Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Annoyed]

I think Google is working on personal submarines...

[Gatefan1976]

What he said...

That's what she said??

[Gatefan1976]

I know I'm gonna regret this... but what would that be?

You know what I mean, but let's not and say we did

[Meaghan]

hehehe....yeah, the Arkansas State Police really screwed up when it came to me getting my license. I went in thinking I'd get my learners in AR, practice then do the road test. I had just moved to the US and needed 1 piece of US photo ID. I told the guy who was doing the written tests that the license I had was only a learners permit....but I still got the full license. Then switched it for a Louisiana one when I moved there, then for a Manitoba one when I came home. Evidently the AR road test is pretty easy.

[jelgate]

Most states make you take a road test in your under 18. I wonder if you still have to log in those 40 hours with license driver or if that is an under 18 thing too.

[garhkal]

I could think of at least one other thing that should have at least a 6 hour minimum training time...........

Such as??

That is exactly what I'm referring to. They need to an a persons ability to handle a sudden emergency, such as a skid, sudden obstruction or other situations. Test the ability to get out of trouble.

Additionally, once they hit 65 or even 70, i feel that they should 'retest' at least once every 3-4 years. I have seen way too many instances over the past 10 years, of some 'old fogey driving the WRONG way onto a freeway, or some other road.. Have only heard of 2 incidences where it was a younger person.

[jelgate]

I can think of several instances of when younger people drove on the wrong side of the road. Usually alcohol or drugs was involved

[Gatefan1976]

I can think of several instances of when younger people drove on the wrong side of the road. Usually alcohol or drugs was involved

At least it -takes- alcohol and drugs to do it

[Annoyed]

Such as??

Additionally, once they hit 65 or even 70, i feel that they should 'retest' at least once every 3-4 years. I have seen way too many instances over the past 10 years, of some 'old fogey driving the WRONG way onto a freeway, or some other road.. Have only heard of 2 incidences where it was a younger person.

Agreed. But we will never see such changes, or even "real" tests of the ability to drive in order to get a license. A very large part of the population simply wouldn't be able to pass the tests, including many of the people who make the rules. So you're not going to see that happen.

Yeah, it's kinda funny how if somebody gets drunk or otherwise drives with their ability impaired and causes an accident which kills somebody the outcry comes forth: Off with his head! But if someone whose ability is equally impaired by the aging process does the same thing, no one says a word.

Does it really matter to the dead or their families why the person was impaired?

The US population is aging, and in the coming years, we're going to have a lot of older folks who can't or shouldn't drive anymore. Businesses like Uber are going to become rather common, provided they can survive the legal challenges being raised by the taxicab industry and other vested interests.

[Annoyed]

And people accuse the military of wasteful spending.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...end-furniture/
Excerpt:

By Kellan Howell - The Washington Times - Thursday, September 24, 2015

The federal agency that has the job of protecting the environment doesn’t seem to have too much concern for trees, at least the ones cut down to make furniture.

The Environmental Protection Agency over the past decade has spent a whopping $92.4 million to purchase, rent, install and store office furniture ranging from fancy hickory chairs and a hexagonal wooden table, worth thousands of dollars each, to a simple drawer to store pencils that cost $813.57.

The furniture shopping sprees equaled about $6,000 for every one of the agency’s 15,492 employees, according to federal spending data made public by the government watchdog OpenTheBooks.com.

[mad_gater]

Agreed. But we will never see such changes, or even "real" tests of the ability to drive in order to get a license. A very large part of the population simply wouldn't be able to pass the tests, including many of the people who make the rules. So you're not going to see that happen.

Yeah, it's kinda funny how if somebody gets drunk or otherwise drives with their ability impaired and causes an accident which kills somebody the outcry comes forth: Off with his head! But if someone whose ability is equally impaired by the aging process does the same thing, no one says a word.

Does it really matter to the dead or their families why the person was impaired?

The US population is aging, and in the coming years, we're going to have a lot of older folks who can't or shouldn't drive anymore. Businesses like Uber are going to become rather common, provided they can survive the legal challenges being raised by the taxicab industry and other vested interests.

don't see why Uber should be around anyway given that most communities have a quite extensive network of senior citizen transportation services...and I think the fees for these services, if any, can even be covered by Medicare depending on the level of Medicare coverage they have

[garhkal]

I can think of several instances of when younger people drove on the wrong side of the road. Usually alcohol or drugs was involved

Yea, there have been some of those.. BUT i was on about Non drinking/drug impaired issues.
Heck some of those old folk seem to have issues driving in a STORE on one of those motorized scooter/mobility devices.. LET alone on a road.

Agreed. But we will never see such changes, or even "real" tests of the ability to drive in order to get a license. A very large part of the population simply wouldn't be able to pass the tests, including many of the people who make the rules. So you're not going to see that happen.

Especially when a lot of those who make the rules, are themselves old (or getting there)..

[jelgate]

I was trying to make a analogy that the elderly people who should not be driving are impaired in similar ways that drunk drivers are and I would say its more than some

[Annoyed]

don't see why Uber should be around anyway given that most communities have a quite extensive network of senior citizen transportation services...and I think the fees for these services, if any, can even be covered by Medicare depending on the level of Medicare coverage they have

From my experience before my mother passed a few years ago, such transportation is covered, but only for medically necessary transportation; to doctors' offices/hospitals/test facilities, etc. And only partially covered.

Day to day transportation for someone who can no longer drive is up to the family, or taxicabs and public transportation in areas that are served by such.

So Uber would be a good reasonable cost alternative for such folks, but I expect the taxicab industry & the government will eventually get it killed via the courts. Can't have an established industry that is a financial contributor to the government via taxicab licenses, registration, or even the right to operate a cab being subject to a fee paid to the local government being rendered obsolete, can we?

[Annoyed]

Yea, there have been some of those.. BUT i was on about Non drinking/drug impaired issues.
Heck some of those old folk seem to have issues driving in a STORE on one of those motorized scooter/mobility devices.. LET alone on a road.

Yeah, I've seen a few examples of that as well.

Aside from the inevitable declines eyesight, reaction times, coordination and such, it seems that some people lose their situational awareness (for lack of a better term) as they age, they just can't keep an accurate and current mental picture of their surroundings, be it a highway or a supermarket or anything else. This causes them to be in a constant state of confusion, and they become a hazard to themselves and others.

At the other end of the scale, a young driver can theoretically be the safest drivers on the road, as their reaction times eyesight, coordination, situational awareness and such are all near the peak of human normal range. Once they have a few years experience under their belt, and it sinks in that they can be killed, a young driver who chooses to apply themselves to learning the skill can probably drive far faster than an older person like myself in complete safety because their native abilities are so much better. I'm no slouch, I still consider my ability behind the wheel to be well ahead of the average driver, but I will be the first to admit that I couldn't hope to match my own performance when I was younger.

I've wondered if maybe forcing youngsters to drive at speeds safe for older folks doesn't actually cause accidents. Someone who is limited to performing a task at a level far below their ability will inevitably get bored and their attention may start to wander from the task at hand. Are we hurting ourselves by setting driving standards to the lowest common denominator in order to allow people with lesser abilities to drive?

But I digress. As the US population ages, mobility for the older folks is going to be a big problem. Taxicabs are way too expensive for day to day transport, but Uber could be viable alternative.