I don’t imagine their lax safety standards started the day of the blast. Presumably, by skimping on safety measures the plant saved money and showed better financial results; at least for as long as their luck held out.
Put another way, a company may own a thousand such plants, with similar safety standards. If the increased profits from the other 999 offset the losses from 1, then it’s a good business model to follow. Without knowing the real numbers of risk vs. reward, you can’t say that the interests of the owners and the people living near the plant coincided.
The ones looking after the people’s interest are the people themselves, or their elected representatives. And that includes all interests; the right of the owners to run a business, and the right of residents to not have something blow up in their backyards.
OSHA and DHS don’t do the same thing. DHS would have done nothing to prevent this accident; they do not deal with workplace safety. DHS is interested in terrorism.
As to your comparison to flight delays (a funny thing to bring up given what a huge, huge social and economic success deregulation of the airline industry was) Evil Captor is claiming this accident is the result of DEREGULATION, which implies either that there are fewer regulations, either in terms of actual regulations being relaxed or lifted, or (as you imply) regulations remaining the same but being less enforced.
But nobody has presented any evidence of any kind that the regulation of explosive chemicals, in general or of the sort that resulted in this blast, has been reduced from a previous state. There is some evidence West Fertilizer wasn’t inspected very much, but that’s always been true. It’s not “deregulating” something to continue doing it the same way you always have.
I can dig it. It still could be deregulation, but like XT says, it would be nice to see some cites that demonstrate that. If that turns out to be a dead-end proposition, well then we can cross that off the list and see if another thread comes along.
The FAA has it’s own trust fund to finance it to avoid budgetary problems. Over 70% of it’s funds come from taxes on tickets, facilities and fuels. These funds cover everything from air traffic control to airport expansions. So a 7% cut of 30% is 2%. That’s all they have to trim off the total budget to keep things going on time.
As for the airline industry, it has always been a self policing entity that is greatly involved in the construction of policy.
Did the plant blow up? I’m guessing that is my cite. Yep, the plant blew up but I’m sure I could find a cite for you, if you really need it.
The very fact that the agency responsible for the regulation was paid to do their job and didn’t, means exactly what I said.
They had exactly the same chance of stopping this accident as not having an agency in the first place.
That is, unless you are denying the incident happened, of course. Are you?
Its a novel solution. The answer to ineffective regulation:remove enforcement from the mix. This is where somebody says “Hey, that’s so crazy, it just might work!”.
This entire thread was started as an I told you so, that blew up in the OP’s face. He has yet to change his tune and I imagine that he will not do so now.
Pun intended.
If it is now a thread about how to stop things like this from happening in the future, perhaps you’d like to start the discussion. Maybe we should base it on “how to get the government to do the job they are paid to do”?
Born and raised in Waco. The geographic distance is misleading. Molly Ivins once called Waco “the Vatican of Baptists”. Home of the Baylor Bears, a football team that supplied many practice sessions to Aggies too stupid to use tackling dummies. The last Baptist college in America to permit dancing.
I don’t know what the chances were of this plant exploding; but I know that when a roulette wheel comes up 00, you can’t then point to it and say “look, one-chance-out-of-one, it had to happen.”
My point was that the economic interests of the plant don’t necessarily coincide with the safety interest of those who live near it. It’s like the gas tank in the Ford Pinto. The story goes that Ford executives knew there was a safety issue, but decided it would be more expensive to fix than to pay out damage claims for those times when it did catch fire.
From a purely economic economic perspective, Ford was right. And the plant owners may have been right, too, The money they saved on safety may have been worth the increased risk. I don’t agree with the argument that regulations are unnecessary because economic interests will always keep us safe.
Again, when you are talking about big corporation you are setting a standard that doesn’t exist for the mom and pop. I know lots of mom and pop stores where mom and pop actually live (either in or really close by) at the store/plant/shop.
People don’t become emotionless calculators when they run a business, that’s true. There’s nothing preventing someone from going above and beyond the bare minimums when it comes to taking care of their employees or interacting with the communities in which they operate. I’m sure there are businesses that do, I just don’t want to rely on such kindness to keep me safe.
But whether someone owns one factory or a thousand, the math is the same. Over thousands of spins, a roulette wheel will make money for the casino. Now, a single spin might make money or lose money, but the way probability works, if it makes sense to do something thousands of times, it makes sense to do it once. Again, that’s a purely mathematical argument, and there are other factors at play.
Well, Chris Hayes just did a segment on his show explaining the role of deregulation in the West explosion. Details are sketchy, but I’m pretty sure it was West, not Waco.
Anyway, the gist is that the Bush administration took the authority to inspect chemical plants away from the EPA and gave it to DHS, the point being that DHS just doesn’t have the same oomph and would therefore be more convenient for the chemical companies. Cites from chemical industry lobbyists plus a video from 2008 of Obama promoting a bill for better chemical plant oversight via giving authority back to the EPA (guess how that turned out).
I have to cook and anyway I doubt the link is up so soon, but maybe Evil Captor has a point after all.
