BP's newest plan

Stypo420

So BP is hoping to siphon some 70 -90% of the oil leaking from the sea floor into tankers. Let's say they finally accomplish something and they start filling tanker after tanker with oil....Then what? They get to start profiting from their own disaster? I would just like to say that I have a problem with that! Thank you. :twisted:

catefrances

well its 'their' oil anyways. but any profit made should be appropriated by the government for the clean up and restitution to those whose livelihoods have been affected by their gross incompetence.


p.s. i have a major problem with private companies profitting from what i see as the resources of a country. to me natural resources are 'owned' by the entire nation not just some moneygrabbing corporation.

Stypo420

catefrances wrote:

well its 'their' oil anyways. but any profit made should be appropriated by the government for the clean up and restitution to those whose livelihoods have been affected by their gross incompetence.


p.s. i have a major problem with private companies profitting from what i see as the resources of a country. to me natural resources are 'owned' by the entire nation not just some moneygrabbing corporation.

That is a great point and you never hear it mentioned either. Why can't we have that discussion?

catefrances

lgoose420 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

well its 'their' oil anyways. but any profit made should be appropriated by the government for the clean up and restitution to those whose livelihoods have been affected by their gross incompetence.


p.s. i have a major problem with private companies profitting from what i see as the resources of a country. to me natural resources are 'owned' by the entire nation not just some moneygrabbing corporation.

That is a great point and you never hear it mentioned either. Why can't we have that discussion?

cause thats not how capitalism works my friend.

primussucks

Why not blow up the well and collapse it and stop 100% of the leak like the Russians have done on 4 seperate occasions??????????? Oh thats right, cause then BP can't siphone it and continue profiting from it. So what is more important? BP making a profit or the cleanliness of our ocean????? The Russians are laughing at us!

Stypo420

catefrances wrote:

cause thats not how capitalism works my friend.

Agreed...I think it is time for capitalism 2.0 A regulated system designed with profits and society in mind. :?

I may be eaten alive by some in here for that one.

catefrances

lgoose420 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

cause thats not how capitalism works my friend.

Agreed...I think it is time for capitalism 2.0 A regulated system designed with profits and society in mind. :?

I may be eaten alive by some in here for that one.

they call that socialism.

Stypo420

primussucks wrote:

Why not blow up the well and collapse it and stop 100% of the leak like the Russians have done on 4 seperate occasions??????????? Oh thats right, cause then BP can't siphone it and continue profiting from it. So what is more important? BP making a profit or the cleanliness of our ocean????? The Russians are laughing at us!

I have been asking this question for weeks. However I believe the Russian's used nukes which I don't think we should do. But there must be some giant bunker buster type of bomb that could shut this damn hole and I don't get why it s not an option. Do explosives not work under the pressure of 5,000ft of water? If there is a good reason fine I would just like to know. But NO NUKES

gimmesometruth27

lgoose420 wrote:

primussucks wrote:

Why not blow up the well and collapse it and stop 100% of the leak like the Russians have done on 4 seperate occasions??????????? Oh thats right, cause then BP can't siphone it and continue profiting from it. So what is more important? BP making a profit or the cleanliness of our ocean????? The Russians are laughing at us!

I have been asking this question for weeks. However I believe the Russian's used nukes which I don't think we should do. But there must be some giant bunker buster type of bomb that could shut this damn hole and I don't get why it s not an option. Do explosives not work under the pressure of 5,000ft of water? If there is a good reason fine I would just like to know. But NO NUKES

they did use nukes, so that is not an option. we already have a massive ecological disaster on our hands, why make it worse by radiating the entire gulf of mexico? the fallout would make it this disaster times 1 million...

Stypo420

catefrances wrote:

lgoose420 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

cause thats not how capitalism works my friend.

Agreed...I think it is time for capitalism 2.0 A regulated system designed with profits and society in mind. :?

I may be eaten alive by some in here for that one.

they call that socialism.

See I disagree I think you could manipulate so it really isn't. Would there be redistribution of wealth? Bet your ass there would be. Much like what occurred during the Actors stay and beyond. Trickle down economics is a misnomer 1.it is not a trickle it is a stream 2.it travels upward not down. So due to that things need to be shaken up a bit.

I would like to state I'm fortunate to be in a position where a change like this probably wouldn't help me but it probably would not coast me any more either. So it not for personal gain it is just some thoughts.

Stypo420

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

lgoose420 wrote:

primussucks wrote:

Why not blow up the well and collapse it and stop 100% of the leak like the Russians have done on 4 seperate occasions??????????? Oh thats right, cause then BP can't siphone it and continue profiting from it. So what is more important? BP making a profit or the cleanliness of our ocean????? The Russians are laughing at us!

I have been asking this question for weeks. However I believe the Russian's used nukes which I don't think we should do. But there must be some giant bunker buster type of bomb that could shut this damn hole and I don't get why it s not an option. Do explosives not work under the pressure of 5,000ft of water? If there is a good reason fine I would just like to know. But NO NUKES

they did use nukes, so that is not an option. we already have a massive ecological disaster on our hands, why make it worse by radiating the entire gulf of mexico? the fallout would make it this disaster times 1 million...

I know Russia used nukes that is what I said above. Why not use a large non-nuke?

edit I completely agree with your post btw

catefrances

lgoose420 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

lgoose420 wrote:

Agreed...I think it is time for capitalism 2.0 A regulated system designed with profits and society in mind. :?

I may be eaten alive by some in here for that one.

they call that socialism.

See I disagree I think you could manipulate so it really isn't. Would there be redistribution of wealth? Bet your ass there would be. Much like what occurred during the Actors stay and beyond. Trickle down economics is a misnomer 1.it is not a trickle it is a stream 2.it travels upward not down. So due to that things need to be shaken up a bit.

I would like to state I'm fortunate to be in a position where a change like this probably wouldn't help me but it probably would not coast me any more either. So it not for personal gain it is just some thoughts.

youd have to remove the private corporations for it to be socialism i know that. i use the term to encompass anything where the people benefit from what they as a nation should by rights 'own' collectively to the betterment of that nation.

no corporation should own natural resources. its ridiculous.

rb115565

As Long as they try and do something, Whatever they do will only be very minor compared to the damage that will happen in the coming years

catefrances

well whatever they try next lets hope it doesnt result in another 20% increase in leakage like their last effort did.

Pepe Silvia

lgoose420 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

well its 'their' oil anyways. but any profit made should be appropriated by the government for the clean up and restitution to those whose livelihoods have been affected by their gross incompetence.


p.s. i have a major problem with private companies profitting from what i see as the resources of a country. to me natural resources are 'owned' by the entire nation not just some moneygrabbing corporation.

That is a great point and you never hear it mentioned either. Why can't we have that discussion?

because there were a couple of countries that didn't take too kindly to iran having that discussion in the '50s

vomikus39

It is mind boggling how this sort of catastrophy is not prepared for. As if we don't have enough reason to hate the oil CO's, life sentences for the CEO's