GM Did the Crime, Drivers Do the Time

[Caolela]

^ I agree, which is a first for me with anything I've seen you post.

However, it is also widely known that this type of malfeasance is not only endemic to the Obama Justice Dept., but was during Bush's as well since this goes back to 2001, among other cases.

Also, as mentioned in the report, there are Republican Congress members that are attempting to block legislation that would make corporations and individual employees found to be involved with this kind of thing criminally liable, which would include any of their executives.

It's a bi-partisan problem.

[enragedgorilla]

"Under the terms of the Justice Department’s $900 million settlement, no GM executives will be prosecuted for covering up the faulty ignition switch linked to at least 124 deaths. The deal is the latest in a string of deferred prosecution agreements between the Obama administration and corporations accused of criminal activity. We speak to longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader, "Why Not Jail?" author Rena Steinzor and Laura Christian, the mother of a GM crash victim."

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/9/1...ime_drivers_do


Once again, the Obama government's "Justice" Dept. in cahoots with giant corporations to the detriment of the larger public. This is an extension of the Bush administration's tactics and the definition of corporatism/fascism.

We bail them out...no one does time.This ...and no one does time.
Whew! thought something had changed in the world!

[Paula Deen]

I don't drive, but if I did there is only one company in the world that makes cars I would use, Ford.

They didn't accept bailout money in 08, and they have been trying very hard to stay positive and work hard over the last few years. Fuck the rest of these companies doing all this shady bullshit.

[Caolela]

I wouldn't put Ford on any sort of pedestal, since whether it received bailout funds or not doesn't affect this issue. They've had recalls in the past, and IIRC they're involved in one as we speak, as is Toyota yet again.

- - - Updated - - -

We bail them out...no one does time.This ...and no one does time.
Whew! thought something had changed in the world!

Things would change if more people got involved with their Congress reps, and pressured them to change the laws, like the one I mentioned above that was highlighted in the DemocracyNow! report with the 2 senators.

[araine]

gotta love the desperation in trying to pin it on Obama. really that right there proves he isnt a socialist. what we need is a true workers champion in the white house someone that is willing to take on all the wall street greed and get bankers and corrupt CEOs behind bars for the crimes they do.

[IIamaKing]

Until people get as outraged over this shit as they do over, a lion being shot, or Gays getting married, or what a woman does with her body, it will never get better.

The rich buy the laws they want and we squabble over things that hardly matter when compared to the real problems in this corporate sponsored nation we live in.


We need to stop arguing over distraction issues, and really clean house on the hill.

[Caolela]

^ I 100% agree, araine and IIamaKing.

However, IMO one of the first things that needs to happen is repeal of the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court, and serious campaign finance reform. If you don't get the corporate money and wealthy donors out of the politicians pockets, it will be very hard to change much else, as it is now with many issues.

It would take a Constitutional amendment, which itself is very difficult to do. The bastards who voted for Citizens United on the Roberts court knew that when they made the unconstitutional CU decision, as well as the related McCutcheon decision.

[belfpala]

What about an engine turning off causes people to crash exactly? I've run out of gas before and didn't die.

My timing belt broke when I was going about 65mph once. No breaks, no power steering. Had to ease it to the side of the road and get it to stop. I don't usually panic, but I could easily see others freaking out and not handling the situation.

[unbound]

Once again, the Obama government's "Justice" Dept. in cahoots with giant corporations to the detriment of the larger public. This is an extension of the Bush administration's tactics and the definition of corporatism/fascism.

Unfortunately, this is the way of things anymore. Bush's Justice Dept gave the tobacco giants a minor slap on the wrist when he was in office in lieu of the suing for billions like there were supposed to. Corporations are the most protected class in the US right now.

http://www.propublica.org/article/th...orate-impunity

Princeton and Northwestern study concludes that the US is already an Oligarchy - http://journals.cambridge.org/downlo...1724b76fbc7feb

[matt4pack]

My timing belt broke when I was going about 65mph once. No breaks, no power steering. Had to ease it to the side of the road and get it to stop. I don't usually panic, but I could easily see others freaking out and not handling the situation.

