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

Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#21

Post by sophacles »

vondur wrote: post #16
bufordtwain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although it seems to be the same playbook as used by Trump - which so far has worked well for him. Deny deny deny and say you're the very best.

Keep your politics to yourself, it has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

Boeing safety is a political issue:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/boeing-...

If a company tries (temporarily successfully) to use political connections to respond to safety issues, it's fair to bring that up in light of related safety issues.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#22

Post by lisper »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #20
lisper wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually not true. If the punishment is severe enough then it can be made to diffuse all the way back to the shareholders in a way that they will notice, and that will eventually bring about change. The problem is that we have insulated the shareholders from responsibility so that granny can buy blue chip stocks to fund her retirement without having to actually pay attention to the bothersome details of corpor…

How do you propose to punish shareholders? Fine them? The market already does that, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars in the 737 MAX case. Jail them? Good luck with that. What else can/should be done to them, in your opinion?

> Fine them? The market already does that, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars in the 737 MAX case.

Really? How? The day before the Lion Air crash Boeing stock was just a hair under $360 a share. Today it's at $380. How exactly is that punishing the shareholders?

The market isn't punishing Boeing shareholders because everyone knows full well that the U.S. government will not allow the last domestic producer of commercial jets to go bankrupt.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#23

Post by CamperBob2 »

lisper wrote: post #22
CamperBob2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose to punish shareholders? Fine them? The market already does that, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars in the 737 MAX case. Jail them? Good luck with that. What else can/should be done to them, in your opinion?

> Fine them? The market already does that, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars in the 737 MAX case. Really? How? The day before the Lion Air crash Boeing stock was just a hair under $360 a share. Today it's at $380. How exactly is that punishing the shareholders? The market isn't punishing Boeing shareholders because everyone knows full well that the U.S. government will not allow the last domestic producer of…

Really? How? The day before the Lion Air crash Boeing stock was just a hair under $360 a share. Today it's at $380. How exactly is that punishing the shareholders?

Well, that's not exactly the whole story, is it? What happened on March 8?

https://www.google.com/search?q=boeing+stock

A single crash won't usually tank the company's stock, nor should it.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#24

Post by WalterBright »

_s wrote: post #2

Profit before people / product / planet. It’s been the downfall of many companies, and in this case, has resulted in the unnecessary death of many individuals. Boeing is currently in the spotlight, but there are so many other companies - ranging from pharma to agriculture to tech, that also adhere to the above mantra and have been the cause of much death and destruction. You can’t blame individuals, nor the companies…

> Profit before people / product / planet

Socialist organizations do not have a better track record. Without a profit motive (and competition) there is no reason to please customers.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#25

Post by lisper »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #23
lisper wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fine them? The market already does that, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars in the 737 MAX case. Really? How? The day before the Lion Air crash Boeing stock was just a hair under $360 a share. Today it's at $380. How exactly is that punishing the shareholders? The market isn't punishing Boeing shareholders because everyone knows full well that the U.S. government will not allow the last domestic producer of…

Really? How? The day before the Lion Air crash Boeing stock was just a hair under $360 a share. Today it's at $380. How exactly is that punishing the shareholders? Well, that's not exactly the whole story, is it? What happened on March 8? https://www.google.com/search?q=boeing+stock A single crash won't usually tank the company's stock, nor should it.

> What happened on March 8?

The stock dropped 5%. And your point would be...?

> A single crash won't usually tank the company's stock, nor should it.

This was two crashes. Caused by gross negligence. Yeah, that ought to put a dent in the stock price IMHO.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#26

Post by fallous »

sophacles wrote: post #21
vondur wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep your politics to yourself, it has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

Boeing safety is a political issue: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/boeing-... If a company tries (temporarily successfully) to use political connections to respond to safety issues, it's fair to bring that up in light of related safety issues.

Which of course has nothing to do with the actual political message in the original comment to which vondur was responding. Had that comment made any reference to a relationship between Boeing and a particular politician, or political group, it would indeed be fair to bring that to light.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#27

Post by javert »

vondur wrote: post #16
bufordtwain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although it seems to be the same playbook as used by Trump - which so far has worked well for him. Deny deny deny and say you're the very best.

Keep your politics to yourself, it has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

That statement wasn't political, and it has everything to do with the topic being discussed.

It wasn't political because Trump's "style" is a fact recognized by partisans on both sides; they just judge it differently. I can't even tell if OP is for or against.

It has to do with the topic because it's an observation of the same underlying trend: that lying is becoming a standard and accepted behavior in America. People are no longer punished for lying, so they are doing it more and more.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#28

Post by gonyea »

In North Charleston, the pace of production has quickened. Starting this year, Boeing is producing 14 Dreamliners a month, split between North Charleston and Everett, up from the previous 12. At the same time, Boeing said it was eliminating about a hundred quality control positions in North Charleston.

These planes are going to start failing in unison in a few years.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#29

Post by gonyea »

kikoreis wrote: post #15
rayiner wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this some new thing making rounds on the internet? Airplanes account for 5% of all CO2 emissions, and only a fraction of that is individuals flying. The average American would have to take a dozen New York-Tokyo flights per year to even double their carbon footprint. I assume you’ve addressed more important sources of carbon emissions, such as moving to a state that doesn’t require heating in the winter or AC in t…

This is off topic but it was startling to me when I looked at CO2 stats that there was so little air travel and so much energy generation and heating. I think we have just stumbled upon the real reason we haven't fully grokked climate change yet.. the problem is much simpler and more brutal than most of us perceive.

Installing a foam roof or replacing the insulation in your walls goes a long way and saves a lot of money on energy costs over time.

Re: Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

#30

Post by Scipio_Afri »

Sure, the power of unions can sometimes be too much in terms of compensation demands but it certainly isn't like that frequently and their benefits far outweigh their negatives and outlier issues. However most importantly, in cases where there is poor worker safety, issues with production quality or life endangering corners are being cut, workers can speak up knowing that they have protections through the union should managemen be happy to retaliate about what they say. We are all safer because of those protections and securities a work force like that has.
Post reply on HN