Had the other side won last November, we would have continuation of mine closings everywhere. Sorry, not going to happen. If this man has run 39 mines, I think he is uniquely qualified to know the hazards of mining and will supervise well.
When it is done rapidly as if the world is ending, replaces current cheap methods of energy, thus harming the middle class, and there is no major proven negative, yes, it is horrible.
They need to price in externalities created by the coal industry on both the companies and the consumers. This has a worldwide effect which should be considered and included. Of course some degenerates deny effectively all the science and claim climate change is fake.
I am pro-business, but this nomination sounds like a fox watching the chicken house. I do agree that the nominee needs to have some background, but this one makes me a little uneasy.
Hmmmmmm, why don’t we just appoint the former head of Solyndra or one of the other “green guys” to this important post? I am sure they would do a great job, right?
Please re-read Hmmmmm’s reasonable post and try again. What part of, “I do agree that the nominee needs to have some background…” do you not understand?
If it turns out that he maintains any financial interest in mining, he should be disqualified.
So…maybe we get someone who one visited a tourist coal railroad? How about the family member of someone who was killed in a mine? There is no “background” that would please a liberal except a “background” that makes zero sense.
What they really want in every post is a “community organizer.”
How about someone who has worked in mines, but does not put profits before people. Someone like a well-qualified foreman who does not hold any stock in a mining company whose personal wealth may be impacted by his/her decisions?
Why does President Trump need to keep appointing people whose careers have been defined by financial success? There is much more to life than money.
October 25, 2017 at 2:18 pm
Jax Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
4
6
Ron, you sound like a pathetic liberal tool. Try to pull up your big boy pants. How in this world would you know if this appointee put profits before people ? You don’t, but facts never get in the way of a liberal who wants to rant about the ‘bad successful business people’. I’m guessing that Ron and company would want Al Gore or some other liberal genius to man this post. You’re pathetic, Ron.
October 25, 2017 at 2:28 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
Thank you for the respectful reply, Jax Agent.
Fact: Rhino Resources, while Mr. Zatezalo was an executive, was issued two “pattern of violations” letters from MSHA over safety issues at their mines.
Fact: MSHA also sought a federal court injunction against Rhino in 2011 after the agency discovered that employees were warning workers at one Kentucky mine about inspections.
What are your facts confirming this gentleman would be qualified the head the same agency that had issues with safety in his mines?
October 25, 2017 at 3:06 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
So. You begin a debate, then run when facts go against your argument?
October 25, 2017 at 7:52 pm
Topic Commenter says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Polar Bear, please stay on topic.
October 27, 2017 at 3:43 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Is just slightly less subtle than the Puerto Rico contractor disaster. They will destroy the world, rake in huge profits at the expense of others, and then spread a bunch of nonsense justifying it, which the normal dunderheads will repeat.
I worked as an inspector for 38 years starting with The Bureau of Mines. I’ve seen the best and the worst of Administrators. I can say that some of them would choke on a gnat and swallow a camel and were all about quantity of inspections and not about quality. You never know what you get and what kind of job they will do until they take the reins. .
The inadequate bolting, broken supports and loose or hanging ribs noted in the report above are a symptom of an inadequate safety inspection frequency and a poor hazard abatement program on the part of mine management. MSHA is only inspecting on a quarterly basis, so, mine management has to take up the day-to-day safety issues by making, at least, weekly safety inspections for such problems. Mine supervisors should report potential safety problems (in triplicate with a personal copy and a copy to archival files)that they note, preferably on a daily basis, so that expeditious remedies can be initiated (by management) under penalty of fine. Does this seem unreasonable to anyone? If so, you care more about company profit than miner’s lives.
I would much rather have someone from the mining industry than anyone who is against the mining industry.
Had the other side won last November, we would have continuation of mine closings everywhere. Sorry, not going to happen. If this man has run 39 mines, I think he is uniquely qualified to know the hazards of mining and will supervise well.
Yeah, cause coming up with cleaner and safer forms of energy would be so terrible.
When it is done rapidly as if the world is ending, replaces current cheap methods of energy, thus harming the middle class, and there is no major proven negative, yes, it is horrible.
They need to price in externalities created by the coal industry on both the companies and the consumers. This has a worldwide effect which should be considered and included. Of course some degenerates deny effectively all the science and claim climate change is fake.
I am pro-business, but this nomination sounds like a fox watching the chicken house. I do agree that the nominee needs to have some background, but this one makes me a little uneasy.
Hmmmmmm, why don’t we just appoint the former head of Solyndra or one of the other “green guys” to this important post? I am sure they would do a great job, right?
Agent,
Please re-read Hmmmmm’s reasonable post and try again. What part of, “I do agree that the nominee needs to have some background…” do you not understand?
If it turns out that he maintains any financial interest in mining, he should be disqualified.
So…maybe we get someone who one visited a tourist coal railroad? How about the family member of someone who was killed in a mine? There is no “background” that would please a liberal except a “background” that makes zero sense.
What they really want in every post is a “community organizer.”
How about Colin Kaepernick?
How about someone who has worked in mines, but does not put profits before people. Someone like a well-qualified foreman who does not hold any stock in a mining company whose personal wealth may be impacted by his/her decisions?
Why does President Trump need to keep appointing people whose careers have been defined by financial success? There is much more to life than money.
Ron, you sound like a pathetic liberal tool. Try to pull up your big boy pants. How in this world would you know if this appointee put profits before people ? You don’t, but facts never get in the way of a liberal who wants to rant about the ‘bad successful business people’. I’m guessing that Ron and company would want Al Gore or some other liberal genius to man this post. You’re pathetic, Ron.
Thank you for the respectful reply, Jax Agent.
Fact: Rhino Resources, while Mr. Zatezalo was an executive, was issued two “pattern of violations” letters from MSHA over safety issues at their mines.
Fact: MSHA also sought a federal court injunction against Rhino in 2011 after the agency discovered that employees were warning workers at one Kentucky mine about inspections.
http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/energy-environment/349015-trump-names-former-coal-executive-to-top-mining-safety
What are your facts confirming this gentleman would be qualified the head the same agency that had issues with safety in his mines?
So. You begin a debate, then run when facts go against your argument?
Polar Bear, please stay on topic.
Is just slightly less subtle than the Puerto Rico contractor disaster. They will destroy the world, rake in huge profits at the expense of others, and then spread a bunch of nonsense justifying it, which the normal dunderheads will repeat.
I worked as an inspector for 38 years starting with The Bureau of Mines. I’ve seen the best and the worst of Administrators. I can say that some of them would choke on a gnat and swallow a camel and were all about quantity of inspections and not about quality. You never know what you get and what kind of job they will do until they take the reins. .
The inadequate bolting, broken supports and loose or hanging ribs noted in the report above are a symptom of an inadequate safety inspection frequency and a poor hazard abatement program on the part of mine management. MSHA is only inspecting on a quarterly basis, so, mine management has to take up the day-to-day safety issues by making, at least, weekly safety inspections for such problems. Mine supervisors should report potential safety problems (in triplicate with a personal copy and a copy to archival files)that they note, preferably on a daily basis, so that expeditious remedies can be initiated (by management) under penalty of fine. Does this seem unreasonable to anyone? If so, you care more about company profit than miner’s lives.
This appointment makes so much good sense that the liberals and MSM will surely attack it.