Reply
Tue 8 Jun, 2010 06:57 pm
Mostly I don't like the idea of our legislative bodies sticking their noses into things they tend to screw up rather than help, but lately I've been thinking that perhaps BP should be pushed to hire anyone who is currently unemployed and is willing to work on cleaning up beaches/birds/wetlands/etc. By "pushed" I mean legislatively forced.
I'm getting appeals to donate to this, that, and the other cause and as one who normally does just that I'm wondering why the funding of this cleanup is something that should come from those who care when 1) this is a f-up at the highest level from a corporation who has more cash than any of us, and 2) we have a 10% unemployment rate.
I'm a regular thorn in my Representative's side so he's bound to hear from me in the next day or two but before I do that I'd like some opinions. What do y'all think? Should there be a law forcing BP to hire unemployed workers to help with the cleanup?
@JPB,
I'm guessing that would be everyone living on the gulf coast.
@JPB,
It would be a good idea and maybe silence those who wants more drilling to create more jobs.
@JPB,
I heard a wildlife expert on NPR today who would poohpooh your suggestion and I hesitantly agree (at least when it deals with the wildlife). One needs specialized training when handling the clean up of the birds and mammals, etc....
http://beta.wnyc.org/shows/bl/2010/jun/08/sticky-situation/
Bryan Walsh, staff writer for Time Magazine, talks about the oil spill cleanup efforts in the Gulf Coast.
Joining him will be Tom MacKenzie, spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to talk about physically finding and cleaning birds covered in oil.
@tsarstepan,
don't take a brain surgeon to clean rocks and sand...
@dyslexia,
It would get bogged down in bureaucratic bs for sure, such as defining "unemployed".
On the other hand I hear calls for sending in the navy to take over. WTF? Who's supposed to cover the cost of sending in the military without a plan? And, just what are they supposed to do when they get there? I understand the frustration. I'm frustrated too, but before we start calling for nationwide telethons (I heard that one earlier tonight) and a full-scale volunteer effort, I'd like to explore the idea of putting some people to work on BP's buck.
@tsarstepan,
In triage situations, even Radar O'Reilly was pressed into service.
@JPB,
The US military is the most expensive in the world. It charged $5,000 for a hammer. Remember Senator Proxmire's the Golden Fleece Award?
@talk72000,
I know. It's a cry for help from a trusted entity vs the anger against BP. I understand the anger. I understand the desire to give the appearance that we're doing something with public dollars towards a positive outcome. It's just wishful thinking.
I mentioned my idea to Mr B. He thinks it's "too complicated"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-8-2010/ass-quest-2010
There might be a 30sec commercial before the clip.
@JPB,
If they send the National Guards to prevent rowdiness would be okay. I think they are worried about liability from cleaning injuries to 'unemployed volunteers' especially under their command or care.
@talk72000,
talk72000 wrote:
It would be a good idea and maybe silence those who wants more drilling to create more jobs.
That's a current government concept. Private industry doesn't do anything with the intent of creating jobs.
@roger,
I have been reading about the protests on CNN about some group wanting the govt. not to 'ban drilling' temporarily or otherwise in the Gulf. Their reasoning was it would negatively affect job creation which they want badly.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace