Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#81

Post by DaveExeter »

Lendal wrote: post #16
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

Because Boeing is so important to national security, everyone involved in leading this from the CEO to the board of directors should be treated as traitors and have all their assets seized and spend the rest of their life in a maximum security federal prison.

This is what happens when monopolies are allowed to exist. In a competitive market if the CEO gives away market share to rivals due to reckless indifference to safety and becomes a liability, they will be fired or the company gets spun off to fend for themselves. When we as a society allow a monopoly to exist, then government assumes responsibility for whatever that monopoly does with its power. Government interventi…

I'm looking forward to Chinese competition in the aviation industry. This would benefit all players.

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#82

Post by [deleted] »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #60
jostmey wrote: post #43

If corporations are people (remember that Supreme Court ruling?) then Boeing should be held criminally liable for their missteps

> remember that Supreme Court ruling Corporate personhood is a centuries-old legal concept [1], finding first mention at the Supreme Court in the 19th century. > then Boeing should be held criminally liable They were charged in 2021, and entered into a deferred-prosecution agreement after paying a $2.5bn fine [2]. It appears the DoJ is already looking into the Alaska Airlines blow-out [3]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.…

[deleted]

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#83

Post by readthenotes1 »

piva00 wrote: post #55
whythre wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to the other big economic system, the one that always seem to involve a lot of camps and mass graves.

Capitalism has its own ways to kill people as well, just with some extra layers to blame the victims.

And government run monopolies don't?

E.g.,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_accidents_and_incid...

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#85

Post by flandish »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #65
flandish wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy: If this is proven to be a criminal act, even of criminal negligence, charge not only the people making decisions, the board members, but also shareholders, relative to their holdings. Including grouped stocks such as funds. All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing.

> All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing Right, you wouldn’t invest in American business, period. (Also, how do you criminally charge someone on a pro rata basis? Do you send every American with a pension to jail for 1/31,000,000th the jail time?)

>pro rata

Yes. Yes you do. You set a minimum then fine below that minimum.

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#86

Post by flandish »

jdlshore wrote: post #68
flandish wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy: If this is proven to be a criminal act, even of criminal negligence, charge not only the people making decisions, the board members, but also shareholders, relative to their holdings. Including grouped stocks such as funds. All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing.

Easy? You’re letting your outrage short-circuit your brain. There’s no way you’ve thought this ridiculous proposal through. Boeing is part of the S&P 500. Almost every American who has stocks is going to have a fund that includes Boeing. That includes people with 401Ks, so basically everyone in the middle class. You’re talking about charging a 100 million people. Okay, so maybe that’s what you intended. Now what? Doe…

Like I said - all it will take is once.

Below a certain holding quantity, fine the shareholders.

I didn’t say it was simple.

Capitalism has destroyed more lives than it’s really worth. If it wants to keep existing its capital owners should be held responsible.

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#87

Post by dumpsterlid »

rhelz wrote: post #71
flandish wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy: If this is proven to be a criminal act, even of criminal negligence, charge not only the people making decisions, the board members, but also shareholders, relative to their holdings. Including grouped stocks such as funds. All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing.

> If this is proven to be a criminal act So who committed the crime? The exec who wanted to save money? Saving money is the prime directive. Why is it his fault that he was given bad advice by his engineers about it? Did the engineers commit the crime? Does your computer software have no bugs in it? Arn't the testers and inspectors supposed to give the proper feedback? Did the testers and inspectors commit the crime?…

[dead]

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#88

Post by flandish »

rhelz wrote: post #71
flandish wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy: If this is proven to be a criminal act, even of criminal negligence, charge not only the people making decisions, the board members, but also shareholders, relative to their holdings. Including grouped stocks such as funds. All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing.

> If this is proven to be a criminal act So who committed the crime? The exec who wanted to save money? Saving money is the prime directive. Why is it his fault that he was given bad advice by his engineers about it? Did the engineers commit the crime? Does your computer software have no bugs in it? Arn't the testers and inspectors supposed to give the proper feedback? Did the testers and inspectors commit the crime?…

> Saving money is the prime directive

This is what makes all of capitalism deplorable - and sometimes criminal.

When people are hurt - even knowingly - the owners need to be held to task.

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#89

Post by flandish »

whythre wrote: post #53
flandish wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* all the years capitalism has existed. This is bog-standard capitalist formula. Profit over people. Worker and customer and public alike.

As opposed to the other big economic system, the one that always seem to involve a lot of camps and mass graves.

What other system? Capitalism has camps and mass graves.

The other system has never been implemented. You know this.

Re: Boeing put Wall Street first, safety second ahead of Alaska Air blowout

#90

Post by JumpCrisscross »

flandish wrote: post #85
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All it will take is once for this to happen and shareholders to actually think about the repercussions of “investing” in corporations that do this kind of thing Right, you wouldn’t invest in American business, period. (Also, how do you criminally charge someone on a pro rata basis? Do you send every American with a pension to jail for 1/31,000,000th the jail time?)

>pro rata Yes. Yes you do. You set a minimum then fine below that minimum.

At that point you’ll need to go full Soviet. Seize resources and have the state deploy them. Because in no rational world would someone accept criminal liability on behalf of someone they do not control. So to stop a capital exodus, you’d need to seize the means of production (and incur the stasis that comes from centralising economic decision making among the political class).

Would be pretty convenient for America if China or Russia adopted your proposal…

Post reply on HN