pretty big if there.. there's no money in it.
another big if. is there any proof or even suggestion?) that driver or vehicle licensing has made teh road a safer place to do stuff?
(yay visual puns)
yeah. that'd be fine by me.
IF having a license of any variety would guarantee that the holder wasn't a fucking muppet.
... judging by the "driver"s i see on the road - it isn't.
as for a system: how about a bunch of disgruntled old pricks get to drive tanks around to sort out those young hooligan upstarts on their loud motorcycles with their rap videos and whut nut. say, one old cunt for every 2000 "driver"s... it'd be a damn site cheaper than the current policy enforcement scheme.
I am contracted to a customer to to provides a service.The terms of my contract deem that I must complete a minimum requirement of work tovsatisfy my customer. the contract is growing weed, . I must get a minimum of 49% strike rate from the seed they supply.
I manage eash year to get a 53% strike from the seeds supplied, I reach my quota required to keep my contract.
Is the 40% stated in the memo the minimum amount of persons required to pass this test for the company to be able renew its contract each year? Less than a %40% pass in a year would see the contract opened up to any other company who could meet this requirement.
To be old and wise, first you must be young and stupid.
you smoked the surplus yourself...?
Opinions are like arseholes: Everybody has got one, but that doesn't mean you got to air it in public all the time....
Yep quota based contract.
Your customer would be better off specifying a delivered amount of product, of a certain quality, with clear measures as to what the quality measures were.
If you manage only to grow 35% of seeds but germinate all female plants, you have done much better than the grower who manages a 49% target, equally divided male/female.
The STANDARD is important... the quota merely easier to measure.
David must play fair with the other kids, even the idiots.
Winding up drongos, foil hat wearers and over sensitive KBers for over 14,000 posts...........![]()
" Life is not a rehearsal, it's as happy or miserable as you want to make it"
Better for who? If you want to categorise drivers into safe and unsafe lumps you wouldn't be handing licences out to anyone under 24 to start with.
Now that you've effectively got yourself voted out of office the next set of fuckwit politicians with a fresh new bunch of lobbyists in their ears will come up with another idiot policy with even less relevance to the real world. Rinse and reload.
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
What do you mean by better for who?
The hypothetical question which would be put to the tenagers is "Do you want to be good drivers and not be dead/injured or kill/maim others?" Who would want to consciously be a bad driver and be killed/injured etc?
Statistically they are categorised anyway. That's what this whole new licensing system is all about, most young drivers are unsafe and need to be upgraded.
Teenaged drivers are not "consciously" bad drivers ... after a few lessons (but before getting a license) ... they'll tell you they're getting quite good. And the "Boy-racers" that find themselves parked on their roof/in the side of a house/inside another car/under a truck ... etc. ... will ALL tell you how good a driver they are. And then howThey just got unlucky. And it wasn't their fault.
But hypothetically (of course) ... they might be wrong.
When life throws you a curve ... Lean into it ...
Winding up drongos, foil hat wearers and over sensitive KBers for over 14,000 posts...........![]()
" Life is not a rehearsal, it's as happy or miserable as you want to make it"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks