omw_68
3mo ago
Thanks . . I try to keep public posting to a minimum. Even on this discussion board, public posting leads to pointless bickering matches with culture warriors. When I get into an argument online, I tend to get so engaged with it that it distracts me from actual, paying work.
I tend to agree with you on this. I would guess that at some point the town residents wanted buried power lines. Maybe someone was injured by a downed electric line, maybe there was a power failure with especially bad consequences, maybe it was the pet issue of a few leading residents, who knows. At the same time, there wasn't the political will to spend the necessary money to do it. (Presumably it's very expensive to bury power lines as it is very unusual). In that kind of situation, nobody wants to tell some widow that the town doesn't want to spend the money to prevent more possible electrocutions. So one way to square that circle is to set up a situation where you can pretend that there is an actual project to bury the power lines when in reality there is not.
I think that these sorts of situations -- let's all pretend that we are addressing problem X -- are actually pretty common in politics. Anyone with a lick of sense knew perfectly well that the crime bill of 1992 would not reduce crime; that the No Child Left Behind Act would accomplish little or nothing; and so on. More recently, a lot of the policies put in place to fight against Coronavirus were obviously never going to help. So I would guess that the Pasadena power line project is a similar kind of situation.
More options
Context Copy link