lax regulations result in no drinking water for 300k. thanks Freedom Industries

[Jhoon]

over the river right now in philadelphia, there is a train tilted to the side, loaded with oil. if it wouldve tipped over, it would of been one of many accidents via rails in the us over the last few months. but lets pick our poison: train derailment or a sweet ass pipe leak from canada to Mexico? this is the issue that americans are being faced with.

 

[DEAD7]

over the river right now in philadelphia, there is a train tilted to the side, loaded with oil. if it wouldve tipped over, it would of been one of many accidents via rails in the us over the last few months. but lets pick our poison: train derailment or a sweet ass pipe leak from canada to Mexico? this is the issue that americans are being faced with.

You are framing these accidents as a choice?

I'm a little slow, could you explain what you mean?

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

HL did this to Dead7 in this thread...

 

[DEAD7]

HL did this to Dead7 in this thread...

ya being anti govt. on a liberal board is rough

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

HL did this to Dead7 in this thread...

This could be a gun company shooting animals en masse to test out new calibers and he would be like " dont you guys realize that more regulations will only make americans lose jobs and hurt the economy? Why punish the companies ?"

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

ya being anti govt. on a liberal board is rough

Being anti-public water safety isn't anti-government, it's just obtuse and irrational.

 

[The Real]

Being anti-public water safety isn't anti-government, it's just obtuse and irrational.

Nobody has a right to water, though. That would be extreme.

 

[Jhoon]

Being anti-public water safety isn't anti-government, it's just obtuse and irrational.

companies should wantonly harm the enviroment and the people who live in because eventually the company will go bankrupt. the guy isnt obtuse, hes just a conservative. in my household, being a conservative means you get ignored and fed scraps of bootstraps.

 

[DEAD7]

Being anti-public water safety isn't anti-government, it's just obtuse and irrational.

Nobody has a right to water, though. That would be extreme.

companies should wantonly harm the enviroment and the people who live in because eventually the company will go bankrupt. the guy isnt obtuse, hes just a conservative. in my household, being a conservative means you get ignored and fed scraps of bootstraps.

Since not one of you has denied that the corp is protected by govt., I'm going to assume we agree on that and your liberality wont let you articulate it.

What I want to know now, is how does me wanting those responsible harshly punished equate to not caring about those poisoned or water?
Its like you guys are making this stuff up as you go... how does me taking a stance of lets say -low regulation, but anyone found contaminating water is to be shot- equal i dont care? Is govt. regulation really all you guys can see? No regulation equals no care? its completely idiotic.

 

[The Real]

Since not one of you has denied that the corp is protected by govt., I'm going to assume we agree on that and your liberality wont let you articulate it.

What I want to know now, is how does me wanting those responsible harshly punished equate to not caring about those poisoned or water?
Its like you guys are making this stuff up as you go... how does me taking a stance of lets say -low regulation, but anyone found contaminating water is to be shot- equal i dont care? Is govt. regulation really all you guys can see? No regulation equals no care? its completely idiotic.

When did I say you didn't care about the poisoned people or water? I just think you are misguided as to the precise nature of the problem and its solutions.

 

[DEAD7]

This could be a gun company shooting animals en masse to test out new calibers and he would be like " dont you guys realize that more regulations will only make americans lose jobs and hurt the economy? Why punish the companies ?"

Yep, i'd only want the company and those involved punished.

 

[DEAD7]

When did I say you didn't care about the poisoned people or water? I just think you are misguided as to the precise nature of the problem and its solutions.

I just think accountability is more cost effective approach.

I honestly didnt think it would be taken as being extreme or ridiculous.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Cant argue with that. I just know the regulation will be for show/votes, and not really provide a worthwhile reduction in risk. The regulations in place already are more than enough, and this was simply an accident.




I just hope you see the connection between "I don't give a fukk if it adds costs to businesses" and jobs being shipped over seas.

What's the point of having businesses here if we can't even drink our own fukking water?

 

[tru_m.a.c]

They are protected by govt. why exactly does it matter to you which level of govt. it is? Is it ok at the state level? or ok at the fed level?
To answer you, its the federal govt. that is protecting them.
In practice bankruptcy is exactly the same as a bailout, as they are demonstrating. I am not a supporter of bankruptcy across the board, but I get why its appealing.



I'm not quite clear on what you are trying to say Are you saying they are not being protected by govt. and/or escaping through govt. created loopholes? If not, I dont see what we are disagreeing on....

Bankruptcy is available to everyone. Companies, for no fault of their own, could be hit with a ridiculous amount of suits that completely wipe out their ability to operate. Individuals could be hit with a ridiculous amount of suits that can completely wipe out their ability to rebound in life. Bankruptcy is there to protect them from a run off on finances. It serves a purpose in society. It serves its purpose rather well.

In THIS SPECIFIC situation, THIS SPECIFIC organization, is PURPOSELY taking advantage of the bankruptcy laws as a way of legal insurance fraud and wealth transfer. That does NOT mean the "government" is protecting them. Your wording implies that the government is encouraging the actions of freedom industries. The organization is HIDING behind a law. Two very different ideas.

And again about the different levels of government. This is where your ideology gets exposed. According to you, the "government" (and then as you later specified - the federal government), is protecting Freedom Industries. So what happens when The State of West Virginia or the City of Charleston, West Virginia sues Freedom Industries (not that they can anymore since the organization filed for bankruptcy). If we put your ideology into an equation, it would say, "the government is suing the government with the help of the government."

Each branch, each level of government, has a responsibility to what it considers its "constituents." You fail to see, and you fail to understand, that local, state, and federal authorities are not 1 entity. They routinely sue each other. They routinely fight for authority. STATES routinely sue each other as well. So how elementary is your "it's the governments fault" ideology, when there is no singular ideology that constitutes the "Government of the United States."

 

[DEAD7]

Bankruptcy is available to everyone. Companies, for no fault of their own, could be hit with a ridiculous amount of suits that completely wipe out their ability to operate. Individuals could be hit with a ridiculous amount of suits that can completely wipe out their ability to rebound in life. Bankruptcy is there to protect them from a run off on finances. It serves a purpose in society. It serves its purpose rather well.

In THIS SPECIFIC situation, THIS SPECIFIC organization, is PURPOSELY taking advantage of the bankruptcy laws as a way of legal insurance fraud and wealth transfer. That does NOT mean the "government" is protecting them. Your wording implies that the government is encouraging the actions of freedom industries. The organization is HIDING behind a law. Two very different ideas.

And again about the different levels of government. This is where your ideology gets exposed. According to you, the "government" (and then as you later specified - the federal government), is protecting Freedom Industries. So what happens when The State of West Virginia or the City of Charleston, West Virginia sues Freedom Industries (not that they can anymore since the organization filed for bankruptcy). If we put your ideology into an equation, it would say, "the government is suing the government with the help of the government."

Each branch, each level of government, has a responsibility to what it considers its "constituents." You fail to see, and you fail to understand, that local, state, and federal authorities are not 1 entity. They routinely sue each other. They routinely fight for authority. STATES routinely sue each other as well. So how elementary is your "it's the governments fault" ideology, when there is no singular ideology that constitutes the "Government of the United States."

I have already stated i'm against bankruptcy as a whole(for anyone), but understand why its appealing/desirable.
"its the govt's fault" isnt my ideology nor does is it remotely close, so I dont know how to defend that point. Its just a complete fabrication. Whoever subscribes to that I guess has been exposed...



"the government is suing the government with the help of the government."
let me explain what I mean, The federal Govt. charters corporations, making them legal entities through legislation, and granting them limited liability. Then if we take the scenario here and the state takes action against the corp., the provisions provided by the federal govt. will protect the shareholders from harm(the people we really need to be held accountable). In the end the shareholders under this corporate cloud skate away untouched.
To blame any corps without faulting govt.... actually scratch that, to not blame the existence of corps as we know them today on govt. is to ignore facts.

Its more of govt battling the beast it created then govt. vs govt head on as you suggest.

I'd post the link again explaining how corps must be registered by the federal govt. to come into existence yadayadayada and how the benefits of being a corp come from govt. but I dont think you guys are interested in the facts