Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 469
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...Page 14 of 33    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33)
Obfuscation, biostitutes, confusionists, and utter BS will usually win out over obvious truths whenever enough money is applied.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 470
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/7/2010 7:27:08 PM


That all depends on what type of stock you purchase. Some companies have shares that pay dividends, some stock that doesn't pay dividends. Are you saying that you would limit the type of stock that a company could issue? If you don't want publically traded companies, there are places in the world, where you can have your wish.......... but, you may not want to live there.............


It should be up to the company how they want to handle it.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 471
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/7/2010 7:36:00 PM


Without controls, BP, Shell, et. al would have pillaged, plundered, and polluted far more egregiously, and faster without such constraints. The failure of the MMS only shows the deregulation mentality of the far right and libertarian extremists, who favor corporate anarchy over common sense regulations of people who cannot control their greed, profit motive and disdain for nature and people.


The person who wrote this clearly doesn't understand libertarians. Libertarians oppose the very existence of corporations.
 themadfiddler
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 472
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 2:19:52 AM


With bush, an oil man, it never would have happened to begin with.


Do you live in some alternate dimension where "Shrub" was a success in the oil business and didn't get everything handed to him on a plate by Pappy Bush?

What's it like there?

I think the only reason it didn't happen on his watch is that on the day of the leak, D1ck Cheney was not employing his full VP powers of evil any more and thus the ordinary sh@t, spit and haywire holding the well together under a Neo-Con/corprocrat, revolving-door system of multiple levels of safety came into play.

McCain no longer knows who or what he wants to blow up from week to week. From the moment he agreed to compromise himself to the Dominionists and allow Sarah "Moose" Palin to be his running mate, torpedoing any hope at all for the Rep. party, his judgment could be called into question as anything resembling an honorable man any more...just a senile panderer.

Does the government react too slow?

Hell yes...but lets not forget what allowed it to get there. Who do you think is in multiple levels of all of the regulatory agencies that allowed things to get this bad?

And in the end, who allowed the government to pass laws that allowed corporations to be able to get away with this crap to begin with...that would be us.
 jenniab
Joined: 1/24/2010
Msg: 473
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 4:06:24 AM
Well what can we say that hasnt already been voiced, and the sad thing is our voices dont seem to be heard by the right people, but at least we get to express on here freely...
Once again the greed of the bigger men out there is going to effect the susistance of the smaller man. Tho it is the hoards of the smaller man that keep the bigger more wealthy man sitting on his throne. We need petrol and oil but at what cost, why cant we as a group and united force demand that they stop there drilling and denting of OUR planet (thats right its ours too not just theirs) until they find a safer way to do it. And dont say we will run out of petrol and oil, USA alone has enough of these resources under the rockies, colorado, antarctica to keep them going for at least 200 hundred years let alone all their stock piles they have bought in over the years.
There are rumours that the spill could of been capped within a week but due to some political behind the scens secret handshake it wasnt. Is this true. why are so many things kept from us???
The price of oil and petrol is going to go up again, no wage rises for the normal middle class and lower class tho to cover the cost, and what about all those families that have now lost their incomes and business because of this so called spill,
and dont forget the enviroment, those animals cant speak out so we have to do it for them. BP not only needs to cover all expenses for this disaster but for all future harm as well. Think of all the millions of smaller creatures that we dont see on a day to day basis that are now wiped out... they are all a link in our life chain, what effect will not having them have not only on us but the rest of the animal world.... Come on its up to us to stand up strong and keep this planet whole and healthy not just for now but hopefuly for generations to come. there is no planet we can just move too like we do when we ruin a town and get sick of it................
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 474
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 5:55:31 AM
No libertarians don't oppose business, they oppose excess government.

You must not read many position papers from the self-proclaimed bastion of libertarianism, the Cato Institue. At the moment, they have several papers on immigration listed right on their homepage and nothing about them suggests free markets, either a real one or one which could be confined to the markets in say, the U.S. In a real free market, you cannot have any restrictions on immigration anywhere, so that workers may compete for all jobs which are available anywhere.

The Cato Institute does not seem to support that idea. On the other hand, if you were to try to simulate a free market in the restricted sense of confining it to a geographical location in which immigration is unrestricted, the US, for example, you would have to restrict the labor pool to people within that geographic region and impose tarrifs on goods manufactured in other regions where the wages are lower than than the wages in the US, because that would undermine the free market for labor in the US. You also could not allow work visas for foreign workers to take jobs at a lower rate than a person in the would accept since that also undermines the free market for labor. The Cato Institute's position on that is neither of those possibilities. They strongly favor a very anti free market where labor is concerned. If the free market price for digging ditches in the US is too high, they support the idea of giving visas to people from other countries to do it a lower wage. The Cato Institute is also a big fan of H1B visas which it claims are needed due to a lack of qualified applicants for technical jobs in the U.S. I'm a physicist and I can assure you there is no shortage of physicists. There is, however, a shortage of jobs for physicists. It's a lot cheaper to hire skilled workers from other countries, too.

The Cato Institute also has no real objection to government interference when it comes to doing it in favor of business interests over people's interests. For example, the Cato Institute thinks that NAFTA somehow favors free trade. Since I spent a week in Mexico just last March, I can assure you that free trade is a myth (and in fact, you can check this on government web sites). For example, if you travel to Mexico, you are not allowed to bring in more than 5 computers. Why? Because you might sell them. That seems rather strange in view of the supposed free trade that is claimed for the NAFTA treaty. I also cannot bring lots of stuff back if I buy it in Mexico (unless I want to pay an import duty). Apparently, the meaning of free trade only involves companies who want to exploit low wages in Mexico to sell products here in the US and in other coutries who aren't involved in manufacturing those products because of high labor costs. Try buying things like printer ink in Mexico. It's MORE expensive there than here.

The concept of libertarianism would be great if it rally meant what it purports to mean, but it does not. What it does mean as it's used today, is a person who favors oligarchy.

I believe if Mccain was in office he would have it blown up within the week

Which would have done what, exactly? As far as I know, blowing ``it'' up (whatever ``it'' is) is no guarantee of anything and I'm quite sure I can imagine how the flow could be made worse by such an attempt.

With bush, an oil man, it never would have happened to begin with.

Uh, bush was constantly pushing for even fewer regulations on drilling. As far as McCain goes, have you forgotten that his running mate's slogan was ``Drill baby, drill?''
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 475
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 9:22:54 AM
In a real free market, you cannot have any restrictions on immigration anywhere, so that workers may compete for all jobs which are available anywhere.

Yes, in a pure free market. I don't know of anyone, libertarians included, and Cato included, who advocate a truly free market with no restrictions on monopolies and trusts and immigration.


The Cato Institute is also a big fan of H1B visas which it claims are needed due to a lack of qualified applicants for technical jobs in the U.S. I'm a physicist and I can assure you there is no shortage of physicists. There is, however, a shortage of jobs for physicists. It's a lot cheaper to hire skilled workers from other countries, too.

There's no shortage of physicists, true. But there are shortages of things like hospital lab techs, electrical engineers, software developers, etc.. People who are trained in marketable skills, not pure theory fields. And it is certainly NOT cheaper to hire skilled workers from other companies. Companies have three choices in that scenario. They can import labor, which means they have to deal with immigration paperwork and licensing and visas that have limited lifetimes. They can offshore, which means they must deal with teams that are split up, they lose tax advantages for employees that they have to pay for anyway, they have to set up new infrastructure in another country to find people who are typically frustratingly underqualified, and they have to often overcome differences in the way skills are taught. They can outsource, which is expensive and means they can't integrate the labor with their own teams' labor nearly as fluidly. Skilled jobs are not cheaper to hire from other countries at all. Hiring tech support in India, on the other hand...


The concept of libertarianism would be great if it rally meant what it purports to mean, but it does not.

Yes it does. You are twisting what its concept means, though, in an attempt to paint it as unrealistic. Any platform, taken to its extreme, is unrealistic.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 476
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 9:45:33 AM
Well here we are on day "80" of this disaster. Nothing has changed BUT:

First yesterday, they said they were 15 feet away from reaching the pipe for the relief well.

Second if this is so, I'll bet dollars to donuts, they try and get er done, by July 27th. That's when BP will announce their earnings! Hahahaa! BP hasn't missed a beat on it's publicity campaign. At least short term, the stock has bottomed out in the high 20's(28-29).

Finally we still don't know if the relief well will work. That would multiply the disaster, if it failed.

Watch for insider selling to get a sense of things. If they start again, you know they don't have faith in the process and will expect the stock to break lower.

As for the libertarian debate(yawn) no group seems to have the interest of the people nor their original platforms in place. They all do lip service to their core beliefs while actually doing some other things. This is all BS, the republians ain't republicans, not after allowing ALL the Bush(like that "shrub" reference) spending. The democrats ain't democrats with all the money their taking from Wall St., big Pharma, and the insurance companies. Finally all the lesser parties have morphed away from core beliefs as well. Well maybe not the neonazis, but they again, what do you expect.

Frankly I'm frustrated with all the talk, all the inaction, all the maneuvering for sound bites and face time. We have become a world of talking heads and politicans who are so out of touch with reality they should have played a part in that movie "alice in wonderland"!
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 477
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 11:23:44 AM

Yes, in a pure free market. I don't know of anyone, libertarians included, and Cato included, who advocate a truly free market with no restrictions on monopolies and trusts and immigration.

Then we aren't talking about a free market and there is no ideology involved. All we're talking about is who prefers what regulations, who has the influence to get regulations passed for reasons of self-interest with the ideology bullshit being peddled as pr.

But there are shortages of things like hospital lab techs, electrical engineers, software developers, etc..

That is also incorrect. My fiancee works at a very large hospital, she has marketable skills and she feels very licky to have a job. She spent money and time getting training to go into the medical field only because getting a job as a paralegal (which she was doing until she moved to Dallas and found an oversupply of paralegals) was very difficult. Meanwhile, out of all of the people she went to school with, she is the only one who found work (at less than she was making as a paralegal). If there's a shortage of tech jobs, it's only because no one wants to pay people enough to make the job worth doing. (Labor is also a market.) My fiancee is going to quit and gpo back to svhool for that reason. Programmers? Ha. If there was a shortage of programmers, I'd go pick up some extra work programming to help get my business rolling. I've done systems programming. If you want more skilled workers, do the exact thing that a free market tells you to do. Pay people more to do those jobs. Offer enough money and and provide training and there will be plenty of people lining up to fill whatever job you need done. Unfortunately, many people seem to think that there is some intrinsic value on different jobs that trancends the salary required to provide people incentive to do them.

And it is certainly NOT cheaper to hire skilled workers from other companies.

I didn't say it was. I said it was cheaper to hire people from other countries. Offer an H1B visa to someone and that peron will work at substandard wages. The only impediment to H1B visas were some additional requirements imposed because people here were getting pissed off because so many ``temporary workers'' were becoming permanent workers.

Hiring tech support in India, on the other hand... ]/quote]
Solved that problem for even lower wages and less paperwork.


Yes it does. You are twisting what its concept means, though, in an attempt to paint it as unrealistic.

If you want to argue ideology, accept what the ideology requires to operate in the manner the ideology assumes in order to work. Otherwise, the ideological crap is exactly that - crap. The conclusions drawn from ideological arguments rest on the assumptions being true. Read Adam Smith (not the selected sound bites). Free markets require that the labor pool have the same freedom of movement and freedom to compete as the products that are produced. If that isn't true, then the entire notion of a free market is bullshit.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 478
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 12:35:35 PM

Then we aren't talking about a free market and there is no ideology involved. All we're talking about is who prefers what regulations, who has the influence to get regulations passed for reasons of self-interest with the ideology bullshit being peddled as pr.

We're NEVER talking about a completely free market. We live in a regulated market. We have a minimum wage, anti-trust laws, regulations against monopolies, tariffs, taxes, regulations on who can use what wireless bands, building codes, welfare, insurance, etc.... You're not arguing in the sector of reality most people (for all intents and purposes, everyone) in the political spectrum is working with.


That is also incorrect. My fiancee works at a very large hospital, she has marketable skills and she feels very licky to have a job. She spent money and time getting training to go into the medical field only because getting a job as a paralegal (which she was doing until she moved to Dallas and found an oversupply of paralegals) was very difficult. Meanwhile, out of all of the people she went to school with, she is the only one who found work (at less than she was making as a paralegal).

That's nice. I'm sure I can find someone who lives in a place lucky to have a job with good skills as well. However, the reality of the matter is that those jobs are extremely in-demand. Lab techs in hospitals are just in short supply. This is the situation right now.


Programmers? Ha. If there was a shortage of programmers, I'd go pick up some extra work programming to help get my business rolling. I've done systems programming.

Then you should know that "programmer" and "software developer" in that particular field refer to different things. I focused on that because I am in that field. Coincidentally my education is in physics, too (and engineering).


Read Adam Smith (not the selected sound bites). Free markets require that the labor pool have the same freedom of movement and freedom to compete as the products that are produced. If that isn't true, then the entire notion of a free market is bullshit.

I am familiar with Adam Smith. Yes, the labor market is hurt by excessive regulations on it. It costs businesses a lot to employ someone because of them. But we don't produce enough engineers anymore, and everyone wants to get a half-ass education and then expect to be employed, and when they're not they blame the government.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 479
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 1:18:33 PM
"everyone wants to get a half-ass education"

Not sure about that, I doubt most start out to get it "half assed", business helps here too! When we turned education into a business and not a government or even a good private service to community, we started to undermine that as well.

Now we have major universities who get a kick back from banks they steer students to for credit cards. Or by working with one financial institution over another directing the student loans to as well.

We also have these "fly by night" universities(a real joke) who don't hire qualified teachers, compile study programs that give ineffective degrees. How many people take medical billing and expect a job out of school? ITT Tech, Phoenix(yeah that one burns up your money)Art institute(for those who will design the next great video game hahaha) and on and on.

It isn't only the people who take these courses that are wrong, it is those who take their money and spit them out 60 or $80,000 in debt with a degree they can hang in their bathroom in case they run out of toilet paper!
 verygreeneyez
Joined: 3/15/2006
Msg: 480
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/8/2010 4:17:05 PM

We have a minimum wage

We have a suggested Federal minimum wage. That is superceded by individual State minimum wage law.
South Carolina requiring "no state minimum wage law"; Montana (with conditions) being a staggering $2.00 per hour; Tennessee following in SC's shoes and so on. This by no means equates to a "regulatory system." This is very much State-free-will on this issue and most of the others you named. There are states with NO Corporate income taxes, no personal income taxes, obvious varying degrees of taxation on goods/services, etc. So is "regulatory" singular per state or is it an assumptive term??? JMO
http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm
 jenniab
Joined: 1/24/2010
Msg: 481
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/9/2010 5:32:17 AM
You should look into what oil is under the rockies and other areas in USA that are not being raped from the earth,,, these areas and the massive quatities are know by the US government but they refuse to mine for it in their own country as it will upset the ecological balance.........
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 482
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/9/2010 9:04:54 AM
^^^ I believe that is because that large deposit hasn't evolved into the type of petroleum we can easily use-- not because of any sort of environmentally conscious restraint.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 484
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/9/2010 10:44:35 AM


No libertarians don't oppose business, they oppose excess government.


I diodn't say that libertarians oppose business. What I said is that they oppose corporations. Not all businesses are corporations and the distinction is quite important. Corporations are government created entities that get special legal protections.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 485
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/9/2010 12:36:09 PM

We have a suggested Federal minimum wage. That is superceded by individual State minimum wage law.
South Carolina requiring "no state minimum wage law"; Montana (with conditions) being a staggering $2.00 per hour; Tennessee following in SC's shoes and so on. This by no means equates to a "regulatory system." This is very much State-free-will on this issue and most of the others you named. There are states with NO Corporate income taxes, no personal income taxes, obvious varying degrees of taxation on goods/services, etc. So is "regulatory" singular per state or is it an assumptive term??? JMO

You are incorrect. In fact, this entire paragraph is completely incorrect on every count. There is a minimum federal hourly wage. States can go higher, but they cannot go lower. Montana's minimum hourly wage is $7.25. South Carolina and Tennessee have not raised over the federal minimum wage. There is a federal corporate income tax, but states are free to add their own taxes on top. There are 7 states that do not impose income taxes, but the federal income tax is paid by all who earn income in the country.

There are no "suggested" Federal laws.


When we turned education into a business and not a government or even a good private service to community, we started to undermine that as well.

Our education was never better than it is now.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 486
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/9/2010 1:16:48 PM
"Our education was never better than it is now."

I'll agree if your talking Harvard or ivy league schools. I'll agree if your talking most state school programs. I'll even agree with the feeder school for 4 year colleges, community colleges run by states.

When your talking ITT Technical Intstitue, Phoniex University, Art Institue and that slew of schools you see advertised Devry University for expample. Are you SERIOUSLY going to compare their educational standards to regular universitys and colleges?

They change teachers like they change shirts. They change ciricullums like they change their socks. Every sememester, not year, semeseter, you need a different text book for the same classes. Worse where there are multiple places to get the book for $99 to $125, they routinely charge double and triple the price for the same book at the student store. So if your going there on a shoestring, your loans (which are paid to the school) include your book allowance) and they won't let you spend it where you want.

They churn out students with ineffective degrees for what they want to do. Even in nursing, they many times have difficulty placing studdents. Funny story, Art Institute of Atlanta, offers courses in game technology, claims a 95% rate of employed graduates. Less than 2% work in the gaming industry, the rest are bar tenders, waiters and bank tellers and the like. Sp what's that degree REALLY worth? Further it was their high school advisor, then student advisor in these sh1t schools that told them what to take.

They wind up with somewhere betweem $60,000 and $120,000 in student loans for a degree as I said it good for toilet or wall paper.

Sorry, when it became a business, no different than the housing crisis, that sold $400,000 and 500,000 homes to people making 42,500 a year, with 2% down. They just became another business that is designed to seperate YOU form your money. When this happens to an unsuspecting 18 year old, or an undereducated person trying to better themselves, they are no better than Swindlers.
 imalwayssmiling
Joined: 7/17/2009
Msg: 487
view profile
History
affordable ! take off you blinders,nothing could be more expensive than oil
Posted: 7/9/2010 2:08:17 PM

With bush, an oil man, it never would have happened to begin with.
sad but laughable,Bush was an oil man,senior bush was an oil man,wasn't Johnson also,heck most of Bushes cabinet was oil,even Condeleesa Rice served on the board of directors for the Chevron Corporation,this is why we have no real rules or regulations or real inspections.Rather than praise Bush he a main reason we have these issues in the drill baby drill industry.GOP is still saying we need less regulation,what morons.They even got a judge to allow this industry to go ahead when we haven't even begun to figure out how to even stop this oil disaster,and watch at what they say over the next year as the remaining oil continues to come ashore,they will still not get it.

As for idiots claiming this is Obamas fault,you all act as though all these new presidents understand every industry known to man.Can I see a show of hands how many of you as me were shocked that the industry in all these years have no equipment to fight a spill.A fact was given to the millions of barrels of oil spewed and the fact that the skimmers thus far have only collected 65,ooo barrels,BP told us they are capable of skimming either(sorry) 450,000 barrrels or gallons in a single day,yet in reality all these weeks later,hardly a drop in the bucket.

Obama was Jimmy on the spot,he as all of of thought BP had this handled,they said no worries here,we don't even see a leak,all is well,then they downplayed the actual leakage totals by the millions,well Obama and all of us believed this disaster was in control of BP,it took days and weeks to learn that the whole BP industry was telling a giant cover up lie and as soon as Obama realized we were all being lied too he stepped in further and really went on the attack of BP only causing GOP's to say Obama still was at fault.Since 50% of this country is Republican its just another thing to **** about Obama for. Heck I'm having a slow down here on my computer,oh wait,I know whats wrong with it,its Obama.I over slept today,I don't know how it could be,but bet Obama is at fault.

