Offshore Drilling Ban to be Lifted by Bush

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

But I don't think oil companies are evil.

I don't think they are evil either, however I do think that public policy should value their interests below the interests of society and the planet.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I don't think they are evil either, however I do think that public policy should value their interests below the interests of society and the planet.

And that is a completely rational thing to want/expect. I don't think the policy of drilling now, though, puts the interests of society at risk - i see it as win-win. Cheaper gas (and grated that will take a bit) while other techs and infrastructure are developed and implemented. The planet? Yeah, accidents can happen. we had 3 mile island and Chernobyl but yet nuke power has advanced to the point of extreme safety.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I don't think they are evil either, however I do think that public policy should value their interests below the interests of society and the planet.

Is that an absolute? If so, then every single car would need to be taken off the road tomorrow (and every airplane grounded, every non-electric train, etc.). All fossil fuel burning power plants would need to be shut down. All sorts of things would have to happen that would not only be extremely inconvenient and dangerous to every person in this country, but would also send the economy into a complete tailspin.

We make the decision every time we get into our car, that today, our personal interests are more important than that of society and the planet.

Both personally and globally, we are making risk/reward assessments. No, oil exploration is not 100% safe - there will be a small amount of damage to the environment. But I believe that (as long as it is on US soil), it will be safe and will have negligible impact on the surrounding environment. Increasing our (the US) capability to be self-sustaining improves the safety of our country, economically and politically.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Is that an absolute? If so, then every single car would need to be taken off the road tomorrow (and every airplane grounded, every non-electric train, etc.).

No, because that would not be in society's interest

All fossil fuel burning power plants would need to be shut down. All sorts of things would have to happen that would not only be extremely inconvenient and dangerous to every person in this country, but would also send the economy into a complete tailspin.

What part of that is in society's interest?

I did not say I don't think oil companies should be allowed profit. But, as I've stated above, the only benefit I see from off shore drilling is to the oil companies, not to us. I don't expect it to lower prices to consumers. I don't expect it to lessen our dependence on foreign oil to any appreciable degree. I don't expect it to forestall the inevitable day when the world's oil supplies can no longer support us. And I do expect it to delay the hopefully inevitable day when we no longer need oil. All I expect it to do is temporarily allow the oil companies larger profit margins due to lower cost of oil speculation.

if they were make $9 million profit on $100 million in sales, there would be no problem. $9 billion on $100 billion is somehow a problem.

You know I seem to recall you chastising Obama for not being charitable enough because he had such a high income. Why do you hold an individual to such sliding scale and not an entity? If his willingness to part with his money for the greater good increases with increased income, why not the oil companies?

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

No, because that would not be in society's interest.

But it would be in the PLANET'S best interest. Is society more important than the planet?

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

What part of that is in society's interest?

See my response above.

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

But, as I've stated above, the only benefit I see from off shore drilling is to the oil companies, not to us. I don't expect it to lower prices to consumers. I don't expect it to lessen our dependence on foreign oil to any appreciable degree. I don't expect it to forestall the inevitable day when the world's oil supplies can no longer support us. And I do expect it to delay the hopefully inevitable day when we no longer need oil. All I expect it to do is temporarily allow the oil companies larger profit margins due to lower cost of oil speculation.

I guess we will have to disagree on this as while I don't believe that it will eliminate our dependence on foreign oil, I do believe that it WILL give us less exposure to the whims of madmen of the world and give us more flexibility. It probably won't lower prices (or if it does, it won't be by much) but I don't believe that it will increase oil company profits (or if it does, it won't be by much).

How about the fact that it WILL provide jobs for Americans? Is that something of relevance? It isn't a major factor in the decision, but it is still there.

ETA: and do you believe that an oil company making a profit is in no way beneficial to you? Who is it that benefits from oil company profits? As I stated above, more than 50% of the ownership of EM is institutional holders: Joe Public and his pension. Individual stockholders are negligible in this equation.

One last thing: EM's recent quarterly profit at 9% is DOWN from 2007 when they made 10.9%

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

But it would be in the PLANET'S best interest. Is society more important than the planet?

Sigh, I don't believe I have to be this pedantic, but if you want to play that game let's play.

Sustainability of our society with as minimal impact to the planet as possible is the goal. Finding that balance is no easy task and I don't claim to have the answers. However, when I see a public policy decision that clearly serves neither of those goals I do not find it difficult to be indignant about it.

Yes, it would provide jobs for Americans, but (to be ridiculously pedantic), so building oil burning factories. Should we do that? Think of the jobs!

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Sustainability of our society with as minimal impact to the planet as possible is the goal. Finding that balance is no easy task and I don't claim to have the answers. However, when I see a public policy decision that clearly serves neither of those goals I do not find it difficult to be indignant about it.

Again, we clearly disagree. I DO believe that oil exploration and tapping into those oil reserves has a relevant benefit to society and does it with minimal risk to the environment.

To me, it is a public policy decision that benefits society.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

You know I seem to recall you chastising Obama for not being charitable enough because he had such a high income. Why do you hold an individual to such sliding scale and not an entity? If his willingness to part with his money for the greater good increases with increased income, why not the oil companies?

Fair enough. I have no idea what the charitable contributions of oil corporations are. I admit that I'm not sure why I view a corporation as different than an individual when it comes to charitable giving.