• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate nears 60 on Keystone

iguanaman said:
None of the refined product is to be marketed here, we have no need for it. We are already exporting 400,000 barrels a day of gasoline.
I don't suppose you know that the first "Keystone" pipeline had 12 leaks in the first year. That sounds safe to you?
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah. Statistically, pipelines are the safest, cleanest way to move the product. We may even export more gasoline in the future, but a good share of what comes through Keystone XL will be consumed right here because the distribution network from the Gulf is so efficient.
 
I hate when people talk about exporting oil as though its just disappearing to no ones benefit. We have a global petroleum market and the addition of more supply invariably has an effect on the price.
 
Jack Hays said:
Blah blah blah. Statistically, pipelines are the safest, cleanest way to move the product. We may even export more gasoline in the future, but a good share of what comes through Keystone XL will be consumed right here because the distribution network from the Gulf is so efficient.
Click to expand...

Your undying allegiance to corporate interests over those of the people is duly noted and rejected. Let the Canadians have the carcinogens from refineries and the risk of oil spills from leaking pipelines. They are making the money they should take the risks.
 
clownboy said:
Actually, this is exactly the sort of thing eminent domain was written into the Constitution for. Public projects that need private land right of way.
Click to expand...

Actually James is right. I am all for the pipeline. But the companies building it should NOT be able to eminent domain peoples land. The company needs to make and offer the land owners would unlikely to refuse.
 
iguanaman said:
Your undying allegiance to corporate interests over those of the people is duly noted and rejected. Let the Canadians have the carcinogens from refineries and the risk of oil spills from leaking pipelines. They are making the money they should take the risks.
Click to expand...

The voice of American decline.
 
iguanaman said:
Your undying allegiance to corporate interests over those of the people is duly noted and rejected. Let the Canadians have the carcinogens from refineries and the risk of oil spills from leaking pipelines. They are making the money they should take the risks.
Click to expand...

Corporate interests and the interests of the people go hand-in-hand. Corporations can't exist without employees and the people can't exist without employment.
 
apdst said:
Corporate interests and the interests of the people go hand-in-hand. Corporations can't exist without employees and the people can't exist without employment.
Click to expand...

Blind as a bat.
 
apdst said:
Why do you think that?
Click to expand...

Corporate interest is sometimes, if not most times diametrically opposed to the interest of the public. You don't see this, thus, blind as a bat.
 
apdst said:
Corporate interests and the interests of the people go hand-in-hand.
Click to expand...

If by people, you mean the people who have a financial stake in those corporations. If you're talking about people in general... LOL.
 
clownboy said:
Hurrah! Congress finally gets something positive done. Great for Canada, good for the US and a wash for the environment.

Btw, for the uninformed, the pipeline itself will be carrying nothing different than all the other existing pipelines. The tar sands are still processed where they are already processed and have been for years.
Click to expand...

The biggest non-event since Y2K...
 
Texmex said:
Corporate interest is sometimes, if not most times diametrically opposed to the interest of the public. You don't see this, thus, blind as a bat.
Click to expand...

It's impossible for corporate interests to be in opposition to public interests most of the time. Sometimes, a rogue corporation may have motives that have a negative impact, but the country exists because of a strong private sector. The private sector can't stay strong without financial independence. We can't have that financial indepence without jobs.
 
This whole issue seems to be a perfect example of environmentalists (and I consider myself one), letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, or in this case the better than the alternative. Yes, tar sands is dirty oil. Yes, extracting it has terrible environmental costs (its right up there with coal mining). However, unless oil prices take a big dive, they are going to do it anyway. So the question is how that oil will be transported to refineries. So basically we have 2 choices: rail or pipeline. Transporting that oil by rail greatly increases the odds of a spill and it results in higher emissions. So being that they are going to extract that tar sands oil anyway, why would we not want to transport it by pipeline rather than rail being its the lesser of 2 evils?
 
Amadeus said:
If by people, you mean the people who have a financial stake in those corporations. If you're talking about people in general... LOL.
Click to expand...

Private companies are the number one job creators in the country. If not for private enterprise, the country would collapse.

Where do you work?
 
apdst said:
It's impossible for corporate interests to be in opposition to public interests most of the time. Sometimes, a rogue corporation may have motives that have a negative impact, but the country exists because of a strong private sector. The private sector can't stay strong without financial independence. We can't have that financial indepence without jobs.
Click to expand...

Tell the people of Bhopal, India how good American companies are at taking care of the public interest.

People like you have sold out to the corporate dick. It's been that way so long, you even seem to enjoy it.
 
Texmex said:
Tell the people of Bhopal, India how good American companies are at taking care of the public interest.

People like you have sold out to the corporate dick. It's been that way so long, you even seem to enjoy it.
Click to expand...

That's the best argument you can come up with? :lamo
 
Texmex said:
The truth is often simple and concise.
Click to expand...

You're saying that one event...in India...defines private sector businesses in The United States? And that event was intentional?
 
apdst said:
You're saying that one event...in India...defines private sector businesses in The United States? And that event was intentional?
Click to expand...

Without proper governmental regulation, corporations can be dangerous to the public. A properly regulated industry is something else altogether.
 
Texmex said:
Without proper governmental regulation, corporations can be dangerous to the public. A properly regulated industry is something else altogether.
Click to expand...

That's not what you said. Now, explain to us how the disaster in India benefitted Union Carbide.
 
apdst said:
That's not what you said. Now, explain to us how the disaster in India benefitted Union Carbide.
Click to expand...

Have a nice day. I hope the weather is fine in your world.
 
clownboy said:
Hurrah! Congress finally gets something positive done. Great for Canada, good for the US and a wash for the environment.

Btw, for the uninformed, the pipeline itself will be carrying nothing different than all the other existing pipelines. The tar sands are still processed where they are already processed and have been for years.
Click to expand...

So, I understand that the keystone is going to carrying crude waste: how is that good for US?
 
apdst said:
You're saying that one event...in India...defines private sector businesses in The United States? And that event was intentional?
Click to expand...

Oh hell, look at the explosion in Texas, where the fertilizer plant had way too much anhydrous ammonia onhand and where way too many houses and what-not were built way too close to it. Seriously, you think the corporation didn't know what it had in its tanks?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fertilizer_Company_explosion

That's why we need regulation. Corporations will ALWAYS put the bottom line ahead of safety. Well, almost always. There might be a corporation out there who puts safety first without being regulated; let me know when you find it.
 
paddymcdougall said:
Oh hell, look at the explosion in Texas, where the fertilizer plant had way too much anhydrous ammonia onhand and where way too many houses and what-not were built way too close to it. Seriously, you think the corporation didn't know what it had in its tanks?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fertilizer_Company_explosion

That's why we need regulation. Corporations will ALWAYS put the bottom line ahead of safety. Well, almost always. There might be a corporation out there who puts safety first without being regulated; let me know when you find it.
Click to expand...

How did that company benefit from that explosion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom