AOC Rules!

[alfablue]

Re: AOC Rules!

I wish we would solve this problem and go with it. Problem is there is too much NIMBY about the waste storage. The mountain in Nevada made a lot of sense but the NIMBY crowd would not allow it.

I was watching some TEDx lectures, and a very interesting point was brought up- nuclear fission is the only power generation that contains all of it's own waste. Much of Coal is up the stack, and then spread out over the countryside, gas is obviously in the exhaust, and we don't think of solar, but those panels will have to go someplace. Think about that for a while....

 

[SJHovey]

Re: AOC Rules!

If FedEx is partially held responsible, they will do a better job finding pilots. Just like if WF was partially held responsible, they would do a better job knowing what they are financing, and make sure whoever builds will do a better job. At some point, companies have to be held liable, to the point of officials going to prison, to reduce the odds of dumb failures. This pipeline is a great example- it's such a simple device- a pipe- yet they have more than their obvious share of failures. Given that they do such a simple job in a simple way, it's clear to me that the builders and operators cut corners to save money. And if the "go out of business" when a failure happens, who gets held responsible? Tax payers. And that's not the way to make sure that failures are avoided.

The problem is control. Fedex can control who flies it's planes, what kind of experience and training they have to have, what sort of policies they have to follow, etc... That's why they are liable. WF has no control over Fedex, just like they have no control over the pipelines. With all due respect do we really want some Wells Fargo executive telling companies how to build a pipeline or how to fly a plane? Because when you make them liable, that's what you're forcing them to do.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: AOC Rules!

If FedEx is partially held responsible, they will do a better job finding pilots. Just like if WF was partially held responsible, they would do a better job knowing what they are financing, and make sure whoever builds will do a better job. At some point, companies have to be held liable, to the point of officials going to prison, to reduce the odds of dumb failures. This pipeline is a great example- it's such a simple device- a pipe- yet they have more than their obvious share of failures. Given that they do such a simple job in a simple way, it's clear to me that the builders and operators cut corners to save money. And if the "go out of business" when a failure happens, who gets held responsible? Tax payers. And that's not the way to make sure that failures are avoided.

What AOC and you are really asking Wells Fargo to do, by the way, is essentially be the insurance company for the pipelines. Well, we already have insurance companies. We have an entire industry that handles insurance, why are you trying to make companies like Wells Fargo do that?

 

[aparch]

Re: AOC Rules!

Then as a counterpoint, why are bartenders held to a higher standard than corporations?

Fu** it, let's take away bartender responsibility. They're only there to make profit from drinkers anyway. Who gives a sh** if they over serve someone and that someone drives drunk and kills a family in an automobile crash.

 

[Rover]

Re: AOC Rules!

The problem is control. Fedex can control who flies it's planes, what kind of experience and training they have to have, what sort of policies they have to follow, etc... That's why they are liable. WF has no control over Fedex, just like they have no control over the pipelines. With all due respect do we really want some Wells Fargo executive telling companies how to build a pipeline or how to fly a plane? Because when you make them liable, that's what you're forcing them to do.

Not sure how the discussion ended up here but I will grudgingly admit that Hovey has a point. If FedEx had a pristine record of hiring pilots, so much so that WF lent them money to expand their fleet, and then afterwards FedEx either hired a bad one or an existing one went downhill, I don't see how WF for all their faults is in any way responsible for any damages. I would also question if the court system would even allow a law like that to exist but I'll let the many legal beagles out here answer that.

Then as a counterpoint, why are bartenders held to a higher standard than corporations?

Fu** it, let's take away bartender responsibility. They're only there to make profit from drinkers anyway. Who gives a sh** if they over serve someone and that someone drives drunk and kills a family in an automobile crash.

I'm not aware of bartenders being criminally charged for overserving somebody and then them getting into an accident? The bar itself will get sued if that's where the person got loaded at however and liability insurance for this very reason tends to be significant in this industry.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: AOC Rules!

Then as a counterpoint, why are bartenders held to a higher standard than corporations?

Fu** it, let's take away bartender responsibility. They're only there to make profit from drinkers anyway. Who gives a sh** if they over serve someone and that someone drives drunk and kills a family in an automobile crash.

Yes, that was the point. And it was a good one.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: AOC Rules!

Not sure how the discussion ended up here but I will grudgingly admit that Hovey has a point. If FedEx had a pristine record of hiring pilots, so much so that WF lent them money to expand their fleet, and then afterwards FedEx either hired a bad one or an existing one went downhill, I don't see how WF for all their faults is in any way responsible for any damages. I would also question if the court system would even allow a law like that to exist but I'll let the many legal beagles out here answer that.



I'm not aware of bartenders being criminally charged for overserving somebody and then them getting into an accident? The bar itself will get sued if that's where the person got loaded at however and liability insurance for this very reason tends to be significant in this industry.

Good. Then the liability insurance for building a ****ing pipeline should be significant as well. It's not.

 

[Rover]

Re: AOC Rules!

Good. Then the liability insurance for building a ****ing pipeline should be significant as well. It's not.

I have no idea if it is or it isn't. How do you know?

 

[alfablue]

Re: AOC Rules!

