• 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!

Gov't: 23K workers affected by Gulf oil drill ban

A drilling ban on deep off shore oil drilling will prevent the fishermen and others from being out of work again due to some massive oil leak that takes months to plug and possibly decades to clean.

Common sense would dictate that there has been alotta learning take place as to how to plug a deepwater well. You think the very first oil well was drilled with a blowout preventer? No, it wasn't. Years of R&D took place in just a few months this summer.

As to the decades to clean; things aren't as disasterous as the Libbos were hoping for.
 
Common sense would dictate that there has been alotta learning take place as to how to plug a deepwater well. You think the very first oil well was drilled with a blowout preventer? No, it wasn't. Years of R&D took place in just a few months this summer.

As to the decades to clean; things aren't as disasterous as the Libbos were hoping for.
Really? Because I would think the Libbo's would prefer for this disaster never to have happened in the first place, especially since Obama had announced he would allow more off shore drilling before the oil spill occured. But now that it has, what makes you think it won't take at least ten years for the Gulf to recover, especially since that is how long it took for the oil spill in Mexico to recover?
 
Really? Because I would think the Libbo's would prefer for this disaster never to have happened in the first place, especially since Obama had announced he would allow more off shore drilling before the oil spill occured. But now that it has, what makes you think it won't take at least ten years for the Gulf to recover, especially since that is how long it took for the oil spill in Mexico to recover?

Prefer for it to never happen? yeah, maybe. Gonna get as much mileage out of it now that it has happened? Most definitely!!!

But now that it has, what makes you think it won't take at least ten years for the Gulf to recover

Because it's already recovering, maybe? It's far from the disaster that the Libbos made it out to be.
 
Common sense would dictate that there has been alotta learning take place as to how to plug a deepwater well. You think the very first oil well was drilled with a blowout preventer? No, it wasn't. Years of R&D took place in just a few months this summer.

Tell you what. If a deep off shore oil leak happens along the coast of some other country and it only takes a day or two maybe even I week I will support deep offshore oil drilling.

As to the decades to clean; things aren't as disasterous as the Libbos were hoping for.

Has all the oil been cleaned up? No?
 
Prefer for it to never happen? yeah, maybe. Gonna get as much mileage out of it now that it has happened? Most definitely!!!

Because it's already recovering, maybe? It's far from the disaster that the Libbos made it out to be.
Maybe? What do you mean by "it's already recovering, maybe"? You don't sound so sure.
 
Okay, but there is still a problem with the date of the "memo", July 10, and the fact that it was only a worst case scenario of what might happen

Where are you getting this? Nothing I've seen indicates that the 23k projection was presented as a worst case scenario. To the contrary, it was presented as a best estimate.

So where is the data or proof or research or new "memo" stating that the worst case scenario has been "fully realized" when there is no evidence or new information to suggest that it has been "fully realized"?

I honestly don't understand what you're asking for. Approximately one month ago, the government conducted an analysis of the situation and concluded that a six month ban would eventually affect 23,000 workers. Once this formerly internal memo was revealed in a court filing, the government tried to downplay it by saying that we haven't yet "fully" realized that outcome. This is fairly straightforward.

The other problem with the AP articles, and it is a major one, there doesn't seem to any "memo" or "federal document" by Michael Bromwich giving an economic job loss "worst case scenario" whatsoever. If you can find it, then please let me know. Because the last and only memo I can find by Michael Bromwich is dated August 16, 2010 and it makes no mention of the economic job loss impact from the morititorium on 63 exploratory oil rigs.

Again, what exactly do you expect? Most news stories don't come with hundreds of pages of supplemental material attached. The many, many stories out there on this topic all refer to the memorandum and clearly indicate what it includes.

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

If you think they're all lying for some unknown reason, that's fine. I just don't know where you'd get that from.
 
Maybe? What do you mean by "it's already recovering, maybe"? You don't sound so sure.

Ok, let me rephrase my comment, so that you can understand it more better: Maybe, it's because things are already recovering."

Amazing how one's understanding of puncuation can shed new light on things. Eh?
 
Where are you getting this? Nothing I've seen indicates that the 23k projection was presented as a worst case scenario. To the contrary, it was presented as a best estimate.
I got it from the OP article.....

