BP wants taxpayers to pay for lost oil revenues and clean up expenses.
#1 Donkey
a new platform.
They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
they have wanted for years.
First Post
So what? Are you afraid that your new master Obama is going to grant
their wishes?
Since he is your end all do all in regards to the great leader you all
constantly tell us he is then BP is just spinning their wheels.
So why the concern hotshot?
Bert Hyman
"#1 Donkey" <number_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
> they have wanted for years.
So, they'd have done things differently if only there had been someone
around to force them?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
John Galt
> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> a new platform.
BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
What is about about disasters that brings you ghouls out of the woodwork?
And never a thought about the 11 men that died out there. Money, money,
money, all the time with you people.
JG
Joe Cool
Not according to CNN.
Post a link for a cite or STFU, asshole.
Christopher Helms
> On Sat, 1 May 2010 08:37:05 -0700 (PDT), "#1 Donkey"
>
> >BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> >a new platform.
>
> >They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
> >they have wanted for years.
>
> So what? Are you afraid that your new master Obama is going to grant
> their wishes?
> Since he is your end all do all in regards to the great leader you all
> constantly tell us he is then BP is just spinning their wheels.
> So why the concern hotshot?
Why doesn't this sort of thing bother conservatives? You don't owe
those greedy cocksuckers a living any more than liberals do. If their
privately owned platform explodes and sinks and they have to eat the
cost of containment, clean up and lost revenues, that's their tough
shit, not yours. Or mine. I don't know when the conservative movement
got it into its tiny little head that private corporations shouldn't
have to pay taxes on their earnings but should be allowed to
confiscate citizens' taxes to cover the costs of their losses, but
it's an idea that needs to be taken out back, shot and buried in
unconsecrated ground.
First Post
Evasion noted. Where did I say that the taxpayers should and will pay
for shit in this regard.
Again, why do you believe that your precious government is going to do
as BP asks.
Seems you're the ones that believe they have power over the
government. They can only take what the government gives in this
case. So why do you believe that Obama is going to "bail" them out
simply because they ask?
i can ask the government to pay all of my bills for me as well but I
have enough sense to know that it won't happen. Do you also worry
about that as well?
Not to mention there is no evidence whatsoever that your concerns will
come to fruition.
So no I'm not worried about it since Obama is so anti corporate and
for the people. Or is all that crap you all have preached to us about
him total bullshit? Is he just another "corporate shill"?
Deport Palin to Russia
"First Post" <LyingL...@reInvalid.org> wrote in message
news:puiot5hu9gojq269q...@4ax.com...
Holding Bush/Cheney/Palin/FOX News responsible this time is imperative. The
ignorance of republicans is astounding.
Billary
Obama and his minions sabotaged that oil rig to gain political
leverage in the battle over Drill baby drill. They had the means,
motives and opportunity to do so. And they stood to gain the most as a
result of this tragedy. Sometimes, when it walks like a duck and
quacks like a duck. It's a duck. You lefties have been suckered by
your own puppet masters.
Frank Pittel
: On May 1, 10:43??am, First Post <LyingLefti...@reInvalid.org> wrote:
: > On Sat, 1 May 2010 08:37:05 -0700 (PDT), "#1 Donkey"
: >
: > <number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > >BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
: > >a new platform.
: >
: > >They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
: > >they have wanted for years.
: >
: > their wishes?
: > Since he is your end all do all in regards to the great leader you all
: > constantly tell us he is then BP is just spinning their wheels.
: > So why the concern hotshot?
: Why doesn't this sort of thing bother conservatives? You don't owe
: those greedy cocksuckers a living any more than liberals do. If their
: privately owned platform explodes and sinks and they have to eat the
: cost of containment, clean up and lost revenues, that's their tough
: shit, not yours. Or mine. I don't know when the conservative movement
: got it into its tiny little head that private corporations shouldn't
: have to pay taxes on their earnings but should be allowed to
: confiscate citizens' taxes to cover the costs of their losses, but
: it's an idea that needs to be taken out back, shot and buried in
: unconsecrated ground.
A lot of blabber and spewing of hate but I still haven't seen any credible cite
proving the claim that BP wanted the fed to pay for the cleanup and rebuild the
oil rig.
--
-------------------
Keep working dumbo needs the money
Frank Pittel
: On Sat, 1 May 2010 08:57:59 -0700 (PDT), Christopher Helms
: <Chrish...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: >On May 1, 10:43??am, First Post <LyingLefti...@reInvalid.org> wrote:
: >> On Sat, 1 May 2010 08:37:05 -0700 (PDT), "#1 Donkey"
: >>
: >> <number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >> >BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
: >> >a new platform.
: >>
: >> >They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
: >> >they have wanted for years.
: >>
: >> So what? ??Are you afraid that your new master Obama is going to grant
I've only read a claim by a looney tune brain dead lying fascist loser lib dem
with no crediblity that BP wants the feds to pay for the cleanup and rebuild the
oil rig. Until credible evidence is provided that claim made by the OP is
assumed to be a lie.
Lamont Cranston
> On May 1, 11:37 am, "#1 Donkey"<number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>> a new platform.
>>
>> They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
>> they have wanted for years.
>
> Obama and his minions sabotaged that oil rig to gain political
> leverage in the battle over Drill baby drill.
ROTF L! You are living proof that the brain degenerates as it gets
older, Shill. Keep the chuckles coming, dumbfuck!
RichTravsky
>
> #1 Donkey wrote:
> > BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> > a new platform.
>
> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>
> What is about about disasters that brings you ghouls out of the woodwork?
>
> And never a thought about the 11 men that died out there. Money, money,
> money, all the time with you people.
Please pass that on to the states and the people therein who face billions
in losses.
RT
RichTravsky
You probably believe in the death panels too.
HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHA
RT
John Galt
That human lives are more important than money?
I will indeed. And no one of character will dispute it.
JG
>
> RT
John Galt
Always happens. And others open to replace them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
the major forces behind these reorganizations.
The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
kill off future projects.
JG
Billary
wrote:
Yet morons like you blamed countless conspiracies on Bush. How do you
like a taste of your own medicine. I really enjoy hooking idiots like
you.
Billary
Yet morons like you blamed countless conspiracies on Bush. How do you
John Galt
> On Sun, 02 May 2010 05:50:09 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
>> kill off future projects.
>
> republican politicians----including idiots like the Bush Family.
What regulations, specifically, are you talking about. Could you please
provide a list? (Just to make sure you're not, as usual, blowing smoke.)
>
> People like you who are too stupid to realize that it's OUR oil,
> pumped by a FORIEGN company---who flood the policymakers with money
> extracted from OUR resources, who, after screwing things up, make US
> pay for the cleanup they caused.
I suppose you missed this, in that you don't seem to read much:
http://skynews.com.au/business/article.aspx?id=457077
Sorry to embarrass you again.
JG
The Bummah in '12@whitehouse.org Obummah's Katrina: TheGulf Oil disaster
"First Post" <LyingL...@reInvalid.org> wrote in message
news:puiot5hu9gojq269q...@4ax.com...
>=============
Damn, you really KO'd that Liberal Obama Dick Sucking Asshole ! I'll call
the Coroner.
End Republicanism
It's going to cost American tax payers some $2 billion, all because
the Republican corporation saved themselves $500,000 in safety
equipment that would have shut down and eliminated the $2 billion
in damages the idiot rightards caused.
Sarah Palin needs to be choked in oil.
---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
End Republicanism
>On Sat, 1 May 2010 08:37:05 -0700 (PDT), "#1 Donkey"
><number_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>a new platform.
>>They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
>>they have wanted for years.
>So what? Are you afraid that your new master Obama is going to grant their wishes?
Your President Obama is just another Republinazi traitor, ya frothing
idiot. He's another corporate shill working for YOUR masters.
End Republicanism
The evasion is *yours*, cunt. Why didn't you or any of your America-hating
rightarded tea baggers scream bloody murder about what these BP mother
fuckers have been doing to us tax payers?
Well, cunt? Did Christopher shut your yap for you?
End Republicanism
>In news:dfcaecc2-fb07-428b...@42g2000prb.googlegroups.com
>"#1 Donkey" <number_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
>> they have wanted for years.
>So, they'd have done things differently if only there had been someone
>around to force them?
Actually yes, if adults had been in charge the platform would have had
a much needed half million dollar safety suit of valves that would have
cut the flow of oil after the initial blow out which would have saved
America tax payers $2 billion.
End Republicanism
>#1 Donkey wrote:
>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>> a new platform.
> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
What, you think that the lobster, clam, and fish industry is all going
to be paid for their lost jobs, their lost lives? Are you really so
fucking Republidiot that you actually believe it?
End Republicanism
>On May 1, 11:37=A0am, "#1 Donkey" <number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>> a new platform.
>> They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
>> they have wanted for years.
>Obama and his minions sabotaged that oil rig to gain political
>leverage in the battle over Drill baby drill.
You insane cunt, Obama is another Bushite corporate traitor who is
*in(favor* of raping the planet for his corporate masters. Obama is
entirely in favor of Drill Baby Drill, you idiot.
John Galt
> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>> a new platform.
>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>
> Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
Do you have *reason* to believe that they will not? (Keep in mind that
strong emotion is the enemy of reason. I think you could benefit from
that counsel.)
>
> What, you think that the lobster, clam, and fish industry is all going
> to be paid for their lost jobs, their lost lives? Are you really so
> fucking Republidiot that you actually believe it?
I think that neither you nor I know how BP's statement will play out in
practice over time. What I know is that the estimated damages are well
within the power of BP's insurers and BP's bank account to pay.
But, the fact that the statement by BP is given is an excellent start,
and people of CHARACTER (you do not seem to be such a person, but
perhaps you'll surprise me) will hold their criticism until evidence
indicates the contrary.
JG
End Superstition
>End Republicanism wrote:
>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>>> a new platform.
>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>> Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
> Do you have *reason* to believe that they will not?
How many times do Republican corporate rapists have to fuck you up
the ass before you get it in to your rightarded head that that's
what they do? Seven? Twenty? How many times, rightard?
John Galt
> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> End Republicanism wrote:
>>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>>>> a new platform.
>>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>>> Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
>> Do you have *reason* to believe that they will not?
>
> How many times do Republican corporate rapists have to fuck you up
STFU and answer the question, and not with another question. DO YOU HAVE
REASON TO BELIEVE THEY WILL NOT?
(BP's down another 7% today. Getting VERY close to a screaming buy.)
JG
Gary DeWaay
kad...@gmail.com says...
> > How many times do Republican corporate rapists have to fuck you up
>
> STFU and answer the question, and not with another question. DO YOU HAVE
> REASON TO BELIEVE THEY WILL NOT?
>
> (BP's down another 7% today. Getting VERY close to a screaming buy.)
>
>
Our Gulf gets destroyed and "Galt" here is all giddy because he see's an
opportunity to make some money.
Fuck you asshole.
Go shove your money up your ass as you suck more corporation cock...
--
How's That Oily Drilly Thing Working Out For Ya?*
-Digby
End Superstition
>End Superstition wrote:
>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> End Republicanism wrote:
>>>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>>>>> a new platform.
>>>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>>>> Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
>>> Do you have *reason* to believe that they will not?
>> How many times do Republican corporate rapists have to fuck you up
>STFU and answer the question
Woops! The rightarded cunt couldn't come up with a number. Guess
that means you're one of these rightarded buttfucks that take it
up the ass endlessly and still believe your corporate masters
regardless.
John Galt
> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> End Superstition wrote:
>>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> End Republicanism wrote:
>>>>> John Galt <kad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>>>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>>>>>> a new platform.
>>>>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>>>>> Are you so rightarded that you actually believe them? Seriously?
>>>> Do you have *reason* to believe that they will not?
>>> How many times do Republican corporate rapists have to fuck you up
>> STFU and answer the question
>
> Woops! The rightarded cunt couldn't come up with a number.
You didn't ask for a number. Better have your mother re-read your post
to you.
Guess
> that means you're one of these rightarded buttfucks that take it
> up the ass endlessly and still believe your corporate masters
> regardless.
Nice to see you're an expert on snark. You obviously don't know shit
about anything that matters.
JG
RichTravsky
>
> RichTravsky wrote:
> > John Galt wrote:
> >> RichTravsky wrote:
> >>> John Galt wrote:
> >>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
> >>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> >>>>> a new platform.
> >>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
> >>>>
> >>>> What is about about disasters that brings you ghouls out of the woodwork?
> >>>>
> >>>> And never a thought about the 11 men that died out there. Money, money,
> >>>> money, all the time with you people.
> >>> Please pass that on to the states and the people therein who face billions
> >>> in losses.
> >> That human lives are more important than money?
> >>
> >> I will indeed. And no one of character will dispute it.
> >
> > Go for it. Be sure to be there as they shutter their businesses.
>
> Always happens. And others open to replace them.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
Ah, excuses for big business.
> The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
> for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
> the major forces behind these reorganizations.
We're talking about an environmental disaster.
> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
> kill off future projects.
It could take years to recover from the spill. Alaska has yet to recover
two decades later.
RT
RichTravsky
>
> Fee...@Vetzer.com wrote:
> > On Sun, 02 May 2010 05:50:09 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
> >> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
> >> kill off future projects.
> >
> > The regulations were blocked by the influence of billions to
> > republican politicians----including idiots like the Bush Family.
>
> What regulations, specifically, are you talking about. Could you please
> provide a list? (Just to make sure you're not, as usual, blowing smoke.)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html
Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device
> > People like you who are too stupid to realize that it's OUR oil,
> > pumped by a FORIEGN company---who flood the policymakers with money
> > extracted from OUR resources, who, after screwing things up, make US
> > pay for the cleanup they caused.
>
> I suppose you missed this, in that you don't seem to read much:
>
> http://skynews.com.au/business/article.aspx?id=457077
This is an essentially blank page.
RichTravsky
>
> On May 2, 12:11 am, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > Billary wrote:
> >
> > > On May 1, 11:37 am, "#1 Donkey" <number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> > > > a new platform.
> >
> > > > They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
> > > > they have wanted for years.
> >
> > > Obama and his minions sabotaged that oil rig to gain political
> > > leverage in the battle over Drill baby drill. They had the means,
> > > motives and opportunity to do so. And they stood to gain the most as a
> > > result of this tragedy. Sometimes, when it walks like a duck and
> > > quacks like a duck. It's a duck. You lefties have been suckered by
> > > your own puppet masters.
> >
> > You probably believe in the death panels too.
> >
> > HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHA
>
> like a taste of your own medicine. I really enjoy hooking idiots like
> you.
You mean you enjoy looking like a fool.
RT
John Galt
> John Galt wrote:
>> Fee...@Vetzer.com wrote:
>>> On Sun, 02 May 2010 05:50:09 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
>>>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
>>>> kill off future projects.
>>> The regulations were blocked by the influence of billions to
>>> republican politicians----including idiots like the Bush Family.
>> What regulations, specifically, are you talking about. Could you please
>> provide a list? (Just to make sure you're not, as usual, blowing smoke.)
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html
> Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device
"The oil well spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico didn't have a
remote-control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing
nations as last-resort protection against underwater spills."
OK, so out of the 100 nations or so that drill for all, 2% require this
device. And the US is the odd one because we don't require it?
The US was conforming to world standards vis a vis this device.
>
>>> People like you who are too stupid to realize that it's OUR oil,
>>> pumped by a FORIEGN company---who flood the policymakers with money
>>> extracted from OUR resources, who, after screwing things up, make US
>>> pay for the cleanup they caused.
>> I suppose you missed this, in that you don't seem to read much:
>>
>> http://skynews.com.au/business/article.aspx?id=457077
>
> This is an essentially blank page.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-0504-oil-spill-20100504,0,3502098.story
JG
John Galt
> John Galt wrote:
>> RichTravsky wrote:
>>> John Galt wrote:
>>>> RichTravsky wrote:
>>>>> John Galt wrote:
>>>>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
>>>>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
>>>>>>> a new platform.
>>>>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is about about disasters that brings you ghouls out of the woodwork?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And never a thought about the 11 men that died out there. Money, money,
>>>>>> money, all the time with you people.
>>>>> Please pass that on to the states and the people therein who face billions
>>>>> in losses.
>>>> That human lives are more important than money?
>>>>
>>>> I will indeed. And no one of character will dispute it.
>>> Go for it. Be sure to be there as they shutter their businesses.
>> Always happens. And others open to replace them.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
>
> Ah, excuses for big business.
It's nothing of the sort. The point is that people don't sit around and
cry in their beers while their families starve. They find other ways to
make a living.
>
>> The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
>> for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
>> the major forces behind these reorganizations.
>
> We're talking about an environmental disaster.
We are indeed. And it wil be cleaned, and we will move on. We're humans.
We fuck up and then we fix it. I don't know about you, but I'm very
pleased that we know HOW to fix it.
Oil is nasty shit, but unfortunately, we can't live without it.
>
>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
>> kill off future projects.
>
> It could take years to recover from the spill. Alaska has yet to recover
> two decades later.
Quite so. However, would you rather walk 20 miles to work? Solar, wind,
nuclear, geothermal, and hydro won't power your car. The only things
that can do that are (1) gasoline, and (2) natural gas.
JG
Billary
How many conspiracies did you blame on Bush Travesty? A dozen or
more. You're an idiot. How do you like it now that the shoe is on
the other foot?
RichTravsky
>
> On May 5, 1:32 am, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > Billary wrote:
> >
> > > On May 2, 12:11 am, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > > > Billary wrote:
> >
> > > > > On May 1, 11:37 am, "#1 Donkey" <number_1_don...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> > > > > > a new platform.
> >
> > > > > > They blame lax laws and enforcement of enviromental standards that
> > > > > > they have wanted for years.
> >
> > > > > Obama and his minions sabotaged that oil rig to gain political
> > > > > leverage in the battle over Drill baby drill. They had the means,
> > > > > motives and opportunity to do so. And they stood to gain the most as a
> > > > > result of this tragedy. Sometimes, when it walks like a duck and
> > > > > quacks like a duck. It's a duck. You lefties have been suckered by
> > > > > your own puppet masters.
> >
> > > > You probably believe in the death panels too.
> >
> > > > HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHA
> >
> > > Yet morons like you blamed countless conspiracies on Bush. How do you
> > > like a taste of your own medicine. I really enjoy hooking idiots like
> > > you.
> >
> > You mean you enjoy looking like a fool.
>
Zero. The truth was sufficient without embellishment.
RichTravsky
> RichTravsky wrote:
> > John Galt wrote:
> >> RichTravsky wrote:
> >>> John Galt wrote:
> >>>> RichTravsky wrote:
> >>>>> John Galt wrote:
> >>>>>> #1 Donkey wrote:
> >>>>>>> BP wants the taxpayers to pay all expenses and lost revenues and build
> >>>>>>> a new platform.
> >>>>>> BP has already stated that they intend to be responsible for all costs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What is about about disasters that brings you ghouls out of the woodwork?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And never a thought about the 11 men that died out there. Money, money,
> >>>>>> money, all the time with you people.
> >>>>> Please pass that on to the states and the people therein who face billions
> >>>>> in losses.
> >>>> That human lives are more important than money?
> >>>>
> >>>> I will indeed. And no one of character will dispute it.
> >>> Go for it. Be sure to be there as they shutter their businesses.
> >> Always happens. And others open to replace them.
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
> >
> > Ah, excuses for big business.
>
> It's nothing of the sort. The point is that people don't sit around and
Yes, it is.
> cry in their beers while their families starve. They find other ways to
> make a living.
We're not talking a few families. We're talking about a lot of families
and businesses, with effects beyond the region
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/05/05/oil.spill.seafood.restaurants/index.html
...
Depending on the season, about 40 percent of the nation's commercial seafood
harvests come from the Gulf Coast, according to NOAA data from 2008.
...
> >> The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
> >> for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
> >> the major forces behind these reorganizations.
> >
> > We're talking about an environmental disaster.
>
> We are indeed. And it wil be cleaned, and we will move on. We're humans.
Two decades later, Alaska is still cleaning.
> We fuck up and then we fix it. I don't know about you, but I'm very
> pleased that we know HOW to fix it.
Please inform Alaska about that...
> Oil is nasty shit, but unfortunately, we can't live without it.
> >
> >> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
> >> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
> >> kill off future projects.
> >
> > It could take years to recover from the spill. Alaska has yet to recover
> > two decades later.
>
> Quite so. However, would you rather walk 20 miles to work? Solar, wind,
> nuclear, geothermal, and hydro won't power your car. The only things
> that can do that are (1) gasoline, and (2) natural gas.
Ah, the excuses kick in.
RichTravsky
> RichTravsky wrote:
> > John Galt wrote:
> >> Fee...@Vetzer.com wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 02 May 2010 05:50:09 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
> >>>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
> >>>> kill off future projects.
> >>> The regulations were blocked by the influence of billions to
> >>> republican politicians----including idiots like the Bush Family.
> >> What regulations, specifically, are you talking about. Could you please
> >> provide a list? (Just to make sure you're not, as usual, blowing smoke.)
> >
> > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html
> > Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device
>
> "The oil well spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico didn't have a
> remote-control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing
> nations as last-resort protection against underwater spills."
>
> OK, so out of the 100 nations or so that drill for all, 2% require this
> device. And the US is the odd one because we don't require it?
>
> The US was conforming to world standards vis a vis this device.
Which has nothing to do with anything. What's relevant is they weren't
implemented
http://www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2010/04/dick-cheney-caused-gulf-oil-disaster.html
...
But as Plaintiff's lawyer Michael Papantonio - suing BP concerning on
behalf of fisherman and local businesses hurt by the oil spill - just
revealed, Dick Cheney is partly largely responsible. As summarized by
Eric at Daily Kos:
Mike Papantonio [said] An 'acoustic switch' would have prevented this
catastrophe - it's a failsafe that shuts the flow of oil off at the
source - they cost only about half a million dollars each, and are
required in off-shore drilling platforms in most of the world...except
for the United States. This was one of the new deregulations devised
by Dick Cheney ...
Video follows the text.
John Galt
> John Galt wrote:
>> RichTravsky wrote:
>>> John Galt wrote:
>>>> Fee...@Vetzer.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 02 May 2010 05:50:09 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
>>>>>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
>>>>>> kill off future projects.
>>>>> The regulations were blocked by the influence of billions to
>>>>> republican politicians----including idiots like the Bush Family.
>>>> What regulations, specifically, are you talking about. Could you please
>>>> provide a list? (Just to make sure you're not, as usual, blowing smoke.)
>>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html
>>> Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device
>> "The oil well spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico didn't have a
>> remote-control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing
>> nations as last-resort protection against underwater spills."
>>
>> OK, so out of the 100 nations or so that drill for all, 2% require this
>> device. And the US is the odd one because we don't require it?
>>
>> The US was conforming to world standards vis a vis this device.
>
> Which has nothing to do with anything. What's relevant is they weren't
To you, perhaps. To others, perhaps not. Your POV is not in line with
our own legal system.
In a civil complaint, the courts generally ask if the defendant took all
reasonable steps to prevent whateverthehellitis they are being sued for.
The plaintiff, of course, would prefer the court to ask if the defendant
to *all possible steps* to prevent, because they'd win rather easily
under that test.
If the world standards for drilling safety were adhered to by BP, then
BP has a very strong argument for complaints to be dismissed.
>
>
> http://www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2010/04/dick-cheney-caused-gulf-oil-disaster.html
> ...
> But as Plaintiff's lawyer Michael Papantonio - suing BP concerning on
> behalf of fisherman and local businesses hurt by the oil spill - just
> revealed, Dick Cheney is partly largely responsible. As summarized by
> Eric at Daily Kos:
I especially like this emerging talking point, and it's not surprising
that the KosKiddies and Ed Shultz are coming up with this latest lie:
1) Acoustic switches were never required on rigs in the US waters,
anywhere. Logically then, they could never be DE regulated, since they
had never been required.
2) The courts have ruled that the proceedings of the Energy Task Force
are (rightly or wrongly) privileged. So, it is impossible for anyone to
know (outside of hearsay) if the acoustic switch matter was taken up
and, if so, how and why it was rejected; and thus this Papantonio is lying.
3) 'Bats wanting to lay this on Cheney first have to show (a) that they
have been concerned about this acoustic switch for some time -- and
aren't just trying for political hay, and if they were, then (b) explain
why Obama/Salazar didn't implement the regulation by presidential order
sometime in the last two years.
The reason why the serious Democrats aren't raising this issue as any
big deal is because they don't want to answer the question "So, if you
KNEW this acoustic switch reg was very important, why the hell didn't
the administration make it a requirement?"
Your call. Fact is that even IF Cheney screwed it up, Obama had two
years to fix it.
Obama owns it.
JG
John Galt
Didn't say anything to disagree. The POINT is that if I'm a fisherman,
and my fishing range gets covered with oil, I move to another town and
open up a Subway or something. I don't sit around beer-crying.
> ...
>
>>>> The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
>>>> for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
>>>> the major forces behind these reorganizations.
>>> We're talking about an environmental disaster.
>> We are indeed. And it wil be cleaned, and we will move on. We're humans.
>
> Two decades later, Alaska is still cleaning.
And it may take two more.
>
>> We fuck up and then we fix it. I don't know about you, but I'm very
>> pleased that we know HOW to fix it.
>
> Please inform Alaska about that...
I think they know it, AND about how long the process is. But, I'll be
glad to repeat it to anyone you want. Just because the truth hits
somebody emotionally hard doesn't mean it's not the truth.
>
>> Oil is nasty shit, but unfortunately, we can't live without it.
>>>> The biggest destroyer of businesses and employment due to this will not
>>>> be the spill itself; it will be the poorly-designed regulations that
>>>> kill off future projects.
>>> It could take years to recover from the spill. Alaska has yet to recover
>>> two decades later.
>> Quite so. However, would you rather walk 20 miles to work? Solar, wind,
>> nuclear, geothermal, and hydro won't power your car. The only things
>> that can do that are (1) gasoline, and (2) natural gas.
>
> Ah, the excuses kick in.
Yes, hard science always becomes an "excuse" when it's inconvenient for
a 'bat argument.
If you have a way to pull all the 18 wheelers in the country with an
alternative fuel, start a company and get rich. As of today, there are
precisely **two** fuel sources which can be (a) mobile, (b) exist in
sufficient quantity, and (c) release sufficient BTUs when burned to move
heavy loads. They are gasoline and natural gas.
If you have another that you prefer, please post proof of its existence
and, if it currently doesn't exist in sufficient quantity to move the
fleet, provide estimates of how long it will take to create sufficient
quantity for the fleet and the time expected to build out the delivery
infrastructure. Estimates of its cost per mile in comparison with gas
and nat gas are also necessary to make sure that the fuel is economical
an does not kick the cost of shipped fuel so high that food shortages
are created.
JG
First Post
wrote:
The crab fisherman in the Arctic travel thousands of miles.
When they are not crabbing the, the rest of the year they spend
fishing elsewhere for White , Cod etc.
Sword fisherman and Lobster men go hundreds of miles out off the New
England coast.
Shrimpers, comparatively speaking have it pretty easy as far as
distance is concerned in the Gulf.
And there will be some industrious and determined enough to go way out
and find shrimp. Just expect it to cost a lot more at the store.
That's one of the things I've never understood about those folks. They
think they can just demand something and someone will shit it for
them. Like demanding a cure for AIDS and expecting someone just go
"OK, here."
The oil companies would be the first to jump on something cheaper to
get and less likely to cause the mess in the Gulf. But the ones
screaming the loudest about an alternative want to believe that the
oil companies are intentionally going after an expensive, hard to get
to, hard to process compared to a lot of others like alcohol, that can
cost them billions with one accident just so they can pollute the
world and make 2 cents a gallon profit..
John Galt
Or, if the government decides to invest it in, it will suddenly become
useful and wonderful.
Unlike the climate change debate, the science behind all this is pretty
simple physics. A vehicle has to be able to carry around with it
something that goes boom with enough force to drive a crankshaft. Motors
that don't go boom (electrics) don't generate enough energy to move the
crankshaft.
> The oil companies would be the first to jump on something cheaper to
> get and less likely to cause the mess in the Gulf.
Yes. Exxon is investing in the one source that looks like it MIGHT work
-- algae biodiesel -- but scaling the production of that stuff into the
quantities we need is a problem still to be solved.
But the ones
> screaming the loudest about an alternative want to believe that the
> oil companies are intentionally going after an expensive, hard to get
> to, hard to process compared to a lot of others like alcohol, that can
> cost them billions with one accident just so they can pollute the
> world and make 2 cents a gallon profit..
