PDA

View Full Version : Environment What is the crazy neolibertarian solution to the oil spill problem?


banyon
06-02-2010, 06:44 PM
I was just thinking, though I've heard a lot of criticism and hyped up fears of socialization and nationalization, but I haven't hear what the alternative is here.

mlyonsd
06-02-2010, 06:48 PM
Make it so painful for an oil company to screw up they won't. If that's socialization or nationalization so be it.

KC native
06-02-2010, 07:03 PM
http://memegenerator.net/Sir-Courage-Wolf-Esquire/ImageMacro/1254136/Sir-Courage-Wolf-Esquire-It-is-imperative-there-is-less-regulation-fish-will-evolve-and-refine-oil-and-market-it.jpg

Taco John
06-02-2010, 07:04 PM
No company has a right to pollute. Mlyonsd has it absolutely right. Make it so painful for an oil company - or anyone at all for that matter - to infringe on another's life or property, that they go the extra mile to ensure that they never have to face it. And prosecute INDIVIDUALS to the full extent of the law, rather than leaving the responsibility solely with the social organization itself (that's all a corporation is: a social organization with legal standing and liability cusion).

I don't agree that the government should own BP. That should be left to what their books will support after the justice system is through with them. Make an example of them, and sell their equipment off to others. Nationalizing should not be an option. Liquidation absolutely should be an option.

Ensuring liquidation is the government's job, not purchasing and propping up.

healthpellets
06-02-2010, 07:06 PM
i don't think there's a relationship between a political philosophy and any ideas to clean up the oil spilling in to the Gulf.

nor do i think that any political philosophy would prevent such a disaster.

however, one of the reasons, as i understand it, that this is such a difficult problem to solve is that the well is so deep, some 5000 miles from the surface. the reason, also as i understand it, that the reason that shallow water drilling is prohibited is due to environmental concerns. so it seems that drilling in more shallow water may solve some future problems.

as for solving future problems, i don't think there is an answer. however, should this disaster bring BP to the brink of extinction, i believe they should be allowed to expire. there should be no "bailout".

Taco John
06-02-2010, 07:09 PM
There will be a bailout, but they'll call it something else. All of those resources will be gathered in one place, and government is not going to have the willpower to liquidate it and let it get out of its grasp. It'll probably be nationalized and sold to a union or something. Who knows. But what I do know is that the "solution" will involve taxing us more in order to cover the costs of the scheme.

banyon
06-02-2010, 07:24 PM
Make it so painful for an oil company to screw up they won't. If that's socialization or nationalization so be it.

Yeah, that's the reasonable, practical position, that's not the one I'm looking for.

banyon
06-02-2010, 07:27 PM
No company has a right to pollute. Mlyonsd has it absolutely right. Make it so painful for an oil company - or anyone at all for that matter - to infringe on another's life or property, that they go the extra mile to ensure that they never have to face it. And prosecute INDIVIDUALS to the full extent of the law, rather than leaving the responsibility solely with the social organization itself (that's all a corporation is: a social organization with legal standing and liability cusion).

I don't agree that the government should own BP. That should be left to what their books will support after the justice system is through with them. Make an example of them, and sell their equipment off to others. Nationalizing should not be an option. Liquidation absolutely should be an option.

Ensuring liquidation is the government's job, not purchasing and propping up.

You misunderstood my question and it was poorly phrased (we've already had the discussion about magic class action lawsuits that are quickly and easily available to ordinary people).

What I mean is what is the position about to do RIGHT NOW. What do we do about the giant, gushing ridiculously destructive continuous plume of oil shooting into the Gulf?

HonestChieffan
06-02-2010, 07:46 PM
Let Engineers and experts in the necessary specialties work without a bunch of politicians interfering. Give them whatever resources they need to successfully stem the flow or eliminate it.


And ask a couple movie producers what they think?

healthpellets
06-02-2010, 07:56 PM
oh oh! i forgot. invite a top physicist to a meeting with the Dept. of Energy to discuss possible solutions to the oil spill. then dismiss the scientist because he made public statements about his opinions on homosexuality. fail.

banyon
06-02-2010, 07:58 PM
Let Engineers and experts in the necessary specialties work without a bunch of politicians interfering. Give them whatever resources they need to successfully stem the flow or eliminate it.


And ask a couple movie producers what they think?

Isn't that what's being done? What has been the substantial interference?

How are they doing so far?

HonestChieffan
06-02-2010, 08:07 PM
Isn't that what's being done? What has been the substantial interference?

How are they doing so far?

I think so.

Not too well but it seems they are working as hard as they can and doing as many things as they can humanly do. They are the ones who will have to fix it if it is to be fixed. Its Not like they have an example of how the last pipe that was broken when a rig fell to the bottom of the sea in 5000 feet of water was fixed.

mlyonsd
06-02-2010, 08:19 PM
What I mean is what is the position about to do RIGHT NOW. What do we do about the giant, gushing ridiculously destructive continuous plume of oil shooting into the Gulf?

As far as the gusher goes I'm afraid we might be screwed until the relief wells are complete. If those don't work the gulf is probably now a cesspool for the rest of our born lives.

If I were the government right now I'd be concentrating heavily on shore protection. It would be awesome if we could send it Hugo's way.

If only this well was inland....it would have been stopped weeks ago.

go bowe
06-02-2010, 08:23 PM
As far as the gusher goes I'm afraid we might be screwed until the relief wells are complete. If those don't work the gulf is probably now a cesspool for the rest of our born lives.

If I were the government right now I'd be concentrating heavily on shore protection. It would be awesome if we could send it Hugo's way.

If only this well was inland....it would have been stopped weeks ago.if it was inland, there wouldn't have been a spill...

blowout preventers seem to work pretty well on land, so far (knocks on wood)...

go bowe
06-02-2010, 08:25 PM
As far as the gusher goes I'm afraid we might be screwed until the relief wells are complete. If those don't work the gulf is probably now a cesspool for the rest of our born lives.

If I were the government right now I'd be concentrating heavily on shore protection. It would be awesome if we could send it Hugo's way.

If only this well was inland....it would have been stopped weeks ago.i'm not sure why, but i'm worried that the relief wells might not work either...

i'm going to miss my gulf shrimp...

Taco John
06-02-2010, 08:26 PM
You misunderstood my question and it was poorly phrased (we've already had the discussion about magic class action lawsuits that are quickly and easily available to ordinary people).

What I mean is what is the position about to do RIGHT NOW. What do we do about the giant, gushing ridiculously destructive continuous plume of oil shooting into the Gulf?


You seem to be under the impression that libertarians don't believe in legitimate use of executive power. I have no problem with government intervening to protect the lives and properties of those affected by this disaster. If I'm not mistaken, those are government owned waters, so clearly they have an interest in being part of the solution. They should be working in cooperation with BP, not setting themsleves at odds with the company mid-crisis.

I don't know that I'd represent it at the "official libertarian position," but seeing the government operating in it's actual constitutional role would be a refreshing change. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to understand this. We saw it with the last administration, and we're seeing it with this one. Government is dazed when it comes to disasters. They're so used to social engineering that they've forgotten that their job is to protect.

By the way, what insurance agency is on the hook for this? The libertarian response is to make sure that they stay on the hook, and liquidate them if necessary. That might mean a lot of people get the carpet pulled out from underneath them though - and God forbid we disshelve people who participate in malinvestment.

mlyonsd
06-02-2010, 08:27 PM
if it was inland, there wouldn't have been a spill...

blowout preventers seem to work pretty well on land, so far (knocks on wood)...

Yeah I understand that. Doesn't mean it wouldn't ever happen though but the remedy is much easier inland.

Which is my point...maybe we should rethink where we're drilling. Like if a well were to break in Anwar who would hear it? Instead of doing a knee jerk reaction of stopping drilling offshore we should instead take another long look at the best way of producing what we need.

Taco John
06-02-2010, 08:33 PM
Let's see what Fema thinks:
http://www.fema.gov/

BucEyedPea
06-02-2010, 08:57 PM
Libertarian solution? LMAO

This requires scientific expertise and no one in the govt or with BP seems to know.

BucEyedPea
06-02-2010, 08:57 PM
Then again, this is a tragedy of the commons since no one owns the Gulf.

banyon
06-02-2010, 09:07 PM
You seem to be under the impression that libertarians don't believe in legitimate use of executive power. I have no problem with government intervening to protect the lives and properties of those affected by this disaster. If I'm not mistaken, those are government owned waters, so clearly they have an interest in being part of the solution. They should be working in cooperation with BP, not setting themsleves at odds with the company mid-crisis.

I am under that impression, because you've repeatedly demanded an interpretation of the Constitution that they only do the things that are specifically enumerated by the Constitution. Now, I keep a pocket copy of it handy and I don't see a section where it talks about them helping to clean up oil disasters and protect people from economic/environmental damages. Are we abandoning that insistence in this case?

I don't know that I'd represent it at the "official libertarian position," but seeing the government operating in it's actual constitutional role would be a refreshing change. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to understand this. We saw it with the last administration, and we're seeing it with this one. Government is dazed when it comes to disasters. They're so used to social engineering that they've forgotten that their job is to protect.

I thought that their attempts to collect revenue to pay for their ability to help protect people in this situation was "theft". So, now you think it is ok for the government to "steal" from me to pay for protection in the Gulf?

By the way, what insurance agency is on the hook for this? The libertarian response is to make sure that they stay on the hook, and liquidate them if necessary. That might mean a lot of people get the carpet pulled out from underneath them though - and God forbid we disshelve people who participate in malinvestment.

There is no insurance for a disaster of this magnitude. It simply isn't offered, AFAIK. The "free market" forgot to provide for that.

BucEyedPea
06-02-2010, 09:08 PM
Uh hmmm.

headsnap
06-02-2010, 09:09 PM
Let's see what Fema thinks:
http://www.fema.gov/

WOW!!!

banyon
06-02-2010, 09:13 PM
Uh hmmm.

Did you say something? :shake:

Silock
06-02-2010, 09:20 PM
As a predominantly libertarian-leaning person, my response is this:

There are certain responsibilities that the government has. Ensuring that I don't eat fish covered in oil is one of them. Companies need to FEAR what will happen if they allow things like this to occur.

go bowe
06-02-2010, 09:28 PM
Yeah I understand that. Doesn't mean it wouldn't ever happen though but the remedy is much easier inland.

Which is my point...maybe we should rethink where we're drilling. Like if a well were to break in Anwar who would hear it? Instead of doing a knee jerk reaction of stopping drilling offshore we should instead take another long look at the best way of producing what we need.i agree completely...

but offshore drilling can be made much safer with the addition of acoustic switches...

the blowout preventer should have worked this time, but it didn't work when the deadman's switch would have been activated (if i understand all this correctly)...

the real solution will be to produce more of our energy needs from sources other than oil...

coal is abundant here, can't we find some acceptable way to use it for vastly increased electricity generation?

nuclear plants should be springing up all over and new designs for solar and wind energy...

we should be striving toward energy independence as vigorously as when we were striving to go to the moon...

banyon
06-02-2010, 09:41 PM
i agree completely...

but offshore drilling can be made much safer with the addition of acoustic switches...

the blowout preventer should have worked this time, but it didn't work when the deadman's switch would have been activated (if i understand all this correctly)...

the real solution will be to produce more of our energy needs from sources other than oil...

coal is abundant here, can't we find some acceptable way to use it for vastly increased electricity generation?

nuclear plants should be springing up all over and new designs for solar and wind energy...

we should be striving toward energy independence as vigorously as when we were striving to go to the moon...

The last thing is where both parties have failed us for 20 years. Obama has only paid lip service to it to date.

ClevelandBronco
06-02-2010, 10:22 PM
i don't think there's a relationship between a political philosophy and any ideas to clean up the oil spilling in to the Gulf.

nor do i think that any political philosophy would prevent such a disaster.

however, one of the reasons, as i understand it, that this is such a difficult problem to solve is that the well is so deep, some 5000 miles from the surface....

Damn. They should have started digging from the opposite surface. ;)

Dallas Chief
06-02-2010, 10:29 PM
I was just thinking, though I've heard a lot of criticism and hyped up fears of socialization and nationalization, but I haven't hear what the alternative is here.

:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:

You make me laugh!

The guy bemoaning the criticism of his team is pissed off because the other team hasn't joined the fail parade yet. It feels good doesn't it? You know, when your guy gets yoked with some shitty disaster that the whole world damn well knows had nothing to do with him or his administration. Welcome to reality counselor.

banyon
06-02-2010, 10:43 PM
:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:

You make me laugh!

The guy bemoaning the criticism of his team is pissed off because the other team hasn't joined the fail parade yet. It feels good doesn't it? You know, when your guy gets yoked with some shitty disaster that the whole world damn well knows had nothing to do with him or his administration. Welcome to reality counselor.

I have been critical of Obama's decisions on this incident.

I thought it would be interesting to apply these principles I've been hearing so much about from Taco and BEP to this incident. They have not failed to disappoint.

JohnnyV13
06-03-2010, 12:36 AM
I know that Glenn Beck isn't really representative of libertarin thought, but Glenn Beck would point out that government compulsion to private companies not to discriminate against racial minorities hurt corporate efficiency.

And, the BP oil spill was caused by corporate inefficiency, so it really was the oppressive government that caused the spill. He would then point out that the Nazi's also interferred with the efficiency of private industry, and the oil spill shows how America is becoming like Nazi Germany.

Glenn Beck would then start screaming "SOCIALISM" at photos of the oil spill, dredge up footage of Chernobyl, and ask, "what will happen to our nuclear arsenal when socialists get in control of the government?" He will then comment that the gulf oil spill will look like a poopy diaper compared to the environmental disaster that socialism would cause.

Then he will inform his listeners that's why he's against progressives, and that only Glenn Beck really knows what is truly happening to America.

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 06:09 AM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3QqO8EXd-II/TAdghP5mtKI/AAAAAAAA0K8/WXhq3z6onjs/s1600/image001.jpg

Amnorix
06-03-2010, 06:21 AM
By the way, what insurance agency is on the hook for this? The libertarian response is to make sure that they stay on the hook, and liquidate them if necessary. That might mean a lot of people get the carpet pulled out from underneath them though - and God forbid we disshelve people who participate in malinvestment.


No "insurance agency" would be on the hook for the full amount. Damages are capped at policy limits, etc.

Not sure how many insurance companies may be liable under the business interruption policies of the various businesses affected by the outflow, but they may have a force majeure out or something.

healthpellets
06-03-2010, 06:51 AM
i agree completely...

we should be striving toward energy independence as vigorously as when we were striving to go to the moon...



and here's a quick way to give a shot in the arm to the alternative fuels industry. take the $6B we donate to Israel, Jordan, the PA, and Egypt every year, and tell alternative fuels industry that if they develop something good, there's more where that came from.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 09:18 AM
And, the BP oil spill was caused by corporate inefficiency, so it really was the oppressive government that caused the spill.

That's why Iran, a country with socialized oil, offered to help us with our oil spill because they get them all the time in their gulf. No system is perfect but it seems like Iran has had many more than us. Enough, to have the experience to offer us help. That being said, the oil industry is a subsidized one here.

In life, accidents happen. Period.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 09:24 AM
Popular Mechanics:How Oil Breaks Down in Water (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/oil-spill-water-chemistry)


Nature has its own chemical processes to minimize oil's impact in seawater—can human dispersant efforts measure up? ( Clue: such processes are controversial) I mean afterall, oil, is a product of Mother Nature too.

You gub'ment lovers can hem and haw over govt activism....it just may not be the answer.

banyon
06-03-2010, 09:40 AM
Popular Mechanics:How Oil Breaks Down in Water (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/oil-spill-water-chemistry)


Nature has its own chemical processes to minimize oil's impact in seawaterócan human dispersant efforts measure up? ( Clue: such processes are controversial) I mean afterall, oil, is a product of Mother Nature too.

You gub'ment lovers can hem and haw over govt activism....it just may not be the answer.

There it is: do nothing. I knew you wouldn't fail to disappoint.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 09:48 AM
Uh hummm.

JohnnyV13
06-03-2010, 01:47 PM
That's why Iran, a country with socialized oil, offered to help us with our oil spill because they get them all the time in their gulf. No system is perfect but it seems like Iran has had many more than us. Enough, to have the experience to offer us help. That being said, the oil industry is a subsidized one here.

In life, accidents happen. Period.


That post was supposed to be ridiculous. It wasn't aimed at libertarins, it was aimed at Glenn Beck--whom I think is an idiot.

Chief Faithful
06-03-2010, 02:02 PM
I would prefer drilling take place is remote far reaches of the earth like Anwar instead of deep water in the Gulf.

HonestChieffan
06-03-2010, 02:22 PM
I would prefer drilling take place is remote far reaches of the earth like Anwar instead of deep water in the Gulf.

Logic
cannot be used.

ClevelandBronco
06-03-2010, 02:58 PM
and here's a quick way to give a shot in the arm to the alternative fuels industry. take the $6B we donate to Israel, Jordan, the PA, and Egypt every year, and tell alternative fuels industry that if they develop something good, there's more where that came from.

And take the money from the war on drugs and give it to zoos!

And, and, and take the money from the war on terror and give it to someone to come up with an alternative to baseball umpires!

KC native
06-03-2010, 03:05 PM
Popular Mechanics:How Oil Breaks Down in Water (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/oil-spill-water-chemistry)


Nature has its own chemical processes to minimize oil's impact in seawaterócan human dispersant efforts measure up? ( Clue: such processes are controversial) I mean afterall, oil, is a product of Mother Nature too.

You gub'ment lovers can hem and haw over govt activism....it just may not be the answer.

stupid bitch is still stupid.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 04:00 PM
stupid bitch is still stupid.

You should write the marine scientist that contributed to the article instead of shooting the messenger (me) and advertising your own traits with projection.
What you need is a good couch....with restraining straps.

ClevelandBronco
06-03-2010, 04:06 PM
I'm pretty sure that KC native wasn't calling the marine scientist a stupid bitch.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 04:06 PM
Ah, yes just in case the "fake ignore" accusation appears from the more hostile here....I admit it. I peeked. Shame shame, hold my head shame. I committed the CP's posting Nazi's crime.

KC native
06-03-2010, 04:13 PM
You should write the marine scientist that contributed to the article instead of shooting the messenger and advertising your own traits with projection.
What you need is a good couch....with restraining straps.

You are stupid for even trying to suggest that nature will take care of this. Yes, nature does have mechanisms to deal with oil. Those mechanisms however aren't designed to handle millions of barrels of oil spilling into it at the pace the oil leak is providing.

so, stupid bitch is still stupid.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 04:51 PM
*crickets*

HC_Chief
06-03-2010, 04:53 PM
*crickets*

Where the hell do you live? Crickets don't chirp "stupid bitch!" 'round here! ;)

healthpellets
06-03-2010, 04:55 PM
And take the money from the war on drugs and give it to zoos!

And, and, and take the money from the war on terror and give it to someone to come up with an alternative to baseball umpires!

ok, i made real suggestions. no one cares about zoos and umpires. although we should find an alternative way to spend the money we spend fighting the "war" on drugs.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 04:58 PM
Where the hell do you live? Crickets don't chirp "stupid bitch!" 'round here! ;)

That doesn't say they chirp. Birds do that. It just say crickets. Meaning you hear crickets....whatever you wanna call what they do. ;)
The authorities should ship out CB bitch.

HC_Chief
06-03-2010, 05:05 PM
That doesn't say they chirp. Birds do that. It just say crickets. Meaning you hear crickets....whatever you wanna call what they do. ;)
The authorities should ship out CB bitch.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_(insect)">Crickets do so chirp</a> <font size=1>;well, the male ones do</font>, you stupid bitch! :D

ClevelandBronco
06-03-2010, 05:07 PM
ok, i made real suggestions. no one cares about zoos and umpires. although we should find an alternative way to spend the money we spend fighting the "war" on drugs.

There's nothing wrong with advocating for the idea that we should stop funding Israel, Egypt, etc. Your particular idiocy is displayed in thinking that every time we stop funding one stupid fucking thing, we should spend the imaginary pile of money on another stupid fucking thing instead.

ClevelandBronco
06-03-2010, 05:08 PM
...although we should find an alternative way to spend the money we spend fighting the "war" on drugs.

See? Why the FUCK do we have to find something to spend it on?

banyon
06-03-2010, 05:12 PM
Ah, yes just in case the "fake ignore" accusation appears from the more hostile here....I admit it. I peeked. Shame shame, hold my head shame. I committed the CP's posting Nazi's crime.

You peek every time, it's just a juvenile tactic that's been shown for what it is.

It's not a crime, but it does impact your credibility when you make claims, get challenged on them, and then put people on the "fake ignore" so you can pretend like you didn't know they were challenged and you don't want to or can't answer them.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 05:20 PM
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_(insect)">Crickets do so chirp</a> <font size=1>;well, the male ones do</font>, you stupid bitch! :D

Well ya' learn something new everyday!

I see I shouldn't have fed the two trolls ( not you the other two) ....it usually just gets them trolling more.

healthpellets
06-03-2010, 06:19 PM
There's nothing wrong with advocating for the idea that we should stop funding Israel, Egypt, etc. Your particular idiocy is displayed in thinking that every time we stop funding one stupid ****ing thing, we should spend the imaginary pile of money on another stupid ****ing thing instead.

i don't think spending that money incentivizing alternative fuel development is stupid.

healthpellets
06-03-2010, 06:21 PM
See? Why the **** do we have to find something to spend it on?

because i'm a realist. because as great as it would be to send that money back to the people, i realize that the likelihood of that happening is slim. so if we're gonna spend it, let's spend it on something that could actually make a positive difference in people's lives.

i think we're in the same boat here. and if not spending it was a really an option, i'd fully support it.

ClevelandBronco
06-03-2010, 07:56 PM
because i'm a realist. because as great as it would be to send that money back to the people, i realize that the likelihood of that happening is slim. so if we're gonna spend it, let's spend it on something that could actually make a positive difference in people's lives.

i think we're in the same boat here. and if not spending it was a really an option, i'd fully support it.

Even the Broncos' defense is stronger than this.

Chiefs Rool
06-03-2010, 09:45 PM
Barrack Obama will probably end up bailing out BP so that they can stay in business with our taxpayers money. Then instead of BP paying for the cleanup, we will pay for all of that too.

healthpellets
06-03-2010, 10:30 PM
Barrack Obama will probably end up bailing out BP so that they can stay in business with our taxpayers money. Then instead of BP paying for the cleanup, we will pay for all of that too.

what's a couple billion more tacked on to the deficit? not much really.

BucEyedPea
06-03-2010, 11:45 PM
because i'm a realist. because as great as it would be to send that money back to the people, i realize that the likelihood of that happening is slim. so if we're gonna spend it, let's spend it on something that could actually make a positive difference in people's lives.


Makes a difference according to who? You need to drop your sig if you're going to post this. :)

Rain Man
06-04-2010, 12:13 AM
If the market wants to cap the leak, the market will cap the leak.

BucEyedPea
06-04-2010, 07:20 AM
If the market wants to cap the leak, the market will cap the leak.

Still it was a subsidized leak.