OMG, America, RISE UP:: BP burning sea turtles

[susano]

YouTube - Venice, Louisiana, Boat Captain/ by Catherine Craig (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kjw3_bMk8o)

[Uriel999]

FU BP!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.

[Fox McCloud]

hardly worth complaining about IMHO--there's more important things ruined here, like actual ownable property, not to mention a number of jobs (in the fishing industry and oil industry).

[Uriel999]

hardly worth complaining about IMHO--there's more important things ruined here, like actual ownable property, not to mention a number of jobs (in the fishing industry and oil industry).

Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

[MichelleHeart]

Ooo...sea turtles.

EDIT: Sorry for that outburst. It's not that I don't like sea turtles. I do. It's just that econazis seem to care more about birds, turtles, marine wildlife, and plots of blue ocean than they do actual human beings and human civilization itself.

[Uriel999]

Ooo...sea turtles.

EDIT: Sorry for that outburst. It's not that I don't like sea turtles. I do. It's just that econazis seem to care more about birds, turtles, marine wildlife, and plots of blue ocean than they do actual human beings and human civilization itself.

Guess what Wisconsin, those birds, turtles, marine widlife, and plots of blue ocean are critical to human beings and human civilization itself in the coastal gulf regions.

[Eroberer]

BP doesn't own the water. Do what needs to be done.

We need to stand up and be men instead of the serfs we are quickly becoming.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

BP doesn't own the water. Do what needs to be done.

We need to stand up and be men instead of the serfs we are quickly becoming.

The point is no one owns the water. The fundamental issue here is that there is no property rights or ownership on the seas. This is a fundamental flaw that led directly to a lot of environmental damage. If you care about the environment then this must be a huge issue.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Guess what Wisconsin, those birds, turtles, marine widlife, and plots of blue ocean are critical to human beings and human civilization itself in the coastal gulf regions.

How do you think the turtle population would be if someone had stake in their ownership? You ever wonder why Bison went nearly extinct, and cows and horses, and other animals aren't? You take care of things you own. You destroy, and waste things you don't.

Also, those marine animals aren't critical to human beings. All humans need for survival is plant life, and ownership of animals that supply meat. None of those criterium is met with the above (since we have adequate supply from land based animals). So, no it isn't "critical". Is it beneficial? Of course. Is it sad that this has happened? Of course. But this IS a fundamental issue of property rights, and their benefits, especially towards the environment.

[DjLoTi]

I lived in the gulf coast region, and people don't understand.... some wildlife along the gulf coast is already struggling....

We are destroying a way of life for generations. For you to say people's property and jobs is more important then our ocean and coastal biodiversity, I'm not sure you understand the planet is somewhat interconnected. If we eliminate biodiversity in the gulf coast, the animals won't magically re-populate.

I am totally not a animal rights activist, but I think we should be more concerned about destroying an entire oceanic region then a few jobs or some people's property.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

YouTube - Venice, Louisiana, Boat Captain/ by Catherine Craig (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kjw3_bMk8o)

Rise up over burning sea turtles? Are you some kind of environmental extremist?

Burning sea turtles is not high on my list of grievances for being raped and pillaged by government.


Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about.

Property is the most important to think about but I don't worship the state version of property which promotes distorting land ownership and no self ownership. The an/cap view on property rights derived from self ownership and homesteading land to share the planet earth are very environmentally friendly. The unused land market is not distorted. Risks of living in coastal regions is not distorted with subsidized flood insurance. Liability is not distorted. etc.

Problem... violent gangs (government)
Solution... eliminate violent gangs

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I lived in the gulf coast region, and people don't understand.... some wildlife along the gulf coast is already struggling....

We are destroying a way of life for generations. For you to say people's property and jobs is more important then our ocean and coastal biodiversity, I'm not sure you understand the planet is somewhat interconnected. If we eliminate biodiversity in the gulf coast, the animals won't magically re-populate.

I am totally not a animal rights activist, but I think we should be more concerned about destroying an entire oceanic region then a few jobs or some people's property.

Thats all nice and emotional, and everything, but it doesn't save a damn thing. Use reason, not emotion! If you want to protect the environment then this is a serious issue of property rights, or the lack of them. As long as we continue to cap liability, prevent damage remuneration, and prevent ownership on the seas, this will continue to be a problem. So if you really are concerned, then you better start advancing the solution to the problem.

[DjLoTi]

Thats all nice and emotional, and everything, but it doesn't save a damn thing. Use reason, not emotion! If you want to protect the environment then this is a serious issue of property rights, or the lack of them. As long as we continue to cap liability, prevent damage remuneration, and prevent ownership on the seas, this will continue to be a problem. So if you really are concerned, then you better start advancing the solution to the problem.

Maybe you haven't seen me post and post and post saying we HAVE electric vehicles, they are HERE and we need them NOW! With all the money from the oil companies preventing EVs from dominating our car industry, there's nothing left for us to do but bail out our worthless, gas-guzzling car producers (ie-GM).

I love how you have this genius argument to totally minimize my concern for THE OCEANS ON PLANET EARTH, but I have been posting and posting and posting about how we can end the monopolistic corporate oil domination. I don't see YOU doing anything but talking about how it would be so much better if people owned a portion of the seas, cuz the perfect free market....

How about this? Lets make the government make a law banning gas cars? Oh but I'm sure your 'free market' will provide a more advanced and effective way.. oh in what maybe 40 years? Meanwhile look at the Iphone only 3 years after the first one, 9 years after the first Ipod, and yet we're bailing out our car companies who don't even put basic GPS in $14,000 cars

Sorry, but don't try to tell me my cherished beaches and a wonderful way of life is just a 'casualty' since everyone can't own everything, thus creating *perfect* property ownership protection situations, since we KNOW everyone is going to follow up and take care of their property and our earth!

[Bman]

How do you think the turtle population would be if someone had stake in their ownership? You ever wonder why Bison went nearly extinct, and cows and horses, and other animals aren't? You take care of things you own. You destroy, and waste things you don't.

Also, those marine animals aren't critical to human beings. All humans need for survival is plant life, and ownership of animals that supply meat. None of those criterium is met with the above (since we have adequate supply from land based animals). So, no it isn't "critical". Is it beneficial? Of course. Is it sad that this has happened? Of course. But this IS a fundamental issue of property rights, and their benefits, especially towards the environment.

Ok seriously. That has got to be the stupidest post's you've ever made. The eco-system in the ocean is one of the most important elements of supporting human life period.

From food to weather patterns. This is a major issue. If you want to blow it off go ahead but understand somethings are vital to human existence. Nothing is more vital than a water source, especially the ocean.

Just because there is no ownership doesn't equate to something having no value. Not to mention people would buy sections of the ocean if it was allowed.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Maybe you haven't seen me post and post and post saying we HAVE electric vehicles, they are HERE and we need them NOW! With all the money from the oil companies preventing EVs from dominating our car industry, there's nothing left for us to do but bail out our worthless, gas-guzzling car producers (ie-GM).

I love how you have this genius argument to totally minimize my concern for THE OCEANS ON PLANET EARTH, but I have been posting and posting and posting about how we can end the monopolistic corporate oil domination. I don't see YOU doing anything but talking about how it would be so much better if people owned a portion of the seas, cuz the perfect free market....

How about this? Lets make the government make a law banning gas cars? Oh but I'm sure your 'free market' will provide a more advanced and effective way.. oh in what maybe 40 years? Meanwhile look at the Iphone only 3 years after the first one, 9 years after the first Ipod, and yet we're bailing out our car companies who don't even put basic GPS in $14,000 cars

Sorry, but don't try to tell me my cherished beaches and a wonderful way of life is just a 'casualty' since everyone can't own everything, thus creating *perfect* property ownership protection situations, since we KNOW everyone is going to follow up and take care of their property and our earth!

Well I can obviously tell you care more about emotion, than either the environment or liberty. Pray tell, how do you plan to prevent these things in the future? I'm sure no one in the Government has ever been corrupted by money. Nope.

Besides, there is a very little market for electric cars because they are not better than traditional oil cars. The only people who would buy them are the rabid environmentalists, who don't even understand it costs energy (and 50% produced in the US is fossil fuels), to make electricity. You aren't solving anything going from oil to electric. Anyways, continue your emotional tantrum.

[DjLoTi]

Besides, there is a very little market for electric cars because they are not better than traditional oil cars. The only people who would buy them are the rabid environmentalists

This is enough for me to completely ignore you, since it's a perfect example of you 1-being totally wrong, and 2-being rude and judgmental.

I will say this though; you don't know me or know what I think. I mean you're talking to me as if I have the power to just walk into Washington and start telling people what to do. I've probably started a bigger movement then you ever have, but even that aside, it amazes me you completely minimize and ignore the damage to the biodiversity on planet earth, as if it's 'in the ocean so it doesn't matter'

[MichelleHeart]

The point is no one owns the water. The fundamental issue here is that there is no property rights or ownership on the seas. This is a fundamental flaw that led directly to a lot of environmental damage. If you care about the environment then this must be a huge issue.

Precisely. When the oceans and coasts are owned "in common" (as opposed to in private) the incentive to avoid potential damages are vastly curbed. More property rights in these parts would have encouraged supervision, caution, proper bargaining, and full assessment of risks before moving forward. And, of course, limited liability creates perverse incentives that negatively affect company policy. But this has been discussed at length on these forums. Free markets do far more for the environment than tight controls and socialism. And, as it has been duly noted several times before, communist countries have far worse pollution and safety records than capitalist countries. Property rights are key if you want to prevent pollution and the destruction of wildlife and natural resources.

However, the econazis who dominate today's environmentalist movement are in no position to consider such economic realities. Their hatred for oil, industry, and human civilization itself is a hindrance to any chance they might consider stricter property rights to curb pollution, or free markets, profit, and private investment as the road to newer and cleaner energies.

Two decades ago, in 1989, Murray N. Rothbard, through sharp analysis and wit, revealed modern environmentalists for who they truly were – enemies of mankind, industry, and modern life as we know it.

"The environmentalists are in pursuit of their own perverse and anti-human value-scale, in which every creature, animal, fish, or bird, heck even blue water, ranks higher than the wants and needs of human beings. ... They want to reverse the Industrial Revolution, and get back to pristine 'nature,' with its chronic starvation, rampant disease, and short, ugly, and brutish life span."

How right he was.

[DjLoTi]

Seriously, I think if people 'bought' pieces of the oceans, some of them would be as neglected as animals or cars or homes, or anything else. Plus it would NOT be hard for BP to just buy everybody off. Imagine BP going to court against hundreds of property owners... BP would prob win most of the time with their amazing lawyers.

Sometimes i think u guys live in libertarian la-la land

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Precisely. When the oceans and coasts are owned "in common" (as opposed to in private) the incentive to avoid potential damages are vastly curbed. More property rights in these parts would have encouraged supervision, caution, proper bargaining, and full assessment of risks before moving forward. And, of course, limited liability creates perverse incentives that negatively affect company policy. But this has been discussed at length on these forums. Free markets do far more for the environment than tight controls and socialism. And, as it has been duly noted several times before, communist countries have far worse pollution and safety records than capitalist countries. Property rights are key if you want to prevent pollution and the destruction of wildlife and natural resources.

However, the econazis who dominate today's environmentalist movement are in no position to consider such economic realities. Their hatred for oil, industry, and human civilization itself is a hindrance to any chance they might consider stricter property rights to curb pollution, or free markets, profit, and private investment as the road to newer and cleaner energies.

Two decades ago, in 1989, Murray N. Rothbard, through sharp analysis and wit, revealed modern environmentalists for who they truly were – enemies of mankind, industry, and modern life as we know it.

"The environmentalists are in pursuit of their own perverse and anti-human value-scale, in which every creature, animal, fish, or bird, heck even blue water, ranks higher than the wants and needs of human beings. ... They want to reverse the Industrial Revolution, and get back to pristine 'nature,' with its chronic starvation, rampant disease, and short, ugly, and brutish life span."

How right he was.

Indeed. The modern environmental movement is nothing more than Neo-Ludditism.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Seriously, I think if people 'bought' pieces of the oceans, some of them would be as neglected as animals or cars or homes, or anything else. Plus it would NOT be hard for BP to just buy everybody off. Imagine BP going to court against hundreds of property owners... BP would prob win most of the time with their amazing lawyers.

Sometimes i think u guys live in libertarian la-la land

Oh yeah, because its certainly far harder to buy a few politicians off, who have no economic interest in avoiding such buy offs. The only one living in la-la land is yourself, and others who share your view.

[DjLoTi]

You can label me what you want when you call me an 'environmentalist' just like I can call you a 'libertarian', but I don't see anything wrong with loving our earth, and I don't see anything wrong with loving liberty.

But I just like the earth. I'm not some stuck-up asshole about environmental issues.

Oh yeah and by the way, humans have emotion. You might wanna try it sometime ;P Maybe one day you can care about our beaches

[GunnyFreedom]

It is true that if we HAD been under a free market, then there would be a variety of solutions that are not now available, just as AED says. However, we also have to come to grips with the fact that we are not currently under such a system, and yet this crisis still has to be dealt with.

a not-so-well-fitting analogy I will craft refers to our wilderness. Yes, allowing occasional brushfires helps to prevent runaway forest fires. However in some areas they have failed to let the natural clearing take place, leading to forest fires that threaten whole cities. Do we shrug our shoulders, state that this wouldn't have been a problem if we had managed the forest right in the first place, and then say, "oh well, let it burn."

Of course not.

The situation in the Gulf is f'ed up. A whole lot of ignorant big-government intervention and total ignorance of private property led to the disaster we now face. But just because it was their ignorance which created the situation does not mean that we can just shrugour shoulders and walk away.

The crisis of wildlife in the Gulf is apparently a lot worse than some here seem to think. To use a tired and worn out phrase, "What if one of those species we extinct here holds the cure for cancer or AIDS?" Not to mention that the natural environment is deeply interconnected and this will leave scars for decades to come.

Yeah, no kidding if we had the right business free market environment the problem would not have been nearly as bad. Yeah, no kidding if not for government meddling in places it didn't belong this whole thing might have been a blip instead of a crisis. All that is true, and good and well.

Well, that's sadly simply NOT the situation we are presented with today. The cretins messed everything up, and now they try to leave the smart people to clean up their mess...except there will be more government regulations now making things even worse.

That doesn't mean we sit back and let a huge chunk of the ocean die because we weren't the ones who made the mess!

My goodness, one of the basic tenets of human life is that we have to deal with the reality we are presented with, whether arriving at that point was fair, just, right, or not. Sure, it was jacked up government that brought us here. Sure, it was a lack of respect for property that makes it unlikely to be cleaned in a timely manner. But like it or not, this is the reality we face, and this really and truly is a crisis that will continue to hurt us for decades if not centuries to come UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING to clean it up.

I, like you, AED, think this is all crap. I believe that had we had a right-minded nation and a good policy on property and the free market, this wouldn't even be a crisis. But that's past, and this is now. When you are in a survival situation trying to build a shelter and all you have is a hammer and some screws, do you lament the fact that a screwdriver would be a better tool, or do you just get over it and proceed to drive the screws with your imperfect hammer?

Let's get this crisis mopped up and THEN let's worry about implementing the policies to avert a similar crisis in the future. Unfortunately, we have this crisis NOW, and like it or not, all we have to drive those screws is a hammer, so it's best we get to hammering. Nothing we say or do is going to make a screwdriver magically appear, and if we do nothing at all, this thing could devastate an entire region for several decades. :(

[LittleLightShining]

Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.*hugs*


BP doesn't own the water. Do what needs to be done.

We need to stand up and be men instead of the serfs we are quickly becoming.That we do!


Thats all nice and emotional, and everything, but it doesn't save a damn thing. Use reason, not emotion! If you want to protect the environment then this is a serious issue of property rights, or the lack of them. As long as we continue to cap liability, prevent damage remuneration, and prevent ownership on the seas, this will continue to be a problem. So if you really are concerned, then you better start advancing the solution to the problem.

First, I totally agree with you about the liability cap. That's shit and it needs to go.

But dude, who's gonna own the ocean? You and me? Because we're so resourceful and have all this money available to buy a stake in it? And the turtles, birds, pelicans, blue fin tuna, oysters, shrimp, crabs... the coral, the sand, the plantlife, the ducks, the migratory birds. You really think if we just tag all of it problem solved? Wow.

I'm all for property rights but private property rights are NOT going to be some utopian magic bullet that will clean up the shit that is in the Gulf right now.

How about someone go arrest the bastards at BP and MMS for manslaughter. How about the National Guard not take their mofo orders from foreigners. How about more coastal towns and states take the lead from Magnolia Springs, Okaloosa and Jindal? How about the people with the hay and the hair just fucking go out there and say, "I'm doing this. Shoot me if you don't like it."

I'm so frustrated I could cry. However much I appreciate the theory of anarchy and total private property it's not fucking practical. Even if someone owned the Gulf what about the gases? Pretend BP owns the Gulf-- they may as well the way things have been going. So now what? You have people on the shore getting sick from the gases. Where's the mofo recourse? Can a shore dweller REALLY own the air? It is not going to happen. It will be years and lives lost before anyone gets anywhere because it will be litigated til there's no money left.

:mad:

Exhale...

[teacherone]

i was going to write something sarcastic about turtle soup but can't now after reading this.

thanks for ruining my cynicism...feel all sentimental now. should watch some sinefeld and get it back...



Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

i was going to write something sarcastic about turtle soup but can't now after reading this.

thanks for ruining my cynicism...feel all sentimental now. should watch some sinefeld and get it back...

You are likely wise to self moderate because a turtle soup joke would probably not go over well in this thread. ;)

I did want to ask Djloti about his comment on electric vehicles. Is the problem electric/alternative fuel vehicles or is the problem no one purchasing fuel and paying gas taxes for public roads?

[roho76]

How do you think the turtle population would be if someone had stake in their ownership? You ever wonder why Bison went nearly extinct, and cows and horses, and other animals aren't? You take care of things you own. You destroy, and waste things you don't.

I agree whole heartedly. This does not mean I am not sad for your situation Uriel. It sucks, greatly. This whole disaster sucks. BP and all the other oil companies are nothing more than corporate couch surfers. They eat your food, drink your beer and then when they've warn out their welcome they move over to someone elses house. I will have to your your analogy in the future. That's a good one. Truth be told though, if someone owned the Gulf of Mexico there would be no drilling there, I guarantee.

[fisharmor]

This is enough for me to completely ignore you, since it's a perfect example of you 1-being totally wrong, and 2-being rude and judgmental.