Well I think that's a failure in educating people. Everyone should know how to handle a situation where the engine cuts off whether it's a timing belt that breaks, you run out of gas, or the ignition cuts off but most probably don't. I still had steering and brakes but it just required a lot of force that many might not know how to handle in that situation because they've never been told.

Separately if they knew about a problem and tried to hide it then they should be held responsible.

[Caolela]

Well I think that's a failure in educating people. Everyone should know how to handle a situation where the engine cuts off whether it's a timing belt that breaks, you run out of gas, or the ignition cuts off but most probably don't.

So we're supposed to have training or education in order to somehow compensate for reckless, intentional, and criminal corporate behavior, instead of ensuring at the point of manufacture that the problems won't occur, and jail time for criminal culpability?

Even if everyone took a mandated driver safety course that covered such a scenario, there is no predicting what can happen in a real situation, with so many possible variables such as driver reaction time, experience, and physical abilities, weather and lighting conditions, traffic and road conditions, vehicle condition, and so on.

That's a waste of time and money and is an attempt to place the onus on the potential victim. What you do is prevention and accountability first.

[matt4pack]

So we're supposed to have training or education in order to somehow compensate for reckless, intentional, and criminal corporate behavior, instead of ensuring at the point of manufacture that the problems won't occur, and jail time for criminal culpability?

Even if everyone took a mandated driver safety course that covered such a scenario, there is no predicting what can happen in a real situation, with so many possible variables such as driver reaction time, experience, and physical abilities, weather and lighting conditions, traffic and road conditions, vehicle condition, and so on.

I said if they tried to hide a problem which it appears they did then they should be held responsible and not get off.

But I also see reckless driving all the time with people speeding and tailgating. It's those situations where you're much more likely to have something bad happen when anything goes wrong.

[tru]

Bought my 06 Cobalt brand new. Love my car. Its sad it got such a bad rap for the switch thing even sadder some people lost their lives because of it. I never had any problems with it had some smaller recall stuff prior to the switch but I would tell anyone looking to buy a used car not to let that recall of that sway you because they are reliable. Mine is a base model ls 5-speed with around 95k miles.

I have a 68 chevelle ss that doesnt have power assisted brakes or steering handling my old heavy chevy can be quite hard to "drive" sometimes but my own personal experiences with older cars and having exp. behind the wheel of an 18wheeler honestly the switch issue wouldnt have scared me nor caused me problems if it had went out.
Just wanted to add that to this thread.

[Planeshaper]

I wouldn't put Ford on any sort of pedestal, since whether it received bailout funds or not doesn't affect this issue. They've had recalls in the past, and IIRC they're involved in one as we speak, as is Toyota yet again.

Recalls are a good thing, not a bad thing.

Covering up a problem that's killing people until your coverup can't work anymore, then finally admitting to a recall. That's a bad thing.

We shouldn't be punishing companies because they recall faulty products or even because they make faulty products. We should be punishing companies when they attempt to cover up evidence that indicates the faults in those products, and then proceeds on with those products despite that evidence of fault.

And people within those companies, and very probably several lawyers, should definitely be jailed when that happens.

[Caolela]

But I also see reckless driving all the time with people speeding and tailgating. It's those situations where you're much more likely to have something bad happen when anything goes wrong.

Which has nothing to do with the GM ignition and gov't settlement issues here.

- - - Updated - - -

Recalls are a good thing, not a bad thing.

Covering up a problem that's killing people until your coverup can't work anymore, then finally admitting to a recall. That's a bad thing.

We shouldn't be punishing companies because they recall faulty products or even because they make faulty products. We should be punishing companies when they attempt to cover up evidence that indicates the faults in those products, and then proceeds on with those products despite that evidence of fault.

And people within those companies, and very probably several lawyers, should definitely be jailed when that happens.

Where did I say Ford or any company should be punished for recalls? I replied to the point about Ford being somehow exceptional or different than any of the others about defective products simply because they didn't accept bailout monies during the financial crisis, when they have nothing to do with each other here.

You're trying to conflate the two, or something that I didn't blame them for.

[Planeshaper]

Which has nothing to do with the GM ignition and gov't settlement issues here.

- - - Updated - - -



Where did I say Ford or any company should be punished for recalls? I replied to the point about Ford being somehow exceptional or different than any of the others about defective products simply because they didn't accept bailout monies during the financial crisis, when they have nothing to do with each other here.

You're trying to conflate the two.

You conflated recalls as apparent evidence that Ford shouldn't be trusted. In the very same paragraph, you said, "Don't put Ford on a pedestal. They've had recalls."

Recalls should be an indicator of corporate trust, especially if those recalls were unsolicited by an external agency. The next step, of course, is to publicly release all data that led to the decision of a recall.

But recalls do not represent some evidence that a corporation shouldn't be trusted. We should encourage, not discourage, recalls. And the post I quoted appeared discouraging of recalls by apparently providing their existence as a caution against trusting a particular corporation.

[Masark]

What about an engine turning off causes people to crash exactly? I've run out of gas before and didn't die.

It's not just the engine turning off. If the ignition switch goes to accessory, you get the following:

1. The steering wheel locks. You now have no ability to turn.

2. Loss of brake booster. There goes 75%+ of your ability to slow down.

3. If/when you do crash, the air bags are not going to deploy.

In an out-of-gas situation, you only have #2 to deal with.

[Aphrel]

Find out where they live and dirty your hands yourself if you want justice :P Drag them out of their 100million dollar homes and punish them as you see fit.
Voting isnt gonna change anything. Both parties are deep in the pokets of the corporations. Vigilantism is the only option left!!!

[Caolela]

You conflated recalls as apparent evidence that Ford shouldn't be trusted. In the very same paragraph, you said, "Don't put Ford on a pedestal. They've had recalls."

But you've deleted an important part of what I said, which was,"I wouldn't put Ford on any sort of pedestal, since whether it received bailout funds or not doesn't affect this issue." Then I said they've had recalls too. Whether they've pulled the same shennanigans that GM has I don't know, but I didn't accuse them of doing so.

Recalls should be an indicator of corporate trust, especially if those recalls were unsolicited by an external agency. The next step, of course, is to publicly release all data that led to the decision of a recall.

But recalls do not represent some evidence that a corporation shouldn't be trusted. We should encourage, not discourage, recalls. And the post I quoted appeared discouraging of recalls by apparently providing their existence as a caution against trusting a particular corporation.

I agree that recalls are good, obviously. But there should be no inherent trust of corporations to be "self-policing". That has proven time and again to be wishful thinking, a fallacy, because corporations are concerned with increasing their bottom line at the expense of anything else, including their own customers, employees, communities they operate in, and environment if they can get away with it.

The main compelling reason to do a recall on their own is the thread of gov't action. That's what laws and regulations are there for because they cannot be trusted without them.

[Planeshaper]

But you've deleted an important part of what I said, which was,"I wouldn't put Ford on any sort of pedestal, since whether it received bailout funds or not doesn't affect this issue." Then I said they've had recalls too. Whether they've pulled the same shennanigans that GM has I don't know, but I didn't accuse them of doing so.

Obviously there was contextual misunderstanding somewhere. I read your statement as one suggesting that they should be mistrusted because they've had recalls. You're saying that's not what you meant, so ok then, the misunderstanding was on my behalf. The dismissal of the bailout funds portion, though, was irrelevant to my perception of your statement.

I wanted to be clear that a company having a recall should not invite skepticism on its own.

But there should be no inherent trust of corporations to be "self-policing".

I agree. And I agree that strong government regulations should be in place and enforced.

But when a corporation does actually self-police, they should be praised for it. Regardless of whether their motivation is actually altruistic or just to save themselves from punishment.

-----------------

As an aside...I'll never understand the attitude of, "shouldn't be praised for doing what they're supposed to do." Doing what you're supposed to do is exactly the kind of action that deserves praise, and not doing what you're supposed to do is exactly the kind of action that deserves punishment.

Positive reinforcement empowers repeated positive actions.

-----------------

GM should be punished much more severely than a fine -- they did not do what they were supposed to do.

And it led to violent deaths.