Home Non Cigar Related

Regulations? Nawwww!

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.
«134

Comments

  • Alex WilliamsAlex Williams Posts: 1,515
    laker1963:
    greedy people who cut corners and acted recklessly did.
    i agree with this. The company knew the part was faulty but didnt want to stop production and spend the couple hundred grand to fix it. That being said, i dont see how regulations could have prevented the spill any better...
  • TatuajeVITatuajeVI Posts: 2,378
    sigh...

    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.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    TatuajeVI:
    sigh...

    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.
    Groan...

    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.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    i think that regulation was part of the reason why the problem cant be fixed quickly. the regulations set by the government forced the well to be dug so far out to sea that it makes most solutions for a problem like this almost impossible. had this well been in water that was only 1000 feet deep as apposed to a mile deep, this woulda been capped a few days after it started.


    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.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    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?

    im not sure what the financial meltdown has to do with this. I feel that i have made my case many times that the meltdown was caused by too much regulation in the financial and housing market.


    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.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,806 ✭✭✭
    Laker I want to go at this one, but I dont even have the energy anymore----its so simplistic, so easy to see, so black and white....yet the fight is doubled to try and show otherwise. The failure to see equals an atrocity in my mind---financially, environmentally, etc. and in so many areas. However, apathy and disgust leads me to just not even try here.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    kuzi16:
    i think that regulation was part of the reason why the problem cant be fixed quickly. the regulations set by the government forced the well to be dug so far out to sea that it makes most solutions for a problem like this almost impossible. had this well been in water that was only 1000 feet deep as apposed to a mile deep, this woulda been capped a few days after it started.


    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.
    So now regulations are what decide where oil is found! That's too funny.

    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?
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    kuzi16:
    laker1963:
    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?

    im not sure what the financial meltdown has to do with this. I feel that i have made my case many times that the meltdown was caused by too much regulation in the financial and housing market.


    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.
    The financial meltdown is another situation where YOU feel that over regulation were partly to blame, and I have shown that with proper regulations the situation could have been avoided or would not have spread across the whole banking sector like it did. I made my case many times as well Kuzi, but you still say you are right and my arguements are wrong, even thou we never experienced a complete meltdown like the US and other places did. I put it down to the regulations we have in place, what do you put it down to? Luck? At least with my arguement I have some evidence to back it up. In your case, it is just your opinion, and you have nothing to back it up.

    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.

  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    So now regulations are what decide where oil is found! That's too funny.
    no. not at all. regulations DO decide where it is drilled. its found in MANY places. it is only drilled in some due to regulations.
    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.
    laker1963:


    I have clearly shown where PROPER regulation could have changed the outcome of this whole situation.
    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.
    laker1963:
    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
    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.
    laker1963:


    As for your statement that I can't prove that proper regulation could have stopped this... that is silly.
    its is silly to believe that regulation could have stopped this.
    laker1963:
    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
    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.
    laker1963:


    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?
    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.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    The financial meltdown is another situation where YOU feel that over regulation were partly to blame, and I have shown that with proper regulations the situation could have been avoided or would not have spread across the whole banking sector like it did. I made my case many times as well Kuzi, but you still say you are right and my arguements are wrong, even thou we never experienced a complete meltdown like the US and other places did. I put it down to the regulations we have in place, what do you put it down to? Luck?
    and i have shown that in a freer market the banks would not have made the risky loans they did because there would be too much to lose. with institutions like Freddie and Fanny and the FDIC to buy up all the bad loans thus "reducing" risk, banks were not afraid to lend to people that had risky credit histories. canada does not have freddie, fanny, or the FDIC, nor did it pass the same legislation as the US. maybe thats why canada didnt get hit the way the US did. thats not luck.
    laker1963:
    At least with my arguement I have some evidence to back it up. In your case, it is just your opinion, and you have nothing to back it up.
    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.
    laker1963:


    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.

    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.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    Vulchor:
    Laker I want to go at this one, but I dont even have the energy anymore----its so simplistic, so easy to see, so black and white....yet the fight is doubled to try and show otherwise. The failure to see equals an atrocity in my mind---financially, environmentally, etc. and in so many areas. However, apathy and disgust leads me to just not even try here.
    spoken like a true statist. just give all the power to the government. weather its environmental, economic, the boarder, or anything else. you always seem to be on the side of more government control of everything.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    kuzi16:
    laker1963:
    So now regulations are what decide where oil is found! That's too funny.
    no. not at all. regulations DO decide where it is drilled. its found in MANY places. it is only drilled in some due to regulations.
    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.
    laker1963:


    I have clearly shown where PROPER regulation could have changed the outcome of this whole situation.
    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.
    laker1963:
    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
    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.
    laker1963:


    As for your statement that I can't prove that proper regulation could have stopped this... that is silly.
    its is silly to believe that regulation could have stopped this.
    laker1963:
    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
    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.
    laker1963:


    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?
    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.
    You have proved nothing, and most of your answers to points I raised only restate your opinions. There is one thing I have learned while discussing things with you Kuzi. You will never move off of your position regardless of how precarious that position may be. You claim that BP being regulated to build in relief wells would have made no difference in this situation, yet you don't say why... what experience are you drawing these conclusions from? I think it is pretty obvious that a relief well was the answer in this situation, and considering that is EXACTLY what they are now doing in order to bring this to a stop is the evidence I point to. What have you got?
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    You have proved nothing, and most of your answers to points I raised only restate your opinions.
    neither have you, and so do yours (respectively). this is an argument of opinions. good luck winning that.
    laker1963:
    You claim that BP being regulated to build in relief wells would have made no difference in this situation, yet you don't say why...
    im saying that regulations cannot solve every situation. there s a VERY good chance relief well would have helped. but being regulated to do it isnt the solution. having good business practices and having them on their own accord is the solution. since they didnt have them, maybe they are to blame for violating rights, and should be punished.
    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.
    laker1963:
    I think it is pretty obvious that a relief well was the answer in this situation, and considering that is EXACTLY what they are now doing in order to bring this to a stop is the evidence I point to. What have you got?
    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.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    Kuzi, I am NOT attacking you. I do admit that I get totally frustrated by some of your answers.

    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.
  • 24footjet24footjet Posts: 132
    We need to regulate how many political threads Laker starts. 10 cigar fine for every thread started concerning a political point of view. I'm assuming you'd be out of smokes in less than 6 months. :)
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    24footjet:
    We need to regulate how many political threads Laker starts. 10 cigar fine for every thread started concerning a political point of view. I'm assuming you'd be out of smokes in less than 6 months. :)
    You would be WRONG!

    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.?
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,806 ✭✭✭
    LOL, he's got a point there 24foot fish---this is the topic for poliitical and possible inflamatory discussions btw...please send me cigars too.

    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.
  • Alex WilliamsAlex Williams Posts: 1,515
    laker1963:
    24footjet:
    We need to regulate how many political threads Laker starts. 10 cigar fine for every thread started concerning a political point of view. I'm assuming you'd be out of smokes in less than 6 months. :)
    You would be WRONG!

    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 think he was just trying to make a funny. BTW, I laughed out loud when I read it haha
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    Alex Williams:
    laker1963:
    24footjet:
    We need to regulate how many political threads Laker starts. 10 cigar fine for every thread started concerning a political point of view. I'm assuming you'd be out of smokes in less than 6 months. :)
    You would be WRONG!

    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 think he was just trying to make a funny. BTW, I laughed out loud when I read it haha
    Yeah but you're sick !!

    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 am still sitting on my coolerdor !
  • Alex WilliamsAlex Williams Posts: 1,515
    laker1963:
    Alex Williams:
    laker1963:
    24footjet:
    We need to regulate how many political threads Laker starts. 10 cigar fine for every thread started concerning a political point of view. I'm assuming you'd be out of smokes in less than 6 months. :)
    You would be WRONG!

    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 think he was just trying to make a funny. BTW, I laughed out loud when I read it haha
    Yeah but you're sick !!

    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 am still sitting on my coolerdor !
    haha if you are referring to my april fool's day pranks... those were DAMN funny :D
  • 24footjet24footjet Posts: 132
    Hahahaha. I have no problem with you Laker, it's just that you like to argue with CAPITAL LETTERS all the time and it's fun READING your posts....

    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!

  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    24footjet:
    Hahahaha. I have no problem with you Laker, it's just that you like to argue with CAPITAL LETTERS all the time and it's fun READING your posts....

    OK, now you're just making FUN of ME LMAO.
  • 24footjet24footjet Posts: 132
    HEHEHE.... just having a little fun. I'm sure you're a good guy, just have a way different outlook on things than me... and that's fine.

    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 :)
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    24footjet:
    HEHEHE.... just having a little fun. I'm sure you're a good guy, just have a way different outlook on things than me... and that's fine.

    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 :)
    Yup. And being that the Police should be held to a higher standard then regular folk... you can send those ten sticks to me immediately. The ten you had mentioned sound good. :)
  • cabinetmakercabinetmaker Posts: 2,561
    As self-appointed head of the forum regulation committee, I'll be taking a 40% cut.... lol, I crack me up..
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    A better question would be "Where were the regulators that were supposed to be overseeing this operation"? The answer is they were in bed with industry rather than regulating. Once again we prove that big govt is corrupt govt and this one is as corrupt as they come.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    fla-gypsy:
    A better question would be "Where were the regulators that were supposed to be overseeing this operation"? The answer is they were in bed with industry rather than regulating. Once again we prove that big govt is corrupt govt and this one is as corrupt as they come.
    Funny. You may want to look into who is responsible for the present regulations, such as they are.

    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.
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    laker1963:
    fla-gypsy:
    A better question would be "Where were the regulators that were supposed to be overseeing this operation"? The answer is they were in bed with industry rather than regulating. Once again we prove that big govt is corrupt govt and this one is as corrupt as they come.
    Funny. You may want to look into who is responsible for the present regulations, such as they are.

    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.
    Oh please, it is getting old, I am sure it was BUSH'S Fault ,right? This bunch has been in office plenty long enough to do anything they want and have a congress complicit in everything they have done. All they have to do is fix it! Instead they have spent all their time wrecking our economy for another 5 years. Great job. You know this incessant attack on business is getting a little tired bro. Not all business is evil, in fact most are owned in little tiny chunks by folks like me trying to eek out an existence and have a better life.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    fla-gypsy:
    laker1963:
    fla-gypsy:
    A better question would be "Where were the regulators that were supposed to be overseeing this operation"? The answer is they were in bed with industry rather than regulating. Once again we prove that big govt is corrupt govt and this one is as corrupt as they come.
    Funny. You may want to look into who is responsible for the present regulations, such as they are.

    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.
    Oh please, it is getting old, I am sure it was BUSH'S Fault ,right? This bunch has been in office plenty long enough to do anything they want and have a congress complicit in everything they have done. All they have to do is fix it! Instead they have spent all their time wrecking our economy for another 5 years. Great job. You know this incessant attack on business is getting a little tired bro. Not all business is evil, in fact most are owned in little tiny chunks by folks like me trying to eek out an existence and have a better life.
    You know what? I have been self employed for over 20 years so I don't think I need any lessons there.

    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.
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    laker1963:
    fla-gypsy:
    laker1963:
    fla-gypsy:
    A better question would be "Where were the regulators that were supposed to be overseeing this operation"? The answer is they were in bed with industry rather than regulating. Once again we prove that big govt is corrupt govt and this one is as corrupt as they come.
    Funny. You may want to look into who is responsible for the present regulations, such as they are.

    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.
    Oh please, it is getting old, I am sure it was BUSH'S Fault ,right? This bunch has been in office plenty long enough to do anything they want and have a congress complicit in everything they have done. All they have to do is fix it! Instead they have spent all their time wrecking our economy for another 5 years. Great job. You know this incessant attack on business is getting a little tired bro. Not all business is evil, in fact most are owned in little tiny chunks by folks like me trying to eek out an existence and have a better life.
    You know what? I have been self employed for over 20 years so I don't think I need any lessons there.

    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.
    So how come you only hate Conservatives, yeah it really shows here laker!
Sign In or Register to comment.