Offshore Drilling Ban to be Lifted by Bush

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Do you believe that Enron (and World-Com, etc.) are the exception or the rule? I believe they are they exception. No, it is not a perfect world. Yes, there are greedy people in it (and there always will be).

You cannot make rules which limit growth. Otherwise, this country will stagnate and die. Yes, someone will always find a loophole. When that happens, you deal with it.

Deregulation is not a blanket bad thing. Many instances have benefited you and I - the American People (splitting up Ma Bell for example).

You obviously do not have Qwest as your answer to the MA Bell divestiture. I miss PNW Bell, as do most people around here.

Enron is the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps you can point out companies or examples that support your stance? I'll willingly change my tune if given some positive input. Oh, and the rules did not limit growth- they limited graft.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

You obviously do not have Qwest as your answer to the MA Bell divestiture. I miss PNW Bell, as do most people around here.

Let's see: we now have CHOICES in phone service. There is major competition amongst phone companies for your business. New products, services, and technologies, which we may or may not have seen without the breakup, have appeared (I believe mostly not, but we will never know).

Qwest and Worldcom were individual instances of this being less than a perfect world (something I have repeatedly acknowldged). But I believe that our economy is generally better off with de-regulation.

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Oh, and the rules did not limit growth- they limited graft.

Usually, the rules which keep monopolies in place and over-regulate industries limit competition which takes away the incentives for companies to innovate and grow. That is an econmics 101 lesson.

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Perhaps you can point out companies or examples that support your stance? I'll willingly change my tune if given some positive input.

It wouldn't be companies to point out, it would be industries. I believe that the phone company is a good example of that. No, it is not perfect, but I believe we are much better off overall with a deregulated phone system.

I am sorry I cannot expand on that, but I am running short of time.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I truly believe that what the American Public is sick of the current two-party system and would like to see all of the old stalwarts (from BOTH parties) go away.

I would! I hate both parties. I have for a long time. Neither of them represent my feelings particularly well. I really wish a gajillion people would vote for the third-party candidates and show our discontent.

As for off-shore drilling, I don't really trust its safety. Things happen. Safety costs money. Nor do I think it will do much to lower gas prices.

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Do you believe that Enron (and World-Com, etc.) are the exception or the rule? I believe they are they exception.

The more profit available, the more likely to have another Enron. So maybe Enron is not the rule now, but likely to be in the future.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Let's see: we now have CHOICES in phone service. There is major competition amongst phone companies for your business. New products, services, and technologies, which we may or may not have seen without the breakup, have appeared (I believe mostly not, but we will never know).

Qwest and Worldcom were individual instances of this being less than a perfect world (something I have repeatedly acknowldged). But I believe that our economy is generally better off with de-regulation.




Usually, the rules which keep monopolies in place and over-regulate industries limit competition which takes away the incentives for companies to innovate and grow. That is an econmics 101 lesson.
It wouldn't be companies to point out, it would be industries. I believe that the phone company is a good example of that. No, it is not perfect, but I believe we are much better off overall with a deregulated phone system.

I am sorry I cannot expand on that, but I am running short of time.

Uhm, I believe there are many other places across this great nation who would agree that the companies they now deal with are far less service oriented, more expensive and provide really crappy product. I'm not saying deregulating (or rather, breaking up the monopoly of) the telephone industry was bad, just that it's not really proved to be much of a boon to anyone other than some CEO's that get paid way too much for too little.


Oh, and Kevy? I had two years in Gen.Business- studied macro and micro econ, administrative law, etc. Had a 3.9 average. Don't need the econ 101 lesson, but I appreciate your concern. I'm also wondering about the industries statement- which industries are doing better now (besides Wal-Mart style retail) and do they not have companies that carry out their production? I am hard pressed to find anything doing well in this economy, excepting the aforementioned Wally World.