Bob Murray, Who Fought Regulations as a Coal Operator, Files for Lung Benefits
wvpublic.org
wvpublic.org
> “It's idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. IPF, and it is not related to my work in the industry. They've checked for that,” Murray told NPR. “And it's not — has anything to do with working in the coal mines, which I did for 17 years underground every day. And until I was 76, I went underground twice a week.”
How could they have "checked for that," given that IPF seems to be a diagnosis of exclusion (someone more knowledgeable than I can correct me if I'm wrong).
Test for all the plausible causes, and if there’s nothing left you shrug and call it idiopathic. So either he was tested, or the doctors thought his symptoms were very atypical and didn’t run the test.
(I know two people and a pet with idiopathic something or other. In the cat’s case, the treatment was the same as the least invasive treatments for the common cause. The humans are just SOL.)
Seems he wants to have it both ways. Jeopardizing the safety of his employees with his opposition to regulations is justified - except when it affects him personally. Then, he should be entitled to benefits and remedies under the law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw6RsUhw1Q8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN8bJb8biZU
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/climate/murray-energy-cli...
[2] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/a-coal-executives...
It’s a shame that the both the government and industry have not pursued a better path forward.
I’m sorry for your friends and acquaintances. People care, it’s just always an uphill battle.
The people who endangered miners really shouldn't be entitled to benefits for miners, especially when that person, via bankruptcy, has guaranteed that the government is going to end up on the hook for providing that.
Now I’m against capital punishment, so I don’t want him dead, nor do I want treatment withheld for the disease he’s suffering, even if he did the same for many others. But I’ll be damned if I see him get a penny of that money before he spends his own first. That’s justice enough, and I think that’s downright generous, far more generous than he deserves. And that, my friend, is what makes me the better man.
I want the best for society, not some moral high ground, so I definitely would deny the benefits and if he does want to obtain them, he should at least do some public apologies.
He had paid taxes all his life, all he is asking for is to get something out of these taxes back.
Is he a bad person? Does he not deserve his share? I don’t know. If he does not, then our legal system is broken - he paid for a service he is denied. If he gets his share, then what about the workers he denied their share to? But his denial was enabled by the law, what are we going to do about this?
And if his pledge is denied, I am going to see this as a petty retaliation against a sick old guy.
If you want to fix something, fix the system that enabled him to fight the regulations in first place. Don’t fight his cruelty with your own just because you think he deserves it and he cannot punch back anymore.
(throwaway because I am afraid of expressing my views due to socialist culture prevailing. Call it self-censorship if you like)