Regulations? Nawwww!
laker1963
Posts: 5,046
So after the financial meltdown and now the massive oil well blowout... I am just wondering if some of the BOTL here still feel there are too many regulations on industry in the US?
In Canada's "over regulated" system.. that relief well would have been drilled as part of bringing this well to production, thereby allowing the flow of oil to be shut off whitin hours of the accident.
I am NOT trying to compare our system to the US. I am just pointing out that there are other ways of doing business, and these oil companies who claim regulations cost them too much money, still drill for oil here and elsewhere and they live up to whatever regulations are present in the particular country they are working in. So it would seem pretty evident that they can still make enough money (even when following restrictive regulations) to go ahead and dril. In my opinion this proves that regulations will NOT hamper a company's ability to make money, but may just go a long way to protect people who can be impacted by a spill like this for years and years. Think of it as insurance for the innocent people who will feel a financial impact from incidences like this spill even if they do NOT rely on the oil industry for their living. Regulations did NOT put oil into the water and onto beaches... greedy people who cut corners and acted recklessly did.
In Canada's "over regulated" system.. that relief well would have been drilled as part of bringing this well to production, thereby allowing the flow of oil to be shut off whitin hours of the accident.
I am NOT trying to compare our system to the US. I am just pointing out that there are other ways of doing business, and these oil companies who claim regulations cost them too much money, still drill for oil here and elsewhere and they live up to whatever regulations are present in the particular country they are working in. So it would seem pretty evident that they can still make enough money (even when following restrictive regulations) to go ahead and dril. In my opinion this proves that regulations will NOT hamper a company's ability to make money, but may just go a long way to protect people who can be impacted by a spill like this for years and years. Think of it as insurance for the innocent people who will feel a financial impact from incidences like this spill even if they do NOT rely on the oil industry for their living. Regulations did NOT put oil into the water and onto beaches... greedy people who cut corners and acted recklessly did.
0
Comments
Look, the answer to the oil well disaster has nothing to do with MORE regulations. So many things had to go wrong for this to take place, including a massive explosion, an oil well blowing up, and then falling on the well itself, and then a bunch of valves failing that could have turned this off.
Most important of all - the government regulations in place didn't work anyway. We now know that the regulators themselves completely failed at their jobs and didn't do the inspection they were supposed to do. The answer to this is not more regulations. It is a horrible, horrible disaster, but that doesn't mean we need more government involvement in industry. All oil companies will react to this on their own to get their own equipment in line - why? Because BP is losing billions of dollars dealing with this spill, is losing a MASSIVE PR war, and will be sued by individuals and our own government for things that were not necessarily their responsibility. It is a complete disaster for BP.
When did I say MORE regulations would have solved this? There is a HUGE difference between MORE regulations and PROPER regulation.
I agree that this was a disaster. That is exactly why you NEED proper regulations. As I stated before, here in Canada, REGULATION requires that relief wells be drilled as part of the drilling program. That means that thru regulation, companies are required to have the safety redundencies built into the well. In other words, because they were NOT regulated to do so, BP decided to NOT drill relief wells as part of bringing this well into production.
That is why I said what I said about regulations. In this case PROPER regulation would have enabled BP to finish drilling the relief well and stop the flow of oil within hours of the accident. The fact that the rig collasped on itself is NOT what is causing BP to be unable to stop it. The absence of any safety relief wells, used for this EXACT purpose is what is causing the oil to continue to flow.
MONEY is the root cause of this incident. BP has it, and they (like other industries) don't want to spend any more then they HAVE to, to carry out their business. That is why if they were PROPERLY regulated to do so, they would accept these regulations, just like they do in other countries, and they would have spent the money required to bring this well in safely.
Could an accident still have happened? Absolutely. If it did happen, and there were proper regulations in place, then this situation would have been already taken care of and BP would not be dealing with a public relations nightmare
As far as oil companies suddenly becoming more responsible in the future? Why did they NOT learn from the Exxon Valdez? As for being sued for "things that were not necessarily their responsibilty", who would you say should be considered responsible? And how would the people of the US be in a more secure position if there were even less regulations then there are now, considering that we already see how the company decided to protect people, their livelihoods and the environment with the regulations already in place? Companies DO NOT act responsibly, they are regulated to do so.
that being said, a lot had to go wrong for this to happen. BP didnt want a disaster. they didnt want to kill people. BP didnt want this negative press. they didnt want the US government breathing down their necks. nobody wants this. a disaster like this is bad business. They took away (through negligence) the lively hoods of those who live off of the Gulf. is that a violation of rights? i think so. does this mean that there should be more regulations, stricter regulations, or "better" regulation?
you cant prove that those would have stopped this.
does it make BP an "evil corporation" for trying to save money?
no. just because you spend more money on something does not mean that it will be done correctly. spending money wastefully will not make your business run better.
is money the root cause?
im sure there is a roll played, but there is way more to the situation than "greed"
"greed" and "money" are just over simplifications used to vilify corporations. they are simple answers offered up to drum up hate against a corporation involved in a very complex situation. people want answers now. "greed" and "money" are quick and easy. there is way more to it than that i assure you.
one thing is clear though. when rights are violated (the way this disaster is violating the rights of people affected), those who violate them should be held accountable, and those who didnt, shouldnt.
of course the oversimplification of "greed" is used again for this. people again buy it because its easy to understand.
but thats neither here nor there.
I have clearly shown where PROPER regulation could have changed the outcome of this whole situation. I mentioned that in other countries BP would NOT have been allowed to bring the well to production without having relief wells (you know what they are doing now, in order to stop the flow) being drilled which would have enabled them to stop the flow of oil very soon after the accident. You never addressed that point. Like always, you just gloss over things you can't adequately answer and then go on as though they were never said. hmmmm
As for your statement that I can't prove that proper regulation could have stopped this... that is silly. Just like the climate change situation, you ask for 100 % proof or YOU don't beleive it. How about a little proof regarding what YOU said Kuzi? OH and FYI... I NEVER said it would have stopped this from happening. I said with the relief well in place they could have had the flow of oil stopped very shortly after the accident. I guess you misunderstood what it was I said, because you can clearly see that I NEVER said a relief well would have prevented this from happening in the first place... BIG difference.
I was talking about good regulation and you mention "just because you spend more money on something does not mean that it will be done correctly. spending money wastefully will not make your business run better". So does that mean BP would have been wasting money if they had of drilled relief wells prior to bringing the well into production? I think what is happening right now in the gulf says YOU ARE WRONG!!!Does your restaurant have fire insurance Kuzi? Because possibly if they stopped "wasting" that money they spend on fire insurance they would make the business "run better", if I use your arguement above. You seem to have missed the point. Running a business better, in this case surely would mean that BP drilled that relief well as part of the program and then they could have shut off the oil flow right away. They then could have turned this into a situation where they could have used the fast response as GOOD PR to show the world that they WERE doing it right and that because of the proceedures they follow they are able to stop an accidental blowout FAST, and thereby prevent a catastrophe like we have now. So I think your arguement is totally wrong
It would seem that there were heated discussions on the rig between two of the contractors responsible for bringing the rig "online" about 1.5 hours prior to the explosion. Something to do with the mudding process and the way it was done, and whether it was done satisfactorily, according to some news reports that I have seen. I agree that those responsible should be held accountable. I have also heard that while in office *** Cheney did an overhaul of the regulations which were in place at the time. That is what has been reported on the news. I don't know for sure if it is true, (or wether they can prove it) but if it is true, would you consider Cheney as someone who could / should be held accountable as well as anyone else ? You never mentioned who you thought was responsible in this. You did allude to your belief that those responsible should be held accountable and those that aren't shouldn't. Is there someone or something which you feel at this point shouldn't be blamed?
Trying to say that my arguements oversimplify the situation is laughable. This is NOT a situation that the average man cannot understand. I would like YOU to prove that statement. Trying to belittle my statements without providing any proof of your position doesn't cut it.
there is plenty of oil off shore that is in only a few hundred feet of water, but regulations prevent us from getting at it. this pushes the rigs farther off shore making it more difficult to correct issues should they arise. the depth of the ocean at the drilling sight seems to be a huge obstacle. i dont think you have. you claim that it would have, but every situation is different. it is impossible to regulate all risk out of anything. again relief well being drilled doesnt matter. if this wouldnt have happened, the relief wells wouldnt be needed. regulating that oil companies drill them does not ENSURE that there will never be a disaster.
if BP chooses not to drill them, like they did, and disaster ensues, like it did, they should be held accountable.
Rules and regulations have never been a good substitute for good moral standards. its is silly to believe that regulation could have stopped this. no
my argument is that a smart business move is to have those safety precautions there because it is the ethical thing to do. mandating that they are in place is what i am against.
if i owned a company that drilled oil for 100 years then i closed it down and during that 100 had no problems at all but did not drill relief wells then there is no problem.
if i didnt drill the relief wells then violated the rights of people by causing a disaster, then there is a problem. not drilling the relief wells does not violate rights. causing disasters does. see the difference?
to further my point...
if my restaurant had no fire insurance and never burnt down, there is no problem. however, it is the wise business decision to have it because if it did burn down and hurt someone, we are violating their rights and should be held accountable.
again, rules and regulations are a poor substitute for good morals and standards. i feel that those who caused this should be held accountable. its just unclear at this point who exactly is to blame. BP seems to be a prime suspect. Haliburten (sp?) could have a roll, maybe some of the guys on the rig as individuals... it should be investigated.
i dont think regulations caused this disaster, but i do think that they complicated it - in the physical and political sense.
i have posted many time on my evidence. all i hear from the left is "greed" and "evil wall street" thats not proof. thats not evidence. you cite that canada didnt crash as a reason that the US wasnt regulated right? thats hardly evidence. they are very different situations, very different countries, very different ways of looking at things, very different demographics, etc. there is no comparison. not only that but there are countries where the housing market is regulated WAY more than us that have taken a huge hit. causation and correlation a not the same.
your argument is also your opinion. this is a debate that has many opinions. id like you to prove it wrong.
the argument that "greed" caused the housing crisis is a very simple and debatable argument on what caused it. there is way more going on than greedy bankers. in a freer market the greedy bankers die out because someone else comes along with better rates/prices/offers that are more sustainable to business.
for arguments sake, lest say it was regulated that they had to have them but they didnt drill them anyway. we would be in the same position of a bad business practice leading to disaster. i agree. that seems like a very good solution. that is the right action to take. it would have been even better for them to take the action before they drilled. having the government mandate that action is the problem. this should be done on their own for the sake of good business practices to prevent situations like this. BP may never recover from this in the eyes of the public. their mismanagement of this situation made ME stop buying their gas. im sure im not the only one....
