Thursday, August 31, 2017

What Went Wrong in Houston

From Sean:
Anyone want to talk about our lax regulatory scheme that led to the chemical plant explosions?

A couple of years ago, the Houston Chronicle did a tremendous series on how little control there is over hazardous chemicals in Texas (and to a lesser extent nationwide).  Chemical Breakdown

From Moose:
We could also talk about lax (zero) zoning regulations that ultimately led to some of the serious problems Houston is facing.

I feel bad for the people of Houston, but I don't feel bad that Texas' Republicanism is showing...and it's not a good look.

Additional Links from G2A

Of course my view is pretty simple, it is the same reason a poor Baby Mama has 3 kids that she can not afford to feed on her own. They both know that the tax payers will pick up the cost of their irresponsible and stupid decisions.  I mean look at what we spent after Katrina so many irresponsible people and businesses could rebuild in a high risk location.

14 comments:

John said...

Equal Relief

Anonymous said...

The environment is not my issue, but I do know one or things about them. The first thing I know is that weather, and more generally the environment is not affected by what we call things. Terminology and words of art don't keep you dry on a rainy day. I also know that politically, environment issues are dead. Part of what we did in electing Donald Trump is make a decision as a nation that human factors don't play a role in whatever is going on with the weather. We decided to put our faith in Rush Limbaugh. Whatever the merits of that choice, we did make it, and there is no coming back from it. No cavalries will be coming the the rescue in the third act. We are committed.

Moving on to what I know a whole lot less about. Gulf waters are getting warmer and warm waters fuel hurricanes. Harvey was a terrible storm not so much because of the wind as it was because of the rain. While I am not much of an analogy guy, what I know about fires is perhaps applicable here; that a fire requires fuel to continue, and the more fuel you give it, the longer it will last, and the hotter it will get. The same relationship applies between warm water, and strong storms, I would suggest.

--Hiram

Sean said...

No, the poor mom and the irresponsible chemical company are not the same.

The current Administration is ready and willing to lavish the irresponsible chemical company (and all other companies) with tax breaks, despite the fact that corporate profits as a percent of the economy are at historical highs. The irresponsible chemical company can contribute millions of dollars in soft money to politicians to make sure it continues to get favorable treatment.

Meanwhile, this Administration is prepared to whack the poor Mom's health care so when she breathes in the noxious fumes from the irresponsible chemical company's plant she has no way to get treatment. The poor mom has essentially negative political power in the current system.

John said...

Personally I think the poor Mom has huge political clout... She shows up on TV with her 4 children from 4 different Daddies and cries that someone needs to provide them a new home, food, healthcare, etc. She cries "look at my suffering babies..."

And the Liberal Feelers of the country will strive to pass programs to provide her with food, housing and healthcare with no expectation that she change in any way.

Where as the chemical company which already had multiple redundant systems in place will have to pay fines and buy even more systems to ensure this does not happen again. All the while people like yourself will deem them as the villains because a natural disaster of historic proportions occurred.

Sean said...

"Where as the chemical company which already had multiple redundant systems in place will have to pay fines and buy even more systems to ensure this does not happen again. All the while people like yourself will deem them as the villains because a natural disaster of historic proportions occurred."

All of their redundant systems failed. They have been cited multiple times in the past for violations of regulations. And now their collective response to the fact that their plant is going to start on fire or explode is little more than a shrug.

The notion that, given such circumstances, they should have to "pay fines and buy even more systems to ensure this does not happen again" really shouldn't be controversial.

John said...

Holding the company accountable is fine.

Now when will you agree to do the same with irresponsible citizens?

Laurie said...

"Now when will you agree to do the same with irresponsible citizens?"

While I agree it would be better for all citizens to be responsible and self sufficient it just seems to me the better option is provide assistance rather than let these people and their children be sick, homeless, and hungry.

I think you could preach about this for 10 more years and no minds will be changed. I advise typing some new thoughts rather than just keep repeating yourself.

Sean said...

"Now when will you agree to do the same with irresponsible citizens?"

Yawn.

Anonymous said...

People like to have kids. It's a biological imperative. And on the whole, society benefits when they do. Paying for other people's are one of the things in life I don't mind doing.

--Hiram

John said...

Laurie,
As long as incompetent and under-educated mamas / papas are allowed to breed and poorly and neglectfully raise children to follow in their foot steps. I will continue to beg that our society put an end to it. Those children deserve much better.

Now I realize that you are happy letting them breed and giving them food, healthcare, and a nice pen with no expectations of improvement or accountability.

However I will continue to see that as the cruelest thing our society can do.

John said...

Along those lines, why are Hiram, Sean and yourself so inconsistent?

It seems that you want to hold this poor company that was financially damaged by this "Act of God" accountable for something. And you likely want the government to force them to change their ways so that it can not happen again. Possibly regulating them to the point that they move out of the country if necessary.

And yet you want to do NOTHING to stop welfare mamas and dead beat dadas from making more children who will be poorly raised and that the tax payers will need to pay for.

Why are you so okay with controlling businesses and so against controlling citizens?

I mean when either group screws up, people are hurt and it costs the tax payers. But at least rarely are children harmed by the actions of companies. At least when compared to all the kids being raised questionable households.

Laurie said...

this is very offensive

"Now I realize that you are happy letting them breed and giving them food, healthcare, and a nice pen with no expectations of improvement or accountability."

the country you seem to be imagining is not a place that I'd want to live.

John said...

Do you mean a country:

where children are raised by 2 Parents who are mature, educated, emotionally stable, personally responsible for themselves and their actions and not addicted.

where society dissuades citizens who do not meet the above requirements from making and raising children poorly.

where society values children and ensures they are well cared for by capable adults.

John said...

As you know I find it very personally offensive that you support:

Enabling people who can barely care for themselves to have multiple children that they are in no way prepared to raise responsibly and well.

Thereby helping to propagate the bigotry of low expectations, the academic achievement gap, generational poverty and the hopelessness of government dependency.


These people can be so much more if only our society would believe in them and hold them accountable. They are not rabbits to be fed in their cage as you promote, they are humans who need to be challenged and pushed to grow.