4 ms·

What infuriates me about this is that the people who made that decision were responsible for at least 50 deaths due to increased pollution, and probably even mo

by Fede_V 11y ago

What infuriates me about this is that the people who made that decision were responsible for at least 50 deaths due to increased pollution, and probably even more. If a serial killer murdered 50 people, there would be a public outcry - instead, the most we can expect is that a few directors might retire to 'pursue different opportunities' or 'spend more time with family' and they will lead a very comfortable life with the millions they made from their illgotten profits. White collar crime that results in deaths should be treated just as seriously as any other act that results in deaths. The executives that approved or turned a blind eye to these results should be treated as serial murderers. Moreso, most of those people had the luxury of a very expensive education and a nice and well paid lifestyle. They cheated because their greed told them that the millions they made were not enough.

jl6 11y ago
The trouble with that calculus is that the deaths are caused by the pollution rather than the faking of data. If you want to blame someone for those deaths, you need to blame every driver who contributes to that pollution.
- Fede_V 11y ago
  No, those are the deaths cause by the extra pollution due to the cheating. In practice, as a society, we indirectly decide on pollution standards by voting in politicians who nominate people in regulatory roles. If we are unhappy with those standards, we can vote in other politicians who will alter them. The system is not perfectly responsive of course. In this case, those 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the decisions made by a director that wanted a flashier career, a bigger bonus, or higher social status. Those 50 deaths are on his conscience, and I hope when he goes on to retire in his expensive villa paid by his ill-gotten bonuses his conscience reminds him of this every single instant. It's not likely to happen.. but hey, I can hope.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    It doesn't really work that way with responsibility. Whether or not the number is 50 is moot, it could be 1 it could be 500. The fact is that driving causes deaths, directly and indirectly and that we as a society have placed a cap on the number of deaths that we find acceptable. The total number of deaths we're ok with is staggeringly high, those 50 are a statistic derived with some math that I'm not comfortable with based on assumptions that I'm even less comfortable with. If you want to have that discussion you'd have to look at the bigger picture of the toll of traffic in general. Because if it was ok for VW to kill let's say 50000 people per year but not 50050 then I'm not sure what the fuss is about but if the alternative is 0 or 50 then you may have a point depending on how solid those numbers really are. As it is that number is very handwavy.

by Fede_V 11y ago

jl6 11y ago

The trouble with that calculus is that the deaths are caused by the pollution rather than the faking of data. If you want to blame someone for those deaths, you need to blame every driver who contributes to that pollution.

Fede_V 11y ago
No, those are the deaths cause by the extra pollution due to the cheating. In practice, as a society, we indirectly decide on pollution standards by voting in politicians who nominate people in regulatory roles. If we are unhappy with those standards, we can vote in other politicians who will alter them. The system is not perfectly responsive of course. In this case, those 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the decisions made by a director that wanted a flashier career, a bigger bonus, or higher social status. Those 50 deaths are on his conscience, and I hope when he goes on to retire in his expensive villa paid by his ill-gotten bonuses his conscience reminds him of this every single instant. It's not likely to happen.. but hey, I can hope.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  It doesn't really work that way with responsibility. Whether or not the number is 50 is moot, it could be 1 it could be 500. The fact is that driving causes deaths, directly and indirectly and that we as a society have placed a cap on the number of deaths that we find acceptable. The total number of deaths we're ok with is staggeringly high, those 50 are a statistic derived with some math that I'm not comfortable with based on assumptions that I'm even less comfortable with. If you want to have that discussion you'd have to look at the bigger picture of the toll of traffic in general. Because if it was ok for VW to kill let's say 50000 people per year but not 50050 then I'm not sure what the fuss is about but if the alternative is 0 or 50 then you may have a point depending on how solid those numbers really are. As it is that number is very handwavy.