CDZ Big government in Texas makes America less competitive

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Toronado3800, Aug 27, 2018.

  1. HereWeGoAgain
    Online

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,746
    Thanks Received:
    8,079
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +37,644
    So you want to abandon our ports?
    The port of Houston being the largest port in the U.S. in regards to foreign tonnage,second largest in the U.S. and tenth largest in the world.
     
  2. oldsoul
    Offline

    oldsoul Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,654
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    East side of Spoon Lake
    Ratings:
    +1,389
    OMG. Are you being serious? Tell me, is it difficult to be THAT obtuse, or does it come naturally? Go back and re-read my post #4. You know what, don't I'll just copy and paste it for your convenience:

    Get a damn grip dude.
     
  3. HereWeGoAgain
    Online

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,746
    Thanks Received:
    8,079
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +37,644
    You obviously have no idea how much infrastructure is needed to support these ports.
    Workers,machine shops,petro chemical and all the other businesses that support those businesses.
    You cant expect people to drive 75 miles to work everyday nore can you expect the petro chem plants to have to wait for parts that are hours away.
    As someone who worked in that support roll in the petrochemical and oil and gas industry I know that it's not feasible.
    When a waste flare goes out it costs the refinery millions of dollars a day.
    These are called cost plus jobs. In other words these parts are worked on 24 hours a day until they're completed.
    Close proximity to these plants is necessary to avoid huge losses.
     
  4. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,930
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    No one is saying abandon the port.

    I'll say zone right and build proper housing near the port.

    Are there no houses near the port which weren't destroyed or flooded?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. BILLSANDS
    Offline

    BILLSANDS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2018
    Messages:
    104
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Cleveland Ohio
    Ratings:
    +69
    California has a huge government and is beating the pants off texas
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. oldsoul
    Offline

    oldsoul Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,654
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    East side of Spoon Lake
    Ratings:
    +1,389
    You are correct, I am not familiar with the specifics. I, therefore, am ASKING A QUESTION. So, it would seem, from your post, that the idea of moving the support further away in the case of Houston, may not be feasible. However, I still wonder if it would be feasible to employ mass transit type systems to facilitate moving the residential aspects, as well as the commercial and industrial aspects of the city that are not as intrinsically tied to time sensitive portions of the petrochemical industry of Houston. Or even (and I have no idea about the feasibility of this) moving the entire petrochemical industry to a less flood prone area. Again, I have no idea if this is possible, let alone feasible. I do, however, believe that simply pouring more tax dollars at each disaster is not the best solution we can come up with. Too many peoples' lives are lost, and too much money is spent. At what point does it become unsustainable?
     
  7. HereWeGoAgain
    Online

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,746
    Thanks Received:
    8,079
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +37,644
    The petro chem plants have to near the coast for shipping purposes both in and out going.

    About all you can do is improve flood control measures which they're doing by requiring retention ponds on new construction that covers more than a certain amount of acreage,widening bayous and improving the dams.

    Personally I think dredging out the reservoirs so they'd have more capacity would be a good idea.

    With a coverage area of 43 square miles a few feet would have made the difference between flooding and not flooding.
     
  8. oldsoul
    Offline

    oldsoul Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,654
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    East side of Spoon Lake
    Ratings:
    +1,389
    Is Houston the ONLY place where these plants can exist? Is it not feasible to just encourage more growth in the industry elsewhere? Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating forcing anyone to endure the expense of relocating. I am informed enough to realise that would take years, and billions of dollars (if not decades, and trillions). What I am suggesting is encouraging the industry to invest in other locations to gradually phase-out the dependance on the Houston port. I remember quite clearly how it affected prices where I live, well over a thousand miles away. I was devastating to the entire industry, thankfully, they were able to recover pretty quickly. My worry is, what happens next time? will they be able to recover? If so, how long will it take?

    As for increasing flood mitigation, I'm all for it...as a stopgap. It is not a long term solution, IMHO. The same is true in places like San Francisco, and Los Angeles. It's not a question of if an earthquake hits, but how much damage will result when one does. Would it not make more sense to change how these ports are accessed, supported, and used to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic damage?
     
  9. HereWeGoAgain
    Online

    HereWeGoAgain Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,746
    Thanks Received:
    8,079
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
    Ratings:
    +37,644
    Where would you put em? Anywhere on the Gulf Coast is susceptible to hurricanes. Which is the only feasible place to put them and still use the Panama canal.
    You need a deepwater port near the refineries and Houston is it.
     
  10. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,930
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Then I guess they have to be there. Create a special taxing district where they can pay for their own water rescues, environmental disasters and what not so we don't make them welfare dependants and I'm thrilled.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page