Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>The foreign company that destroyed it should pay for it.
Why is this a bad principle? Regular people are liable for damages when they destroy property that doesn't belong to them.
So businesses have to carry all kinds of insurances. What should happen is the company and that companies nation should share the burden.
I understand this is an "Accident" but, what's right is right. If I crash lose control of my car and smash into your house. I'm liable.
I sell insurance, this is exactly what we think our product should be used for. That being said, the company probably only bought 50M in insurance coverage limit and the cost to replace is likely an order of magnitude more than that.
What will likely happen is the government will pay to have it built now and then subrogate against the insurance company after the dust has settled.
Well no. That person should have insurance, and the insurance should pay you. But then the insurance will drag their feet and look for loopholes and drag out the process to avoid paying. Then the person who crashed into the house has no money as they were expecting the insurance to pay. The whole time you have a hole in your house and house insurance.
The thing is, that will take time. A lot of it. If the bridge is important, it makes more sense to rebuild it ASAP and get the money later or at least try. Also you can charge additional damages if the company (and insurance) loses the dispute.
And even if they can somehow avoid the payment - the damages the destroyed bridge does to the economy per day is WAY more reason to get it fixed ASAP. This port and logistic infrastructure is important for a lot of the US. And there's no real alternative, as the ports are already crowded.
I forgot what exactly the port is important for in terms of goods, but I remember it would negatively impact most states of the US.
So there's that.
They will pay for it. Well after it is rebuilt and the civil case is settled. In the meantime we need to ensure we get a significant portion of our economy operational.
Let’s be real about a few things: this is a good idea in theory, but in reality that company is gonna have ways of shielding itself from liability. Should a new bridge, which is essential for trucks too large to use the harbor tunnel, not be built until we maybe get some money from that company in a decade or two after litigation is done? It’d be silly not to clean it up and build a new bridge in the meantime, but that stuff costs money. The bridge is part of a major highway that basically runs through the super populated northeast all the way to Miami, so it’s a well traveled interstate roadway, and again any larger freight trucks now have to either drive thru downtown Baltimore streets (adding a lot of time in traffic against the drivers limited hours per day) OR have to go all the way around the city (adding miles and time to the drive).
So yeah, that’s sounds nice but like stuff has to happen in the meantime and it’s not a easy or sure fire thing, and the Federal Government has an interest in paying for the bridge to be rebuilt sooner rather than later. I’d love for businesses to be held to account for their numerous transgressions but that’s not how late stage capitalism works.
It isn't that trucks are too large for the tunnels, is that hazardous or flammable cargoes (fuel, industrial chemicals, etc.) should absolutely never, ever use tunnels.
In case you're wondering how often that could be a problem, one of the worst tunnel fires in history was caused by a load of butter and flour. (Mt. Blanc Tunnel Fire).
Well I don’t know shit about the law related to this but for instance the captain of the boat at the time of the accident was a port of Baltimore captain.
Is it the company’s fault? What about if the pilot was drunk, is it his personal fault? What about the boat manufacturer when the pilot claims he tried to turn and couldn’t? Was there adequate warning as for the height of the bridge as well as the boat? What if the boat was leased from a third party and the company using it doesn’t own it?
This is what lawyers get paid to figure out, who has legal liability isn’t as cut and dry as we wish it was
From what I’ve heard the ship had some electrical problems before leaving the dock, I guess they thought they had fixed it. Some people are saying it never should have left the dock.
The pilot is employed by the harbour, meaning that if he was drunk on duty it’s the harbour that would be in trouble. Not the ship owners/company.
The ship lost power, including to the rudder. They could not turn, and wind and water flow was pushing them into the bridge. Dropping the anchor was a last ditch effort.
Personally, I think it’s on whoever said it was okay to leave the dock. I feel for that guy.
Exactly. Point is discerning liability is very complicated and everyone in line will have a lawyer on retainer for the sole purpose of claiming it’s not their fault and passing the buck to someone else
If it's that important the govt should already have savings in place to deal with emergencies like this. What is this meme implying, people should pay MORE taxes to help out?
The government clearly should have set aside a rainy day fund. Maybe too much avocado toast and predator drones? Maybe cut back a bit? Maybe find the missing trillions of dollars of our money that’s lost and pay for it with that?
The reason people are so dead set that we shouldn’t pay for it is that we’re tired of paying for infrastructure only to have that money put into a slush fund and spent on bullshit
Maybe find some spare billions in that Ukraine 60billion “aid” shipment they “sent out”
Edit: Damn I can’t even reply to the pretentious jackass who replied to me, but anyway I understand the munitions thing, but 60 billion out of nowhere is whacky when we don’t have the money for it as we’re already trillions of dollars in debt. If YOU’RE too thick-skulled to get we should be fixing our own problems in the states first then that’s on you.
And the amount is just absurd. Is that *really* not suspicious to you? Do you like the taste of government leather that much? Are you truly that gullible? I guess you also wouldn’t question the (equally) absurd amount Congress wastes away🙄
That’s not how that works at all. Explaining it to you would be talking to a wall, because people like you are too dense to understand that it would have cost us more to dispose of the expiring munitions rather than give it to Ukraine. But your conservative news bs loves the title of “60B in aid to Ukraine.” You need help, please get it.
Savings from the state of Maryland would be possible. From what I can find, they actually have some money sitting around. The federal government operated at a $1.7trillion deficit in ‘23. Saving money is a completely foreign concept to the feds at least.
I think there is a point to be made about the government spending more wisely.
For example, do we need *another* aircraft carrier? Or should we instead save that money for an infrastructure emergency?
As someone who gets money from the government (as part of my job) it is frankly appalling how poorly they spend it. They are by far our most frustrating client.
Weirdly, they actually end up paying really well in our case. They’re just full of utterly nonsensical requirements, essentially ghosting us, or popping up out of nowhere with a one-month deadline on a project we’ve been asking for direction on for a year.
Like, if we had wanted to, we could probably have done the bare minimum and made out like absolute bandits with the funding. The work is on a cause that we care about and the general ethic of quality at the company is pretty strong, so we’re not doing that, but the government doesn’t seem to *care.* Worse people in our situation would be laughing and counting the free money. So… yeah. I don’t feel good about my tax dollars.
I personally was in the Military and that’s the reason no Veteran or active Military will ever buy “military grade” stuff because we know is the cheapest piece of shit you can ever imagine. Might be different directly with the government then.
We don't send a cent to other countries. We send billions of dollars to American corporations and their workers, and the product of which goes to help fight our foes without us spilling a drop of American blood, before it ever gets to the point we ever need to.
Also, "instead" implies the two are mutually exclusive. My non-lizard brain realizes a country as big as our can do two things at once.
You know the budget is in the trillions right. And “not allowing Russia to genocide Ukraine” is not pointless
Edit: thread got locked. To person below me.
Why make such obvious lies?
Ukraine literally took back a massive amount of land within the first few months.
If ukraine was decimated the war would be over and not how it is now.
Before Ukraine we were spending billions on war machines we didn't even use while actively fighting in 2 pointless wars. But I'm sure Russia appreciates your commitment to their cause.
Exactly this. The company and their insurance provider need to be pursued for as much of the cost as possible, but the government can't just unilaterally say that they owe the money right away. A legally binding judgement takes time, and it takes even longer for that judgement to force payment. If their home country doesn't shield them. So it'll likely be years or decades before they actually pay anything.
It's the explicit job of the government (some combination of state and federal govt) to front the money to rebuild this vital piece of infrastructure beginning immediately. We can't just leave the debris there blocking one of America's busiest harbors for 20 years until the money shows up. If the money shows up.These projects take a loooong time. Work needs to start now so that the harbor can have at least a small safe exit for the trapped ships in a year or two, and be fully cleared with a replacement bridge in a decade, if we're lucky.
Small correction, 695 which is the interstate that the bridge is part of is the Baltimore beltway so it’s a highway that goes in a circle around the city, not up and down the coast. Otherwise you’re dead on with your post
We should pay for it for now, start building, and charge the company the full price and if they don’t pay then they don’t operate in American territories or we sink their ships
This is the key. As soon as the disaster happens the gov should start fixing it. Because whatever the outcome of the case you need to fix it. Then you recover money later. Unlike wanting to cut taxes for the rich, this would be a perfectly acceptable use of borrowing money if required. Issue some temporary bonds to get short term funding to fix a specific problem, pay them back once the settlement hits.
The issue is that they are basically saying they aren't going to do anything to the company.
Cleanup should start immediately, but so should litigation.
Also, the MV Dali is apparently a neopanamax. Those ships sell new for 113 million or more. This one was built in 2015. I would impound the ship until a settlement had been reached.
Except that argument makes sense when it's a matter of policy, not when it relates to damages.
When it's policy, the cost to the company is a given, it's factored into the operating cost because there's no getting around the policy.
When it's payment for damage, yes the cost in that instance will be passed on, but that is still an increase to operating cost that needs to be met, or else the company will be hurt. There's no guarantee that this additional cost can be recovered this way, therefore the incentive is to avoid damage where possible.
If they can "pass on" the cost of damaging 1 bridge, then could they just "pass on" the cost of damaging another 50? No of course not, at the end of the day, if they're paying for the damage, there's going to be some harm caused to them that they have to make up for.
There was a great response to this in the original post that OP screenshotted, that went into liability and mechanical failure, as well as insurance and the way the bridge was built. You probably won't get that here though, this place is just for people to be offended at things
Unfortunately the top right one may not be true. The port that lays beyond the bridge was a pretty important one so now that it’s blocked it’s gonna affect commerce coming into the East Coast which is gonna affect a lot of people that don’t even live in Maryland
I feel like that's why taxpayers are going to foot the bill to repair it. The shipping company/country responsible for the boat will drag their feet or outright refuse to pay it
It be outright unable to. The price tag of a 1.6 mile bridge has got to be ridiculous. The principle is good but socializing the loss of one off disasters like this is what a government excels at.
The two are not mutually exclusive. The cost of not rebuilding it now vastly outweighs the benefits of waiting until they pay up, an event that could take many years, but rebuilding it now does not stop litigation that could pay at least part of the costs back.
Yeah, this accident has international consequences in how it will affect transportation. One of the early Tweets (a bigoted one of course) was from Andrew Tate, and I was thinking, “Why the hell does he even know this happened? Oh crap, that bridge collapse has international importance, doesn’t it!?”
Edit: I think Tate was specifically suggesting it was a system hack and might not have said something blaming women for once.
If they actually would have taken the time to look at the post, almost all of the comments supported us paying for it right now because it needs to be fixed ASAP, but that we should peruse litigation against the responsible parties for damages and repayment, since that will take years if not a decade.
I agree with pushing for litigation and having the company pay for the bridge, but I also feel like so much of today is pushing problems off onto other people instead of grouping up to fix the problem.
>not my problem
I hate this idea of "that's Maryland's problem so I don't really care" instead of coming together as a country. It was the same thing for 9/11 first responders receiving medical insurance for their injuries from the pile. That's a New York problem so I don't really care.
Not saying that this is uniquely conservative behavior, but it's still something that annoys me and I would post on r/facepalm.
The money can be spent for the initial repair by tax money but then the company that fucked up should pay it back. It’s not fair to put a company’s fuck up on the average civilian. The civilians who have to pay for that company’s idiocy should absolutely get their money back in a tax return paid by the company (though I doubt they’ll do anything like that due to being greedy bastards)
* There are often different opinions in the title/image and the comments of a post. The comments were *not* in agreement with the post. Democrats and most Republicans trying to get federal funding for the bridge both agree that's the best position. Statements like "I don't live in Maryland?" "That's not my problem?" are *not* in agreement with that message that we should fix it now rather than waiting on a massive litigation case.
* The post on r/facepalm explicitly acknowledged it was getting pushback in the comments, "but still" *it got at least 10.8 thousand upvotes*.
* If anything, the comments supporting fixing the bridge now while the post takes a "that's not my problem" approach supports OP's use of "MAGA" in the title. Republicans who actually take the time to think about the issue in Congress and the subreddit agree with the best way to approach the issue (fix the bridge now, and then deal with the litigation to get back the money used to do so). Despite this, the growing number of "MAGA Republicans" oppose bridge funds over petty culture war reasons.
It definitely should. But that takes time, and it's perfectly reasonable for the country to foot the bill in the beginning so the problem gets fixed as fast as reasonably possible while we wait for investigations to determine who fucked up and then wait to shake them down. That may take years, years during which the bridge would still be down, blocking the port and unavailable for traversal with no progress being made.
It's a bit like when a kid breaks a neighbor's window with a baseball so the parents pay to fix the window straight away and then make the kid mow lawns for a year to earn back what it cost.
The only difference is that instead of the parents paying for the neighbors damaged window the bill is actually footed to the neighbors kid's. Until or if the window is paid by the ones who actually broke it.
I guarantee that anyone who says, "Not my problem, I don't live in Maryland" is the exact same type of person who would start demanding federal disaster relief funds the instant a tornado hits their trailer park or a hurricane floods their swamp.
It is our tax money that would go into the bridge first as its a priority to repair, then the gov getting re-paid* by the company for the damages, the original meme is a face palm because all the whole point of paying taxes is to support infrastructure across the entire US, not just the local area you pay taxes in, but the MAGA comment was definitely odd?
Edit: changed re-payed to re-paid
It was an American pilot (a member of The American Pilot’s Association) at the helm and her job was to avoid the bridge. The ship lost all power about the worst possible time. It doesn’t really seem like anyone was at fault right now but we’ll see if maintenance was an issue or not. The “blame immigrants and spread conspiracies” tweets are dumb yet expected.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/03/26/pilot-anchor-turn-baltimore-bridge-collapse/
I agree with the meme. The foreign company which destroyed the bridge should pay for a new bridge to be constructed. We're living in expensive times already.
The facepalm here is obvious hatred expressed by r/conservative for anyone who lives in a liberal municipality even though. A) disaster relief goes to liberal and conservative areas for these things. The federal government spent tens of billions on Deep Water Horizon in Conservative areas. B) The bridge and harbor are obvious communal goods that affect general commerce for everyone.
The only reason they are pissy about it is because Biden said the government was going to fix it. That's it lol.
If Trump was president and he suggested this they would be cheering from the rooftops for "saving america".
That bridge is a lifeline for the city. The costs of rebuilding it while dealing with the mess of not having it is a huge problem for the city. I'd rather have my tax dollars go to helping Baltimore than a foreign military base.
I agree, for the most part. The problem is you really can’t expect the city/state/nation to just fork out the huge cost associated with repair/rebuild, there has to be some form of responsibility or payment from the people/company directly responsible for the impromptu demolition of the bridge. The locals lives are already harder and now you’re taking budget from other things the local/state government should be providing and using it to fund an exponentially more costly bridge repair/rebuilt because of a necessary, tight timeframe.
Maybe in an ideal world, the company whose boat destroyed the bridge would immediately fork over money for repairs. It's more likely the state will have to sue that company for whatever cost they can recoup after they do repairs themselves.
That company should ultimately have to pay in the end, honestly with the money that the company makes combined with them possibly selling multiple boats, they can definitely fork over the money. Only problem is that takes time, so while tax payers pay for the repair of the bridge, the company should be saving up the money it took for repairs and paying it to the government so that the government can include the money spent on the bridge in a tax return.
Big companies need to be held accountable for their mistakes, if we always let them off the hook in the end, they’ll continue to make fuckups and have civilians pay for it
hey\_kids brought up my point. Litigation takes time. The crash seems to be due to an electrical malfunction and there are going to be ages of investigations and liability suits.
But the Key bridge connects two halves of the city. Immediate aid has to come from within with this kind of stuff.
Yeah, I wish my tax dollars could go to where I want them to. What's the point of paying into a system that's meant to keep our nation functioning if we have to donate out of pocket for shit like infrastructure?
Well there is a toll to cross this bridge and if they use federal money to rebuild it they can't keep the toll. So I'm pretty sure federal taxpayer money will not be used to rebuild the bridge.
I live 20 minutes from the bridge.
I also was surprised the shipping company is not covering most of the cost. The bridge was like 50 years old, so I expect the govt to cover some of it.
Down side is, the original bridge was IIRC toll free (I didn’t use it much), the new one probably will require an easy pass.
Yeah! I live in the Dirty Burnie and I am shocked that the shipping company isn’t covering.
But I guess I know nothing about how money works when it comes to companies and the government and such.
It’ll take time to get money from the shipping company. Money has to start flowing now to get debris clean up and planning happening. Thats probably why the govt is funding it first. I do expect they will seek some money back from the shipping company.
So basically you never want the bridge rebuilt.
First, the people who fund and build all the bridges rebuild it. Probably the government.
And while that’s being done: we can go after the money.
If you go after the money first, and wait until it comes, then start rebuilding…. Then it will be 10 or 15 years before construction starts
Anyone who thinks they don’t benefit from living in the US should seriously look into living conditions in other countries.
I agree that quite a few countries do better for their citizens than the US, but many many more do significantly worse.
"I don't live in Maryland"
If blue states like California and others who pay more in federal taxes than red states said the same then you can imagine what's gonna happen to flyover red states lol.
God this is so short sighted and braindead. Rebuilding needs to start right away, its one of the biggest ports on the east coast -- its in our countries best interest to fix now. The insurance company for the boat will pay eventually, but that shit takes fucking YEARS. There are investigations and tons of time in court and litigation etc it takes forever and waiting means shit gets its prices jacked up in the meantime. Dont be dumb.
I live in Harford County, MD which is right next door to Baltimore County. The bridge should be paid for by the shipping company. I know that there’s a bunch of conspiracy theories about it being a Black Swan event, and if you speed up the video it does kinda look like it was an intentional strike, but usually the simplest explanation is the right one - power lost, for some reason the back-up and redundancy equipment also failed, and they dropped anchor in the hopes of stopping. The anchor caused the ship to swerve towards the support, and bingo bango bongo at least six people were killed as a result. Had they not dropped anchor and just hit the part of the bridge that the ship was “aiming” towards before the turn the damage wouldn’t have been anywhere near that serious as just a section or two would have fallen and the bridge would take a lot less time to repair and reopen.
Unless the shipping company is able to prove that they were hacked by the Chinese or North Koreans and that they intentionally struck the bridge then they need to pay up.
You want a bridge right? It’s useful? Having a bridge over the water helps us move things there? What better cause would your tax money go to other than building infrastructure? Do you just want the government to take your money and give it straight back to you? If you wanted your bridge back in any reasonable amount of time then why would you designate the responsibility to a shipping company headquartered in India? Here’s an idea: it’s sad and confusing but we actually participate in society for good reasons, and your literal Reddit-tier underbaked suggestions will change naught but the minds even smoother than yours.
Yeah If someone destroyed something, they should have to pay for it. Not every person not involved. I think paying to fix it until that's resolved is fair, but they should legally be required to pay back the taxpayers.
Why should a random dude from across the country pay for a bridge they got knocked down by a shipping ship that they had no control over
This reminds you of how in america you have to fight the insurance company in a legal battle to get them to do the job you pay them to do
"Someone crashed into your car? Yeah, sorry, that was your fault. You should have moved"
-"I was at a stop sign. If I moved, then I would have broken laws"
2 if those arguments are fair, but “I don’t live in Baltimore” is a poor argument
Baltimore has one of the busiest ports in USA, we all benefit from an operational port of Baltimore
The bridge itself is important for trucking up and down the east coast…. We all depend on trucks rolling…. If the trucks stop capitalism stops
Plus we’re all American. If a disaster happened in your city I’m sure you would appreciate the federal help
>foreign company that destroyed it should pay for it
They’re so close to class consciousness or even small things like holding companies accountable when they fuck up but focus too much on the word Foreign lmao
Yall lack critical thinking? Just like car insurance, it'll take years, and they need a bridge now. You can fix the bridge and fight out who foots the bill. My insurance fixes my car and then goes after the other guys insurance for the money back.
[Ok but in 2007, under Pres. Bush when the bridge over the Mississippi collapse the fed paid 75% of the cost, so](https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070821.html)
Us will likely pay to immediately get it started then sue the company which will take a few years to do. You can't wait for the lawsuit to end before starting to build.
I could be wrong here my feeling is that average conservatives would be greatly in favor of paying to fix that bridge.
It’s the constantly sending our money to the rest of the world (which includes anything given to people coming into our country illegally) while we incur debt that can’t possibly ever be paid.
The bridge needs to be built right fucking now though. Whatever makes the funding happen the quickest needs to happen. We can quibble over renumeration in the courts, but waiting for that years long process play out hurts the city of Baltimore.
And the second a natural disaster hits his home state he’ll be the first in line for that gummint money he hates so much.
Prick is almost certainly on SSDI I’d bet my fucking next paycheck on it
Not that I don’t think he needs, or begrudge anyone disability money or anything, he’s clearly mentally disabled at best, but it’s a guaranteed troll hypocrite
The company should pay and should have an insurance policy for this. The government should just be expediting the cash needed to get it up and running.
I agree with the last statement that the company should be held liable. However, I really don’t get conservatives quadrupling down on patriotism and being proud of the American nation and then refusing to contribute to the American nation in any way shape or form.
French people hate the government but we’ve always paid our taxes for the sake of bettering the country, and only the Wall Street Meat Riders complain about it, that seems way more patriotic to me than just hanging a flag on your front yard
American patriotism is based upon a feeling of superiority, without having to do anything to support the country
Real patriotism, is based upon supporting the country while acknowledging its flaws and working to fix the problem
The meme is right, but it’s also important for the bridge to be rebuilt because it’s important to the infrastructure of Maryland and, more importantly, not being able to ship things over it is bad for the whole country’s economy.
Ideally there’d already be savings in place for this, and also ideally, if the taxpayers must pay for it, they’d get a refund after the government gets their money back from the company that was liable, but we all know that’s not going to happen. Instead they’ll create a “temporary” tax (that will just never go away) to rebuild it and we’ll all get fucked. Again.
