The Libertarian world without regulations EXPLODES IN TEXAS'S FACE. Literally.

[LJ_Reloaded]

West Fertilizer was not adequately regulated.

They were allowed to self-report their issues, and were not actively monitored by the government.

As a result their fertilizer plant exploded and killed 70 people.

Lesson learned, eh Libertarians? Here's your world without regulations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlMQAZEUrjI

Own it, bitches!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So fucking what?

How long and how many plants have operated like this to have just one accident?

Look at all the regulations that added to the cost of energy that did not stop the Gulf Oil Spill...

You can bet that all the other plants are now inspecting and that the lawsuits and criminal charges will be at the forefront of their minds because that really cuts into their evil profits.

This is as poor a charge as your latest attempts at economic explanation.

 

[kbate]

BP and the Oil industry are heavily regulated and monitored. Their Deep Sea Horizon drilling platform exploded, sank and polluted the gulf with millions of barrels of oil.

That's regulated society for you.

own it bitch.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/18/us/texas-explosion/index.html

Worst-case scenario
In 2006, West Fertilizer had a complaint filed against it for a lingering smell of ammonia, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality website shows.
Separately, the plant had informed the Environmental Protection Agency that it presented no risk of fire or explosion, according to The Dallas Morning News. It did so in an emergency planning report required of facilities that use toxic or hazardous chemicals.
The plant's report to the EPA said even a worst-case scenario wouldn't be that dire: there would be a 10-minute release of ammonia gas that wouldn't kill or injure anyone, the newspaper reported.

You two were saying?

The next time you start thinking of claiming my facts are wrong, STOP. You're just going to embarrass yourself. Horribly.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Libertarianism BLOWING UP IN YOUR FACE..... LITERALLY, on video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROrpKx3aIjA

KABOOOOOOOOOOM goes your no-regulation paradise!!!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/18/us/texas-explosion/index.html

You two were saying?

The next time you start thinking of claiming my facts are wrong, STOP. You're just going to embarrass yourself. Horribly.

In PM's were discussing just how looney tunes you are.

Here, we are still waiting for you to produce some of the facts that we asked for.

Complaining of ammonia smell around a fertilizer plant.

Really? If it was completely hands-off...

Why was the ERA involved?

It sounds more like,

YOUR

GOVERNMENT

DROPPED THE BALL

WERE THEY BRIBED, IGNORANT OR INCOMPETENT?

(I used the caps because I know how you crazy people relate to them.)

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Just so the passing reader understands, this is what Libertarianism is all about:

The Government should not interfere in a business's operations.

Therefore West Fertilizer should not have been subject to any regulations at all.

West Fertilizer was, in fact, subject to few if any regulations. As a direct result of the government NOT interfering with West Fertilizer's negligent behavior, thus satisfying the Libertarian fantasy, their plant exploded.

4est dumbass here is trying to argue that this isn't what happened.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Just so the passing reader understands, this is what Libertarianism is all about:

The Government should not interfere in a business's operations.

Therefore West Fertilizer should not have been subject to any regulations at all.

West Fertilizer was, in fact, subject to few if any regulations. As a direct result of the government NOT interfering with West Fertilizer's negligent behavior, thus satisfying the Libertarian fantasy, their plant exploded.

4est dumbass here is trying to argue that this isn't what happened.

Yes, because the government does not do it efficiently, it adds cost, it becomes a drag on the economy, killing the middle class and it adds corruption allowing the rich to get richer and still have accidents.

It is the fear of legal consequences that works best to prevent disaster.

Again, how many plants, how many years, how many accidents?

Even our highly regulated nukes have had more "incidents" than what you have managed to provide. You cannot indict the whole because of the one on the flimsy basis of a video...

 

[mercury14]

BP and the Oil industry are heavily regulated and monitored. Their Deep Sea Horizon drilling platform exploded, sank and polluted the gulf with millions of barrels of oil.

That's regulated society for you.

own it bitch.

It's the product of their lobbying for insufficient regulations, not sufficient regulations. If there were sufficient regulations there would have been a law saying that underwater oil drillers have to have a way to plug leaks.

A wiser person than you would compare a regulated oil drilling world with an unregulated one.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Even you admit that there were regulations in place.


This really isn't about Libertarianism, but the logical fallacy of the protective abilities of an omnipotent state. You cannot trade Liberty for security, you end up with neither.

 

[RobDownSouth]

BP and the Oil industry are heavily regulated and monitored. Their Deep Sea Horizon drilling platform exploded, sank and polluted the gulf with millions of barrels of oil.

That's regulated society for you.

own it bitch.

We interrupt this rant to bring you some badly needed reality....

Here in the reality-based world, the blue ribbon commission that investigated the oil spill found that a LACK of sufficient regulation led to a series of poor cost-cutting decisions by BP and Halliburton which in turn led to the catastrophic oil spill.

We now return you to kbate's spittle-flecked rant, already in progress

 

[blulilacgrl]

I think you are confused LJ. Actually the Libertarian party does not favor the eradication of Environmental policies.

The Libertarian platform supports a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of natural resources, believing that private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining such natural resources.[citation needed] The party has also expressed that "governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to the environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection."[50] The party contends that the environment is best protected when individual rights pertaining to natural resources are clearly defined and enforced. The party also contends that free markets and property rights (implicitly, without government intervention) will stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect the environment and ecosystem because environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.[50] 9wikipedia)

Or check out this article for more information. http://www.lp.org/issues/environmenthttp://www.lp.org/issues/environment

Libertarians object to the loss of personal property rights and are not out to discount every regulatory agency.

We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.



Seems to be this incident proved that government is a fucking waste when it comes to oversight and that this is a problem that needs to be addressed.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

We interrupt this rant to bring you some badly needed reality....

Here in the reality-based world, the blue ribbon commission that investigated the oil spill found that a LACK of sufficient regulation led to a series of poor cost-cutting decisions by BP and Halliburton which in turn led to the catastrophic oil spill.

We now return you to kbate's spittle-flecked rant, already in progress

D'ohhhhhhhhh nailed 'em right to the wall!!!

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

It's the product of their lobbying for insufficient regulations, not sufficient regulations. If there were sufficient regulations there would have been a law saying that underwater oil drillers have to have a way to plug leaks.

A wiser person than you would compare a regulated oil drilling world with an unregulated one.

It's not that these people aren't wise. It's that they are deliberately being intellectually dishonest.

The tactic is all about demanding the Government step aside, and then blaming the Government again when things go wrong after it steps aside.

Since this tactic works fabulously among weak-minded Republican voters, there's no reason to expect these Libertarians to stop this dishonest move.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I think you are confused LJ. Actually the Libertarian party does not favor the eradication of Environmental policies.

The Libertarian platform supports a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of natural resources, believing that private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining such natural resources.[citation needed] The party has also expressed that "governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to the environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection."[50] The party contends that the environment is best protected when individual rights pertaining to natural resources are clearly defined and enforced. The party also contends that free markets and property rights (implicitly, without government intervention) will stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect the environment and ecosystem because environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.[50] 9wikipedia)

Or check out this article for more information. http://www.lp.org/issues/environmenthttp://www.lp.org/issues/environment

Libertarians object to the loss of personal property rights and are not out to discount every regulatory agency.

We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.



Seems to be this incident proved that government is a fucking waste when it comes to oversight and that this is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Okay so Libertarians support a "clean and healthy environment and sensible use of natural resources" but nowhere in that pile of text did you indicate that they support the government enforcing pollution controls or inspecting businesses which run a risk of explosions and damage to nearby property.

The best that Libertarianism has for that is MAYBE lawsuits after the fact. That is, those who survived the explosion. Sucks to be you if you died at ground zero.

 

[Busybody]

Obama DID IT

Wants Texans dead

So he can turn it BLUE

 

[blulilacgrl]

Okay so Libertarians support a "clean and healthy environment and sensible use of natural resources" but nowhere in that pile of text did you indicate that they support the government enforcing pollution controls or inspecting businesses which run a risk of explosions and damage to nearby property.

The best that Libertarianism has for that is MAYBE lawsuits after the fact. That is, those who survived the explosion. Sucks to be you if you died at ground zero.

Okay I need to clarify. (It was early in the morning and apparently my brain was not firing completely). Libertarians propose that the government agencies be abolished and in their place private property rights and Conservation Group management of lands take over. This includes the right to restitution and compensation for damages.

The Libertarian Party's platform on environmental issues is thus.

Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet’s climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

You can find a deeper explanation on the Libertarian view here and here.

 

[mercury14]

Okay I need to clarify. (It was early in the morning and apparently my brain was not firing completely). Libertarians propose that the government agencies be abolished and in their place private property rights and Conservation Group management of lands take over. This includes the right to restitution and compensation for damages.

The Libertarian Party's platform on environmental issues is thus.

Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet’s climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

You can find a deeper explanation on the Libertarian view here and here.

The free market is what's destroying the environment. So the Libertarian platform's way to deal with that destruction is to add moar free market. Am I reading that right?

 

[blulilacgrl]

The free market is what's destroying the environment. So the Libertarian platform's way to deal with that destruction is to add moar free market. Am I reading that right?

It is my understanding that the free market is used in conjunction with an individual's right to sue individuals, companies/corporations and the government for environmental issues.

It necessitates an informed public and the thinking is that if you do not like the environmental impact of a company, you should not buy the product. You attack the company through financial incentives. With that comes the idea that there is NO governmental subsidy or backing of companies/corporations. So a corporation is reliant upon only the purchasing individuals.

There is also the case of private property rights and the effects of pollution/etc on individuals. You have the right to sue for damages and restitution if someone (again this can be an individual, corporation, or even the government~ because Libertarians are of the mindset that the government cannot hold sovereign immunity in this arena). They envision something like "In Britain, [where] individuals have property rights in the rivers that run through their land. If someone upstream pollutes the water and harms the fish, the downstream owners don't have to wait for a bureaucratic commission to study the issue. Instead, they immediately sue the polluters to protect their valuable property and claim restitution for damages. As a result, would-be polluters are effectively deterred from damaging the environment." (http://www.ruwart.com/environ2.lpn.wpd.html)


ETA* I would also dispute the notion that the free market is in affect. If it were there are many corporations that would have been demolished years ago. I question how a free market can exist when the government subsidizes and back certain companies. That our tax dollars go to making sure certain companies do not "fail", we are undermining the basic precept of free market, are we not?

 

[KingOrfeo]

BP and the Oil industry are heavily regulated and monitored. . . .

But perhaps more heavily regulated than monitored.

 

[kbate]

It's the product of their lobbying for insufficient regulations, not sufficient regulations. If there were sufficient regulations there would have been a law saying that underwater oil drillers have to have a way to plug leaks.

A wiser person than you would compare a regulated oil drilling world with an unregulated one.

Why in an industry with that many regulations on who may drill, how they may drill, when they may drill, and so on - wasn't that one thought of prior to the explosion?

Is it a surprise that the Obama administration found, "too few regulations," as the cause for anything? I wouldn't expect any other finding from an Obama chosen 'blue ribbon fact finding panel' and had they come up with anything but, "we need more regulation," I would have looked for bribes.

 

[kbate]

But perhaps more heavily regulated than monitored.

You cannot regulate greed and cannot monitor with incompetence.

 

[the_kuntess]

Okay so Libertarians support a "clean and healthy environment and sensible use of natural resources" but nowhere in that pile of text did you indicate that they support the government enforcing pollution controls or inspecting businesses which run a risk of explosions and damage to nearby property.

The best that Libertarianism has for that is MAYBE lawsuits after the fact. That is, those who survived the explosion. Sucks to be you if you died at ground zero.

Okay I need to clarify. (It was early in the morning and apparently my brain was not firing completely). Libertarians propose that the government agencies be abolished and in their place private property rights and Conservation Group management of lands take over. This includes the right to restitution and compensation for damages. The Libertarian Party's platform on environmental issues is thus.

Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet’s climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

You can find a deeper explanation on the Libertarian view here and here.

It is my understanding that the free market is used in conjunction with an individual's right to sue individuals, companies/corporations and the government for environmental issues.

It necessitates an informed public and the thinking is that if you do not like the environmental impact of a company, you should not buy the product. You attack the company through financial incentives. With that comes the idea that there is NO governmental subsidy or backing of companies/corporations. So a corporation is reliant upon only the purchasing individuals.

There is also the case of private property rights and the effects of pollution/etc on individuals. You have the right to sue for damages and restitution if someone (again this can be an individual, corporation, or even the government~ because Libertarians are of the mindset that the government cannot hold sovereign immunity in this arena). They envision something like "In Britain, [where] individuals have property rights in the rivers that run through their land. If someone upstream pollutes the water and harms the fish, the downstream owners don't have to wait for a bureaucratic commission to study the issue. Instead, they immediately sue the polluters to protect their valuable property and claim restitution for damages. As a result, would-be polluters are effectively deterred from damaging the environment." (http://www.ruwart.com/environ2.lpn.wpd.html)

Looks like in a Libertartian Utopia there would be a shit load more lawyers and people working in the judicary?

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Okay I need to clarify. (It was early in the morning and apparently my brain was not firing completely). Libertarians propose that the government agencies be abolished and in their place private property rights and Conservation Group management of lands take over. This includes the right to restitution and compensation for damages.

Define "Conservation group" for me, please. Does it have any policing authority above and beyond the rights of the person who owns the land? No? Then how does your model of society expect to stop environmental destruction?

Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet’s climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

Okay, so I am running a fertilizer plant. I am a negligent son of a bitch while doing so.

1) What authority is granted power by Libertarianism to come make me not be negligent?

2) What mechanism does Libertarianism have to prevent an accident, rather than punish me with lawsuits afterwards?

I've read your cites long ago and I know for a fact that Libertarian "law" has no means of policing anyone to prevent disasters from happening.

Suing someone into oblivion for violating your property rights means exactly NOTHING when your rivers are polluted by a spill, your entire family is wiped off the map by a fertilizer plant explosion, or your lungs are melting in the midst of a toxic gas leak.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

There is also the case of private property rights and the effects of pollution/etc on individuals. You have the right to sue for damages and restitution if someone (again this can be an individual, corporation, or even the government~ because Libertarians are of the mindset that the government cannot hold sovereign immunity in this arena). They envision something like "In Britain, [where] individuals have property rights in the rivers that run through their land. If someone upstream pollutes the water and harms the fish, the downstream owners don't have to wait for a bureaucratic commission to study the issue. Instead, they immediately sue the polluters to protect their valuable property and claim restitution for damages. As a result, would-be polluters are effectively deterred from damaging the environment." (http://www.ruwart.com/environ2.lpn.wpd.html)

Got one problem with this theory when applied to Libertarian society and its lack of preventative policing:

How do you get all those fish back once they're dead?