California panel rejects new offshore...

California panel rejects new offshore oil drilling

There are 645 comments on the www.iht.com story from Jan 29, 2009, titled California panel rejects new offshore oil drilling. In it, www.iht.com reports that:

A state panel rejected a proposal Thursday that could have led to the first new oil drilling project off the California coast in 40 years.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.iht.com.

Skeptic

Houston, TX

#660 Mar 25, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
May be I am. May be I am also more actively engaged in political issues ....??
And because I live in a small country I must have a different view on many issues....
SNJ,

We’re again “off topic” but:

Though I study both candidates and issues I CANNOT claim any expertise in politics. My personal experiences with illegal Mexicans leads me to see both advantages and disadvantages in their presence here.

My own preference would be to make legal entry easier but require better documentation of legal entry by employers. Many do use stolen or faked Social Security cards but payment of income and Social Security taxes is still required. Computer checking should uncover those were employers required to keep better payment records and copies of those SS cards.

I live very near some “pickup points” where employers pick up (probably illegal) workers. Some use identified vehicles—usually those of construction or lawn service companies. Those employers should “serve time.”

I also feel disregarding laws on automobile registration, inspection and insurance should be grounds for permanent exclusion or even incarceration. A walk through a Wal Mart parking lot will show at least 5% of the vehicles with expired licenses and/or inspection stickers and I’d bet better than half of those are uninsured. Of course not all belong to illegals.

However this is a very minor and incompletely understood issue for me and I’m willing to “go along” with a majority. I know far more about the petroleum industries. I’ve studied them (and a couple of others) intensively for well over a quarter of a century—first for my employer and later for my own (reasonably successful) investments. I find the erroneous and misleading information I see on topix appalling.
SNJ

Skien, Norway

#661 Mar 26, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
We’re again “off topic” but:
Though I study both candidates and issues I CANNOT claim any expertise in politics. My personal experiences with illegal Mexicans leads me to see both advantages and disadvantages in their presence here.
Let's be off the topic - after all this is not a Board Meeting in Exxon. We don't prevent anyone to stick to the topic it we deviate - others can just ignore our posts....

Tell me please:
What advantages do you see in the presence of ILLEGAL Mexicans in USA ??
I've read miles of arguments against. No-one has as of yet spelled out to me what the ADVANTAGES are - although I can imagine a few ..
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#662 Mar 26, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's be off the topic - after all this is not a Board Meeting in Exxon. We don't prevent anyone to stick to the topic it we deviate - others can just ignore our posts....
Tell me please:
What advantages do you see in the presence of ILLEGAL Mexicans in USA ??
I've read miles of arguments against. No-one has as of yet spelled out to me what the ADVANTAGES are - although I can imagine a few ..
SNJ,

I do prefer to stay on topic. There are topics on nearly every subject imaginable. However my short answer is costs. Costs for construction of houses here in Texas, for example, are quite a bit lower than most other places. Though not all the construction workers are here illegally, many are. My two sons worked as roofers one summer and most of their fellow workers were illegals.

Some are excellent auto mechanics. Keeping older vehicles running is a necessary art in Mexico.

Many also serve in the “background” in restaurants and that lowers prices.

It is for those reasons I would prefer entry be made easier but employment better documented.

The reasons are similar to those so many of our goods are made in third-world countries.

Many of our immigrant groups in the past...Irish, Italians, Chinese etc..., not to mention Africans, also were used as “cheap labor.” Some of my own ancestors were almost certainly “indentured servants.”

Again, I’m NOT an expert on immigration policy!!!!!! My opinions are ONLY that!!!!!
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#663 Mar 26, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's be off the topic - after all this is not a Board Meeting in Exxon. We don't prevent anyone to stick to the topic it we deviate - others can just ignore our posts....
Tell me please:
What advantages do you see in the presence of ILLEGAL Mexicans in USA ??
I've read miles of arguments against. No-one has as of yet spelled out to me what the ADVANTAGES are - although I can imagine a few ..
SNJ,

I certainly forgot one area—agriculture. As a teen I worked (illegally, I was under age) for a short time in onion fields. By far a majority of those I worked with were illegals (of both sexes and all ages). They were universally (including children younger than I was) better at the work than I was and, since we were paid on a “piece work” basis, earned more (but still not much). However I went home every night to a comfortable house while they lived in shacks provided by the farmers.