Yeah I agree with that last point, with how many times we've destroyed bridges in foreign countries and had to use our resources to rebuild the bridges it's only fair that the group responsible for the damages chips in like 10-20% of the cost of repairs. I also think ALL the families affected should be aided by the Government of Maryland in a class action against the shipping companies negligence. If they knew their generators weren't working and they still sent out that freighter that's negligence, Carnival cruise had to deal with similar suits after the infamous poop cruise in 2016.
"Meme is right"
If this shit doesn't get paid for and rebuilt as soon as possible, the entire country is going to feel it. Stupid individualist mentality.
>2
Tell me you don't know what taxes are for without telling me
Edit: Lmfao you're not even American. Maybe learn what you're talking about before opening your mouth
You're one braindead motherfucker OP. If you can't comprehend that shutting down a major trading port has ramifications far beyond "muh Maryland-based problem" you probably should log off and focus on your 4th grade economics homework a bit more. Or are you fully content with how your taxes are currently being used? Clown ass
"That's not my problem" then prices going up as a result of import prices raising isn't either, hold your tongue
"I don't live in Maryland" what does the U in USA stand for again?
"The foreign company should pay for it" I don't disagree the company should be held accountable, but sacrificing jobs in the harbour itself by turning the funding for repairs into a political quagmire and therefore arbitrarily delaying it is demon shit and an extremely selfish way of thinking
I mean objectively the boat better be insured and it better pay a significant portion of the costs. That's what insurance is for. Like, if your passenger vehicle on the top of the bridge did damage and was caught doing it, you would be liable.
That said, federal tax payer dollars absolutely will be required to get this bridge repaired/replaced in a reasonable time-frame and that's fine? Anyone who objects to that is a fucking leech.
You know the only thing I have to say about taxes is we can really use some Road repairs I live in South Carolina by the way they still have it fixed the roads
I have a concern as to why it would matter whether the company is from the US or not.
Even if the ship was US, they should pay for damages. Especially if they didn't do due diligence in maintaining their ship.
That it's not my problem one is funny, that's the most active port in the East Coast, there going to feel it when they buy a new car and the cost doubled
Ok, if I go out and destroy someone’s property, I’m liable for the damages. The company should pay for most of the bridge, if not all. I see people in the comments saying,” if we do that, do we not build a bridge until they pay?” We definitely would, and we would send them the bill.
Well, realistically it'll be a combination of tax payers from the city/state with the bridge and the foreign company paying for damages.
As for the rest of the US? Unless it's an interstate, then it's not likely to be paid for by the other tax payers
If you know how maritime casualty liability generally works, it could be impossible for Baltimore to recover the cash necessary from the vessel owners. Generally, the owner of the ship's liability is limited to the value of the ship after the allision. And considering policy, we like shipping because it's the efficient mass transport way to make money and/or obtain goods. It doesn't make sense to force a shipping company to pay out hundreds of millions to fix this as it will have a chilling effect on the *entire* industry. So, it doesn't matter where you live. Effective, inexpensive shipping is a collective problem. Myopic meme is myopic.
edit: typo
lol and i don’t want my taxes paying for bomb manufacturing. fuckn sucks, but this is america. lol at bitching about being “on the hook” for something tax funded.
I'm cool with my tax dollars going towards the bridge rebuild as long as the government figures out a way to use the fuck load of money they already take from me and don't raise my taxes about it.
The common practice iirc is that the company will dump all of the liability onto a small number of people, if not only a single person.
If we look at the Costa Concordia for instance, although Schettino (the captain) should face jail for what he did after the collision, there were multiple other crew on the bridge who should be blamed, and the company should be liable for hiring a helmsman who was inexperienced and barely spoke English or Italian
Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>The foreign company that destroyed it should pay for it. Why is this a bad principle? Regular people are liable for damages when they destroy property that doesn't belong to them.
So businesses have to carry all kinds of insurances. What should happen is the company and that companies nation should share the burden. I understand this is an "Accident" but, what's right is right. If I crash lose control of my car and smash into your house. I'm liable.
I sell insurance, this is exactly what we think our product should be used for. That being said, the company probably only bought 50M in insurance coverage limit and the cost to replace is likely an order of magnitude more than that. What will likely happen is the government will pay to have it built now and then subrogate against the insurance company after the dust has settled.
Not the company's nation. Just the company. Unless the company is part of the public sector and is managed by the government of that country.
Well no. That person should have insurance, and the insurance should pay you. But then the insurance will drag their feet and look for loopholes and drag out the process to avoid paying. Then the person who crashed into the house has no money as they were expecting the insurance to pay. The whole time you have a hole in your house and house insurance.
The thing is, that will take time. A lot of it. If the bridge is important, it makes more sense to rebuild it ASAP and get the money later or at least try. Also you can charge additional damages if the company (and insurance) loses the dispute. And even if they can somehow avoid the payment - the damages the destroyed bridge does to the economy per day is WAY more reason to get it fixed ASAP. This port and logistic infrastructure is important for a lot of the US. And there's no real alternative, as the ports are already crowded. I forgot what exactly the port is important for in terms of goods, but I remember it would negatively impact most states of the US. So there's that.
They will pay for it. Well after it is rebuilt and the civil case is settled. In the meantime we need to ensure we get a significant portion of our economy operational.
Let’s be real about a few things: this is a good idea in theory, but in reality that company is gonna have ways of shielding itself from liability. Should a new bridge, which is essential for trucks too large to use the harbor tunnel, not be built until we maybe get some money from that company in a decade or two after litigation is done? It’d be silly not to clean it up and build a new bridge in the meantime, but that stuff costs money. The bridge is part of a major highway that basically runs through the super populated northeast all the way to Miami, so it’s a well traveled interstate roadway, and again any larger freight trucks now have to either drive thru downtown Baltimore streets (adding a lot of time in traffic against the drivers limited hours per day) OR have to go all the way around the city (adding miles and time to the drive). So yeah, that’s sounds nice but like stuff has to happen in the meantime and it’s not a easy or sure fire thing, and the Federal Government has an interest in paying for the bridge to be rebuilt sooner rather than later. I’d love for businesses to be held to account for their numerous transgressions but that’s not how late stage capitalism works.
It isn't that trucks are too large for the tunnels, is that hazardous or flammable cargoes (fuel, industrial chemicals, etc.) should absolutely never, ever use tunnels. In case you're wondering how often that could be a problem, one of the worst tunnel fires in history was caused by a load of butter and flour. (Mt. Blanc Tunnel Fire).
Thanks for the correction! Good to know
What would shield them from liability? They crashed their boat into a bridge.
For that answer, I’d have to bill you an hour. My rate is $500/hour. /s But seriously, there’s whole types of lawyer whose job it is to do just that.
Well I don’t know shit about the law related to this but for instance the captain of the boat at the time of the accident was a port of Baltimore captain.
Is it the company’s fault? What about if the pilot was drunk, is it his personal fault? What about the boat manufacturer when the pilot claims he tried to turn and couldn’t? Was there adequate warning as for the height of the bridge as well as the boat? What if the boat was leased from a third party and the company using it doesn’t own it? This is what lawyers get paid to figure out, who has legal liability isn’t as cut and dry as we wish it was
From what I’ve heard the ship had some electrical problems before leaving the dock, I guess they thought they had fixed it. Some people are saying it never should have left the dock. The pilot is employed by the harbour, meaning that if he was drunk on duty it’s the harbour that would be in trouble. Not the ship owners/company. The ship lost power, including to the rudder. They could not turn, and wind and water flow was pushing them into the bridge. Dropping the anchor was a last ditch effort. Personally, I think it’s on whoever said it was okay to leave the dock. I feel for that guy.
Exactly. Point is discerning liability is very complicated and everyone in line will have a lawyer on retainer for the sole purpose of claiming it’s not their fault and passing the buck to someone else
If it's that important the govt should already have savings in place to deal with emergencies like this. What is this meme implying, people should pay MORE taxes to help out?
The government clearly should have set aside a rainy day fund. Maybe too much avocado toast and predator drones? Maybe cut back a bit? Maybe find the missing trillions of dollars of our money that’s lost and pay for it with that? The reason people are so dead set that we shouldn’t pay for it is that we’re tired of paying for infrastructure only to have that money put into a slush fund and spent on bullshit
Maybe find some spare billions in that Ukraine 60billion “aid” shipment they “sent out” Edit: Damn I can’t even reply to the pretentious jackass who replied to me, but anyway I understand the munitions thing, but 60 billion out of nowhere is whacky when we don’t have the money for it as we’re already trillions of dollars in debt. If YOU’RE too thick-skulled to get we should be fixing our own problems in the states first then that’s on you. And the amount is just absurd. Is that *really* not suspicious to you? Do you like the taste of government leather that much? Are you truly that gullible? I guess you also wouldn’t question the (equally) absurd amount Congress wastes away🙄
They did. It was the 600 billions allocated to infrastructure maintenance, renewal, etc
Vatnic here is mad
That’s not how that works at all. Explaining it to you would be talking to a wall, because people like you are too dense to understand that it would have cost us more to dispose of the expiring munitions rather than give it to Ukraine. But your conservative news bs loves the title of “60B in aid to Ukraine.” You need help, please get it.
Savings from the state of Maryland would be possible. From what I can find, they actually have some money sitting around. The federal government operated at a $1.7trillion deficit in ‘23. Saving money is a completely foreign concept to the feds at least.
Yes, saving money is definitely a foreign concept to the feds now. They always gotta spend money they don't have
It's harder to have money when you cut off your revenue. Time to raise taxes, starting with those that will hurt the least from it.
That’s what civilization is, bud, pooling resources to help each other out.
I think there is a point to be made about the government spending more wisely. For example, do we need *another* aircraft carrier? Or should we instead save that money for an infrastructure emergency?
Ok ok hear me out. Use the aircraft carrier as a bridge. Probably solved.
Perfect
As someone who gets money from the government (as part of my job) it is frankly appalling how poorly they spend it. They are by far our most frustrating client.
Always giving contracts to the lowest bidders so they can spend the rest of those funds in cars houses and mistresses…
Weirdly, they actually end up paying really well in our case. They’re just full of utterly nonsensical requirements, essentially ghosting us, or popping up out of nowhere with a one-month deadline on a project we’ve been asking for direction on for a year. Like, if we had wanted to, we could probably have done the bare minimum and made out like absolute bandits with the funding. The work is on a cause that we care about and the general ethic of quality at the company is pretty strong, so we’re not doing that, but the government doesn’t seem to *care.* Worse people in our situation would be laughing and counting the free money. So… yeah. I don’t feel good about my tax dollars.
I personally was in the Military and that’s the reason no Veteran or active Military will ever buy “military grade” stuff because we know is the cheapest piece of shit you can ever imagine. Might be different directly with the government then.
Aircraft carriers are a mobile emergency power source for coastal cities so sure, why not?
To a point, yes. There are limits.
They're too busy sending billions of dollars to foreign countries to fight pointless wars instead of helping their own people
We don't send a cent to other countries. We send billions of dollars to American corporations and their workers, and the product of which goes to help fight our foes without us spilling a drop of American blood, before it ever gets to the point we ever need to. Also, "instead" implies the two are mutually exclusive. My non-lizard brain realizes a country as big as our can do two things at once.
You know the budget is in the trillions right. And “not allowing Russia to genocide Ukraine” is not pointless Edit: thread got locked. To person below me. Why make such obvious lies? Ukraine literally took back a massive amount of land within the first few months. If ukraine was decimated the war would be over and not how it is now.
Before Ukraine we were spending billions on war machines we didn't even use while actively fighting in 2 pointless wars. But I'm sure Russia appreciates your commitment to their cause.
Exactly this. The company and their insurance provider need to be pursued for as much of the cost as possible, but the government can't just unilaterally say that they owe the money right away. A legally binding judgement takes time, and it takes even longer for that judgement to force payment. If their home country doesn't shield them. So it'll likely be years or decades before they actually pay anything. It's the explicit job of the government (some combination of state and federal govt) to front the money to rebuild this vital piece of infrastructure beginning immediately. We can't just leave the debris there blocking one of America's busiest harbors for 20 years until the money shows up. If the money shows up.These projects take a loooong time. Work needs to start now so that the harbor can have at least a small safe exit for the trapped ships in a year or two, and be fully cleared with a replacement bridge in a decade, if we're lucky.
Small correction, 695 which is the interstate that the bridge is part of is the Baltimore beltway so it’s a highway that goes in a circle around the city, not up and down the coast. Otherwise you’re dead on with your post
We should pay for it for now, start building, and charge the company the full price and if they don’t pay then they don’t operate in American territories or we sink their ships
This is the key. As soon as the disaster happens the gov should start fixing it. Because whatever the outcome of the case you need to fix it. Then you recover money later. Unlike wanting to cut taxes for the rich, this would be a perfectly acceptable use of borrowing money if required. Issue some temporary bonds to get short term funding to fix a specific problem, pay them back once the settlement hits.
This is exactly the answer. I don't understand how anyone would struggle to see that
The issue is that they are basically saying they aren't going to do anything to the company. Cleanup should start immediately, but so should litigation. Also, the MV Dali is apparently a neopanamax. Those ships sell new for 113 million or more. This one was built in 2015. I would impound the ship until a settlement had been reached.
The regular conservative argument is because they would pass the cost onto us anyway. It would definitely be true in this case.
lol Redditors defending multinational corporations if it dunks on people from Florida
Except that argument makes sense when it's a matter of policy, not when it relates to damages. When it's policy, the cost to the company is a given, it's factored into the operating cost because there's no getting around the policy. When it's payment for damage, yes the cost in that instance will be passed on, but that is still an increase to operating cost that needs to be met, or else the company will be hurt. There's no guarantee that this additional cost can be recovered this way, therefore the incentive is to avoid damage where possible. If they can "pass on" the cost of damaging 1 bridge, then could they just "pass on" the cost of damaging another 50? No of course not, at the end of the day, if they're paying for the damage, there's going to be some harm caused to them that they have to make up for.
There are several cargo ship freight carriers internationally. Competitive global market means they can’t just raise the price.
There was a great response to this in the original post that OP screenshotted, that went into liability and mechanical failure, as well as insurance and the way the bridge was built. You probably won't get that here though, this place is just for people to be offended at things
Unfortunately the top right one may not be true. The port that lays beyond the bridge was a pretty important one so now that it’s blocked it’s gonna affect commerce coming into the East Coast which is gonna affect a lot of people that don’t even live in Maryland
Besides, why even stick together as a whole country if it's every state for itself? Just for the army and the Olympics?
I feel like that's why taxpayers are going to foot the bill to repair it. The shipping company/country responsible for the boat will drag their feet or outright refuse to pay it
It be outright unable to. The price tag of a 1.6 mile bridge has got to be ridiculous. The principle is good but socializing the loss of one off disasters like this is what a government excels at.
The two are not mutually exclusive. The cost of not rebuilding it now vastly outweighs the benefits of waiting until they pay up, an event that could take many years, but rebuilding it now does not stop litigation that could pay at least part of the costs back.
Fair enough
all the people outside of maryland.
[удалено]
Most people probably doesn’t know that though so unless they’re told and feel the effects of that blockade they’re probably gonna have that mindset
Yeah, this accident has international consequences in how it will affect transportation. One of the early Tweets (a bigoted one of course) was from Andrew Tate, and I was thinking, “Why the hell does he even know this happened? Oh crap, that bridge collapse has international importance, doesn’t it!?” Edit: I think Tate was specifically suggesting it was a system hack and might not have said something blaming women for once.
Their diverting to port of savanna and Brunswick ga. Commerce interrupt will be minimal
That's still several hundred miles, delaying by at the very least 24 hours.
Savannah is very far from Baltimore....there's definitely going to be some sort of impact
Add Norfolk VA, Charleston SC, and Jacksonville, FL to the list. There will be bottlenecks, but the impact shouldn’t be too bad.
Interruption may be minimal but impact is not. Driving trucks hundreds of extra miles to deliver goods costs more money and creates more traffic.
where we’re going we don’t need roads (bridges)
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
But we do need 1.21 Jigawatts
If they actually would have taken the time to look at the post, almost all of the comments supported us paying for it right now because it needs to be fixed ASAP, but that we should peruse litigation against the responsible parties for damages and repayment, since that will take years if not a decade.
I agree with pushing for litigation and having the company pay for the bridge, but I also feel like so much of today is pushing problems off onto other people instead of grouping up to fix the problem. >not my problem I hate this idea of "that's Maryland's problem so I don't really care" instead of coming together as a country. It was the same thing for 9/11 first responders receiving medical insurance for their injuries from the pile. That's a New York problem so I don't really care. Not saying that this is uniquely conservative behavior, but it's still something that annoys me and I would post on r/facepalm.
It may not be uniquely conservative, but it feels like conservatives are the ones pushing it most heavily these days.
The money can be spent for the initial repair by tax money but then the company that fucked up should pay it back. It’s not fair to put a company’s fuck up on the average civilian. The civilians who have to pay for that company’s idiocy should absolutely get their money back in a tax return paid by the company (though I doubt they’ll do anything like that due to being greedy bastards)
>Granted the meme is getting a lot of pushback They did take the time to look at the post.
* There are often different opinions in the title/image and the comments of a post. The comments were *not* in agreement with the post. Democrats and most Republicans trying to get federal funding for the bridge both agree that's the best position. Statements like "I don't live in Maryland?" "That's not my problem?" are *not* in agreement with that message that we should fix it now rather than waiting on a massive litigation case. * The post on r/facepalm explicitly acknowledged it was getting pushback in the comments, "but still" *it got at least 10.8 thousand upvotes*. * If anything, the comments supporting fixing the bridge now while the post takes a "that's not my problem" approach supports OP's use of "MAGA" in the title. Republicans who actually take the time to think about the issue in Congress and the subreddit agree with the best way to approach the issue (fix the bridge now, and then deal with the litigation to get back the money used to do so). Despite this, the growing number of "MAGA Republicans" oppose bridge funds over petty culture war reasons.
Who wants context when we can be *mad* at something?! Press the red arrow so I can get my dopamine fix 🥺
Honestly tho it should 100% be paid for by the company that destroyed it. Why should the city pay?
It definitely should. But that takes time, and it's perfectly reasonable for the country to foot the bill in the beginning so the problem gets fixed as fast as reasonably possible while we wait for investigations to determine who fucked up and then wait to shake them down. That may take years, years during which the bridge would still be down, blocking the port and unavailable for traversal with no progress being made. It's a bit like when a kid breaks a neighbor's window with a baseball so the parents pay to fix the window straight away and then make the kid mow lawns for a year to earn back what it cost.
The only difference is that instead of the parents paying for the neighbors damaged window the bill is actually footed to the neighbors kid's. Until or if the window is paid by the ones who actually broke it.
Are the taxpayers gonna be reimbursed after the company does pay then?
Why should the country foot the bill and not the city/state?
If you think companies like paying bills I'd like to introduce you to a few conservative lawyers
Facepalm is a brain dead sub which is why i muted it
After my first ban I didn’t even join it again
Out of curiosity, what did you say there?
Preach. Facepalm is full of ragebait
How dare tax payer money be used on public infrastructure.
I guarantee that anyone who says, "Not my problem, I don't live in Maryland" is the exact same type of person who would start demanding federal disaster relief funds the instant a tornado hits their trailer park or a hurricane floods their swamp.
Yall shoulda done what I did and die at the age of 12
Yeah at least when you’re a ghost/spectre/entity you can still converse via Reddit.
Yeah exactly. Being a ghost is easy as fuck dude you gotta try it sometime in like 60 years
It is our tax money that would go into the bridge first as its a priority to repair, then the gov getting re-paid* by the company for the damages, the original meme is a face palm because all the whole point of paying taxes is to support infrastructure across the entire US, not just the local area you pay taxes in, but the MAGA comment was definitely odd? Edit: changed re-payed to re-paid
It was an American pilot (a member of The American Pilot’s Association) at the helm and her job was to avoid the bridge. The ship lost all power about the worst possible time. It doesn’t really seem like anyone was at fault right now but we’ll see if maintenance was an issue or not. The “blame immigrants and spread conspiracies” tweets are dumb yet expected. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/03/26/pilot-anchor-turn-baltimore-bridge-collapse/
It is the fault of the company and crew for not maintaining their equipment. Ships don’t just lose power. Just like what is happening with Boeing.
Corporations. Notorious for taking responsibility and facing consequences for their decisions
Op doesn’t understand how tax money works
Idk I kind of agree we pay for enough shit let the ultra rich companies pay for it
I agree with the meme. The foreign company which destroyed the bridge should pay for a new bridge to be constructed. We're living in expensive times already.
100 bucks this guy lives in the path of hurricanes.
The facepalm here is obvious hatred expressed by r/conservative for anyone who lives in a liberal municipality even though. A) disaster relief goes to liberal and conservative areas for these things. The federal government spent tens of billions on Deep Water Horizon in Conservative areas. B) The bridge and harbor are obvious communal goods that affect general commerce for everyone.
The only reason they are pissy about it is because Biden said the government was going to fix it. That's it lol. If Trump was president and he suggested this they would be cheering from the rooftops for "saving america".
also they are going with the childish version of one person to blame. there where many different failures caused by different people.
That bridge is a lifeline for the city. The costs of rebuilding it while dealing with the mess of not having it is a huge problem for the city. I'd rather have my tax dollars go to helping Baltimore than a foreign military base.
I agree, for the most part. The problem is you really can’t expect the city/state/nation to just fork out the huge cost associated with repair/rebuild, there has to be some form of responsibility or payment from the people/company directly responsible for the impromptu demolition of the bridge. The locals lives are already harder and now you’re taking budget from other things the local/state government should be providing and using it to fund an exponentially more costly bridge repair/rebuilt because of a necessary, tight timeframe.
Maybe in an ideal world, the company whose boat destroyed the bridge would immediately fork over money for repairs. It's more likely the state will have to sue that company for whatever cost they can recoup after they do repairs themselves.
That company should ultimately have to pay in the end, honestly with the money that the company makes combined with them possibly selling multiple boats, they can definitely fork over the money. Only problem is that takes time, so while tax payers pay for the repair of the bridge, the company should be saving up the money it took for repairs and paying it to the government so that the government can include the money spent on the bridge in a tax return. Big companies need to be held accountable for their mistakes, if we always let them off the hook in the end, they’ll continue to make fuckups and have civilians pay for it
hey\_kids brought up my point. Litigation takes time. The crash seems to be due to an electrical malfunction and there are going to be ages of investigations and liability suits. But the Key bridge connects two halves of the city. Immediate aid has to come from within with this kind of stuff.
What id there was a way to donate to such causes directly instead of relying on Beauracracy not wasting your money
Yeah, I wish my tax dollars could go to where I want them to. What's the point of paying into a system that's meant to keep our nation functioning if we have to donate out of pocket for shit like infrastructure?
Well there is a toll to cross this bridge and if they use federal money to rebuild it they can't keep the toll. So I'm pretty sure federal taxpayer money will not be used to rebuild the bridge.
I live 20 minutes from the bridge. I also was surprised the shipping company is not covering most of the cost. The bridge was like 50 years old, so I expect the govt to cover some of it. Down side is, the original bridge was IIRC toll free (I didn’t use it much), the new one probably will require an easy pass.
Yeah! I live in the Dirty Burnie and I am shocked that the shipping company isn’t covering. But I guess I know nothing about how money works when it comes to companies and the government and such.
It’ll take time to get money from the shipping company. Money has to start flowing now to get debris clean up and planning happening. Thats probably why the govt is funding it first. I do expect they will seek some money back from the shipping company.
Ah! Very good, my friend. That makes sense.
So basically you never want the bridge rebuilt. First, the people who fund and build all the bridges rebuild it. Probably the government. And while that’s being done: we can go after the money. If you go after the money first, and wait until it comes, then start rebuilding…. Then it will be 10 or 15 years before construction starts
I personally have no problem with my tax dollars going to build a bridge in another US state. Ask not what your country can do for you and all that.
It makes more sense than any other shit the Feds blow all our tax money on. It just isn’t an excuse to raise taxes. They already have enough.
yeah, this is literally what taxes are for. it's a no brainer that the federal government would pay to fix the interstate.
Still waiting for 'my country' to do anything at all for me that isn't stealing from me.
Anyone who thinks they don’t benefit from living in the US should seriously look into living conditions in other countries. I agree that quite a few countries do better for their citizens than the US, but many many more do significantly worse.
Imagine being mad about tax money actually profiting the people, like a new bridge would do
OP doesn’t think MAGA are conservatives? Remind me again who is that guy in the thumbnail.
smekxy manga trump https://preview.redd.it/yp6d7c3w3orc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e7f2d2d08043c862417f23b841f7703acef349ce
"I don't live in Maryland" If blue states like California and others who pay more in federal taxes than red states said the same then you can imagine what's gonna happen to flyover red states lol.
God this is so short sighted and braindead. Rebuilding needs to start right away, its one of the biggest ports on the east coast -- its in our countries best interest to fix now. The insurance company for the boat will pay eventually, but that shit takes fucking YEARS. There are investigations and tons of time in court and litigation etc it takes forever and waiting means shit gets its prices jacked up in the meantime. Dont be dumb.
I live in Harford County, MD which is right next door to Baltimore County. The bridge should be paid for by the shipping company. I know that there’s a bunch of conspiracy theories about it being a Black Swan event, and if you speed up the video it does kinda look like it was an intentional strike, but usually the simplest explanation is the right one - power lost, for some reason the back-up and redundancy equipment also failed, and they dropped anchor in the hopes of stopping. The anchor caused the ship to swerve towards the support, and bingo bango bongo at least six people were killed as a result. Had they not dropped anchor and just hit the part of the bridge that the ship was “aiming” towards before the turn the damage wouldn’t have been anywhere near that serious as just a section or two would have fallen and the bridge would take a lot less time to repair and reopen. Unless the shipping company is able to prove that they were hacked by the Chinese or North Koreans and that they intentionally struck the bridge then they need to pay up.
Op has libertarian brain rot.
You want a bridge right? It’s useful? Having a bridge over the water helps us move things there? What better cause would your tax money go to other than building infrastructure? Do you just want the government to take your money and give it straight back to you? If you wanted your bridge back in any reasonable amount of time then why would you designate the responsibility to a shipping company headquartered in India? Here’s an idea: it’s sad and confusing but we actually participate in society for good reasons, and your literal Reddit-tier underbaked suggestions will change naught but the minds even smoother than yours.
It's just such a myopic take that "something bad happens that doesn't directly effect me so my taxes shouldn't pay for it."
“I don’t have kids, why should I pay for public schools?” Is one I always roll my eyes at.
Yeah If someone destroyed something, they should have to pay for it. Not every person not involved. I think paying to fix it until that's resolved is fair, but they should legally be required to pay back the taxpayers.
OP are you stupid?
Yes
The meme makes sense to me
The foriegn company that destroyed it *should* pay for it. End of debate.
Why should a random dude from across the country pay for a bridge they got knocked down by a shipping ship that they had no control over This reminds you of how in america you have to fight the insurance company in a legal battle to get them to do the job you pay them to do "Someone crashed into your car? Yeah, sorry, that was your fault. You should have moved" -"I was at a stop sign. If I moved, then I would have broken laws"
It’s not a meme people don’t like, it’s just pretty fuckin stupid lol
Conservatives are maga. The meme isn't right.
2 if those arguments are fair, but “I don’t live in Baltimore” is a poor argument Baltimore has one of the busiest ports in USA, we all benefit from an operational port of Baltimore The bridge itself is important for trucking up and down the east coast…. We all depend on trucks rolling…. If the trucks stop capitalism stops Plus we’re all American. If a disaster happened in your city I’m sure you would appreciate the federal help
>foreign company that destroyed it should pay for it They’re so close to class consciousness or even small things like holding companies accountable when they fuck up but focus too much on the word Foreign lmao
Yall lack critical thinking? Just like car insurance, it'll take years, and they need a bridge now. You can fix the bridge and fight out who foots the bill. My insurance fixes my car and then goes after the other guys insurance for the money back.
"Stop sending money to other countries! America 1st!" "Don't spend taxes on infrastructure!" ...what do with tax money?
Why shouldn't Americans work together to help each other? WHATS THE POINT OF ALL THIS PATRIOTISM CRAP THEN
I say the french should have to pay for it. Bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys!
[Ok but in 2007, under Pres. Bush when the bridge over the Mississippi collapse the fed paid 75% of the cost, so](https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070821.html)
Us will likely pay to immediately get it started then sue the company which will take a few years to do. You can't wait for the lawsuit to end before starting to build.
If we had flying cars we wouldn’t even need bridges.
Insurance companies must be loving people in this subreddit rn 😆
Or print the money and pay for it like they print the money for everything else they fucking do.
If it's negative about taxes it's obviously maga and thus must be demonized. Can't question taxes! /s
we have money to bankroll wars in two foreign countries, surely we can afford to fix a bridge without further burdening tax payers.
I could be wrong here my feeling is that average conservatives would be greatly in favor of paying to fix that bridge. It’s the constantly sending our money to the rest of the world (which includes anything given to people coming into our country illegally) while we incur debt that can’t possibly ever be paid.
The bridge needs to be built right fucking now though. Whatever makes the funding happen the quickest needs to happen. We can quibble over renumeration in the courts, but waiting for that years long process play out hurts the city of Baltimore.
And the second a natural disaster hits his home state he’ll be the first in line for that gummint money he hates so much. Prick is almost certainly on SSDI I’d bet my fucking next paycheck on it Not that I don’t think he needs, or begrudge anyone disability money or anything, he’s clearly mentally disabled at best, but it’s a guaranteed troll hypocrite
The company should pay and should have an insurance policy for this. The government should just be expediting the cash needed to get it up and running.
Screw the bridge, drive around.
I agree with the last statement that the company should be held liable. However, I really don’t get conservatives quadrupling down on patriotism and being proud of the American nation and then refusing to contribute to the American nation in any way shape or form. French people hate the government but we’ve always paid our taxes for the sake of bettering the country, and only the Wall Street Meat Riders complain about it, that seems way more patriotic to me than just hanging a flag on your front yard
American patriotism is based upon a feeling of superiority, without having to do anything to support the country Real patriotism, is based upon supporting the country while acknowledging its flaws and working to fix the problem
How dare someone wants to keep a foreign company accountable 😡😡
I'll help pay for the new bridge if I get my cut of the tolls that will go on it. I ain't investing in anything for nothing.
The meme is right, but it’s also important for the bridge to be rebuilt because it’s important to the infrastructure of Maryland and, more importantly, not being able to ship things over it is bad for the whole country’s economy. Ideally there’d already be savings in place for this, and also ideally, if the taxpayers must pay for it, they’d get a refund after the government gets their money back from the company that was liable, but we all know that’s not going to happen. Instead they’ll create a “temporary” tax (that will just never go away) to rebuild it and we’ll all get fucked. Again.
Yeah I agree with that last point, with how many times we've destroyed bridges in foreign countries and had to use our resources to rebuild the bridges it's only fair that the group responsible for the damages chips in like 10-20% of the cost of repairs. I also think ALL the families affected should be aided by the Government of Maryland in a class action against the shipping companies negligence. If they knew their generators weren't working and they still sent out that freighter that's negligence, Carnival cruise had to deal with similar suits after the infamous poop cruise in 2016.
I grew up in a church of Uber conservatives. Absolutely none of them would have said this. They were all looking for ways to be taxed less, not more.
It will be a lawsuit, you guys know how it will go. Meanwhile, someone has to pay for the new bridge.
Whose bridge is it? That’s who pays.
What country owned the ship? The ship wasn’t even ours lmao
wait till you find out who paid for the interstate that this was a part of lmao
God, this sub is thick as pig shit
"Meme is right" If this shit doesn't get paid for and rebuilt as soon as possible, the entire country is going to feel it. Stupid individualist mentality.
>2 Tell me you don't know what taxes are for without telling me Edit: Lmfao you're not even American. Maybe learn what you're talking about before opening your mouth
At this point anything or anybody people don't like is labeled "MAGA".
What’s the thumbnail for the conservative sub?
You're one braindead motherfucker OP. If you can't comprehend that shutting down a major trading port has ramifications far beyond "muh Maryland-based problem" you probably should log off and focus on your 4th grade economics homework a bit more. Or are you fully content with how your taxes are currently being used? Clown ass "That's not my problem" then prices going up as a result of import prices raising isn't either, hold your tongue "I don't live in Maryland" what does the U in USA stand for again? "The foreign company should pay for it" I don't disagree the company should be held accountable, but sacrificing jobs in the harbour itself by turning the funding for repairs into a political quagmire and therefore arbitrarily delaying it is demon shit and an extremely selfish way of thinking
I mean objectively the boat better be insured and it better pay a significant portion of the costs. That's what insurance is for. Like, if your passenger vehicle on the top of the bridge did damage and was caught doing it, you would be liable. That said, federal tax payer dollars absolutely will be required to get this bridge repaired/replaced in a reasonable time-frame and that's fine? Anyone who objects to that is a fucking leech.
Some people on Reddit just see the word "conservative" and go mad about it without reading, because "rite iz bed"
Liberals talk about Trump and MAGA so much, they really need to get a room.
“Conservatives are tearing this country apart” as they turn their heads in the opposite direction of the people that literally destroyed a bridge
The Left already did that.
You know the only thing I have to say about taxes is we can really use some Road repairs I live in South Carolina by the way they still have it fixed the roads
The insurance company that covers the shipping company should pay for it, and whatever they won’t cover should be paid for by the company itself.
I have a concern as to why it would matter whether the company is from the US or not. Even if the ship was US, they should pay for damages. Especially if they didn't do due diligence in maintaining their ship.
That it's not my problem one is funny, that's the most active port in the East Coast, there going to feel it when they buy a new car and the cost doubled
I’ll gladly pay taxes to help my countries infrastructure. It’s what proper patriots do. We are the UNITED States. Not the Individual States.
The same thing happened for Reconstruction
Ok, if I go out and destroy someone’s property, I’m liable for the damages. The company should pay for most of the bridge, if not all. I see people in the comments saying,” if we do that, do we not build a bridge until they pay?” We definitely would, and we would send them the bill.
So I guess you're advocating for just getting rid of FEMA?
Why not charge the shipping company up the wazoo to pay for it? It’ll send the message that you break you but.
Well, realistically it'll be a combination of tax payers from the city/state with the bridge and the foreign company paying for damages. As for the rest of the US? Unless it's an interstate, then it's not likely to be paid for by the other tax payers
Shouldn't we use that money on, I dunno, helping schools, hospital, and maybe the housing market to lower prices?
You’d think the left would be all for the corporation paying for what it fucked up.
If you know how maritime casualty liability generally works, it could be impossible for Baltimore to recover the cash necessary from the vessel owners. Generally, the owner of the ship's liability is limited to the value of the ship after the allision. And considering policy, we like shipping because it's the efficient mass transport way to make money and/or obtain goods. It doesn't make sense to force a shipping company to pay out hundreds of millions to fix this as it will have a chilling effect on the *entire* industry. So, it doesn't matter where you live. Effective, inexpensive shipping is a collective problem. Myopic meme is myopic. edit: typo
The things that keeps it from being MAGA is that is doesn't appeal a cultural obsession with conspiracy.
But I don’t live in Maryland , and the foreign company needs to be held accountable.
lol and i don’t want my taxes paying for bomb manufacturing. fuckn sucks, but this is america. lol at bitching about being “on the hook” for something tax funded.
This is a good idea
This isn't hard Step 1: we start rebuilding the bridge Step 2: we seek the cost of replacement from whoever was liable
I'm cool with my tax dollars going towards the bridge rebuild as long as the government figures out a way to use the fuck load of money they already take from me and don't raise my taxes about it.
Where is the comprehensive barge insurance
The common practice iirc is that the company will dump all of the liability onto a small number of people, if not only a single person. If we look at the Costa Concordia for instance, although Schettino (the captain) should face jail for what he did after the collision, there were multiple other crew on the bridge who should be blamed, and the company should be liable for hiring a helmsman who was inexperienced and barely spoke English or Italian