Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday May 15 2017, @09:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the free-room-and-board dept.

The World Socialist Web Site reports

Former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship was released from prison [May 10] after serving a one year sentence in connection with the April 2010 explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia, which killed 29 coal miners. The Upper Big Branch blast was the worst US mine disaster in 40 years.

Blankenship served the first ten months of his sentence at the Taft Correctional Institution in Southern California. The facility, which houses many white collar criminals, boasts baseball diamonds and soccer fields along with tennis and racquetball courts. Blankenship was then moved to a halfway house for a month and spent the last month prior to his official release at his home in Las Vegas.

In tweets [that] Blankenship posted after his release, the millionaire coal boss showed no remorse for the deaths of 29 miners. He complained that at Taft he had to return to his room several times a day to be counted and could not choose what to watch on TV.

[...] In 2015, Blankenship was convicted on a single misdemeanor count of violating federal safety laws at the mine in Montcoal, West Virginia. The disaster occurred when a spark from a longwall machine ignited a pocket of methane gas, which, in turn, set off a massive coal dust explosion throughout the mine.

Multiple and grave safety violations occurred at the mine when Blankenship issued an order to "run coal", flouting regulations designed to prevent explosions. In an October 2005 memo to the company's deep mine superintendents, Blankenship outlined his priorities. "If any of you have been asked by your group presidents, your supervisors, engineers, or anyone else to do anything other than run coal (i.e., build overcasts, do construction jobs, or whatever), you need to ignore them and run coal", he wrote.

[...] Four investigations of the disaster found that bits on the longwall machine were broken and worn out, causing sparking. Water nozzles meant to keep the bits cool and prevent sparks were also broken. Proper ventilation to prevent the buildup of methane gas was lacking. Explosive coal dust was allowed to accumulate throughout the mine.

Previous: Massey CEO Indicted for Acts Resulting in Coal Mine Explosion that Killed 29


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:13AM (16 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:13AM (#510322) Journal

    That is cold hearted. Coal miners are people, just like people anywhere. In case you didn't know it, mining is a tough job. But, it's a job. We have a nation of people, complaining about the lack of jobs, because jobs have been exported all over the world, where there are no regulations. These guys grew up in coal country, their daddies were probably coal miners, and the coal puts food on the table for their families. No different than most other people. People who live by the sea often go to sea, fishing, researching, or whatever. People who live in forests often work the forests, for paper, lumber, and other resources. Coal miners mine coal.

    Sympathy, you say? I'm not big on sympathy, but I can empathize with them. Coal has fed their families for generations, and there are no jobs being created to replace coal. So, they mine coal.

    What do YOU suggest they do? Apply for welfare?

    It's not their fault that American politics are so polarized on every issue in existence. Nor is it their fault that politicians are corrupt. Tell us, which of your elected officials has spent his entire career representing his constituents, and never taken a bribe, or otherwise looked out for his own interests, instead of yours? I very seriously doubt that such a creature exists.

    Sympathy? Keep it - the miner's don't want it. They would appreciate some respect, but if you have none to give, so be it. But, you could be a bit more human in your attitude.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:18AM (15 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:18AM (#510324)

    What do YOU suggest they do?

    I'd suggest they stop voting against their own best interests. Voting for people who want to eliminate regulation that keeps them from getting killed is stupid.

    It's not their fault that American politics are so polarized on every issue in existence.

    Actually, it is in a way. It's everyone's fault. But what issues should be more important to a coal miner than worker safety regulations? Transgender bathrooms? Abortion? Guns? Marijuana enforcement? Sorry, but if you're voting for a party on these issues and fucking yourself over on real issues that actually make a difference in your life, then you're an idiot.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:35AM (7 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:35AM (#510333) Journal

      Well, what does the "other side" want? I mean, besides closing the mines. Coal is demonized in almost every publication in existence. The left wants to shut down all the coal burning mills and generators in the country. Voting against people who want to keep the mines open is not in the coal miner's interest, is it? They need jobs.

      In this case, we can point to an individual in a position of authority who made the decision to ignore regulations. He should have been punished much more severely than he was.

      Alas, those who attend Ivy League colleges, and build strong networks are never held responsible when they screw up. Most often, they are rewarded, just like Wall Street executives were rewarded in the aftermath of the meltdown in 2008. A few worker's lives don't matter much, now do they?

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:33AM (4 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:33AM (#510377)

        Voting against people who want to keep the mines open is not in the coal miner's interest, is it? They need jobs.

        Then they're going to get jobs that kill them. There's other jobs out there, they just need to move. You can't have everything you want in life handed to you on a silver platter, and the whole reason people of European descent even live in West Virginia is because a bunch of people in Europe got tired of having poor or no jobs, and decided they had to pack up and try living someplace else. Modern-day West Virginians don't even need to go across an ocean, just a state or two away. There's plenty of jobs out there, people just don't feel like doing them because they think they're entitled to jobs in whatever podunk town they currently live in. I see this a lot with Trump supporters: they're mad that their jobs have left whatever rural place they live in, yet they absolutely refuse to move elsewhere, especially any kind of city, to get another job.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:35AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:35AM (#510453)

          Suppose your city was dying, and all the jobs were in rural places. Would you want to move out to that podunk town full of strange people and strange things, and missing all the comforts of where you live now?

          I know somebody from West Virginia. Until he moved away as an adult, he had never tasted Chinese food.

          So imagine that, Grishnakh. You have to move to a place that doesn't even have a Chinese restaurant. All concerts take place at the church, on Sunday. Your new neighbors shoot animals in their yards. One of them flies the confederate flag. Public transportation is a single van with a wheelchair lift. Most people smoke. There is no Starbucks; you can get coffee at the gas station. You'll be leaving your friends and family behind.

          How would you feel about moving there? Might you instead try to survive in your declining city and vote for somebody who might bring back jobs?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:52PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:52PM (#510543)

          It takes money to uproot and move a whole family to a city. A lot more money if you actually want significant certainty the move will be a success (many cities are lot more expensive to live in).

          Money people with no/crap jobs don't have.

          So what happens is one person goes and leaves the rest behind.

          Welcome to poor country lifestyle...

        • (Score: 2) by quacking duck on Tuesday May 16 2017, @05:14PM (1 child)

          by quacking duck (1395) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @05:14PM (#510601)

          Then they're going to get jobs that kill them. There's other jobs out there, they just need to move. You can't have everything you want in life handed to you on a silver platter

          I wonder if the beautiful irony of this statement will be lost on the right... anytime the left argue that wages are too low, or that a job is too dangerous, unethical, etc, the right is always eager to trot out the "just move to a better job" line, and that they knew better but "chose" to continue working in a bad job.

          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:07PM

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:07PM (#510716)

            Yeah, the irony isn't lost on me. It's like the sides have switched. These days, it's the right-wingers that I see who are refusing to move to a better job. The left-wingers have all packed up and moved to the big cities (and any that haven't are planning to when they can); so that's left a bunch of angry and bitter right-wingers clinging to their rural lifestyles and refusing to leave, and then whining that there's no jobs for them any more, and voting for Trump who promises to fix it somehow.

            The left still thinks many wages are too low (minimum wage, obviously), and that it's wrong for part-time jobs to have zero benefits. But this is a somewhat separate issue, and really a non-issue for rural right-wingers since they don't believe this (or else they'd be left-wingers).

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:38AM

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:38AM (#510379)

        Coal is demonized in almost every publication in existence. The left wants to shut down all the coal burning mills and generators in the country.

        Coal *should be* demonized. It's a horrible fuel, with horrible pollution. And these days, it's not even economically viable: thanks to fracking, natgas is cheaper for making power, and it's far cleaner-burning to boot. And of course renewables (mainly solar) are getting cheaper all the time. Coal is on the way out, no matter what. These people might as well be involved in the horse-buggy industry. Most coal now is being shipped out of the country, and China is cutting back on it now too.

        So they can either start looking for some jobs that aren't on the verge of total obsolescence, or they can sit around and whine. Somehow I doubt they're going to choose the former.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday May 16 2017, @06:19PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @06:19PM (#510649) Journal

        Well, what does the "other side" want? I mean, besides closing the mines.

        Considering there have been absolutely zero legislative attempts from the "other side" to do anything but let economics do it's work I'd say the answer is proper, life-saving regulation.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:32AM (2 children)

      by TheGratefulNet (659) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @03:32AM (#510376)

      it may sound cold, but maybe more people need to DIE before america gets with the program and stops electing republicans.

      yes, the dems suck, but they are nowhere near as bad in terms of rolling back SAFETY regulations.

      the religious folks keep listening to their churches, which are all in the pocket of the R party. they won't go against their church leaders and this will KILL THEM.

      but maybe that's what has to happen.

      its cold an cruel but what's the choice? MORE R's in charge wanting to turn back MORE regulations because it 'costs money to companies'?

      my god. when are we going to stop being pawns to religion???

      yes, I 100% blame religion here; the southern states are all owned by big religion and the R party owns them all.

      they simply don't even think about what they are doing - the voters. they simply have that feel-good-jesus feeling when they agree with their churches. even when they DIE, they seem to not learn their lessons.

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:55PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:55PM (#510544)

        From what I gather the electoral college means that more rural folk dying will just make the rural votes worth more.

        • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:12PM

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:12PM (#510720)

          Um, no. If, for instance, 100k rural voters in Pennsylvania drop dead tomorrow, and for some reason we have a Presidential election the next day, the liberals in Philly will have their votes count more, because there's fewer rural conservatives voting against them.

          Long term, meaning after a census (3 years away), this could change the relative numbers of voters in the states, so states that had more rural voters will now have fewer, so they'll lose electoral votes.

    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday May 16 2017, @11:05AM (3 children)

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @11:05AM (#510478) Journal

      But what issues should be more important to a coal miner than worker safety regulations? Transgender bathrooms? Abortion? Guns? Marijuana enforcement? Sorry, but if you're voting for a party on these issues and fucking yourself over on real issues that actually make a difference in your life, then you're an idiot.

      That's right, but pitching those issues instead of addressing real ones has worked for the duopoly for 40 years. It still works, even here. Note how many in these threads look at those issues and conclude the two parties are "soooo different."

      On every question that matters to the well being and livelihood of Americans, Democrats and Republicans vote the same. And before somebody peeps up with "ACA! ACA!" I'll point out that was a Republican plan! It had no single payer. That was stripped out by Max fucking Baucus, Democratic Senator from Montana.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:50PM (2 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:50PM (#510525)

        That's all bullshit, I'm sorry. The parties are different, just not in the way many people would like. No, on questions that matter to the well being of Americans, they do NOT vote the same. The ACA is a prime example here: the Republicans voted against it (yes, even though it was originally the plan of a conservative thinktank), while the Dems voted for it. Yeah, it's a shitty plan but it's less shitty than what we had before, especially if you make less than $50k-75k, which should describe many working-class people. But its origins are irrelevant to the vote: the Republicans all voted against it. And now, the Republicans are trying to repeal it and replace it with... nothing. The same is true for many other things, including regulation of industry. With Obama, we got net neutrality (finally). Now with Trump they're taking it away. Have fun paying an extra fee to Comcrap so you can watch Youtube. Dems have been pushing hard to kill coal, for good reason: it's poisoning us. Now the Republicans want to bring it back (though they'll ultimately fail because of solar and natural gas being cheaper).

        The parties are different, even though they're both corrupt. The Democrats are a center-right pro-corporate party that sometimes adopts some leftish positions to appeal to their voters and sometimes works to regulate those corporations poorly, and the Republicans are an extremely far-right-wing party that doesn't believe in regulation at all unless it plainly benefits only their rich cronies.

        • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:14PM (1 child)

          by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:14PM (#510531) Journal

          So the Democrats sell us out to a slightly different set of corrupt evil sociopaths than Republicans do? That's a difference without a distinction.

          I'm gonna propose a novel idea here: government should serve the voters who pay its salaries. Period.

          Corporations and evil oligarchs can stand way the fuck in the back of the line after children, women, men, and so on all the way back to hippies, chickens, and three-legged dogs. Then they can get somebody's ear, but not before.

          --
          Washington DC delenda est.
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 16 2017, @04:22PM

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @04:22PM (#510567)

            No, there is a distinction. Before, with the health care "plan" that Republicans favor, if you make less than $50k, and your job doesn't give you health insurance, you simply go without. Now, with the plan that Democrats managed to get passed, you can afford a subsidized insurance plan, though this screws over the 6-figure earners by making their premiums higher. If you're lower middle class, voting Republican is simply stupid and voting against your economic interests. Yes, they're all corrupt sociopaths, but with one party, at least you can get insurance coverage and get treatment when you get sick or have cancer, with the other party you're just fucked.

            I'm gonna propose a novel idea here: government should serve the voters who pay its salaries. Period.

            Sounds great. Let me know when you have a concrete plan on how to achieve that. It'll probably happen about the time you also figure out how to solve world hunger, eliminate aging, make working cold fusion power, and colonize the solar system.