Finally finished

[Woody]

my statement about legislation has to do with what those companies have done in the past in terms of environmental damage, not wealth. Any resource company is held to very strict standards because in the past they destroyed areas, plain and simple. Granted, at the time it was not a well known issue.

Do you look to the government to solve all your problems?

[Woody]

my statement about legislation has to do with what those companies have done in the past in terms of environmental damage,

I will finish your thought, if I may...
The oil companies have proven they can't be trusted to be responsible.

In that case the government has proven they also can't be trusted time and time again.

So, why trust them?

[(MT)Montanafowler]

"spread the wealth" statement, care to explain?

You want the tax payer money to be spent on environmental issues, john smith does not... you want the government to forcefully take John's money and use it as you see fit.

explain where i said anything about anyone else's tax money, i said MY tax money. And whether you like it or not, the govt. is already using tax money as they see fit, for shit nobody wants. You seem to forget that the govt. answers to us, we choose how our money that we so generously "give" them should be spent.

Do you think it's possible to control big oil with your checkbook?

On my own, no.
as a group in the economy we have now, no.
in a purely capitalistic society, as a group, yes.

and how are we going to go from where we are to a purely capitalistic society?

That is the exact attitude that has us where we are today.

short of a revolution, i just don't see how we could realistically change the entire system. that's just reality.

it appears to me that we're waaaaaay beyond killing an oil company with capitalism. How would you propose we control those companies?

If you think we operate in a free market right now... you are crazy.

i know we don't have a free market, so how do you propose we control those companies Mr. Capitalist?

my statement about legislation has to do with what those companies have done in the past in terms of environmental damage, not wealth. Any resource company is held to very strict standards because in the past they destroyed areas, plain and simple. Granted, at the time it was not a well known issue.

Do you look to the government to solve all your problems?

don't be stupid. i'd be happy if the whole fucking thing collapsed. right now though we have parameters in place that we have to work within, so how do you manipulate those companies to do what the public wants?

[(MT)Montanafowler]

my statement about legislation has to do with what those companies have done in the past in terms of environmental damage,

I will finish your thought, if I may...
The oil companies have proven they can't be trusted to be responsible.

In that case the government has proven they also can't be trusted time and time again.

So, why trust them?

you can't, plain and simple.

[bill herian]

Do you think it's possible to control big oil with your checkbook?

On my own, no.
as a group in the economy we have now, no.
in a purely capitalistic society, as a group, yes.

So everything you said is strictly hypothetical?

The company may not want the regulation, but I bet they don't mind having that guy around making sure they don't run afoul. You can say its all bullshit to begin with, and you might be right, but that's a cop out. You don't really address anything.

Sorry for repeating you MT, you snuck in ahead of me.

[Woody]

don't be stupid. i'd be happy if the whole fucking thing collapsed. right now though we have parameters in place that we have to work within, so how do you manipulate those companies to do what the public wants?

We have slowly let them take more and more freedoms, because people looked at the current and said, 'it is not that bad'.

i know we don't have a free market, so how do you propose we control those companies Mr. Capitalist?

Change the current situation.

short of a revolution, i just don't see how we could realistically change the entire system. that's just reality.

I am sure quite a few people said that in the 1770s...

and how are we going to go from where we are to a purely capitalistic society?

I don't have that answer... However, I do know that standing by idly is what got us here.

explain where i said anything about anyone else's tax money

I think you should be able to figure that out, without to much trouble.

[one2many]

broccoli....congrats
i lasted 2 weeks in school. i was a touch wild in my youth.
welcome to the next chapter in your life

[Woody]

my statement about legislation has to do with what those companies have done in the past in terms of environmental damage,

I will finish your thought, if I may...
The oil companies have proven they can't be trusted to be responsible.

In that case the government has proven they also can't be trusted time and time again.

So, why trust them?

you can't, plain and simple.

Then why are you?

[Woody]

Do you think it's possible to control big oil with your checkbook?

On my own, no.
as a group in the economy we have now, no.
in a purely capitalistic society, as a group, yes.

So everything you said is strictly hypothetical?

The company may not want the regulation, but I bet they don't mind having that guy around making sure they don't run afoul. You can say its all bullshit to begin with, and you might be right, but that's a cop out. You don't really address anything.

Sorry for repeating you MT, you snuck in ahead of me.

I am saying that government shouldn't be imposing the regulations. If the regulations were not there, the oil company wouldn't hire the guy/gal. If that were the case, a separate entity, like DU, would keep tabs on the ecological impacts of the oil company, and the citizens would keep them in check.

