Father's Day Blogging (posted by DT)

Well I figure that on Father's Day I should be allowed to spend time ignoring my children briefly so that I can blog on all the things rattling around in my head lately. Here goes the roundup:

• The Gulf Oil Spill: Fascinating turn of events last week when Republican congressman Joe Barton of Texas decided to switch up the tone of the congressional hearing with BP's president and actually apologized for the White House "shakedown" of the oil giant in pressuring them into putting up $20 Billion for future reimbursements of those hurt by the spill. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100617/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_bp_s_ally Barton was quickly pressured into an apology of his own, but this kind of thing reminds me of someone's definition of a gaffe that I heard a while back: a gaffe is when a politician accidently says what he really thinks. Exactly. There are significant numbers of politicians who may say they believe in "taking responsibility" and "free markets", but they really seem to just want what Business wants. Corporate Welfare is no problem as long as the money is going to wealthy corporations and not diverted to poor people or immigrants. And now I see that congress is debating a measure that would raise the liability cap on oil spills from $75 million to $10 billion. Wait a minute: why is there a liability cap on oil spills at all??? If we believe that corporations, like people, should take responsibility for their errors, why shouldn't BP pay back every dime that is lost by every fisherman in the Gulf? How could anyone be in favor of capping their liability after they destroyed a huge swath of US coastline? What has BP done to deserve our protection?
• Gun Nut Nonsense: Jeff Jacoby's op-eds in the Boston Globe are usually a good bet to get me roiled up. This one www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/06/20/the_instrument_of_crime_remains_only_an_instrument/ is no exception. Jacoby writes that guns are merely the instrument of crime, not the cause, and makes analogies to crimes committed using camcorders (to illegally record women in a bathroom) and cars so ask why we would limit guns when we don't limit cars or camcorders. Well, for starters, how about because handguns have no purpose other than to kill people? Cars, knives, and camcorders have many legitimate and socially useful purposes- we have to put up with horrible vehicular homicides and drunk driving in order to make use of all the good things that cars provide. But what are guns doing for us? Not much. And furthermore, society does put restrictions on car use- we license drivers, take away their driving privileges if they drive badly, and have laws prohibiting driving while drunk. These seem somewhat equivalent to laws limiting use of handguns. Now I have no illusions that significant gun control is coming- in spite of what the NRA and the Right Wing Nut Machine would have you believe, there is no secret Democratic plan to take away guns because the votes aren't there- but that doesn't mean I concede the point on the merits. The lack of gun control laws in our country is crazy and unjustifiable, but it's not going to change any time soon.
• In my correspondence with some rabid right wingers, we've continued to go over the old ground around stimulus spending and its usefulness. One data point I hadn't considered much is the fact that federal stimulus spending isn't really injecting lots of extra money into the economy as much as it's replacing state cutbacks. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-13/economy-in-u-s-slows-as-states-lose-federal-stimulus-funds.html States have to balance their budgets, but the recession has decreased tax revenues, causing massive budget cutbacks. Much of this was ameliorated this fiscal year by federal stimulus, but as that winds down and the economy hasn't really returned to health, state cuts are expected to be bigger than ever for next fiscal year. This doesn't bode well for the recovery at all, and is a good reason for additional stimulus. Unfortunately, that won't happen because the Tea Party types won't let Republicans vote for more deficits, and Democrats are too spineless to do it on their own. If we have another "double dip recession" this year, though, Democrats will have only themselves to blame for their pathetic display. Meanwhile, I'm still left debating whether stimulus was a good idea at all, when most legitimate economists say it kept us from another Great Depression.

Lessons from Recent Disasters (posted by DT)

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, on the heels of the coal mine disaster in West Virginia, makes me think about government regulations. I think this also applies to Wall Street regulation to some degree.

Businesses hate government "red tape". Workers hate red tape. I work in a (state) government-regulated facility, and I hate the government's red tape. It is incredibly inefficient, forcing businesses everywhere to jump through often silly hoops to show the regulators that they're safe in some way.

Of course, we all feel we work for organizations that are fully incentivized without government help to avoid a major catastrophe. If someone dies in my facility because of our negligence, we would be in huge trouble, and we don't need government regulations to show us that. Similarly, mine owners and oil well owners probably argue that they don't need so many regulations to keep their facilities from killing workers or destroying a region because they care about quality too.

But then we get these two disasters, and we need to step back and remember that this is why governments throw up so much red tape. How many mine workers are alive and well thanks to "red tape" that forces them to have safe rooms and fans and gas detectors? How many oil spills have been avoided thanks to governments forcing drillers to put in redundant safety features that stop wells from blowing out?

This Gulf spill is a complete catastrophe for the region. 1000 miles of coastline may be destroyed for years to come. The fishing industry may be completely wiped out. So the next time an oil company complains about too much bureaucracy making it too hard to create jobs, we have to remember this- all that bureaucracy protects us, and we cut corners at our collective peril.