... and wait till the lawsuits kick in. all those people whos rights have been violated by BP need justice.
im not sure why you are attacking me here. our only differences in this argument is who should be telling the people actually drilling to drill the relief wells. your think the government should. i feel that good ethics and economic pressure should.
If I read what you said here correctly, you agree that (in this case) relief wells drilled before the well was completed seems to be the answer. OK, I'm with you there. However, I think that regulations should require proper practices should be used in the business world and you think that self regulation is a better idea. Tell you what... I agree with your view 100%. However, since the reality is the way companies do business is not responsible, it is in a way which provide the most profits, I believe that your view is nothing more then a pipe dream. I mean IF business could be relied on to do these things, then GREAT! Since history has shown us again and again that business cannot be trusted to act this way, then regulations are required.
I will also just say here that perhaps (perhaps not) you have misunderstood WHY I feel this way. In your scenario BP because of bad business practices should / will pay for damaging the environment and people livlihoods, fair enough.
If proper regulations were in place and followed then this situation would have been much more preventable, AND even if it did happen, there would have been a method built in which would have allowed the flow of oil to stop shortly after the accident.
What I feel so strongly about (in this case) is the thousands of people who are going to be negatively impacted by this situation, and that could have been avoided or at least minimized if proper regulations were in place and followed.
In other words, the regulations I feel should have been in place would have been there to PROTECT people who are NOT working for or relying on BP for their living. You seem to feel that I want to see these BIG, BAD companies kept down. That is NOT it. Regulations are to protect people and the environment not to punish business.
I apologize to you if you feel like I am attacking you prsonally, that is NOT my intent. I will agree thou that it is more then a little frustrating discussing things with someone who seems to feel like businesses have more rights then people. I say that because you think BP (and others) should be allowed to conduct business free of regulation and then be held accountable for any damage they cause AFTER the fact. I feel like regulation to protect people and the environment is much more proactive. Why should the people who live around the gulf coast have their whole lives / livelihood destroyed or disrupted so that BP (and others) can conduct business with an eye to profits alone? Do BP's rights to make as much money as they can trump everyone who lives on the gulf coast rights to live safely, cause that is what your arguement seems to be saying, and I just can't come to grips with that.
I have noticed that you seem to have a problem with me, since you always seem to respond to me personally rather then what I am posting about. Like I am the only one who starts these threads or discusses politics? If you would like to add something to the discussion, super. If you are just here to criticize me, maybe it is you who should be paying a fine. If these posts bother you, or if it is just my posts which bother you... feel free NOT to read them.
Who elected you as the Forum Police anyway bro.?
I have never said MORE regulation Kuzi, I have said better or smarter regulation. Regulation meant to protect citizens, not solely to protect the right make unadulterated profit. Doesnt have to be govt. if business would do it on their own...but there is no incentive to do that. Whatever the price to fix this mistake is, it will be far less than to make the system safe to start with---and in the process the shareholders have remained very happy for quite a long time, which is really all that matters......without of course, sensible regulation.
24 may have been kidding, and if he was then I would apologize. He hasn't said one way or the other and I can only go on history. As I said if he were kidding, my bad. But that 10 stick penalty comment was way out of line
I'm kidding. Like Kuzi said above... you are gonna have a tough time winning an argument on a forum when you're arguing your opinion.... It's funny to see guys get all ruffled up.
And as for the forum police, self professed...
Fantastically funny Vulchor... the 24 foot fish remark...AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH.... that was a goodie!
If the world all thought like me, we'd be perfect and we would all be bored.... nothing to talk about:)
So... for the first 10 cigar penalty I would like 5 T52's and 5 Bolivar Cub.... ohhh, almost said it. And being the self professed forum police, I would have had to oust myself from the forums
From what I read it was Di CK Cheney who re-wrote the regulation, using his vast oil industry experience.
Once again you prove that you are all about blaming everything on the present administration. No matter how far you have to stretch to find a connection. Did Obama fill the MMS office with his people or are they the same folks who have worked there for years? They are called Bureaucrats.
I have not attacked "business" I have attacked BIG businesses or Corporations. I also did not say it was Bush's fault. Never even mentioned his name. I was refferring to the people who work in government do not change every time there is a change in Administrations, that's all.
I realize that you really hate Obama,but he is also not responsible for everything in your life that you don't like. The election is over and the Republicans LOST, some people just can't seem to come to grips with that.
Bottom line is, whover is in office sure don't care about folks like you or I, we just aren't rich, or powerful enough for them to even notice, Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Socialist... it doesn't matter with the present political systems we use to run our countries. Average people are left out.