Like I said the position within the oil company is not needed... not the profession itself.

[bill herian]

So what responsibility does a group like DU take on exactly?

[(MT)Montanafowler]

We have slowly let them take more and more freedoms, because people looked at the current and said, 'it is not that bad'.

i know we don't have a free market, so how do you propose we control those companies Mr. Capitalist?

Change the current situation.

short of a revolution, i just don't see how we could realistically change the entire system. that's just reality.

I am sure quite a few people said that in the 1770s...

and how are we going to go from where we are to a purely capitalistic society?

I don't have that answer... However, I do know that standing by idly is what got us here.

explain where i said anything about anyone else's tax money

I think you should be able to figure that out, without to much trouble.

No worries Bill, you summed it up well


Woody, this is about telling a company that they can't destroy an ecosystem. We, the people decided that. not the government. this isn't taking away freedom, this is telling that company that they can't release arsenic and heavy metals into watersheds. You want DU to manage it, don't you think they have just as much of an agenda as the next guy? you have only posted hypotheticals that mean diddly, the legislation is already in place and has been for a while.

Then why are you?

I don't.

[(MT)Montanafowler]

I am saying that government shouldn't be imposing the regulations. If the regulations were not there, the oil company wouldn't hire the guy/gal. If that were the case, a separate entity, like DU, would keep tabs on the ecological impacts of the oil company, and the citizens would keep them in check.

Like I said the position within the oil company is not needed... not the profession itself.

so you want everyone else to be their brother's keeper? Who pays the salary of the biologist in charge of watching over that company?

based on your prior answers, i'd expect you to say he's gonna do it pro bono.


Why not just tell the company they need a biologist to make sure they keep their shit on the up and up?

[bill herian]

I think the conclusion that we are trying to arrive at here is that the Fed should keep their nose out of issues that states should be working out for themselves. At least that's where I hope we're going.

[(MT)Montanafowler]

I think the conclusion that we are trying to arrive at here is that the Fed should keep their nose out of issues that states should be working out for themselves. At least that's where I hope we're going.

agreed But an Environmental Biologist can still make bango bucks at a resource extraction company whether Woody thinks it's bullshit or not.

[Woody]

So what responsibility does a group like DU take on exactly?

MISSION STATEMENT
Ducks Unlimited conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America's waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.

I would say "conserve... wetlands and associated habitats" covers prevention of oil spills.

But that is just one example, I have always been of the belief that just about anything the government can do the People could do better.


To be honest, after thinking about it, this could limitedly fall under regulating the general welfare, but I hesitate to lend power in any way to the federal government.

[Woody]

I don't want to be rude or insulting to you, I generally think you are a good guy.

based on your prior answers, i'd expect you to say he's gonna do it pro bono.

But if that is what you got from what I wrote... You have a lack in reading comprehension.

[(MT)Montanafowler]

So what responsibility does a group like DU take on exactly?

MISSION STATEMENT
Ducks Unlimited conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America's waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.

I would say "conserve... wetlands and associated habitats" covers prevention of oil spills.

But that is just one example, I have always been of the belief that just about anything the government can do the People could do better.


To be honest, after thinking about it, this could limitedly fall under regulating the general welfare, but I hesitate to lend power in any way to the federal government.

I understand where you're coming from, but I would say that your proposal would actually strip more freedom from a given company than government regulation because you've made it someone else's job to watch over that company, rather than just require them to hire personnel to regulate themselves. you now have someone in power who is not associated with that company in any way, shape or form calling the shots. that won't go over well.

you separate the govt and the people. we the people, are the government. they answer to us.

[Woody]

We have slowly let them take more and more freedoms, because people looked at the current and said, 'it is not that bad'.

i know we don't have a free market, so how do you propose we control those companies Mr. Capitalist?

Change the current situation.

short of a revolution, i just don't see how we could realistically change the entire system. that's just reality.

I am sure quite a few people said that in the 1770s...

and how are we going to go from where we are to a purely capitalistic society?

I don't have that answer... However, I do know that standing by idly is what got us here.

explain where i said anything about anyone else's tax money

I think you should be able to figure that out, without to much trouble.

No worries Bill, you summed it up well


Woody, this is about telling a company that they can't destroy an ecosystem. We, the people decided that. not the government. this isn't taking away freedom, this is telling that company that they can't release arsenic and heavy metals into watersheds. You want DU to manage it, don't you think they have just as much of an agenda as the next guy? you have only posted hypotheticals that mean diddly, the legislation is already in place and has been for a while.

Then why are you?

I don't.

I would say your statements say otherwise.

The government has proven over and over again, they will pervert any and every power they have to be more than it was originally meant to be. My first job out of college, I (and 15-20 others) was on staff to do two things, one of those was to navigate government regulations and bureaucracy dealing with the clean air act. And my second responsibility was only there because of the CAA. Trust me when I tell you there are most certainly many examples of the government going to far in ecological dealings, and if they haven't already they will. It is self preservation and just like a wild animal they will fight to be on top and stay alive.

[Woody]

So what responsibility does a group like DU take on exactly?

MISSION STATEMENT
Ducks Unlimited conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America's waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.

I would say "conserve... wetlands and associated habitats" covers prevention of oil spills.

But that is just one example, I have always been of the belief that just about anything the government can do the People could do better.


To be honest, after thinking about it, this could limitedly fall under regulating the general welfare, but I hesitate to lend power in any way to the federal government.

I understand where you're coming from, but I would say that your proposal would actually strip more freedom from a given company than government regulation because you've made it someone else's job to watch over that company, rather than just require them to hire personnel to regulate themselves. you now have someone in power who is not associated with that company in any way, shape or form calling the shots. that won't go over well.

you separate the govt and the people. we the people, are the government. they answer to us.

No they will hire personnel of their own want and need if the People make it to the company's benefit.

[Woody]

I think the conclusion that we are trying to arrive at here is that the Fed should keep their nose out of issues that states should be working out for themselves. At least that's where I hope we're going.

Bingo!
That or the People should be in charge of it.

[Woody]

I think the conclusion that we are trying to arrive at here is that the Fed should keep their nose out of issues that states should be working out for themselves. At least that's where I hope we're going.

agreed But an Environmental Biologist can still make bango bucks at a resource extraction company whether Woody thinks it's bullshit or not.

Trust me I know someone can make "bango" bucks working a job thats soul existence stems from government regulation, doesn't make it right. If you can sleep at night knowing that your job fits that description, good for you. I couldn't.

[(MT)Montanafowler]

I think the conclusion that we are trying to arrive at here is that the Fed should keep their nose out of issues that states should be working out for themselves. At least that's where I hope we're going.

agreed But an Environmental Biologist can still make bango bucks at a resource extraction company whether Woody thinks it's bullshit or not.

Trust me I know someone can make "bango" bucks working a job thats soul existence stems from government regulation, doesn't make it right. If you can sleep at night knowing that your job fits that description, good for you. I couldn't.

believe me, i want no part of it. i try to not let money dictate my life.

[Woody]

Well to that...

"money doesn't buy happiness," said by some poor guy

[DeadEye_Dan]

It's a slippery slope.

[Redbeard]

It's a slippery slope.

haha!

[bill herian]

So what responsibility does a group like DU take on exactly?

MISSION STATEMENT
Ducks Unlimited conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America's waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.

I would say "conserve... wetlands and associated habitats" covers prevention of oil spills.

You're diluted.

[RonE]

The way I see it, it that the University of California Davis hired some hippies that started an environmental sciences degree program and graduated some other hippie tree huggers. The tree huggers didn't have a job or any prospect for one so the State of California in their "share the wealth, commie pinko, wisdom" created government jobs for the hippies with environmental sciences degrees. Their jobs amounted to fucking with and fucking up projects that were going forth for the betterment of mankind. This environmental tampering resulted in higher costs for producers and developers and higher prices for consumers. Simple as that!

Along the way in the early 1970's the UC Davis came up with "Earth Day" to make Tree hugging, bunny fucking, commie pinko hippies feel good about themselves.

Drive by Davis on highway 80 and you will see that the enlightened city fathers have declared it a nuclear free zone and a gun free zone.

[RonE]

The way I see it, it that the University of California Davis hired some hippies that started an environmental sciences degree program and graduated some other hippie tree huggers. The tree huggers didn't have a job or any prospect for one so the State of California in their "share the wealth, commie pinko, wisdom" created government jobs for the hippies with environmental sciences degrees. Their jobs amounted to fucking with and fucking up projects that were going forth for the betterment of mankind. This environmental tampering resulted in higher costs for producers and developers and higher prices for consumers. Simple as that!

Along the way in the early 1970's the UC Davis came up with "Earth Day" to make Tree hugging, bunny fucking, commie pinko hippies feel good about themselves.

Drive by Davis on highway 80 and you will see that the enlightened city fathers have declared it a nuclear free zone and a gun free zone.

[The Duck Hammer]

How do you see it Ron?

[Feelin' Fowl]

How do you see it Ron?