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
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 642
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...Page 20 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)
"You are basically determined to judge all lawyers as being inherently bad."

Well, frankly yes! The number of lawyers adhering to the rule of "all people deserve a fair trial" as opposed to those who just sell out to the corporate interests is exceedingly small. In addition those with the best education seem to gravitate to the money. Kinda like a bad Star Wars film "come to the dark side"!!

Yes there are those who represent the ACLU, while I don't always agree with the stance they take, they are far more close to representing a constitutional role, than a "law bending"role.

In addition for every lawyer who helps those in need, there are 5 who ONLY help those out of GREED. One only need see the ads, the stands on issues that would more closely alligned with the collective good, and how the majority just seeks out the loopholes and not the spirit or intent of te law enacted.

As for the "disciplinary" actions, I worked in the financial industry, saw more than my share of lawyers who skirted issues, looked for the letter of the law, not the spirit. When you screw some old lady because nobody complained in time, you followed the letter of the law, not the spirit. A distinction lawyers have no problem with. When those in states congresses, pass limitations on litigation on medical issues, to say 3 years or less, but it's 7 years for crimes, who benefits? The doctors can drag their feet for 3 years and are off the hook.

Frankly, no offense intended since you are a lawyer, but I don't what kind you are. But how someone can do what they do to people and lay their head down with not a care makes me wonder if they have a conscience at all.

One of my fond memories from my divorce was how my lawyer and opposing counsel, made plans for lunch and a future golf date, all the while, billing the sh1t out of both of us, making one supid motion after another. So I guess they could afford a good lunch having soaked us both for nothing more than horsesh1t, instead of sitting down with us both and hammering out the real issues.

Are you alledgeing what I said about BP's lawyers trying to get them out from under a horrendous problem, at the cost of the livelihood of the gulf residents? You as a lawyer can't be that naive? Some things in this world cannot be right, no matter what latin words are printed on your degree and what garbage you feed yourself.
 slybandit
Joined: 7/10/2006
Msg: 643
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/3/2010 12:34:23 PM
O.k. Mr. Evil,

1. It's really impressive that you can manage the time for eight paragraphs of invective directed at lawyers in general but cannot (apparently) find the time to actually *read* anything that I have written on here about the response to BP.

I think the outfit should be sued out of existence.

2. It's also impressive that you worked in the financial industry, yet have no hesitation castigating lawyers for greed. The financial industry basically IS organized greed in action, no?

3. Saying "no offense intended" is like saying "with all due respect". In both cases, offense is intended, and the implication is that no respect is due, but the recipient of the insult is not to be allowed to display annoyance, because that would be poor form.

4. "In addition for every lawyer who helps those in need, there are 5 who ONLY help those out of GREED."

Congratulations on your facility with invented statistics and rhyming phrases.

This sort of attitude on people's part never ceases to amaze me, combining as it does a sort of near-mystical respect for what lawyers are 'supposed to' be and how they are 'supposed' to act, with anger and umbrage over their failure to live up to a standard that would be completely *laughable* if anyone was to suggest it be applied to anyone else.

Hey, I "need" some financial services, Mr. Evil. You *should* help me for free. Be my unpaid slave, in effect, and I will reserve the right to be offended if you question that arrangement. Well, otherwise, you're helping me out of greed, and that's *bad*.

And, lo and behold, ludricrous enough, you guessed it, we actually ARE the only profession I have ever heard of that actually exhorts it's members to do some work for free. We even have a pretentious Latin phrase for it "pro bono publico" and yes, anticipating your question, I do it.

5. Hey, supposedly your divorce was mis-handled and you got over-billed. That's a perfect reason to judge hundreds of people you have never met, and it has everything to do with an environmental disaster.

I wonder if your ex would tell us the same story-- or would she tell us that the motions were necessary because of your refusal to come clean about finances, cooperate on reasonable custody arrangements, or do any one of the thousands of dishonest or pig-headed moves that I have seen divorce litigants sign on for, and eventually pay for.

In my jurisdiction, 30 seconds of online research can tell anyone how to contest a lawyer's bill. If you did not do that, why are you crying on here?

6. Television advertising for lawyers ought to be banned. That you allow it in the U.S. just beggars comprehension, in my view. Much of it is tactless and an exhibition of extremely poor taste, and an indirect demonstration that the lawyer advertising does not get enough business from referrals by satisfied clients to make it on the market.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 644
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/3/2010 1:24:20 PM
Well I guess I have been told off!!! Hahahaha!

Well on some of your stuff, I beg to differ:

Point #1, oh no, I don't want them sued "out of existance"! One of my early concerns on this thread was that BP, would plunge the US unit into bankruptcy, thereby hiding behind the law. This cleanup will take decades to understand, maybe even 50 years to fix. I want BP front and center, paying for their mistake, not hiding behind the law of bankruptcy. What happens after that I could care less.

But if we can make an example of them, force them into the role of good corporate world citizen, that might change the way other companies operate.

Point #2 "financial industry basically IS organized greed in action, no?"

In many instances your absolutely right, in others no, it certainly is no worse than yours. Although we are held to a higher standard, we are licensed, regulated very carefully, especially the part that deals with the public. Rare are the cases of abuse, fraud or misuse of funds that don't end in lifetime ban from the industry and revocation of that license. We don't have closed meetings which issue letters of reprimand or censure. You are investigated by the SEC AND your supervisory body NASD, NYSE or other.

Yes the banks abused the MBO and CBO market, most will eventually be fined such as the case with Goldman and the 500 million dollar fine. How many lawyers can say they heard of a similar situation? There will be more cases, more fines. Again though, how many lawyers will make a forune working on those cases? Hhahahaha!!

For my own part, I was part of the vanilla side of the industry, trading and raising capital for factories, businesses. Did it have certain, abuses absolutely. Hence among other things the name "evil"!

Point #3, "saying "no offense intended" well it's better than the southern version of "bless your heart" which you ask any southerner about! hahahaha

Point #4 Yes sometimes I can be quite adept at rhyming and other things, thank you.

Further yes by all means you should, as I did be paid for your services, BUT I always did my own work, can many lawyers say the same? How many lawyers bill out at their hourly rate of $250 or $300 an hour for work done by their paralegal who they pay a fraction of that? That would be the equivalent of having you recieve a bill for something I never saw, looked at or wrote that was done by my secretary! How about the practice of billing by the increments of the clock in 10 minute intervals? You look at something for 30 seconds, bill me for 10 minutes. hahaha! Adds up quickly when the bill rate is $300 an hour or more.

As for "pro Bono" well I'm glad to hear it! Few of the top gunslingers of your business really do that, they may have some flunky 1st year guy do that, but not the top guns. I would equate that with the charity work we did, my firm did over $5 million in trades for institutions and donated all those fees to the victims of 9/11.

Point 5 well yes my divorce was ugly, my wife cheated, I left and filed. Her lawyer assuaged her anger by adopting a "scorched earth" policy against me. Which extended to personal possessions, as for money, cause I worked where I did, made what I did, I wanted my kids to have whatever they needed. Point in case, my child support ended at 18, with no provision for college. I paid until they graduated and paid for college. How many guys do you know who paid for 12 years, instead of the 9 they were obligated for. Hahaha!!

Now what would I have contested? The bill, how, they filed the motions, we both know th paralegal did the work, just the bill rate was set too high. Her lawyer filed them, my lawyer answered. Sh1t come to think about it, the court did a job there as well. Since I ended up paying 80% of her legal bill as well.

Point6, at last we agree on something, those ads detract from your professions standing and increase the beliefs nt only I have but others share, you know what I mean, "ambulance chasers"!
 sarniafairyboy
Joined: 6/19/2010
Msg: 645
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/3/2010 4:09:12 PM

2. It's also impressive that you worked in the financial industry, yet have no hesitation castigating lawyers for greed. The financial industry basically IS organized greed in action, no?

3. Saying "no offense intended" is like saying "with all due respect". In both cases, offense is intended, and the implication is that no respect is due, but the recipient of the insult is not to be allowed to display annoyance, because that would be poor form.

4. "In addition for every lawyer who helps those in need, there are 5 who ONLY help those out of GREED."

Congratulations on your facility with invented statistics and rhyming phrases.

This sort of attitude on people's part never ceases to amaze me, combining as it does a sort of near-mystical respect for what lawyers are 'supposed to' be and how they are 'supposed' to act, with anger and umbrage over their failure to live up to a standard that would be completely *laughable* if anyone was to suggest it be applied to anyone else.

Hey, I "need" some financial services, Mr. Evil. You *should* help me for free. Be my unpaid slave, in effect, and I will reserve the right to be offended if you question that arrangement. Well, otherwise, you're helping me out of greed, and that's *bad*.

And, lo and behold, ludricrous enough, you guessed it, we actually ARE the only profession I have ever heard of that actually exhorts it's members to do some work for free. We even have a pretentious Latin phrase for it "pro bono publico" and yes, anticipating your question, I do it.


2 -most lawyers I've had anything to do with are pure greed.

point 3, funny that he people I've heard the phrase "with all due respect" the MOST from, have been shylocks, yes they are masters at the sneering tone, using a word that on its surface shows 'respect' but has the sneering condescension attached -you can call someone "sir" in the 'right' sneering tone, and have it sound much worse than calling him a a "d1ckhead"

point 4 -really?

see "Doctors without Borders/Medicins sans Frontiers" - I think these guys REALLY area profession that does awesome charity work/helps the less fortunate -these guys & gals put it on the line , leaving home, going toother countries for minimal or very little/no pay, often in to war zones , putting themselves at-risk

- check it:

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.com/

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.com/work/field/


Point 5 well yes my divorce was ugly, my wife cheated, I left and filed. Her lawyer assuaged her anger by adopting a "scorched earth" policy against me. Which extended to personal possessions, as for money, cause I worked where I did, made what I did, I wanted my kids to have whatever they needed. Point in case, my child support ended at 18, with no provision for college. I paid until they graduated and paid for college. How many guys do you know who paid for 12 years, instead of the 9 they were obligated for. Hahaha!!

Now what would I have contested? The bill, how, they filed the motions, we both know th paralegal did the work, just the bill rate was set too high. Her lawyer filed them, my lawyer answered. Sh1t come to think about it, the court did a job there as well. Since I ended up paying 80% of her legal bill as well.

Point6, at last we agree on something, those ads detract from your professions standing and increase the beliefs nt only I have but others share, you know what I mean, "ambulance chasers"!


I agree with mr. evil, getting your secretary and /or paralegal to do all the work on many cases at $10-15 or maybe $20 per hour, then billing it out at $300- 350 an hour (at least) is a good trick if you can do it -or all the work s/he does at maybe $15/hr. filing papers in courts , esp. in land transactions,but billed out at $300 + /per hour, sweet for the shylock, I grant you . esp. since they have most people so scared that you can't do the simplest things without a lawyer to hold your hands.

heard of many cases where lawyers rip off $$ out of trust accounts, are never caught, or if they are the law society gives them a nominal fine, or suspend license for a week for stealing $1 million, + , etc.

"we police our own" (law society) = 'fox policing the hen house' .
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 646
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/3/2010 4:20:05 PM
Amen to you sarniafairyboy, I only wish I had the guts of those guys and gals from Doctorswithoutborders! I do what I can, based on my ability, but I admit to having less guts than those who place themselves in harms way, as those doctors do.

He11 we have doctors who volunteer within our own country to provide services to thousands at free clinics.
 xlr8ingmargo
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 647
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/3/2010 7:03:10 PM
Guys what does any of this have to do with staying on topic?
Mr. Sly in my opinion you seem to hijack threads as you have in the past with other posters on other threads. I know Im not the only one that reads this thread and has from the begining. Thank you gentlemen.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 649
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 12:29:16 AM
" you will need to prove through inter-office memos that the top told the bottom to skirt safety rules ... and good luck with that one. "

That's where a criminal trial comes in. Evidence would be collected and judged on it's merits in context with their past criminal record. The memos, emails, and other documentation already disclosed are adequate to file charges. Wrist slaps have not stopped the murder of 30 employees recently.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bps-dismal-safety-record/story?id=10763042&page=1
"In the last five years, investigators found, BP has admitted to breaking U.S. environmental and safety laws and committing outright fraud. BP paid $373 million in fines to avoid prosecution. "
"BP's safety violations far outstrip its fellow oil companies. According to the Center for Public Integrity, in the last three years, BP refineries in Ohio and Texas have accounted for 97 percent of the "egregious, willful" violations handed out by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). "

http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/whistleblower-bp-has-long-history-ignoring-safety-profit
E-MAILS SHOW BP OFFICIALS KNEW OF DANGER TO ITS GULF RIGS

BP's own internal communications show that company officials were made aware of the issue and feared that the document shortfalls related to Atlantis "could lead to catastrophic operator error" and must be addressed.

Indeed, according to an August 15, 2008, e-mail sent to BP officials by Barry Duff, a member of BP's deep-water Gulf of Mexico Atlantis subsea team, the piping and instrument diagrams (PIDs) for the Atlantis subsea components "are not complete" and "there are hundreds if not thousands of subsea documents that have never been finalized, yet the facilities have been" up and running.

PID documents form the foundation of a hazards analysis BP is required under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act to undertake as part of its safety and environmental management program related to its offshore drilling operations. The drawings provide the schematic details of the project's piping and process flows, valves and safety critical instrumentation.

'CATASTROPHIC OPERATOR ERRORS' LIKELY

Duff's e-mail to company officials Bill Naseman and William Broman warned that "The risk in turning over drawings that are not complete are [that] the operator will assume the drawings are accurate and up to date. This could lead to catastrophic operator errors due to their assuming the drawing is correct.

"Turning over incomplete drawings to the operator for their use," the e-mail continued, "is a fundamental violation of basic document control, [internal standards] and process safety regulations."
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 650
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 7:55:18 AM

In what way have I proposed ideas that promote anything other than a free market in labor?
Uh, by promoting excuses for corporate welfare without addressing the labor market AT ALL? What you've posted are the exact same arguments found for years on on so-called ``libertarian'' and freeper sites. (I put libertarian in quotes because the majority of self-described libertarians are really apologists for corporate welfae and irresponsibility. There is nothing really libertarian about them.) I'd be all for free trade if that meant what it is supposed to mean.

Sure, I realize that some nations harm themselves by not participating, but that doesn't mean throwing the baby out with the bathwater is appropriate.

No, but it does mean addressing the labor issue with regard to nations who do not participate. That would require things like tarrifs and regulations against corporations utilizing the work force of those countries for cheap labor. If you allow corporations to utilize the cheap labor of a country which keeps its citizens from traveling to the countries with which it trades other goods, then corporations can always impoverish a country to obtain slave labor.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 651
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 7:58:54 AM

heard of many cases where lawyers rip off $$ out of trust accounts, are never caught, or if they are the law society gives them a nominal fine, or suspend license for a week for stealing $1 million, + , etc.

Try reading the Texas Bar Journal. Every month they report the disciplinary actions against attorneys' more than a few of which involve exactly what you are talking about. I have yet to see where an attorney comes out ahead.
 sarniafairyboy
Joined: 6/19/2010
Msg: 652
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 9:14:01 AM
^^


heard of many cases where lawyers rip off $$ out of trust accounts, are never caught, or if they are the law society gives them a nominal fine, or suspend license for a week for stealing $1 million, + , etc.

