Just because something can be optimum doesn’t mean it has to be optimum. We accept less than optimum all the time for reasons of cost, aesthetics, functionality or tradition. Autocratic governments with the idea that they have unlimited budgets tend to forget that.
I think that’s what I was trying to say in my post, isn’t it?
To my mind, government mandates of all sorts seem to come down the pike for one reason only: to make the public think that they’re DOING something.
I personally believe this particular mandate fits that description quite nicely. I mean, how many times have you heard of an auto accident happening and the driver later saying, “Gee, officer, I was trying to read all those capital letters on the sign and the car just got away from me! If only the signs had big AND small letters, this never would have happened!”
So why this demand from the feds? Is it because they are True Believers, determined to wipe out even the smallest speck of danger from the roadways? Or is it to justify their own jobs and positions? I tend to go with the latter.
In any event, you’re right, optimization is not always required, and you are futher correct when you point out that each of us, every day, make decisions to purchase less than optimum items due to all the myriad reasons you listed.
Regards,
PS: Did you get a chance to look at that “Forgotten NY” website? It really is very interesting, and for me, a born & raised NYer, a little trip down memory lane. (I do remember those old signs.)