The Rise and Fall of Boeing
statecraft.beehiiv.com
The policies and culture that shaped Boeing from the creator of the B-52 to the 737-Max fiasco. We're analyzing Boeing's historic rise and recent missteps.
  • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    29·
    11 months ago

    I’ll save you some time:

    The FAA even lets the company regulate its own planes starting in 2009 (“self-regulation”).

    You’re welcome.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      14·
      11 months ago

      But I was told the free market would sort it out! That some other person would see the need for planes that don’t fall apart, and take on building multi-million dollar planes against a multi-billion dollar corporation and that the public would decide whose is better!

      • vividspecter@lemm.ee
        2·
        11 months ago

        No no, you see it’s up to the consumer to choose the planes that are safe! After all, we are all rational economic actors with perfect knowledge, so we of course know which planes are dangerous in advance!

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    111·
    11 months ago

    So the summary is, Boeing ruined Boeing. Government is not to blame nor are rules. They decided to be greedy asses who skipped on checks and quality control just to get bigger bonuses for their management.

  • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    10·
    11 months ago

    Market Capitalism exists to feed insatiable greed.

    These aren’t specific bad actors, this is what it means to be a publically traded corporation.

    We’re going to destroy the planet and civilization will collapse sooner rather than later, but if hypothetically we cared about our species/children/future, capital markets would have to either go, or capital investment would have to be the party receiving a small fraction of the value produced while the labor that generates that value gets most of it, as always should have been the case.

    Capital markets, in theory, were supposed a way to seed businesses to grow, now they run the table, threaten legal action against corporations who don’t self-cannibalize for short term cash grabs, and at this terminal stage are eating one a other’s empires in their desperation to grow/metastasize on a saturated, capitalist conquered finite world.

    Having currency isn’t the problem, having a do nothing investment class that provides no labor but expects ever Moooooooooaaaaar merely for presenting chips from their last trip to the human exploitation casino is destroying civilization and our sole, shared, COMMUNal habitat is.

    Labor makes the world run, builds the goods, provides the services, makes the discoveries, grows our food, etc. Do nothing capital investors are societal leeches claiming all the value generated to keep their livestock desperate, in subsistence, and perpetually separated from the resources to buy their own means of production to form cooperatives and the like, as is the core function of market capitalism.

    • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      11 months ago

      Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world.

      I hate the finance sector.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        8·
        11 months ago

        I hate biased, ivy league, self-serving economists pretending to be and having the gravitas of scientists when they declare this intentionally corrupt, thieving economy to be the optimal system for distributing goods and services to the society it is supposed to be in service to instead of the other way around as it has become.

        Giving the rich people all the money isn’t efficient at distributing good and services in such a way as to maximize the well-being of the citizenry(isn’t that supposed to be the POINT of any economy?), its only efficient giving the rich people all the money.

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          3·
          11 months ago

          Give poor people money and let the rich find ways to earn their spending. We broke capitalism by removing any incentive to do anything for people. Just serve other rich people because they have all the money.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          3·
          11 months ago

          Market economies are an efficient system for distributing goods and services. Capitalism is an efficient system for funneling wealth to an investor class. Markets don’t require capitalism. We can distribute surplus revenue back to the workers instead of non-working investors, and the market forces will continue to do all the things economists praise them for, without concentrating profit in bourgeoisie pockets.

          Every worker a member of the board.

        • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          2·
          11 months ago

          I hate biased, ivy league, self-serving economists pretending to be and having the gravitas of scientists when they declare this intentionally corrupt, thieving economy to be the optimal system for distributing goods and services to the society it is supposed to be in service to instead of the other way around as it has become.

          People compare academic models to real world scenarios without considering whether the underlying assumptions made in a model are met. A lot of times a free market economy is supposed to have many competing vendors, and there is supposed to be many customers who are all well educated about the marketplace and the product and the prices, and the widgets being sold are all virtually identical, etc. I think there are some good ideas in economics, but it is closely linked to politics and it seems like there are many people who are acting in bad faith, or are otherwise little more than accountants that like to dabble in philosophy.