Try reading the Texas Bar Journal. Every month they report the disciplinary actions against attorneys' more than a few of which involve exactly what you are talking about. I have yet to see where an attorney comes out ahead.


well, perhaps it is different in TX, I was speaking of what I have seen in Canada.

by the way-- the only ones you see in those journals are the ones who were CAUGHT

so ask yourself what the probability of being caught is?

if it is only 1% or 2% , etc. there may not be much deterrence even if they are fairly stiffly punished _ If they figure there is only a 2, or maybe 5, times chance out of 100 of being caught it might be worth "rolling the dice" ?

slybandit may have a point- I'm sure not "EVERY" lawyer is slime, but enough are that it gives a bad taste about the role as a whole

if there are 100 snakes in my backyard, and "only" 50 of them are poisonous, and 50 are benign, but they all look the same externally, do I want to deal with any of them?

my personal feelings with lawyers is it would be about 90 poisonous, 10 maybe benign, but the percentages aren't key -if you have a chance of being bitten you'd rather avoid ALL of them

MOST of us don't deal with lawyers enough to get to know them, so in sort of an 'emergency' you call one out of the Yellow pages? how do you know which might be 'good', which might be slime? I'm sure the slimeballs /con artists can talk a very good game about how great they are, maybe better than the 'good guys'
 imalwayssmiling
Joined: 7/17/2009
Msg: 653
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 9:36:59 AM
I have a great idea,maybe we could start a forum about BP and a oil spill in the gulf !
 slybandit
Joined: 7/10/2006
Msg: 654
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 9:53:25 AM
@ xlr8ingmargo : Not sure what you're basing your opinion on, in regard to hijacking other threads on my part

In regard to THIS one, **you're right**-- the line-items in the bills from Mr. Evil's divorce lawyer etc., lawyers' disciplinary records are pretty off-topic.

I'll shut up about that, and invite everyone else to start a new thread or resurrect an old one if they want to talk about it.

@ earthpuppy: I am 100% in accord with what you are saying about a criminal proceeding against BP, by the way.

Not only BP's history of breaking U.S. environmental and safety laws should be scrutinized, so should their performance in cleanup of the spill.

Here's another charming piece.

Apparently BP is primarily employing dispersants that are banned in the United Kingdom, it's headquarters country: http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/In-Gulf-Spill-BP-Using-Dispersants-Banned-in-UK

And here is an example of a politician doing something USEFUL for a change, questioning the EPA about this:
http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/letter-about-disperants-from-rep.-markey-to-epa1
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 655
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 10:06:33 AM
Well it looks as though the the "static Kill" is working, but they are continuing with the relief well in addition. There is also news that the oil seems to be breaking up on the surface.

Few things here, is the oil REALLY gone, or is it just down several hundred or a thousand feet below the surface and being pushed by the various currents away from the well?

Also what about those marsh areas, where the oil came ashore? As I said earlier on the thread, guards are restricting access to those areas most affected, not only to civilians but to news media as well. I would love to see a comprehensive overview of the entire gulf coast and what the cleanup looks like.

We already know, the BP cleaning crews are only cleaning the top 1 or 2 feet of sand on beaches. Dig your feet into that sand, and you come up looking like a tar baby yourself.

The spin doctors are out in force, on all the networks saying or alluding to the fact that the worst of the tragedy is past. This is when things become most dangerous. We don't know the true condition of clam and oyster beds, the reefs, the fish and what has happened with them. We don't know if they clean the marshes say 90% whether that will affect egg laying by turtles, birds or fish.

The talking heads of media have the attention span of a gnat. After 103 days of this disaster, they just want to move onto whatever else they can find. That's why aside from the occasional program or report it is starting to fall off the radar.

