Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Oil Company Trickle-down Economics 101

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
blueworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 03:11 PM
Original message
Oil Company Trickle-down Economics 101
Corporate Masters Screw up & taxpayers foot the bill. First they lobby Congress. Then they party with their pseudo-regulators (Dept. of Interior). As they rake in millions per day, they manage to avoid the necessity of a tax-deductible $500K expenditure for a safety measure that might have protected millions of people. Very thrifty & stock prices are up!

They create dozens of jobs, then kill off at least 11 people, but they do provide health care to the survivors. Whew! With no way to control the disaster that they promised couldn't ever happen in the first place, they turn to the taxpayer-funded military for help. (Good luck with that). When the oil hits the coast & devastates the environment (wildlife, fishing industry, tourism) in an economically-challenged area, they promise to buy enough Dawn soap to wash off the birds. Of course with the regional economy affected for years, the taxpayers will have to fund those poor folks ruined by this calamity. Regional businesses will die off slowly but surely. Oops!

This amount of oil will destroy the region for years, if not decades, but it isn't a drop in the bucket as far as national energy needs. Anyone care to estimate next year's CEO bonuses? And Congress schedules more hearings.

For those nuclear power proponents convinced that new technological safeguards are golden, consider that the back-up mechanisms on this rig failed, as well as the "fail-safe" mechanism, apparently. Could have been human error...hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. The backup mechanisms on that rig were thought to be inferior
An upgrade was proposed and denied by the regulation commission under Bush/Cheney.

Not that I'm a proponent for nuclear energy insomuch. I just don't want the facts regarding this tragedy to be distorted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC