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

Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#51

Post by afavour »

colonwqbang wrote: post #50
afavour wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think any investors are applauding the mismanagement at Boeing Even with everything going on Boeing’s stock price is higher than it was ten years ago. Five years ago it was 4x, I’m sure it’ll recover a good amount from today’s number. My cynical take is that a lot of investors don’t see what Boeing is doing as mismanagement. They’re in a hugely enviable market position: only one competitor that can’t scale…

I can understand wanting the executives to be held accountable. But why is it important to punish the stock holders of Boeing? Do you feel that they had a hand in these disasters?

I never said they should be punished but it's an interesting thought exercise. A long-time stock holder in Boeing has indirectly profited from the death of innocent airplane passengers, I certainly wouldn't object to them losing that profit. And if punishing executives is permissible... well, those execs serve at the pleasure of the stockholders. There's surely _some_ responsibility there. But no, I'm not saying we should lock up the stockholders.

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#52

Post by Spartan-S63 »

dmix wrote: post #29
indymike wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. If you were to make a Venn diagram of amoral and illegal (including civil malfeasance) have a pretty large overlap. Eventually, the illegal part gets people (even CEOs) sued, fired and/or jailed, but the company might continue if it can afford to pay the legal bills. > These big companies are applauded for being amoral because their stock prices go up. I don'…

> Society has decided that closing down large employers is a cure worse than the disease. This sort of thinking is exactly why companies like Boeing get a free pass to do whatever it wants. Local govs protect them like the mob because "jobs" and then Congress panics every time they see the market only has 1-2 options for national security stuff and then reinforces monopolies that slowly eat away at the country's comp…

Why not solve the "jobs" crisis of shutting down business in this situation by inverting liquidation preference and injecting employees to the front of the line? When the business liquidates as a result of close of business, creditors and investors become last in line and the preference adds employees (ICs first) with executives, creditors, and investors either completely cut out or left at the end of the line.

The folks who did the job on the floor walk away with a chunk of change that's runway for them to find a next job, or whatever they want to do. Creditors, investors, and execs are left holding the bag, as they should.

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#54

Post by _aavaa_ »

resource_waste wrote: post #2

Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. I'm not sure where that puts humans in an effort to defend ourselves. We must be moral, we are judged harshly otherwise. A company uses psychology tricks against its customers(aka Ads/Marketing) making them feel status insecure or a group outsider, totally fine. Actually, those blue bubbles were a great idea, I made sooo much money on stocks. Really feel bad fo…

> Companies are amoral

No they're not. They very much have a morality, it's just not ours. Some include:

Greed is good.

Profits first and foremost.

Externalities are not our responsibility.

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#55

Post by gravescale »

colonwqbang wrote: post #50
afavour wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think any investors are applauding the mismanagement at Boeing Even with everything going on Boeing’s stock price is higher than it was ten years ago. Five years ago it was 4x, I’m sure it’ll recover a good amount from today’s number. My cynical take is that a lot of investors don’t see what Boeing is doing as mismanagement. They’re in a hugely enviable market position: only one competitor that can’t scale…

I can understand wanting the executives to be held accountable. But why is it important to punish the stock holders of Boeing? Do you feel that they had a hand in these disasters?

If owning shares means having an, admittedly small when it comes to a firm the size of Boeing, part in the decision making process and a financial stake in the company, then yes, in principle. Shares aren't a vacuum-sealed number-go-up game, taking a share means an interest in supporting a company via investment or a desire to be involved in the decisions (which usually requires a substantial investment as a proof of stake).

It gets a bit murkier when it's all mashed and derived and packaged to death which results in things like the Church of England accidentally (or at least they divested when it was pointed out) having shares in things that it doesn't share philosophies with such as oil companies.

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#56

Post by thejazzman »

indymike wrote: post #13
resource_waste wrote: post #2

Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. I'm not sure where that puts humans in an effort to defend ourselves. We must be moral, we are judged harshly otherwise. A company uses psychology tricks against its customers(aka Ads/Marketing) making them feel status insecure or a group outsider, totally fine. Actually, those blue bubbles were a great idea, I made sooo much money on stocks. Really feel bad fo…

> Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. If you were to make a Venn diagram of amoral and illegal (including civil malfeasance) have a pretty large overlap. Eventually, the illegal part gets people (even CEOs) sued, fired and/or jailed, but the company might continue if it can afford to pay the legal bills. > These big companies are applauded for being amoral because their stock prices go up. I don'…

> illegal part gets people (even CEOs) sued, fired and/or jailed

This really doesn't seem to be true anymore to those wise enough to lawyer. Arbitration clauses maybe the biggest culprit but I mean, Tesla Supervised Full Self Driving? Sure that cross country zero intervention demo in 2017 was great but...

Re: Boeing retaliated against its own engineers working for FAA, union says

#57

Post by salawat »

indymike wrote: post #13
resource_waste wrote: post #2

Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. I'm not sure where that puts humans in an effort to defend ourselves. We must be moral, we are judged harshly otherwise. A company uses psychology tricks against its customers(aka Ads/Marketing) making them feel status insecure or a group outsider, totally fine. Actually, those blue bubbles were a great idea, I made sooo much money on stocks. Really feel bad fo…

> Companies are amoral, they literally can't be otherwise. If you were to make a Venn diagram of amoral and illegal (including civil malfeasance) have a pretty large overlap. Eventually, the illegal part gets people (even CEOs) sued, fired and/or jailed, but the company might continue if it can afford to pay the legal bills. > These big companies are applauded for being amoral because their stock prices go up. I don'…

>Society has decided that closing down large employers is a cure worse than the disease.

Cure: Don't allow excessive consolidation/break up TBTF.

Post reply on HN