Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Mine owner Massey Energy kept two sets of records that chronicled safety problems. One internal set of production reports detailed those problems and how they delayed coal production. But the other records, which are reviewed by federal mine safety inspectors and required by federal law, failed to mention the same safety hazards. Some of the hazards that were not disclosed are identical to those believed to have contributed to the explosion

Gas readings taken shortly after the explosion showed too little methane to support Massey Energy's claim that a massive, naturally-occurring and unpredictable inundation of gas caused the disaster

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... gators-say" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Massey management deserves anything that gets thrown at them for falsifying records and putting their workers in danger along with criminal charges for the deaths of those workers.

Why is this an Ayn Rand/Conk issue?

ASUG8 wrote:Massey management deserves anything that gets thrown at them for falsifying records and putting their workers in danger along with criminal charges for the deaths of those workers.

Why is this an Ayn Rand/Conk issue?

These guys believed they were free to make as much money as possible, without interference from those evil Feds. Just like Rand would have wanted.

There clearly wasn't enough disincentive to keep this particular company from violating the rules. They chose to do a cost benefit and the cost of closing the mine, paying federal fines, and settling with the families from any potential disaster didn't outweigh the profits they could make.

That's effectively the same model that every successful insurance company in the world takes - reward > risk. Except the government intervenes to make sure that an insurance company makes enough to remain solvent while paying enough out to keep rates low, effectively dictating how much an insurance company can charge.

Grizalltheway wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:Massey management deserves anything that gets thrown at them for falsifying records and putting their workers in danger along with criminal charges for the deaths of those workers.

Why is this an Ayn Rand/Conk issue?

These guys believed they were free to make as much money as possible, without interference from those evil Feds. Just like Rand would have wanted.

I can now certainly see why you're a Donk.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Mine owner Massey Energy kept two sets of records that chronicled safety problems. One internal set of production reports detailed those problems and how they delayed coal production. But the other records, which are reviewed by federal mine safety inspectors and required by federal law, failed to mention the same safety hazards. Some of the hazards that were not disclosed are identical to those believed to have contributed to the explosion

Gas readings taken shortly after the explosion showed too little methane to support Massey Energy's claim that a massive, naturally-occurring and unpredictable inundation of gas caused the disaster

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... gators-say" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And all the regulations in the world didn't stop him from doing what he did. The answer isn't "more government"...hell, even your benevolent government picks and chooses which of ITS OWN laws its going to enforce (see the "immigration and border control" discussions).

Baldy wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
These guys believed they were free to make as much money as possible, without interference from those evil Feds. Just like Rand would have wanted.

I can now certainly see why you're a Donk.

Face it, Bald One-you and your fellow conks bitch about overregulation/oversight of the private sector by the gov't, and then, when something like this happens to vindicate said regulation, you go silent.

Rand championed sociopathic behavior such as this where workers are dispensible and safety concerns are purely driven by the bottom line. However she probably wouldn't have agreed with Massey's use of government through election financing etc.

Perhaps Massey represents neo-objectivism.

It's fun to watch you conks defend it.

Everybody hates the big evil companies for exploiting the US worker while individuals go out and stock up on Nikes and Ipods (exploiting cheap Asian labor in terrible working conditions) and bitch and complain when the companies comprising their 401K portfolios don't make their numbers and your mutual funds don't keep up with inflation. You can't have it both ways, unless you use your mattress as your savings account and watch the buying power erode 3% a year.

Like my initial post stated, I don't condone what Massey did and they deserve any criminal charges thrown at them - they made those choices and decided it was worth the risk. People speed, drink and drive, etc. every day knowing what the consequences could be even with laws in place to curtail it. Individuals are kept in check partly because of this, plus the introduction of a concience, something a corporate or federal entity lacks. Once you become big enough to have shareholders or constituents they will hold you accountable for positive results or the individuals that lead it will be replaced, pure and simple. It's not utopian, but that's the democracy we live in.