"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

Gimme a break!!
If private industry were so ethical and responsible as that, we
wouldn't
need inspectors at all.

I didn't say we shouldn't have inspectors, I just said tey shouldn't be
government inspectors. Nor shold they be a requirement, the only
requirement is that the owner is responsible for damages.


You still,ahve not explained why a private inspector is less
susceptible to bribes.

What would be the incentive? Without the government forcing you to get
inspections the inspections you got would be because you want to know if a
building is being built properly. If they OK something that later falls
down there would be lawsuits.



Corrupt public employee inspectors have lost their jobs, their
retirements, and have gone to jail.


But ehy have also retired with Swiss Bank accounts taking money for
inspection never done or for inspection that weren't up to code,
especially
if the code is overkill.


In the cases I have heard about, they were getting pitifully
small amounts, like $20 per incident.
No one is retiring on Swiss bank accounts for passing through
a bad load of gravel.




The point still remains that governments require inspections to get
money
and to have power, safety is really not their primary concern.

That is completely untrue.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---