Government, rich people, little people, and business

[scaeagles]

Apaprently, a bill in Congress is being opposed by democrats, with some calling it a get rich quick scheme for oil companies. The primary focus of the bill is to help relieve the vulnerability of energy supplies by allowing and encouraging construction and expansion of existing refineries and power plants. There are probably some provisions that could be eliminated, such as relaxed environmental regulations, and I think it is possible to eliminate those whether in debate or committee.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/07/D8D3903O1.html

We have not built a new refinery since the 70s. When a hurricane can damage supply and cause 40% jumps in gas prices in a matter of weeks, perhaps we should look at addressing the issue. Helping the rich oil companies? I have no doubt profits for them will be involved, but considering every person in the country is affected by increasing energy prices, with the poor paying a higher percentage of their income for it, I think that argument falls flat. Maybe it's just me.

Then we have this story. Apparently it's OK to look out for an industry where the average salary is well over a million dollars.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...0902-5838r.htm

It makes me sick that the government decides it's OK to build a ball park where people own property and then use eminent domain to evict them. I don't think a baseball stadium is of such high national importance that it's OK to kick people off their property. Some government officials are complaining about the owners not negotiating in "good faith". Why the hell should they have to negotiate at all if they don't want to sell? Oh - I forgot...the supreme court says it's OK for government to take the property.

So in conclusion, it's OK to take property from the little guy if it benefits the government and baseball. It's not OK to allow for private industry to build oil refineries and expand their own facilities because they will get too much profit, even though increased refining capacity benefits everyone.

[sleepyjeff]

That's what it's really all about. Taxes and regulations are not really about money or public safety....it's all about punishing those who dare to be sucessfull.

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

It makes me sick that the government decides it's OK to build a ball park where people own property and then use eminent domain to evict them. I don't think a baseball stadium is of such high national importance that it's OK to kick people off their property.

Go talk to your buddy Dubya about the abuse of eminent domain laws and baseball stadiums. Texas, circa 1991.

[scaeagles]

Sac, sac, sac.....why do you think I support everything he does? I clearly don't.

While I am not familiar with the case you cite, it happened here in AZ with the building of the Bank One Ballpark (Chase field now). Literally kicked an 80 year old woman out of her home when she had lived there since she was 7 YEARS OLD.

It sucks. I am so sick of hearing about rich, private companies making profits when this kind of crap goes on.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Oh - I forgot...the supreme court says it's OK for government to take the property.

Actually, it is the Constitution that says it is ok for the government to take property. It isn't like eminent domain was a creation of the Warren court. The current argument is simply about when the government can take property.

If urban renewal and blight mitigation is ever a justification (and I'm not saying it is, then the neighborhood in question is a good candidate. With only four residential structures, probably not tenant owned, the specter of forced evictions isn't that bothersome since they'd be equally evicted if the owners sold willingly. The majority of the area is ramshackle industrial use or the type of commercial use that tends to border industrial areas.

This site has good photos of what the D.C. city planners are trying to clean up. I'm not a big fan of eminent domain and think it is overused, but a city-owned ballpark is a public use (even if they then allow themselves to be raped on the leases and concessions) and I can't put this into the category of one of the extremely bothersome cases (as in Kelso where there wasn't even a solid plan for re-use of the seized property).

[innerSpaceman]

scaeagles, are you saying that since there's some unfairness and corruption in the world, we should allow all unfairness and corruption until all of it can be vanquished?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

scaeagles, are you saying that since there's some unfairness and corruption in the world, we should allow all unfairness and corruption until all of it can be vanquished?

I guess I don't see the oil company profits as unfair. I'm sorry if this make me some sort of fascist.

[Scrooge McSam]

Who actually believes oil companies are being prevented from building refineries?

Oil companies can build refineries and improve the ones they already own IF THEY FOLLOW REGULATIONS.

But the oil companies don't want to do that, do they?

They'd rather piss and moan about government regulations holding them down and trust the public to be ignorant enough to buy that argument, even when the oil companies are pulling down record profits.

Looks like it's working quite well for them, doesn't it?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Scrooge McSam

Oil companies can build refineries and improve the ones they already own IF THEY FOLLOW REGULATIONS.

But the oil companies don't want to do that, do they?

They'd rather piss and moan about government regulations holding them down and trust the public to be ignorant enough to buy that argument, even when the oil companies are pulling down record profits.

Looks like it's working quite well for them, doesn't it?

And the have deemed that the regulations reduce their profits too much. This is their decision to make, no one elses. They have a fiduciary responsibility to their investors to make a profit.

I believe businesses of all types are over regulated. Some regulation, is of course, required. However, most of it gets ridiculous.

As an example, since the Enron scandal and others, I now spend between 40-50% of my time estimating how long a certain project will take, documenting actual time, filling out forms, blah, blah, blah. I have had program changes requested of my by users (I program accounting software for a defense contractor) that are simple and would literally take 15 minutes to do. However, the bureaucracy involved of estimation and tracking and filling out of forms turns this 15 minute task into about a 4 hour one. Simply insane.

Show me collusion or price fixing between the oil companies, or some illegal activity, and then we can take action on that. A private company making a profit is not illegal in the least.

And Alex, I know that eminent domain has always existed. I simply doubt it was ever intended to allow private property to be confiscated for uses such as a ballpark. Perhaps the property should be condemned, I don't know. I will admit to being hyper sensitive to eminent domain issues, but rightly so because of a recent ruling.

I fear the government much more than I fear private enterprise.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I fear the government much more than I fear private enterprise.

I fear/trust them both in about equal amounts...but the fear part seems to be the one that gets multiplied when they start working together.