OT: Gulf Help

[Simplicity0]

Oil companies now are the tobacco companies of yesterday. They've been skewing data to downplay environmental impact and just recently (a decade ago) began coming out and admitting mistakes. The only difference is oil companies have a lot more at stake since oil companies garner the largest profits in the world. Who invests the most in 'green technology'? Oil companies, because they know oil isn't sustainable environmentally. They've been using conservatism -- you know, denial of scientific facts because it goes against their cherished religious world-view -- to their advantage.

[spinedoc]

De-regulation, or letting industry regulate themselves, has been the downfall of many of the recent calamities. And just because you have a government agency overseeing, that isn't good enough by itself. Most of the time the agency is in bed with the industry its supposed to be regulating, because in a few short years, those same regulators are looking for jobs in the same industry that they had been tasked to regulate. Normally its bad enough given the system we have with so much money in politics, but it was taken to a new level with the Bush administration. Many of the people put in charge were the biggest abusers in the first place.

My contention isn't too much government or too little, its about functional government. We need a system in which someone is watching the watchers too. Accountability in government is non-existent. Hell, facts are practically non-existent too, and not brought out by the media. Now we have 24hr cable news networks where balance is paramount over anything else. As long as they present both sides of an argument, it doesn't matter what gets said or doesn't. And, the moderator has zero responsibility to the subject matter. I digress, but the entire system is in a mess. Not just the lack of a functional government, but letting big business having too much control while sleeping through ethics class, to the fifth estate too worried about selling soda or whatever in between so called news segments. Or worse, maintaining controversy so they can keep ratings high.

Also, what we are seeing isn't true capitalism anyway, its corporate communism. We privatize the profits, but socialize the risks. And to the dude who wants to blame this on environmentalists because the rigs are so far from the shore, quit listening to Rush. Many Republican congressman have been against those platforms being close enough to be seen from the beaches. Check out the reference NIMBY, its not about party or affiliation.

[aleZ]

what we are seeing isn't true capitalism anyway, its corporate communism. We privatize the profits, but socialize the risks.

I already heard that definition somewhere, and I mostly agree with it you know even Russia's socialism wasn't true to its roots in its later days...in the end people who are in a higher class/position will do anything to maximise their gains...no matter the kind of society that is in place at the moment. That's why the so called "liberal" Obama is already in a similiar state as the old administration popularity-wise.

Oh and paragraphs are your friend 'doc, being the masochist that I am, I even read the whole shebang on a cellphone to add insult to injury

[spinedoc]

Oh and paragraphs are your friend 'doc, being the masochist that I am, I even read the whole shebang on a cellphone to add insult to injury

Sorry, I kind of got on a roll there.

[ivDT]

My contention isn't too much government or too little, its about functional government. We need a system in which someone is watching the watchers too. Accountability in government is non-existent. *snip*

i started with that idea as a garden variety left-liberal social democrat and it eventually lead to my becoming a voluntaryist. top-down, centralized forms of government will never breed the kind of accountability you're looking for.

the solution is to not have classes of watched, watcher, watched-watcher and watcher-watcher ad infinitum, but instead a society where there is no legal distinction between watcher and watched or ruler and ruled.

simple equality, iow. political power diffused down to the individual level.

anarchy.

Also, what we are seeing isn't true capitalism anyway, its corporate communism. We privatize the profits, but socialize the risks.

bingo.

And to the dude who wants to blame this on environmentalists because the rigs are so far from the shore, quit listening to Rush. Many Republican congressman have been against those platforms being close enough to be seen from the beaches. Check out the reference NIMBY, its not about party or affiliation.

here's the thing: i don't think the law bucks was talking about had a goddamn thing to do with protecting the environment. the language of "protecting the environment" was simply used because it got people to go along with it or, at the very least, not prick their ears up and ask questions.

call me a conspiracy nut if you want, but i'm of the opinion that the "no shallow drilling" law is a simple case of the regulatory state erecting an artificial barrier to entry to keep the companies without political connections out.

iow, the law was made in the interest of big oil companies, like bp, so they wouldn't have to compete with smaller oil companies or upstarts.

