Boeing workers vote to strike • Hacker News Board

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#231

Post by FredPret » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:34 PM UTC

schmidtleonard wrote: post #223

diggan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What private corporation could make mistakes where people lose their lives on the same scale while still operating as normal afterwards?

People dying due to profit-motivated corporate negligence and the corporations in question getting a slap on the wrist? Must be a day ending in "y."

There must be a billion corporations out there. What % can kill customers on the scale of Boeing and get away with it?

A tiny number.

And for the ones that can, it’s likely that there are strong ties to the same government that’s supposed to prosecute them. For Boeing, there are significant financial and contractual ties to the US government.

Having a steady stream of ultra-reliable government cash surely reminds you of a state department?

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#232

Post by badpun » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:36 PM UTC

Maken wrote: post #212

echelon wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boeing engineers should leave and start their own company. "American dynamism" is hot right now and there should be ample funding available. Lots of the old dinosaurs are being nipped at by nimble upstarts like Anduril.

I seriously wonder how long it would take for a team of engineers to produce a competitive commercial airplane, from planning to the first prototype, if they started right now. Also, is it viable to produce something like the A320 in low quantities when airlines need fleets in the hundreds?

I remember reading that one engineer spent 6 years designing „ventilation for seats 40-80” on one of the larger Airbuses. It seems like the amount of design and engineering work required for a prototype of a complete aircraft (assuming you buy the engines) is just immense.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#233

Post by marcosdumay » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:37 PM UTC

csomar wrote: post #84

Y-bar wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on if you are a shareholder for the long terms (many years) or a short-term trader. I don't own stock in Boeing (or any of their main competitors), but when there is a strike like this in a company I hold stock in I generally get more bullish for the long term because it means that: 1. It signals employees still care about the company enough to not just quit and go elsewhere. And employees who care make a bet…

[dead]

> Source: Check the current Boeing union demands.

Do you have a source for them? The only one on the article is that Boeing stops breaking the law.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#234

Post by mnau » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:38 PM UTC

Havoc wrote: post #200

Just watched a documentary on Boeing an hour ago. It’s incredible that they avoided criminal prosecution despite two planes crashing, door popping out and then paperwork somehow going AWOL. Also Boeing knew about wiring issues since 2022 and the FAA only issues an inspection order in ‘24. Gonna try and avoid Boeings of all types going forward

They hired the lead prosecutor that cut them a deal. To be precise a Boeing criminal defence firma hired her after she left the Justice department.

It's the American way.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#235

Post by milutinovici » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:40 PM UTC

BlarfMcFlarf wrote: post #163

beaglesss wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't count all the dead from flight being held back FAA. It's similar with housing regulations -- the code inspector sees dead in a house but not the 10 homeless people he killed by making housing less accessible.

How would insufficient ability to make more dangerous planes kill anyone? By what mechanism? Who, for example? What are you even talking about?

Invisible hand of the market would catch passengers mid air

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#236

Post by vundercind » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:42 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #202

Dalewyn wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the US hasn't won a single war against technologically and numerically inferior opponents since the turn of the century, I think we have even more fundamental problems than just a rusty war machine dependent on Chinese blue jeans. Now granted I might be unfair to the US here; the Middle East is known as the graveyard of empires for a reason.

The US clearly choose to lose all wars lost though. The military was doing just fine, but the people back home got sick of the efforts.

1) That’s still losing.

2) I’m not sure the military was doing just fine in all of those. Vietnam comes to mind, but also Afghanistan—reading the Afghanistan papers, the brass seems to have given up on any kind of actual goals or accountability in favor of a system that let them continually cycle officers through and let them claim they succeeded at their mission (funny, they all keep achieving their mission, but facts on the ground remain exactly the same or worse!), for years and years. Fighting fitness may have been OK throughout, but military leadership in the military itself was absolutely not committed to any kind of winnable mission, let alone to actually winning it. That may have been driven (I’m sure it was) largely by civilian leadership, but the entire upper echelon of military leadership betrayed their commands and the soldiers counting on them, to keep up a convenient (to their careers, and a bunch of junior and mid-tier officers who got a big boost to their careers…) political fiction at the cost of any hope of something resembling actual success, and all it took was shitting all over their soldiers and the trust of the American people.

I bet Iraq (part 2) was similar. I have some grave concerns about the state of our more-politicized-and-static professional officer corps since roughly Vietnam.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#237

Post by Balgair » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:44 PM UTC

iancmceachern wrote: post #86

Any Boeing engineers who may be looking for alternate paths, please know that I've known many great aerospace engineers who have made a pivot to medical devices very successfully and many of the best medical devices to come out in recent years are due to such. It seems very different but really it's very similar.

I'll echo this and have done something of this path. It's a very similar field surprisingly. Quite rewarding too. The timelines for products are also about the same (years-decade).

The one tip is to not bother applying to Medtronic. They don't actually hire anything outside of interns. All the job postings are for internal roles (but required by federal law to be ... blah blah blah). Suffice to say, don't bother.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#238

Post by weard_beard » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:44 PM UTC

godzillabrennus wrote: post #230

Larrikin wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If you think government agencies exist to solely help the American people then how do you explain the DMV experience?

Or the unemployment office

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#239

Post by MOARDONGZPLZ » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:45 PM UTC

jdright wrote: post #216

diggan wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you start thinking of Boeing as a government agency with less oversight that poses as a for-profit corporation, a lot of things start to make more sense. Including what you wrote about.

This is just malicious. Boing is the exemplar capitalist enterprise, traded, where the sole objective is profit above everything else, including safety and following regulations obligations, something that they can do because they bought politicians (lobby aka legal corruption).

Their stock is down 55% in the last five years. How is that an exemplar of profit making capitalism?

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#240

Post by themaninthedark » Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 1:45 PM UTC

darby_nine wrote: post #145

bombcar wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The auto companies are strategically significant because war footing America will turn those F150 lines into tank lines in a matter of months instead of the years it would take to spin them up from scratch. IBM made machine guns on typewriter lines in WW2.

Seems like a terribly irrational and inefficient way to run an economy but I'm sure russia will invade any day now. Or is it china these days?

I agree. We should also stop subsidizing agriculture, there is enough food grown around the world for everyone. All this waste is very inefficient!

In fact, we dump our cheap overproduced food on third world countries and collapse their ag. sector. If we stopped producing and switched to importing we would boost their economies.

Since food can be grown in almost any country on earth, we would have a diverse supply chain. I'm sure nothing would go wrong with this plan./s