EVERYONE needs to keep their eye on the ball(or gulf in this case) and keep the pressure on, so the job is done well and not a lip service, wink wink kinda thing.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 656
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 10:11:24 AM

Few things here, is the oil REALLY gone, or is it just down several hundred or a thousand feet below the surface and being pushed by the various currents away from the well?

Well, it's still there. It's just that the majority that's still waterborne has been cleaned up. What they can get to on the surface has been taken care of, and they expect that the submerged oil will break up instead of surfacing on beaches.
 imalwayssmiling
Joined: 7/17/2009
Msg: 659
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 10:42:14 AM
I agree Paul,Cornell University was talking the difference of cold water Valdez and warm water Gulf.Warm water has oil eating microbes,Valdez had not.Now the test is how hard will it be to keep BP going ,doing cleanup.As long as the country stays on them fine,if it becomes old hat to the bulk of the country they could back off,so I hope there is enough noisy gulf people around to keep them going on the cleanup so they don't prematurely say,jobs done,pack it up,like they had done in Valdez.Pressure on BP will be a good thing for those hurt by this.
 sarniafairyboy
Joined: 6/19/2010
Msg: 660
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 11:39:26 AM

1. It's really impressive that you can manage the time for eight paragraphs of invective directed at lawyers in general but cannot (apparently) find the time to actually *read* anything that I have written on here about the response to BP.

I think the outfit should be sued out of existence.


sadly, though if BP is sued, and let's say pays out about US $15 billion total in costs

at least US$ 6 billion will be paid to BP's lawyers in defense costs

about US$ 6 billion will go to the plaintiff's lawyers, contingency fees, etc.

leaving about US $ 3 billion for the actual plaintiffs

or in percentage terms, 40% for BP's lawyers, 40 % for plaintiff's lawyers and about 20%, the remnants, the few bones to pick over, for the people actually hurt by the spill

oh well, that is our litigation 'system'.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 661
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/4/2010 12:40:00 PM
This oil cleanup and after effects is the part that worries me.

BP has been hiring scientists as fast as they can find them. Once they sign on with BP, they cannot publish without BP's direct consent for 5 years. By then you'll be lucky to read about the spill on the obit page of some remote newspaper.

Long term effects may be far worse, when viewed as what we will be consuming, from the gulf. I doubt many would want a shrimp poboy with a petro sauce. Fish the same story, nobody can really say if they are infected, or affected by the oil or not.

As to sarniafairy, well that would be a great place for the aforementioned "pro bono" to work, but I doubt anybody of real importance will take up the fight on that basis. While I understand nobody wants to work for nothing for 10 years, they could reduce the fees, but good luck with that. Everybody wants "theirs"!

In the end as far as I can see, it will wind up being just like the hormone, pesticide thing within our food supply. Because they put all that sh1t in the food, vegetables, meat, we seem to have a higher incidence of cancer than most countries worldwide.

Better living through modern chemistry, BS!!!
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 662
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 12:01:04 AM

... by promoting excuses for corporate welfare...

What are you talking about? I am completely against subsidies, tax-breaks that single-out specific companies, etc.

It sounds to me, like Krebby, instead of debating me intelligently, you've formed a made-up caricature of me and attack strawmen with it.

How do you define corporate welfare?





No, but it does mean addressing the labor issue with regard to nations who do not participate. That would require things like tarrifs and regulations against corporations utilizing the work force of those countries for cheap labor. If you allow corporations to utilize the cheap labor of a country which keeps its citizens from traveling to the countries with which it trades other goods, then corporations can always impoverish a country to obtain slave labor.

The facts are against you on this. If what you say is true, then we should expect to see citizens employed by so-called "slave labor" in emigration-restricted nations that participate in globalization to be suffering. The opposite is true. China is the best example. Scores of international companies employ Chinese citizens (what you call slave laborers). And what is the result? Chinese poverty rates have been plummeting faster than at any time in its history. Their standard of living is increasing dramatically. The same goes for Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, India, and virtually every other nation that fits your qualifications.

Tariffs and quotas would only make things worse for our citizens (higher prices of imported goods) and for the international workers, who finally have the chance to work outside of subsistence agriculture (fewer jobs available to them due to reduced demand -- also would have the effect of lowering wages because there would be more unemployed workers for every unfilled job).
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 663
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 6:18:53 AM
What are you talking about? I am completely against subsidies, tax-breaks that single-out specific companies, etc.

You just gave an example in the latter part of you post.

It sounds to me, like Krebby, instead of debating me intelligently, you've formed a made-up caricature of me and attack strawmen with it.

If by that, you mean that I think you are naive and that you choose to not see the big picture, then it isn't a caricature or a strawman.

How do you define corporate welfare?

Any government regulation which gives a corporation an advantage over an individual. Freedom to cross borders is one. For that matter, the concept of incorporation qualifies. The reason companies incorporate is so that the owners of the corporation benefit by having their assets protected from the corporate liabilities. Corporate assets are further used to indemnify officiers and directors from personal liability in cases where they can be sued. In addition, companies which are located in foreign countries reveive the benefit of protection from the US government.

The facts are against you on this.

No, you just aren't seeing the bigger picture.

If what you say is true, then we should expect to see citizens employed by so-called "slave labor" in emigration-restricted nations that participate in globalization to be suffering.

They are certainly suffering in comparison to western nations for the moment. Because companies are allowed to seek an artificially cheap labor pool created by government restrictions, the western labor pool is being impoverished. Wgen it becomes advantageous to find more artificially created slave labor (and in doing so, impoverish the Chinese), companies will do so. The Chinese standard of living may increase, but only relative to a situation that was worse and at the expense of workers whose situation was better. You'll notice that Chinese workers are now striking, so apparently their increased prosperity isn't great enough to keep them from objecting to their working conditions even though it is illegal to do so. Chinese labor is cheap only because of the government restrictions that limit the freedom of the Chinese workers.

In the old south, slave owners certainly relieved the slaves from having to hunt for food everyday, live in straw huts and worry about being killed by tribal wars. ``Good'' slave owners might have rewarded ``good'' slaves by making them downright comfy in comparison to what their life was like in Africa if the slave owner was smart enough to find an economic advantage in doing so. But slaves were still slaves and the slave owners were the ones who profited from the work the slaves performed. Just like Chinese workers, their lack of freedom to move about freely limited their ability to compete based on their ability. They were still owned by their ``employers'' and were disposable commodities. You are very naive.

I own a business and I recently talked with someone about financing. He suggested that I should move to a foreign country because, as he put it, they work dirt cheap and I wouldn't have to worry about health and safety regulations, nor any other inconvenient human rights issues. I'm sorry, but I don't think that a country's natural resources include a slave labor pool, so I don't think that is an ethical way to do business.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 664
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 6:24:24 AM

ah ... but did not those people blow themselves up ...
the details of the accident have not come to light...

That is what a trial is for. An indfictment is not supposed to be an indication of guilt. The facts are what a jury determines and quite often people are held in jail until a trial. Why should the executives a bp be any different?
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 665
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 8:41:16 AM
"Why should the executives a bp be any different?"

This is the REAL rux of the matter. In almost any corporation, the people at the top are insulated from prosecution, even though they are supposedly responsible for the actions of their company. This has morphed over the years, into this situation. In fact, boards can buy insurance to pay for any lawsuit or damage assessed against them, even going so far as to have the corporation PAY for the insurance!

When a ship sinks, the captain is investigated and tried. If negligence is proved, they go to prison. As the captain of a corporation, the CEO should be held responsible for what happens on his watch.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe this will change anything, these guys will hang this thing on some poor slob middle manager who "misunderstood" their directives. These guys will dance off with their money, not even a meaningful slap on the wrist. This has already been demonstrated by Hayward's "new job" in Russia with BP.

So what is he said "we need to move these rigs to drill more quickly, they cost too much" we don't know if there was a conversation that took place that said "do what you have to do" and never will. These guys are smart enough to not have such conversations recorded or emailed. You can also bet they'll lie their azzes off, to avoid the blame.
 sarniafairyboy
Joined: 6/19/2010
Msg: 666
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 8:46:12 AM

"Why should the executives a bp be any different?"

This is the REAL rux of the matter. In almost any corporation, the people at the top are insulated from prosecution, even though they are supposedly responsible for the actions of their company. This has morphed over the years, into this situation. In fact, boards can buy insurance to pay for any lawsuit or damage assessed against them, even going so far as to have the corporation PAY for the insurance!

When a ship sinks, the captain is investigated and tried. If negligence is proved, they go to prison. As the captain of a corporation, the CEO should be held responsible for what happens on his watch.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe this will change anything, these guys will hang this thing on some poor slob middle manager who "misunderstood" their directives. These guys will dance off with their money, not even a meaningful slap on the wrist. This has already been demonstrated by Hayward's "new job" in Russia with BP.
"

us, demanding all this oil is part of the problem..living 50 miles or more, from work & commuting hundreds of miles each week, often in ahuge SUV, with only one person (driver) , etc. ,etc.

maybe they should update the old bumper stickers that said:

" If you ride alone, you're riding with bin Laden"

to say:

" If you ride alone, you're riding with Tony Hayward"

or:

" If you ride alone, you're riding with British Petroleum"

or: " If you ride alone, you're riding with the Deep Water Gulf mess"
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 667
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 10:00:16 AM
"us, demanding all this oil is part of the problem"

Well of course it is! Although I love the bumper stickers, I've never seen a campaign that really affects behavior. This includes drunk driving, DARE and all the rest. People are stupid, they want what they want, when they want it and hang the future!

Our government is ineffective, due to outside influences, lobbyists, political contributions from corporations, and a host of other things. It is doubtful, short of a revolution that it will change. Despite the worst recession in 100 years, government employees, including congressmen(the worst) continue to assert their right to pensions unequaled in ANY business or industry. Any one term senator or congressman receives a pension for life of a years salary EVERY year!

If this was as serious an issue, back during the Carter administration, during the oil embargo, we would have reenacted similar to WW2, gasoline rationing, dependant on need. Thereby forcing the population to embrace mass transit.

While I hate BP, it is a symptom of the problem, probably the worst, but still a symptom. After Carter our auto industry embraced 30 and 40 MPG autos. That lasted less than 4 years, then we invented the SUV, and were off to the races with 7 MPG vehicles.

Now lets leave disneyworld, because NO ONE wants to be living in reality, not our population, our government, our corporations not anyone! No one wants to make the hard decisions, look at the politicians, everyone says cut spending, but NOT ONE cites the programs they would cut.

This is just an extension of "credit thinking", give it to me now, we'll worry about how to pay the check sometime in the future, if at all.

Still I gotta tell ya, I'd pay $2,000 a gallon for a "ride of a couple of miles, dragging hayward behind the car, at 5 miles an hour!
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 669
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 10:48:57 AM
The captain was "there", operating the ship...

The "captain" on the rig would be the on-site commander.
 mr.evil
Joined: 11/14/2009
Msg: 670
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 8/5/2010 10:58:37 AM
"The "captain" on the rig would be the on-site commander."

Gawd, thank you, I was hoping someone would seize on that statement!

After the sinking of the Titanic, not only was the captain put on trial(even though he was dead) as part of the investigation, not a trial really more an inquiry. BUT also the owner was put on trial as well, because it was at his direction, that the ship's captain went "full speed ahead" despite the danger, because he wanted the TransAtlantic crossing record for his new ship.

What would be the difference here? Hayward wanted to save $500,000 a day, the cost of the rig, so he says "damn the safety, full speed ahead". I need to use that rig on 10 other wells, I don't care about safety, just the money. Do you believe the captain on the rig, 47 miles from shore, would risk his own life without orders to do so?
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >