What's wrong with this country?

[Hawkmoon]

I'm disgusted.

First there was the bridge collapse. Mind you, there have been bridge collapses before, and after each one state governments and the Feds have "resolved" to ensure it naver happens again. Then we read that inspectors in Minnesota found cracks in the structure of the bridge, but the recommended method of repairing them was "too expensive" ... so they did nothing. Gee, I'll bet plating those cracks looks a whole bunch better in retrospect.

And now the mine collapse. Check this out:

Government mine inspectors have issued 325 citations against the mine since January 2004, according to a quick analysis of federal Mine Safety and Health Administration online records. Of those, 116 were what the government considered "significant and substantial," meaning they are likely to cause injury.

The 325 safety violations is not unusual, said J. Davitt McAteer, former head of the MSHA and now vice president of Wheeling Jesuit University in West Virginia.

"It's not perfect but it's certainly not bad," McAteer said.

It's been awhile since I studied arithmatic, but last I knew we still had 12 months in a year. So since January of 2004 we have seen 43 months elapse. So that boils down to an average of 7.6 safety violations per month (roughly two per week), and 2.7 "significant" (defined as likely to cause injury) violations per month (that's one approximately every 11 days).

And a former head of the Federal agency in charge on these inspections says that's "... not bad"? I guess I must be awfully dumb, because it sounds rather bad to me.

Why are we paying government officials to play Russian roulette with our lives? That's what it boils down to. Inspectors inspect, they see problems, and then nothing gets done. They file a report, and the conditions continue, unabated. Why aren't they subject to the same rules of responsibility as ordinary citizens? Suppose my car has a brake failure and I run down a few dozen pedestrians. Can I say "Well, I saw that the brakes were worn out and there wasn't much fluid left in the master cylinder, but brake fluid is expensive, so I deemed it was safe enough and just kept driving it. Sorry 'bout that. Have a nice day."

Didn't think so.

[Paddy]

No money for bridge inspections/repair, no money for food inspections especially imports from China, etc., no money for border patrol, etc., et yada et nausea.  Only money for the fake WOT

[tyme]

For there to be "money for something", or "not enough money for something," there would have to be some connection between the annual revenue of the federal government and the annual budget.  There isn't.  Politicians are happy to spend money that's not there.  The only reason they didn't spending money on toothpaste inspection, toy lead-paint inspection, or bridge repair is that they judged those safety measures wouldn't buy them enough votes to be worth the political capital fighting for those expenditures.

[S. Williamson]

Quit using logic... I'm missing American Idol. 





/vomits moments after typing that

[onions!]

I wonder if something so simple as a miner failing to wear a helmet or safety glasses(or a respirator or whatever) could qualify as "significant & substantial"?

It's been my expierience that the only time/place that all the rules are followed is in a bubble about 50 feet accross surrounding the O.S.H.A. inspector.

[mtnbkr]

Onions, that has been my experience in the various "blue collar" jobs I held before graduating college.

Of course, it's the fault of the eevilll capitalists pig management and their lackeys in the Bush administration (even the offenses and issues occurring during the Clinton administration).

Chris

[RevDisk]

I wonder if something so simple as a miner failing to wear a helmet or safety glasses(or a respirator or whatever) could qualify as "significant & substantial"?

It's been my expierience that the only time/place that all the rules are followed is in a bubble about 50 feet accross surrounding the O.S.H.A. inspector.

Significant and substantial, no.  But if they are in an area designated for specific safety gear and are not wearing said safety gear, yes, that is a violation.  Especially a respirator.

[Vile Nylons]

Why are inspectors not held to the same level of responsibility as average citizens? They are. As a matter of fact they are held to a much higher standard. If an average guy doesn't do his job he/she gets fired. When I was a "health inspector" if I didn't, I was subject to jail time. If was a felony for me not to do my job.

Compliance to code at local levels [ mom and pop facilities] is non problematic. Even cross state chains are very compliance and public safety motivated. When you get into state facilities operations you run up against government meaning lawyers and state politicians. Push back is substantial and agencies whose task it is to ensure compliance often are stifled by other state agencies who bring out their big guns. Compliance is not mandatory but subject to "memo's of understanding" meaning state agency commissioners discuss it over lunch.

At the Federal level or big industry it's even worse. Big industry brings in a team of lawyers and their political friends. Major push back if substantial costs are involved.  Federal facilities themselves are EXEMPT from code and only comply on a voluntary basis, meaning inspectors have to beg.

Inspectors are the low man on the totem pole who perhaps once a year take a snapshot overview of operations but who more often than not become the scapegoats when something goes bad. Compliance and public safety are really a function of the facility managers, their ethics as to staff and public protection and the rescources they are alloted to fulfill that function.       

[grampster]

Too many laws, too many rules, too many bureaucrats, not enough workers, too many studies, not enough people, not enough money, not enough action.

Maybe it's time we recognized that Hillary is our Saviour and we should all work for the government.  Then we'll be safe and the bridges will not fall.

[Paddy]

For there to be "money for something", or "not enough money for something," there would have to be some connection between the annual revenue of the federal government and the annual budget.  There isn't.  Politicians are happy to spend money that's not there.  The only reason they didn't spending money on toothpaste inspection, toy lead-paint inspection, or bridge repair is that they judged those safety measures wouldn't buy them enough votes to be worth the political capital fighting for those expenditures.

Correct.  It's not that the money doesn't exist; rather it's not being directed toward activities that protect the health and safety of the American people. The perception is that the mundane tasks of protecting the borders and maintaining the infrastructure doesn't make the grade into 'legacy statesmanship'    Add to that a failed education system and a press more interested in political agendas than fact and you have an ignorant populace who are easily manipulated.

Besides an apathetic electorate, what else is wrong with this country?  Overwhelming consumerism.  The focus is no longer on what we can produce, rather on what we can consume.  As a nation, we've gone into billions $$ credit card debt to buy cheap imported crap made with slave labor in third world countries.  We can't get enough of it.  Walmart keeps growing and the landfills are overflowing (hey, that rhymes).

Everybody has to have an undergraduate degree and there is no honor in labor anymore. And why should there be?   Who needs to learn or practice the trades when everything we buy is disposable and not repairable?  Besides, we can import as much cheap Mexican labor as we need to do the grunt work.

Few have any sense of stewardship or regard for the great nation we've literally been handed by virtue of simply being born here.  More important is how many greasy cheeseburgers we can stuff into our huge gut. How many of us participate in some volunteer work, with a local charity, church, or hospital?  Few, and mostly older people. 

What's wrong with this country is us.  Our laziness, our apathy, and our self centeredness.  Our lack of appreciation for the founding principles and heritage of this (once, yet hopefully again) great nation.

That's my .02

[Len Budney]

Correct.  It's not that the money doesn't exist; rather it's not being directed toward activities that protect the health and safety of the American people.

That's perfectly natural: the first thing to go under socialism is maintenance. American roads, Cuban hospitals, same story.

--Len.

[Matt King]

Privatize infrastructure. No company would want a bridge disaster connected with the bridge they built. That is a sure way to guarantee infrastructure is kept safe.

Just my .02   

[Manedwolf]

Privatize infrastructure. No company would want a bridge disaster connected with the bridge they built. That is a sure way to guarantee infrastructure is kept safe.

Just my .02   

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

There's no easy solutions.

[Len Budney]

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

Sure--but they'll be balancing the risk of failure against the costs of prevention, where the risks include lawsuits, bankruptcy, etc. For the government agent who fails to maintain the bridges, the risks are minimal. The guy responsible for the collapsed bridge has probably already been promoted out of that job, and some peon will be scapegoated--and the peon will never be sued, imprisoned or rendered penniless. At worst he'll lose his crappy job, and he'll go get another job, just as good as the one he lost.

Liberty isn't utopia. It's just that I'd rather deal with a selfish businessman, than a selfish ruler with an army and guns.

--Len.

[Matt King]

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

There's no easy solutions.

How far do you think companies will go to profit? I certainly don't think that they would endanger people's lives for profit, if only for the fact that it would be a stain on their record.

