zlacker

>>tafda+(OP)
It's funny how if you are a major corporation with fat government contracts you can systematically destroy your engineering department, ostracize whistleblowers, and wind up killing hundreds of people and nobody gets punished and the FAA will even be on your side, like the Boeing thing.

but if you make a youtube stunt that hurts nobody you can get 20 years in prison and the FAA acts like you besmirched the stellar reputation of the aviation industry.

>>fatnec+Gt1
It's easy when it's 1 person to blame.

In an organisation which is connected to the government in many ways through partnerships and contracts, putting a face to a crime is much harder to do. There's no single accountable person who can be thrown under the bus.

It was more a collection of bad actions by actors that had their own motives but nothing that was ever explicitly mean to hurt people.

(Assuming you're referring to 737 MAX)

>>tedk-4+Ax1
This is a strange take. So what if it is more effort. I remember as a member of my cooperatives board, I was reading a lot of what-ifs. One was that if spikes of ice fell down and killed someone on the street, and it happened because of neglilence on the boards side, we would absolutely be under the gun.

The board should be responsible. You don't get to make $200m a year and just brush hundreds of lives off as a whoops.

>>berghe+nX1
> The board should be responsible. You don't get to make $200m a year and just brush hundreds of lives off as a whoops.

I don't think you understand how capitalism works.

>>whitem+0Z1
Is rule of law more effective in non-capitalist jurisdictions?

>>brigan+412
Maybe, but capitalist rule of law makes hypothesis difficult to test.

Rule of law has probably been most influential under capitalist authoritarianism like Nazi Germany.