Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
require that drillers:
1) Disclose the "complete chemical makeup of all materials used;"
2) Ensure the stability of underground casing in wells;
3) Ensure that waste water from fracking does not leak into the environment.
Environmental groups welcomed the proposal's mandatory requirement for disclosure but want even tougher wording.
Should 'fracking' drillers be required to list chemicals they use on federal lands in a federal register? Yes, a mandatory system is better than the voluntary one now used by industry.
No, the industry's voluntary system, in conjunction with oversight by individual states, is sufficient.
"While it is deeply disappointing that fracking on sensitive public lands has been considered at all," Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in a statement, "we fully expect the administration to implement the toughest safeguards possible to rein in irresponsible practices and protect our public spaces. We look forward to working closely with the administration to ensure that happens."
Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocket5s
As if the two are mutually exclusive?
that was my first thought as well ... the poll itself is worthless
I disagree with liberals/progressives/marxists (LPM's), therefore I am trolling. I disagree politically with pretty much everything that comes out of Obama's mouth, therefore I am a racist. Hmm ... easy to see who sees the world in black and white terms.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 60ndown
an honest days money for an honest days work
... will keep you exactly where you are. That's a great saying and nothing overly wrong with it as long as you don't mind working for someone else. Personally I would rather work smarter and get to a point where I am financially self sufficient without relying on someone else, or using my skill set to line someone else's pockets. I certainly don't blame my various employers, as my father-in-law and ironically a friend once said the same thing, "I am not in business to make someone else rich". They take all the risks, have to deal with down turns in the economy, sales, etc. so why shouldn't they reap the benefits?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 60ndown
id say its almost impossible to make a lot of money without being dishonest.
Why? You must not have ever tried. My father-in-law owns his own business and does very, very well and is about as honest as they come. Oh, and he worked his way up from sweeping the floors to eventually buying out the previous owners.
I don't own my own business (yet), but I do quite well and didn't have to be dishonest about anything.
One of the companies I used to work for was owned by a 30-something who had already sold one company for 250 million to microsoft, and fairly recently sold the current company to amazon for 800 million, of which he got some 160 million of and is still the CEO. Honest as could be, down to earth, damn nice guy.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
PETA members are insane. And I mean that. It's completly insane to advocate that your own species has no special right to live. If we follow that to it's logical conclusion the predators on earth will eventually kill us off (and rightfully so, if a bear's hunger outweighs our right to exist) and we'll go extinct. If we really followed their creed we couldn't farm other than small farms by hand. We can't burn anything or use anything that pollutes. We can't even use animals to work for us so I hope you can pull a plow. We'd basically be back to the middle ages plus a bit of technology that we find a way to maointain, except that if some hungry wolves come we let the wolves take a few kids because geez, them wolves are hungry. Eventually we simply lose. That's PETA's demands taken to their conclusion if people actually adopted them. I wonder how many of their rich asshole hollywood members are actually willing to give up any use of animals and and use of anything that pollutes or otherwise hurts the animals.
Seeing Sean Penn getting eaten by a wolf might make it all worth it.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rommelrommel
PETA members are insane. And I mean that. It's completly insane to advocate that your own species has no special right to live. If we follow that to it's logical conclusion the predators on earth will eventually kill us off (and rightfully so, if a bear's hunger outweighs our right to exist) and we'll go extinct. If we really followed their creed we couldn't farm other than small farms by hand. We can't burn anything or use anything that pollutes. We can't even use animals to work for us so I hope you can pull a plow. We'd basically be back to the middle ages plus a bit of technology that we find a way to maointain, except that if some hungry wolves come we let the wolves take a few kids because geez, them wolves are hungry. Eventually we simply lose. That's PETA's demands taken to their conclusion if people actually adopted them. I wonder how many of their rich asshole hollywood members are actually willing to give up any use of animals and and use of anything that pollutes or otherwise hurts the animals.
Seeing Sean Penn getting eaten by a wolf might make it all worth it.
Not to mention the complete hypocrisy of it all. Same goes for vegetarians/vegans who choose that path purely because of animals rights. Why so passionate about only animals? What about the plants? So it is ok to force grow (i.e. farm) millions of acres of crops, cut them down with big machines, process them, package them and sell them but you can't eat a steak? Why, because the corn cob doesn't have cute eyes and whiskers?
I'm all for some responsibility for how the animals are slaughtered and all that. That is fine, but otherwise give me a break.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Bit of an echo chamber going on in here.
First, the question as posed in the subject is mutually exclusive, unless you're of the opinion that to be responsible is to make money (I don't believe almost anyone anywhere believes those two to be synonymous).
Second, try to pay at least the tiniest bit of credit to your opponents arguments instead of straw-manning them. A fundamental principle of most vegetarians is that one should not cause or increase harm to those who have a capacity to suffer (some might look at aggregate suffering, while others might focus on individual or community suffering). I would not say that it is clear that an ear of corn can suffer, nor is it clear that, on balance, suffering would be reduced by not eating vegetables. Or, to use another of your bad arguments, I don't believe that most PETA members would agree that you are under a moral obligation to let a wolf eat your child, and that certainly is not a "logical" conclusion from the perspective of most arguments in ethics.
As for the question at hand, I think it has a related question which is tougher to answer: does one always stand for some particular first principles, or does one allow these principles to be contextually-bound such that long-term success, in whatever sense may be appropriate, is within grasp? Must we optimize our solutions, where we must meet every important principle, or is it enough to have satisficing solutions, where good enough is good enough? Is it alright to be irresponsible when fracking if, in the long run, that money could be used, for example, to feed millions of hungry mouths? Is that the only way to accomplish the end results? I confess the question seems to require more certainty than I can muster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer
The experience you have listening to music through speakers may be similar to drinking great wine and eating the best cheese, but the speaker isn't the wine, it's the wine glass. The music is the wine and cheese. Artists make great music, artisans make great food. Engineers and factories design and make great speakers.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
In my opinion good reputation means more then short term benefit of making immediate profit. Ebay is perfect example of it. here is the story. I bought some battery for my phone from china of course. $15 delivered. 3 weeks later i received it and it was defective, battery cover won1t snap in place. I complaned and 3 weeks later I received replacement with the same problem, I asked for refund and was ignored so I posted honest feedback. seller contacted me asking to remove feedback. seller refunded my money+$5 and sent me 2nd replacement. then feedback correction request. I changed feedback to positive. was I happy about outcome? you bet I am . ive got what i wanted and make $5 on top of it. would i buy from that seller again? absolutely! One negative cost much more in lost sales. look at every US retailer... you can return almost anything without reason, just because you can. does it cost them money? yes and a lot of it.IN the rest of the world it`s not that easy to return anything for refund. in many cases it`s store credit or product must be defective.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
Bit of an echo chamber going on in here.
First, the question as posed in the subject is mutually exclusive, unless you're of the opinion that to be responsible is to make money (I don't believe almost anyone anywhere believes those two to be synonymous).
Synonymous, no, but it doesn't mean you can't be responsible and still make a lot of money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
Second, try to pay at least the tiniest bit of credit to your opponents arguments instead of straw-manning them. A fundamental principle of most vegetarians is that one should not cause or increase harm to those who have a capacity to suffer (some might look at aggregate suffering, while others might focus on individual or community suffering).
if they want to follow that line of thinking, fine. But by no means does that give them the right to try to force me into their way of thinking, or anybody else for that matter. It just like some religions in that regard. If you want to try to convince me, great, show me what you got, but don't force it down my throat or worse, try to do it via legislation.
However when the day comes when they can convince every predatory animal on the planet to stop eating each other, I'll follow suit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
Must we optimize our solutions, where we must meet every important principle
important to who?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
or is it enough to have satisficing solutions, where good enough is good enough?
again to whom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
Is it alright to be irresponsible when fracking if, in the long run, that money could be used, for example, to feed millions of hungry mouths?
irresponsible based on what? And who is to say it isn't? after all, the end result is fuel correct? That fuel is what powers the vehicles that transport the food to let millions eat. That fuel also provides jobs for the transporters directly, and those transporters sell things which are made by others who have jobs and so forth. So, all of that should be bypassed so food could be bought directly. Oh, never mind that that food has to be transported...
is it responsible to feed millions of hungry mouths to people who live where nothing grows (in the case of say Africa)? Or is it more responsible to a) teach them how to grow it. b) tell them to move where the food can grow. Now if you want to donate your money to their cause knock yourself out. But to say that someone else should give their money away to meet your (using 'you' and 'your' in a general sense here) moral obligations is just more selfish than someone claiming a person or company is selfish/greedy because they keep too much money, that they made no less.
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
We continue to slip deeper into the dichotomous mindset of good and evil. I've never seen proof of any wrong being ALL wrong and vice versa. The fact is, every decision and subsequent outcome is based on a billion shades of gray. Are to look at those who are 51% bad or just the all the way bad?
What in particular about fracking are people complaining about? Wastewater downhole or at the surface?
You need to realize that 80+% of the fracking fluid actually stays in the ground. Of the 20% that is recovered it can be sent off to a water treatment facility and utilized for future fracking or treated local and blown back down the hole.
There are alternative methods of fracking that are being tested which are less harsh. The chemical compositions of the fluid are dependant on the substrata of the region and what is necessary to hold it open to allow for the gas/oil/heavy condensate extraction.
In most states the composition of the fluid has to be known and reported. Especially on MSDS's for OSHA requirements.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
2011 USACi Modified Q Champion 2007 Toyota FJ Cruiser
Team Focal
Team Audionutz South
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundJunkie
You need to realize that 80+% of the fracking fluid actually stays in the ground. Of the 20% that is recovered it can be sent off to a water treatment facility and utilized for future fracking or treated local and blown back down the hole.
There are alternative methods of fracking that are being tested which are less harsh. The chemical compositions of the fluid are dependant on the substrata of the region and what is necessary to hold it open to allow for the gas/oil/heavy condensate extraction.
In most states the composition of the fluid has to be known and reported. Especially on MSDS's for OSHA requirements.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Quote:
Leaching is an environmental concern when it contributes to groundwater contamination. As water from rain, flooding, or other sources seeps into the ground, it can dissolve chemicals and carry them into the underground water supply.
If people were to drink contaminated ground water it may pose health problems.
[SIZE5"]Power kills speakers ... not waveform shape. ~ werewolf[/SIZE]
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundJunkie
You need to realize that 80+% of the fracking fluid actually stays in the ground. Of the 20% that is recovered it can be sent off to a water treatment facility and utilized for future fracking or treated local and blown back down the hole.
There are alternative methods of fracking that are being tested which are less harsh. The chemical compositions of the fluid are dependant on the substrata of the region and what is necessary to hold it open to allow for the gas/oil/heavy condensate extraction.
In most states the composition of the fluid has to be known and reported. Especially on MSDS's for OSHA requirements.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
I've heard of the public complaining about the sheer volume of water used in the process but never the potential groundwater contamination. That argument has never made sense to me. I work for an oil company. I'm not on a rig, I'm actually in a completely different part of the business but I hear little bits here and there. We end up with so much water in our process that there are rumors that we might start selling to other oil companies for fracking in other parts of the country. We rarely frack but we rely heavily on thermal injection. A typical water cut for any given lease is 80% so there's plenty of water to go around.
'84 GN 10.60@ 127mph. Infinity 3.5 coaxials and a cheap Sony HU.
Fracking Does Contaminate Groundwater: Carry on Drilling Regardless
Quote:
The EPA’s report on groundwater contamination by fracking (or frakking to taste) for natural gas says that the process does indeed contaminate ground water. So now we’ve got to decide should be the reaction to that: my contribution to the debate is that we should carry on drilling regardless.
EPA Connects Dots Between Groundwater Contamination and Fracking in Wyoming
The tables turned on the gas industry today with the release of a new report by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) connecting the dots between fracking and groundwater contamination in the state of Wyoming, located in the heart of the Niobrara Shale basin.
[SIZE5"]Power kills speakers ... not waveform shape. ~ werewolf[/SIZE]
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuickGN
I've heard of the public complaining about the sheer volume of water used in the process but never the potential groundwater contamination. That argument has never made sense to me.I work for an oil company.
Take a little of the fracking fluid home and boil some eggs in it, you'll be fine
nummy nums
[SIZE5"]Power kills speakers ... not waveform shape. ~ werewolf[/SIZE]
Re: Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
If intelligence is not spiritualized it runs the grave risk of becoming stupid intelligence.
The very notion of making money at any and all costs is dim-witted. This senseless concept plagues the world and is the cause of most of the planets woes.
I think half the populace is infected with this malady, and judging from the poll, 50% seems about right. This is actually good, because we are teetering on the edge. Just a few more virtuous souls and this planet along with its inhabitants will begin to heal.
Should we make money at any and all costs or be responsible ?
[SIZE5"]Power kills speakers ... not waveform shape. ~ werewolf[/SIZE]
Linear Mode