Well, he's not totally wrong about electric cars. I don't know that I would say they're not "better" than internal combustion. But I would say that the best electric car of today is much more expensive than the equivalent power internal combustion engine car, has a shorter range, and a fraction of the lifespan.
Lithium Ion batteries are well known for permanently losing 20% of their capacity every year. That means after just 2.5 years your electric car has lost half of its range, which to begin with was less than the range of a gasoline car. And after 5 years you're on the hook for a total battery replacement, which costs as much as replacing the whole engine in a gasoline car.

How many people would buy a gasoline car knowing that after 5 years they'd need to replace the engine? A big, fat, whopping zero - which, coincidentally, is how many people are interested in replacing a bunch of batteries after 5 years in an electric car.

This doesn't even address the charge times.

These are facts. You bring only name calling. That reinforces the claim that you're probably so infatuated with the idea of electric cars that you're not looking at reality.

Now in MY la-la land, environmentalists who are serious about the environment are willing to entertain other more effective options.
For instance, consider that the problem of electric transportation has been solved for about 140 years now (RAIL), and that there are multiple barriers in place to prevent that solution being implemented.
If environmentalists were serious about electric transport, they'd be arguing in favor of the elimination of zoning laws. They'd be pushing for urbanization, and for planning communities around train stations, just like mankind figured out to do over a century ago.

Privatization of the sea is just another area where environmentalists aren't willing to go. Yet when you sit down and actually think about it, you see that while not perfect, it offers some basic protections against the type of thing we're seeing in the gulf - while public ownership actually encourages this type of thing.

Of course, I'm perfectly willing to admit that I live in la-la land, because no environmentalist is committed enough to the environment to actually seek solutions. They're just looking for government power-grabs, and resort to name calling when their hypocrisy is pointed out.

[constituent]

Guess what Wisconsin, those birds, turtles, marine widlife, and plots of blue ocean are critical to human beings and human civilization itself in the coastal gulf regions.

Thank you.

[constituent]

I lived in the gulf coast region, and people don't understand.... some wildlife along the gulf coast is already struggling....

We are destroying a way of life for generations. For you to say people's property and jobs is more important then our ocean and coastal biodiversity, I'm not sure you understand the planet is somewhat interconnected. If we eliminate biodiversity in the gulf coast, the animals won't magically re-populate.

I am totally not a animal rights activist, but I think we should be more concerned about destroying an entire oceanic region then a few jobs or some people's property.

take a bath you f*n hippy.

[ChaosControl]

To hell with BP

[constituent]

btw, my avatar is an interpretation of a specific spot along the gulf coast where i grew up. It's between a couple of little towns that sort of line Copano Bay.

we're lucky to have escaped the direct effects of this disaster so far, but i can't imagine how much I'd be burning up if we hadn't.

[MsDoodahs]

I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

And that is exactly why BOzo is doing NOTHING to stop the damage to the coastline.

The sonofabitch hates Southerners, and he wants them demoralized.

[Noob]

This fits right into the agenda of the Global Warming policy they want. I bet that some time later on, like 100 years or so, they well have this in school text books as a chapter of an dark period of human life on earth, befor humans grow smarter to only have 1 child per family, and reduce the poplation by billions. Whill another chapter would cover the War on Terror, and all of those photos and videos of halliburton blowing up its own trucks in Iraq, and the people driving them and blowing them up acting like actors in the photos and videos would be use as an examples of al qaeda attacking the convoys in Iraq.

[constituent]

This fits right into the agenda of the Global Warming policy they want.

Ah yes, the famous "they."

[specsaregood]

To hell with BP

http://72.73.236.82/photos/bp-vs-aquaman.jpg

[angelatc]

Maybe you haven't seen me post and post and post saying we HAVE electric vehicles, they are HERE and we need them NOW! With all the money from the oil companies preventing EVs from dominating our car industry, there's nothing left for us to do but bail out our worthless, gas-guzzling car producers (ie-GM).

Where does electricity come from? It's sucky choice, but I'd rather live with burning sea turtles than let them start building more nuclear plants. Michigan got lucky - a tornado hit one in the past two weeks, but the damage was minor. I considered it a warning shot.

[Roxi]

someone elses house. I will have to your your analogy in the future. That's a good one. Truth be told though, if someone owned the Gulf of Mexico there would be no drilling there, I guarantee.

really, you don't think the oil companies wouldn't be buying that shit up?

[Travlyr]

Emotions vs. Logic

Which one wins?

[Roxi]

Emotions vs. Logic

Which one wins?

Logic always wins, but without emotion we also lack passion. without passion we change nothing.

[JeNNiF00F00]

Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

I agree with you here. The gulf is beautiful. When I lived on the gulf I saw such beautiful things. Dolphins were always around, id see sea turtles walking into work or leaving work etc. Property will be worth nothing after this disaster, and the animals may never be able to come back to what they were and they were already suffering to begin with. This has nothing to do with emotion or logic. It has to do with doing what is RIGHT. If you have respect for life, then do something about it! The upright disregard for this disaster on these forums make me wonder why I am still in this movement.

[JeNNiF00F00]

And that is exactly why BOzo is doing NOTHING to stop the damage to the coastline.

The sonofabitch hates Southerners, and he wants them demoralized.

Hmmm...he does think hes the King Lincoln incarnate.....:eek:

[rancher89]

Here's a map of the oil and major bird migration locations:

http://networkedblogs.com/4TcVz

I'm not a "tree hugger," but I believe in trying to not f@#k things up if at all possible.

It's bad now, just wait til the bird migrations start up in late Sept/Oct/Nov.

Or the hurricane season starts up for real. I shudder to think of what the oil rains will do to inland waterways and our water supplies...

I'm with Gunny on this, 100%.

[zade]

Is anyone willing to admit yet that just because consumers strongly demand something doesn't mean it's inherently a good thing? We like oil, but nobody really cares about the consequences, at least not until its too late, even in a free market i can't see why there would be any consideration of environmental impact above expedience and efficiency. And then libertarians and conservatives have the nerve to talk about saving jobs in the oil industry

[Travlyr]

Logic always wins, but without emotion we also lack passion. without passion we change nothing.

I like that! :D

Then maybe we can find a true solution from this thread. :)

[Travlyr]

Is anyone willing to admit yet that just because consumers strongly demand something doesn't mean it's inherently a good thing? We like oil, but nobody really cares about the consequences, at least not until its too late, even in a free market i can't see why there would be any consideration of environmental impact above expedience and efficiency.

And is anyone willing to admit that just because your masters and overlords tell you it's a bad thing that it is inherently bad?

[JeNNiF00F00]

take a bath you f*n hippy.

Uncalled for. :mad:

[puppetmaster]

I think we have a many important things to rise up against.....turtles closer to the bottom of the "pisses me off to the point of no return" list..IMHO

[JeNNiF00F00]

I think we have a many important things to rise up against.....turtles closer to the bottom of the "pisses me off to the point of no return" list..IMHO

Yeah but you live in the desert so yeah it probably doesn't really affect you like it does the ones on the water. :P

[Travlyr]

Is anyone willing to admit yet that just because consumers strongly demand something doesn't mean it's inherently a good thing? We like oil, but nobody really cares about the consequences, at least not until its too late, even in a free market i can't see why there would be any consideration of environmental impact above expedience and efficiency. And then libertarians and conservatives have the nerve to talk about saving jobs in the oil industry

I like oil and I am quite concerned about the consequences. Yet, I do not base my ideas on emotion, but rather on logic. Without oil many people will freeze in the dark. I propose a more reasonable approach.

The emotional wrecks seem to "believe" that oil is inherently bad. The facts do not support this position. While oil may not be the most optimal solution, it has been very good for mankind. Many advancements have been made because of oil, gas & coal production.

In a perfect world, we would be able to keep warm, travel, have electrical conveniences, and sing praises to the sun god, or the renewable energy god. But we do not live in a perfect world. So, we have to work our way to perfection. That takes logic backed by emotion.

Our masters and overlords are out of control. How do we wrest power from them? Their over burdensome laws and controls have us handcuffed. First, the central planners steal from us, then they lie and force bad policy into society for their benefit at the expense of the rest of us. This needs to change.

Hemp regulations is a perfect example. Producing hemp products would solve a lot of issues. Cleaner air, improved economy and and some great products are all benefits of changing just this one regulation that was forced on the people through the lies of the masters.

How do we stop these thieves?

[puppetmaster]

I own property on the beach in SC (Cherry Grove) and South America(not saying!).....I Live on a ranch(with lots of water) and I take care of my surroundings as I live from the land as many folks live from the sea, but this is just another problem that stems from a useless Government and horrible policies. Our Government and the Corporations that run it are disgusting and need to go NOW, regardless of the BP fiasco.

[LittleLightShining]

Uncalled for. :mad:

I thought that was sarcastic. You are quoting constituent, you know :D

[JeNNiF00F00]

I thought that was sarcastic. You are quoting constituent, you know :D

lolz Tru dat!

Cons if you were being sarcastic I appologize.

[JeNNiF00F00]

I own property on the beach in SC (Cherry Grove) and South America(not saying!).....I Live on a ranch(with lots of water) and I take care of my surroundings as I live from the land as many folks live from the sea, but this is just another problem that stems from a useless Government and horrible policies. Our Government and the Corporations that run it are disgusting and need to go NOW, regardless of the BP fiasco.

I was somewhat joking hence the :P face. <3

[puppetmaster]

I was somewhat joking hence the :P face. <3

Yes I know but there was a point that would have come up later in the thread......most likely....Hey I gotta go attend to my sand...later

:D

[MelissaWV]

I agree with you here. The gulf is beautiful. When I lived on the gulf I saw such beautiful things. Dolphins were always around, id see sea turtles walking into work or leaving work etc. Property will be worth nothing after this disaster, and the animals may never be able to come back to what they were and they were already suffering to begin with. This has nothing to do with emotion or logic. It has to do with doing what is RIGHT. If you have respect for life, then do something about it! The upright disregard for this disaster on these forums make me wonder why I am still in this movement.

I read this wrong and thought the turtles were working.

[puppetmaster]

I read this wrong and thought the turtles were working.


me too....

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Where does electricity come from?

Where does it come from?



The average electricity production cost in 2005 for nuclear energy was 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour, for coal-fired plants 2.21 cents / kWh, for oil 8.09 cents / kWh, and for natural gas 7.51 cents / kWh. (Source - Nuclear Energy Institute NEI).


Fossil fuelled plants use either coal (60%), oil (10%)or gas (30%) in purpose designed combustion chambers to raise steam. These are all non-renewable resources whose supply will ultimately be exhausted. The energy content of these fuels and their variants is shown on the Energy Resources page

Oil is probably the most convenient fuel and thirty years ago it accounted for 30% of the consumption but it has mostly been replaced by coal as oil prices have risen faster than the price of coal due to insecurities of supply. At the same time, the premium value of oil for transportation and chemical uses, rather than for just burning it to extract its calorific value, has also been recognised.

Coal is the least convenient. Its calorific content, on average, is less than half that of the other two fuels. Handling and transporting it is more difficult and it produces large quantities of residues, ash and greenhouse gases, some of which are toxic, depending on the quality of the coal.

So what is oil used for?

..... transportation & chemicals .....

[DjLoTi]

here's an electric truck you can get for 25k that can drive up to 200 miles and up to 75 mph - http://www.envisionmotorcompany.com/

but imagine.. if we took the $750 million we spent EVERY DAY on IMPORTED OIL alone, if we took that money and spent it on solar panels, we would have solar panels on every single building, road, basically everywhere. $750 million a day is a staunch investment. If we completely stopped using imported oil, maybe only using domestic oil for planes and stuff, after 6 months we would have that 25k EV for every man, woman, and child in America

But why would we send that money to alternative energies when we can send it to oil companies? I am not an 'environmentalist' but I have done my research and come up with my own ideas. The name of the game atm seems to be, 'fuck it, lets keep using oil till it's gone'. I don't understand why no one is jumping at the idea to eviscerate an oil company. They are not our friends. BP supported the bail-out, cap-and-trade, and numerous other legislation that is very 'anti-libertarian'. If even THAT doesn't make you want to start thinking of other solutions, then I would say just stick to stuff you know. Maybe you can make a good impact on something you know more about. It's really pointless to be a defeatist and argue with people as if oil is really the golden fuel... :rollseyes:

[constituent]

lolz Tru dat!

Cons if you were being sarcastic I appologize.


:D


no problem.

[specsaregood]

Hawksbill are my favorite sea turtles, their shells are so cool.

On a side note, turtles were one of the first/few species where they found out that the different "species" could interbreed and create viable offspring. This helped create the need to redefine "species".

[puppetmaster]

here's an electric truck you can get for 25k that can drive up to 200 miles and up to 75 mph - http://www.envisionmotorcompany.com/

but imagine.. if we took the $750 million we spent EVERY DAY on IMPORTED OIL alone, if we took that money and spent it on solar panels, we would have solar panels on every single building, road, basically everywhere. $750 million a day is a staunch investment. If we completely stopped using imported oil, maybe only using domestic oil for planes and stuff, after 6 months we would have that 25k EV for every man, woman, and child in America

But why would we send that money to alternative energies when we can send it to oil companies? I am not an 'environmentalist' but I have done my research and come up with my own ideas. The name of the game atm seems to be, 'fuck it, lets keep using oil till it's gone'. I don't understand why no one is jumping at the idea to eviscerate an oil company. They are not our friends. BP supported the bail-out, cap-and-trade, and numerous other legislation that is very 'anti-libertarian'. If even THAT doesn't make you want to start thinking of other solutions, then I would say just stick to stuff you know. Maybe you can make a good impact on something you know more about. It's really pointless to be a defeatist and argue with people as if oil is really the golden fuel... :rollseyes:

This is why I support a NATIONAL strike. everyone stay home just one day from work or anywhere and stick it to the oil companies and the Government. The Oil companies would lose out on sales and the Gov would lose tax revenue...alot of tax revenue. I imagine talk of a National strike will be against the law and enforced soon. ya know "terrorism"

[Anti Federalist]

This is why I support a NATIONAL strike. everyone stay home just one day from work or anywhere and stick it to the oil companies and the Government. The Oil companies would lose out on sales and the Gov would lose tax revenue...alot of tax revenue. I imagine talk of a National strike will be against the law and enforced soon. ya know "terrorism"

I've been pushing this idea for a while now for different reasons.

You're right, it will be declared terrorism if it were to ever happen.

[Brian4Liberty]

Emotions vs. Logic

Which one wins?

Both can fail. Logic is very susceptible to incomplete information. Emotions serve a purpose, but are very short-sighted.

As for BP burning animals: it seems like BPs strategy right from the beginning has been to cover up the damage. They use dispersants to hide the oil under the water. They try to keep the public away from damaged coastlines. They prevent rescue workers from seeing how many animals (and types of animals) are caught in the oil out in the gulf (and burned).

[puppetmaster]

I've been pushing this idea for a while now for different reasons.

You're right, it will be declared terrorism if it were to ever happen.


Yes I agree different reasons but attacking the same monster

I don't care I will support a strike and be an activist.

[MsDoodahs]

I realize that boycotting BP gas stations hurts the station owners but I think it is time to move on a boycott because after all, don't the station owners have some ability to put pressure on the company?

[puppetmaster]

unions call strikes all the time and get results.

Since the American people are part of one of the greatest and most powerful unions of all time it is time to consider this seriously.

[pahs1994]

I realize that boycotting BP gas stations hurts the station owners but I think it is time to move on a boycott because after all, don't the station owners have some ability to put pressure on the company?

All BP stations in my area changed their signs to different generic names weeks ago. im not sure if that means they get their gas elsewere now or just trying to save buisness..

[puppetmaster]

I realize that boycotting BP gas stations hurts the station owners but I think it is time to move on a boycott because after all, don't the station owners have some ability to put pressure on the company?

the problem goes much deeper than just boycotting BP. The problem lies in the fact that corporations are entrenched in our goverment and the our politicians are not serving our interests in any way. If there is a boycott lets go big or go home. A boycottt or strike to affect the root cause. A complete shutdown is needed

[klamath]

This is why I support a NATIONAL strike. everyone stay home just one day from work or anywhere and stick it to the oil companies and the Government. The Oil companies would lose out on sales and the Gov would lose tax revenue...alot of tax revenue. I imagine talk of a National strike will be against the law and enforced soon. ya know "terrorism"
Try it for a year or a month then I will think it is more than a feel good do gooder action. Do you think the loss of .277% profit will bring the "Big oil companies" to their knees?

[puppetmaster]

Try it for a year or a month then I will think it is more than a feel good do gooder action. Do you think the loss of .277% profit will bring the "Big oil companies" to their knees?

I agree longer is bette,r but at this point getting any action is better than idle talk.
Getting people to do this for a day is doable and when they taste results they will be hungry for more! That's why the government would not be happy with this plan.

[CountryboyRonPaul]

I have to throw my 2 cents in here.

They are burning the oil for a reason.

If saving turtles means delaying the clean up, which means thousands more barrels of oil reach the coast, I hate to say it, but you are probably hurting turtle populations more by allowing the extra oil to reach the beaches and marshlands than you are by burning individual turtles caught in the oil at sea.

As a lifelong recreational fisherman in S. Louisiana, I think the most important thing we can do to help the entire ecosystem is keep the oil from getting inland.

What is really the most tragic is when the marsh grass dies, and habitat loss occurs.

The turtles can't spawn if they dig into the beach and lay their eggs in oil.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

here's an electric truck you can get for 25k that can drive up to 200 miles and up to 75 mph - http://www.envisionmotorcompany.com/

but imagine.. if we took the $750 million we spent EVERY DAY on IMPORTED OIL alone, if we took that money and spent it on solar panels, we would have solar panels on every single building, road, basically everywhere. $750 million a day is a staunch investment. If we completely stopped using imported oil, maybe only using domestic oil for planes and stuff, after 6 months we would have that 25k EV for every man, woman, and child in America

But why would we send that money to alternative energies when we can send it to oil companies? I am not an 'environmentalist' but I have done my research and come up with my own ideas. The name of the game atm seems to be, 'fuck it, lets keep using oil till it's gone'. I don't understand why no one is jumping at the idea to eviscerate an oil company. They are not our friends. BP supported the bail-out, cap-and-trade, and numerous other legislation that is very 'anti-libertarian'. If even THAT doesn't make you want to start thinking of other solutions, then I would say just stick to stuff you know. Maybe you can make a good impact on something you know more about. It's really pointless to be a defeatist and argue with people as if oil is really the golden fuel... :rollseyes:

Actually the cheapest was 32k. Anyways, I've brought it up before how it is absurd we are still using oil for transportation today. This is primarily the fault of the US Government who have made it so exceedingly difficult to start large R&D and capital projects due to all the bureaurocratic mess you have to hop through, not to mention that on average today, it costs much more to survive than it did between 1850 and 1910. Capital accumulation has decreased drastically, and capital flight has been a cause for much of our economic woes since the 1950s.

Electricity is not an energy source. It stores energy, but is not an energy producer. So you are not "replacing" oil. You are just merely placing the burden of transportation on another resource-- primarily coal which is much worse for the environment than oil! You can thank the .GOV for that one also. Making it nearly impossible for any new Nuclear Reactors to get built. Whatever happened to the hydrogen cars? Also, todays batteries are horrible for the environment, and have to be thrown out every 5 years. There is actually I believe a Mises video that covers this.

The sad fact of reality is that all energy sources decay, and once used have waste -- pollution. You will never get rid of pollution. We can try and minimize it, and we can use economic systems to keep it in check (Laissez-Faire), but ultimately that is just a fact of reality.

Yeah, I don't want to imagine, or care to, since central planning is a failure. The thought doesn't even cross my mind. It is so foreign to me. That 750$ million is stolen money, and that fact, nulls your whole argument. Your whole thesis also is fucking absurd and ludicrous, and reeks of the most totalitarian economic system. Complete and utter trash communism. Who is this we? Certainly not me. I don't consent to being pillaged, and I certainly don't consent to this plunder taken from me, to buy another person a fucking car!

Electricity is not an alternate energy. For someone claiming to not be an environmentalist you seem to be hitting every Luddite talking point. I feel like Bastiat who extensively wrote about the most basic of logical fallacies, and inconsistencies. It still amazes me how people believe electricity is an energy source....Even the fucking Government isn't this stupid.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy.cfm?page=electricity_home-basics


That means that we get electricity from the conversion of other sources of energy.

Anyways, if someone comes out with a better product than the traditional oil cars then I will jump on that ship ASAP. Sadly, there isn't anything on the market that is, and the Government prevents a second Industrial Revolution to occur.

Of course BP isn't our friend, but I would rather not regress, would you? By the way no one was arguing that oil is a golden fuel. I would wager that Nuclear Fusion is the golden fuel, but we are a long ways from that day, and even if it were to come about I'd imagine the Unions, and the Government would prevent it from ever entering the market. It would make electricity become as cheap, as say, paper.

Anyways, I don't understand the hate on oil. Solar panels are inconsistent and unreliable especially in many parts of the country. Other forms of alternate energy are likewise unreliable, or not as efficient. Unleash the free-market! End taxation, and all regulation and you will see within a few decades something to replace the traditional vehicle.

[DjLoTi]

Actually the cheapest was 32k.

It says right on the website that all their cars qualify for a 7.5K tax credit. Which is basically a government reimbursement.

I'm not gonna sit here and argue with you all day so I'll read your post later... and maybe I'll reply later.. k ...

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

It says right on the website that all their cars qualify for a 7.5K tax credit. Which is basically a government reimbursement.

I'm not gonna sit here and argue with you all day so I'll read your post later... and maybe I'll reply later.. k ...

Oh, so you aren't against subsidies, as long as its in your chosen industry? What part of the free-market, and liberty do you actually support again?

[libertygrl]

We are destroying a way of life for generations. For you to say people's property and jobs is more important then our ocean and coastal biodiversity, I'm not sure you understand the planet is somewhat interconnected. If we eliminate biodiversity in the gulf coast, the animals won't magically re-populate.


No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manner of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

- john donne

[angelatc]

Uncalled for. :mad:

The ignore list is your friend.

[DjLoTi]

Oh, so you aren't against subsidies, as long as its in your chosen industry? What part of the free-market, and liberty do you actually support again?

omg, you are crazy. Who said I was 'for' or 'against' ANYTHING DUDE? IT IS WHAT IT IS!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK I AM, JESUS? I CAN JUST SNAP MY FINGERS AND MAKE ALL THE RULES!! THIS IS THE WORLD I LIVE IN IT!!! *****YES****** I HAVE TRIED TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND DO MY PART, APPARENTLY YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THAT!!!! SO KISS MY 100% AMERICAN A$$!!!!

[Fox McCloud]

It's tragedies like these that separate the true libertarians from those who just want libertarianism for everyone else, but get the most benefit they can from the rest of society.

I'm not saying that the spill is something that should be overlooked or discounted, but "rising up" over sea turtles? Really? This would be akin to pitching a fit and rising up against the US government in WWII for bombing HIroshima an Nagasaki because there was a rare plant or species that got hit hard by the bombs while completely ignoring the loss of human life, industry, and the damage to the economy and their normal way of life.

The reason I say that all that matters is property right is because that is truly all their is; when you freak with that order of things, the laws of economics screw you back. It's called "tragedy of the commons"; when individuals are barred from owning an area, then it's contracted out to whomever, the winner of the contract will treat it like crap; that's why you have deforestation in even modern areas--if you don't, someone else will, so you DO do it.

if the ocean was privately owned, then adjacent property owners could sue you for pollution that entered their property; in turn, those on land could sue those who owned the water adjacent to their property for polluting their land. If the area BP drilled in was privately owned, there would be a huge incentive to require the maximum amount of safety techniques put into place to prevent a disaster like we currently have. Would they still happen? Sure, but it'd be wayyyyy less (and currently, we're running a pretty good ratio--30,000 oil drillings in the Gulf and 1 major disaster...that's a damn good track record).

on top of this you have another problem; the government has banned shallow water drilling which is not only cheaper, but far less risky, which is yet another infringement on property rights.

and, of course, there's the oft mentioned liability cap--if you damage it, you pay for it, unless the person forgives you of the damages.

I'm sorry it happened to you guys, and yes, BP shares some of the blame for all the chaos down there, but the government shares most of the blame due to its creation of a moral hazard and not letting the market work and police itself.


As for DjLoTi...you should watch a few videos with Robert Bryce in it (he's on a few of Stossels shows); he shows that oil is just about one of the best energy sources we currently have available,at this point in time.


I'll laugh and laugh if it's found out, one day, that oil is a renewable energy source after all (ie: abiotic oil theory turns out to be proven)---because, if it is, then the whole "we need to focus on renewable energy" crap will fly right out the door.

[DjLoTi]

The ignore list is your friend.

No me and cons are cool, I think he was just kidding with me =P lol =P goof ball

People who actually know me know I am just a normal guy who looks at almost everything objectively. I am very objective.

[angelatc]

I read this wrong and thought the turtles were working.

Carrying little alligator briefcases....

[angelatc]

on top of this you have another problem; the government has banned shallow water drilling which is not only cheaper, but far less risky, which is yet another infringement on property rights.

and, of course, there's the oft mentioned liability cap--if you damage it, you pay for it, unless the person forgives you of the damages.

I'm sorry it happened to you guys, and yes, BP shares some of the blame for all the chaos down there, but the government shares most of the blame due to its creation of a moral hazard and not letting the market work and police itself.

This: ^^^

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

omg, you are crazy. Who said I was 'for' or 'against' ANYTHING DUDE? IT IS WHAT IT IS!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK I AM, JESUS? I CAN JUST SNAP MY FINGERS AND MAKE ALL THE RULES!! THIS IS THE WORLD I LIVE IN IT!!! *****YES****** I HAVE TRIED TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND DO MY PART, APPARENTLY YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THAT!!!! SO KISS MY 100% AMERICAN A$$!!!!

You did. Perhaps you should read your long diatribe where you basically wanted the Government to purchase everyone an electric car/place solar panels everywhere, etc.. What the fuck do you want me to pull from that?

[DjLoTi]

You did. Perhaps you should read your long diatribe where you basically wanted the Government to purchase everyone an electric car/place solar panels everywhere, etc.. What the fuck do you want me to pull from that?

No, I was saying ***IF*** we stopped spending money on all this oil then the government ***COULD*** buy everyone in America one of those EVs... not SHOULD or WOULD but C-O-U-L-D!!!!!!!


*edit* ok I said 'maybe we would' which is bascially could!! lol. Actually 'maybe we would' is better the could

[DjLoTi]

I'm not saying that the spill is something that should be overlooked or discounted, but "rising up" over sea turtles? Really?

It's not just the turtles, it's also the dolphins, the fish, the birds, and the beaches. It's an entire way of life for some of our American people. Basically anything and everything BP can be held responsible for, we need to document everything so that they are accountable for every last bird and fish in the ocean.

And if nobody cares about the wildlife, we can still get mad about our public beaches, which is basically American private property, which also just so happens to have some of the most beautiful beaches in the world.

It's not just the turtles, it's really anything I can hold BP accountable for, because we can print dollars, but we can't print species. I think we should keep that in mind.



As for DjLoTi...you should watch a few videos with Robert Bryce in it (he's on a few of Stossels shows); he shows that oil is just about one of the best energy sources we currently have available,at this point in time.

Cool I'll check it out. Hope my reply doesn't seem too brash, I was getting kind of annoyed by that other guy. lol =P

[LittleLightShining]

I realize that boycotting BP gas stations hurts the station owners but I think it is time to move on a boycott because after all, don't the station owners have some ability to put pressure on the company?Boycott BP is a facebook page with 632k people. They've gotten national attention for encouraging not just a boycott of BP stations but of subsidiaries. "Boycott BP stations until the spill is cleaned up!...FOREVER. BP brands to boycott include Castrol, Arco, Aral, am/pm, Amoco, and Wild Bean Cafe." (http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/pages/Boycott-BP/119101198107726?ref=ts)

The guy has a regular website, too: http://bayoulee.com/


I agree longer is bette,r but at this point getting any action is better than idle talk.
Getting people to do this for a day is doable and when they taste results they will be hungry for more! That's why the government would not be happy with this plan.
Might be worth reaching out to bayoulee. 630k people plus various the networks we all have. Could have an impact.

[Travlyr]

It's tragedies like these that separate the true libertarians from those who just want libertarianism for everyone else, but get the most benefit they can from the rest of society.

This simply goes to show that libertarians have to keep educating to overcome the government's public indoctrinations. And I know that I still have to learn how to communicate with compassion. Liberty benefits everybody except the power elite, yet at least 1/2 of the population does not understand the power of liberty.


I'll laugh and laugh if it's found out, one day, that oil is a renewable energy source after all (ie: abiotic oil theory turns out to be proven)---because, if it is, then the whole "we need to focus on renewable energy" crap will fly right out the door.

Oil... renewable! Yes, it could be. :cool: I am with you there. :)

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I'm down for a boycott of BP. As for DJ, how are you going to hold BP accountable to things that have no ownership. Who exactly has the authority/legitimacy to sue BP over that? No one. It is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as the everyday bullshit we have to deal with that is "tragedy of the commons".

Hmmmm well....very soon we will be able to create species. Last I checked I think we have the technology for this. Granted its a scary fucking idea prone to much abuse, but hey, we have the technology. I wouldn't be surprised to see a Dinosaur amusement park in 100 years. There's some pretty cool ways to access dormant DNA.

[MichelleHeart]

I realize that boycotting BP gas stations hurts the station owners but I think it is time to move on a boycott because after all, don't the station owners have some ability to put pressure on the company?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, boycotts also delay progress by starving BP of much-needed capital to fund the cleanup. Financially, it's a bad idea. No matter what your views are on BP, crippling the company won't help. Cripple it enough, and BP might not have enough money to compensate victims of the oil spill by the time the company is sued.

The thing is, though, I have a hard time viewing BP as a villain. This whole incident distracts us from the wars, the economy, and the statism of the Establishment. The government causes much more death and destruction than BP ever could.

[RonPaulwillWin]

LOL at this thread, people pretending they don't love animals.

[erowe1]

It is unfortunate that all that cooked turtle is going to waste and not getting eaten. But I suppose that the cost associated with altering the cleanup procedure in order to facilitate salvaging them probably exceeds the value of the meat.

If the cost of fishing those turtles out of there could be recouped by selling them, then it would be in BP's financial interest to do that.

Oh wait. The guy said they're endangered, which probably means that it's illegal to sell them. So--surprise, surprise--once again, it gets back to the government.

[erowe1]

LOL at this thread, people pretending they don't love animals.

I love animals.

If there's one thing that really gets me riled up, it's when people try to prevent animals from doing what they were placed in this Earth to do. Especially the ones that were put on this Earth to be eaten by me.

[RonPaulwillWin]

Well, no animal was 'placed on this earth'.

[erowe1]

Well, no animal was 'placed on this earth'.

That was my way of saying "created."

[RonPaulwillWin]

That's a different debate :)

[Vessol]

People don't care when the government's burning their future down. But god damn if some turtles are bein' burned!

[susano]

I've just been able to come back this thread. A quick glance shows the usual sociopaths have shown up. I'm gonna read through and respond. I just want to say to those who care about the innocent and understand what it means to be a real human being, made in the image our Creator, thank you. Without compassion and empathy, we are lost. The whole point of being here is missed.

[susano]

hardly worth complaining about IMHO--there's more important things ruined here, like actual ownable property, not to mention a number of jobs (in the fishing industry and oil industry).

How interesting and predictable that someone with bible scripture in their sig would put man and property above GOD's Creation. Shit like this is why so many people are revolted by bible thumpers who sound more the Babylonian blood cult than someone who understands the real message of Christ. The most helpless and innocent of GOD's creation and you reduce this to an issue of "ownable property". Stunning.

[susano]

Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

My sentiments exactly. I, too, can't stand Al Gore because he is a fraud.

You know the native Americans couldn't conceive of the earth being "property" because they didn't create it. Poperty is what we create from our labor and intellectual talent. No man can "own" Nature and the lives of others. We are mere brief visitors on this planet. How we behave while here is the very essense of the spiritual journey. We don't get these very basic principals of love, compassion, respect for the rights of others and Creation, WE FAIL.

How fitting that you would quote Joni Mitchell, a very evolved and beautiful human being. She's my favorite artist.

Since I was in my twenties (I am now in fifties), and leaned about the Fed and the IRS, I have been devoted to the cause of liberty and our constitution. It's is VERY disturbing that this movement has attracted so many genuine sociopaths. I think that may be because sociopaths believe they are above the rules - it's all about them. I'm not talking about government but the higher law of GOD or the universe, or however one would choose to descibe it. The concept of libertarianism seesm to be attractive to those who think they are above any rules. It's a terrible perversion of what liberty is about.

My heart goes out to you and others in the Gulf. You are so right - property can be replaced. Life cannot. The Gulf may never recover in our lifetimes.

[susano]

Ooo...sea turtles.

EDIT: Sorry for that outburst. It's not that I don't like sea turtles. I do. It's just that econazis seem to care more about birds, turtles, marine wildlife, and plots of blue ocean than they do actual human beings and human civilization itself.

Are you calling the man in the video an "econazi"? Or me?

I am a Ron Paul supporter and constitutionalist. I love GOD's Creation, and that includes animals and Nature. I am humbled by the miracle of life and this amazing planet. Do you equate such sentiments with big government loving policy wonks? I fail to see the connection between FRAUD and tyranny and respect for life and the planet.

Do you feel it's okay to burn alive living animals to suit BP's agenda?

[susano]

Guess what Wisconsin, those birds, turtles, marine widlife, and plots of blue ocean are critical to human beings and human civilization itself in the coastal gulf regions.

Even self interest is lost upon the self centered. Ironic, eh?

[specsaregood]

It is unfortunate that all that cooked turtle is going to waste and not getting eaten.

I had sea turtle steak in the bahamas years ago, it wasn't anything I would order again. It had the texture of veal and the taste of liver.

[MsDoodahs]

How does God feel about those who prance around proclaiming their own perfection while attacking others as lesser human beings?

Any goodness in that sort of person's heart is outweighed by their self aggrandizing behavior.

:)

[susano]

BP doesn't own the water. Do what needs to be done.

We need to stand up and be men instead of the serfs we are quickly becoming.

Fucking A.

What we are witnessing is what corporations have gotten away with, in third world countries, for eons. It's come to America. All of those atrocities have been made possible by corrupt government enablers and people who allowed things to get so far out of hand that they were unable to protect themselves when the death squads were (and are) employed against them.

Unfortunately, it seems that only the left has paid any attention to these atrocities wreaked, upon entire countries, by corporations and their hired lackies in government. This is a HUGE blind spot for the liberty movement because the devotion to "free markets" and the fear of government abuses, has made many automatically, in a knee jerk fashion, defend killers in the name of freedom. Much of this is due to not doing their homework about what has and is going on in other places and how it all works. The truth is that real liberty can exist and these kinds of atrocities stoped - all without bloated government and violations of individual rights.

I'm wondering what is the point of the right to bear arms, to defend against tyranny, when those rights are not exercised. A war is being waged, right here, right now. I don't know abouut the blowout, but the failure to contain the oil and stop it from getting into the marshes is deliberate. BP is now killing animals than can be rescued. The Gulf could be destroyed. This economic warfare being waged by BP and their globalist enablers. Anyone who fails to see that is blind. So, how far will they go and how much will be destroyed before We the People act?

[susano]

How does God feel about those who prance around proclaiming their own perfection while attacking others as lesser human beings?

Any goodness in that sort of person's heart is outweighed by their self aggrandizing behavior.

:)

Are you implying that you think I am claiming I'm perfect - because I don't want living animals burned to death?

[susano]

How do you think the turtle population would be if someone had stake in their ownership? You ever wonder why Bison went nearly extinct, and cows and horses, and other animals aren't? You take care of things you own. You destroy, and waste things you don't.

Also, those marine animals aren't critical to human beings. All humans need for survival is plant life, and ownership of animals that supply meat. None of those criterium is met with the above (since we have adequate supply from land based animals). So, no it isn't "critical". Is it beneficial? Of course. Is it sad that this has happened? Of course. But this IS a fundamental issue of property rights, and their benefits, especially towards the environment.

Uh, no, not everyone destroys what they don't own. You cannot own Nature and wildlife. These things are not property. Lots of people have the utmost respect for animals and the evironment, AND they are pro liberty, as well.

The indians didn't decimate the bison and they never believed they owned them. It was a malignant metality that did that - one with no respect for animals or Nature.

[susano]

I agree with you here. The gulf is beautiful. When I lived on the gulf I saw such beautiful things. Dolphins were always around, id see sea turtles walking into work or leaving work etc. Property will be worth nothing after this disaster, and the animals may never be able to come back to what they were and they were already suffering to begin with. This has nothing to do with emotion or logic. It has to do with doing what is RIGHT. If you have respect for life, then do something about it! The upright disregard for this disaster on these forums make me wonder why I am still in this movement.

yep.

And, these conversations about owning the oceans are total insanity. The idea is so preposterous that I'll refrain from getting into why that isn't feasable (though the British sure tried).

There's a tremendous lack of maturity on this board. The intellectual (and I use that term loosely) wankfest is almost embarrassing to witness. For me, the liberty movement is centered around some of the greatest minds in history. Somehow, what's developed here is has no relationship to that.