[Manedwolf]

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

Sure--but they'll be balancing the risk of failure against the costs of prevention, where the risks include lawsuits, bankruptcy, etc. For the government agent who fails to maintain the bridges, the risks are minimal. The guy responsible for the collapsed bridge has probably already been promoted out of that job, and some peon will be scapegoated--and the peon will never be sued, imprisoned or rendered penniless. At worst he'll lose his crappy job, and he'll go get another job, just as good as the one he lost.

Liberty isn't utopia. It's just that I'd rather deal with a selfish businessman, than a selfish ruler with an army and guns.

--Len.

I'd believe that if the officers could be held personally responsible, but if only the corporation is legally responsible for negligence, there's not as much disincentive to cut corners.

[Matt King]

Edit:Double Post. My bad.

[Manedwolf]

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

There's no easy solutions.

True, however how far do you think companies will go to profit? I certainly don't think that they would endanger people's lives for profit, if for only the fact that if an accident happened there would be outrage.

Ford, Pinto.
GM, Corvair.
Bridgestone, SUV tires.
Airlines, flammable, toxic-fumes-when-burned upholstery
Food producers, high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated waste oils
Importers, contaminated Chinese goods.

[Matt King]

But when those companies screw up, people can stop buying their products. When the government screws up, people have no choice.

[longeyes]

Citizenship has been replaced by Consumerism.  Courage has ben replaced by Convenience.   It took a while but we're now seeing the consequences of what we've allowed ourselves and the country to become.  It will be excruciatingly painful for us to get out of the downward spiral.  Not impossible, just damn difficult and no doubt rife with political explosiveness.

[Len Budney]

Ford, Pinto.
GM, Corvair.
Bridgestone, SUV tires.
Airlines, flammable, toxic-fumes-when-burned upholstery
Importers, contaminated Chinese goods.

Again, the claim isn't that nothing bad will happen in a free market. The claim is that much worse happens in the unfree market. Add up all the "market failures" you can find in all of history, and they'll add up to fewer innocent deaths than are dismissed as "collateral damage" in any war you want to pick. Ignoring war, they'll still add up to fewer than die in government failures such as collapsed bridges, failed levees in New Orleans, banning of life-saving inventions like DDT, delayed approval or outright denial of needed pharmaceuticals, etc., etc.

--Len.

[longeyes]

Bureaucratic America is a nation unto itself, with its own rules and its own priorities.  Where's the citizen oversight?  Of course the private sector is also hierarchical and increasingly unresponsive and irresponsible.  A lot of this is just the result of hypertrophic growth and consolidation of power.

Then again you can just blame it all on Barry Bonds...

[The Rabbi]

The problem with a for-profit enterprise is that if they can profit more by using concrete pillars two feet thinner than the original design, and still be called "relatively safe", they will. 

There's no easy solutions.

True, however how far do you think companies will go to profit? I certainly don't think that they would endanger people's lives for profit, if for only the fact that if an accident happened there would be outrage.

Ford, Pinto.
GM, Corvair.
Bridgestone, SUV tires.
Airlines, flammable, toxic-fumes-when-burned upholstery
Food producers, high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated waste oils
Importers, contaminated Chinese goods.

That isnt a proof of anything other than carelessness.  Do we suddenly expect perfection from multi-million dollar companies?  The fact that the few examples you give spans 40 years says something about reliability.
It is especially so with the Corvair.  The company changed the axle design early on but not before Ralph Nader made his career out of it.  In fact GM continued the model for several years after they planned to discontinue it anyway just because of Ralphie. I owned a '67 Corsa at one time.
And companies that intentionally put people in danger pay a heavy price in liability judgements.

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

For there to be "money for something", or "not enough money for something," there would have to be some connection between the annual revenue of the federal government and the annual budget.  There isn't.  Politicians are happy to spend money that's not there.  The only reason they didn't spending money on toothpaste inspection, toy lead-paint inspection, or bridge repair is that they judged those safety measures wouldn't buy them enough votes to be worth the political capital fighting for those expenditures.

Ding ding ding!  Correct answer!

[longeyes]

Maybe we start with the political process, which is what leads to the overspending to curry votes.  Limit terms and stop the empire-building.  That may be a good first step. 

Cheap money which encourages massive debting, at all levels of society, private and governmental, is another huge problem--but it's not one we couldn't rectify.  We will, but not until the system really starts to collapse, unforunately.