Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mid Atlantic' started by Scarecrow, May 31, 2010.
takes me 1 gallon but then again, my jeep gets 8 mpg
I agree with most of what you are saying. We should have limited government that doesn't infringe on our freedoms and liberties. I do believe they still have a role and this gulf spill is a very grey area. Right now, BP is actually running the show and stopping boaters from entering certain water. The coast guard has actually told locals on boats to not enter certain areas and that these are BP rules. When did BP own the ocean. They should tell them to **** off and go where they want. I understand you can't have people all in the heavy oil spill zone mainly because BP doesn't want them seeing the oil, dispersants being used, and the underwater plumes.
The local towns down in LA actually want to help skim the oil and their boats are standing by. These people have agree to even be trained. BP has never got back to them and act like skimming takes high intelligence. These fishermen know that water far better then BP. Why won't they even let local volunteers help who are affected by this the most? That really pisses me off.
Just heard on the news there may be a 2nd rig in the gulf also leaking !?!?
Agreed but what happens if some well-meaning fisherman gets hurt cleaning up oil? BP gets sued, hence their restriction. I'm sure some corporate attorney at BP is driving that decision.
Don't get me started on attorneys and lawsuits...
I agree with you that it's annoying when Americans are being told what they can and can't do, but again, it's the Feds exercising that power. BP can't do that, they can only ask the gov't to do it.
Not advisable. BP doesn't own the ocean, but this being a national emergency, the President does. If his guidance is to restrict traffic based on BP's recommendation, he is within his constitutional right to cordon off the area. Below is an official Congressional Report, so if you're a Wikipedia guy, this may not hold enough credibility. Page 4, paragraph 1 pretty much sums it up, though.
For those who think BP was all about free, unfettered markets and that the federal gov't is the good guys, read this http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...nt-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html. One more reason why the feds should have very limited powers.
Regardless of who did or didn't do what, BP's responsibility now is to make things right environmentally and economically. The government's responsibility is to make sure BP does this. The last thing I want to see is my tax dollars going to a man-made disaster; unlike Katrina which was a natural disaster. BP's profits in recent years have probably exceeded our country's tax revenues for God's sake.
I did hear hayward this morning stating that all the money made from selling oil out of this well (when re-drilled) will go to economic relief and environmental cleans ups.
Wow. I don't even know what to say. That is a lot of money.
^ really? how much? how do you know the thing won't be dry by the time they get it plugged?
How do you know there isn't a **** load more oil down there? There probably is.
my point exactly. I was pointing out to you that we don't know what is still there.
For all we know his offer of donating all the money to clean up efforts could mean nothing now that it's all in the Gulf of Mexico.
Lets hope there is just enough to fund the recovery, an enough to let the Earth get a breather because BP stops drilling. We're using too much of our most abundant resource: the Earth!
BP is at fault for this disaster, period. Eyewitness accounts from the actual workers state BP's greed over safety. The workers actual saw pieces of the washer for the blowout preventor and alerted BP authorities. BP told them not to worry about it.
BP also had them remove heavy mud from the well and asked them to replace it with salt water. The actual driller (Transocean) was against this because the mud put weight against the oil well pressure. BP knew that removing the mud would allow them to pump more oil and make more money. This also were told is was a high security risk.
These two examples show that BP is all about money even when they knew this explosion could happen. That dumb limey CEO doesn't care about this country and the oil spill's environmental impact. He is just interested in jerking off to the Queen's flacid labia and having wet dreams of fisting her.
Ask any big time company whether they'd take the risk of safety to make an enormous profit, and I bet it'd b a resounding yes. BP is to blame, I won't disagree there. But any company would take that risk I'd assume.
Yes, I think that most big time companies would cut corners and take risks, all in the name of the bottom line. That's business as usual in this wonderful corporatocracy of ours.
We just have built up hatred because we are surfers and therefore are environmentally conscious. Obviously this is horrible though.
Also I bet in some big conference room with nice chairs and a polished desk this was voted on. So don't put all of the blame on Tony Hayward.
I think there are different degrees of risk. The mom and pop business taking safety risks and a company who knows it could pollute the entire Gulf for decades is slightly different.
Hey, all in the name of good old fascism.