I left that job to caddy on a golf course--easier and paid just a bit better.
SNJ

Oslo, Norway

#664 Mar 27, 2009
So you are in fact telling me that the only advantage of the presence of illegal Mexicans is
cheap labour.
There is a reason why already 40 million Americans are defined as living under poverty.
So all told America seems to be lead by the forces in society that take advantages out of cheap labour.
It should be a rather frightening observation.
And I agree - I cannot see one other "advantage".
The fact that your authorities, police and employers just look another way in stead of getting a stop to illegal work and workers makes
you in many senses very vulnerable long term now.
In a way USA is exploiting big parts of it's own citizens. I wonder whether USA could ever been able to mobilize military forces like they have if they did not have such a big group of poor people to offer "work" and "education".....
may be you are (almost) all prisoners of your own super-capitalism???

“If you believe it, stand by it”

Since: May 07

Location hidden

#665 Mar 27, 2009
Mad Dog USN wrote:
<quoted text>
No they are not idiots by a long shot, however they are greedy and self indulgent.
It's a real estate greed issue...
The people who own multi million dollar beachfront properties don't want their ocean vista's or desert sunsets ruined, thus lowering property and resale values.
They aren't concerned about the economy or the working class. They can afford to be aloof and judgemental and enviromentally concious we can't.
What California fails to realize is that you can put an oil rig 14 miles off the coast and you won't see it from land.
They claim to be worried about spill's, but I don't see a great out-pouring of complaining about smog or pollution or trash in LA...
California gets most of it's hydroelectric power from either Nevada or Oregon. California does not have enough power plants to be self sufficient. Hence the rolling blackout in the summertime.
This is just crapcake of greed, and hipocracy made by self-absorbed greedy egotist with a sickening sweet frosting of fake enviromental concern covering it.
Now, you have said a mouthfull. This is pretty close, if not exactly, how the California situation is.
Back in the early 1980's I worked for Gulf Oil in oil exploration. We brought an offshore jack-up rig to the Santa Barbara area. Now, this rig was to drill one hole and be gone in about 4 months. We had to have special "camouflage panels" constructed and installed on the side of the rig so it would not be so "ugly."
they have only gotten worse in their thinking.
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#666 Mar 27, 2009
SNJ wrote:
So you are in fact telling me that the only advantage of the presence of illegal Mexicans is
cheap labour.
There is a reason why already 40 million Americans are defined as living under poverty.
So all told America seems to be lead by the forces in society that take advantages out of cheap labour.
It should be a rather frightening observation.
And I agree - I cannot see one other "advantage".
The fact that your authorities, police and employers just look another way in stead of getting a stop to illegal work and workers makes
you in many senses very vulnerable long term now.
In a way USA is exploiting big parts of it's own citizens. I wonder whether USA could ever been able to mobilize military forces like they have if they did not have such a big group of poor people to offer "work" and "education".....
may be you are (almost) all prisoners of your own super-capitalism???
SNJ,

“May be “(better maybe or perhaps) your arrogance and lack of knowledge are showing again. Though I’m NOT an expert on immigration I DO know that:

(1) Our definition of “poverty” is somewhat flexible and often consists merely those living on incomes below a certain percentage of the median. Many are elderly, living exclusively (or nearly so) on Social Security. Some are physically or mentally handicapped. Others are people who don’t WANT to work but prefer to “live on the dole”(and who would prefer Norwegian Socialism). However there still ARE too many who need and deserve help!

(2) Low-cost labor is a “fact of life”...here and elsewhere. Don’t try to convince me that Norwegians voluntarily pay more than they must for products. Though the second wealthiest person in the world (according to the last Forbes list I’ve seen) is a Mexican, a very high percentage of Mexicans live FAR below our poverty level. Have you no sympathy for the poor other than Norwegians?

(3) Few U. S. citizens would be WILLING to do some of the work done by the illegals even at double what they are paid.

(4) I know several who serve or have voluntarily served in our military. Most did so for patriotic reasons, a few for the educational benefits, none because they could not find employment elsewhere.

(5) Many of our “police forces” are forbidden by law from questioning people on the basis of appearance (“profiling”). I agree ONLY regarding employers.

I’m going back and reply to some of your earlier posts. You are merely an insignificant, egotistical liar. I’m glad you find our society “frightening”...I certainly want nothing of yours and would far rather be a “prisoner of ...capitalism!!!!!”
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#667 Mar 27, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have been very upset if I WERE you!!
SNJ,

You are welcome to do my worrying for me!
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#668 Mar 27, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
May be I am. May be I am also more actively engaged in political issues ....??
And because I live in a small country I must have a different view on many issues....
SNJ,

And I suspect have precisely as great an impact on politics in Norway as on this thread—absolutely NONE.
SNJ

Skien, Norway

#669 Mar 27, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
“May be “(better maybe or perhaps) your arrogance and lack of knowledge are showing again. Though I’m NOT an expert on immigration I DO know that:
(1) Our definition of “poverty” is somewhat flexible and often consists merely those living on incomes below a certain percentage of the median. Many are elderly, living exclusively (or nearly so) on Social Security. Some are physically or mentally handicapped. Others are people who don’t WANT to work but prefer to “live on the dole”(and who would prefer Norwegian Socialism). However there still ARE too many who need and deserve help!
(2) Low-cost labor is a “fact of life”...here and elsewhere. Don’t try to convince me that Norwegians voluntarily pay more than they must for products. Though the second wealthiest person in the world (according to the last Forbes list I’ve seen) is a Mexican, a very high percentage of Mexicans live FAR below our poverty level. Have you no sympathy for the poor other than Norwegians?
(3) Few U. S. citizens would be WILLING to do some of the work done by the illegals even at double what they are paid.
(4) I know several who serve or have voluntarily served in our military. Most did so for patriotic reasons, a few for the educational benefits, none because they could not find employment elsewhere.
(5) Many of our “police forces” are forbidden by law from questioning people on the basis of appearance (“profiling”). I agree ONLY regarding employers.
I’m going back and reply to some of your earlier posts. You are merely an insignificant, egotistical liar. I’m glad you find our society “frightening”...I certainly want nothing of yours and would far rather be a “prisoner of ...capitalism!!!!!”
Well, you just proved you are brain washed - you don't grasp what I am saying to you but twist it into your own frames and give it completely different contents. No use discussing with you .
Skeptic

San Antonio, TX

#670 Mar 27, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you just proved you are brain washed - you don't grasp what I am saying to you but twist it into your own frames and give it completely different contents. No use discussing with you .
SNJ,

For a change you’re at least half right...I certainly can’t make heads or tails out of the garbage, much of it erroneous, you post.

It seems to me that two of the greatest needs of the poor would be for a place to live and food to eat and higher labor costs for construction and agriculture would increase prices for those two things. That certainly would hurt the poor more than it would hurt me.

Personally I would prefer a million illegal immigrants who want to work to a hundred native born citizens who would rather live “on the dole” in a Socialistic society but I may well be part of a minority.

The immigration issue is neither important nor interesting to me and I agree, not worth further discussion. There are plenty of threads where that issue is argued.
SNJ

Skien, Norway

#671 Mar 28, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
For a change you’re at least half right...I certainly can’t make heads or tails out of the garbage, much of it erroneous, you post.
It seems to me that two of the greatest needs of the poor would be for a place to live and food to eat and higher labor costs for construction and agriculture would increase prices for those two things. That certainly would hurt the poor more than it would hurt me.
Personally I would prefer a million illegal immigrants who want to work to a hundred native born citizens who would rather live “on the dole” in a Socialistic society but I may well be part of a minority.
The immigration issue is neither important nor interesting to me and I agree, not worth further discussion. There are plenty of threads where that issue is argued.
I'll wind up by saying that life is not either black or white. Politics is the art of the possible. There are a lot of options for the politicians to make or change a well functioning society. The priorities will have to be different than today's priorities. The distribution of wealth will have to be different too.That is where you will find the key to a better America in the future - for millions more.
Think about how YOU can contribute to that.
Nice week-end!
Skeptic

San Antonio, TX

#672 Mar 28, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll wind up by saying that life is not either black or white. Politics is the art of the possible. There are a lot of options for the politicians to make or change a well functioning society. The priorities will have to be different than today's priorities. The distribution of wealth will have to be different too.That is where you will find the key to a better America in the future - for millions more.
Think about how YOU can contribute to that.
Nice week-end!
SNJ,

The greatest contribution I can make for my children, grandchildren, g-grandchildren and their future descendants is to do all I can to see that we remain a capitalistic nation rather than fall into the trap of socialism.
SNJ

Skien, Norway

#673 Mar 28, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
The greatest contribution I can make for my children, grandchildren, g-grandchildren and their future descendants is to do all I can to see that we remain a capitalistic nation rather than fall into the trap of socialism.
It may surprise you that I say that I fully agree with you!
Skeptic

San Antonio, TX

#674 Mar 29, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
It may surprise you that I say that I fully agree with you!
SNJ,

You did indeed surprise me. Many thanks!!!
SNJ

Oslo, Norway

#675 Mar 30, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
You did indeed surprise me. Many thanks!!!
Chances are though - that you and I will most likely not draw the line between "capitalism" and "socialism" similarly....
Guess many Americans will call Obama's present pressure upon the motor industry as socialism.
But if your motor industry shall survive now you will be dependent on some unusual measures including those that will mean "socialism" to many of youi - like opening up for workers unions-
and then certainly counter measures to pacify "union busting"......interesting to see what may come out of these things in a year or three from now....

“If you believe it, stand by it”

Since: May 07

Location hidden

#676 Mar 30, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Chances are though - that you and I will most likely not draw the line between "capitalism" and "socialism" similarly....
Guess many Americans will call Obama's present pressure upon the motor industry as socialism.
But if your motor industry shall survive now you will be dependent on some unusual measures including those that will mean "socialism" to many of youi - like opening up for workers unions-
and then certainly counter measures to pacify "union busting"......interesting to see what may come out of these things in a year or three from now....
What is disturbing is the fact that, supposedly, Obama has fired the CEO of General Motors. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Right now I can believe that the CEO was playing hard ball with the UAW union. And, as we know, they have Obama in their pocket. He has committed himself to see that unions thrive... And will not allow them to make too many consessions. The best option would have been Chapter 11 bankruptsy.
Skeptic

Houston, TX

#677 Mar 30, 2009
SNJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Chances are though - that you and I will most likely not draw the line between "capitalism" and "socialism" similarly....
Guess many Americans will call Obama's present pressure upon the motor industry as socialism.
But if your motor industry shall survive now you will be dependent on some unusual measures including those that will mean "socialism" to many of youi - like opening up for workers unions-
and then certainly counter measures to pacify "union busting"......interesting to see what may come out of these things in a year or three from now....
SNJ,

My preference would be to let GM and Chrysler fold, even though that would add millions to those unemployed and PBGB would be responsible for billions in under-funded pensions. I feel we must “bite the bullet” sometime and better we take the hit rather than just pass it on to our descendants.

As I posted earlier I once followed “motor vehicle and parts manufacturing” as closely as the petroleum industries but sold off those investments when I became convinced bloated U. S. companies could not compete with the best of foreign ones. Your Swedish “neighbor,” Volvo, is one of those but not, in my view, the most challenging. Renault is another—they bought Mack truck quite a few years ago. However it is Asian companies I believe are the ultimate “winners.” They have NOT “opened up for workers unions” but retained the freedom to move assembly to where it is least costly.

“Did U plug the damn hole yet?”

Since: Jan 08

Dallas, TX

#678 Mar 30, 2009
Skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
SNJ,
My preference would be to let GM and Chrysler fold, even though that would add millions to those unemployed and PBGB would be responsible for billions in under-funded pensions. I feel we must “bite the bullet” sometime and better we take the hit rather than just pass it on to our descendants.
Letting GM and Chrysler fold will just pass along cronic unemployment to our descendants.

America needs a manufacturing base in this country to maintain our standard of living and the car companies are a necessary part of that base.

“oderint dum metuant”

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#679 Mar 30, 2009
GM & Chrysler won't fold

They are becoming Obama motors.

I was just watching the news and appearently
Obama ensured GM & Chryler's warranties..

Can wait to see what next generation of GM Chryslers vehicles will look like and how much they will cost..

Down payment starts with a 1 year tour of duty with ACORN...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Violence follows California Trump rally, about ... 1 hr Injudgement 995
News Cheney's Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq... (Mar '13) 10 hr Oil Barron 51
News Nebraska utility head recommends closing nuclea... 22 hr Dr Abe Slocumvitch 4
News Xcel hopes more customers will turn to Savers S... (Jul '08) 22 hr qwerty 23
News Texas prison labor drives Lufkin factory out of... (Jul '08) Mon KandM Guttering 7
News updated Raccoon triggers overnight power outage... May 13 Hal Sharptone 3
News Possibility of "Bandido" Biker-Gang Members in ... (Dec '09) May 12 wesley 40
More from around the web