When you accept that all political parties' critiques of all other political parties are essentially correct, it really leaves you very little to say about the topic. The Democrats are right about the Republicans, the Republicans are right about the Democrats, Conservatives are right about Liberals and vice versa, Marxists are right about Capitalists - and again vice versa...
We're talking about the Capitalism as it really exists, not the pure Free Market that has never existed except in Iceland and Ireland, and, well, actually anywhere where a government was nominally acknowledged but actually ignored, like colonial Pennsylvania and the back country of... well, any back country.
Take the oil spill. Of course they f'ed up! They're all standing around pointing guns at each other and everybody who looks at 'em instead of concentrating on getting petroleum products to me. 'They' are everybody sticking their noses in between the hole in the ground and me - all the "governmental affairs" specialists in the various companies lobbying for special privileges and wheeling and dealing for special restrictions that only hurt their competition, all the environmental groups lobbying for their personal hobbies, all the bureaucrats fighting for their cushy jobs and all the politicians preening before their constituents so they can keep their cushy jobs.
We've got to do whatever we can to stop supporting the lot of 'em.
By the way, on Probligo's blog I repented of ever having supported George Bush or anything he did. That certainly doesn't mean that I support anything Obama's doing - anybody who thought he return us to Clinton's '90s was an ignoramous - but that should all be clear from my first two paragraphs.
I think it was Kropotkin who wanted us to grow societies until they choke out governments (I'm using the terms as Tom Paine used them). That's the plan.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I hear ya, Al. I have to say that in the probligo's senile greymatters there is a large element of "YAY" floating about.
I want to take your comment about the "'They' are everybody sticking their noses in between the hole in the ground and me - "...
It leads into a challenge that I have failed dismally to meet, and I want to set it out there (half-baked as it is at present) to see if there might be a cogent answer.
The challenge is this -
Imagine the world the day before Horizon Challenger sank; now take out all of the government tax-taking, controls, and interferences; take out the environmental protections - minimal as they might be. Take as a ground the oil fields of Texas in the 1890's before the world ran on the stuff except that now it does...
This morning on the news you read that crude has started washing ashore in Louisiana from a wrecked deep-water rig.
Now, the challenge -
To give a brief, one paragraph summary of what might happen next; who would do what; the responsibilities; the compensation for loss....
There are two words that MUST NOT be used:
GOVERNMENT or any of its agencies.
REGULATION or any other government imposed restriction.
The screwing up started way before that day. It was built into the platform and everybody who ever thought about it. I'm not interested in fixing the world in the past, and any fixing I do will not affect the present. And the present will affect whatever happens going forward.
There is no magic, we just have to learn and grow.
That's the preliminary. I'll have to take some time to think about that, but it will be affected by those thoughts.
It is more in the realms of "what if?" than anything else.
The start point for the challenge should be to put the accident/catastrophe into a context where there is no regulation, small government, capitalism (in its "best and purest" form).
In my first attempt, I got no further than -
"What would happen next? Nothing. The company would walk away from the well, start a new one, and assess any 'recovery' in the light of cost against the potential damage caused by water getting into the oil-bearing structures underground."
That is based upon the "cost minimisation/profit maximisation" concept.
I hear a very loud echo of that same principle from the CEO of BP in his replies to the Senate Committee of Enquiry. I mean to say, what the h3!! was that Congressman from Texas expecting him to say? That "it was all my fault"? Not when your insurance is hanging by a very thin thread you do not.
And so it goes...
So nobody would object to oil washing up on their shore, or killing their fishing income?
Yes, they would.
What power would they have? What kind of remedies?
Take BP to Court? Sure!! How much could they raise to fund a suit against BP? $10 million? $100 million? Spare change out of the $20 billion lodged by BP.
It is a case of realities... and remember; no government involvement.
Seeing as we're pretending the world started yesterday, just as it is now but with no government, I'm sure you are aware that I could buy a .50 caliber sniper rifle right now and take care of the bastards myself. I'd need help with intel, but it could be done.
Mr Al,
Your criticism has been overly harsh.
I would like to inform you that BP and President Oh-bummer have developed superpowers called Oil Dissolving Super Eye Power. What they do is to stare intently at the oil and begin chanting a special mantra.
After enough days of changing, money will suddenly appear and the oil will be sucked out by other people using some special straw.
In this regard, President Oh-bummer was correct to say that he was unable to "suck the oil out with a straw". He needed to keep chanting the mantra.
We hope this allays your fears of the oil reaching your home.
for Bee Pee
Excellent analysis, tef!
Post a Comment