Oh, I was more thinking in terms of judging those percentages specifically. I am well aware that the best thing Boeing could do for aviation safety would be to just close down completely at this point.
Pretty much, the problem with that idea that the market solves everything on its own is that it just isn’t true unless you have some very specific kind of product (one where the barrier to entry into the market is low so there is plenty of competition, the buyer can judge the quality even if they lack expertise and buys frequently and can recognize whether the product is actually the same or changed in the meantime and where the buyer is free not to buy) and 90% of products aren’t like that, more if you take away regulation on things like trademarks.
Eh, I don’t think they should close down, they just need to have their management completely replaced with people who care about aviation safety.
Boeing has a lot of interesting tech, so don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, but we definitely need someone competent to come in and scrub the tub.
I feel it is not just management though, there is a certain kind of corporate culture that is very slow to change. On the other hand if Boeing closed down and most of their assets were bought and employees were employed in a new company there wouldn’t be an expectation by anyone that things would continue as they have been.
But who would buy them? I guess someone like Lockheed Martin, or maybe an airline, idk. And then there’s no guarantee they’ll use it to build commercial airplanes.
I think it would be much better to try to fix the executive team and have that culture trickle down. My company is going through a leadership change, and the cultural shift seems to be pretty quick.
Oh, I was more thinking in terms of judging those percentages specifically. I am well aware that the best thing Boeing could do for aviation safety would be to just close down completely at this point.
I think those are both signs of upper management being shit
Well, of that and of the fact that the government regulators dropped the ball in various areas either on regulation or enforcement of that regulation.
Wasn’t the us kind of about a lack of regulation?
Pretty much, the problem with that idea that the market solves everything on its own is that it just isn’t true unless you have some very specific kind of product (one where the barrier to entry into the market is low so there is plenty of competition, the buyer can judge the quality even if they lack expertise and buys frequently and can recognize whether the product is actually the same or changed in the meantime and where the buyer is free not to buy) and 90% of products aren’t like that, more if you take away regulation on things like trademarks.
Any product like that would be a product most people would just make themselves, like paper airplanes
Eh, I don’t think they should close down, they just need to have their management completely replaced with people who care about aviation safety.
Boeing has a lot of interesting tech, so don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, but we definitely need someone competent to come in and scrub the tub.
I feel it is not just management though, there is a certain kind of corporate culture that is very slow to change. On the other hand if Boeing closed down and most of their assets were bought and employees were employed in a new company there wouldn’t be an expectation by anyone that things would continue as they have been.
But who would buy them? I guess someone like Lockheed Martin, or maybe an airline, idk. And then there’s no guarantee they’ll use it to build commercial airplanes.
I think it would be much better to try to fix the executive team and have that culture trickle down. My company is going through a leadership change, and the cultural shift seems to be pretty quick.