He's updating one pump at a time. What are the other pumps doing? Dispensing gasoline... They would not want to just shut everything down and eliminate a half-hour's worth of revenue from 15 pumps just so OP is not inconvenienced.
If you are correct that all the other pumps are in use, then shutting down one pump at a time will result in the same amount of lost revenue (8 pump-hour's worth) as shutting them all down at the same time.
A better solution is to raise the price of gasoline slightly so fewer than 16 pumps are in use at a time. This way, a financial optimum can be achieved between lost pump revenue and the cost of the technician's time.
Another advantage of tolling is that variable express tolling permanently (yes, permanently) eliminates traffic congestion, without overcharging anyone (where "overcharge" means "charge more than the market equilibrium rate").
And another advantage is that it therefore permanently eliminates the need to widen roads to eliminate congestion, which saves taxpayers a lot of money.
So if you don't like paying taxes or if you don't like sitting in traffic, you should welcome variable express tolling with open arms.
track circuits...can't tell you which train [is on a section of track], nor distinguish between maintenance vehicles and trains, nor can it tell you how fast or long a train is.
It would also jack up the price of nearly anything that is transported over the roads...
Actually, what jacks up the price is when we don't charge users full price for use of the roads, leading to a distorted, inefficient market for transportation.
And building a website without reliance on JavaScript can be really tricky and limiting.
A website should always be navigable without JavaScript. One that isn't, is a sign of laziness, pure and simple. The use of JavaScript should be limited to eye candy, and in many cases CSS will do what you want.
The Chinese don't really know very much about rice. That's why the purpose of other dishes in Chinese cuisine is to help the rice go down.
The Japanese are the real rice connoisseurs. In Japanese cuisine, rice is a thing of worship, probably as an artifact of the Shinto religion where everything has a soul. A Japanese person will tell you that their domestic rice is the best, followed by California rice. But to the Chinese, rice is rice.
(Before someone says "well, they're just hard tests", the 6th grade tests had college level reading material on them.
To play the devil's advocate, if you get a perfect score on a test, you don't really know how good you are, you only know that you were good enough to pass the test. Getting an answer wrong reveals an upper limit of your ability, if knowing that is worth anything.
But how to you discern whether that 10% improvement is due to the work of the teacher or due to the work of a paid tutor outside the class?
If one student improves by 10% due to the addition of a paid tutor, and another student regresses by 10% by dropping a paid tutor, they cancel each other out. If all students got paid tutors, then their percentiles would not change.
The poor kid might be stuck at home by himself watching tv and eating a McDonalds value meal while his single mom is working her 2nd shift job...
And chances are that these circumstances were reflected in the test scores at the beginning of the year. I already explained this.
And evaluating based on the difference between beginning and end year testing doesn't work either because (at least theoretically) both kids are being exposed to new material throughout the year, so the disparity only increases.
If a student starts the year at the 30th percentile and ends the year at the 40th percentile, then the teacher was probably pretty effective, even though the student is still under-performing.
If students from wealthy families score better than students from poor families, then that will be reflected in the evaluation at the beginning of the year, so this "value-added" methodology corrects for family backgrounds.
So we can glean some useful information about teacher effectiveness from student test scores.
That $68 billion is in year-of-expenditure dollars, not 2008 dollars. In 2013 dollars, that $68 billion (actually, $67.6 billion) is $54.9 billion according to the 2014 business plan.
It's unfortunate that even journalists don't understand inflation.
By the way, the central valley segment is only $27.8 billion in 2013 dollars. It's called the IOS, the Initial Operating Section. It's cheap because the land is flat and sparse. The bookends will be expensive.
The original cost estimate was $33 billion in 2008 dollars. The current estimate is the equivalent of $51.1 billion in 2008 dollars. If you'll do the math, you'll notice that $51.1 billion is not double $33 billion.
Very good. Now let's discuss how "opportunity costs" mean this should be completed as soon as possible and why it doesn't make sense financially to have airports close to downtowns.
Personally I feel the rates for the mass-transit system should be raised to meet the financial demands of running that service.
That would increase demand for parking, making it even more of a nightmare than it is today.
No, just raise the price of parking to market equilibrium. Besides fixing the parking problem without the need to build more parking garages, it would also increase demand for alternatives, making mass transit more cost-effective.
Slashdot Mirror
Which freeway express lane has variable tolling, no price ceiling, and still gets congested on a regular basis? I don't think it exists.