I would not allow a new well to be drilled until equipment was made and rules and inspections were all to be the norm and all 27,000 abandoned wells were fixed and inspected and on a routine inspection schedule.

Cheap affordable oil and jobs for thousands is a stupid stupid reason to continue ruining our country at any cost.Those of you that find nothing wrong with new hardcore intervention of such an extremely destructive industry is why we have this problem today.So we fight wars for oil ,we ruin the entire southern coast ,and in the next year as the oil drifts we will ruin lots of the Caribbean and east coast all so we can have cheap affordable oil,cheap ! laughable, affordable !,laughable,nothing we have is more costly to life and our wallets as oil.You don't think BP will cover 100% of the job lost monies of millions in the south and those stores and restaurants and travel industries all over the country involved in this hurt,hell no,welfare and food stamps and bancruptcy will ultimately pay for the shortcoming,do you think the deckhand on a boat will be reimbursed,of course not.

Heck if this was Exxon or Chevron,you'd see the same lack of ability,the same lack of care.We're the losers from this,regulate the sh it out of them.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 488
affordable ! take off you blinders,nothing could be more expensive than oil
Posted: 7/10/2010 11:47:33 AM
"I'm more likely to believe in a conspiracy that Obama had this done"

WOW, you really should take off that tinfoil hat and stop smoking that sh1t, you've been smoking. Funny I guess you were OK when Bush bypassed NOLA after Katrina, doing a "flyover" after his birthday party!

"He jumped to responsibility TOO quickly on this one"

Yes I'm sure your right. He should have waited until 10,000 people died like "shrub" did after the hurricane!

"He is in full press campaign mde this whole presidency"

Yes unlike Bush...err shrub who had what 8 press conferences in 8 years!

"I don't like the way Obama thinks"

Well it's better than shrub who didn't think at all!

"he is the most dishonest president I have seen in my lifetime."

Well by gauge you were alive for Nixon. He quit before going to jail for a coverup, was pardoned by Ford. How about Bush and his neonazi VP Cheney? Cheney gave away 50 BILLION dollars at least, in no bid contracts to his old company Haliburton, or was responsible for breaking the Geneva convention with water boarding. Bush sett all the rules changes for drilling and the MMS.

So how exactly is he dishonest? Oh I understand your one of the teabaggers, are you the one on top or the bottom? Exactly how would Obama influence McCain, in case you didn't realize it, McCain is a republican and can do as he pleases.

I guess while were at it, you must have a shrine to Rush Limbaugh in your home as well.

God it's times like these I hate to have to admit I was a republican before you wackadoos took over the party. Wake up my friend or Cheney, Palin, Steele and the rest willhave you living in a cardboard box, with no job, no benefits, oil on the shore in 14 states and blame that on you and Obama.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 489
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/10/2010 12:57:11 PM

When your talking ITT Technical Intstitue, Phoniex University, Art Institue and that slew of schools you see advertised Devry University for expample. Are you SERIOUSLY going to compare their educational standards to regular universitys and colleges?

No, of course I don't count those amongst our educational system. In fact, anything that isn't even accredited I probably don't count as an actual educational institution.
 slybandit
Joined: 7/10/2006
Msg: 490
affordable ! take off you blinders,nothing could be more expensive than oil
Posted: 7/12/2010 8:13:57 AM
Whoa. Just, whoa. That last post was serious tin-foil-hat territory, I'm sorry, there's just no nice way to describe it accurately.

1. Barack Hussein Obama II, despite his middle name, is most emphatically not a Muslim.

That is a rumour started by a perennial vexatious litigant and public anti-semite named Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona, who has been sanctioned numerous times for filing abusive lawsuits, and even had the chutzpah (there's no better word) to claim that Jewish judges inserted the anti-semitic rants that regularly decorate his abusive Court filings.

Not even Martin-Trigona himself maintains that nonsense in public any more, which, by the way, was deliberate pandering to anti-Muslim prejudice on his part.

2. Wait, Barack Hussein Obama II is sinister and dishonest because...he hides the fact that he smokes?

Seriously, dislike him if you want, mistrust him if you like, but at least do it for a reason that makes some sort of sense. Maybe he conceals his smoking in public because...wait for it...possibly he feels that he would be setting a bad example, or something like that? How sinister.

3. This thread is supposed to be about the worst ecological catastrophe in the history of the United States and quite possibly the history of the world. It is a vivid and clear demonstration that the oil-fueled economy we have created and sustain is completely incompatible with the long-term health of the ecosystem we depend on to survive.

Let's distract ourselves from an issue that matters with nonsense and speculation about Obama's prospects in the afterlife, rather than getting corporate money out of politics and punishing at the ballot-box any candidate that takes it, so as to allow for the enactment of laws that might be in the public interest, rather than in the interests of yet another batch of pinstriped greed-heads.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 491
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/12/2010 1:58:00 PM

We're NEVER talking about a completely free market.

At least that finally seems clear.

We live in a regulated market. We have a minimum wage, anti-trust laws, regulations against monopolies, tariffs, taxes, regulations on who can use what wireless bands, building codes, welfare, insurance, etc....

Uh, that's the point. Yo have regulations, therefore the ONLY argument is which regulations to impose, not to stop imposing them on certain entities and calling that a free market solution.

You're not arguing in the sector of reality most people (for all intents and purposes, everyone) in the political spectrum is working with.

That doesn't really matter. What matters is that what most people want to call a free market is nothing more
than favoring the elimination of some set of regulations that benefit a certain set of individuals. That is no more inherently free than choosing some other set of regulations to eliminate to favor a different set of individuals.

But we don't produce enough engineers anymore, and everyone wants to get a half-ass education and then expect to be employed, and when they're not they blame the government.

The obvious free-market solution to a shortage of some part of the workforce is to pay people enough to become interested in filling the vacancies. Outsourcing to places where the labor market cannot migrate, is not a free market solution.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 492
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/12/2010 2:42:33 PM
RE Msg: 485 by abelian and Msg: 486 by .dej:
abelian: Programmers? Ha. If there was a shortage of programmers, I'd go pick up some extra work programming to help get my business rolling. I've done systems programming.

.dej: Then you should know that "programmer" and "software developer" in that particular field refer to different things. I focused on that because I am in that field. Coincidentally my education is in physics, too (and engineering).
I was quite curious about this. However, it occurred to me that there are a few differences between a systems programmer and a software developer (applications programmer):

1) A systems programmer develops systems, e.g. an OS like Windows, or a database like SQL Server. These systems will be used by millions of people. So you need them to be robust. So you would want a lot of people on their development. But you only need one team, because there is only one product to work on. As a result, you might need 1000 programmers. But that still means that there is 1 programmer for every 1000 consumers.

A software developer who develops generic consumer software, like Microsoft Office, is in the same position.

Software development is far too expensive to be worthwhile for the individual consumer. It's only cost-effective for the needs of a business or an organisation. So in the end, the vast majority of software developers who are not working on generic mass-consumer software, are developing systems for businesses and other similar organisations.

However, businesses need their own customised system to suit the unique needs of each business. So they each have their own IT applications, specifically tailored to that company's needs. As a result, they need programmers to develop each system. Of course, it's not exactly like that. It's pretty common for each software application to be used by multiple businesses, for maybe 10-100 business, whose area of business are all very similar. But again, the system needs to be tailored for the needs of each business, which are in total unique, and so such systems need not only a level of development for all the businesses, but also substantial additional development to tailor the software to the needs of each business that are unique. So overall, each business needs its own system. Each such system is much smaller than the large systems. So you only need a few programmers for each business system. But you need a few programmers per business. So the ratio of software programmers to people, is closer to 1 programmer for every 10 consumers. So there is a need for many more software developers than systems programmers, in a ratio that could be as high as 100 software developers for every 1 systems programmer.

2) Systems programmers develop generic systems that are for the general consumer, like an OS, or to be used by software programmers in a business system, such as a database. In the case of an OS, there are millions using it, and it's tailored for the average consumer. But nevertheless, each consumer has to get used to the OS, because everyone else is using it. Databases are much more powerful, and great for programming business systems. But again, the developer finds them so useful, that it's more worthwhile him getting used to the database, rather than writing it himself. So in both cases, the systems programmer can dictate to the mass consumer and to the developer how the system is to work. So he only needs to consider how to get the computer to do what he wants it to do. Also, because he is coming out with a new invention, it can be developed according to the schedule of the systems programmer, not the consumer. So he is quite free in many ways to do his job in the easiest manner possible.

The above is equally true for software development of generic mass-consumer software.

Software developers for business are developing systems in response to a specific company's needs. So they have to marry the needs of the business, to the abilities of the computer, which are very, very different. You also have to realise that your boss is simply going to give you what he thinks he needs, but is focussed on his business, not thinking IT systems out in detail. So you are going to have to milk him to understand what he really needs, and then figure out what can be done, to satisfy his needs. Then you need to convince him that what he needs, is what he wants, but without making him look like an idiot for not asking for it. Then you need to factor in his business schedule, because he has deadlines to work to, and budgets to work to, and all your work has to fit in with his deadlines and his budgets.

Then he's got to do all, to get the system to work properly with the generic systems produced by the systems programmers, and he has to fit in with their schedules as well.

Software developers are really in the same position as those engineers who develop huge engineering projects, like the LHC. They get their components from tools and component manufacturers, who are in a similar position to systems programmers. But software developers have to make all the components work together, and accomplish the needs of those who ordered the job, and they have to guarantee it works, because if it breaks down, they won't get another job.

You have to be good at a heck of a lot of skills, of which programming is the least important, and yet is still just as important to doing his job, as it is to the systems programmer. So it's a really, really demanding job.

3) You have to learn the customer's business inside out, just to ensure that your software fulfils his business requirements. So software developers end up working in specific industries, and not just generally, like systems programmers can do.

Put those 3 together, and it's reasonable to suppose that it's a 1000 times easier to find a good systems programmer than a good software developer in the industry that you work in.

Read Adam Smith (not the selected sound bites). Free markets require that the labor pool have the same freedom of movement and freedom to compete as the products that are produced. If that isn't true, then the entire notion of a free market is bullshit.

Pardon me, but isn't that impossible? Businesses have the money and connections to move their products around. Employees don't have anywhere near that level of money or connections. They are also tied to their homes, and their families. So I just don't see how it's possible that the labour pool can have the same freedom of movement as the businesses that produce those products.

Doesn't that mean that it's impossible to ever establish a free market?
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 493
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/12/2010 5:57:30 PM
Pardon me, but isn't that impossible? Businesses have the money and connections to move their products around. Employees don't have anywhere near that level of money or connections. They are also tied to their homes, and their families. So I just don't see how it's possible that the labour pool can have the same freedom of movement as the businesses that produce those products.

Not according to the people who come to the US illegally to work. They seem to get across the border just fine despite of the efforts of the INS to stop them. In order to have a free market, two countries which trade freeley with each other must also allow the labour pool to move freely across the borders, otherwise all you have done is create the ability to exploit labor.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 494
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 7/13/2010 5:47:09 AM
RE Msg: 503 by abelian:

Pardon me, but isn't that impossible? Businesses have the money and connections to move their products around. Employees don't have anywhere near that level of money or connections. They are also tied to their homes, and their families. So I just don't see how it's possible that the labour pool can have the same freedom of movement as the businesses that produce those products.
Not according to the people who come to the US illegally to work. They seem to get across the border just fine despite of the efforts of the INS to stop them. In order to have a free market, two countries which trade freeley with each other must also allow the labour pool to move freely across the borders, otherwise all you have done is create the ability to exploit labor.
Exactly. Illegals are not legal. They can only work for those who are willing to employ illegals, or those who are not likely to find out, and that severely restricts who such people can work for, denying them freedom of movement. That means that there are workers in the USA, who have far less freedom of movement, than businesses. Ergo, no free market.

But equally, businesses cannot move in a second. They need to plan their moves, and the introduction of their products into new markets, well in advance. If you open the flood-gates to economic migrants, they can move far quicker than businesses can. So again, not equal freedom of movement between the labour pool and business products. Ergo, no free market.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >