GarryB wrote:Impressive until you look at how he did it and all the paranoia and BS, but then that wasn't him alone, there were plenty of figures that not only didn't try to stop him... but actually made it worse...
Of course. But he still knew a thing or two about management.
I guess if you take away the firing squads, forced labour under atrocious conditions, totalitarian control over society, purging of everyone who constituted a potential rival or didn't align closely enough to him - his methods and general approach would still be pretty effective today. There was rather more to them that just those things; and where a couple of those things might be neccessary, they can be replaced today with something more humane but still punishing enough.
Any expert in the west will tell you he was the root of all evil and everything bad that happened before during and after him was all his fault... but that says more about the expertise of western experts than anything else.
Western experts will tell you that it was due to his decisions and purge of the army that the Red Army lost 90% of its 20,000-strong tank force within the opening months of the war, as well as almost the entire airforce.
And while there may be truth in that, a more serious expert will tell you that if it wasn't for Stalin's mass-industrialization of Russia and the Ukraine during the 30s, when it reached GDP growth rates of some 15% and started to produce its own equipment and weapon designs adapted for its own conditions, rather than importing everything from Europe as the Russian Empire had done - then the USSR wouldn't have had even 1/10th of those 20,000 tanks to lose in the first place against Germany, when the later inevitably invaded.
The option you are suggesting is the Stalin one... rolling heads for position rather than responsibility... one person can't change the US but it seems one person or several people were supposed to fix everything in Russia and for their failure they need to be fired... before any investigation into what actually happened.
But it is responsibility. We in Russia, having come out of a worker's state not too long ago - have a natural disdain for managers. In the Soviet era, you had bosses and you had managers; but they weren't even allowed to fire you from your job, without very good reason. And they were always experienced technical specialists and former workers themselves; they didn't come out of some management degree at university like they do now.
Nowadays though, they get twice the pay of the common people - and seemingly all power in their hands. So then they should have the responsibility that comes with it too, else who the fk needs them? What, to provide motivational speeches and check that everyone is coming to work on time? No, then as well as now, they are to play a senior technical supervisory role, especially in industrial enterprises, and they answer for the practices or lack thereof of the people under their charge. It is their job to find problems with personnel ahead of time and take corrective measures, and their job to make sure standards are being followed. The managers above them, the ones sitting in the offices and directing business operations - their job is to select the technical and shift managers for competency, have enough knowledge to determine what makes a good one, and supervise them in turn, make surprise inspections of the work premises and so on.
If there is a clear failure that leads to deaths and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of damage, then its clear that the whole chain isn't working as intended. If it was, that hypothetical psycho with oil and rags who started the fire wouldn't have been hired, or would have been forced to answer for his suspicious practices by a diligent co-worker or his shift-manager, before the damage was done. And even if he had succeeded, there surely wouldn't have been a complacent bufoon who had placed all the sawdust or whatever in a compartment right below the welding work being done, that turned what could have been a minor incident into a major disaster. Even then, the automated fire retardation systems would have sprung into action. But whoops, someone decided to remove or deactivate them so then wouldn't get in the way; someone gave that order and the workers did it without questioning its wisdom. See where I'm going with this?
Amusing you think investigations are to be punitive rather than fact finding... you have already decided what has happened and you have the solution all ready... except the solution wont change anything either.
By all means they should find the facts too. Find the facts so practices can be improved. And so that the guilty can be identified.
And then shake up the whole place and other places too, because in fact everyone is a little guilty when it comes to something like this. The faults are on many levels.
Doesn't that depend on the quality of his friends, and whether they are competent in their jobs or just there because they are friends with Putin... I have no idea, but I suspect if they were incompetent they would not remain friends for very long... especially if there is evidence of criminal activity...
Of course it does, and his responsibility is to check their quality. He does do replacements - but clearly something isn't working.
Hilarious... of course it is his fault... he needs to analyse every procedure and every rule and every industry and identify problems and make changes... I mean if he has time to meddle in elections all around the western world surely he knows some dumb fuck in some backwater has not paid attention to all the brush and plant growth near his buildings... but when a fire starts there are no fire engines to deal with the problem... I mean just because the guy in charge there said several times there was a problem and everyone ignored him and the local rich
took the only local fire engine to protect his mansion instead of a helicopter repair plant for the Navy... yeah... Putins fault... but I get the sense you don't want to fire him... just give him a telling off that he is not the omnipotent being the west suggests he is. ...bastard.
Well ordinarily no, that's the power of delegation. And decentralization.
But he himself centralized the system (a neccessity back then) and has hardly decentralized it since. He prefers to parade around and visit factories, make a big show of solving every problem on TV, even grants kids their New Year's wishes sometimes. He's like Santa Claus and Jesus rolled into one.
So fine, if that's the role he wants, then fulfil it. Analyse every procedure and every rule and every industry and identify problems and make changes, and find the right people to make those changes. Like Stalin did, albeit not without a **fair bit** of collatoral damage. When Stalin died, they went into his library and found 5000 books there... most of which were annotated with his own notes and thoughts on various passages and thesis contained. Stalin was a very learned man, far from the unremarkable gangster persona that he adopted to play and backstab his way to the top of the heirarchy, and how he is continued to be portrayed to this day by the History Channel and other Western media. Putin is highly intelligent too, and spends all his time working, seems to know a fair amount about everything. Yet if comparing him to Stalin, there are definately things he has done better - mostly in terms of solving problems and resurrecting, developing the country using far more humane means, but also plenty of areas where he has been too laid back and not active enough.
