Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Article from the Chicago Sun-Times

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
It should not be the building code's position, nor should it be the 
structural engineer's position, whether or not it is economical to provide 
safety in a structure.  It should be our position to provide safety 
economically.

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Scott Maxwell wrote:

. > Money.  Money.  And more money.  It makes the world go around.

. > Both sides want the requirements so that it is THEIR product that must be
. > used, which means they make more money.

. > And in case you propose that the requirements could require both, keep in
. > mind that such a proposal usually brings in a third party (i.e. building
. > owners) that will complain that they are being required to spend more
. > money.

. > Thus, money.  Money.  Money.

. > Regards,

. > Scott
. > Ypsilanti, MI


. > On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Roger Turk wrote:

>
> I don't see why there are people on two sides of a fence arguing this
> question.
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********