William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
THE SECOND COMING

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

[heavenlyboy34]

Dude you don't live on the gulf coast do you? Just having effing lights on in buildings on the beaches has decimated sea turtle populations. Yah know sometimes property isn't the most important thing to think about. I say that and the home I live in is on the water. In all likelyhood we will see property damage. Also, I have spent years working in restaurants specializing in local gulf seafood. So as somebody who is going to soon be effected directly by this I am really more pissed about the environmental aspects than simple property things that can be owned. The great things about property is it can be replaced, or you can move to find different land to own and live on. Also, new jobs can always be found even if it is "below" you. However, at the same time, polluted land and decimated animal species cannot be replaced. Not easily anyways.

I do not worship at the alter of Al Gore, and in general I am a fan of oil and oil based products, however, our sea turtle population seriously may not survive this disaster and that will be a travesty. Not even to mention all the other sea creatures that will be brought to near extinction or even extinction because of this spill.

I grew up living on the water, I also grew up scuba diving and surfing. I have seen so many beautiful things in the ocean I used to take for granted. Turns out the song is prophetic "don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." I could tell you stories of experiences from everything seeing dolphins, rays gliding under me as I was riding waves, swimming and surfing with sharks, seeing sea turtles in less than 100 feet from my own house I grew up in, etc.

And you say bigger things? Property? Jobs? For christs sake those are great and all but this is even bigger than those, this is an entire ecosystem at stake here! I love the field of economics, but the entire ecosystem of one of the most beautiful places in the world is at stake.

So fuck bp for drilling so deep, and fuck the government for legislation that required them to drill so deep. In essence, fuck the system for destroying my home, my roots, my culture, way of life, for destroying the very place I love all in name of corporatism. Property and jobs, are you kidding me! That is just the iceberg of what is going on down here. I doubt the South has been this demoralized since the Civil War. At least the coastal parts.

It seems you don't understand the principle of the Tragedy Of The Commons. In short, If the oceans and beaches were privately owned, the owner would have incentive to keep disasters from happening (and could be held responsible for damage). This is not to say you're entirely wrong, but your emotionality seems to cloud your judgement. ttyl.

Statism Is Safer for the Environment? (http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski249.html)
The Impact of the BP Oil Spill (http://mises.org/media/5043)

[susano]

Love, laughter, sorrow, passion, are all emotions. Emotions are natural. Healthy people feel and express emotions and also use logic. It's called being balanced.

Turtles being burned alive has nothing to do their dollar value or their lack of status as "property". While some of you are busy jerking off in the ideasphere, you are completely unaware that there are aspects to our existence that cannot be quantified, catalogued, priced, insured or sued over. EMAPTHY is one of these things. When a living being is burned to death, deliberately, that being suffers. That anyone could be so indifferent to such suffering is obscene. While you place an imbalanced importance on logic, you forget your humanity. Logic doesn't make someone jump into a frozen river to rescuse a person or dog who has fallen through the ice. EMPATHY does. Emapthy, compassion and love are the highest spiritual achievements and they are NATURAL. Callousness and the disregard for others, human or animal, are a FAIL. This is also not about what any turtle, dolphin, egret or pelican does for you or is of value to you, personally. It's about CARING for something or someone other than yourself. It's not about being forced, it's about CHOOSING what kind of human being you are.

To the Loiusiana fisherman: If you listen to the interview, the turtles were being saved, can be saved, and BP decided to send the rescue people away. Much the same as they have had crews cleaning beaches for two hours and sending them home. It's not that it can't be done, it's that they don't want to bother. And, it's what another poster said - hiding the carnage. BP has also been witnessed collecting and hiding dead birds.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I've just been able to come back this thread. A quick glance shows the usual sociopaths have shown up. I'm gonna read through and respond. I just want to say to those who care about the innocent and understand what it means to be a real human being, made in the image our Creator, thank you. Without compassion and empathy, we are lost. The whole point of being here is missed.

I hope you are not paying federal taxes because if you are I don't know how you live with yourself financially supporting these atrocities of government regulatory fraud and limited liability privileges.

[Anti Federalist]

LOL at this thread, people pretending they don't love animals.

I live rural enough and raise enough livestock and crops that my relationship with "animals" is rocky to say the least.

Mice, chipmunks, rats, raccoons, rabbits, skunks, foxes, weasel, deer - all are in abundant supply and all can be pests, some can be extremely damaging and hazardous.

PJ O'Rourke once wrote about how farmers and ranchers in Kenya could possibly kill such a majestic animal as a elephant for trampling crops. He wrote that, let modern urban dwellers deal with elephants trampling their fax machines and computers and office cubicles and then let's see about it.

[BenIsForRon]

I live rural enough and raise enough livestock and crops that my relationship with "animals" is rocky to say the least.

Mice, chipmunks, rats, raccoons, rabbits, skunks, foxes, weasel, deer - all are in abundant supply and all can be pests, some can be extremely damaging and hazardous.

PJ O'Rourke once wrote about how farmers and ranchers in Kenya could possibly kill such a majestic animal as a elephant for trampling crops. He wrote that, let modern urban dwellers deal with elephants trampling their fax machines and computers and office cubicles and then let's see about it.

Dude, that has nothing to do with what anyone is talking about, no one is saying certain animals can't cause economic hardships. Actually, some students from the sustainable development (uh-oh) department here at App State, stayed out one night and spotlighted a few deer that were repeatedly eating crops at the university's farm. So yeah, even us globalist-communist :rolleyes: sustainable development students understand that.

Pelican's aren't causing too much harm to fish stocks last time I checked, I think they have the right to not be soaked in oil.

[susano]

I hope you are not paying federal taxes because if you are I don't know how you live with yourself financially supporting these atrocities of government regulatory fraud and limited liability privileges.

I'm not paying income tax. However, for anyone who does, are you goig to condemn them? Is not the country under the stanglehold of what may as well be the Mafia? Are you paying income tax? If you were, would that mean you conscented to killing Palestinians because of the feds funding Israel? I don't think so. That's the problem with having remote, unconstitutional, corrupt government. There is just about no recourse. Ask the Browns. Oh, wait, you can't because they're probably being tortured in some federal dungeon. That said, your stupid remark is like telling Ron Paul supporters, who are stuck with withholding, hope you anti war people like paying for mass murder in the middle east. IOW, your comment is meant to be argumentative.

Gee, weren't you one of the people on another thread who argued FOR limited liablity, as in you didn't want to be held accountable, as a shareholder, for the actions of a venture you might be invested in?

[specsaregood]

Pelican's aren't causing too much harm to fish stocks last time I checked, I think they have the right to not be soaked in oil.

You ever turned your back on a pelican and your bait bucket while you were fishing? Just wondering. :)

[BenIsForRon]

You ever turned your back on a pelican and your bait bucket while you were fishing? Just wondering. :)

Ok, well if you're surviving on those fish, then you have two options: Kill all the pelicans... or put a lid on your bucket.

[susano]

Pelican's aren't causing too much harm to fish stocks last time I checked, I think they have the right to not be soaked in oil.

Oh, but they can't vote, aren't someones property, so they don't have rights. BP has rights, though, and they have lots of lawyers. Today, their chairman called the people of the Gulf "the small people". We'll see how the small people make out against this global giant.

[specsaregood]

Ok, well if you're surviving on those fish, then you have two options: Kill all the pelicans... or put a lid on your bucket.

I'm not sure a lid would stop them, they are pretty clever. They'd probably just steal the entire bucket instead.

[BenIsForRon]

I'm not sure a lid would stop them, they are pretty clever. They'd probably just steal the entire bucket instead.

Well, shit, I guess we gotta kill all the pelicans. What is the most cost effective do it? Oil and fire, like the turtles? Should we set out decoy bait buckets with poisoned fish inside? Or just good old fashioned bullets?

[Travlyr]

YouTube - George Carlin - Saving the Planet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw)

[specsaregood]

//

[Anti Federalist]

Dude, that has nothing to do with what anyone is talking about, no one is saying certain animals can cause economic hardships. Actually, some students from the sustainable development (uh-oh) department here at App State, stayed out one night and spotlighted a few deer that were repeatedly eating crops at the university's farm. So yeah, even us globalist-communist :rolleyes: sustainable development students understand that.

Pelican's aren't causing too much harm to fish stocks last time I checked, I think they have the right to not be soaked in oil.

Yah, well, all I was responding to is this:


LOL at this thread, people pretending they don't love animals.

As to the pelicans, they are much less to look at than Canada Geese.

But, horrors, around here, nobody hunts the Canada geese anymore and they are exploding population. Problem: their guano in the water feeds a certain type of bacteria that kills fish and can sicken or even kill swimmers.

Keep jacking those deer, I won't tell.

[susano]

YouTube - George Carlin - Saving the Planet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw)

Loved George Carlin. Dunno the point of that video, though. Are you suggesting that caring about a man made catastrophe in the Gulf is the equivalent of what he's talking about? If this amounts to an extinction level event, and it very could, it will not have been natural. This will be the colossal fuck up of greedy, malicious, stupid people.

[Travlyr]

Loved George Carlin. Dunno the point of that video, though. Are you suggesting that caring about a man made catastrophe in the Gulf is the equivalent of what he's talking about? If this amounts to an extinction level event, and it very could, it will not have been natural. This will be the colossal fuck up of greedy, malicious, stupid people.

I simply thought a little laughter could help everyone's state of mind... that's all. :cool:

[BenIsForRon]

George Carlin - Saving the Planet[/url]

People post this video all the time, and the point they miss, and the point Carlin missed, is that when people say save the planet, they mean save the current configuration of the planet. A planet that is inhabitable to humans and to a diverse millions of other species around the globe.

[susano]

I simply thought a little laughter could help everyone's state of mind... that's all. :cool:

Fair enough. This nightmare is making me lose my sense of humor. I can laugh about other stuff, but this is one thing that has me very angry and very down.

[Travlyr]

Fair enough. This nightmare is making me lose my sense of humor. I can laugh about other stuff, but this is one thing that has me very angry and very down.

I see that, but you cannot save the world by yourself. Do what you can, but be nice to your fellow liberty lovers. We don't agree on everything. We can still learn from each other. :cool:

[susano]

People post this video all the time, and the point they miss, and the point Carlin missed, is that when people say save the planet, they mean save the current configuration of the planet. A planet that is inhabitable to humans and to a diverse millions of other species around the globe.

While it posted, just now, to add some levity to a terrible subject, I have no doubt it's frequently posted here as some kind of valdiation for those who see themselves above nature. Too bad Carlin isn't around to set the record straight.

[Travlyr]

People post this video all the time, and the point they miss, and the point Carlin missed, is that when people say save the planet, they mean save the current configuration of the planet. A planet that is inhabitable to humans and to a diverse millions of other species around the globe.

Right! Everybody but you misses the point of the video, Ben. Everybody but you. And oil is bad! We know.

[susano]

I see that, but you cannot save the world by yourself. Do what you can, but be nice to your fellow liberty lovers. We don't agree on everything. We can still learn from each other. :cool:

Sometimes, some of these liberty lovers sound more like Dick Cheney than Thomas Jefferson.

[Travlyr]

Sometimes, some of these liberty lovers sound more like Dick Cheney than Thomas Jefferson.

Not to me. I know a deviant neocon when I see one, and most people on here are trying to learn and teach.. at least that's my take. :cool:

[Uriel999]

My sentiments exactly. I, too, can't stand Al Gore because he is a fraud.

You know the native Americans couldn't conceive of the earth being "property" because they didn't create it. Poperty is what we create from our labor and intellectual talent. No man can "own" Nature and the lives of others. We are mere brief visitors on this planet. How we behave while here is the very essense of the spiritual journey. We don't get these very basic principals of love, compassion, respect for the rights of others and Creation, WE FAIL.

How fitting that you would quote Joni Mitchell, a very evolved and beautiful human being. She's my favorite artist.

Since I was in my twenties (I am now in fifties), and leaned about the Fed and the IRS, I have been devoted to the cause of liberty and our constitution. It's is VERY disturbing that this movement has attracted so many genuine sociopaths. I think that may be because sociopaths believe they are above the rules - it's all about them. I'm not talking about government but the higher law of GOD or the universe, or however one would choose to descibe it. The concept of libertarianism seesm to be attractive to those who think they are above any rules. It's a terrible perversion of what liberty is about.

My heart goes out to you and others in the Gulf. You are so right - property can be replaced. Life cannot. The Gulf may never recover in our lifetimes.


Even self interest is lost upon the self centered. Ironic, eh?

Exactly, my experience and statement is just one of many peoples experiences. I'm not looking for some selfish pity party, I am just one example of thousands upon thousands peoples experiences in an area of not just one environment but many diversified environments being screwed here. The problem wasn't just BP drilling a deep water well, but also government legislation not allowing them to drill in shallower waters where this could have been more easily prevents. Also, while I prefer to avoid legislation/regulation requiring relief wells as mandatory as other countries do would also have prevented this. It is the whole damned system.


It seems you don't understand the principle of the Tragedy Of The Commons. In short, If the oceans and beaches were privately owned, the owner would have incentive to keep disasters from happening (and could be held responsible for damage). This is not to say you're entirely wrong, but your emotionality seems to cloud your judgement. ttyl.

Statism Is Safer for the Environment? (http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski249.html)
The Impact of the BP Oil Spill (http://mises.org/media/5043)

Dude, this isn't time for academic philosophizing. We can all discuss our Utopian ideas of how government should run in other threads as we have done since this forums inception, however, we live within an existing framework that we must work within. I'm sorry, but sometimes we simply just have to work with the tools we got and be pragmatic about it.

[susano]

The fact is, when drilling for oil and gas in water, there have be regulations. Not the corrupt BS that passes for regulations but real and sane and strict ones, with prison sentances for violating them (fat chance). If we want to be regulation free, then we need to be corporation free. Corporations are predatory. You don't let a predator in your home without safeguards (and if you're smart, you don't let them in, period). Corporations have hired death squads in other countries. They don't fuck around with being "good global citizens" (their rhetoric, not mine). Their ONLY concern is money and they have proven they will do whatever it takes to make it. A recent article in a British paper blamed Americans for not protecting what is ours, and correctly stated that BP will get away whatever it can (and this article was DEFENDING BP). Utopia is for commies. The people on this board should know that. Corporations are ruthless. Anyone who can't get that through their head and thinks the "market" will take of care of their abuses is crazy. Suggested reading would be the history of British Petroleum and Iran.

I don't know if we can turn things around. The human race may just wipe itself out because of stupidity.

[RonPaulwillWin]

YouTube - George Carlin - Saving the Planet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw)

Planet Earth 2012!

[MichelleHeart]

The fact is, when drilling for oil and gas in water, there have be regulations. Not the corrupt BS that passes for regulations but real and sane and strict ones, with prison sentances for violating them (fat chance). If we want to be regulation free, then we need to be corporation free. Corporations are predatory. You don't let a predator in your home without safeguards (and if you're smart, you don't let them in, period). Corporations have hired death squads in other countries. They don't fuck around with being "good global citizens" (their rhetoric, not mine). Their ONLY concern is money and they have proven they will do whatever it takes to make it. A recent article in a British paper blamed Americans for not protecting what is ours, and correctly stated that BP will get away whatever it can (and this article was DEFENDING BP). Utopia is for commies. The people on this board should know that. Corporations are ruthless. Anyone who can't get that through their head and thinks the "market" will take of care of their abuses is crazy. Suggested reading would be the history of British Petroleum and Iran.

I don't know if we can turn things around. The human race may just wipe itself out because of stupidity.

So your logic is basically, corporations plunder, so corporations need to be strictly regulated. If people in a corporation use force or coercion to achieve their ends, they should be punished. But if they acquire funds by pleasing their customers, and by offering the best product for the best price, there is no reason for legal action. The safeguards in a true free market are private property rights; threat of loss, bankruptcy and failure; private consumer "protection" firms that increase the profits of those businesses that choose to seek their stamp of approval; the realities of supply and demand (without government controls); competition; and consumers themselves, who vote with their dollar.

There should be rules set when drilling for oil. I agree with you on that. But in a true free market, these rules would be set by private property owners on the coasts and in the oceans, insurance companies that assess risk of doing damage, and company policy that is based on the threat of having to pay full costs of any damage that may occur. Instead of adding more regulations onto the existing ones, I say we add more privatization, stronger property rights, and full liability with no cap. Plus, all the restrictions on drilling in our own soil and drilling in shallow waters drove BP into deeper waters. The federal government, in fact, forced BP to drill in deeper waters.

By the way, "ruthless" is just a dirty word for companies who are unusually successful at competing against other companies. In the age of the so-called "robber barons" (who didn't actually steal from anyone), the word "ruthless" was thrown around by firms who couldn't compete and wanted the government to prop them up and impose punitive damages on efficient firms so they could continue to charge higher prices.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

The fact is, when drilling for oil and gas in water, there have be regulations. Not the corrupt BS that passes for regulations but real and sane and strict ones, with prison sentances for violating them (fat chance). If we want to be regulation free, then we need to be corporation free. Corporations are predatory. You don't let a predator in your home without safeguards (and if you're smart, you don't let them in, period). Corporations have hired death squads in other countries. They don't fuck around with being "good global citizens" (their rhetoric, not mine). Their ONLY concern is money and they have proven they will do whatever it takes to make it. A recent article in a British paper blamed Americans for not protecting what is ours, and correctly stated that BP will get away whatever it can (and this article was DEFENDING BP). Utopia is for commies. The people on this board should know that. Corporations are ruthless. Anyone who can't get that through their head and thinks the "market" will take of care of their abuses is crazy. Suggested reading would be the history of British Petroleum and Iran.

I don't know if we can turn things around. The human race may just wipe itself out because of stupidity.

Too bad Ron Paul disagrees with your assessment that we need more intrusive, bigger inept Government.

YouTube - Ron Paul on CNBC Street Signs 6/15/10: Oil Spill/Gold (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxh2CaQLRMM)

We don't need regulations. We need proper private property ownership & laws that do not contradict liberty. Your posts are irritating. The problem with Corporations is that they get undue privileges from the State (LLC, subsidies, etc.) because its very easy to bribe and corrupt a politician. It's not so easy to buy off, thousands and thousands of property owners. Regulating has never worked, and never will. Its a fools errand. Come on, be a little smarter than that, please.

[BenIsForRon]

We don't need regulations. We need proper private property ownership & laws that do not contradict liberty. Your posts are irritating. The problem with Corporations is that they get undue privileges from the State (LLC, subsidies, etc.) because its very easy to bribe and corrupt a politician. It's not so easy to buy off, thousands and thousands of property owners. Regulating has never worked, and never will. Its a fools errand. Come on, be a little smarter than that, please.

In your little voluntary arbitration procedure, if BP had already paid off the private courts, would the people be justified in using violence to get their compensation?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

In your little voluntary arbitration procedure, if BP had already paid off the private courts, would the people be justified in using violence to get their compensation?

If BP refused to pay for their damages, yes (However, everyone would stop paying that private court, and they would go out of business, so the chances of that happening is slim to little). I would not be the one to initiate violence. Besides, its not my arbitration procedure, its Ron Pauls also. Watch the video. I guess we are separating the strong from the chaff in this thread. I'll remember who the true libertarians are.

[BenIsForRon]

I guess we are separating the strong from the chaff in this thread. I'll remember who the true libertarians are.

Yeah that's what you would like us to think. Of course, you're the most hardcore of all, so everybody here should just really be your disciples if they want to be better libertarians.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Yeah that's what you would like us to think. Of course, you're the most hardcore of all, so everybody here should just really be your disciples if they want to be better libertarians.

I assault inconsistency, and logical fallacies. I would be happy if more people used reason, and logic than emotion. We need a second Age of Enlightenment. I don't want anyone to follow me like a sheep. I want people to think for themselves, and goddamnit I will point out peoples mistakes. How about you go back and listen to Ron Paul in that video and let truth slip in little by little. Ok?

And for fucks sake stop trying to derail the conversation from substance to ad hom.

[BenIsForRon]

And for fucks sake stop trying to derail the conversation from substance to ad hom.

Well you did just call half the people in this thread part of the "chaff". They're clearly mental weaklings not up to your high standard of reasoning.

[MsDoodahs]

I guess we are separating the strong from the chaff in this thread. I'll remember who the true libertarians are.

:)

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I liek turtlez

[moostraks]

I assault inconsistency, and logical fallacies. I would be happy if more people used reason, and logic than emotion. We need a second Age of Enlightenment. I don't want anyone to follow me like a sheep. I want people to think for themselves, and goddamnit I will point out peoples mistakes. How about you go back and listen to Ron Paul in that video and let truth slip in little by little. Ok?

And for fucks sake stop trying to derail the conversation from substance to ad hom.

I think you need to breathe and reread. Susano said she thinks the issue is incorporation is allowing them to gain special priviledges that are not available to those of us "little people". Corporatism is the heart of the issue in the Gulf. If BP was accountable for their actions as an individual would be there would not be a cap to their liability and they would not have been so willing to take shortcuts to make their profit.

That being said, to date we have BP stepping all over the rights of the "little people" with government backing them up in their fiasco of the clean up. How much more in your face corporatism can you get than for them to be allowed to hire a private firm to keep onlookers (and media) away?http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0615/bp-hires-private-security-contractors-guard-oily-beaches/ Meanwhile the states have been placed in legal red tape when trying to protect their citizens and their beaches and marshland from being destroyed. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7135511.ece

Unlike the argument I have seen here about how the oceans need to be privatized, as a South Floridian I was raised that the oceans belonged to everyone and we were all accountable to its welfare because we are dependent upon its survival. Why are they not owned? Because corporate greed will cause its destruction and thus lead to our own peril. So you might want to consider focusing on the issue of corporatism before you go after your private property aspects.

Just because she is not in line with your reasoning does not make her or anyone else for that matter chaff. If you want to control what people are allowed to discuss start your own forum and invite people there.There is so much arrogance and anger exuding from your posts that you have little ground to stand on when it comes to stating you are using substance over emotion as an argument.

[constituent]

I'd rather the turtles be burned alive than just left there to suffer. :(

[erowe1]

If this amounts to an extinction level event, and it very could...

Where do you get the idea that this could amount to "an extinction level event"?

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I think you need to breathe and reread. Susano said she thinks the issue is incorporation is allowing them to gaiquote

That is not how I am reading it. She finds more fault with corporations than government. And then she is going to suggest I, one of the more outspoken an/caps on this forum, is a statist?


Gee, weren't you one of the people on another thread who argued FOR limited liablity, as in you didn't want to be held accountable, as a shareholder, for the actions of a venture you might be invested in?

Give me a break....:rolleyes:

No Susano I said BP should give the FED the finger and say the checks stop at 75mil because that is what the representative government of the people have determined. The whole thing is a sham and what I want to see is people start eating the government cake they have baked. I am tired of it. I have listened to enough assholes tell me how to live or how great government regulation is. I have already had way more than enough. If government regulation is so awesome then 75 million is the government regulatory cap and that is where the checks should stop.


Dude, this isn't time for academic philosophizing. We can all discuss our Utopian ideas of how government should run in other threads as we have done since this forums inception, however, we live within an existing framework that we must work within. I'm sorry, but sometimes we simply just have to work with the tools we got and be pragmatic about it.

I reject this whole line of thought and it just allows this BS to continue on. One person can change the world. It is a historical fact. The Ron Paul revolution is more than one person and just think what we could accomplish if we actually focused on doing something. For this reason I am a relentless advocate of drafting a new Declaration of Independence, geographical organization, private trading clubs, and market solutions over the democratic political process that will only ever preserve a monopoly of force for government.

I wish I had the persuasion skills of Jesus, Ghandi, or MLK. Unfortunately I am not a great man... just a man. However I will never give up on the idea that one man can change the world if we simply decided to do it. It is the only way it has ever been done.


However, for anyone who does, are you goig to condemn them? Is not the country under the stanglehold of what may as well be the Mafia? Are you paying income tax? If you were, would that mean you conscented to killing Palestinians because of the feds funding Israel?

I have a clear conscience.

[LibertyEagle]

All I have to say is be very wary of the solutions that government puts forth to make sure this does not happen again. Remember that liberty is frequently lost during crises and the sad thing is that people clamor for it. Once liberty is gone, it is gone forever.

[LibertyEagle]

Originally Posted by Austrian Econ Disciple
I guess we are separating the strong from the chaff in this thread. I'll remember who the true libertarians are.

Who gives a shit? I mean, seriously? This is not a contest about who can be the most "libertarian", and it never was. Sheesh. Either people stop this BS and start working together, or we are going to completely lose our country.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Who gives a shit? I mean, seriously? This is not a contest about who can be the most "libertarian", and it never was. Sheesh.

Well now I know who actually believes in the libertarian philosophy, than those who merely spout off some libertarian points when it is easy to do so. The true character of a person shows when it is toughest to espouse ones beliefs. The man in Tian. Square. The man who is the lone voice among millions. It is clear in this thread there are many who actually do not follow libertarian philosophy. I am just thanking them for outing themselves. I would like to see people who actually truly believed what they say, than those who pander in certain directions.

Its easy to say how one loves all the animals, and the environment, and say the Government should regulate it even more, when they've shown their incompetence all ready. It's feel good bullshit. It's asinine. Bastiat could have cowed back to the Mercantilist Protectionists. He didn't. He fought for what he believed in. In the tough and good times. Principles aren't to be discarded when the times get tough, or when you are alone.

Continue on though.

[MelissaWV]

All I have to say is be very wary of the solutions that government puts forth to make sure this does not happen again. Remember that liberty is frequently lost during crises and the sad thing is that people clamor for it. Once liberty is gone, it is gone forever.

In this sense, it IS an extinction-level event. The sheer volume of things that could be regulated or taken away from us as a result of this... it's enough to make one shudder.

Things this touches upon:

Private business rights
Ownership of natural resources
Environmentalism
Disaster coordination and response
International relations
Energy policy
Safety regulations
Shared liability (between companies, subcontractors, etc.)
Liability caps
Food safety
Compensation for intangible loss (how many tourism dollars WOULD the Gulf Coast have made, in this economy, but lost because of the spill itself?)

...and at least a dozen others.

[Anti Federalist]

All I have to say is be very wary of the solutions that government puts forth to make sure this does not happen again. Remember that liberty is frequently lost during crises and the sad thing is that people clamor for it. Once liberty is gone, it is gone forever.

That ^


In this sense, it IS an extinction-level event. The sheer volume of things that could be regulated or taken away from us as a result of this... it's enough to make one shudder.

Things this touches upon:

Private business rights
Ownership of natural resources
Environmentalism
Disaster coordination and response
International relations
Energy policy
Safety regulations
Shared liability (between companies, subcontractors, etc.)
Liability caps
Food safety
Compensation for intangible loss (how many tourism dollars WOULD the Gulf Coast have made, in this economy, but lost because of the spill itself?)

...and at least a dozen others.

And that ^

[LibertyEagle]

AED, you can make your points more effectively by not dividing people up into little categories.

[LibertyEagle]

Question. Was the UN's Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) ever signed? If not, I'll bet it will be now, unfortunately.

The first thing that has to be done is to get the leak, stopped. BP should pay for all the damage done. Then, we need to figure out what all transpired that allowed this to happen. And I don't just mean what equipment failed. I venture to say that it was prior government actions and regulations that went a long way to causing or enabling this event. One thing I do know, is that it is government regulation that forces the oil companies to be required to drill so deeply to get oil. Whether we like it or not, we need oil right now to keep us from resembling a 3rd world country. Oil is not just used for gasoline. Research it. And while you are doing that, remember that a goal of the one-worlders is to totally destroy this country and the liberty upon which it was founded, and send us to 3rd world status. This event will be used to further that goal and I for one, am not going to help them accomplish it.

[klamath]

Question. Was the UN's Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) ever signed? If not, I'll bet it will be now, unfortunately.

The first thing that has to be done is to get the leak, stopped. BP should pay for all the damage done. Then, we need to figure out what all transpired that allowed this to happen. And I don't just mean what equipment failed. I venture to say that it was prior government actions and regulations that went a long way to causing or enabling this event. One thing I do know, is that it is government regulation that forces the oil companies to be required to drill so deeply to get oil. Whether we like it or not, we need oil right now to keep us from resembling a 3rd world country. Oil is not just used for gasoline. Research it. And while you are doing that, remember that a goal of the one-worlders is to totally destroy this country and the liberty upon which it was founded, and send us to 3rd world status. This event will be used to further that goal and I for one, am not going to help them accomplish it.
Well said, LE.
I am sure there is plenty of guilt to go around. ALL efforts at this point should be to fix the problem. There will be time enough to point fingers. One of the number one rules of flying a aircraft with mechanical problems. Fly the aircraft to the ground then try and trouble shoot the problem.
911 was a mind altering event that changed the course of history. This oil spill could very well be the death nell to the budding liberty movement as people turn back toward the government to stop all future spills of this nature..

[lx43]

I watched the video of the Judge on Glenn Becks show he said that BP for one didn't have any experience ever in doing deep sea drilling in the Gulf and that the federal govt required them to drill in the deep instead of in shallow water where they had experience. If thats the case, and I don't see why I wouldn't believe the Judge, the federal govt is partially responsible for this spill in expecting a company with no deep sea drilling experience to perform such a complicated job. This is the equvalient of hiring someone with no experience to to command a nuclear submarine--good if you can get by with it but terrible consequences when it fails.

[klamath]

Asked whom they trust more to fix the mess, 54 percent said the government, 32 percent said BP and 12 percent said neither.
Another example of how this has the potential to kill any liberty movement. Big government wins by 22 points.

[susano]

So your logic is basically, corporations plunder, so corporations need to be strictly regulated. If people in a corporation use force or coercion to achieve their ends, they should be punished. But if they acquire funds by pleasing their customers, and by offering the best product for the best price, there is no reason for legal action. The safeguards in a true free market are private property rights; threat of loss, bankruptcy and failure; private consumer "protection" firms that increase the profits of those businesses that choose to seek their stamp of approval; the realities of supply and demand (without government controls); competition; and consumers themselves, who vote with their dollar.

There should be rules set when drilling for oil. I agree with you on that. But in a true free market, these rules would be set by private property owners on the coasts and in the oceans, insurance companies that assess risk of doing damage, and company policy that is based on the threat of having to pay full costs of any damage that may occur. Instead of adding more regulations onto the existing ones, I say we add more privatization, stronger property rights, and full liability with no cap. Plus, all the restrictions on drilling in our own soil and drilling in shallow waters drove BP into deeper waters. The federal government, in fact, forced BP to drill in deeper waters.

By the way, "ruthless" is just a dirty word for companies who are unusually successful at competing against other companies. In the age of the so-called "robber barons" (who didn't actually steal from anyone), the word "ruthless" was thrown around by firms who couldn't compete and wanted the government to prop them up and impose punitive damages on efficient firms so they could continue to charge higher prices.

I think your recommendations about who should do the regulating, and how, are good.

Oil companies have no more acquired funds by "pleasing their customers" than the Fed has. Corruption in government and business has established a reality that people are trapped in, just as we have been trapped by international banksters. I don't use Federal Reserve debt notes because I'm a happy customer, and I don't by gasoline because I have rejected alternatives. As with our "money", when it comes what our cars run on, the choices have been deliberately restricted because of corruption.

No, ruthless is not just a dirty word. It's a fact.

[susano]

The suggestions that the market would run these corporations out of business if people wer not happy with them are ridiculous. Yes, in a perfect world, it would be so, but it is not a perfect world and utopia is for dreamers (and communists and libertarians).

There is currently a war going on, in Nigeria, against oil companies. A real war with killing. They don't have the luxury of living in the free market ideasphere. They are forced to deal with the reality of how things really are.

Have any of you philosophical wankers ever taken into account why we might be in Afgahnistan? You think that might have something to do with militaries being used as the business end of corporate objectives? You think anyone in Afghanistan gets the opportunity to vote with their wallets?

Wake up. This isn't the famers market where if some guy sells us shitty melons we don't buy from him again. We live in an extremely complex and corrupt matrix. I don't pretend to know how the fuck we get out if it. I hate big government and I hate corporations. Both are threats to freedom and life. We live in a globalist corporate state. It remains to be seen if we undo it or it undoes us.

[Travlyr]

I guess we are separating the strong from the chaff in this thread. I'll remember who the true libertarians are.

I agree. While everyone in the liberty movement cannot be on the same level of understanding, I am keeping an eye on these posts as well. I'm looking for liberty movement leaders... ones that already get it, as well as, ones eager to learn.

Moving fairly rapidly toward mutual understanding, and a common goal, will be of great benefit to the liberty movement. Young people have time on their side. Players in their 3rd and 4th quarters have more interest in getting our liberties back ASAP. Plus, we have a better understanding of what we have lost. Anyone interested in liberty can benefit from this forum. It is not just liberties that have been taken from us, it is the opportunity for prosperity as well.

Liberty benefits everyone... except our masters and overlords because they already have it.

[susano]

http://s.ngm.com/2007/02/nigerian-oil/img/nigerian-oil-hdr-615.jpg

That's what big oil is doing to Nigeria. If they could get away with this in the Gulf, they would.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/02/nigerian-oil/oneill-text.html

[heavenlyboy34]

The suggestions that the market would run these corporations out of business if people wer not happy with them are ridiculous. Yes, in a perfect world, it would be so, but it is not a perfect world and utopia is for dreamers (and communists and libertarians).

There is currently a war going on, in Nigeria, against oil companies. A real war with killing. They don't have the luxury of living in the free market ideasphere. They are forced to deal with the reality of how things really are.

Have any of you philosophical wankers ever taken into account why we might be in Afgahnistan? You think that might have something to do with militaries being used as the business end of corporate objectives? You think anyone in Afghanistan gets the opportunity to vote with their wallets?

Wake up. This isn't the famers market where if some guy sells us shitty melons we don't buy from him again. We live in an extremely complex and corrupt matrix. I don't pretend to know how the fuck we get out if it. I hate big government and I hate corporations. Both are threats to freedom and life. We live in a globalist corporate state. It remains to be seen if we undo it or it undoes us.

FYI-
You're entitled to your opinion, but your delivery is utterly ineffective. This site is dedicate to a free market libertarian (RP), and many members are free market, libertarian, or both. I'm sure someone with more patience will come by and explain in painful detail why you are wrong, but it is more important for you to realize that your approach is not going to impress very many here in this rude, insulting manner.

[susano]

Where do you get the idea that this could amount to "an extinction level event"?

Many of the Gulf species are already threatened or endangered. What do suppose will happen if the relief wells don't work?

[LittleLightShining]

I watched the video of the Judge on Glenn Becks show he said that BP for one didn't have any experience ever in doing deep sea drilling in the Gulf and that the federal govt required them to drill in the deep instead of in shallow water where they had experience. If thats the case, and I don't see why I wouldn't believe the Judge, the federal govt is partially responsible for this spill in expecting a company with no deep sea drilling experience to perform such a complicated job. This is the equvalient of hiring someone with no experience to to command a nuclear submarine--good if you can get by with it but terrible consequences when it fails.No it isn't the same. The govt didn't tell BP, "You must drill out there." They said, "You can't drill here but you can drill there." There's a difference.

[Brian4Liberty]

I hate big government and I hate corporations. Both are threats to freedom and life. We live in a globalist corporate state. It remains to be seen if we undo it or it undoes us.

Big business, big government, both essentially the same creature. They both become so big that they are almost immune to Darwinistic market forces. Stupid decisions, short term thinking, incompetence, corruption, waste, destruction; no real or immediate consequences for any of that. Small businesses and most individuals are answerable to the free markets. Too big to fail collectives are immune to market forces in the short time frame of a human life.

[ninepointfive]

While I do care about the region of the gulf, and those poor turtles... You all need to get a grip on what they're doing with the UN SMALL ARMS TREATY!!! :eek: :mad:

Can you say perfect diversion? They're going to try and pass this and cap and trade while our focus is elsewhere (the gulf disaster).

YouTube - Dudley Brown warns of the UN "Small Arms Treaty" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziBumhGG0qc)

YouTube - REALITY REPORT - UN Small Arms Treaty (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV3cJCRdJ8A)

[susano]

FYI-
You're entitled to your opinion, but your delivery is utterly ineffective. This site is dedicate to a free market libertarian (RP), and many members are free market, libertarian, or both. I'm sure someone with more patience will come by and explain in painful detail why you are wrong, but it is more important for you to realize that your approach is not going to impress very many here in this rude, insulting manner.

I'm not a libertarian, I'm a constitutionalist.

I'm sure you've seen discussions here about whether global corporatism constitutes a "free market". Many here believe it does. Some of us don't. I don't.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

The suggestions that the market would run these corporations out of business if people were not happy with them are ridiculous

:rolleyes:

Take a break and give those brain cells a rest with a nice cool drink.
http://caravanofdreams.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/kool_aid_man_glass.jpg

[susano]

Big business, big government, both essentially the same creature. They both become so big that they are almost immune to Darwinistic market forces. Stupid decisions, short term thinking, incompetence, corruption, waste, destruction; no real or immediate consequences for any of that. Small businesses and most individuals are answerable to the free markets. Too big to fail collectives are immune to market forces in the short time frame of a human life.

I completely agree and that's why these suggestions that the market will correct these problems are wrong. We have a beast and it needs to be killed, first.

I have a friend who spent 11 months in SE Asia, last year. She used to post here and was active in Ron Paul's campaign. She marvelled at the free market in Bangkok. Everyone just sets up on the street and sells their goods and services, no gov't interference. IMO, that's a free market. What global corporations do is not.

[erowe1]

Many of the Gulf species are already threatened or endangered. What do suppose will happen if the relief wells don't work?

I don't know. I just asked you where you got that claim, and you replied with another question, which suggests to me that you extruded it from your rectum.

[susano]

:rolleyes:

Take a break and give those brain cells a rest with a nice cool drink.
http://caravanofdreams.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/kool_aid_man_glass.jpg

Tell me how the people of Nigeria can use the free market to drive out big oil. I really want to know. I don't want philosophy, I want to know how they can do it.

[susano]

I don't know. I just asked you where you got that claim, and you replied with another question, which suggests to me that you extruded it from your rectum.

I answered you. MANY OF THE GULF SPECIES ARE ALREADY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. If their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction. That would mean an "extinction level event".

I then followed with a question for you: What happens if the relief wells fail?

[erowe1]

I answered you.

No you didn't. And as of now, you still haven't.

[susano]

No it isn't the same. The govt didn't tell BP, "You must drill out there." They said, "You can't drill here but you can drill there." There's a difference.

That's a very good point.

(to the other poster) BP also has plenty of experience in deep water drilling. What they don't have are any solutions for disasters, besides relief wells.

http://www.offshore-technology.com/projects/crazy_horse/

LocationMississippi Canyon 778/822, 150 miles SE of New Orleans
OperatorBP (75%)PartnerExxonMobil (25%)
Water depth 6,050ft

The Thunder Horse discovery well was drilled in 1999 on Mississippi Canyon Block 778. It was drilled to a depth of 25,770ft, from the drillship Discoverer 534 and found 520ft net of pay in three intervals.

Thunder Horse 2 was drilled in Block 822. It reached its total depth of 29,060ft in November 2000. The well was drilled by the Discoverer Enterprise in 6,300ft of water, 1.5 miles south-east of the discovery well. It encountered 675ft net of pay in three primary intervals.

"The Thunder Horse discovery well was drilled in 1999 on Mississippi Canyon Block 778."In February 2001, a new field - Thunder Horse North - was drilled in Block 776, 5 miles northwest of Thunder Horse. The discovery encountered 581ft net of accumulated hydrocarbons in three intervals. It was drilled in 5,640ft of water by the Discoverer 534 and reached a total depth of 26,046ft.

[susano]

No you didn't. And as of now, you still haven't.

I've answered you TWICE. Now, if you don't like the answer that's too bad. You chose to be willfully obtuse, that's your problem.

[erowe1]

I've answered you TWICE. Now, if you don't like the answer that's too bad. You chose to be willfully obtuse, that's your problem.

No you didn't. And the fact that you're being so stubborn about it only reinforces my initial impression that you extruded that claim from your rectum.

[susano]

No you didn't. And the fact that you're being so stubborn about it only reinforces my initial impression that you extruded that claim from your rectum.

For the third time:

MANY OF THE GULF SPECIES ARE ALREADY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. If their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction. That would mean an "extinction level event".


Is english your first language?

[moostraks]

No you didn't. And the fact that you're being so stubborn about it only reinforces my initial impression that you extruded that claim from your rectum.


The Gulf Oil Spill: Endangered Species Most at Risk from Spill


http://environmentalism.suite101.com/article.cfm/the-gulf-oil-spill--endangered-species-most-at-risk-from-spill

[klamath]

I completely agree and that's why these suggestions that the market will correct these problems are wrong. We have a beast and it needs to be killed, first.

I have a friend who spent 11 months in SE Asia, last year. She used to post here and was active in Ron Paul's campaign. She marvelled at the free market in Bangkok. Everyone just sets up on the street and sells their goods and services, no gov't interference. IMO, that's a free market. What global corporations do is not.
Actually you would do a lot more good if you used this thread for a solution to the need for oil.
Give me nuts and bolts on how you want to solve the huge dependence on oil that feeds multinational corporations.
Until people are personally willing to come up with a real solution to the replacement of oil for energy and material it will not change. Until people are really willing to accept a change in their lifestyle which could very well end the use of the internet it will not change.
I have been off the grid for 42 years so a very good understanding of alternate energy costs.
Here is a very good place to start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

[erowe1]

For the third time:

MANY OF THE GULF SPECIES ARE ALREADY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. If their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction. That would mean an "extinction level event".


Is english your first language?

Yes, English is my first language. I still don't see how you think that's an answer to my question. I asked where you got the idea that this could be an extinction level event, and you reply with a shear assertion that has every appearance of being something you made up, as though it seamlessly logically follows from the fact that some species are endangered, this oil spill must, therefore, have the potential of making them extinct. And then you don't understand why I think that all you did was make it up.

Now this third time you add in the bit "if their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction," which, again, looks like a simple assertion on your part. I suppose it would be a truism that a species could go extinct if every habitat everywhere that is a home to an individual member of that species is destroyed, that in that case, yes, that species could go extinct. But then if you expect something like that to happen, it would only lead back to my original question of where you got that idea.

But at this point, please don't even bother surfing the web looking for some after the fact answer to make it look like you really did have a basis for your assertion all along. It's clear enough to me now that you just made it up that it would be a waste of your time trying to convince me that you didn't.

[charrob]

The fact is, when drilling for oil and gas in water, there have be regulations. Not the corrupt BS that passes for regulations but real and sane and strict ones, with prison sentances for violating them (fat chance). If we want to be regulation free, then we need to be corporation free. Corporations are predatory. You don't let a predator in your home without safeguards (and if you're smart, you don't let them in, period). Corporations have hired death squads in other countries. They don't fuck around with being "good global citizens" (their rhetoric, not mine). Their ONLY concern is money and they have proven they will do whatever it takes to make it. A recent article in a British paper blamed Americans for not protecting what is ours, and correctly stated that BP will get away whatever it can (and this article was DEFENDING BP). Utopia is for commies. The people on this board should know that. Corporations are ruthless. Anyone who can't get that through their head and thinks the "market" will take of care of their abuses is crazy. Suggested reading would be the history of British Petroleum and Iran.

I don't know if we can turn things around. The human race may just wipe itself out because of stupidity.


-have not read thru the entire thread, but I agree with your statement. I also disagree that private property rights will somehow make us more 'environmental'. Take a look at the giant redwood forests in northern California (trees that were here for hundreds of years) that have been completely obliterated for logging. Or the fellow who chopped down the last tree on Easter Island because it was on his land. Just because people own property, does not mean they will respect the nature and life that live on that property: it depends on the person and many persons would chose to exploit that property for material gain.

That means that the rest of us, who value the priceless nonmaterial assets the oceans and wildlife give us, have to fight all the harder to unite with those that want to make sure the corporate/government cronyism seen so often in government ends.

Much of the problem, imho, are the "drill baby drill" screamers who constantly scream against "environmental red tape" and now we are paying for the price of Bush-era cronies that were put in place by these types of screamers. If the people choose an environmentally-unfriendly president and elect him, they only have themselves to blame for the mess in the gulf.

Just because government regulations have failed in this instance, does not mean we get rid of government: it means we make government better, and elect politicians that respect and love nature as much as we do.

I still remember seeing these videos of drill-baby-drill republicans frothing at the mouth saying this chant over and over and over again as if they were perfectly mad in the head. And for what purpose? Is gasoline scarce? Prices high? --when i see single-occupancy SUV after SUV after SUV after TRUCK after TRUCK after TRUCK sitting in literally hours of rush-hour traffic where a honda-fit or other fuel efficient car would suffice, the answer is obviously an unqualified "NO".

[erowe1]

The Gulf Oil Spill: Endangered Species Most at Risk from Spill


http://environmentalism.suite101.com/article.cfm/the-gulf-oil-spill--endangered-species-most-at-risk-from-spill

Hey thanks, Moostraks! That's just the kind of thing I was asking Susano for!

I notice in that link, the only species it mentions as being threatened with extinction because of this is the Sea Turtle. But since we know from the video in the OP that that guy rescued 25 or so already, we can now safely say that the Sea Turtle no longer faces a risk of extinction.

So that leaves the tally of species risking extinction from the oil spill at zero.

[MelissaWV]

Hey thanks, Moostraks! That's just the kind of thing I was asking Susano for!

I notice in that link, the only species it mentions as being threatened with extinction because of this is the Sea Turtle. But since we know from the video in the OP that that guy rescued 25 or so already, we can now safely say that the Sea Turtle no longer faces a risk of extinction.

So that leaves the tally of species risking extinction from the oil spill at zero.

In the short term. If there were, say, only 50 sea turtles of a given species left around... it would not be long before they would die out. I'm not an alarmist about any of this by a long run, but the fact a couple dozen have been rescued is no assurance that they'll survive or breed. A portion of animals rescued die from the shock of the entire process.

This will also mess with the entire Gulf ecosystem, which bleeds into marshes. Marshes will fight back over time, being as hardy as they are, but we don't know what the long term effects will be on this one.

* * *

FYI to all involved... "extinction level event" does have a definition. It would behoove those having this little debate to look it up.


An extinction event (also known as: mass extinction; extinction-level event, ELE, or biotic crisis) is a sharp decrease in the diversity and abundance of macroscopic life. They occur when the rate of extinction increases with respect to the rate of speciation. Because the majority of diversity and biomass on earth is microbial, and thus difficult to measure, mass extinctions have little effect on the total diversity and abundance of life, but rather affect the easily observed component of the biosphere.

...

[Example:]

Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event (K-T extinction) - 65 Ma ago at the Cretaceous-Paleogene transition. About 17% of all families, 50% of all genera and 75% of species went extinct. It ended the reign of dinosaurs and opened the way for mammals and birds to become the dominant land vertebrates. In the seas it reduced the percentage of sessile animals to about 33%. The K-T extinction was rather uneven — some groups of organisms became extinct, some suffered heavy losses and some appear to have been only minimally affected.

It's not even close to what's expected here. What's going on in the Gulf is bad enough without applying the wrong term.

[Anti Federalist]

Tell me how the people of Nigeria can use the free market to drive out big oil. I really want to know. I don't want philosophy, I want to know how they can do it.

By doing what they are doing now.

Hijacking, beating and killing the men working the rigs and vessels.

Of course, we are left defenseless and unarmed.

[erowe1]

In the short term. If there were, say, only 50 sea turtles of a given species left around... it would not be long before they would die out.

I'm skeptical about that. Granted, their chances of survival would be much higher if it were legal to raise them and sell their meat and shells for profit. But even under the current decreased incentive for preserving them that the Endangered Species Act causes, I'm still skeptical that they'd go extinct with 50 known members left and a concerted effort to save them. The California Condor got down to only 22 individuals.

But I don't think that's the kind of numbers we're talking about anyway. The 25 that the guy saved are JUST from their current efforts so far to save them from this spill, not counting all the Sea Turtles in captivity, and not counting all the ones in the wild who haven't yet been affected by it. When I said that we know they won't go extinct, it was with the assumption that those 25 represent a much larger group that has or will escaped that oil.

[klamath]

-have not read thru the entire thread, but I agree with your statement. I also disagree that private property rights will somehow make us more 'environmental'. Take a look at the giant redwood forests in northern California (trees that were here for hundreds of years) that have been completely obliterated for logging. Or the fellow who chopped down the last tree on Easter Island because it was on his land. Just because people own property, does not mean they will respect the nature and life that live on that property: it depends on the person and many persons would chose to exploit that property for material gain.

That means that the rest of us, who value the priceless nonmaterial assets the oceans and wildlife give us, have to fight all the harder to unite with those that want to make sure the corporate/government cronyism seen so often in government ends.

Much of the problem, imho, are the "drill baby drill" screamers who constantly scream against "environmental red tape" and now we are paying for the price of Bush-era cronies that were put in place by these types of screamers. If the people choose an environmentally-unfriendly president and elect him, they only have themselves to blame for the mess in the gulf.

Just because government regulations have failed in this instance, does not mean we get rid of government: it means we make government better, and elect politicians that respect and love nature as much as we do.

I still remember seeing these videos of drill-baby-drill republicans frothing at the mouth saying this chant over and over and over again as if they were perfectly mad in the head. And for what purpose? Is gasoline scarce? Prices high? --when i see single-occupancy SUV after SUV after SUV after TRUCK after TRUCK after TRUCK sitting in literally hours of rush-hour traffic where a honda-fit or other fuel efficient car would suffice, the answer is obviously an unqualified "NO".

Solutions people, solutions, not rants. Explain to me specifically just how and what regulations need to be enacted. Also what is the solution when oil production on US lands get pushed to the middle east. Do you propose that the government ban the manufacture and sales of SUV's? What else do you suggest be done to reduce dependence on oil?

[susano]

Actually you would do a lot more good if you used this thread for a solution to the need for oil.
Give me nuts and bolts on how you want to solve the huge dependence on oil that feeds multinational corporations.
Until people are personally willing to come up with a real solution to the replacement of oil for energy and material it will not change. Until people are really willing to accept a change in their lifestyle which could very well end the use of the internet it will not change.
I have been off the grid for 42 years so a very good understanding of alternate energy costs.
Here is a very good place to start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Wow, that's great that you are off the grid. I am very impressed. I fully believe these types of changes in lifestyle are what are required to move to a different paradigm. How that would play out in different areas, I don't know. What works in Arizona won't work in Michigan, though some solutions are applicable everywhere.

I don't know if you saw, a few pages back, the talk about how if we change our lifestyles it would amount to our practically living in the dark ages. To me, that that kind of thinking is extremely narrow minded and shortsighted. I see infinate possibilities. There's a presumption that the extreme consumerist way of life somehow equals quality. I don't agree with that, at all. I would bet that you find your quality of life to be very good. The people in New Mexico who have buillt earthships are the same.

I looked into doing some environemtally friendly changes for my home. We couldn't afford any of them. Back in the 70s, there was a genuine, not hijacked, environmental movement. Not far from where I live, there was college that was completely devoted to alternative energies. It was later shut down. IMO, that's a tragic period because we came close to actually making big changes, but gov't and big business conspired to support the status quo. The real environmental movement was taken over by the very entities who are destroying the environment - like "Beyond Petroleum" and the global waming fraudsters. Had these last last thirty five years been a period of R&D in alt energy, these things would be well developed, inexspensive and widely available by now.

I'm just one person with very little knowledge and fewer resources when it comes to something like you have done. For decades, I have recyled, avoided plastic and nasty chemicals, and observed a vegitarian diet. It's not much in the big scope of things, but I do believe personal choices are what change the world.

When you mention th internet, I don't see why that would be something the world would lose in an evironmentally conscious world. In the maufacturing of computers, it seems like plastic could be completely eliminated. I think there are elements in the inner workings that are toxic. I don't enough about it to know what alternatives there are but I'll bet there.

[Anti Federalist]

Solutions people, solutions, not rants. Explain to me specifically just how and what regulations need to be enacted. Also what is the solution when oil production on US lands get pushed to the middle east. Do you propose that the government ban the manufacture and sales of SUV's? What else do you suggest be done to reduce dependence on oil?

I'd like to hear this as well.

Austerity measures?

$5 a gallon gas taxes?

What?

And when a group of nations decides to embargo us again, and we're 100 percent dependent, what then?

Just enough fuel for the martial law vehicles and tax tractors to haul around the elite?

[specsaregood]

For the third time:
MANY OF THE GULF SPECIES ARE ALREADY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. If their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction. That would mean an "extinction level event"


That is not the commonly accepted definition of "extinction level event"
The term even has its own wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event


An extinction event (also known as: mass extinction; extinction-level event, ELE, or biotic crisis) is a sharp decrease in the diversity and abundance of macroscopic life. They occur when the rate of extinction increases with respect to the rate of speciation
...
In the past 540 million years there have been five major events when over 50% of animal species died


Glad to help.

[specsaregood]

//

[Anti Federalist]

When you mention th internet, I don't see why that would be something the world would lose in an evironmentally conscious world. In the maufacturing of computers, it seems like plastic could be completely eliminated. I think there are elements in the inner workings that are toxic. I don't enough about it to know what alternatives there are but I'll bet there.

Right now there is no alternative to the complex plastic compounds and energy needed to produce computer systems.

Everything has a level of risk.

We could all ditch cars completely and go back to horses and carriages.

And die from typhus at 25 instead of cancer at 80.

[erowe1]

The problem is they don't mate, lay eggs in captivity. And turtles will travel hundreds of miles to return to the same nest they were hatched from. They don't just pick any beach, they are very specific. they have tagged/gps-tracked turtles that travel from florida to all the way down to off the coast of venezuala, and then return all the way back to florida to lay their eggs.

I admit that I don't know much about Sea Turtles. But the fact that they can migrate so far only makes me think they're even more likely to survive something like this. When species face changes in their habitats that make them unlivable, they adapt and move if they can. The Sea Turtle has been around a long time and survived far more severe environmental changes than this one.

[Travlyr]

Rah... Rah... Hemp.
Go Hemp Go.
Go. Go. Go.
Rah... Rah... Hemp.
Go Hemp Go.
Go. Go. Go.

I realize that a society returning to hemp production would only make a tiny dent, but seriously... Illegal? Banned?

WTF!

[erowe1]

We could all ditch cars completely and go back to horses and carriages.


And whale blubber. I'm sure susano would like that.

[specsaregood]

I admit that I don't know much about Sea Turtles. But the fact that they can migrate so far only makes me think they're even more likely to survive something like this. When species face changes in their habitats that make them unlivable, they adapt and move. The Sea Turtle has been around a long time and survived far more severe environmental changes than this one.

No doubt, commercial fishing and plastic waste floating in the ocean is arguably more of a threat to them than this. I don't know if you saw my comment pages ago, but there are reports from the early the early 16th century of sea turtles being in such abundance that ships would actually get trapped/stuck between schools of them and be unable to move. That they would be so plentiful that it would seem that a man could walk for miles upon their backs. We have done much to destroy their population, well before this oil leak happened....whether this could be the final blow, I am unsure.

[susano]

Yes, English is my first language. I still don't see how you think that's an answer to my question. I asked where you got the idea that this could be an extinction level event, and you reply with a shear assertion that has every appearance of being something you made up, as though it seamlessly logically follows from the fact that some species are endangered, this oil spill must, therefore, have the potential of making them extinct. And then you don't understand why I think that all you did was make it up.

Now this third time you add in the bit "if their habitat is destroyed, that could mean extinction," which, again, looks like a simple assertion on your part. I suppose it would be a truism that a species could go extinct if every habitat everywhere that is a home to an individual member of that species is destroyed, that in that case, yes, that species could go extinct. But then if you expect something like that to happen, it would only lead back to my original question of where you got that idea.

But at this point, please don't even bother surfing the web looking for some after the fact answer to make it look like you really did have a basis for your assertion all along. It's clear enough to me now that you just made it up that it would be a waste of your time trying to convince me that you didn't.

For GOD's sake, what are you in high school? Do you need everything spelled out for you? You seem to expect tha I do the critical thinking for you. CONNECT THE DOTS, dumbass. This is what I said:

Many of the Gulf species are already threatened or endangered. What do suppose will happen if the relief wells don't work?

Because you're so dim, I had to follow with the statement about of habitat. If you used your brain, you would have figured out the living beings require a habitat in order to survive. If the relief wells fail, there won't be a habitat. At this point, the destruction may be enough to, indeed, wipe out some species. I don't know, though. However, if the Gulf is turned into a fucking tar pit, NO MORE HABITAT to support the life forms that survive there. It's not rocket science.

[erowe1]

For GOD's sake, what are you in high school? Do you need everything spelled out for you? You seem to expect tha I do the critical thinking for you. CONNECT THE DOTS, dumbass. This is what I said:

Many of the Gulf species are already threatened or endangered. What do suppose will happen if the relief wells don't work?

Because you're so dim, I had to follow with the statement about of habitat. If you used your brain, you would have figured out the living beings require a habitat in order to survive. If the relief wells fail, there won't be a habitat. At this point, the destruction may be enough to, indeed, wipe out some species. I don't know, though. However, if the Gulf is turned into a fucking tar pit, NO MORE HABITAT to support the life forms that survive there. It's not rocket science.

I'll be the first to admit that I'm dim. But I can tell when somebody didn't answer my question. And you still haven't answered my question.

But it's ok. Like I said, at this point, don't bother. It's pretty clear that you made that all up.

[susano]

-have not read thru the entire thread, but I agree with your statement. I also disagree that private property rights will somehow make us more 'environmental'. Take a look at the giant redwood forests in northern California (trees that were here for hundreds of years) that have been completely obliterated for logging. Or the fellow who chopped down the last tree on Easter Island because it was on his land. Just because people own property, does not mean they will respect the nature and life that live on that property: it depends on the person and many persons would chose to exploit that property for material gain.

That means that the rest of us, who value the priceless nonmaterial assets the oceans and wildlife give us, have to fight all the harder to unite with those that want to make sure the corporate/government cronyism seen so often in government ends.

Much of the problem, imho, are the "drill baby drill" screamers who constantly scream against "environmental red tape" and now we are paying for the price of Bush-era cronies that were put in place by these types of screamers. If the people choose an environmentally-unfriendly president and elect him, they only have themselves to blame for the mess in the gulf.

Just because government regulations have failed in this instance, does not mean we get rid of government: it means we make government better, and elect politicians that respect and love nature as much as we do.

I still remember seeing these videos of drill-baby-drill republicans frothing at the mouth saying this chant over and over and over again as if they were perfectly mad in the head. And for what purpose? Is gasoline scarce? Prices high? --when i see single-occupancy SUV after SUV after SUV after TRUCK after TRUCK after TRUCK sitting in literally hours of rush-hour traffic where a honda-fit or other fuel efficient car would suffice, the answer is obviously an unqualified "NO".

Did you see the congressman who apoligized, today, to Tony Hayward, for the 20 billion escrow fund for the residents of the Gulf? He called it a shakedown.

I agree with all you've said, though the groundwork for big oil doing as they please was laid even before BushCo. And, those redwood trees - over 2000 years old!

Hey, can you imagine if the Rothschilds bought the Gulf of Mexico? They've probably got the money to do it. I'm sure they'd show the greatest respect for Gulf residents and the enviroment. That's okay, though - the "small people" can just take them to court and fight their lawyers for the rest of their lives.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Did you see the congressman who apoligized, today, to Tony Hayward, for the 20 billion escrow fund for the residents of the Gulf? He called it a shakedown.

I agree with all you've said, though the groundwork for big oil doing as they please was laid even before BushCo. And, those redwood trees - over 2000 years old!

Hey, can you imagine if the Rothschilds bought the Gulf of Mexico? They've probably got the money to do it. I'm sure they'd show the greatest respect for Gulf residents and the enviroment. That's okay, though - the "small people" can just take them to court and fight their lawyers for the rest of their lives.

You have any solutions, or all you do is bitch, whine, moan, and deride others? Let's hear your all great solution, which by the way, has no principled, or philosophical backing (since obviously you believe that stuff is just "wankery"). Come on, I want to hear it.

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm not a libertarian, I'm a constitutionalist.

I'm sure you've seen discussions here about whether global corporatism constitutes a "free market". Many here believe it does. Some of us don't. I don't.

Of course it doesn't. I've participated in a few of those discussions myself. However, there is still a role for corporations in a free market (as Walter Block, et. al. have explained). The greater danger is corporate fascism-another good reason to dismantle the State (but that is beyond the scope of this thread, so I'll leave it at that).

[heavenlyboy34]

Did you see the congressman who apoligized, today, to Tony Hayward, for the 20 billion escrow fund for the residents of the Gulf? He called it a shakedown.

I agree with all you've said, though the groundwork for big oil doing as they please was laid even before BushCo. And, those redwood trees - over 2000 years old!

Hey, can you imagine if the Rothschilds bought the Gulf of Mexico? They've probably got the money to do it. I'm sure they'd show the greatest respect for Gulf residents and the enviroment. That's okay, though - the "small people" can just take them to court and fight their lawyers for the rest of their lives.

The problem with the highlighted argument is that the Rothschilds and other criminal elements ALREADY collude with the State. It is much less likely for such corruption to happen in a truly free market, as a free market is decentralized enough to discourage such parasites from trying to attach themselves to it.

[klamath]

Wow, that's great that you are off the grid. I am very impressed. I fully believe these types of changes in lifestyle are what are required to move to a different paradigm. How that would play out in different areas, I don't know. What works in Arizona won't work in Michigan, though some solutions are applicable everywhere.

I don't know if you saw, a few pages back, the talk about how if we change our lifestyles it would amount to our practically living in the dark ages. To me, that that kind of thinking is extremely narrow minded and shortsighted. I see infinate possibilities. There's a presumption that the extreme consumerist way of life somehow equals quality. I don't agree with that, at all. I would bet that you find your quality of life to be very good. The people in New Mexico who have buillt earthships are the same.

I looked into doing some environemtally friendly changes for my home. We couldn't afford any of them. Back in the 70s, there was a genuine, not hijacked, environmental movement. Not far from where I live, there was college that was completely devoted to alternative energies. It was later shut down. IMO, that's a tragic period because we came close to actually making big changes, but gov't and big business conspired to support the status quo. The real environmental movement was taken over by the very entities who are destroying the environment - like "Beyond Petroleum" and the global waming fraudsters. Had these last last thirty five years been a period of R&D in alt energy, these things would be well developed, inexspensive and widely available by now.

I'm just one person with very little knowledge and fewer resources when it comes to something like you have done. For decades, I have recyled, avoided plastic and nasty chemicals, and observed a vegitarian diet. It's not much in the big scope of things, but I do believe personal choices are what change the world.

When you mention th internet, I don't see why that would be something the world would lose in an evironmentally conscious world. In the maufacturing of computers, it seems like plastic could be completely eliminated. I think there are elements in the inner workings that are toxic. I don't enough about it to know what alternatives there are but I'll bet there.
Personally I hate the idea of people driving tons of steel to work where smaller cars would work. Personally I hate buying cheap throw away disposable items but I fear government solutions to the problems even more.
Study that energy chart, think outside the box. For 40 years I have been hearing that Big oil and government have kept alternate energy down but believe me if someone does come up with an alternate cheap energy source they would be the next billionaires. There are just too many people that hate big oil that would buy that product. Fossel fuel is still the densest cheapest energy out there and until this changes drilling and coal mining won't go away. All the energy sources that have higher energy densities are even more environmentlly taboo.
Just not using plastic does not stop your consumpion of oil. ALL conponents in a computer use oil and other fossel fuels to manufacture. How is the aluminum melted for the die cast chasis of a computer etc, etc, etc. Our nitrogen fertalizers for growing vegetable crops comes from oil. Unless we come up with a alternate source of fertilizer there is going to be a huge starvation when oil is shut off or runs out.
I am all ears, I want viable solutions. I watch new energy technologies with keen interest. Brains will solve these problems.

[susano]

By doing what they are doing now.

Hijacking, beating and killing the men working the rigs and vessels.

Of course, we are left defenseless and unarmed.


We agree. They have to resort to war, which is not a market solution.

We aren't unarmed, yet. Of course, the globalists would like to make that happen.

[charrob]

Explain to me specifically just how and what regulations need to be enacted.


End all offshore drilling.
Increase gasoline by $5.00 per gallon: use money gained to create good mass transit systems, and alternate forms of transportation. Subsidize train systems like they do in Europe so to lower the cost of using trains as an incentive over using ones own vehicle.
Create incentives to decrease human population growth: rather than have deductions for children, increase taxes substantially for each child one has. Stop all immigration-- both legal and illegal into the country. At 300 million, we're filled up to capacity. Life imprisonment for anyone who employs illegal immigrant(s).
End the wars, stop foreign aide to all countries: use money gained to have the country totally focus on new energy research, build new electrical grid, build vast windmill farms in the oceans, etc.
Stop trade with countries who are not environmentally friendly.


Also what is the solution when oil production on US lands get pushed to the middle east.

about 50% of our oil is used for transportation: increasing gasoline $5 per gallon will drammatically change American driving habits. This will also create much quicker incentives for alternative transportations. there is still a good amount of unexplored oil on lands in the west: this should be enough to get us through the years as better mass transit systems are built.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs066.ash2/36681_136772473003045_100000108791083_397172_76599 79_n.jpg



Do you propose that the government ban the manufacture and sales of SUV's?

No. If people want to pay $9 per gallon and fill their SUV tank, fine. My opinion is that few would buy them, car lots will stop selling them, and things will normalize on its own to a more sustainable future.

[susano]

The problem is they don't mate, lay eggs in captivity. And turtles will travel hundreds of miles to return to the same nest they were hatched from. They don't just pick any beach, they are very specific. they have tagged/gps-tracked turtles that travel from florida to all the way down to off the coast of venezuala, and then return all the way back to florida to lay their eggs.

And I saw video, last night, of the sand at Destin, Florida. It's saturated with oil. It's very insideous, in that it isn't a layer than can be removed, but it's mixed in the formerly sugar white sand. For Destin, this is just the beginning. I'm wondering if the dispersants are what caused the oil to break down and be able to mix in the sand that. The sea actually loked fairly clear, but it obviously isn't.

[heavenlyboy34]

Charrob, there's something critical you're overlooking. Who's going to use these mass-transit systems you advocate? They are already plentiful, and people avoid them because they prefer the independence of their cars. Further, who's going to pay for it? We've already got an unsustainable level of debt. (also note that transit systems like buses are typically LESS fuel efficient than cars anyway)

[Travlyr]

Further, who's going to pay for it?

Silly, silly boy. It is paid for by raising gasoline to $9/gal. :rolleyes:

[MelissaWV]

Charrob, there's something critical you're overlooking. Who's going to use these mass-transit systems you advocate? They are already plentiful, and people avoid them because they prefer the independence of their cars. Further, who's going to pay for it? We've already got an unsustainable level of debt. (also note that transit systems like buses are typically LESS fuel efficient than cars anyway)

Popular mass transit requires that it be planned together with the city, in many cases, or an ambitious overhaul of how an existing city is planned. Most of our heaviest commutes nationwide would not be fixed by typical transit plans. It doesn't matter how much money is thrown at it.

[heavenlyboy34]

Silly, silly boy. It is paid for by raising gasoline to $9/gal. :rolleyes:

lolz...I know you're joking, but as a serious point-who would be able to afford enough $9/gal. gas to make the plan work? ;)

[specsaregood]

//

[Travlyr]

lolz...I know you're joking, but as a serious point-who would be able to afford enough $9/gal. gas to make the plan work? ;)

Seems to me that very few could afford it... the Rockefellers, Rothschilds... the political class? I'm afraid I would become even more of a homebody.

[klamath]

End all offshore drilling.
Increase gasoline by $5.00 per gallon: use money gained to create good mass transit systems, and alternate forms of transportation. Subsidize train systems like they do in Europe so to lower the cost of using trains as an incentive over using ones own vehicle.
Create incentives to decrease human population growth: rather than have deductions for children, increase taxes substantially for each child one has. Stop all immigration-- both legal and illegal into the country. At 300 million, we're filled up to capacity. Life imprisonment for anyone who employs illegal immigrant(s).
End the wars, stop foreign aide to all countries: use money gained to have the country totally focus on new energy research, build new electrical grid, build vast windmill farms in the oceans, etc.
Stop trade with countries who are not environmentally friendly.



about 50% of our oil is used for transportation: increasing gasoline $5 per gallon will drammatically change American driving habits. This will also create much quicker incentives for alternative transportations. there is still a good amount of unexplored oil on lands in the west: this should be enough to get us through the years as better mass transit systems are built.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs066.ash2/36681_136772473003045_100000108791083_397172_76599 79_n.jpg




No. If people want to pay $9 per gallon and fill their SUV tank, fine. My opinion is that few would buy them, car lots will stop selling them, and things will normalize on its own to a more sustainable future.
Have you changed your political views recently because I cannot see how anything you described matches anything RP advocates. All of it was huge government control. I can guarentee that your population control solution would morph into something far more evil than an oil spill and still not save an endangered animal. Government would soon have the power to determine what how and who lives for the betterment of the society and the environment. Many governments have tried this nazi germany. stalinist russia, communists of the '50's china, pol pot in cambodia. They all had grand visions on how the world would be a better place with their social engineering.

[ninepointfive]

GOOD USE FOR THAT OIL SLICK:

Boil down into tar.
While still boiling dunk in the BP company men by chain.
poof! feathers!
http://www.nwta.com/Spy/spring99/tar.jpg

[susano]

That is not the commonly accepted definition of "extinction level event"
The term even has its own wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event


Glad to help.

Most of the food chain for the Gulf begins in the marshes and wetlands. You detroy those, it could very well lead to an ELE.

[charrob]

Charrob, there's something critical you're overlooking. Who's going to use these mass-transit systems you advocate? They are already plentiful, and people avoid them because they prefer the independence of their cars.

I would use the train in a heartbeat if it was cost effective. However, because the end of the track is further into the city, I would need to drive to the end-point: this requires usage of an expensive parking garage ($5.00 per day); add that to the $5.00 to get round-trip via train to work and back, it's a costly expenditure. I do use it to get to points on the other side of the city, just not everyday. Most cities are not equipped with good train systems: D.C. and, I suppose, NY are exceptions. However I know the train system to Baltimore sucks because there's not enough funds to make it better.


Further, who's going to pay for it? We've already got an unsustainable level of debt.

Increasing gasoline by $5.00 per gallon will certainly help to fund better train systems. And, as mentioned in my post, the expenses of these insane wars, having military bases all over the world, paying billions in foreign aide to other countries every year, etc., could be put towards building efficient train systems all over the U.S. Many cities still have their streetcar lines, although they are unused: well it's time to bring them back! Because the train system in D.C. are so crowded (standing room only during rush hour), D.C. is even bringing back and rejuvenating their old streetcar lines.

In Europe the train systems are phenonemal; they're quick, and efficient. The reason why it's affordable is because it's subsidized through the government, which I agree with.

[susano]

Right now there is no alternative to the complex plastic compounds and energy needed to produce computer systems.

Everything has a level of risk.

We could all ditch cars completely and go back to horses and carriages.

And die from typhus at 25 instead of cancer at 80.

Seroiusly, how we know they are no alternatives? How can we know what's out there, what could be developed, when the petrochemical industry is so dominant?

While this is a small example, who's to say this can't be taken to other levels, including replacing the plastics in computers:

http://www.vegware.com/pla-hot-cup-extras/cat_7.html

I'm also not getting how you equate a simpler and cleaner lifestyle to dieing of typhus. And, all that cancer... maybe it has something to do with environmental contaminants and the stresses of a way of living that isn't so conducive to our health.

[susano]

Rah... Rah... Hemp.
Go Hemp Go.
Go. Go. Go.
Rah... Rah... Hemp.
Go Hemp Go.
Go. Go. Go.

I realize that a society returning to hemp production would only make a tiny dent, but seriously... Illegal? Banned?

WTF!

+ 1

And, hemp is just one eco friendly alternative that has been supressed.

[susano]

No doubt, commercial fishing and plastic waste floating in the ocean is arguably more of a threat to them than this. I don't know if you saw my comment pages ago, but there are reports from the early the early 16th century of sea turtles being in such abundance that ships would actually get trapped/stuck between schools of them and be unable to move. That they would be so plentiful that it would seem that a man could walk for miles upon their backs. We have done much to destroy their population, well before this oil leak happened....whether this could be the final blow, I am unsure.

A long time ago, I read a book of diaries of early explorers in the Great Lakes. Same thing - fish so abundant that they could barely wade though the water. The early settlers should have built upon the native way of living. Imagine if all of our genuis had been put to use with an aboslute repsect for Nature and the indians' seven generations rule.

[susano]

The problem with the highlighted argument is that the Rothschilds and other criminal elements ALREADY collude with the State. It is much less likely for such corruption to happen in a truly free market, as a free market is decentralized enough to discourage such parasites from trying to attach themselves to it.

See, I oppose big government, but I also disagree that those with the might won't use it - with or w/o the crooks in government. When they can't buy their way in to take over a country or land and exploit it's resources and people, they have shown they will use force. I don't propose to know the answers, but some things that come to mind are:

Follow the constitution
Have a strong national defense (and nothing outside of the country)
Do not allow corporations to operate in the US
Protectionism, especially when it comes to natural resources
All hands on deck for alt energies

[charrob]

Have you changed your political views recently because I cannot see how anything you described matches anything RP advocates. All of it was huge government control.

I don't totally agree with Ron Paul-- I supported him in 2008 because he gives me 60% of what I want while Obama gives me 0% and McCain was a nightmare. I agree with the following views of Ron Paul:


end the wars yesterday.
stop the torture.
stop the civil liberty abuses / patriot act.
end the police state.
end trade agreements like nafta, wto, etc.
protect our borders.
end the federal reserve.
stop creating money out of thin air (inflation).
end the department of education.
end the department of homeland security.
end the billions given in aide to foreign countries every year.
end our empire with its zillion military bases all over the world.


