Rand Paul: s*** just happens sometimes?

The Coffee Shop
1

“What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, ‘I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,’ ” Mr. Paul said, echoing a remark made by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar early on. “I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I’ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it’s part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it’s always got to be someone’s fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.”

And on another topic much closer to home in Kentucky, where mining is still a timeworn trade, Mr. Paul seemed to thread the blame-game theme over into the Massey mining accident in West Virginia. “We had a mining accident that was very tragic,” he said. “Then we come in, and it’s always someone’s fault. Maybe sometimes accidents happen.” (Congressional hearings are being held on mine safety this week.)

So when people are negatively impacted by events, sometimes they have no recourse? From a Libertarian perspective, who do the shrimp farmers, who have lost their livelihood, turn to for compensation? “Sorry, s*** happens, better luck next time?”

2

So when people are negatively impacted by events, sometimes they have no recourse? From a Libertarian perspective, who do the shrimp farmers, who have lost their livelihood, turn to for compensation? “Sorry, s*** happens, better luck next time?”

No from a Libertarian point of view BP would be responsible for all damages and clean up. That however does not change the fact that not everything is predictable and that indeed accidents do happen.

That being said the problem with the current oil spill is not “Accidents happen” but that BP was given limited liability protection from the government.

~Matt

3

What Matt just said. Let me just add that it was Rand Paul, not Ron Paul. At least you didn’t say “Rue Paul,” like The Lorax.

4

What Matt just said. Let me just add that it was Rand Paul, not Ron Paul.

So you think that Rand Paul would agree that it could be nobody’s fault, but BP would still be responsible? That certainly doesn’t come across in how he said it. Perhaps I’m merely conflating “fault” with “responsibility.”

5

I don’t really know Rand Paul well enough yet to be able to gauge just what he might say about it. I expressed my own views on the BP situation in this thread, where I also quoted a Libertarian Party source at length.

6

Are you failing to take into consideration negligence versus strict liability?

Or maybe confusing cause with fault?

7

So you think that Rand Paul would agree that it could be nobody’s fault, but BP would still be responsible? That certainly doesn’t come across in how he said it. Perhaps I’m merely conflating “fault” with “responsibility.”

Maybe I’m not interpreting the quote you have the same as you are but despite the fact that he mentions the “Blaming” I don’t see this as saying it’s nobodies fault.

IOW there’s a difference between sitting around and trying to figure out who’s fault it is so you can belittle them in public, create new legislation and try and punish them and knowing who’s fault it is so that they are responsible for damages.

I’ll concede the state of our current justice system is such that finding the liable seems very arduous and confusing, that of course is also partially the result of clouding the waters with “Safety nets” and government oversite etc.

Again I can’t speak for the original quote but seems to me that what is trying to be said here is that we spend too much time trying to place blame for infantile reasons rather than accepting that accidents do happen and getting to the work of fixing the damage caused by the accident. One need look no further than medical malpractice and other legal issues to see the destiny of that behavior.

~Matt

8

I saw the beginning of some discussion on TV last night about how an investment in some really advanced technologies is needed in order to deal with spills like this one. I didn’t have time to watch the whole program, although apparently they were delving into some specific possibilities. But it left me thinking. It’s the kind of thing that really should be funded, not by the government (as I believe the reporter meant to suggest), but rather by a cooperative venture among the oil companies. But what incentive is there right now–given that the lion’s share of liability is handled by the government-administered fund, which is based on automatic tax revenues–for any oil company to waste its money on such a venture? Obviously, my question is rhetorical: Under our present system of socialized liability, no significant incentive at all.

9

Any person of any political affiliation who would describe either the oil spill or the mine explosion as unforeseeable, unpreventable accidents, has no business in Congress.

10

In a market where BP and other companies were 100% liable all of these things would be considered. They would likely put some funding into such products and as they came on line, which would lower their “Clean up cost risk” they would move to more and more difficult areas to drill.

As it is now they have nothing being created that would lower their risk and no reason not to risk more than their actual cost.

It’s a lose lose situation…but by god that won’t stop us from just keep on going or making it worse.

~Matt

11

Any person of any political affiliation who would describe either the oil spill or the mine explosion as unforeseeable, unpreventable accidents, has no business in Congress.

All depends on how you look at it. We could have prevented both by not drilling for oil or mining coal. Certainly one can “Foresee” just about anything…that doesn’t mean it will happen or is even worth worrying about.

The question is and always will be does the risk match the potential gain and again as long as we mess with one or both sides of that equation people will either not put enough into “Prediction” and “prevention” or will not risk enough.

Clearly in the BP case the “Risk” was severely limited via governmental regs.

~Matt

12

Huge number of unknowns and risk in deep water drilling, nowhere near enough oversight (ever wonder why the platform was regulated like a ship, and why that ship flew a flag of convenience from the Marshall Islands?) or R&D for such a risky operation. It’d be like building a nuclear facility in Kansas without knowing whether it can withstand a direct strike from an F5, and without any reliable means of containing the damage when one does.

As far as the mining disaster goes, their safety record speaks for itself. They operated, like most mining companies, on the premise that it’s cheaper to pay the fines than to clean up their act (a failure of regulation, enforcement, and private industry). To call either of these disasters a mere accident is to strip the word of its meaning entirely, and worse, confirms your loyalty to corporate interests above those of the citizens who elected you to serve.

13

Any person of any political affiliation who would describe either the oil spill or the mine explosion as unforeseeable, unpreventable accidents, has no business in Congress.

There is just no arguing that statement. I would like to see 60 Minutes send its segment on the spill to every member of Congress so there could be no denying they had access to the material.

14

Yes, there are risks and unknowns, but let’s not let one accident cause us to forget that the track record of offshore drilling is pretty solid. Can’t say the same about mining, but comparatively - offshore drilling is pretty safe.

15

Deep water drilling is another issue altogether.

16

How would Rand Paul respond to this hypothetical?

Mother of 4 Dead Kids: Senator Paul, last year you sponsored a bill that abolished the Food and Drug Administration and laid off all the food inspectors and a month later my kids ate contaminated hamburger and they all died.

Senator Paul: Let me jump in right there, maam, I’m very proud of that legislation you see, umm do you understand libertarian philosophy?

MO4DC: I understand my kids are dead.

SP: Let me explain it to you. Umm you see the government has no business getting in the way of free enterprise and getting in the middle of your purchase of hamburger from that supplier. You see, umm private property and umm free trade, yea, umm free trade are very important and umm freedom, and ummm the government is bad and wants to take it away from you.

MO4DC: but that meat supplier took my kids.

SP: Ahh yes, but here’s the beauty of libertarianism. You need to go out and tell everyone that ACME meat sells bad meat and pretty soon nobody will shop there and they’ll go out of business. In about 100 years all the suppliers of tainted meat will be gone and the free market will preserve the good ones.

MO4DC: but what happens to all the dead people who eat the meat in the meantime? What about my kids?

SP: there’s a solution to that too you see. The meat supplier will pay you compensation for your loss, that’s another disincentive to selling bad meat.

MO4DC: Compensation? How much?

SP: Dunno, whats the going rate for a dead kid these days? I’ll have my staff get back to you on that one.

MO4DC: can we have the FDA back please?

RP: I don’t think you understood me maam. You see libertarian philosophy is really cool……

17

What Matt just said. Let me just add that it was Rand Paul, not Ron Paul. At least you didn’t say “Rue Paul,” like The Lorax.

I’m kinda proud of that one. He is after all named after a woman who thought she was a man.

18

Right, the water’s deeper so I’m assuming the technology is different (and the process newer). But, it’s still a pretty clean record, no?

I was trying to track down information on the number of “deep water” rigs, but no luck. Interesting to learn that there is (was?) a bottleneck in building the rigs do to increased demand.

19

As far as I know; if it weren’t relatively clean, we’d all know about it. And that’s really the point; when the stakes are so high, the unknowns need to be known, and redundant, functional safety mechanism should be compulsory. One Deep Water Horizon every twenty years may constitute 0.001% of all deep water drilling operations, but it’s more than we should have to bear. It’s more than we *can *bear.

20

Its fairly clean, but not perfect. Here is how I would break it down:

Catastrophic Disaster (what we are experiencing now): in industrialized nations these are probably one every 30-40 year events.

Massive Disaster (Valdez level++): pretty regularly about once every 20 years. The exception being Africa/Nigeria where they are annual events.

Environmentally damaging spills (1000+ barrels): much more frequent than you realize–every other year or so, but they do seem to come in waves as most are caused by natural occurences (hurricanes destroying oil rigs) or offshore in other countries (old tankers sinking in deep water). These are usually easily contained as (in the US) they tend to occur in relatively shallow waters & usually its a matter of getting a diver down to turn a valve if the blowout valves failed.

Minor spills: in the GOM about once a quarter. Elsewhere (Alaska, West Coast) very infrequent as the state regulations in Cali & Alaska are pretty strict.

Overall we (USA) aren’t bad, but we certainly aren’t the North Sea (almost zero problems due to huge regulation & safety measures) but we certainly aren’t Mexico, Argentina, or Africa (probably the worst 3 offenders, in that order). Remember that most of Mexico’s oil production also comes from the GOM, so some of the accidents down there can be tied in with the last two I listed above (as quite a bit of their infrastructure & top-level operations are run by US contractors).