While Ron Paul is not an apologist for the Obama administration in any way concerning their handling of the BP (NYSE:BP) oil spill, he does give some insight into BP itself, which is a lot different than the free market corporation it should be.
One problem you have in the Gulf situation is when you reveal one aspect of it you don't like, such as fascism, socialism or crony capitalism, you can give the impression your in support of the other side, when in fact all of it is just a big mess.
With that in mind, it's almost impossible to analyze because the entire thing is built on the wrong practices of government and business combined. So when you deal with one you endlessly have to balance it by saying this doesn't mean you agree with the other side of an issue either.
That's my own thought on it.
I've read a lot of Ron Paul's stuff, and I know he isn't supporting the governments' actions in the Gulf at this time, just because he doesn't like the past actions of BP.
Here's what he said in an article for lewrockwell.com:
"It should be noted that BP is not exactly a bastion of free market capitalism. Rather, they are very vested in acquiring government subsidies, favorably slanted policies, and competition-hobbling regulation.
"BP has even been a major lobbying proponent of cap-and-trade because of certain provisions in the legislation it could profit from. Considering who lobbies for them and what they lobby for, my concern is that attempts to hold them strictly and fully accountable could end up being nothing more than a shell game, with taxpayers ultimately holding the bag."
No comments:
Post a Comment