Skip to main content

*Another* Gulf explosion... I called it!

OK, I didn't call the explosion, but I did say the Deepwater Horizon explosion was fishy and I smelled funny business. How many "coincidences" are required before sabotage is considered a respectable hypothesis? Now we have another explosion. Come on, this is just blatant! The author of the linked article notes (apparently not seeing any irony in his statement), "Just as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill as worked its way out of the news, a new explosion has taken place." [Emphasis added]

A quick Google search shows that the oil rig company (Mariner Energy) is in the midst of a big merger deal with Apache Corporation which has also bought up a bunch of stakes from BP on the cheap because BP needed the cash to pay for costs incurred by the Deepwater Horizon spill.

That gets a big, fat "Hmmmmmmm" from me (complete with eyebrows raised). Oh, and don't forget the mysterious exploding box of chocolates. Houston seems to be a nexus of corruption.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Constitution has gone to the dogs

Actually, it should have gone to the dogs, but didn't. I'm talking about  Leona Helmsley's estate , of course. The contract clause of the Constitution says, "No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts..." This means that private contracts cannot be changed by legislative edict. This clause is incredibly important because the willingness of private individuals to engage in profitable enterprise - which is the foundation of social welfare - crucially depends on their belief that they can realize a profit. In turn, their belief that they can realize a profit depends on their belief that they can hold parties to a contract liable to the terms in the contract. For example, lenders must have confidence that they can repossess the collateral for a loan if the loan is defaulted on. Otherwise, they will not take the risk of giving the loan in the first place. When lenders are too scared to lend, everyone is worse off. In the case of Leona Hel...

What Law Is

Law What is law? Frederic Bastiat, in his treatise The Law, defines law as the collective use of force. As much as I love Bastiat’s treatise, I think his definition is not sufficiently analytical. It is certainly the case that the law plays a role in the collective use of force but the law is something more basic than this. We can begin by looking at law as it is today. The website for the Oregon courts has an excellent summary [1] of modern law and courts. I will quote it at length: Throughout history, people have had disputes and have needed some means to settle their disputes. As civil societies develop, they need an orderly system of conflict resolution. One system that developed in "western" cultures is the "law court" or court of law. In England, those early law courts developed a "body of law" called the common law, which defined both the rights of the people and the government and the duties people owe each other and their government. T...