- advertisement -

Oil Spill

Discussion in 'Other Hot Topics' started by Darryl, May 24, 2010.

  1. Becky Stevens mom

    Becky Stevens mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,719
    And I see Sarah Palin is using the spill for political gain:rolleyes: Thats why she said "drill baby drill" Because instead of drilling for oil way out in the ocean we should be doing it in wildlife refuges. And before anyone tells me that this is a vast waste land that they want to drill in I dont give a rats a$$:mad: Why can we not look for other sources of energy? This oil spill should be a big wake up call that we as a society cant keep looking for new places to destroy for oil but look to other sources of renewable energy that doesnt destroy the environment and the livelihoods of thousands of people. And why isnt BP coming up with some new hairbrained ideas to get the spill stopped? Havent heard much from them recently except that one of the BP web site reporters said that the spill has been good for the hotel owners because many of the people that are cleaning up the spill are staying at the hotels. That is just sick:mad:
     
  2. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    All their money is riding on the relief well.
     
  3. Becky Stevens mom

    Becky Stevens mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,719
    Which wont be finished until next month. Another what 30+ days of that crap pouring into the ocean. Way to go BP (NOT!)
     
  4. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    I feel your frustration but I have to wonder if there's not some rationale to the approach. Sure, they could engage in mechanical masturbation (which I feel they may have already) for the benefit of the outraged public or focus on a sure-fire solution. Now, if the relief well fails to stop the flow then I'm thinking I would support a few strategically placed snipers. ;);)<nudge><nudge> (Just kidding, of course - I wouldn't intentionally violate terms of use).
     
  5. Darryl

    Darryl Approved members

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,313
    Of course, because the "relief well" gits them their oil. If they just put a 21" plug into the 21" hole, if they had really tried the top-kill procedure vs. telling us they tried it when they really didn't (remember how they wanted to turn off the cameras right before, so we wouldn't know), they wouldn't get their oil. And lord knows if they had capped this thing 2 months ago, then said OK now, we're gonna drill baby drill them relief wells to still get our oil, their would have been a lot of protest and court injunctions filed and it would probably October before they could get their oil, so they look at the cost of a few months delay in producing oil from the relief well vs. spilling 250 million gallons of oil into the ocean and they decided that their gonna get their oil, and in the mean time they won't close the vents because it would cause hydrade crystals that would block the oil from getting up the tube and then they would not meet their daily production targets from deepwater production until they day that the relief wells are drilled (yes, both of them) and they can really get their oil.

    Now the other day they got one relief well within 20 feet of the leaking wellhead, and they stopped. They said they will not connect the first relief well and cap the leaking well until the second relief well is ready. Why? If they connect the first well, then cap off the gusher, the oil flow into the gulf will be stopped. But they will only get half the oil production they are looking for. Imagine if the leak stopped, then they said "we want to drill a second relief well now, to git more oil". With the moratorium they would not be able to drill again without a fight, so it would delay them getting their oil. So we sit here until August, with oil flowing at 2.5 million gallons a day.
     
  6. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    Its not that they couldn't afford it, they most certaintly could.. they decided it was cheaper, and they'd make a bigger profit if they went over seas.. it wasn't out of desperation that they move or go bankrupt, it was about bigger profits.
     
  7. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623

    Did you see the product that a new hampshire company has made (been working on it for years) It soaks up the oil.. its called MOP.. here is a link with some info.. I havent' had time to look for more information.. this is mostly pictures..

    http://www.wmur.com/slideshow/news/24121867/detail.html
     
  8. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    I know a small businessman who is trying very hard to do manufacturing in the U.S. You would not believe the differences in costs for manufacturing in the U.S. (even manufacturing it yourself, since equipment and overhead is here) vs. overseas -- particularly China. I didn't believe it -- it's like 10 cents a piece vs. $10. It's not just that this guy wants to "make bigger profits" -- he's hoping to make $15 to $20,000 a year in this business, not Daddy Warbucks. But he probably can't sell enough of his product at a price American consumers are willing to pay if he manufactures here. His product costs $40 and is similar to products sitting next to it on the shelf for $20, even if his is superior quality (which is usually isn't, because China is very good at manufacturing now) or uniquely appealing, Americans are now trained to want the cheap thing (and 6 of it) rather than the thing of value.

    I completely believe that when our economy left off of manufacturing it started to build on sand. But I'd again disagree with you that greedy corporations are the only ones to blame for all that. Wouldn't just blame trade unions, either, to be fair.
     
  9. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    After watching "blood, sweat, and t-shirts".. I will do everything I can to make sure we are buying 'made in the USA' products and supporting those little companies.. Its not always possible.. because, of course, people look at those price tags.. but if people also realized what goes on in these other countries, and how these people are treated, vs paying a bit more and buying USA made products, where there are laws and rules against the shameful and discusting things going on in other countries... maybe we can shift back to supporting our country, our working men and woman.
     
  10. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    I think a lot of people are doing this now.

    I used to get odd, nearly eye-rolling looks when I asked where something was manufactured. Now I'm just as likely to get someone pointing me in the right direction because they are buying that way themselves.

    It's definitely a circle, part of the problem is that you can swear to not buy made in China (my particular tack, I consider it slave labor), but some things are only made there. Sometimes things you need. The more people choose to pay extra for American goods the more American goods will be available again and people can choose American again. We may get back on track to that, I hope.
     
  11. StillMamamia

    StillMamamia Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    13,195
    This is, IMO, the fundamental key to restoring a country's economic roots - buying local (local also meaning your country's products, not just your locally/regionally produced goods).

    But that would mean a HUGE change in how people think. We must have this product and the other. We don't necessarily have the means to buy the usually more pricey local products, so we go where we can afford them - the places selling cheap products made elsewhere, i.e. China or even India.

    How do we stop the needless consumerism though? How do we transform what has become a very matter-of-fact lifestyle - I want, I buy ?

    How do we step away from the individualist right of choice to consume and go back to a simpler, less frivolous state of mind, conscious that we don't need everything we want, and that our actions affect our immediate world, and the world beyond what we see day to day?

    This is an universal issue. Unfortunately, ethic/moral (not in the religious sense, mind you, but in the "human/common sense" sense) accountability is not in the forefront of most governments, hence the unsurmountability of it all.

    But then, who'd want the gov't to dictate what we can or can not do with our wants?

    All we can do is act locally, in our families, our friends, our towns and act consciously. And hope that perhaps others are doing the same elsewhere. And perhaps in a few centuries, our descendants won't be having this kind of crap to deal with.

    One can dream.
     
  12. Sarah Maddie's Mom

    Sarah Maddie's Mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    12,521
  13. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    So, they don't pay taxes, they have it registered to another country, yet we Americans are paying the price, both finacially and physically.. loving this company more every day.

    And to threaten job losses if they DO have to pay on the clean up, just discusting.. they are and should be 100% fincially responsible for ALL aspects of that disaster.. their workers shouldn't be punished.. If they economy was better all the 'little' people should bail out and find other jobs, but in this economy, that isn't possible.

    What a discusting and nasty company!
     
  14. KHM

    KHM Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    696
    Yeah---or perhaps we should look at requirements (and lack thereof) for worker safety,minimum living wages. That's where these corporations are saving the most money. So sure---as long as you don't mind being the consumer that benefits from the lamentable worker conditions in China and India, go right ahead and plunge your head right back in the sand.

    Corporates taxes? Feh. They don't pay enough and are given far too many exemptions.
     
  15. KHM

    KHM Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    696
    Bingo. One person acting responsibly across communities will eventually encourage others to do the same. Just say no to needless consumerism,support your local growers and producers, ask for the products you want when you don't see them. These kinds of attitude shifts and their impact on markets take a long time. But doing nothing will leave us precisely where we are, if not worse.
     
  16. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Let's see, do we stop buying stuff made by slave labor or do we stop paying companies to find labor in countries that have slavery.

    Any reason we can't do both?
     
  17. KHM

    KHM Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    696
    Are you suggesting there are entities within the US encouraging (paying?) US corporations to take their production operations abroad?
     
  18. StillMamamia

    StillMamamia Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    13,195
  19. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380


    My comment is in response to your post that the problem is not that corporate tax policy is driving companies away, it's that consumer choices are. My point is that both are doing it. That doesn't "suggest" that a company should get a pass on taxation because we want to beg it to stay on our shores. It "suggests" that we should be intentional about all our actions, personal and communal, and that we should look at consequences as well as intent, and that we should look at whole systems rather than just correct pieces.

    Please feel free to disagree with my point, preferably without restating it in a way that implies lunacy.:p I am on the lunatic fringe in oh so many ways :cool:, but I think on this issue it's pretty clear that a U. S. regulatory culture that can't let my local rancher sell beef in his local grocery store unless his butcher provides a bathroom solely for the use of the USDA inspector but manages to not notice lead in children's toys and poison in the toothpaste imported from China is what's nuts. :eek:
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2010
  20. Sarah Maddie's Mom

    Sarah Maddie's Mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    12,521

Share This Page

- advertisement -

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice