1. Das haben wir schon immer so gemacht (that's how we've always done it)
2. Das haben wir noch nie so gemacht (we have never done it like that)
3. Da könnte ja jeder kommen (then everyone would try it)
They're so German that they're very difficult to faithfully translate. Just imagine a grumpy older guy looking for every excuse not to do what you want him to.
Me: I'd like to get out here please.
Driver: But it can be dangerous...
Me: Noted. Good thing that is not your problem.
And when I am hit by a camel while departing the bus, that is my problem also. But of course, most cultures do not support this line of reasoning - you need to be taken care of weather you like it or not. This approach is well tolerated by most people, but saddens and irritates people like me.
> Me: Noted. Good thing that is not your problem.
As if... when you get injured while leaving the bus, do you really believe the bus driver would just mind their business? There is another rule that demands you help people in emergency situations
You probably wouldn't do this, but the company needs to protect itself against the people who would.
You only get to say that when you live on an island.
I don’t think that at all. All I said was that if I absolve the driver of whatever responsibility he believes he has for me, then if something happens as I step out, it is indeed should not be his problem, legally speaking. He might not like it, of course - which is not my problem, to be honest.
edit: this is all linguistics, however. The initial issue was that the driver is unable to open the door even if we both assess the risk as negligible. Sure, he might not want me to suicide jump from his bus onto a highway - even if I believe I have the theoretical right to do that - but that is not the situation we're in. The point was that I should be able to say it's ok, looks safe, I accept the risk if something happens.
It doesn't work or scale in a society. If everyone gets to arbitrarily choose what is 'not your problem', the everything is everyones problem, or nobody's problem.
No, it wouldn't. This type of logic only holds if we consider that drivers are automatons who can not analyze risks by themselves. Give the drivers autonomy to judge whether it's safe or not to deviate from the scheduled route.
I rather have a driver signaling me "No, I will not open the door now because I don't think it is safe" over "No, I will not open the door now because I can't break the rules". It makes me think of the driver less as a person and more as a brainless cog.
Rules are not the problem. Trying to apply one set of rules to every context is.
> People might overlook consequences or are not informed enough to make good decisions.
That happens regardless, so much so that "I was just following orders" defense has been tried many times before and never became morally acceptable.
After 13 years living in Berlin, I've come to terms with the fact that most aspects of German culture are things I need to tolerate, but never embrace.