Pondering the panic of 2009

In the hierarchy of human needs, the bladder always outranks the stomach.

Hunger, after all, can wait patiently for hours — even days — before being satisfied. An urgent need for bathroom facilities is another matter.

So why did the Commonwealth of Virginia close 19 rest areas on its interstate highways? Was it a sober, well-thought-out decision that would result in significant savings, as government officials will tell you? Or was it because they panicked?

When this was originally being debated, the state transportation folks said it would save $9 million a year. But how many people are required to keep a rest area operating? Two? Even adding in heat and water expenses, $9 million seems a bit high.

I’m surprised the Chamber of Commerce and Department of Tourism folks allowed this to happen. To me, it sends the following message to carloads of out-of-staters as they drive past with pained expressions on their faces: “Wow, this state is really in bad shape. Good thing we don’t live/go to school/own a business here.”

Furthermore, this makes a mockery of the term “southern hospitality.” That task now falls to the convenience stores and fast food restaurants located just off the interstates. The rest areas were a lot easier to access.

Yes, I’m speaking from personal experience, having just driven I-81 through the Shenandoah Valley last week. Many of the closings, however, were in Northern Virginia’s I-95 corridor, where there is not only the most traffic, but the most potential for bumper-to-bumper delays that will further aggravate already outraged bladders.

Perhaps the state could install those old-fashioned pay toilets. Or ask for volunteers to stand in front of the building with tip jars. Anything seems better than what they’ve created.

This isn’t the only thing I wonder about amidst the daily drumbeat of grim economic news.

Not being an economist, for example, I wonder: “Why?” Why should an epidemic of bad housing loans shut down rest areas and close down companies completely unrelated to the housing industry? I’m sure this makes sense on some level, but it all blew past me on CNN.

I also wonder about the concept of unemployment insurance for laid-off workers. Instead of paying that to the worker who is let go, wouldn’t it make more sense to pay the company that he or she works for, with the stipulation that it goes to pay wages (or some percentage of them)? That way, the company could keep its workforce more or less intact and continue to produce its product, paying governmental taxes in the process.

We talk a lot about patriotism in these United States, but it doesn’t seem to extend to helping each other. What if all of the country’s creditors, starting with those at the very top of the food chain who could afford it, gave all of their debtors a two-month moratorium on bill paybacks? That might trigger a true “trickle-down” effect. Or not — it’s just a thought.

I like the story about the company owner somewhere in the Midwest who suggested to his workers that they each take a small pay cut as an alternative to layoffs. Those with more seniority immediately began grumbling about this, until the owner said: “Fine. Then we’re going to decide who gets laid off by drawing names out of a hat.”

Instant change of heart.