A person isn't a car, so fewer cars doesn't necessarily mean fewer people.
The same way eBay prevents too many people from ever winning the same auction, while preventing anyone from ever being overcharged.
Pricing things at market equilibrium has never required a way for people to avoid paying.
If you are correct that all the other pumps are in use, then shutting down one pump at a time will result in the same amount of lost revenue (8 pump-hour's worth) as shutting them all down at the same time.
A better solution is to raise the price of gasoline slightly so fewer than 16 pumps are in use at a time. This way, a financial optimum can be achieved between lost pump revenue and the cost of the technician's time.
Another advantage of tolling is that variable express tolling permanently (yes, permanently) eliminates traffic congestion, without overcharging anyone (where "overcharge" means "charge more than the market equilibrium rate").
And another advantage is that it therefore permanently eliminates the need to widen roads to eliminate congestion, which saves taxpayers a lot of money.
So if you don't like paying taxes or if you don't like sitting in traffic, you should welcome variable express tolling with open arms.
Absolutely false! Drivers currently pay less than half the total cost of roads.
Problems that are difficult but solvable and lucrative are what every entrepreneur hopes to find.
That means road subsidies benefit employers who don't have to pay higher wages just so their employees can afford to get to work.
RFID can tell you those things.
Don't the poor usually walk, ride bikes, and take mass transit? Did you know that the poor love tolls more than other income classes because tolls displace taxes the poor would otherwise have to pay?
Actually, what jacks up the price is when we don't charge users full price for use of the roads, leading to a distorted, inefficient market for transportation.
Yes, what a drab, sad world it would be if people lived where they weren't an economic burden on others.
A website should always be navigable without JavaScript. One that isn't, is a sign of laziness, pure and simple. The use of JavaScript should be limited to eye candy, and in many cases CSS will do what you want.
The Chinese don't really know very much about rice. That's why the purpose of other dishes in Chinese cuisine is to help the rice go down.
The Japanese are the real rice connoisseurs. In Japanese cuisine, rice is a thing of worship, probably as an artifact of the Shinto religion where everything has a soul. A Japanese person will tell you that their domestic rice is the best, followed by California rice. But to the Chinese, rice is rice.
Buffalo eggs.
Unless it can do it so much better than doing it some other way and it's used so often that it's worth the space. For example, a rice cooker.
One of these should do the trick, without any collateral damage.
To play the devil's advocate, if you get a perfect score on a test, you don't really know how good you are, you only know that you were good enough to pass the test. Getting an answer wrong reveals an upper limit of your ability, if knowing that is worth anything.
If one student improves by 10% due to the addition of a paid tutor, and another student regresses by 10% by dropping a paid tutor, they cancel each other out. If all students got paid tutors, then their percentiles would not change.
And chances are that these circumstances were reflected in the test scores at the beginning of the year. I already explained this.
Do you understand how percentiles work?
If a student starts the year at the 30th percentile and ends the year at the 40th percentile, then the teacher was probably pretty effective, even though the student is still under-performing.
If students from wealthy families score better than students from poor families, then that will be reflected in the evaluation at the beginning of the year, so this "value-added" methodology corrects for family backgrounds.
So we can glean some useful information about teacher effectiveness from student test scores.
That $68 billion is in year-of-expenditure dollars, not 2008 dollars. In 2013 dollars, that $68 billion (actually, $67.6 billion) is $54.9 billion according to the 2014 business plan.
It's unfortunate that even journalists don't understand inflation.
By the way, the central valley segment is only $27.8 billion in 2013 dollars. It's called the IOS, the Initial Operating Section. It's cheap because the land is flat and sparse. The bookends will be expensive.
The original cost estimate was $33 billion in 2008 dollars. The current estimate is the equivalent of $51.1 billion in 2008 dollars. If you'll do the math, you'll notice that $51.1 billion is not double $33 billion.
Very good. Now let's discuss how "opportunity costs" mean this should be completed as soon as possible and why it doesn't make sense financially to have airports close to downtowns.
The rising cost due largely to inflation is why it needs to be built as quickly as possible.
That would increase demand for parking, making it even more of a nightmare than it is today.
No, just raise the price of parking to market equilibrium. Besides fixing the parking problem without the need to build more parking garages, it would also increase demand for alternatives, making mass transit more cost-effective.