The Perils of Taking Action.

Suppose we're the CDC (Centre for Disease Control). We anticipate an outbreak of, say, Squirrel Pox (which, to my knowledge, doesn't exist except in this example). We have to choose to either take action against the outbreak of Squirrel Pox, or let it go on its own. No brainer, right? Always take action for the public good. Well, if you do take action, and you're successful in keeping the Squirrel-linked disease to a minimum... well... here's a tongue in cheek outcome table:

Obviously, the best thing for the CDC to do is to do nothing! The best outcome (The "Let's ignore it, and hope it goes away" outcome) is in that category. ;)

Imagine! You put effort into a vaccination campaign against Squirrel Pox, and hunt down Squirrels for extermination so even their Squirrel Alarm Calls don't save them from the glue factory. And so few are injured by the evils of Squirrel Pox. And then the public goes, "See? No one died! You, CDC, are a bunch of alarmist jerks. For this, we punish you."

Nope, much safer for your job for you to do nothing.  Imagine how good you can get at Solitaire! I guess my point is Squirrels are up to NO GOOD.

See? Evil!