HuffingtonPost: How Soon Until the Free Market Stops the Oil Spill?

[ACW]

The free market does almost nothing in the public interest or for the public good. Every great achievement in the history of mankind has been accomplished through the collective effort of the people.

:bsflag:

Ever heard of Rockefeller?

BTW, government can make things worse: look at the bill that limited liability for oil companies.

[DCSaints_fan]

So they would do both. Like I said.

What percentage of oil is used on the creation of electricity in the US? I honestly don't know. That is the energy nuclear power plants would replace which I would think would reduce demand for coal more than oil. I could be wrong.

< 1%, according to http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/tablees2b.html. That doesn't list hydro and nuclear, which would push the percentage even smaller.

But the idea is, that if you had more electrical genration capacity that (not based on fossil fuels), most people could switch to EVs/light rail for their commuting needs.

[Burgold]

I kinda agree with IHOP, but I'd say the tree of blame has a lot of branches.

1. There's good ole human greed. That includes the fm and pressure from shareholders to ever increase profits.

2. There's BP and their short cuts.

3. The deregulation

4. There's failure to enforce regulation.

5. There's understaffing of government watchdog groups like the EPA.

6. There underfunding of government watchdog groups like the EPA.

7. There, and this one is speculation, are too many that have too comfy a relationship with the groups with the folks that they are supposed to overview. The whole industry seems way too chummy. I suspect if the experts come from big oil, the reviewers are trained by those experts, and over the last decade the hires were people who were likely friendly towards the interests of oil... you have a watchdog group whose sympathies don't lie in objective evaluation and enforcement. That doesn't mean that they would cook the books, but if you are reviewing a friend or a stranger, you tend to look differently. Most of these guys on the bureacratic level have probably been in bed together for a long, long time.

[JimboDaMan]

I blame anyone who bought into the lines: "government is the problem" and "the era of big government is over." It's been systematic deregulation and the elevation of free market libertarian laissez-faire capitalism that have wrought this damage and allowed potentially destructive corporations to write their own rules

And if there was criminal neglect? (meaning regulation is in place)

I would blame a do nothing GOVERNMENT, for not being vigilant

See Sig for more juicy details concerning this administration

Premise/Government Fail

Justso I know how this works: if I rob a bank, is it the fault of the police, or is it the fault of the legislators who make bank robbery a crime? Because it sure isn't MY fault, right?

Premise/Argument Fail.

Actually, if there are regs in place and a failure of enforcement through weak effort, as opposed to a lack of funding (often deliberately the case) than I agree that the government is guilty of not doing its job. But not of the leak in the first place, that responsibility lies with the entity who owns and drilled the well. And I don't see the remedy in this to in any way be LESS government.

[JimboDaMan]

Stop it? No, But free market would prevent another one.

A free market would lead to shallow water drilling and drilling in Alaska where problems like this are easily fixed.

First, congratulations for the outstanding Palinspeak.

What makes you think in a free market a leak would ever be plugged? Only if there's enough profit in doing so. Without legal restraints to assign liability to the oil company, the company is free to decide whether shareholder value will be increased more by spending money to cap or leak or by just letting it go.

[ACW]

First, congratulations for the outstanding Palinspeak.

What makes you think in a free market a leak would ever be plugged? Only if there's enough profit in doing so. Without legal restraints to assign liability to the oil company, the company is free to decide whether shareholder value will be increased more by spending money to cap or leak or by just letting it go.

There shouldn't be a liability cap.

[JimboDaMan]

There shouldn't be a liability cap.

100% agreed. (Which probably eliminates nuclear power as an option, btw). And that would factor into the decision.

But - who owns the ocean? Is it the company's responsibility to clean up the spill? Why would the fishing industry, for example, have any more claim to ocean resources than the oil company does? All those oil-covered birds we see heartbreaking pictures of, are those YOUR birds? Yeah, it sucks to have oil on the beaches, but BP didn't put it there. Still might get stuck for beach cleanup, as that can be property, but fouling the air and open seas is a lot tougher since nobody owns them.

[twa]

There shouldn't be a liability cap.

The economic liability cap was a direct result of companies agreeing to fund the oil response fund(a ins plan if you will)

This thread premise totally ignores the otherwise total liability and is just another waste of hot air.

[JimboDaMan]

The economic liability cap was a direct result of companies agreeing to fund the oil response fund(a ins plan if you will)

This thread premise totally ignores the otherwise total liability and is just another waste of hot air.

How so? You saying without the fund and the cap BP would have total liability?

