I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. Our power company is Pacific Gas & Electric—PG&E.
Several years ago there was an explosion in what I assume was a PG&E gas line in a town just south of the City, and it burned a lot of houses right down.
It was a major disaster in our area. Shocking...
PG&E has been lambasted, sued, fined, shunned, shamed and whatever a faux-angry government, and actually angry home-owners could think of...
And the other day, I saw a new ad for PG&E that claimed that "safety" is their first priority.
Not a surprise, I suppose after all that, but still...
I may just be an asshole, but, shouldn't a power company's FIRST priority be getting POWER to people...with safety, say, next on the list?
Yes, it was a real disaster. Yes it looks like it might actually have been PG&E's fault. Yes, we don't want it to happen ever again.
But, do we want SAFETY to be their FIRST priority?
Isn't running gas lines by definition a little risky? Isn't igniting natural gas a little risky? Isn't trying to control electricity a little risky?
Do we really want SAFETY to be their FIRST priority?
If so, wouldn't they stop dealing in Natural Gas and Electricity, cause they're, like, dangerous?
Seriously, I just can't stand this nonsense.
/gun
Joebama American citizens 2024 print
3 months ago
Your problem is you are "thinking." Stop it! ;-) Why put yourself through all the angst about the marketing message when no one else is bothered by it? (sarc)
ReplyDeleteHah hah! True dat!
DeleteI have investigated quite a number of industrial and commercial property losses over the span of 40 years and have found such losses can always be traced to a failure of design, manufacture or operating procedures. The losses are frequently used as an excuse for increasing government regulation as if we could create a "risk free" society. The regulations then become a check list to escape liability and a substitute for thinking because the losses still happen. In fact, this has a dampening effect on innovating new methods of risk control that may be better but don't have government sanction. Companies become defensive when something goes wrong because the left has politicized everything on the basis that there is no risk living in the utopia they are trying to create. In this pre-utopia, there are only greedy people running businesses without regard for other people and every loss of life or property must be the fault of not doing things the way government says they should be done.
ReplyDeleteWhat you observed, I believe is a deep psychological defect in some if not many people to accept that risk and reward are inextricably linked to give us a better standard of living. No one wants to burn down the houses of their customers just to make a buck, but that will never sink in to the utopian mind. The gas they use for heating and cooking is "mysteriously" delivered in absolute safety despite the fact it is flammable and explosive because if it were not, it wouldn't be useful. If something goes wrong, it is only because government is not doing enough to regulate the evil gas company which is now on the defensive.
It's no surprise to me that businesses today have to play this political game at a cost that detracts from actually improving product quality and safety. You just have to realize that the salaries paid to PR people and lawyers could have been used to develop improved operating and maintenance practices that would make delivery both more reliable and safer. But the politics of the left demand that money be spent on defensive advertising.
Amen, Brother. What a shame. We live in such a crazy world.
ReplyDelete