Yea, there's little rationale behind this thinking. The oil majors,
which are one of the best run companies on the planet, are certainly an
easy target for criticism and ripe for conspiracy theories.
Let the criticism run. I enjoy the annual repartee when Congress calls
the oil majors' CEO's in for the annual photo op. Congress throws up a
load of these accusations, the CEO's (using polite terms) tell them to
fuck off, Congress then gives interviews to the media about what sort of
regulations they want to propose, and nothing ever happens, BECAUSE the
government realizes that Main Street needs the oil majors a lot more
than they need the government.
JG
John Galt
> On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:04:11 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> If the world standards for drilling safety were adhered to by BP, then
>> BP has a very strong argument for complaints to be dismissed.
>
> stupid fuckwit.
Do you? Let's hear it. (I;m sure this will be instructive.)
>
> WE (the people) WILL be paying for the entire cost of this massive
> disaster----not "BP"
>
> The Price of Oil---even if the price of a barrel of oil goes up
> $1---will cause BP's profits to cover the loss of any "fine".
You're math challenged. Let me help.
1) The blowout occurred on April 22. The price of OIL that day was 26.57.
2) Today, with the nature of the disaster more clearly understood, and
with the Moron-in-Chief ordering reviews of all US platforms which will
disrupt production, the price of OIL has dropped to 24.25 as of this
morning.
>
> Stupid fuckwit.
You've been smacked down using data. The price of oil was expected to
rise over time since before this disaster. If and when it actually DOES
increase, it will be up to you to do the math and show us how much of a
component the BP platform disaster has on the overall price increase
(compared to other factors such as political unrest, etc.)
But, you'll just call names and not do any intellectually rigorous work,
won't you? :-)
JG
>
John Galt
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 10:15:12 -0500, John Galt <kad...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Stupid fuckwit.
>> You've been smacked down using data.
>
> existence
Read data. Ignore it. Never dispute it. Just change you e-mail and
repeat the refuted nonsense.
Standard response you use whenever you've been tanked.
JG
>
> The claim still stands
>
> No matter what BP does, or does not do, YOU (and the public) pay for
> the fucking mess they made
>
> The addition(al) price (if applicable) will ADD to BP's profit, if
> not, their profit will suffer very little.
>
RichTravsky
Actually, your POV is not in line since what the world is doing or has done
will not matter when BP is sued.
> In a civil complaint, the courts generally ask if the defendant took all
> reasonable steps to prevent whateverthehellitis they are being sued for.
> The plaintiff, of course, would prefer the court to ask if the defendant
> to *all possible steps* to prevent, because they'd win rather easily
> under that test.
Luckily, their lawyers would ask that question.
> If the world standards for drilling safety were adhered to by BP, then
> BP has a very strong argument for complaints to be dismissed.
That's a strong argument? Why? How does that excuse them?
RichTravsky
Actually, I did. It went over your head.
> and my fishing range gets covered with oil, I move to another town and
> open up a Subway or something. I don't sit around beer-crying.
So what happens when that happens to a whole region????? They ALL open
Subways? Your capacity to make excuses for BP is astounding.
> > ...
> >
> >>>> The process of one set of industries giving way to others has gone on
> >>>> for the entire scope of human history. Disasters have always been one of
> >>>> the major forces behind these reorganizations.
> >>> We're talking about an environmental disaster.
> >> We are indeed. And it wil be cleaned, and we will move on. We're humans.
> >
> > Two decades later, Alaska is still cleaning.
>
> And it may take two more.
So much for "we know HOW to fix it"...
> >> We fuck up and then we fix it. I don't know about you, but I'm very
> >> pleased that we know HOW to fix it.
> >
> > Please inform Alaska about that...
>
> I think they know it, AND about how long the process is. But, I'll be
> glad to repeat it to anyone you want. Just because the truth hits
> somebody emotionally hard doesn't mean it's not the truth.
I'm sure they'll feel ever so much better about it now. As they continue
to spend time and resources cleaning...
RichTravsky
Ah. Another win for the consumer.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008912109_exxonherring24m.html
That's one of the things I've never understood about you folks. The oil
companies will keep doing the same ol same ol and will have to be dragged
kicking and screaming into facing reality. And that reality is get
off the oil habit.