Well it seems that Ghaddaffi was “gone”.. That itself probably is good news. Now there will be some interims government. The people of Lybia now have chances hardly ever seen by countries like ours. The chances are gigantiv and the risks not less.
If they embrace sound money, no corruption, money as value and debt free government. They will strive without comparison
Unfortunatly for them it seems most of the interrims government were risen and “de”-educated in developed country. So I’m nearly sure that they will follow the developed countries. I do not think corruptoin will be fought very hard. I do not think they will not have a central bank nor “gold-money” they. The bureaucrats from the IMF, etc will come and suggest them they can not use gold as money.
If they will not embrace austrian economics they will be just another dictatorship this time under “green” authority.
If I’d live in Lybia I’d ask for the following:
1) civil rights
2) free markets and freedom of contracts
2) sound money based on gold or anything else of value
3) no acceptance for corruption
4) no debts allowed for the government
I’m afraid they will get
1) civil rights
2) Bureaucrats (probably too much in too short time, Argument we can not trust markets)
3) regulated markets and limits to freedom of contract (e.g not the freedom to accept anything but gold for payment
4) “democratic” parties
5) central bank and fractional reserve
8) tons of corrupton and “worthless” money
The chanced of the first are surely below 1% so I bet that Lybia will just get another France …. The bastard bureacrats from hell will do their best to start a new round
of suppression, theft, black mailing etc. It’s not that they will want freedom for everyone, but support of the population for their vermins
Let’s see BP chef does yachting in England. And Obama sits in his white house, blaming that BP has caused the biggest envorinmental catostrophy ever.
(Howerver we should not forget who has allowed them to exploit the oil in the gulf?, and who has the power to decide upon the to be granted security).
Ah yes it’s all that clear. The BP chef is the bad guy. And his “Royalness Obama”, oh yes he has signed the extension of the exploitation but that’s not all
he also let Amercians die in Iraque and Afghanistan. So who’s the more ruthless?
When was a President of the US ever impeached for human rights violations? Or “bending the law”?
Yes BP obviously has accepted the risks with this exploitation, and yes I can not found anything slanderous about asking all of the BP staff to pay for it.
There are a few things which show that the technical risk were either misjudged, or well may mitigated by other things. We really don’t know. Howerver what is obvious is that currently neither BP nor the US
have the technical abilities to stop this oil leak. So if they are helpless, the only conclusion one can draw is. “We can not afford to exploit in such deep waters”. Let me just remember about the Gulf war, where the Iraquis have inflamed so many bore holes. It was a catastrophy also, but the technical skills were there to seal this bore holes….
We have to conclude that disadvantages on this deep water bore holes are not yet controllable. Maybe with a bit more “fore-sight” and investing money beforehand this could have been avoided. But maybe not. Of course in retrospect a lot of people will say, it was unavoidable or was possible to prevent… But this does not help anyone yet. BP has to aquire all the knowledge they can to find a strategy stopping this leak. And instead of political pressure etc, it probalby would help much more to find experts able to help with it, and let BP but also the Politicians having decided to allow this deep water exploitations to pay for it. But I bet 1 000 000 000 : 1, that the politicians will not have to pay for it. They will use it as another lever to “aquire” more political rights. Now tell me about ruthlessness.