4 ms·

It should not be seen as business as usual when these kinds of things happen. It was at least tolerable due to my ignorance when you talked about these chemical

It should not be seen as business as usual when these kinds of things happen. It was at least tolerable due to my ignorance when you talked about these chemicals boiling off, but then to say "no biggie that petroleum spilled everywhere, I'm sure it burned off too." The whistle has been blown on the rails and the rail companies for some time, and now a catastrophe has occurred. We should be severely punishing the rail companies if not nationalizing them. We should make sure every citizen is taken care of and their homes are safe to live in. I don't have to believe in a conspiracy theory to be angry at negligence causing an environmental disaster in a city.

xwdv 4y ago
Nationalizing is an overreach. This is why events like this have to be downplayed because if you don’t the vultures will swoop in with their own agendas and try to stir up emotions to garner support for unpopular causes.
- unethical_ban 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - kneebonian 4y ago
    Well given the way they've been running Amtrack I don't trust their ability to run shipping.
  - TechBro8615 4y ago
    It's confusing to me why you think nationalizing the rail company would solve any problem. The government can't even keep us safe when it's telling the rail company what to do. In fact, the issue here doesn't seem to be "rail company not listening to government" so much as "government not listening to rail workers." So you think that same government - which just legislatively forced those workers back to work - can run the rail company, while complying with all the same (and new) regulations, and also not turning it into a loss-making operation funded by taxpayers in perpetuity (or at least as long as the country/economy still exists)?
- Sakos 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - MrOwnPut 4y ago
    Airlines are regulated heavily and safe without nationalizing / seizing ownership.
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      Airline accidents kill hundreds of people outright. The media gives those stories tons of attention (If it bleeds, it leads) and accordingly the airline industry knows it must take safety seriously to protect their profits. Meanwhile the chemical industry kill the gods only know how many thousands of people over the course of decades with a steady trickle of statistically correlated illnesses, but the media doesn't cover it and the consumers of chemical goods feel insulated from harm which seems very abstract and indirect to them. A consumer buying a chemical good is not directly imperiled by the chemical industry in the same way as an airline flier is threatened by airline crashes. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why the airline industry is better at safety than the chemical industry.
      - MrOwnPut 4y ago
        Yes I agree, that was my point. Though I was comparing train derailments overall, not chemical spills. Chemicals are needed for society. Nationalizing trains will not help. Nationalizing chemical transfers won't help either if it's the same EPA in charge that said 9/11 debris was safe or this spill was okay. Heavier regulations on trains may be needed, especially when transferring hazardous loads, but nationalization would be horrendous. All that be said, investing in pipelines is a much safer form of transfer for these chemicals. Trains are too risky.
thepasswordis 4y ago
[flagged]
- unethical_ban 4y ago
  In theory, I don't see government ownership of society-critical industries with no opportunity for competition to be crazy. Tell me how you'd spin up a competing national rail line network.
  - MockObject 4y ago
    The craziness appears when you realize that US governments are no more accountable than US corporations. Nobody lost their job over 9/11, or the Afghanistan pullout, or any other debacle you can name from the past few decades. Charges were dropped against the low level jail guards who allowed Jeff Epstein to die; Acosta resigned as Labor Secretary only due to public outcry and 12 years later. Responsibility is a quaint tradition of a lost America.
  - jasonlotito 4y ago
    It's not worth replying. "Is this a joke?" is not asking if it's a joke. It's an worthless insult. Nothing more.
    - unethical_ban 4y ago
      Agreed they were low effort, so I put in little as well.
  - claytongulick 4y ago
    Ayn Rand wrote a sci-fi/political philosophy book about this exact subject, named Atlas Shrugged. The main character in the book is a railroad executive struggling to keep her company afloat in the face of ruinous regulations that were designed to drive the rail systems towards nationalization. The flip side of course, that she fails to address completely in that book, is unethical behavior by private industry, such as super trains with one engineer, unsafe working conditions, etc...

xwdv 4y ago

Nationalizing is an overreach. This is why events like this have to be downplayed because if you don’t the vultures will swoop in with their own agendas and try to stir up emotions to garner support for unpopular causes.

unethical_ban 4y ago
[flagged]
- kneebonian 4y ago
  Well given the way they've been running Amtrack I don't trust their ability to run shipping.
- TechBro8615 4y ago
  It's confusing to me why you think nationalizing the rail company would solve any problem. The government can't even keep us safe when it's telling the rail company what to do. In fact, the issue here doesn't seem to be "rail company not listening to government" so much as "government not listening to rail workers." So you think that same government - which just legislatively forced those workers back to work - can run the rail company, while complying with all the same (and new) regulations, and also not turning it into a loss-making operation funded by taxpayers in perpetuity (or at least as long as the country/economy still exists)?
Sakos 4y ago
[flagged]
- MrOwnPut 4y ago
  Airlines are regulated heavily and safe without nationalizing / seizing ownership.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    Airline accidents kill hundreds of people outright. The media gives those stories tons of attention (If it bleeds, it leads) and accordingly the airline industry knows it must take safety seriously to protect their profits. Meanwhile the chemical industry kill the gods only know how many thousands of people over the course of decades with a steady trickle of statistically correlated illnesses, but the media doesn't cover it and the consumers of chemical goods feel insulated from harm which seems very abstract and indirect to them. A consumer buying a chemical good is not directly imperiled by the chemical industry in the same way as an airline flier is threatened by airline crashes. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why the airline industry is better at safety than the chemical industry.
    - MrOwnPut 4y ago
      Yes I agree, that was my point. Though I was comparing train derailments overall, not chemical spills. Chemicals are needed for society. Nationalizing trains will not help. Nationalizing chemical transfers won't help either if it's the same EPA in charge that said 9/11 debris was safe or this spill was okay. Heavier regulations on trains may be needed, especially when transferring hazardous loads, but nationalization would be horrendous. All that be said, investing in pipelines is a much safer form of transfer for these chemicals. Trains are too risky.

thepasswordis 4y ago

[flagged]

unethical_ban 4y ago
In theory, I don't see government ownership of society-critical industries with no opportunity for competition to be crazy. Tell me how you'd spin up a competing national rail line network.
- MockObject 4y ago
  The craziness appears when you realize that US governments are no more accountable than US corporations. Nobody lost their job over 9/11, or the Afghanistan pullout, or any other debacle you can name from the past few decades. Charges were dropped against the low level jail guards who allowed Jeff Epstein to die; Acosta resigned as Labor Secretary only due to public outcry and 12 years later. Responsibility is a quaint tradition of a lost America.
- jasonlotito 4y ago
  It's not worth replying. "Is this a joke?" is not asking if it's a joke. It's an worthless insult. Nothing more.
  - unethical_ban 4y ago
    Agreed they were low effort, so I put in little as well.
- claytongulick 4y ago
  Ayn Rand wrote a sci-fi/political philosophy book about this exact subject, named Atlas Shrugged. The main character in the book is a railroad executive struggling to keep her company afloat in the face of ruinous regulations that were designed to drive the rail systems towards nationalization. The flip side of course, that she fails to address completely in that book, is unethical behavior by private industry, such as super trains with one engineer, unsafe working conditions, etc...