Messed up.

Private ownership of the oceans? WWIII?

The Exxon Valdez catastrophe – a mere peccadillo?

http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/3571.cfm#down

Ignorance can be cured - stupid is forever.

How wicked of BP
To give us what we demand
Cheap(ish) oil from 'neath the sea
And from the desert sand

So whose to blame for this catastrophe?
I looked in the mirror, and it was me.

If you drive a petrol guzzling car you share the blame

If you squeal at rising petrol prices you share the blame.

If you don't make the provision of effective public transport a first order issue in choosing who to vote for you share the blame.

If you agitate for ever more toll-free roads to be built you share the blame.

If you want more airports instead of a high speed rail link between Australian cities you share the blame.

So stop being so damned self-righteous and change your habits and your voting preferences.

Look in the mirror.

So now we should privatize the seas because of an oil spill. There's an Australian farmer currently in the high court fighting for the loss of his farming property rights which was caused by Native Vegetation laws. If people are having to fight for 'just' property rights on land, I think this article is getting a little ahead of itself. Obviously there's an agenda in mind, to suggest we should privatize the seas, perhaps by those who think they should own the seas themselves. I would hazard a guess that it's the same lobby groups that helped bring about the Native Vegetation laws to steal other peoples' property rights.
Obama wants to push his cap and trade agenda because of the oil spill. How many other ludicrous agendas can you get out of an oil spill? How about cleaning up the oil as quickly and efficiently as possible? It seems that was not a high priority back in early May with the US Government refusing the offer of Dutch ships to the collect the oil. The offer has now been accepted six weeks later.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6072778-us-finally-permits-dutch-skimmers-to-help-bp-oil-spill

This article is weel written but overly simplistic. Private ownership over the seas would not only allow for greater control over the use of the oceans but it would also stifle most current sea-borne trade.

Would a shipping company ship items if they knew that they had to pay a fee for crossing every private sector? Probably, like every good company they would just shove this onto the consumer. Would the consumer, bussiness's themselves pay this fee to ship thier goods? Probably, again they just shift the cost onto someone else. Would that companies consumers, us, pay the increased cost - or purhaps a better question is could we pay the increased cost? Now that is the question.

Further, if a private concern owned a section of the ocean and an oil copany had to pay for the right to drill, plus any insurances required, would the oil company not pass on that cost to its consumers? Further placing the pressure on us the end consumer. Everything that moves goods needs fuel supplied by the oil companies, our personal transport requires fuel, the cost of which would go up if this was the case.

And what would happen to insurance premiums on ships, companies, enterprises, etc if BP had had to take out an policy and make a claim? Insurers need to get the money from somewhere themselves.

I don't think the author has quite thought through all of the issues involved with private ownership of the oceans.

This essay is IMHO verging on the insane. I note with interest the author's apparently reasonably central role in the processes which led to the Global Financial Recession.

Kris, I believe your "private good, government bad" theory has crossed the line here! You cannot blame all bad things on collective action, and the free market does not solve all things: largely because markets can only be "free" to the extent that you can restrict the powerful players from changing rules to their benefit. Do you see the conundrum? In *theory* the free market works, in practice all "free" markets are manipulated by the most powerful/profitable to benefit themselves. To keep any semblance to "free" needs an independent umpire...the dreaded government. There is also the issues of natural monopolies, and the fact that "market corrections" that involve thousands of livelihoods, or a millionaire or two, are generally prevented from happening due to riots, social displacement, etc.
This spill was most definitely BP's fault, and more stringent safety rules with real teeth are the answer.
At a local Geelong oil refinery there are regular spills. The company just pays the fines, year after year because the fines are less expensive than fixing the plant. When the issue is raised they threaten to move to Asia. Jobs vs pollution: jobs win. Of course they will shut down and move to Asia anyway...but only when most profitable to do so. Privatising everything is a very silly idea!

Ridiculous

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10555&page=0

What a ridiculous article.
The author fails to mention one of the core attributes of a private property system is "exclusion". The owner gets to say who can and cant use their property.
I wonder if the author would be so keen on privatising the oceans if GetUp or Greenpeace were to end up as the owners.

<<In most cases where property is privately owned and where the owner values the property, it is better taken care of than property that is publicly owned.>>
Oh really. So all the farmers that farmed their land to desert or overstocked till the grass was gone soon to be followed by the soil or irrigated till their land was a salt pan are taking care of their property? All the open cut mines are "taking care" of the land? All the soil erosion and salination and loss of fertility we see all around this country and many others is "taking care of the land"? All the factories that polluted their sites so badly the government had to step in or the land has the be fenced off never to be used again were "taking care" were they? What about the toxic waste plume under the Orica plant at Botany. Great stewardship of the land there wasnt it.

Your article is a self serving crock, with no basis in reality, designed to hand the richest and wealthiest our oceans and all our remaining land so that they can then use their monopoly on everything to (further) enslave us all. Such is the face of modern capitalism. Well on its way to becoming the new feudalism, with slavery, exclusion and barbarity for all but a lucky few who would happily wipe out everything if it gave them a few more bucks and bit more power.

The capitalist fanboys are rising to defend one of their own because they are quaking in fear that if we the people go after BP for this and make them pay then all the other miscreant capitalists will be next. As they should be in a democracy.

BTW. We have tried true "free market" economies for many thousands of years...it is called "law of the jungle".
It wasn't until some societies formed non-individual institutions that this thing called civilisation was invented.
I still reckon the banks need to be as accountable as BP for their stuffups. The taxpayers handed over trillions without a single banker sacked or (multi million $)wages docked.

Hi mikk,
I thought the author was suggesting Greenpeace, WWF and the like own the oceans, either that or his favourite multi-national corporation or even Non-government organisation. I guess we all read the same words but interpret different underlying agendas. Greenpeace and WWF have certainly contributed their pseudo scientific campaign material to the IPCC climate science reports and it's been presented to Joe Public as peer reviewed science. We've got some common ground here mikk in terms of our anger, now we have to make sure we direct it in the right direction. We all want to save the planet, so is the IPCC lot the best to lead us? Personally I think not.

Sorry Kris, it doesn't weork that way.

Just ask the farmers who have coal seem gas mining on their properties. The state claims the resource & licence the miners/extractors. The land holder has no say, at all.

Many of them are complaining of gas leaks making them sick, & damaging their stock, but they are not even getting a hearing.

You'll have to find another control method, like perhaps, standards written into the mining lease.

I think this is "Karma" coming to get BP after they changed their logo to look like a flower.

CO2 – Perhaps you would prefer that the IPCC publish the unscientific rants of oil shills - Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, Swizzle Eyes Monckton, Vaclav Klaus and the rest of the fossil fuel industry parasites - all unqualified, all claiming expertise and all peddling disinformation to an unsuspecting public?

It appears that you have zero knowledge on the important role that Greenpeace has played over decades, particularly within its research laboratories which house its peer-reviewed scientists (based at the University of Exeter in the UK) who provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace offices worldwide, over a range of disciplines.

An extensive database of scientific literature has been built up at the Greenpeace laboratories since 1986 and serves as a core information resource centre but you claim this is ‘pseudo-science?'

http://www.greenpeace.to/people.htm

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:BfMAR-57h4sJ:www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/deploying-mescosms-79n/blog/12004+greenpeace+laboratories+scientists&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

In addition, Greenpeace has extensive experience and knowledge on the environmental impacts of oil spills so were your obfuscations unintentional or were they meant to impede endeavours to mitigate emissions of CO2?

Private ownership of the oceans?
Why not the air? Charges to fly through it (safely), and charges to breathe it?
Come on, Kris!

Ponder,

LOL

You beat me to the punch.

If we privatised the atmosphere we could charge people for dumping greenhouse gases in it.

I don't like Obama's condemnatory rhetoric about BP. We don't know if BP is guilty of negligence of any sort or not.

America's (and the developed world's) addiction to oil is to blame.

BP and CEO Tony Hayward are now in the position of just being condemned for everything that can incur the slightest bit of criticism, while all their positive efforts will incur no compliments but rather just further condemnation for not being good enough.

This is the psychology of a company and individual that are in the bad books. Obama should realise this and stop promulgating it.

*they are quaking in fear that if we the people go after BP for this and make them pay*

LOL Mikk! It turns out that those capitalists in Florida will use
the courts to claim every cent that they can think of and it will
be British pensioners, who on average will lose 600 pounds each,
just on the dividend cut. For of course British pensioners are
the major shareholders of BP.

I'm amused that you are happy, that they are about to get screwed
by the US courts and legal system. Florida's rich capitalists
will no doubt cash in big time!

At the BP hearing on Thursday, 'the public rebuke was broken only by Republican Joe Barton of Texas, who seemed to think that although they facilitated the worst environmental disaster in American history, BP had endured enough.

"I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation that does something that is legitimately wrong is subject to a shakedown," said Republican Barton.

The "shakedown," Barton said, was President Obama's insistence that BP set up a $20 billion fund for claims filed by Gulf Coast victims; a fund that would be paid out without the oil giant's supervision.

"Barton, by the way, has received $317,000 from the oil and gas industry donations since 2007. Most of the members on the committee have received a total of $1 million-plus since the start of last year -- $1.316505 million since Jan. 2009.

"NOTE: Barton has since been forced to apologize for his...um...apology to BP.

"Well coached by BP lawyers, Hayward deflected all the questions about allegations that the company cut corners and ignored safety measures to save money.

"Your answer 65 times that 'you don't know' doesn't leave us with confidence," snapped Rep. Peter Welch.

"One of the only straight answers Hayward promptly provided during the hearing led Rep. Mike Doyle, to consider changing his career choice:

"My compensation last year was recorded, I think, at $6 million dollars," said BP’s Tony Hayward.

And the Americans say that BP's long-term, reckless disregard of safety is threatening the Gulf with an oil spill many times larger than the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion.

“The BP Atlantis, an oil platform in the Atlantic, is so fraught with safety problems that even BP management admits another catastrophic accident is possible. Yet BP continues to spend millions of dollars lobbying federal officials who then turn a blind eye to safety violations. Meanwhile, BP continues to operate the Atlantis -- a disaster just waiting to happen.” Stay tuned!

Kris Sayce's solution to this calamity appears to be creating an artificial calamity which can then be turned into social mayhem which in turn opens the door for the manipulators' to make even more profit from ecological & social disasters. A great human indeed ! Probably gets nominated for a Nobel Prize.

The majority of land around cities is privately owned and look what that system has done to nearby creeks, rivers and estuaries. And yes, Kyoto is taking private land away from farming families.

There is dire urgent need to overcome local state and national media gagging of information about all environment damage incidents. Knowledge allows for constructive debate and solutions. For real news see:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65D3Z220100614

It is not just most of the oceans and seas that we hold in common. It is the entire Planet. While individual nations hold their sovereignty the Planet and its atmosphere appears to be deteriorating in a way inimical to human (and other species) survival. Whether we agree or not with the writer's thesis, he is raising the vital issue of how we maintain what we hold in common. I am not convinced that more private ownership of bits of the Planet is the way forward.

How do do assign property rights and design a market? A system of ocean pollution permits? Given the absence of international agreement on an emissions trading scheme, perhaps regulation. A reassignment of international waters? Tough one.

The tough one is the grey matter between human ears. For example what has a CO2 emission trading scheme got to do with reducing sewage nutrient pollution in the ocean and oil well accidents?

Co2
The reason I mentioned Greenpeace etc and presumed the author would not be so keen on them owning the oceans is that they would restrict access to their property. They wouldnt charge a fee, introduce restrictions on oil drilling, fishing etc. They would say "KEEP OUT".
As is their right as the "property owner". Where would that leave the authors desire for increased exploitation and development of OUR oceans?

Yabby
You call the residents of Florida "rich capitalists". How do you know. Many Florida residents are retirees. Hardly the definition of "rich capitalists". Why shouldnt they bankrupt BP for what they have done. Their home and environment is being fouled by this spill with no end in sight. Shareholders should be more careful where they invest their money. Do shareholders not have a duty to make sure the company/s they own behave in an ethical and lawful manner?
Anyway you are full of it when you say that BP is owned by British pensioners. Im sure there are a few but since less than half of BP shareholders are British I wonder how the pommy pensioners are in control. Indeed according to BPs website it is only one third owned by UK citizens/businesses. 25% of shareholders are from the US! http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9010453&contentId=7019612
All "property" is theft. Doubly so for privitising current and past common assets "owned" by all, both current people and future ones.

Yes, oil spills are not just the fault of companies like BP, but of society itself. The Truth is that society allows and sponsors oil spills to a degree, because it hate nature and animals. Animals are Superior to humans, and show humans up. They show humans the Reality of how disturbed and sickly they Truly are.

I read this poem :
"How wicked of BP
To give us what we demand
Cheap(ish) oil from 'neath the sea
And from the desert sand

So whose to blame for this catastrophe?
I looked in the mirror, and it was me.

If you drive a petrol guzzling car you share the blame

If you squeal at rising petrol prices you share the blame.

....
Look in the mirror."

A very good poem, but it fails to place the blame on society, instead it seems to place the blame onto individuals. Individuals are NOT responsible for the oil spill, nor any other action or event that occurs due to society. Only society and societal leaders are responsible.

For more information, visit My website at www.Truthmedia.8k.com and also pay attention to the "animal abuse" essay.

*All "property" is theft*

I'm not sure what you mean by that one, Mikk. If you and I both
earn 100$, you blow yours at the pokies and I save mine, are
you going to begrudge me having more then you and want half of
mine too?

*Why shouldnt they bankrupt BP for what they have done.*

And who would benefit? Best to Keep BP operating and making profits,
which can be used to pay damages as well as an income stream for
all those pensioners which largely own the company. Not just British
pensioners, American ones too. Plus charities, philanthropic funds
etc, all who own BP shares. I sometimes wonder who you actually
hate, when you hate these corporations. The staff perhaps?

*Shareholders should be more careful where they invest their money.*

Mikk, when people put money in a pension fund or super fund, they
are not exactly going to go out onto oil rigs to see if the guys
are doing their job or not. The thing is, we've had over 40 years
of offshore drilling now, with very few problems. This is the first
major spill that I can recall, so lots of people will learn a great
deal and the industry will be all the wiser, when it comes to the
future. So that is a good thing. It is perhaps because of this
good record, that complacency could have set in.

Some people post only about profits. They're greedy and obsessed with the black and can think of nothing else. Money, money, money! Show me the money!

And what will be the penalty for Chevron and Total's apocalypse and crimes against the environment? A 'petty cash' fine and business as usual?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/18/buncefield-fire-oil-company-guilty

What are you girls complaining about ? BP changed its name from something like 'British Petroleum' to just BP - but that wasn't enough for you ! Then they changed their logo to a flower to show their sincerity about being green, and even that wasn't enough either ! And they are investing millions in renewables like biofuels, but some people are still never satisfied !

As Ludwig says above, 'We don't know if BP is guilty of negligence of any sort or not.' Why can't you leave it at that ? You don't appreciate that BP is LOSING 100,000 barrels of oil EVERY DAY while this goes on ! Imagine what this is doing to their bottom line !

If Obama can bail out the banks, why can't he bail out BP - 39 % of its shareholders are Americans, so it really is substantially an American company. Is this spill in British waters ? No, it's in American waters. So it really is an American problem - so why isn't Obama fixing it ? Why hasn't he fixed it yet ? Has he got orders from his commie friends to keep this problem festering, just to make BP look bad ? Why isn't he putting booms across the Florida straits to stop the oil getting into the Gulf Stream, up to Canada, and then around the North Atlantic and across to Europe ?

Tony Hayward has explained again and again that he wasn't in the decision-making loop, but will you give him a chance ? No !

So this spill is not either BP's fault or Tony Hayward's fault, or anybody's really. Yet you expect BP to clean it up ! And then the Greenies rabbit on about seventy days at 100,000 barrels a day, as if BP doesn't care ! They know this is hurting investors in the US as well as in Britain ! They're people too - they like fishing, boating, all the things that the small people used to like to do.

So give them a break !

Yeah, right.

Joe