(say, what do you think the odds are that an upstart oil company would've been more likely to try newer, safer technologies than the established companies?)

sounds crazy, i know, but if you look closely at what is often passed off as "pro-conumser", "pro-environment" or "pro-worker" legislation, you'll invariably find the same kind of pro-big business motivations.

a guy by the name of gabriel kolko, a self-proclaimed marxist and certainly no friend of free enterprise, wrote several books about this during the 50s and 60s.

here's one infamous example:

When the sensational accusations of The Jungle became worldwide news, foreign purchases of American meat were cut in half and the meatpackers looked for new regulations to give their markets a calming sense of security. The only congressional hearings on what ultimately became the Meat Inspection Act of 1906 were held by Congressman James Wadsworth's Agriculture Committee between June 6 and 11. A careful reading of the deliberations of the Wadsworth committee and the subsequent floor debate leads inexorably to one conclusion: Knowing that a new law would allay public fears fanned by The Jungle, bring smaller competitors under regulation, and put a newly-laundered government stamp of approval on their products, the major meat packers strongly endorsed the proposed act and only quibbled over who should pay for it.

In the end, Americans got a new federal meat inspection law. The big packers got the taxpayers to pick up the entire $3 million price tag for its implementation as well as new regulations on their smaller competitors, and another myth entered the annals of anti-market dogma.

To his credit, Upton Sinclair actually opposed the law because he saw it for what it really was—a boon for the big meat packers.10 Far from a crusading and objective truth-seeker, Sinclair was a fool and a sucker who ended up being used by the very industry he hated.

and that's just one example from the early years of the american regulatory state; before they decided it was their place to regulate everything from what type of smokes we can and cannot buy to what types of fatty foods we're allowed to eat when we go out.

[spinedoc]

here's the thing: i don't think the law bucks was talking about had a goddamn thing to do with protecting the environment. the language of "protecting the environment" was simply used because it got people to go along with it or, at the very least, not prick their ears up and ask questions.

call me a conspiracy nut if you want, but i'm of the opinion that the "no shallow drilling" law is a simple case of the regulatory state erecting an artificial barrier to entry to keep the companies without political connections out.

iow, the law was made in the interest of big oil companies, like bp, so they wouldn't have to compete with smaller oil companies or upstarts.

(say, what do you think the odds are that an upstart oil company would've been more likely to try newer, safer technologies than the established companies?)

sounds crazy, i know, but if you look closely at what is often passed off as "pro-conumser", "pro-environment" or "pro-worker" legislation, you'll invariably find the same kind of pro-big business motivations.

a guy by the name of gabriel kolko, a self-proclaimed marxist and certainly no friend of free enterprise, wrote several books about this during the 50s and

Interesting angle on the usage of the pro environment language. The last administration tried some of that as well with euphemisms like the "Healthy Forests Act", and the like. I've also been thinking back to all these pro green commercials that BP was doing before the spill, ridiculous. They were also the one's who had the leak in the Alaskan pipeline a few years ago. The tube had actually rusted, and oil spilled all over ANWAR. It's funny how everyone is so afraid of government controlling their lives, but they will gladly let big business do it. Think back to what it was like before we had agencies like OSHA and Consumer Affairs, people had practically zero rights or protections. The constitution says "we the people...", not "we the corporation...".

[ivDT]

Interesting angle on the usage of the pro environment language. The last administration tried some of that as well with euphemisms like the "Healthy Forests Act", and the like. I've also been thinking back to all these pro green commercials that BP was doing before the spill, ridiculous. They were also the one's who had the leak in the Alaskan pipeline a few years ago. The tube had actually rusted, and oil spilled all over ANWAR. It's funny how everyone is so afraid of government controlling their lives, but they will gladly let big business do it.

the ability to control people implies force and/or deception. sure, oil companies can lie and lie and lie in their commercials or to the press to surprising effect, but their ability to mete out force is extremely limited (even with all that money) unless they have the government doing their bidding. (trying hard to not mention the iraq war...) that, btw, is just one aspect of the "corporate communism" you mentioned earlier.

Think back to what it was like before we had agencies like OSHA and Consumer Affairs, people had practically zero rights or protections. The constitution says "we the people...", not "we the corporation...".

none of our rights come from government. they don't come from the constitution either. if they did then they wouldn't really be rights but privileges.

no, we always have our rights--even during those times and worse--the only thing that changes is our ability to defend or assert them against those who wish to infringe upon them.

if people better understood direct action as a principle and it's superiority to government action by way of so-called "representatives" then we'd be better able to deal with rights violations whenever they arise.

another link (gratis) that i think explains this far more eloquently than i ever could: http://radgeek.com/gt/2010/05/17/the-clean-water-act-vs-clean-water/

[SevereMagic]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VfypUzx1tI&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

this won't stop the the leak, but may help the environment, and help clean up this mess...

also: http://spillfighters.com

[ivDT]

gah, why can't i keep away from this thread? i feel like a dog and this thread is my vomit.

i'm actually fine with "no regulation by the gov whatsoever" so long as the legal environment is such that people are held fully accountable for the messes they make.

I'd rather prevent a disaster from happening but that's just me

sure, we both would. i guess the point i failed to make was that self-regulation requires that people understand that they will be held accountable for the damage they do. this is superior, in my view, to government regulation in the absence of such accountability.

if we're both in favor of full restitution for damages caused then it's really a matter of government regulation versus self-regulation or non-government regulation.

You know, probably neither system would be the perfect solution: regulators may be payed to turn a blind eye and law enforcement may just be late, incompetent or too slow to act.

again, to be clear: i'm not proposing accountability instead of prevention. i want both, i'm just not in favor of the government regulating the preventative procedures or equipment or whatever else.

i've already explained elsewhere in this thread why i believe government regulation to be inferior to non-government regulation.

[PigsEatHam]

i started with that idea as a garden variety left-liberal social democrat and it eventually lead to my becoming a voluntaryist. top-down, centralized forms of government will never breed the kind of accountability you're looking for.

the solution is to not have classes of watched, watcher, watched-watcher and watcher-watcher ad infinitum, but instead a society where there is no legal distinction between watcher and watched or ruler and ruled.

simple equality, iow. political power diffused down to the individual level.

anarchy.

Two things: First, an anarchist is simply a disempowered facist, someone who wishes to impose their ideology on others but lacks the power to do so. Thus, if it can't be their way, it should be nobody's way. Or, conversely but identically, everybody's way.

Second: Volunteerism is a bane on the economy. Why pay someone, even minimum wage, slave wages, if there are misguided do-gooders who'll do the same work for free. People need to take an example from gold-digging strippers and stop giving it away.

[PigsEatHam]

As for the spill itself, it's a mess--one caused by a combination of laziness, greed, and unaccountablity.

I hope someone staunches it soon, because no matter what happens now, it's going to be a liver punch to our environment. And I use "our" to differentiate between what affects people and what affects nature. It'll hurt some marine and wildlife, too, but it'll definitely be an issue for people, one that won't get cleaned up any time soon, sadly. I just hope that our coastal towns weather this environmental catastro-hell.

[ivDT]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VfypUzx1tI&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

this won't stop the the leak, but may help the environment, and help clean up this mess...

also: http://spillfighters.com

bio-remediation ftw.

[ivDT]

i started with that idea as a garden variety left-liberal social democrat and it eventually lead to my becoming a voluntaryist. top-down, centralized forms of government will never breed the kind of accountability you're looking for.

the solution is to not have classes of watched, watcher, watched-watcher and watcher-watcher ad infinitum, but instead a society where there is no legal distinction between watcher and watched or ruler and ruled.

simple equality, iow. political power diffused down to the individual level.

anarchy.

Two things: First, an anarchist is simply a disempowered facist, someone who wishes to impose their ideology on others but lacks the power to do so. Thus, if it can't be their way, it should be nobody's way. Or, conversely but identically, everybody's way.

anarchists are disempowered fascists? lol. i'm actually at a loss for words.

Second: Volunteerism is a bane on the economy. Why pay someone, even minimum wage, slave wages, if there are misguided do-gooders who'll do the same work for free. People need to take an example from gold-digging strippers and stop giving it away.

what? i'm not against people being paid for their work. and i love strippers.

yeah, i think i need a break from this thread...

[happypedro12]

hahaha, I'm glad this thread could be so cathartic for some. I never meant for it to turn political, although I suppose there was no other direction for it to go, but I have found some links. I've been thinking that besides New Smyrna (b/c of its proximity), the next area I'm concerned for is the keys. its called http://www.keysspill.com, you can call the hotline for info. Apparently the only job for volunteers in the FL area at the moment is just like beach cleanup so that way no trash turns into toxic waste. However you can get a 24hr "class" lol for $70. Then you're certified (lol again) to clean up the oil. I kno some ppl think volunteering is misguided, but someone has to clean this mess up and it has now moved into my back yard so i'm doin it. Besides I've been to the Keys and it would be a trajedy if that wonderful place turned to S**t.


On a side note: can someone please figure out cold fusion or maximize solar power so we can get the F*!! off fossil fuels? sometimes it seems like humans live out self-fulfilling prophecies. In the words of C. Barkley "its turrrrible".