birdog1960 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Hey dipshit, it wasn't the oil companies that were at the job fair it was the city of Minot. You know.........the government. then they're acting irresponsibly unless they have suddenly developed adequate housing and infrastructure or are warning recruits about the problems. what's they're incentive to recruit for the oil companies? tax revenues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted May 18, 2012 Author Share Posted May 18, 2012 what's they're incentive to recruit for the oil companies? tax revenues? No, they're telling everyone to bring Twinkies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 is it unreasonable to wait until safe working and living conditions are present before proceeding with large scale production? nevermind, already know your answer and it's incorrect. ya think the locals might want to know what they're being exposed to as far as carcinogens or toxins in waste water from the mines. my understanding is that it's poorly studied and if the industry knows, they're not telling. You think it's reasonable that corporations should build suburbs FIRST, to ensure that housing exists for a labor force not present for industrial sites that don't exist? And then, when the corporations either sold the housing to the workers or rented it to them at market rates, you'll be the first in line to complain that they're gouging the workers. Then when the workers can't sell their properties or get out of their leases, you'll complain that the companies have made indentured servants out of their labor force. Then we can all gather 'round in a great big circle, and you can lead us in singing a rousing chorus of "Sixteen Tons" together. One has to wonder, too...did your employer build your house for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted May 18, 2012 Author Share Posted May 18, 2012 (edited) You think it's reasonable that corporations should build suburbs FIRST, to ensure that housing exists for a labor force not present for industrial sites that don't exist? And then, when the corporations either sold the housing to the workers or rented it to them at market rates, you'll be the first in line to complain that they're gouging the workers. Then when the workers can't sell their properties or get out of their leases, you'll complain that the companies have made indentured servants out of their labor force. Then we can all gather 'round in a great big circle, and you can lead us in singing a rousing chorus of "Sixteen Tons" together. One has to wonder, too...did your employer build your house for you? Well to be fair my employer didn't build my house for me seeing it was built over 50 years ago, but they helped my buy and renovate it. It's called offering me a job. Edited May 18, 2012 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 One has to wonder, too...did your employer build your house for you? well yes, i built my own house and my own business. but i'd have never built either in a place with no housing available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 but i'd have never built either in a place with no housing available. I'm guessing because your business isn't required to operate in the middle of nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 well yes, i built my own house and my own business. but i'd have never built either in a place with no housing available. Well, maybe we should start drilling for oil where all the housing is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 The oil find in ND will be an economic boon for a while- Oil workers will need house built and for a while there will an increase in construction, and the infrastructure improvements that go with it- there will also be a need for increased public and private services- but if ND does not entice or develop other industry at the same time as this boon then there is a bust waiting on the other end- in 15-20 years the oil industry in ND becomes mature and only needs about 25% of the work force to maintain operations as they needed for it's development, as the oil workers leave it has a domino effect in construction then services. As jobs leave then property prices decrease and so does the tax base- you are now in a downward cycle-not inevitable but without proper planning a good possibility ie resource curse (paradox of plenty). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 here's the condensed version of my criticism so maybe yall can concentrate on attacking the meat of it: almost overnight, the oil companies build and operate huge production facilities. they make grossly inadequate provisions for necessities such as workers housing. this impacts the indigenous population negatively through unsightly, undesirable trailer work camps cropping up all over, potential health and environmental risks (with inadequate impact studies) , potential earthquakes, increased cost of living and straining of available infrastructure. the workers aren't being forced at gun point to sleep in trailers with 3 or 4 other guys for rent that might afford them a nice shared beach front condo on the outer banks but are they being informed before hand? there pay is severely reduced by this added expense and they're living in one of the harshest winter climates in north america. if they're aware (of the potential health risks also), then fine. but what choice does a homeowner overlooking a man camp have? i argue that the oil co's have a responsibility for due diligence on several issues that they have apparently ignored. it seems yall believe that's entirely mitigated by a 3% unemployment rate and increased tax revenues. i say it isn't, especially in regards to health and environmental threats to those long term inhabitants who profit little from the oil co's presence. The oil find in ND will be an economic boon for a while- Oil workers will need house built and for a while there will an increase in construction, and the infrastructure improvements that go with it- there will also be a need for increased public and private services- but if ND does not entice or develop other industry at the same time as this boon then there is a bust waiting on the other end- in 15-20 years the oil industry in ND becomes mature and only needs about 25% of the work force to maintain operations as they needed for it's development, as the oil workers leave it has a domino effect in construction then services. As jobs leave then property prices decrease and so does the tax base- you are now in a downward cycle-not inevitable but without proper planning a good possibility ie resource curse (paradox of plenty). yes. and they've seen this play out before. that's one of the reasons cited for moratoriums on work camps in several towns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 here's the condensed version of my criticism so maybe yall can concentrate on attacking the meat of it: almost overnight, the oil companies build and operate huge production facilities. they make grossly inadequate provisions for necessities such as workers housing. this impacts the indigenous population negatively through unsightly, undesirable trailer work camps cropping up all over, potential health and environmental risks (with inadequate impact studies) , potential earthquakes, increased cost of living and straining of available infrastructure. the workers aren't being forced at gun point to sleep in trailers with 3 or 4 other guys for rent that might afford them a nice shared beach front condo on the outer banks but are they being informed before hand? there pay is severely reduced by this added expense and they're living in one of the harshest winter climates in north america. if they're aware (of the potential health risks also), then fine. but what choice does a homeowner overlooking a man camp have? i argue that the oil co's have a responsibility for due diligence on several issues that they have apparently ignored. it seems yall believe that's entirely mitigated by a 3% unemployment rate and increased tax revenues. i say it isn't, especially in regards to health and environmental threats to those long term inhabitants who profit little from the oil co's presence. yes. and they've seen this play out before. that's one of the reasons cited for moratoriums on work camps in several towns. Earthquakes, in North Dakota?!?! If you are worried about earthquakes in North Dakota then you must be against all oil exploration. The place isn't totally earthquake free but it's pretty darn close. Also, you appear to be decrying the work camps for not using permanent housing and also being concerned with reduced need for construction and services after the drilling boom is over (which, as mentioned previously, is one reason for using temporary housing in the drilling camps). Oh, no, there's unsightly drilling camps in the middle of nowhere. There's a reason they call it 'the middle of nowhere;' there aren't a whole lot of people that see them. Out in the Dakotas, Montana, and Wyoming you can literally drive for miles without seeing a house. I truly doubt that the majority of the drilling camps are set up right next to the town hall or the school. There are problems that crop up with some of the camps, but the benefits outweigh the negatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Earthquakes, in North Dakota?!?! yeah, they're pretty rare in ohio too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 here's the condensed version of my criticism so maybe yall can concentrate on attacking the meat of it: almost overnight, the oil companies build and operate huge production facilities. they make grossly inadequate provisions for necessities such as workers housing. this impacts the indigenous population negatively through unsightly, undesirable trailer work camps cropping up all over, potential health and environmental risks (with inadequate impact studies) , potential earthquakes, increased cost of living and straining of available infrastructure. the workers aren't being forced at gun point to sleep in trailers with 3 or 4 other guys for rent that might afford them a nice shared beach front condo on the outer banks but are they being informed before hand? there pay is severely reduced by this added expense and they're living in one of the harshest winter climates in north america. if they're aware (of the potential health risks also), then fine. but what choice does a homeowner overlooking a man camp have? i argue that the oil co's have a responsibility for due diligence on several issues that they have apparently ignored. it seems yall believe that's entirely mitigated by a 3% unemployment rate and increased tax revenues. i say it isn't, especially in regards to health and environmental threats to those long term inhabitants who profit little from the oil co's presence. yes. and they've seen this play out before. that's one of the reasons cited for moratoriums on work camps in several towns. You seem to know the situation. How would you propose handling getting enough oil from the ground here in the U.S. for us to have reasonably cheap gas along with energy independence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 You seem to know the situation. How would you propose handling getting enough oil from the ground here in the U.S. for us to have reasonably cheap gas along with energy independence? it's promising technology, no doubt. but might we get a better understanding of the risks involved before we barge in like wolves after a rabbit? you'd think we'd have learned our lesson by now. more science, less knee jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 it's promising technology, no doubt. but might we get a better understanding of the risks involved before we barge in like wolves after a rabbit? you'd think we'd have learned our lesson by now. more science, less knee jerk. So, you are against what we are doing but have no alternate solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 it's promising technology, no doubt. but might we get a better understanding of the risks involved before we barge in like wolves after a rabbit? you'd think we'd have learned our lesson by now. more science, less knee jerk. So you have proof they just barged in? So the oil companies did zero research on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 So you have proof they just barged in? So the oil companies did zero research on this? No, it's the camps, or the fracking or the earthquakes or the ruining of groundwater or maybe just liberalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 I was working a career fair this week and across the room was a booth that said Minot. I just thought they were come company I had never heard of. During lunch I heard someone talking to them and found out they were from Minot North Dakota and were here in CA looking for workers because they have a shortage. They have 3% unemployment and that's because of the oil industry boom up there. Well what do you know. Where the hell have you been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 So you have proof they just barged in? So the oil companies did zero research on this? is that so unbelievable? with the gulf spill, yellowstone pipeline spill, valdez, chernobyl, fukushima? and now 7 earthquakes in ohio (sounds like a good song title- played to the csny song "ohio"). which i'm sure they anticipated...right? and you have faith in the energy co's doing the right thing? let's deregulate and let em do whatever they think best...yeah, that's the answer! we'll ajj be rich! and have a better life! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted May 19, 2012 Author Share Posted May 19, 2012 Where the hell have you been? Attending career fairs in CA the past 10 years in both northern and southern CA and have never seen anyone from another state looking for workers. What's your point? And if you don't have one color me shocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Attending career fairs in CA the past 10 years in both northern and southern CA and have never seen anyone from another state looking for workers. What's your point? And if you don't have one color me shocked. This has been going on for quite some time. The only problem with this is it's temporary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts