Would we have been better off with nationalized oil?

[KonaKane]

On August 19th 1953, democratically elected Iranian president Mohammed Mossadegh was rounded up and arrested. Removed from power in a seedy CIA plot code named Operation Ajax. While this outrageous intrusion into Iranian affairs was kept from the American public for years after it happened, there was clearly one guiding motivation and one only that led to the coup: oil. Iran had alot of it, Britain and the US wanted access to it, and President Mossadegh wanted to nationalize it. The rest is pretty embarrassing history.

Fast forward to the Gulf Spill. The right wing has banged the drum beat of laissez faire economics without a rest, continuing to hold that private enterprise is the best to offer the people, and the best solution to any problem. But is it really? If anything stands as stark evidence to the contrary, it's the current BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. It is the worst ecological event in our history to date, and the great free and private entity called BP has been able to do little to nothing about it. In today's vernacular, an epic fail if ever there was one.

What if we dare utter the unspeakable, and toy with the notion of nationalized US oil? Would the current disaster have been this disastrous if our oil were nationalized? Government gets alot of crap for "never being able to to anything right" but how much better has this huge private company been at the task? They had to have their arm twisted - by government - to even come up with a paltry relief fund for the victims. Their touted technology has so far failed them. Had the government been at the reins of oil, perhaps there would have been enough saftey regulations in place that would have thwarted what happened in the Gulf. The military could have been mobilized straight away with clean up and capping efforts. Say what you want about in the inefficiency of government, there is no way they could have done worse.

Maybe it's time we seriously reconsider the idea of nationalizing our oil. By all evidence so far, we cannot trust big business to deal with such an enormous and environmentally damaging event. It seems all we can trust them to do is collude with some governments to eradicate any threat they have to their profits, at any cost. Oh, and that oil company all those years ago that caused the removal of their elected president? It was called Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.

Years later it changed it's name to "British Petroleum".

[izquierdista]

1. Norway is

[KonaKane]

3. Damn right they are. We have this bizarre allergy to nationalizing an important industry.

I'll never understand why.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. A little US History might help

the US luuves it's private sector... to the point of defending it to the nth degree. And that shall we say trend, started oh in the 17th century... at the very least. It is a long trend, hard to break the habit you know.

The War of Independence was about property rights, one of the causes, why Americans who did not own property were not able to cast a vote until the Age of Jackson... and only if they were white and male.

The only two times the US has actually attacked property rights, was the civil war... (yes slaves were property who essentially were made non-property by government fiat). Yes there is more to the civil war, but the nice, freed the slaves line was truly an attack on personal property... and why many in the South have an allergic reaction to melding Feds, er Yanks... to this day. Some say that the US has no history, well many in the South, I mean the old families, still have not forgotten.

The third time the US actually did something about this was... the rail nationalization during WW I... which were returned to the previous owners after the war was over.

Hell, every time furiegn governments have had the gumption to nationalize oh oil industry, we have had coups and other unpleasant acts. Mexico escaped because of a looming World War, not because DC was too happy about it. And Mossadeqh, well he ran afoul of not just the Brits but us too.

They don't teach US history do they? What am I saying? No, they don't... but oh the myths that are taught are amazing... and yes what's her name (Betsy Rose) had a little do with the Flag, but jeesus age that is the kind of depth of US History "knowledge" instead of the ugly reality.

[iamjoy]

2. No

We don't need to nationalize the industry. We need the regulators to do their damn jobs.

[postulater]

5. A commando strike force of inspectors and regulators

who have the whistleblower financial incentives to find violations. They travel from rig to rig.

That would keep the oil companies on their toes.

[Oregone]

7. Why would they?

Private industry will amass wealth, elbow their way into political circles, lobby away regulations, and bribe off regulators.

Over any long amount of time, how could you expect sufficient government regulation of this industry? Or almost any private for-profit industry?

This one, unfortunately, has a lot of consequences when that ball is dropped.

What sufficient reason is there, at this point in time, to allow private ownership of the means of production in the oil sector? Why allow a system that results in less government revenue and the natural degradation of regulations?

[w4rma]

9. We should just nationalize BP USA and use their profits to pay for their disaster.

5 Billion a year isn't going to pay for a cleanup. And, as a bonus, we'll have our own oil company to compete against big oil and better stabilize prices.

[KonaKane]

13. I'm all for that.

[laughingliberal]

4. Yep. K&R eom

[Gold Metal Flake]

6. Yes.

The entire make-up of this nation would have been changed withotu the sociopathic CEOs in charge all of these years. Every sector of modern America would be changed. If the US had nationalized oil since the 1930s, say, would we have perpetual war now? What would be the state of public transport? What would our cities look like? Who would be in Congress and who would control them? How much of our power would be supplied through renewable sources? Would we have as many military bases?

[Waiting For Everyman]

8. Yes.

How about a baby-step? We could have a law that oil drilled here must be sold here.

[MellowDem]

10. Not necessarily...

It's all about who you elect and put in office. I mean, we did have FEMA, but look who was running it. And while profits would no longer drive cost cutting, the government agenda would, and we have all seen what can happen with that.

[KonaKane]

11. But if government's agenda has to do with what the people want,

how is that a bad thing?

[MellowDem]

14. Well, it should be that way...

but many times it has to do with what will keep whichever party in power rather than what's best for the people. Just look at Obama's opening of more drilling due to political pressure before this accident. If we had nationalized oil, there would still be drilling platforms out there.

You could say there will be more direct accountability, but it wouldn't have stopped us from drilling far offshore. And when Republicans take power, who knows what would happen.

[Scuba]

15. Where did you get such a notion? The government's agenda...

...has nothing to do with what the people want, it's about what the corporate masters want.