I also support Ron Paul because he is honest and has integrity, which is very unusual in D.C.



I can guarentee that your population control solution would morph into something far more evil than an oil spill and still not save an endangered animal.

What is more evil: creating incentives to limit our numbers so we share the earth equitably with all its creatures, or causing the kind of suffering of life going on right now in the Gulf? Why is the life of a human more important than the life of a dolphin or porpoise who has the same consciousness as well as an intelligence equal, or greater than, human intelligence?

[susano]

Oh, and, btw, when I wrote

When they can't buy their way in to take over a country or land and exploit it's resources and people, they have shown they will use force

I just realized that's what the United States empire does. Won't play ball, we'll bomb the shit out of you (for "business"). Dick Cheney said, "The American way of life is not negotiable". That's what he meant.

[susano]

I don't totally agree with Ron Paul-- I supported him in 2008 because he gives me 60% of what I want while Obama gives me 0% and McCain was a nightmare. I agree with the following views of Ron Paul:


end the wars yesterday.
stop the torture.
stop the civil liberty abuses / patriot act.
end the police state.
end trade agreements like nafta, wto, etc.
protect our borders.
end the federal reserve.
stop creating money out of thin air (inflation).
end the department of education.
end the department of homeland security.
end the billions given in aide to foreign countries every year.
end our empire with its zillion military bases all over the world.


I also support Ron Paul because he is honest and has integrity, which is very unusual in D.C.




What is more evil: creating incentives to limit our numbers so we share the earth equitably with all its creatures, or causing the kind of suffering of life going on right now in the Gulf? Why is the life of a human more important than the life of a dolphin or porpoise who has the same consciousness as well as an intelligence equal, or greater than, human intelligence?

I so much agree with your sentiments and that's why I supported Ron Paul. He's a great man, but he isn't GOD. I still differ with some of his opinions.

I disagree with some of your solutions, especially population control. I think it's the way we live that causes the problems, not how how many of us are alive. If we lived in harmony with Nature, it would be a different world. I see consumerism and this constant bullshit about (economic) "growth" as the real problem.

[charrob]

If we lived in harmony with Nature, it would be a different world. I see consumerism and this constant bullshit about (economic) "growth" as the real problem.

here's an interesting book you may like that was discussed on c-span:
http://www.theecologist.org/reviews/books/498587/twelve_by_twelve_a_oneroom_cabin_off_the_grid_beyo nd_the_american_dream.html

[moostraks]

Hey thanks, Moostraks! That's just the kind of thing I was asking Susano for!

I notice in that link, the only species it mentions as being threatened with extinction because of this is the Sea Turtle. But since we know from the video in the OP that that guy rescued 25 or so already, we can now safely say that the Sea Turtle no longer faces a risk of extinction.

So that leaves the tally of species risking extinction from the oil spill at zero.

It mentioned well more than the Sea Turtle.


"Endangered coastal birds like the brown pelican, the piping plover and the least tern are similarly threatened. Only recently removed from endangered status, the brown pelican may return to the list, due to the spill...


Other, less visible marine creatures are also featured on the endangered, threatened or “of concern" list. They include three species of sharks, four whale species and a number of fish, from the iconic Gulf Sturgeon and the Smalltoothed Sawfish to three types of Grouper. Depending on the species, surface oil or subsurface plumes may pose the greatest risk...


Underwater oil plumes certainly pose a major threat to the Blue Fin Tuna, considered by some to be on the global critical list. The Blue Fin is currently breeding in the Gulf, and scientists worry that as much as 20% of their spawn may be wiped out as a result of subsurface oil, laced with dispersants.

But the full impact of the oil spill on fish populations may remain hidden for some time. Scientists funded by the National Science Foundation are currently tracking the impact of oil as it moves up the food chain, from single celled algae to large fish. NOAA, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, is monitoring dolphins, whales and sea turtles to assess populations and determine baseline levels of exposure to oil and other contaminants."


I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss the effects this will have on the wildlife. Not to mention the effect it will have once it poisons the brackish waters of Florida and eventually works its way into the fresh waterways...

[catdd]

A long time ago, I read a book of diaries of early explorers in the Great Lakes. Same thing - fish so abundant that they could barely wade though the water. The early settlers should have built upon the native way of living. Imagine if all of our genuis had been put to use with an aboslute repsect for Nature and the indians' seven generations rule.


I agree, we act as though we hate nature.

[susano]

here's an interesting book you may like that was discussed on c-span:
http://www.theecologist.org/reviews/books/498587/twelve_by_twelve_a_oneroom_cabin_off_the_grid_beyo nd_the_american_dream.html

Thanks! That looks very interesting.

[susano]

It mentioned well more than the Sea Turtle.


"Endangered coastal birds like the brown pelican, the piping plover and the least tern are similarly threatened. Only recently removed from endangered status, the brown pelican may return to the list, due to the spill...


Other, less visible marine creatures are also featured on the endangered, threatened or “of concern" list. They include three species of sharks, four whale species and a number of fish, from the iconic Gulf Sturgeon and the Smalltoothed Sawfish to three types of Grouper. Depending on the species, surface oil or subsurface plumes may pose the greatest risk...


Underwater oil plumes certainly pose a major threat to the Blue Fin Tuna, considered by some to be on the global critical list. The Blue Fin is currently breeding in the Gulf, and scientists worry that as much as 20% of their spawn may be wiped out as a result of subsurface oil, laced with dispersants.

But the full impact of the oil spill on fish populations may remain hidden for some time. Scientists funded by the National Science Foundation are currently tracking the impact of oil as it moves up the food chain, from single celled algae to large fish. NOAA, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, is monitoring dolphins, whales and sea turtles to assess populations and determine baseline levels of exposure to oil and other contaminants."


I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss the effects this will have on the wildlife. Not to mention the effect it will have once it poisons the brackish waters of Florida and eventually works its way into the fresh waterways...

Wow, I just noticed your sig.

OMG, we took a wrong turn a long time ago :(

[susano]

I agree, we act as though we hate nature.

My experiences on this board have shown me that there is a huge divide among those of us drawn to the liberty movement.

[susano]

YouTube - (Part 1) Indigenous Native American Prophecy (Elders Speak part 1) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7cylfQtkDg)

[catdd]

My experiences on this board have show me that there is a huge divide among those of us drawn to the liberty movement.

A lot of it is the left/right thing. Lefty is generally the tree hugger while the right would just as soon turn it into paper. I keep saying that we should avoid that duality and walk the noble middle path.

[susano]

A lot of it is the left/right thing. Lefty is generally the tree hugger while the right would just as soon turn it into paper. I keep saying that we should avoid that duality and walk the noble middle path.

Agreed. I'm not drawn to liberty to be contained in a toxic paradigm.

Love liberty
Freedom is the birthright of ALL life
Be in harmony with all life
Remember the higher law

[Roxi]

Charrob, there's something critical you're overlooking. Who's going to use these mass-transit systems you advocate? They are already plentiful, and people avoid them because they prefer the independence of their cars. Further, who's going to pay for it? We've already got an unsustainable level of debt. (also note that transit systems like buses are typically LESS fuel efficient than cars anyway)

this.... not a chance I would give up my car, not a chance I would take mass transit unless it were life or death.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I might be in the market for a set of bowls if prices come down:

http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/images/MB050_200.jpg

[BenIsForRon]

Mass transit isn't the only solution to the car problem. We need to get back to walkable/bikeable communities, where most of the things you need are within a couple miles (market, general store, and hopefully your job). Mass transit would be more for the person who needs to go 30 blocks to get somewhere. Really, we need to end the suburban lifestyle.

[LibertyEagle]

Mass transit isn't the only solution to the car problem. We need to get back to walkable/bikeable communities, where most of the things you need are within a couple miles (market, general store, and hopefully your job). Mass transit would be more for the person who needs to go 30 blocks to get somewhere. Really, we need to end the suburban lifestyle.

Uh, I forget what the UN planners call this. Something like sustainable communities, or some such nonsense. Herd us all together into nice little compact cities, while the elite lives high on the hog.

Think about Al Gore. Going around the country hailing every government regulation under the sun to so-called, conserve. However, he, uses more energy than probably half of us lumped together.

What we need to do, IMO, is to let the free market operate. Remove the unnecessary constraints. There are all kinds of known oil deposits on land that oil companies have been prohibited from drilling. And what about in shallow waters? If the free market was fully allowed to operate, alternatives would be discovered.

The thing NOT to do is to fall for what the media and government is dishing out, that business is evil, we need government in all their wisdom about business practices and technology (yeah, right) to manage business, and that only government should decide what energy sources are worthy for us to use.

Don't fall for it.

[LibertyEagle]

We need to come up with some good talking points, because us small government types are in a defensive mode right now. You can already see how the big government socialists in the administration and media are using this event to give credence to the existence of big government.

[Anti Federalist]

We need to come up with some good talking points, because us small government types are in a defensive mode right now. You can already see how the big government socialists in the administration and media are using this event to give credence to the existence of big government.

Tough to do.

People are spun up and out of control just like they were after 9/11 and not willing to listen to reason anymore.

As a first hand operator and observer to this whole thing I've tried to gently point out some glaring factual errors and got shouted down for my trouble.

A crazed mob is hard to reason with.

After all the dust settles, we'll have lost even more freedom and there will be even larger government. :(

[BenIsForRon]

Don't fall for it.

I'm not falling for anything. The average meal travels 1300 miles from the farm to the plate. There are 10 calories of oil energy used for every one calorie of food energy. This is not sustainable. Communities must be rearranged, I don't care what the UN says.

[rancher89]

I'm with you Ben, we need to localize our production and usage.

[DjLoTi]

or all you do is bitch, whine, moan, and deride others?

I think this is all *you're* doing. So you talked about privatizing the oceans. That argument was kind of shut down by the poster who mentioned easter island.

AED, if you've got nothing to contribute to this topic other then talking **** to others, you should just leave.

[MsDoodahs]

I'm not falling for anything. The average meal travels 1300 miles from the farm to the plate. There are 10 calories of oil energy used for every one calorie of food energy. This is not sustainable. Communities must be rearranged, I don't care what the UN says.

Way to support freedom of the individual to choose!

"communities must be rearranged" per the central planner. :rolleyes:

[rancher89]

BTW, I asked a local strawberry producer why he didn't sell locally to the nearby grocery chains.....contracts and unions.

He said he could not compete against the unions. PLUS he didn't have the equipment to flash cool his produce to truck it any distance.

[klamath]

I don't totally agree with Ron Paul-- I supported him in 2008 because he gives me 60% of what I want while Obama gives me 0% and McCain was a nightmare. I agree with the following views of Ron Paul:


end the wars yesterday.
stop the torture.
stop the civil liberty abuses / patriot act.
end the police state.
end trade agreements like nafta, wto, etc.
protect our borders.
end the federal reserve.
stop creating money out of thin air (inflation).
end the department of education.
end the department of homeland security.
end the billions given in aide to foreign countries every year.
end our empire with its zillion military bases all over the world.


I also support Ron Paul because he is honest and has integrity, which is very unusual in D.C.




What is more evil: creating incentives to limit our numbers so we share the earth equitably with all its creatures, or causing the kind of suffering of life going on right now in the Gulf? Why is the life of a human more important than the life of a dolphin or porpoise who has the same consciousness as well as an intelligence equal, or greater than, human intelligence?
Ok let's see.
I have a child the government doesn't aprove. I don't pay the child tax I go to jail and CPS takes my kid to be raised by the state. Na civil liberties lost there. No police state there.:rolleyes:
OK taxing gas 5 buck a gallon. I live in an area that will never see a mass transit system. I live a life style that uses less carbon than I guarentee almost anyone around, My environmentally friendly lifestyle would come to an end because I couldn't afford to drive to the nearest city for the few things I can't build myself. Yes this sounds like the result of a giant centalized planned utopia.
Life imprisionment for a person that happened to employ a mexican so he could feed his family. Nah, no loss of civil liberties there.:rolleyes:
I sell a widget to Mr Johnson in Norway and some government agency decides that norway is on the no sell list because they are dirty rotton fish eaters. I go to jail because I didn't abide by the law. I am sure if we call the people that haul me away other than police then it wouldn't be a police state.
I am sure being in jail as bubba's girlfriend because I sold widgets to mister Johnson is not a torture like experience.
Massive windfarms off the coast sound great until the impediment to the natural wind flow changes the wave and current patterns of the ocean. Loss of rainfall to coastal mountains because of the impediment to the moisture laden low level winds that no longer can create enough orographic lifting to condense the moisture out.
Ah, how do you build a new grid when the copper is mined in an unfriendly to the environmental country? Why should the animals of the west be terrorized to death by the sonic explosions needed to explore for new oil. This is an ongoing war the environmentalists have with oil exploration. Clinton took huge tracks of the of the west off limits by an executive order.
Million of sea birds dying in windmill blade strikes. Fish populations scared from the windmill farms massive flickering. Loss of oxygen in the coastal waters because of the loss of mixing wave action. No I don't think that would be the perfect utopia you think it would be. There is already well organized environmental groups that oppose wind farms and desert solar generation plants in the deserts because of the harm they do to wildlife.

Yes I have seen how granting the federal governemnt massive powers has helped the environment first hand. First they thought that all fire in the forest should be supressed then young environmentalists trained in college decided Smokey Bear was wrong and changed the federal fire fighting stategy to "Fires are great for the ecology". Now they don't just let the fires started by man or nature burn but manage them by lighting more fire. I live in an area of almost all old growth forest. Fire crews cried to me about torching 5 foot in diameter 250 foot tall pines. Thirty percent of the forests in my canyon are dead standing trunks where 20 years down the road they will be the fuel that takes out another 50% of the remaining old growth forests. How many acres was this? 100,000. Entire animals population disappeared, hundred or years of lichen burned from the rock. Thousand of years of humus scorched to sterile soil. Millions of tons of soot and carbon was released into the atmosphere. A river that used to run absolutely crystal clear ran for 3 years a dingy tea color. Two years later another 200,000 acres were burned. It was a year without a summer. Crops failed becaust the sun was only a faint orange ball in the sky and you had to wear a sweater when normally it is 100 degrees. This went on for months. And once again the environmentalists and Forest Service put out press releases on how much good it was doing the forest. Sorry I don't by your central planing environmental policy.

[specsaregood]

//

[catdd]

Or some examples from Florida.
Mosquitos were a problem in the FL keys, so the army corps of engineers got the bright idea of drilling holes in the ground and building big drainage ditches thinking that mosquitos need stagnant fresh water to breed, so we'll let make it so the salt water can come to the surface so they can't breed.....only problem? Mosquitos can hatch their larvae in salt water too! whoops, they ended up building thousands of new mosquito hatcheries.
Or the australian pine, it soaks up lots more water than the native trees, so the government and developers planted thousands of them to dry up the land to make it buildable. Ok, so then it starts to cause problems with drying out too much and they decide to try to burn them down....whoops australian pines use forest fires to spread their seed and further propagate, so the fires caused them to grow even more.....

Like children playing with matches.

[Travlyr]

Way to support freedom of the individual to choose!

"communities must be rearranged" per the central planner. :rolleyes:

Yes, we know what is best for you and the collective society. You must obey or we will put you in jail. How would you like that community... MsDoodahs? Eh? Your choice... what I know is best for you and society, or jail? Do you choose freedom or jail?

[MsDoodahs]

Yes, we know what is best for you and the collective society. You must obey or we will put you in jail. How would you like that community... MsDoodahs? Eh? Your choice... what I know is best for you and society, or jail? Do you choose freedom or jail?

:)

[susano]

Klamath, your account of the fires is just terrible. I used to live in SoCal and have seen the horror of wildfires.

As for where people should live, free people should live anywhere they want to. Thomas Jefferson hated cities, for good reason (they breed corruption and loss of liberty). What works in the city doesn't work in the country.

Someone mentioned the energy that goes into the transport of food. I know some eco conservative types who try to abide what's called the 100 mile diet. That brings to mind the book, Small is Beautiful, a great book that a conservative turned me on to. The more local something is, the better control we have over all aspects of our lives.

Something I think some of the folks here don't get is that our individual liberty, and desire to be free of government interference, has nothing to with the world of global corporations. That may as well be a different universe. I don't want government butting into my life AND I don't want corporations fucking it up. The two are ONE voracious beast. We need to get rid of both, which equates to a massive adjustment in how we live.

I watched part of Rachel Maddow tonight. I know, she's a total commie, but when she's not pushing a political agenda, she does some good stuff. She had old clips, going back to Nixon, talking about how we need "energy independence". That's since 1974. Then she explained how the oil drilled for in the US is not sold here, but goes to the global energy market, gets pooled with the products of other nations, and we buy it back at the global market price. So, allowing BP free reign in the Gulf of Mexico, recovering American minerals, hasn't benefitted the US one bit. I don't how that works in socialized countries like Venezuela. Does anyone else? I know Iran, which has state owned oil, can't refine, so they have to buy gas on the open market. I can't figure why theu don't refine. I doubt they have a big tree hugger lobby.

[Travlyr]

:)

We will take that smiley face to mean you choose freedom as we choose it for you. We need people in Fargo, ND. You must live in Fargo. Are you ready to move to Fargo?

[MsDoodahs]

We will take that smiley face to mean you choose freedom as we choose it for you. We need people in Fargo, ND. You must live in Fargo. Are you ready to move to Fargo?

Hell no. Too damn cold.

<though some days, Texas is too damn hot>

[Anti Federalist]

We will take that smiley face to mean you choose freedom as we choose it for you. We need people in Fargo, ND. You must live in Fargo. Are you ready to move to Fargo?

Ha, LoL.

"That which is not prohibited is required."

[susano]

Or some examples from Florida.
Mosquitos were a problem in the FL keys, so the army corps of engineers got the bright idea of drilling holes in the ground and building big drainage ditches thinking that mosquitos need stagnant fresh water to breed, so we'll let make it so the salt water can come to the surface so they can't breed.....only problem? Mosquitos can hatch their larvae in salt water too! whoops, they ended up building thousands of new mosquito hatcheries.
Or the australian pine, it soaks up lots more water than the native trees, so the government and developers planted thousands of them to dry up the land to make it buildable. Ok, so then it starts to cause problems with drying out too much and they decide to try to burn them down....whoops australian pines use forest fires to spread their seed and further propagate, so the fires caused them to grow even more.....

Wow. I do not approve of the Corps of Engineers, at all. They've screwed up the entire Mississippi, too. OTOH, oil companies have cut through barrier islands and destoryed wetlands for their opeartions (Houston being a good example). I don't see it's sustainable for life on earth to live with either gov't or corporations.