How much has Exxon paid for the Vladez disaster? 20 years after fouling Alaska, Exxon was still in court arguing they didn't owe a dime. The fund is something of a deal with the devil, because otherwise you might wait 50 years to see any money. Queue the "under a true free market they wouldn't be able to tie up in courts forever". Mebbe so, but under any free market I can forsee the free-market industries will purchase whatever legislation they desire.

[Thiebear]

The Free Market is about as 'free' as Free speech.

Both take constant work to ensure they continue to exist.

Both sides will continue to gripe as you have to walk the fine line between over regulation and under..

BP paying 75million is stupid.

BP currently has paid a billion with 500million promised minimum: slightly better.

They failed to follow even the very basic rules

The Free society should ensure that IF BP survives this it is crippled.

Same as the coast.. Actions have consequences.

That is how you teach others that wish to make money how to follow the rules and safety engineers they hire..

[Peeping Wizard]

The free market does almost nothing in the public interest or for the public good. Every great achievement in the history of mankind has been accomplished through the collective effort of the people.

Who is to say that the "collective effort of the people" and the free market are mutually exclusive? Just because somebody wants to be paid for something doesn't mean there aren't additional motives driving them forward to create new and better things.

[Peeping Wizard]

100% agreed. (Which probably eliminates nuclear power as an option, btw). And that would factor into the decision.

But - who owns the ocean? Is it the company's responsibility to clean up the spill? Why would the fishing industry, for example, have any more claim to ocean resources than the oil company does? All those oil-covered birds we see heartbreaking pictures of, are those YOUR birds? .

The fishermen are killing the fish in a nice way.

[Henry]

The fishermen are killing the fish in a nice way.

Yes, over-fishing a region can be (and has been) a huge problem as it can destroy an ecosystem, so that's a good point. In a pure free market entire fish populations could be wiped out by fishermen.

[Burgold]

The fishermen are killing the fish in a nice way.

The fishing industry isn't a part of the free market? Freemarket alone didn't halt overfishing? Or whaling?

[mjah]

He was responding to zoony's equally hilarious post. Come on, you've been around here long enough to know the games we all play.

Since he didn't directly quote zoony, that actually wasn't clear to me. I took it to be a general reply to the direction of the conversation to that point in the thread, followed by an oversimplified straw man directly regarding the article.

(The latter of which, it most certainly was by the way.)

[panel]

The free market does almost nothing in the public interest or for the public good. Every great achievement in the history of mankind has been accomplished through the collective effort of the people.

The free market is great for helping people make money- which is of course very important.

paraphrasing- why trust the long term capital development of a country to the actions of a casino? Why trust any benefit for society to the by-product of myopic greed?

It's sort of an IQ test at this point. It really is.

The development of the Radio, Airplanes, light bulbs, assembly line, the electric motor, Ice makers, band-aids, frozen foods, Cellphones, transistors, solar panels, aspirin, artificial organs, laser eye surgery, X-ray tubes, Ultrasound, Penicillin, MRIs, and so on have not done anything for the public good? Just because someone is trying to make a living by develop these things doesn't mean that they do not benefit the public. No one seems to mind when they take up the costs and risks to make these advancements themselves, but when they start to benefit from them, then it is society harming greed.

[Kilmer17]

When is socialism going to stop it?

[ACW]

The development of the Radio, Airplanes, light bulbs, assembly line, the electric motor, Ice makers, band-aids, frozen foods, Cellphones, transistors, solar panels, aspirin, artificial organs, laser eye surgery, X-ray tubes, Ultrasound, Penicillin, MRIs, and so on have not done anything for the public good? Just because someone is trying to make a living by develop these things doesn't mean that they do not benefit the public. No one seems to mind when they take up the costs and risks to make these advancements themselves, but when they start to benefit from them, then it is society harming greed.

:applause:

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.

[JimboDaMan]

When is socialism going to stop it?

Maybe when we get some socialist politicians elected?

[Veretax]

What Free Market? The government stifles innovation in this area by their overregulation in some areas. and drops the ball with under regulation in others.

[Qdeathstar]

Meh. The Huffington post is the liberal equivalent to Bill O Reilly or that one chubby radio personality...

I don't think "free market" is any slower to stop the oil than "big government" is. I'm sure if the government had a solution, it would have been delivered by now due to political costs alone.

[IHOPSkins]

......I don't think "free market" is any slower to stop the oil than "big government" is......

Agree

Which supports the point about People being the key...whatever organization they are in

Some of the criticism of the Obama administration made a comparison that Clinton would have been done there with a wetsuit....I agree with this