Aftershocking verdictFollow

Is this where I insert a stock statement about how this is an inevitable result of socialism/nanny-state/etc?

Gbaji is going to insert it whether you want him to or not. It's what god would want.

Edited, Oct 24th 2012 4:35pm by Bardalicious

You think blame-shifting is somehow uniquely socialist? Are you in grade school or something?

I mean "Yes, this is exactly the point where you make a smug and erroneous statement. Actually, every point is that point when you're Gbaji."

No one expects private sector committees to accomplish anything.

Right, because corporations are known for standing up and saying, "You know what? My bad."

[EDIT]

And question, do we have any indication that this even IS a public committee? It could just as easily be an independent organization contracted by the government.

But, of course, that wouldn't suit gbaji's rhetoric.

Edited, Oct 24th 2012 7:21pm by idiggory

All I've been able to find conflicts. This article calls it Italy's top disaster relief organization.

But the top disaster relief organization for the US is the American Red Cross, which isn't led by the state.

So that doesn't actually give me any room to say.

Furthermore, the articles keep saying seven were convicted--six scientists and one (ex)government official. But all seven were members of the National Commission.

So, what? Was there only one person there capable of acting in any official capacity? Why are all of them being held liable then--it's obviously isn't their job if they aren't given a position of authority.

And I'm seeing quotes that "These are professionals who spoke in good faith and were by no means motivated by personal interests." Is that just trying to reinforce their defense, or were they actually just experts called in to discuss the situation, without a personal stake in the issue?

I have no clue. I'm not seeing anything close to definitive proof for either argument.

And my point is that you're a biased moron for jumping to that conclusion.

Right, because you're not making any wild assumptions there at all.

And, of course, a gov't that just says ****'em is so much better.

That's my inclination as well.

In such a society, the individuals would take responsibility for their own well being. I suspect you don't quite grasp what that means. Point being that instead of a government trying to tell the people not to worry about the earthquakes, it would have told them that anything is possible and to take whatever preparations they felt they needed to take. As a result, more people would have chosen to do what they would normally do (stay outside), and fewer would have died. While those who did might attempt to sue, they'd have a hard time doing so because they weren't told that they were perfectly safe.


The issue here is that it's become increasingly common for governments to use scientists as a backdrop to lend weight to their positions. In this case, the scientists were put out in front of the public to give the usual song and dance about earthquakes, then the government official told the public that they were perfectly safe. While the scientists didn't say anything technically untrue (the odds of a big earthquake were low, relatively speaking), it was how they were used that caused the problem. If it had just been a government official telling people not to worry, the people would have told him he doesn't know anything and would have taken precautions themselves. But by saying that in a press release as part of a presentation by a group of expert scientists people put more weight in his words.


I agree that this is somewhat unfair to the scientists, but on the other hand, scientists have become complacent in past decades with regard to how they are used by governments. They darn well know that the PR folks will spin the science, and they usually stand silent when it happens because they get paid to do this sort of thing. And every once in a while it backfires. Did they lie? No. But they allowed their expertise to lend weight to a lie.

Yeah, I decided the other day to just let it go.

SpoilerAnd I debate SSM with Alma! ALMA!!

Insert stock rebuttal about how they'd have been sued the shit out of if this has happened in the United States?

As others have said, demanding someone be held responsible isn't even remotely unique to a Socialist country.

Yeah, keep the masses uninformed or better yet, misinformed. Knowledge is power, yo.