The Middle of the Road

"The tree which moves some to tears of joy is in the eyes of others only a green thing that stands in the way" - William Blake. I was reminded of this quote when I read this short editorial in NY Times by Maura J Casey. In a world with little tolerance for eccentricity, it is hard to imagine that decision being made today, says the author. Difficult to digest, yet absolutely TRUE.

NY Times Editorial

When I saw employees of my small Connecticut town digging around a tree near my home, I feared they were getting ready to cut it down. Thankfully, they were just replacing a nearby street sign.

The tree is an ordinary maple, but it stands at the juncture of two roads. Not at the side of the road, mind you. In the middle. When you turn from one street to the other, you have to drive around the tree, which is at least 60 years old, and grows smack in the center of the pavement. It is a reminder of a slower time that always makes me smile.

The road is one of the few remaining lightly traveled ones in town. Once, all of this town’s roads were lightly traveled. Tractors and milk trucks ambled in greater numbers; now today’s busy commuters whiz by. The traffic — which at certain times of the day can be near constant — forced the town to install its second stoplight about five years ago, followed soon after by a few fast-food franchises. A Chinese restaurant moved in, and now we can pick up kung pao chicken without having to drive 15 minutes to the small city nearby. Such are the privileges and the constraints of civilization.

That’s why the site — and sight — of the tree, the silent, leafy sentinel of a slower time, is at once amusing and comforting. Sometime, decades ago, town officials decided to pave around the tree instead of cutting it down for the convenience of cars despite the fact that it probably made more sense to remove it while widening the road. But it was a perfectly good tree, and someone argued, successfully, that it be left alone. In a world with little tolerance for eccentricity, it is hard to imagine that decision being made today.

Social welfare organisations liable to pay minimum wages

Business Line (July 9, 2008) reports that the Madras High Court has held that payment of minimum wages would stand irrespective of whether a work undertaken by an organisation was on voluntary basis.

Citing a decision of the apex court [in Sanjit Roy vs State of Rajasthan (1983 (1) SCC 525)], Mr Justice K. Chandru ruled that neither the Government nor any other authority could evade payment of minimum wages on the specious plea that they were running a social welfare organisation.

Non-payment of minimum wages to workmen on piece rate basis, would amount to forced labour is the key decision.

Why Do You Lie? The Perils of Self-Reporting

I read with interest this informative article by Stephen J. Dubner in Freakonomics / NY Times Blog about how he is always surprised at how easily, and cheaply, we humans lie.

I guess, may be if there is a penalty for telling lies, we would behave properly. While we teach children "Telling lies no papa", we ourselves are quite capable of telling lies and do tell lies, if it suits us. May be that's what this research indicates wherein people say they possess certain things, when they actually don't possess them and similarly deny possessing certain things, when they actually do possess them. Probably, the benefit of telling lies, either material or otherwise, outwieghs the costs involved, enticing people to tell lies, even as they teach their children "Telling lies no papa".

Some highlights from the Freakonomics / NY Times blogpost -

• Have you ever been in a conversation about, say, a particular book and been tempted to say you’ve read it even though you haven’t? I am guessing the answer is yes. But why would anyone bother to lie in such a low-stakes situation? The book lie is what you might call a lie of reputation: you are concerned with what other people think of you. Of the many reasons that people lie, I have always thought that the lie of reputation is the most interesting — as opposed to a lie to gain advantage, to avoid trouble, to get out of an obligation, etc.
• A new paper by the economists Cesar Martinelli and Susan W. Parker offers some fascinating insights into lies of reputation. It is called “Deception and Misreporting in a Social Program,” and will be published soon in the Journal of the European Economics Association.
• It turned out that a lot of people underreported certain items that they thought might exclude them from getting benefits. These include cars, trucks, video recorders, satellite TV, phone, washing machine etc. That’s not very surprising: you might expect people to lie to gain the advantage of a welfare benefit. But here’s the surprise - some items which applicants said they had but in fact did not and these include toilet, tap water, gas stove, concrete floor, refrigerator etc. So 4 out of 10 applicants without a toilet said they had one. Why?
• Martinelli and Parker chalk it up to embarrassment, plain and simple. People who were desperately poor were also apparently desperate to not admit to a welfare clerk that they lived without a toilet or running water or even a concrete floor. This is one of the most amazing lies of reputation I can imagine.
• The Martinelli-Parker paper may have broad implications for not only poverty programs but any kind of project where the data are self-reported. Think about the typical survey on drug use, sexual behavior, personal hygiene, voting preference, environmental behavior, etc.
• Here’s what we once wrote, for instance, in an article about the lack of hand hygiene in hospitals - In one Australian medical study, doctors self-reported their hand-washing rate at 73 percent, whereas when these same doctors were observed, their actual rate was a paltry 9 percent.
• But as often as we or anyone else writes about the perils of self-reporting, the Martinelli-Parker paper really gives the whole topic a foundation to stand on. Not only does it deliver a surprising insight into why we lie, but it is also a sobering reminder to naturally distrust self-reported data — at least until some scientists enable us to peer into one another’s minds and see what’s really going on there.

A Sapling Grows Into a Giant; The Streets Around It Change, Too

I grew up in Madras. As was the case with numerous other places, even Madras had its places which had lots of trees. As the economy grew, more people made money, credit culture also took great shape, enticing millions of individuals all over the country to go for their personal transport which in turn lead to traffic jams finally resulting in authorities resorting to road widening projects. Madras also participated in this journey for personal vehicles. In short, we had more vehicles than what we could handle. Never mind if the trees were still healthy. Never mind if the trees gave a cool shade to the citizens all these years. The only way by which roads could be widened was by reducing the footpath and removing trees. There were also accidents due to trees. Heartlessly, our local administrations, over the years, have faithfully carried out the tasks of reducing footpaths and removing trees, though in the later case, they were ably aided by property developers, flat owners, owners of hoardings etc. The sufferers were those who had to walk around - in the absence of footpaths and in the absence of cool shades of the trees.

Once a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) resulted in the Madras High Court ordering a stay on the felling of trees along G. N. Chetty Road, North and South Usman Roads, C. P. Ramaswamy Road and TTK Road until an expert panel looked into the issues. Authorities are confronted with a decision making issue - save trees or widen the roads and ease the traffic. The easiest decision to take is to support the public, property developers etc. as at the end of the day, they are the people who are going to vote for politicians. See, we are a democracy where only people have voting rights. Trees don't vote! While PILs helped in saving some time, often the contractors who are given the job, are in great hurry and clear the trees before anyone could react. Transplantation could be tried out wherever possible, but it has not been successful, as it is not a statutory requirement. The easiest solution is cutting of trees, which our people have faithfully done, most of them under the cover of night. In the end, trees lost their lives and Madras lost its tree cover.

I was reminded of the lost trees of Madras when I read this article about a tree in New York Times. Some highlights from the article.

"...The tree, on Kane Street near Tompkins Place, became a giant, with branches that reach across Kane, roots that have torn apart the sidewalk, and a trunk wrapped in vines that leans into the street like an old man warning cars away. In recent weeks, though, residents who live appreciatively in the mulberry’s shade feared the tree faced a new threat: a city chain saw. Then, one morning in early June, Mark Melamed saw posted signs explaining that trees on the street were scheduled for trimming or removal. The family feared the worst. The Melameds’ 16-year-old daughter, Caroline, went to school that day “close to tears,” her mother, Helen Melamed, said. The mulberry’s branches scraped Caroline’s window, providing a leafy prism on the neighborhood. She anxiously called home from school to find out what had happened to the tree...."