AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NakedPuts Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > AS, your wingnuttery and lunacy have been well > > established, and I don’t feel a need to respond. > > > My posts and view will always be pro: small > government, free market, lower taxes and let the > seemingly chaotic but actually the most efficient > capitalism work… > > If you have a problem with that, please just stay > away from my posts. > > Nothing against you personally, it’s just your > ideology. Sounds fair? > > Now back to the big picture, wise Americans are > really building momentum to turn the tide against > the extremely left, populist BO administration… Free markets on the upside with the gov’t stepping in on the downside.
LBriscoe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Free markets on the upside with the gov’t stepping > in on the downside. The gov’t does take 20-30% of the upside…
justin88 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry that I wasn’t clear. My point is that this > is predominantly political theater, just like how > invading Iraq wasn’t about WMDs (righting wrongs) > but was politically motivated. Intelligent people > should be able to see through the histrionics. > > Dragging a CEO, who’s going to be on trial > imminently, in front of Congress to encourage > “self”-incrimination, then deriding him on a > personal level when he doesn’t self-incriminate is > asinine. To top it off, moral outrage from a > Congressman – the lowest of the low – is a sad > joke. Indeed, and I agree. I also think criminal charges against executives (as nice as having the Chinese execute lead-toy makers sounds) is inappropriate. There may be legitimate negligence or fraud charges against people on the rig, but they might be BP, RIG or HAL employees for all I know.
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Indeed, and I agree. I also think criminal > charges against executives (as nice as having the > Chinese execute lead-toy makers sounds) is > inappropriate. There may be legitimate negligence > or fraud charges against people on the rig, but > they might be BP, RIG or HAL employees for all I > know. And what about the people at the MMS? We at least know that they skipped at least a dozen inspections of the Deepwater Horizons rig and that they at least signed off on some of the drilling plans. A reasonable person could argue that the federal government itself is responsible for the mess to some extent.
Not only are the arguments of ‘due process’ completely unrelated to the discussion, I find surprising people who bring up the argument of ‘infringing on free markets’. Free market doesn’t mean you do whatever you want without government intervention. Free market means, you can earn a profit, do it how you like, sell whatever idea you have BUT if the cost includes a part of the social fabric of society, if it involves abuse, if it involves environmental degradation, if it destroys someone else’s way of life, the government will come, and they will crush you. Seems fair. Anyone who thinks government should be left out of the process is still clinging to their eco101 books from first year university. The only reason this administration seems so quick to stomp on throats is because the last one was sleeping at the wheel.
Justin88 brings up a valid point. If the BP CEO is personally criminally responsible/fully negligent for the spill, then BO is responsible for the abuses at MMS.
It’s quite a lot for BP, but quite insufficient to cover all damages. However the fund brings some more certainty, at least there is something to start with, solving the problems caused by BP. People are calmer for now, BO got a 1 more popularity point for him, BP got some more certainty, might be even reached bottom (which I doubt), but at least investors are a bit happier. Clear win-win.
libor.plus1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Free market doesn’t mean you do whatever you want > without government intervention. Free market > means, you can earn a profit, do it how you like, > sell whatever idea you have BUT if the cost > includes a part of the social fabric of society, > if it involves abuse, if it involves environmental > degradation, if it destroys someone else’s way of > life, the government will come, and they will > crush you. Seems fair. +1
jg1996business Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > libor.plus1 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Free market doesn’t mean you do whatever you > want > > without government intervention. Free market > > means, you can earn a profit, do it how you > like, > > sell whatever idea you have BUT if the cost > > includes a part of the social fabric of > society, > > if it involves abuse, if it involves > environmental > > degradation, if it destroys someone else’s way > of > > life, the government will come, and they will > > crush you. Seems fair. > > > +1 Seems fair, but government should come and crush you by following the “due process”. That’s the KEY! Use the legal system… Not the populism pinhead…
justin88 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NakedPuts Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Indeed, and I agree. I also think criminal > > charges against executives (as nice as having > the > > Chinese execute lead-toy makers sounds) is > > inappropriate. There may be legitimate > negligence > > or fraud charges against people on the rig, but > > they might be BP, RIG or HAL employees for all > I > > know. > > And what about the people at the MMS? We at least > know that they skipped at least a dozen > inspections of the Deepwater Horizons rig and that > they at least signed off on some of the drilling > plans. A reasonable person could argue that the > federal government itself is responsible for the > mess to some extent. MMS was/ is full of Bush appointed cronies with ties to Big Oil. In fact the previous agency head was an oil executive. Pretty much all regulatory agencies including MMS, EPA, FDA etc. were gutted during the Bush regime. They were reduced to mere rubber stamp organizations, exactly what the some of the unscrupulous industries were seeking. Its very difficult to remove these beauracrats and “clean house” so to speak once they are in. And if you think those agencies are not needed, I have some arsenic water to sell you to go along with your mercury laden salmon. To those who say but people will simply stop doing business/ sue with companies that poision your food…well its too late for the person who is already poisoned, isn’t it?
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > MMS was/ is full of Bush appointed cronies with > ties to Big Oil. In fact the previous agency head > was an oil executive. Interesting that you mention that Randall Luthi was an oil executive, considering he just replaced Clinton’s first MMS director, Tom Fry, at NOIA. As far as MMS being packed with Bush cronies, Pres. Obama has had Ken Salazar in place since day 1 and Liz Birnbaum was MMS director for almost a year before her recent resignation. Before Birnbaum was appointed, the acting director was a product of the Clinton administration who was held over during the Bush adminstration. Just since the original explosion in April, MMS (under the direction of Obama appointees) has approved more than 2 dozen new projects even though those projects didn’t have the required NOAA permits. So, MMS clearly sucks at what it is supposed to do, but that is a product of the Clinton administration, the Bush adminstration and the Obama administration.
Listen, I think we can all agree the SEC are a bunch of trained monkeys, but on the list of culprits for the 2008 meltdown I would put them on, but pretty far down, the list. Same here.
Look, this “shakedown” presumably said “BP, we’d like you to put money in escrow, so that people who have claims on damages can receive money ASAP, and if you don’t, we’re going to use due process of law to get this money.” BP says, “Hmm… we might get hit with more if we go the due process route, plus we get public opinion points for looking more pro-active on this and like we are trying to cooperate rather than obfuscate. It’s probably a better deal for us to do the escrow idea.” Now a bunch of AFers are whining about freedom and due process, as if they know what they are talking about. BP had the freedom to refuse to do this. Nowhere was BP told, if you don’t do this, I’m sending you to Guantanamo. They had the option of going the due process route if they wanted it. They opted otherwise. That’s called having freedoms to choose. Yes, it’s constrained by the fact that they’ve just dumped millions and millions of gallons of poison into an area where there is fishing, shrimping, wildlife, and beachfront property about to get oiled up. But BP and the government have the freedom to try to work out some kind of deal as opposed to fight absolutely everything in court and have it take 20 years.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE DUE PROCESSSS!!!1111