poverty. A raise in minimum wage will cause loss of jobs, an increase in the inflation rate, increase in
If presented a complex word, then one may believe that the accident was a lot more worse than it actually was. In experiment two, Loftus and Palmer were focused on the phrasing of the question and how it could create a false memory about that accident. One hundred and fifty students participated. The subjects were required to remember the accident and to describe it their own words. Fifty were asked the speed of the car when it was smashed, another fifty were asked the speed of the car when it was hit, and the other fifty were asked no question regarding speed.
Do you think driving with a hand-held device should be illegal or legal. I think that driving with a phone should be illegal because there would be a lot less accidents and help the economy more. My first reason that it should be illegal because there would be fewer accidents. People would be more focus on the road, than with a phone, because they would be less distracted. If they were to crash and they have insurance, their rates would go higher than what they are paying for or they have a chance to completely drop their insurance which no one wants, which will remind them to be more focus.
Therefore, the world is not benefiting from daylight saving time. All these effects of daylight saving time such as health issues, electricity usage and gasoline consumption negatively impact the world. Daylight saving time lessens the amount of sleep we get which affects our health. More electricity and gasoline is consumed due to the extra hour. Without daylight saving time these effects would not be as bad.
Throughout the past decade, we have been facing a very strong issue, this is drunk driving. This has caused many tragic deaths and is an obstacle that kills many innocent people. The issue with drunk driving is we can stop it, but no person stands up to it. Drunk driving kills many in only a matter of time. On average in only forty minutes someone is killed by a drunk driver in the U.S.
The second article “Murder Machines: Why Cars Will Kill 30,000 Americans This Year” talks about how dangerous the cars had become to pedestrians especially in the cities after the war,“In the first four years after World War I, more Americans died in auto accidents than had been killed during battle in Europe”(Murder Machines: Why Cars Will Kill 30,000 Americans This Year).It talks about how back in the 1920s they didn 't have laws like they do today to protect prediction from the large cars on the narrow roads, because the government wasn 't catching on to how dangerous the cars had become. In “The Great Gatsby” there are several scenarios where there car prove how dangerous they are but there one scene that is perfectly fits the article. Several years after Gatsby comes back from the war and meets up with Daisy and her new husband Tom and they go into town together in separate cars. However on the way back Daisy and Gatsby drive back from town and Gatsby lets Daisy drive, with Gatsby 's bright yellow car she hits Myrtle Wilson, her husband 's mistress, it was a total accident but it was fatal to Myrtle killing her because she came running out onto the street and Daisy couldn 't stop the
Damian Carrington of The Guardian News and Media, says on emissions that “It has been revealed by new research showing a minimum of 38,000 people a year die early due to the failure of diesel vehicles to meet official limits in real driving conditions.” Meaning that people are dying because of the failure of our tests to be accurate partially due to not testing duing the regeneration cycles. The way to fix this is first to test during those cycles, and as Peter M Mcclintock of The New York Times says is to “Test Emissions Where Cars Pollute: On the Road.” which is exactly the title of his article. In it he says that “This technology already exists. Remote sensing devices on the roadside can measure emissions as a vehicle passes by, without impeding traffic flow, often without the driver or vehicle even knowing they have been tested, and without the vehicle owner waiting in line at an inspection
The coming era of driver-less vehicles promises a bright future full of safety and ease, yet this is not currently an obtainable goal. Widespread use of autonomous vehicles proves to introduce more negative effects than the promised positive. They won 't make the roads any safer, for they are more likely to misread their surroundings. There are major risks in taking control away from human drivers, and current technology is not yet up to the task. Self-driving cars should be banned in the state of Pennsylvania because they are not as safe as vehicles operated by humans, they put jobs and businesses at risk of being lost, they can 't make ethical decisions, and they use unreliable and unsecured technology.
If we expand it, it could help us in the long run to increase the markets and decrease trafficking. But is a couple less cars on the road more important than the homes of others and the prices? We have limited time and money and I don’t think it should be going into this