Something else occurred to me as well concerning the miners and their rescue. These sort of things happen in China all the time, but we never seem to hear of any mine rescues taking place in China. It's almost as though the mine owner in China just shrugs and walks away, the workers being a disposable and replaceable commodity. Perhaps I'm imagining things, but I doubt it.

A competent government led by a sober President like Sebastian Pinera (instead of a clown like Hugo Chavez) had something to do with the successful rescue. If these had been Venezuelan miners, Hugo wouldn't have done anything but rant & rave about how evil capitalist greed was the reason the miners were stuck in the hole in the first place.

>>These sort of things happen in China all the time, but we never seem to hear of any mine rescues taking place in China.

We do actually hear of them, roadgeek, even though yes, the mine safety record in China remains deplorable.

From the NY Times Re: a disaster in northern China this spring.

"Had rescue efforts failed [refers to 115 miners out of 140 successfully just rescued in the April 2010 mine flood], the mine disaster would have been China’s deadliest in more than two years. Although the government has managed to significantly reduce the death rate at coal mines since 2002, its safety record remains among the world’s worst."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/asia/06mine.html

If it's true mine safety records in China are deplorable and outweigh this unique and wonderful outcome in Chile, it can hardly be said capitalism is any reason for saving lives in mining. If anything, it is capitalism that puts miners in the precarious and dangerous position in the first place. This "deus ex mercati" argument that capitalism saved them is interesting, but it's a fallacy.

Okay, I cheerfully stand corrected. But who reads the New York Times any longer?

Mathew if you are so opposed to the capatailism that paid these men a livable wage for their work, perhaps you should give up all the technology that capatailsim has not only provided, but also made so damn cheap and inexpensive that you can commnicate your thoughts to the entire wordd with the push of a button on your lunch break.

You neglected to mention the Canadian company, Precision Drilling which was according to all reports a key player in completing the rescue shaft!!

Matthew, you make the fallacy the miners would be treated any differently by other political systems, but that is demonstrably false. If you cannot hold a government accountable for an accident with it's citizens, then the govt. will turn a blind eye. This is what happened in China and the USSR etc, etc... A corporation similarly may turn a blind eye right up to the point where it gets sued by citizens for doing something neglignet. The govt. then forms a backbone where a suit can take place. and a balance is struck.

It is in the best interest of all parties to get miners like this out, so that future operations of any one party aren't negatively impacted.

There's no deus ex here... except maybe in the one where you don't look at a larger picture.

Every year, every year, capitalism kills 10,000 - 20,000 miners. I'm glad capitalism saved 33.

This was a very strange post.

First, I really don't see anyone attacking Capitalism or thinking it's going to go away, so I'm not sure what the point of the WSJ editorial is. Soviet Union is gone, China and Vietnam are pretty capitalistic, it's here, it's out, it's loud and it's proud, baby.

Second though, though there may be some truth that Capitalism saved these miners, Capitalism is precisely what put them in danger. Private for profit mine ==> Capitalism baby ran this mine terribly.

What actually saved them?

Government Mining regulations.
Public schools like Colorado School of Mines, UC Berkeley's Hearst Mining, and the equivalents in Chile.
Engineers.
NASA & Military Medical research

Unions that demanded the safety chamber be built.

And the hard working efforts of the labor of the rescue workers and rescue drill teams, along with the

very much needed r&d and implementation of the company the WSJ claims was entirely responsible.

For more on mines, mine safety, and how and why mining regulations got started:

http://www.hereandnow.org/media-player/?url=http://www.hereandnow.org/2010/10/rundown-1014-2/&title=Mine%20Safety%20Under%20Scrutiny%20Around%20The%20World&segment=4&pubdate=2010-10-14

And unions have no need for profit?

The unions were created due to capitalism and the miners wanting more money.

The government created the saftey regualtions so they would have to fund fewer rescuses and spend less money - capitalism

There are only two forms of economy - capitalism and slavery

As I said to Mike earlier if you have a problem with capitalism then feel free to give up eveything capitalism has provided

somewhere above 6000 people die in Chinese mines every year alone, and the idea that China is somehow capitalistic is utter lunacy. WHO OWNS THE MINES? The Government DOES. The stat that is interesting is that per ton of caol mined China is 100X more deadly to miners than the US. Mining is dangerous, end of story. IF it is profitable for the worker than the risk may outweigh the danger, just like fishing in Alaska. But where does all that mine safety equipment come from? Where does that R&D money come from? It comes from potential reward for taking the chance. Which is what? yes, capitalism.

The nice thing about capitalism is it gives people a choice. If you live somewhere where the govt is entirely in charge you might end up being a miner when you really want to be a doctor (or vice versa). And if the govt is entirely in charge, who is going to hold it accountable if bad things happen to people in that government.

Capitalism does not equal exploitation. All economic systems are exploitative, and capitalism is no more (and often less) exploitative than others.

Russian communism often put the good of the people ahead of the good of the individual. It's no accident that Three Mile Island was not Chernobyl. As long as the people have electricity, who cares if the individual dies from radiation poisoning?

Isn't dying because of a poorly planned command economy worse than working some unpaid overtime at WalMart? But I guess it's better to die because of a rice shortage than let someone make a profit off your labor.

"If it's true mine safety records in China are deplorable and outweigh this unique and wonderful outcome in Chile, it can hardly be said capitalism is any reason for saving lives in mining"

Did you just call China 'capitalist'? OMG I fell off my chair.

I guess the apparent lack of a major decline in embarrassingly glaring ignorance during the information age, where information on anything is always a few clicks away, just reinforces that old adage that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. People don't want to be informed.