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

US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

on.ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 367 posts

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#221

Post by blibble »

InTheArena wrote: post #210
blibble wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aren't most modern constitutional monarchies just a veneer over a republican democracy anyways? it's the other way round, by the time of the rebellion absolute monarchy was long gone, the things the colonists didn't like were being passed by parliament the US then gave its presidency more power than George III would have dreamed of (in practice the presidency also seems to be prone to dynasties)

Absolute monarchy was still a thread at this time. They just called it enlightened despotism. The colonists were objecting to taxation (and really any form of government) without representation, which both the monarch and the parliament were at fault for. Enlightened Despotism died when George III didn't apply reason (as the colonists saw it) to rectify the problem. In terms of power then George III would have dreame…

> Absolute monarchy was still a thread at this time.

The Civil War (1642-1651) was the last attempt at absolute monarchy in England

then Bill of Rights (1688) put it well and truly to bed when Parliament decided they didn't like the current king and picked someone else, simultaneously stripping them of their powers

it was well and truly dead by the time of the rebellion

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#222

Post by blibble »

InTheArena wrote: post #212
hash872 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances and putting multiple factions with different interests against one another Completely American myopic POV. Stable, healthy democracies that are unicameral parliamentary systems include Norway, New Zealand, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Lithuania, Portugal, and Sweden. (Most of those countries don't have strong judicial review e…

Comparing tiny countries at the edge of Europe and the edge of the world with the the US as super-power is a weakness. Every country has adopted American Republicanism with a clearly defined and written constitution that has some form of separation of powers. None of these, for example, allow the PM to act as an absolute dictator without some form of emergency. The difference is simply in whether the president has an…

> Every country has adopted American Republicanism with a clearly defined and written constitution that has some form of separation of powers.

the UK has none of this and its current system of government predates the US

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#223

Post by autoexec »

akira2501 wrote: post #213
autoexec wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think society is dependent on government. Is that a hypothetical or are there large and successful societies around today that don't have one (or a group by some other name fulfilling the same function)?

You'd have to more thoroughly define "successful." You'd also have to explain why you think the lack of one would prove any point.

It's not that the lack of one proves it's impossible, but if one existed it'd sure be evidence that government isn't a requirement. As for "successful" I suppose that is very much subjective. Is there one you'd consider to be successful?

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#224

Post by LeroyRaz »

mulmen wrote: post #211
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This immediately falls apart, by that logic we should literally have no government or society to speak of. "Only as much power as you think the worst possible person should have" would mean literally no power - there isn't a single decision in my life I would pass off to the worst person I could think of. What you're describing is anarchy. Not at all. Suppose the worst possible person is in the prosecutor's office.…

There is another failure mode. The prosecutor can refuse to prosecute a guilty party. This can happen for several reasons. 1) corruption, don’t prosecute your friends. 2) ideology, the law or punishment are “unfair” or the defendant is “misunderstood” or “disadvantaged” according to the prosecutor. 3) politics, to advance their political careers prosecutors want an unblemished record of successful convictions. It is…

You can have multiple prosecutors. E.g., if one does not want to prosecute (and so not get paid) then another will.

While you can't ensure an individual does their job, market forces and competition can ensure the job gets done (by someone).

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#225

Post by graemep »

gottorf wrote: post #103
wanderingmind wrote: post #101

As an aside, For all those who talk about corruption and getting money out of politics I suggest reading Federalist 10 by Madison. Its a deep analysis of a need for a republican democracy. Any government that depends on human virtuousness will fail. The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances and putting multiple factions with different interests against one another.

> Any government that depends on human virtuousness will fail. The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances and putting multiple factions with different interests against one another. Absolutely! Any form of government that depends on an unbroken line of "good people" in power will fail, and fail much sooner than anybody thinks. Modern China has already reached the end of their…

> Modern China has already reached the end of their system, a scant 50 years after Mao Zedong.

I do not think you have picked a good example. Mao was a pretty nasty piece of work. The relatively prosperity of modern China is the result of abandoning his ideology - and a large chunk is the result of reversing the damage he and his followers did.

There has been no line of good people in communist and post communist China. It failed from the start.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#226

Post by jacquesm »

adamisom wrote: post #160
TylerE wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the Federalist Papers are great works, I don't agree with taking them as enlightened guidance from on high. They were theorizing. No one of them really knew how a modern democracy/republic would actually work in practice. Remember, the authors of the constitution (large overlap) stated on the record that they expected they got a lot of it wrong, and expected large swathes of it to be amended and replaced once a…

you could even say that the USA founders’ vision is the worst ever tried—except for all those others.

There are plenty of other countries that have similar or even better (depending on the viewpoint of the observer) systems of governance, this sort of American exceptionalism isn't rooted in an objective evaluation but simply a nice soundbite and a riff on the 'democracy' one, which has a lot more substance to it.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#227

Post by [deleted] »

LeroyRaz wrote: post #224
mulmen wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is another failure mode. The prosecutor can refuse to prosecute a guilty party. This can happen for several reasons. 1) corruption, don’t prosecute your friends. 2) ideology, the law or punishment are “unfair” or the defendant is “misunderstood” or “disadvantaged” according to the prosecutor. 3) politics, to advance their political careers prosecutors want an unblemished record of successful convictions. It is…

You can have multiple prosecutors. E.g., if one does not want to prosecute (and so not get paid) then another will. While you can't ensure an individual does their job, market forces and competition can ensure the job gets done (by someone).

[deleted]

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#228

Post by HDThoreaun »

ethbr1 wrote: post #173
notJim wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances I don't think this viewpoint can be supported empirically. The US government has much stronger checks and balances than most parliamentary systems where the prime minister is elected by the parliament. This means that there's no split possible between the executive and legislative branch. I think the result of this in the US is that…

I'd argue that the US biparty system tends to have fewer checks and balances than a parliamentary system. In many ways, it's winner take all. President + 50%+1 in the lower legislature + 50%+1 in the upper legislature = a huge amount of power. Historically, I think it's been exceedingly rare to have as finely balanced government as recent times have featured. And to me, the Supreme Court is less about the people curr…

You need 60% in the senate to get anything passed. There have been many cases where one party controlled all three but couldnt accomplish much due to the filibuster. Famously Obama's first couple years.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#229

Post by ed_balls »

wanderingmind wrote: post #101

As an aside, For all those who talk about corruption and getting money out of politics I suggest reading Federalist 10 by Madison. Its a deep analysis of a need for a republican democracy. Any government that depends on human virtuousness will fail. The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances and putting multiple factions with different interests against one another.

> government that depends on human virtuousness will fail.

that was the crucial difference between communism and capitalism. Communism used virtuousness only, when capitalism used virtuousness and greed. Communism failed.

Post reply on HN