450
California could ban Clear, which lets travelers pay to skip TSA lines
(www.cbsnews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
450 points (98.9% liked)
News
23360 readers
1671 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You are right, but having a system like Clear also incentivizes the whole system to be worse to increase sales. While it's not a whole solution, it's a good move, imo.
I disagree. Clear gives wealthy an “out” and incentivizes the TSA system to NOT change. Clear is increasing sales but there is no relationship between their sales and TSA. TSA is not incentivized to make Clear more money. It’s a bad move.
I'd day it's still a good move as it prevents inequal wealth resulting in inequality treatment. We should ALL be moved to the front of the TSA line, with no extra cost, or none of us should.
The ultimate solution is a change to TSA that makes it easier to board for everyone, but if the only option is to let people who pay a fee get a leg-up, I'm fine with just banning the whole service.
You're forgetting the best option: disband TSA. It's never been shown to improve safety and I have always argued it's a greater security risk to congregate all the passengers (before screening) in a central location anyway.
If Clear's entire business model is predicated on getting money from people who don't want to deal with the standard security system, then they are 100% incentivized to keep security as unpleasant as possible. Suppose that Congressman Jones introduces the Make TSA Less Horrible Bill. That bill would be an existential threat to Clear, so they would absolutely lobby against it, even though it would objectively improve the lives of everyone who travels. By that same token, if Congressman Chudknuckle wanted a campaign donation from Clear, he might just so happen to introduce the TSA Now Can Stab You in the Ear with an Unfolded Paperclip Bill, and Clear would happily oblige.
Clear may not have created the problem for which they are selling the solution, but they have every incentive in the world to keep the problem as bad as possible, and even make it worse if they can.
Nothing you have said (which I agree with) disagrees with my comment. Clear only exists because TSA is terrible. Fix TSA and Clear goes away because no one will see value in it. In my airport, Clear is worse than preTSA and many have cancelled their Clear because a better option exists.
If it gave the wealthy an out it would be $1000/yr. This is trying to onboard everyone cheap, so you either pay clear or wait 2 hours.
It's doing that to generate a captive customer base so they can add additional tiers later on.
Okay? It’s still a private sector solution to make a public sector shitshow tolerable. How does banning it help the shitshow that is TSA? This was my whole point - government thinks banning Clear is the solution to be “fair” when the problem is TSA. If they fix the TSA shitshow there is no need for Clear.
Let’s reverse the question: how does continuing to allow it not just make the system the same but with a yearly fee attached?
Because only a small percentage of people use Clear.