Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Old 16th Jan 2011, 14:41
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 895
Although I've now bailed out of BP (probably too soon) I've been enjoying this latest development.

It's well deserved payback for Obama for his villification of BP and his personal attacks on Hayward when both were trying (and succeeding) to do the right thing, while he just sniped at every opportunity. I hope his political opponents crucify him for the damage he has done to business relationships and economic prospects for America.

Having said that, I doubt whether Rosneft will prove to be the easiest of partners.
vulcanised is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 15:14
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 278
Capot:

BP needed to diversify away from the USA fast, as a matter of risk management, and it has done just that
Well let's see, according to BP's website, their good ole' boy CEO, raised in Mississippi and educmakated in Illinois, has actually decided that 11 new development projects between 2011 and 2015 will be in...hang on for it...the US. The US has more E&P projects, not fewer, than any other country in the world.
Matari is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 15:24
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ontario Canada Gulf Coast USA
Posts: 46
I never personally experienced any negative anti-British speech around the unfortunate event.
All comments were around general public opinion on oil companies. I NEVER heard a single anti-British comment. I am not doubting they did exist somewhere.

I have had years of personal hands on experience in the oil industry with high level managers from Scotland, Wales, England and India.
My opinion is very very positive.

The Federal Government has CFR(Congressional Federal Register) laws that spell out Process Safety Management for businesses. All are responsible for PMI(positive material identification) of building materials, among other things and must MANAGE all change via another CFR Reg called Management of Change forms and make sure all involved with change must receive training and sign off that they understand the change.

BP incident was unfortunate for sure. The following tragedy was the Obamanation of stopping all other oil co. drilling, immediately causing 10,000 lost jobs.
CanAmdelta1 is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 17:02
  #224 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
I know, plus some of the biggest Bush supporters are the biggest Obama opponents, even though many of Obama's policies are basically the same as Bush's.
Yeah, so much for that 'Hope and Change', huh.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 17:36
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,420
decided that 11 new development projects between 2011 and 2015 will be in...hang on for it...the US.
My word was "diversify", not "move". Suddenly BP is less vulnerable than it was to adverse conditions in the USA.

And I guess Mr Dudley is well-placed to recognise the danger and do something about it.
Capot is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 18:19
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
CFR stands for Code of Federal Regulations, not Congressional Federal Register. The Federal Register is where changes or proposed changes in Executive Department regulations are posted; the Congressional Record is where Congress posts changes or proposed changes to Laws--never the twain shall meet. The CFR is the implementing regulations based on Laws enacted by Congress. For example, Title 14CFR contains regulations on transportation. Regulations are NOT Laws, very big difference! Regulations imply civil penalties while Laws imply criminal penalties.

GF

Last edited by galaxy flyer; 16th Jan 2011 at 20:29.
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 20:30
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
If anyone thinks BHO's first term is the third term of GWB, may I ask what is the color of the sky where you live?

GF
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 20:45
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ontario Canada Gulf Coast USA
Posts: 46
BandAide,

On the Geopolitical subject I suspect you are correct.

The US is slowly becoming a 2nd hand oil consumer compared to China.
This probably means we will get less of the easily refined crude like Arabian Light for example and more of the Arabian Med /Heavy.

Galaxy Flyer

Yes a definite difference between law and civil penalties. Doesn't matter much when OSHA seeks and the court issues jail time. Also it doesn't mean much to the dead or their families and I've seen how work fatalities weighed on the so called guilty.

Point is that BP, as any other oil company, is responsible for all aspects of workplace safety.

regards
CanAmdelta1 is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 20:56
  #229 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Seems to me the exponential increase in US natural gas resources brought on by fracking technology is poised to change the world's energy equations over the next several years.

Guess you haven't heard. The fracking process is coming under attack by the usual suspects. There is a move in Washington to create regulations to have all fracking banded.

Sometimes you just have to wonder on just whose side these people are on.

We can't drill on 80% of out offshore waters.

We can't drill in a wilderness that only a few hundred people will ever travel to or ever see.

Now where we can drill and there are literally trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, they want to ban fracking. A process that has been going on for decades, almost a long as they been drilling for oil and natural gas.

But I forgot, on a popular police fictional TV show a couple of weeks to a month ago, the evil doer was an 'Evil Big Oil man' that had murdered some righteous and wonderful people by "this new process called fracking" and poisoned the ground water.

When the show was over, I turned to my wife and said, "You watch, in a couple of weeks somebody in Washington, who saw this, will try to ban fracking. She said don't be silly.

Sure enough...........
con-pilot is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 21:01
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 65
Posts: 618
popular police fictional TV show
Aaron Sorkin in on that one? Given that we seem to be going into the third season of the West Wing here, I wouldn't be surprised. Hopefully this time around, Josh will figure out (much sooner) just how hot Donna is.
11Fan is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 21:19
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 65
Posts: 618
Customers, on the other hand, will flee from companies (airlines, oil and others) they deem to be unsafe or callous with regard to safety.
At least those who are paying attention. There's a number of companies I avoid, for numerous reasons, even if I wind up spending more for whatever the product or service may be.
11Fan is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 22:01
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ontario Canada Gulf Coast USA
Posts: 46
BandAide

I can generally agree on your comment about guaranteed safety.

Back on topic with oil industry safety and compliance, it is the on the company to improve above and beyond the minimal compliance.

A minimal compliance attitude has high safety consequences. Hurting people cost companies money directly and in negative public opinion.
BP is a good example and substantiates your last sentence.

regards
CanAmdelta1 is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2011, 22:26
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
CanAmdelta1

Just clarifying things, so n one has it wrong. No argument with your point, just with the details

GF
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 01:33
  #234 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York & California
Posts: 414
con-pilot

Yeah, so much for that 'Hope and Change', huh.
I'm amazed so many idiots actually fell for that. Political candidates will promise people the Sun, the Moon, and the Sky, knowing that they have no real obligation to keep their promises.

For the record, I made my voting choice based on a coin-toss: I figured both candidates sucked; some of my family wouldn't talk to me if I didn't exercise my civic-duty to vote; I wanted to vote without actually voting and feeling any responsibility or regret for who I picked.
Jane-DoH is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 02:37
  #235 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York & California
Posts: 414
Don't these links pretty decently describe the State of Affairs in the United States?

Inverted totalitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Chris Hedges: Democracy in America Is a Useful Fiction - Chris Hedges' Columns - Truthdig
Inverted Totalitarianism: A New Way of Understanding How the U.S. Is Controlled
Jane-DoH is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 03:32
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
Only if you believe the last three elections didn't happen! I doubt very much that "managed democracy" describes wave elections. Hedges, like numerous lefties, is hung up on the Citizens United decision, good luck with that.

The First Amendment says,

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Nowhere does it talk about citizens having "rights", it says Congress shall make no law.... Delightful words, by the way.

GF
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 06:10
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,615
Alas, the Judicial Branch can create law that harms those freedoms however!

Were they to do their constitutional duty all the while referring to the Constitution....we would be much better off.

For evidence I put forth the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.....the most overturned court in the Country. The damage is done when so many of their decisions fail to make it to the Supreme Court and are left to stand.
SASless is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 08:16
  #238 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York & California
Posts: 414
Galaxy Flyer,

Nowhere does it talk about citizens having "rights", it says Congress shall make no law....
Really? How about this part...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Jane D'oh!
Jane-DoH is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 15:24
  #239 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Jane, one could say it depends on just whose interpretation of the Constitution one choses to believe, but it is generally accepted by most Constitutional scholars that the statement; "the right of the people" does not grant any rights, but rather mean Congress cannot remove the right of the people or make any law removing such rights.

The rights of the people are not granted by the Congress, ie government, but exists as inalienable rights.

At least that is what I believe and a lot of people a hell of a lot smarter than I believe.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2011, 15:25
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 65
Posts: 618
Really? How about this part...
Jane D'oh,

I think the point GF was making was that the Constitution doesn't "grant" rights, rather, that it prohibits Congress from making any law restricting those "inalienable rights endowed by their creator."

The Bill of Rights protects the rights granted by the Creator, not government - Raleigh Libertarian | Examiner.com
11Fan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.