Else, if he doesn't want to do that, then he can reform Russia's system into something a bit more manageble, when he and his top-level ministers aren't the only ones who make all the decisions and thus aren't the only ones that can answer for them.
All different problems in different places... or are you suggesting he ban fire?
Exactly. Ban fire. Not with words but with measures.
Russia has managed the seemingly impossible before, it can manage this.
Look at how the military has been transformed over the past 10 years.
Why has there been no such effort for emergency services and industrial practices? Nevermind healthcare, education, etc... which have at best only improved slowly and incrementally.
Of course.... he could have been to all those places with a wet towel and damped those flames out before they did any real damage... not just telepathic and fortune teller... now also with a cape and in a suit with a big S on the front...
Again, that's what he himself is presented as, in the media that is under the control of the Russian state.
Of course in pratice there is some decentralization in Russia, local decisions, governors, mayors, heads of industrial corporations, lower level ministers and so on. But something isn't working and when it isn't, it's always up to Putin to go there, fire someone, solve the problem. The system should be changed, it's all built around the idea of reaction, PR and finding scapegoats, not putting the right people in the right place to identify problems ahead of time.
But so you understand, I'm not arguing here in favour of finding scapegoats for the fire. Rather, the opposite. Make everyone answer for everyone else; it's a team sport and either everyone wins together or they lose alone. And if this approach works then adopt it for other sectors.
So what you are saying is that there is no change in fire codes or safety standards or fire fighting equipment in the last 20 years... really?
There surely has been, in fact I know there has been, after a spate of mass fires. But clearly this incident as well as the forest fires this summer has shown that it's not enough. They may have reacted to the problems and failings that were visible. They probably decided to ignore the stuff that hasn't caught on fire just yet though.
Sounds like a Vann like over reaction to me... you are upset and you want someone to blame... but the real funny thing is that you are not interested in finding out what actually happened... PERHAPS THAT IS THE CULTURAL THING THAT RUSSIA NEEDS TO CHANGE, because if the reaction is always the same then covering your ass and keeping your mouth shut will be standard procedure wont it?
Culture is a consenquence of material conditions. When you have had a corrupt or incompetent system in the 90s-2000s, and really since the 80s, and only now it's getting better, bit by bit - it has had enough time anyway to seep into everyone's skin and make everyone think that this way of doing things is normal.
But it's not normal, and the only way to change this culture is to change the conditions and system that underpin it. Shaking things up would be a good start, then finding some more competent people, then decentralizing things a bit.
It is the dumbest thing they could possibly do to discard an almost complete aircraft carrier for the promise of perhaps one in 6-8 years time.
They have said they will lay down a new carrier in 2030 or there abouts... that is what all their plans are optimised for no doubt, so completely changing them to push forward a new CVN means pushing forward a lot of other programmes that will cost rather more than just one CVN... we are talking 10s of billions of dollars on all the other things that need to be ready or put in place to operate a new CVN... when they already have a carrier they can use right now.
It is not a super carrier... if they only use it for flight practise with MiGs and Sukhois, and also for planning and practising during exercises then they will be getting their moneys worth from the K... if they scrap her now you multiply all the costs and take away any usefulness you might have gotten from using her...
Sorry mate... normally I respect your opinion but in this case I am thinking of asking Vlad to check your IP to see that Vann hasn't hacked your account...
I don't have the strongest opinion on it, so I won't argue it vehemently.
But if the Kuznetsov was previously slated for a 2022 completion date, which may now be moved back by another year at least - then we're already looking at over 3 years and several hundred million dollars just to bring it back to order. And then you'll have it back, a still problematic ship, with probably not more than 15 years left in it anyway, that Russia is dependent on until further notice.
If we have the option of building a new one within 6 years and a 3 billion dollar budget, then it begins to looks like a viable idea, especially as some of that 3 billion we can raise by removing the Kuznetsov from service along with all its associated operation costs, and scrapping it. The carrier airwing and infastructure we can reuse, no need to raise a new one.
Of course if it takes more than 6 years, or much more than 3 billion dollars, or a whole reshuffling of schedules and delays across the board due to no spare capacity, or no ready design and so on - then I agree, it's not worth it. It all depends.
Exactly... if they can't get it right with the K then there is no point in spending any money on a bigger more expensive and more complicated CVN... they will end up with a Ford class carrier that can't do anything... the propulsion will be all new, the EMALS will be all new, the electronics will be new for a ship of this size... by 2030 they will likely have all new aircraft too... so much potential for a fuck up... so do you think a good idea is to move it up 5 years and start making it right now without the damn design even likely finalised yet?
That's a good argument, but then on the Kuznetsov they're not trying out revolutionary new technologies and can't anyway. They neeeeeed it, remember?
Last edited by flamming_python on Mon Dec 16, 2019 2:28 pm; edited 2 times in total