What AOC and you are really asking Wells Fargo to do, by the way, is essentially be the insurance company for the pipelines. Well, we already have insurance companies. We have an entire industry that handles insurance, why are you trying to make companies like Wells Fargo do that?

If there are actual insurance companies, then why are tax payers regularly the ones paying for the clean up?

Seems to me that either the companies don't actually have insurance OR that the insurance isn't enough. Otherwise, this would not be a discussion.

So without actual insurance, then the person who lends them the money should do their best to make sure they do good job.

We keep talking about liability, and the real issue is that nobody is stepping up to be liable. Especially liable enough to make sure that the very simple pipe is safe enough. Come on, here, we are not talking about a complex machine that has millions of different parts that do different things so that the machine can do it's job- it's a pipe. How is it that they keep getting them so wrong?

Someone is not doing their job, so someone OTHER than landholder and tax payers need to be held liable.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

If there are actual insurance companies, then why are tax payers regularly the ones paying for the clean up?

Seems to me that either the companies don't actually have insurance OR that the insurance isn't enough. Otherwise, this would not be a discussion.

So without actual insurance, then the person who lends them the money should do their best to make sure they do good job.

We keep talking about liability, and the real issue is that nobody is stepping up to be liable. Especially liable enough to make sure that the very simple pipe is safe enough. Come on, here, we are not talking about a complex machine that has millions of different parts that do different things so that the machine can do it's job- it's a pipe. How is it that they keep getting them so wrong?

Someone is not doing their job, so someone OTHER than landholder and tax payers need to be held liable.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

 

[alfablue]

Re: AOC Rules!

I have no idea if it is or it isn't. How do you know?

Who is paying for the clean up? That would answer your question.

 

[SJHovey]

Who is paying for the clean up? That would answer your question.

Didn’t BP pony up a boatload of money for the Deepwater Horizon accident?

 

[aparch]

Didn’t BP pony up a boatload of money for the Deepwater Horizon accident?

Didn't BP sue the rig owners and operators, the well manufacturer, and associated maintenance companies for their "negligence" in the upkeep of the oil rig?

And then wasnt BP shamed into participating in the cleanup costs?

 

[aparch]

Re: AOC Rules!

Also, isnt Exxon still fighting paying for continued cleanup and associated lawsuits from the Exxon Valdez crash?

So they should just be able to wash their hands of having a drunk boat pilot from 1989?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Also, isnt Exxon still fighting paying for continued cleanup and associated lawsuits from the Exxon Valdez crash?

So they should just be able to wash their hands of having a drunk boat pilot from 1989?

They should not be allowed to fight it.

 

[aparch]

Who is paying for the clean up? That would answer your question.

And to answer this question for you:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jcaf.22306#

While BP was paying all the spill response costs, the company sought reimbursement from other owners of the Macondo well and contractors BP hired for the drilling operation. BP started to bill Anadarko and MOEX from July 2010, while filing in U.S. courts for damages of up to $80 billion, the total cost of the spill, in December 2010. Consequently, various actions and claims were filed by BP and cross‐filed by other responsible parties against BP (see Exhibit 1 for details of legal proceeding between BP and other related parties). Besides the operating majority owner BP (65%), there were two other co‐owners of the oil well, Anadarko (25%) and MOEX (10%). Under the operating agreement between them, BP was to perform the drilling of the well in a good manner and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. There were multiple service providers involved in the operation.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: AOC Rules!

Just like if WF was partially held responsible, they would do a better job knowing what they are financing, ...

By that same theory Wells Fargo shouldn't make car loans to people who might violate traffic laws (simple failures), lest Wells be held liable for someone's bad driving choices (dumb failures) that may cause great harms.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: AOC Rules!

By that same theory Wells Fargo shouldn't make car loans to people who might violate traffic laws (simple failures), lest Wells be held liable for someone's bad driving choices (dumb failures) that may cause great harms.

That's what liability insurance is for, hello.

You know. The insurance that we evidently can't require gun owners to carry.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: AOC Rules!

If FedEx is partially held responsible, they will do a better job finding pilots. Just like if WF was partially held responsible, they would do a better job knowing what they are financing, and make sure whoever builds will do a better job. At some point, companies have to be held liable, to the point of officials going to prison, to reduce the odds of dumb failures. This pipeline is a great example- it's such a simple device- a pipe- yet they have more than their obvious share of failures. Given that they do such a simple job in a simple way, it's clear to me that the builders and operators cut corners to save money. And if the "go out of business" when a failure happens, who gets held responsible? Tax payers. And that's not the way to make sure that failures are avoided.

I don’t think you understand just how complex these piping systems are.

 

[alfablue]

Re: AOC Rules!

By that same theory Wells Fargo shouldn't make car loans to people who might violate traffic laws (simple failures), lest Wells be held liable for someone's bad driving choices (dumb failures) that may cause great harms.

I'm required to show that I have insurance at a specific level before I'm allowed to finance a car. So, yes, whoever is loaning me the money is making sure that bad choices are capable of being dealt with. Heck, even the state requires proof that I have that same insurance before giving me permission to drive the car on their roads.

How is that different than WF? Shouldn't corporations be held to the same standard as consumers are?