"In light of the current risks of deepwater drilling as illustrated by the BP Deepwater Horizon Spill and the potential impacts of another spill, the moratorium is necessary and appropriate. With that said, the worst-case economic impact estimates from three months ago have not been realized. The reality on the ground suggests that the impacts are less than we initially projected as a potential worst-case scenario," Lee-Ashley said.

It probably was a best estimate of a worst case economic impact.

I honestly don't understand what you're asking for. Approximately one month ago, the government conducted an analysis of the situation and concluded that a six month ban would eventually affect 23,000 workers. Once this formerly internal memo was revealed in a court filing, the government tried to downplay it by saying that we haven't yet "fully" realized that outcome. This is fairly straightforward.

Again, what exactly do you expect? Most news stories don't come with hundreds of pages of supplemental material attached. The many, many stories out there on this topic all refer to the memorandum and clearly indicate what it includes.

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

If you think they're all lying for some unknown reason, that's fine. I just don't know where you'd get that from.
First the government gives a worse case best estimate and now it downplays that estimate. I give up. Sorry, for the inconvience.
 
Ok, let me rephrase my comment, so that you can understand it more better: Maybe, it's because things are already recovering."

Amazing how one's understanding of puncuation can shed new light on things. Eh?
Well yes, I think it would go without saying that things would start recovering now that the oil leak has stopped. But I'm curious as to why you said "things aren't as disasterous as the Libbos were hoping for", when it is the "libbos" Obama and team who are saying the Gulf is recovering quicker than anticipated and you obviously agree with that assessment?

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Federal Science Report Details Fate of Oil from BP Spill
 
Last edited:
No, I think I got the point just fine. We are in the middle of the worse recession in my lifetime, with unemployment hovering between 9% and 10%, and our president costs 23,000 more people their jobs playing partisan politics.

I got the point just fine.

You are wrong, the unemployment is higher. ;)
 
Well yes, I think it would go without saying that things would start recovering now that the oil leak has stopped. But I'm curious as to why you said "things aren't as disasterous as the Libbos were hoping for", when it is the "libbos" Obama and team who are saying the Gulf is recovering quicker than anticipatedd you obviously agree with that assessment?

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Federal Science Report Details Fate of Oil from BP Spill

Then, he should lift the moratorium and let us go back to work.
 
What if the choice was between 23,000 people losing their jobs and having a 1% chance of another oil spill?
What if the choice was between 23,000 people losing their jobs and having a .01% chance of another oil spill?
What if the choice was between 23,000 people losing their jobs and having a .000001% chance of another oil spill?

Go play Russian Roulette with you own coast, thanks.
 
I take it you like walking to work.

A better analogy is that I don't like gambling with my primary source of income. Saving 23,000 jobs in the short term is not worth the risk of losing millions of jobs, potentially for decades in the future. It's a simple cost benefit analysis, which you'd think somebody who purports to understand the economics would be able to wrap their head around.
 
Florida, and I don't want even a one in a million chance of any more oil clotting up my beautiful white sand beaches.

They're not clotted up now, are they? Most of the tar balls that are there, didn't even come from MC 262.

What are you going to do when the entire economy along the gulf cost collapses, because of the millions of oilfield jobs that will be killed because of the moratorium? I think that's what people are having a hard time wrapping their heads around. There's no doubt that millions of oilfield dollars flow into Florida every year. I know all kinds of people that spend their oilfield wages in Florida
 
They're not clotted up now, are they?

Yes they are. Even one tarball on my beaches is one tarball too many, and there are way more than that unfortunately.

As for the rest of your "drill, baby, drill" diatribe, it's laughable. You're worried about the Gulf economy collapsing because of the drilling moratorium? Nonsense. If you're truly concerned with the Gulf economy, you'd want to protect it from any threat to its most important assets, tourism and fishing. But I guess it's no use explaining that to oil company shills.
 
Yes they are. Even one tarball on my beaches is one tarball too many, and there are way more than that unfortunately.

Well, you're gonna be a mad mothre****er when the Cubans open drilling in the North Cuba Basin.

As for the rest of your "drill, baby, drill" diatribe, it's laughable. You're worried about the Gulf economy collapsing because of the drilling moratorium? Nonsense. If you're truly concerned with the Gulf economy, you'd want to protect it from any threat to its most important assets, tourism and fishing. But I guess it's no use explaining that to oil company shills.

Where do you think those tourists and sport fishermen make their livings?

But I guess it's no use explaining that to oil company shills.

I don't work for an oil company. I work in the service and support end of the industry and I have a right to make a living, just like anyone else. A right that I've been deprived of.

This is from your link:

The Impact of the Oil Spill has not Affected Florida Beaches beyond Northwest Florida. All Other Beaches are Free of Oil
 
Last edited:
Well, you're gonna be a mad mothre****er when the Cubans open drilling in the North Cuba Basin.

You better believe it. But guess what? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Where do you think those tourists and sport fishermen make their livings?

I was talking about commercial fishermen, who make their living by, you know, fishing in the Gulf. As for the tourists, what does it matter how they make their livings? It's the money they spend in Florida that I care about.

I don't work for an oil company. I work in the service and support end of the industry and I have a right to make a living, just like anyone else. A right that I've been deprived of.

So you're a self-confessed oil industry shill? Well, you're right you have a right to make a living. And so do I. I work in a Gulf coast state, where the entirety economy is dependent on a robust tourist industry, that we shouldn't be taking risks with.
 
Last edited:
A better analogy is that I don't like gambling with my primary source of income. Saving 23,000 jobs in the short term is not worth the risk of losing millions of jobs, potentially for decades in the future. It's a simple cost benefit analysis, which you'd think somebody who purports to understand the economics would be able to wrap their head around.
The Gulf Coast's primary source of income is oil.
 
You better believe it. But guess what? Two wrongs don't make a right.

I'm going to laugh my ass off, when all you do about it is piss-n-moan.



I was talking about commercial fishermen, who make their living by, you know, fishing in the Gulf.

They're back fishing. Didn't know if you heard.

As for the tourists, what does it matter how they make their livings? It's the money they spend in Florida that I care about.

that's where you're missing the boat. If people that visit Florida are unemployed, they won't be spending any money in Florida.



So you're a self-confessed oil industry shill? Well, you're right you have a right to make a living. And so do I. I work in a Gulf coast state, where the entirety economy is dependent on a robust tourist industry, that we shouldn't be taking risks with.

Too bad The Massiah and his propaganda machine made far too much of this oil spill. Huh?
 

I'd like to see how that study was done, as there is absolutely no indication is supports the conclusion you draw from it. Does it include Florida's Atlantic coast in the "Gulf" economy? How much of that oil industry is in Mexico? It seems like very skewed numbers to me, and there is not enough information to be determinative of anything.

Not that it really matters, even if oil is the largest industry in the US Gulf economy (which there is no evidence for, and it seems likely that this is not the case, but even assuming for the sake of argument that it is true), it doesn't matter. The moratorium on new drilling isn't hurting our oil industry as much as another oil spill would hurt our tourism, period. But the voice of the segment of the economy that benefits from tourism is not as unified as the oil industry, whose shills are very vocal indeed and adept at distorting facts. But when we cut through the BS, it's obvious to anybody that there is enough potential harm that could come from another oil spill, and enough public relations damage-control that needs to be done to combat the effects of the BP spill, that the moratorium is justified.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see how that study was done, as there is absolutely no indication is supports the conclusion you draw from it. Does it include Florida's Atlantic coast in the "Gulf" economy? How much of that oil industry is in Mexico? It seems like very skewed numbers to me, and there is not enough information to be determinative of anything.

Not that it really matters, even if oil is the largest industry in the US Gulf economy (which there is no evidence for, and it seems likely that this is not the case, but even assuming for the sake of argument that it is true), it doesn't matter. The moratorium on new drilling isn't hurting our oil industry as much as another oil spill would hurt our tourism, period. But the voice of the segment of the economy that benefits from tourism is not as unified as the oil industry, whose shills are very vocal indeed and adept at distorting facts. But when we cut through the BS, it's obvious to anybody that there is enough potential harm that could come from another oil spill, and enough public relations damage-control that needs to be done to combat the effects of the BP spill, that the moratorium is justified.

How much do Florida fishermen generate, every year?
 
Back
Top Bottom