Contributors

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Corporate Abuse

Recently, I was asked in comments

What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you?"

Setting aside the fact that only an ostrich with his head buried quite deeply in the sand couldn't see how corporations of this country abuse and essentially enslave us, I do actually have a specific example.

Take a look at this postcard (left) I received in the mail from Center Point Energy, a private corporation.

If you do not call immediately, Centerpoint Energy will be required to take appropriate legal action to obtain access.

This is not the federal government trying to beat down my door. This is a PRIVATE company.

The only mention of the government in all of this is a federal statue that says that this private company can invade my home any time they want to and if I don't let them, then they can...what exactly? Sue me? Send Blackwater agents into my house to subdue my family and inspect the meter?

What's funny is that it's not even Center Point that does the inspections. It's a sub contractor. I did call and have someone come to my home. This company, RMR services, caught blazing hellfire for this card from Centerpoint customers...which is pretty much anyone with a furnace in my area. In fact, they are the only choice I have for gas in my area. So much for free will. Oh wait. That's right. I can burn a pile of wood in my front room. Great.

Someone care to explain to me how the "gubmint" is running the show here? It seems to me that Centerpoint greased the politicians to essentially have an organized monopoly and uses them if they need a tool to get into my home. Wooo-wee...them Feds have got me a quakin' now!

73 comments:

Anonymous said...

"The only mention of the government in all of this is a federal statue that says that this private company can invade my home any time they want to.."

and

"Someone care to explain to me how the "gubmint" is running the show here"

Damn. Answered yourself already?

I note you didn't respond to any of Juris' actually questions.

Anonymous said...

That would be "actual".

rld said...

I bet if the company didn't perform safety inspections and somehting bad happened, you would cry foul then too. That company is probably tired of being sued for not doing safety inspections when one of their Company Owned (it says that on the flyer there) gas meters blows up. Only in a liberals world can a safety inspection be interpreted as abuse, enslavement and invasion. IT ISN'T YOUR METER TO BEGIN WITH. You want to know how the government is running the show here? The words Federally Mandated tell you who mandated the inspections you moron. Invasion! I'm being enslaved!!!!!!

last in line said...

But rld, it "seems to him", and that may be all that's needed.

Kevin said...

Uh, dude... "Center Point Energy is REQUIRED to conduct FEDERALLY MANDATED inspections..." That would be a GOVERNMENT mandate.

HARD, EPIC fail.

Mark Ward said...

Then why isn't the government pounding on my door? The only "epic fail" is your complete inability to notice what the corporations of this country do to all of us. Certainly the government is a part of that but they are simply a tool...just like they are in this scenario...

rld said...

The government is requiring Centerpoint to do an inspection of equipment they (not you) own based on regulations placed on them by the government. It's just a safety inspection - they aren't abusing you. If there was something wrong with the natural gas meter or piping in my house or workplace, I'd like the gas company to be aware of it so they can fix it. Subduing your family into doing a safety inspection regarding natural gas in your home? Have you seen what happens to homes where there was a natural gas leak? (see: kaboom)

last in line said...

Here is why Centerpoint is doing the inspection Mark.

http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/local/state-and-regional/article_d9155ad0-9642-11de-9c85-001cc4c002e0.html

There was a recall of a connector from the external natural gas pipeline (outside your home) to the internal natural gas pipeline (inside your home) from the manufacturer of the connector back in the late 1980’s and the recall was ignored and the connectors were not replaced by Xcel energy. A rental property in Fargo blew up at 7am one morning from a corroted natural gas pipeline in the building, sending debris 4 blocks away and the cause of it was a corroted connector from the external gas pipeline to the internal gas pipeline. Regarding the above link, Xcel was fined a huge, huge dollar amount by the state of North Dakota and a government mandate was put into place. Centerpoint, in addition to covering their behinds, is trying to make sure your home does not explode and is trying to make sure none of the homes around you explode either.

An internal/external connector goes bad over time due to corrosion and your house fills up with natural gas. Once that happens, all that is needed is for your cell phone to vibrate or someone to answer a home phone and you will have this...

http://www.energyindustryphotos.com/pipeline_blowout_photos_and_natu.htm

You should really start a campaign to have inspectors shut out of all the homes in your neighborhood. What could go wrong? Just google "Natural gas explosion pictures" to see what happens and how often it happens as well.

As rld said, the gas meter and the pipes that bring natural gas into your home do not belong to you and the federal mandate does not say the company "can "invade" your home "anytime they want"", it says the company must now comply with the federally mandated inspection that was put into place by the government. If Centerpoint doesn’t comply when it comes to your house they will be held accountable by the govt if something bad happens. After Centerpoint is held accountable in that situation, Centerpoints next step will be to hold you accountable. This whole episode may prove one of your common themes about more regulation needed but it sure as hell does not prove your point about slavery, submission and invasion.

You really should take this entry down. The degree to which your interpretation of this inspection misses the mark is astronomical. Abuse? Enslavement? Invasion? Really?

Mark Ward said...

I'm curious, though, if you would be saying the same thing if it was a notice from the Federal government. Would you be OK with them coming in and inspecting your home? With the same wording on the card?

dick nixon said...

Yes, but who owns the property? Mark. Or, if he has a mortgage, the bank.

Last, you should take this entry down as a complete denial of corporate power in America. The federal government made this law at the behest of lobbying groups for natural gas. They want to figure out ways to make more money (see: gauge) off of their customers. Do you like to see your energy costs go up?

jeff c. said...

Has anyone gone and read the statute? It tells me the page doesn't exist.

Anonymous said...

"The federal government made this law at the behest of lobbying groups for natural gas"

Wow. Trying to get this stuff into your head is like trying to nail jello to a tree.

Now, if the corporations had the power, *why* would they need to do this lobbying to begin with?

Anonymous said...

(You'll note this question has been asked before, and Mark's approach was to open this thread without actually answering the question, which still stands.)

Anonymous said...

So why don't you just stop using the product they're providing & disconnect the pipes? Problem solved.

Anonymous said...

"So why don't you just stop using the product they're providing & disconnect the pipes?"

Well, see, Mark maintains that this company has acquired a monopoly and therefore forced alternative options out. Despite the fact that he absolutely cannot demonstrate any evidence of a monopoly that did not require appeal to government to obtain (if there even IS such a monopoly).

Rand said it in an interview long ago - there hasn't been a monopoly in human history that wasn't effected by government. Seems to still stand.

last in line said...

Who the hell cares if "I would say the same thing" in some other circumstance...we aren't dealing with "some other circumstance", or even me for that matter.

Jeff, I wasn't aware anyone posted a link to the statute.

Tell me Dick, do you think that Centerpoint Energy is excited about having to send their technicians/subcontractors out to do this inspection? How the hell does sending subcontractors out to each home in the area in order to comply with a federal mandate make money for Centerpoint energy? If you want to say they are trying to avoid a major liability I would agree with you but I don't think the money Centerpoint is going to be paying RMR Services is going to show up as an asset on Centerpoints income statement/balance sheet at the end of the year. Just a hunch...

juris imprudent said...

[heh-heh-heh] The comment this post is in response to was suffixed with the aside that I, a good capitalist, would sell him the rope to hang himself. And I did! [MUWhahahahaha]

Truly EPIC fail. Thanks for the laugh M; maybe someday a clue will fall from the sky and penetrate your skull. As for dick nixon, no such hope.

jeff c said...

There is a link on the card that supposedly describes the federal statute to which CenterPoint and RMR are following. I've tried to find it and it doesn't work. Or it says no such link exists. Can anyone else find it? I guess I'm wondering if I'm doing something wrong. Check out the address on the lower left of the card.

Last, what puzzles me is that you seem to be ok with "We're here from ______ Corporation, we're here to help" but not "We're here from the government, we're here to help." You rip Mark for not following safety protocols in his own home but is that only because it's a private company?

Juris, I think your comment is quite funny considering Mark put up this post in response to your question. He answered it and your response was basically the same as what you accuse him of being like--avoiding the argument.

juris imprudent said...

No Jeff, he did not answer at all. The whole previous thread was on the FORCE that corporations can use -- according to M -- and that it is worse (and more pervasive) than the FORCE that govt uses. That is his thesis, and he has yet to provide an iota of evidence in support of it. Now, just stop for a second and think about that; he claims that a company, like the govt, can come to your door, kick it in and haul you off for failing to do as they dictate.

Even in this case, where a corporation is complying with a GOVT regulation, there was no force, least of all by the company. There is NOTHING in this incident that supports the notion that the corporation in question used force (e.g. busting down his door) to abuse/suppress/harass or in any other way impinge on M's liberty, property or pursuit of happiness. Over at TSM, M's responses are so patterned that there is a taxonomy of them; this is standard response #3 (any evidence cited by M, whether it is relevant or not - and usually not at that, is "his proof" of his argument).

juris imprudent said...

Here is the link you were wondering about. I google'd "49cfr192.481" and found it with no problem.

juris imprudent said...

I have to have a bit more fun with this.

Setting aside the fact that only an ostrich with his head buried quite deeply in the sand couldn't see how corporations of this country abuse and essentially enslave us, I do actually have a specific example.

So, this abuse is so pervasive and so common, that the ONLY example you could come up with was this. Allow me to quote last who actually knows you:

You really should take this entry down. The degree to which your interpretation of this inspection misses the mark is astronomical. Abuse? Enslavement? Invasion? Really?

Now, personally, I prefer that you leave this up, and endure as much ridicule as can possibly be ginned up. So much so that it hurts, and in order to avoid that kind of pain you actually learn something. I want every liberal that wanders by to see this, and ponder "could I possibly think something as stupid as this"?

C'mon M, try again. Show me how any corporation, any business at all, has essentially enslaved you. Or you could of course just admit you were wrong.

last in line said...

Keep talking to me boys. Not one of you has disputed anything I've typed in this thread. All you have are hypotheticals about what I "might" say in "some other" situation. When your sentences include "you seem to..." you aren't really dealing in fact are you? I fully supported the police going into Gates house at Harvard and gave my reasons why, remember?

Mark did follow the safety protocol and let the inspector in his house...he said so in his original entry....something 99.8% of homeowners who know anything about the realities of gas leaks would do so it's not about Centerpoint being a private company, it's about common sense.

Dick, my energy costs have gone down. I bought a high efficiency furnace/air conditioner 2 years ago and had another foot of insulation blown into my attic earlier this year. You want to see your energy costs go up...just support the cap and trade bill that the people you voted for passed earlier this year. Government rationing out carbon permits that can be used to energy production...what could go wrong with that? Not one of you can tell my how cap and trade will make your energy cheaper, not one of you.

dick nixon said...

Thanks for the link, juris. Let's see if you and last are smart enough to link get why this statute was enacted and who actually made it happen. Hint: follow the money.

Oh, and, juris? If you can't see how we are slaves to pretty much every major corporation in this country--although it seems to me you have an inkling otherwise you wouldn't be so pissed off right now--then you are a fucking ostrich as Mark describes.

Anonymous said...

"Let's see if you and last are smart enough to link get why this statute was enacted and who actually made it happen. Hint: follow the money."

Ok, then tell us how the company which served the notice Mark posted is profiting from this.

"If you can't see how we are slaves to pretty much every major corporation in this country"

Demonstrate it. Once again, not one iota of evidence or proof. The one case presented (Mark's) has been shot thoroughly out of the water by LiL's post.

Or you can keep deflecting, generalizing, and failing entirely to address the points standing.

juris imprudent said...

If you can't see how we are slaves to pretty much every major corporation in this country

C'mon Dick, give us an example, not just leftist bullshit rhetoric. If this is so easy, do it. Put up an example that shuts me up.

You won't because you can't. It is religious dogma to you and the other braindead lefties. It's like arguing about homosexuality with one of the Westboro Baptist church whackos. Maybe you all should get signs that say "God hates capitalists".

last in line said...

It shouldn't puzzle you Jeff. Read up on the Contingency theory - my interpretation/reaction of any given situation depends on the parameters of the particular situation at hand. I am ok with the gas company inspecting my gas lines because I am familiar with the consequences of having corroded natural gas lines in my home and I don't view it as an invasion.

juris imprudent said...

Jeff, please remember that this whole argument is about FORCE. M's contention is that corporations use force more than the govt, and that is why it is misguided (for folks like me) to worry about what the govt is doing with it's power.

So, if that were even remotely true, these inspectors would've been carrying guns and would've threatened to use them if not given immediate access to the gas meter. Oh, and they would've done it not because they were complying with federal law, but simply because it was fun or there was some profit in it. Does the absurdity begin to take shape for you?

Yo, dick I want an example of how WalMart forced you to buy something from them. I want to know how YOU were essentially enslaved by them and forced to do what they want. Feel free to substitute McDonalds for WalMart if that helps.

Kevin said...

"Then why isn't the government pounding on my door?"

They don't need to. They placed that burden on the utility company, which would then be subject to penalty (read FORCE) if it did not comply.

"The only "epic fail" is your complete inability to notice what the corporations of this country do to all of us."

Guilty as charged. With very few exceptions, I see corporations doing things FOR us (provide services - for a fee,of course; evil capitalists! - provide jobs, provide goods) rather than TO us. I've said it before, corporations lobby govt to make rules that favor them (or mitigate damage to them)in the market place, because government is so heavily involved in the marketplace.

"Certainly the government is a part of that but they are simply a tool...just like they are in this scenario..."

More than a part, more than a tool. Please explain in this scenario exactly WHAT benefit your utility gains by thus using government "as a tool". How does Centerpoint benefit as a corporation by coming into your house and conducting an inspection? How does Centerpoint profit by this?
Bueller?

I stand by my original post, which used AS EVIDENCE a quote taken directly from YOUR so-called example, as opposed to your response which is nothing more than unsupported opinion.

Fail.
Again.

juris imprudent said...

Good morning kids. Just as a refresher while you bright young lefties are out searching for examples of corporations essentially enslaving all of us, I thought it might be useful to refresh everyone's memory about the actual meaning of the word slavery:

"Slavery, bondage, servitude refer to involuntary subjection to another or others. Slavery emphasizes the idea of complete ownership and control by a master: to be sold into slavery. Bondage indicates a state of subjugation or captivity often involving burdensome and degrading labor: in bondage to a cruel master. Servitude is compulsory service, often such as is required by a legal penalty: penal servitude."

Good luck!

the iowa kid said...

The only failure I see here is the inability of any of you to see that you are all right. The symbiotic relationship between corporations and government has degraded into something quite malignant. I have to admit that I can't tell the difference between who works for the government and who is a lobbyist for a corporation. The revolving door between the two is awful.

In my opinion, neither one has power over the other. I am a Republican who believes in a smaller, more efficient government. But I don't see them having the all powerful hand of God as some of the Tea baggers who post here seem to think they have. Too big? Yes. Cumbersome and inefficient? Yes. A waste of my money? Yes. All powerful and in charge? No. They can't be when their future job security depends on the private sector.

Anonymous said...

"The only failure I see here is the inability of any of you to see that you are all right"

Please, by all means, explain how the statements made by Mark, Dick, and their ilk are "right."

I mean, the whole relativist "let's all just get along we're all kind of right" thing is cute, but it's nonsensical bullshit. The statements they made have thus far proved to be absolutely, irrevocably incorrect. They have not been able to back them up.

Revolving door or not, a corporation can *NOT* use *FORCE* and must appeal to government. The ownership of power is *quite* clear.

juris imprudent said...

No IK, we're not ALL right. There is a fundamental difference between the power of corporations and the power of govt. It is the very reason that corporations lobby the govt, and not vice-versa. Hell, the govt has the power to revoke the charter that a corporation operates under. It is govt that granted that charter in the first place.

So unless you can tell me about the last time an armed agent of a corporation (or any other form of business) held you against your will, there is no way that both of the arguments here are correct.

Oh, and the people you are talking about (flipping between industry and govt) are the political appointees typically, not the civil service. While this obviously has problems, who would you rather have at say Defense - someone who knows nothing about either the military or the industries that support the military, or an "insider"? Same for any other department - you'd really prefer someone who doesn't know a thing about the businesses subject to his regulatory agency?

dick nixon said...

"Demonstrate it."

Not really inclined to do so with someone who posts anonymously.

I also think it wouldn't make a difference but I will start with this: ever heard of PG & E?

Anonymous said...

"Not really inclined to do so with someone who posts anonymously."

Ahh.. so the calls on you to do the same from those who do not post anonymously are... what? Invisible?

Deflection. Again. Failure. Again.

sara said...

I actually think that the Iowa Kid makes a good point. I see the power of government and corporations working as a tandem with neither really running the show. I would disagree with Mark there.

Now if there were only more people in the Republican Party that thought the way you do, Iowa rather than the absolute belief that the government is an all powerful evil force determined to force its will upon the citizenry of the nation.

Anonymous said...

"...rather than the absolute belief that the government is an all powerful evil force determined to force its will upon the citizenry of the nation."

So is that your interpretation and blanket statement for all of those questions asked of Mark and his ilk here? The characterization is cute, but it's not accurate and I'd say the onus on you is to demonstrate it if that's -...

...nevermind. You're the same damn people go poof *every* time a question is asked.

(Or deflect... heh)

juris imprudent said...

Not really inclined to do so with someone who posts anonymously.

So sayeth dick nixon! The irony fairly drips off that. Y'know, I wouldn't give you all such a bad time if you would simply admit that this is a religious belief and not a demonstrable phenomenon. I can accept that people have bizarre religious beliefs - Muslims, Mormons, Westboro Baptist, Scientologist and of course Leftism of various flavors.

I see the power of government and corporations working as a tandem with neither really running the show.

OK, sara, what is the nature of the power that corporations have independent of what they rely on the govt for? Is this power only exhibited in corporations, or all businesses?

And for your edification, I don't believe the govt is an all-evil entity. As I noted in the previous thread, the govt has power for legitimate purposes. But you cannot escape that the ultimate expression of govt power is FORCE, and businesses (including corporations) do NOT have that power.

sara said...

Corporations frame the way we live our lives. I think it's a stretch to say that it's slavery (Mark is prone to exaggeration) but they do pretty much dictate how we spend our money, what we buy, and how we live our lives. They study trends and use those trends to manipulate people into thinking a certain way-a way that leads them to buy their product or service.

I think it's naive to think that we live in a free marketplace where the customers drive the boat. In many cases, we see legalized monopolies and the customers really don't have a choice. The gas and electric industries are examples of this.

Have you ever seen the film "The Corporation" juris? Mark recommended it on here a while back. He exaggerates some things in it but for the most part the amorality of private industry is admitted as being good and laid bare.

juris imprudent said...

Corporations frame the way we live our lives.

Again with the rhetoric. Have you NO example? C'mon, tell me about the nasty things Microsoft does to you. Tell me how they DICTATE what you must buy. You're laying it on almost as thick as M. Of course businesses (not just corporations) can influence people, big deal. So do charitable organizations, educational institutions, etc. That is not FORCE nor is it slavery. To live in fear of THAT is the height of irrationality.

What M has claimed is that corporations (but apparently NOT other business structures) use FORCE, not influence. Those two words DO mean different things, and I expect M to show up and say "oh yeah, sara said what I meant" rather than just fess up that he is full of it.

...a free marketplace where the customers drive the boat.

Ah, of course, the belief that SOMEBODY must be in charge. Can you not consider the possibility that neither god, nor anyone is actually running the whole show? No business can compel (i.e. force) me to do business with them, not even the electric company. I might have to be kinda stupid, or willing to be terribly inconvenienced, but that is NOT FORCE people. Not even close.

Oh, and sara, I prefer to develop my opinions from better sources than films, let alone ones that are quasi-documentaries.

Also, just as a real funny aside, not all corporations are businesses and not all businesses are corporations. It seems that all of you are obsessed with a few large businesses that are corporations.

Kevin said...

Dick Nixon: elaborate on PG&E, please. I'm all ears.

juris imprudent said...

M, I have to bring something else to your attention. When Kevin at TSM puts up a post and gets something wrong, even something minor, he usually posts an update to his post. That's another one of those 'rule things' that you so often complain about. Here you have had your ass thoroughly handed to you, and I doubt you or any of your supporters is going to come up with a stunning example that causes myself or any of the other critics on this thread to concede even a tiny bit of ground. You would begin to gain some credibility and respect if you were to man up and admit error.

sara said...

"Have you NO example?"

I suggest you watch the film The Corporation for multiple examples. It's not a quasi documentary. Milton Friedman is in it. But your comment betrays a possible unwillingness to step outside of your usual information network.

Oh, and Mark? You have not had your ass handed to you in this link. I don't agree that corporations enslave people but they do have as much power as the government and you gave an excellent example of this. And, as usual, the corporate apologists are falling all over themselves in a vain attempt to keep their belief system intact.

juris imprudent said...

sara, it is not a documentary, as they make clear on their own website, thus I characterized it as "quasi-documentary". If it isn't even that, then perhaps it should be characterized as Riefenstahl's work is - propaganda.

But your comment betrays a possible unwillingness to step outside of your usual information network.

Yeah, pardon me for reading books (by Friedman for example) instead of watching a movie (co-produced by an "activist"). And you couldn't even cite an example from the movie, which might have given me a reason to watch it. All you have is bullshit leftist rhetoric - "corporations frame our lives". Gawd help me the day I spew such stupidity and expect that to convince an intelligent person.

but they do have as much power as the government and you gave an excellent example of this

Damn sara, I was giving you more credit than you deserve.

Alright, let's go through it again:

1) They were complying with a Federal law.
2) They did not force entry.
3) They were not going to disturb or sieze any of M's property.
4) They were not going to do ANYTHING to M personally.

So, what power did the company exercise, and how was it abusive?

Mark Ward said...

Well, I suppose it's time for me to chime in. It's been awhile since I had this many comments...obviously touched a nerve for some folks.

I'm curious what part of

"If you do not call immediately, Centerpoint Energy will be required to take appropriate legal action to obtain access."

and the word "Force" you found to be incongruent? To me, that's force. If it's not to you, we will just have to agree to disagree. So, #2 on your list above isn't really accurate in my opinion. #3 is accurate but that wasn't really part of this debate. #4 is inaccurate as well. They threatened me with legal action. That's personal. Of course you could have meant personally as in my body in which case that is different.

Then we come to #1. Yes, they were complying with federal law. According to juris and last, any time the federal government regulates anything it leads to bad things. And now this is a good thing? Hmmm...could it be that the federal government does things that are good? Apparently it can when arguments on here are trying to be won.

The law states that each operator "take remedial action whenever necessary to maintain protection against atmospheric corrosion." What exactly does that mean? Could it mean that if they are corroded that I have to replace them? Or does Centerpoint? And where does the money come from? More importantly, who gets the money? Who are the contractors and how much did they have to do with the writing of this law?

Oh, and juris, I'll admit I'm wrong when I am actually wrong. I was wrong when last was getting pummeled on here a while back and I wasn't considerate enough to see what it was like to be the lone voice of dissent. Now I know what that's like. I was when I said President Obama was not going to win Iowa because it was too white....quite happy about that one.

I was also wrong when I thought the Republican Party would return to its roots rather than give into lunacy. I'm wrong about a lot of things, juris, but not about the fact that the corporations of this country...of this world...run our lives. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

They have all the money. They can do whatever the fuck they want to do.

rld said...

Just deal with the point at hand for cripes sake and quit trying to deflect by saying things like according to so-and-so. You gave a pretty weak example and the only nerve you touched is the one that makes people laugh. Corporate apologists Sara? No, just common sense. You are obviously pretty young and have very little knowledge of the problems a natural gas leak could cause. You people are abused slaves. hahahahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

"To me, that's force."

Once again, Mark redefines the words to fit the bullshit he distributes.

sw said...

centerpoint will probably take legal action against you as a response to the government taking legal action against them for not complying to the federal mandate when it comes to your house. dont you morons have any other examples of companies using force? good catch rld - yeah theyre subduing your family markadelphia. run from the gas company kids!

sara said...

"have very little knowledge of the problems a natural gas leak could cause. "

So that would be something that would be alright for the government to regulate? Just to be clear, government regulation is just fine and dandy when it comes to natural gas piping?

alan said...

RLD, I'm afraid I don't follow you. Mark stuck to the point completely. He addressed all of juris' concerns above and related them to the letter of the regulation.

last in line said...

I don't want to speak for rld or sw but I see what Sara is trying to do. One only asks that question if they view the word "regulation" as some black and white, monolithic concept that one has to be either for or against. Has it occurred to you that there are good regulations and bad regulations? I know I don't view regulation that way because the world is not that black and white and I have typed those very words on this blog before...and you all know that so if you are looking for an "According to Last...." moment, start with that.

To answer your question Sara, yes - if the gas company shows up to my house to inspect the internal/external connectors to my gas lines they can come right in. In addition, if there has been a reported burglary at my residence and the cops show up and I am there, I have no problem with them detaining me until they find out exactly what is going on while they complete their investigation (and I would not yell at them because I know that there is no situation you will ever encounter where losing your temper will make it better...a fact lost on some professors who are supposed to be a lot smarter than me).

Perhaps what rld was talking about is things like Saras last post. Instead of talking about Centerpoint energy itself and the realities of natural gas, she veers off into trying to point out hypocrisy and goes back to other discussions had on here that involve different industries, different context, etc.

We got a "Yes, they were complying with federal law" from someone on the other side so progress is being made...and the things you have been wrong about are your charges of racism toward the entire state of Iowa, the context of political discussions over the internet and predictions about the "other side"?

We have an admission that the company had to comply with a law passed by the government, but so far nobody has been wrong in this discussion. Got it. Perhaps we'll just have to chalk it up to this being a pretty poor example of the point you were trying to make.

alan said...

I'm afraid I'm still at a loss, last. Mark was asked, by juris, "What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you? What have you been FORCED to do by a corporation that you should have been free from doing?"

He was forced, by Centerpoint, to let RMR into his house. If he did not comply, "legal action would be taken immediately to obtain access.

It doesn't get more cut and dried than that.

Anonymous said...

"He was forced, by Centerpoint, to let RMR into his house. If he did not comply, "legal action would be taken immediately to obtain access."

That is not force by Centerpoint. Centerpoint cannot enact it except through the government, and only per the government's own law.

Jesus fucking christ. Keep trying.

juris imprudent said...

To me, that's force.

That is because, at the moment you are a total fucking idiot. Honestly, I just can't say it any nicer than that. That is NOT force, although, it is almost a threat of force - given that they said they would go to a COURT (hint: a part of the govt) to get an order (hint: a legal decision by a govt actor) to get the accompaniment of U.S. marshals (do you even need the hint) in order to inspect the gas meter and lines (that THEY OWN) on your property (notice the respect for that from these evil corporate bastards) all so that they could comply with A MOTHERFUCKING FEDERAL LAW. Is that just too fucking nuanced for you? Do you need it in partisan black and white, good and evil? Them or us?

According to juris and last, any time the federal government regulates anything it leads to bad things.

For a supposedly nuanced [liberal] view, that is incredibly black and white, and did I mention fucking stupid. Nor can you ACTUALLY quote me to that effect, not in this thread nor anywhere else - you lying sack of shit. Nor does it have a goddamn thing to do with FORCE, which WAS NOT exacted on you dumbass or you would at leave have some bruises to show for it. I can only imagine how shattered your psyche would be if these guys HAD pulled guns on you.

Oh, and juris, I'll admit I'm wrong when I am actually wrong.

You are wrong now, and yet there you stand lips firmly sealed - except when you part them to spew forth more stupidity. You just couldn't possibly be more wrong, and you deny it.

Honest to fucking gawd, I don't understand how you people function on a day to day basis. No wonder you pine for the womb-like comfort of a complete nanny state.

juris imprudent said...

It doesn't get more cut and dried than that.

Alan, there's a message for you from the Dept of Health and Human Services; it is a reminder that breathing will send oxygen to your brain, and that is a good thing.

Why god, why? Why do these people get a vote that counts the same as mine?

juris imprudent said...

Apologies to anyone offended by my inner Sam Kinison, but JESUS fucking CHRIST on a pogo stick CROSS, you are the stupidest goddamn people I've run across in a while.

And I work with a lot of people in the Dept of Defense.

last in line said...

Key words in this discussion are -

"Demonstrate it. Once again, not one iota of evidence or proof."

"C'mon Dick, give us an example, not just leftist bullshit rhetoric. If this is so easy, do it. Put up an example that shuts me up. You won't because you can't. It is religious dogma to you and the other braindead lefties."

"Have you NO example?"

Guess they don't have any other examples. We'll just have to believe they are right. How dare you guys question these truths!!!! AAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA

Anonymous said...

Not one example offered, yet their claims of (apparently) widespread corporate use of force (not to mention possession of power) stand.

Generally speaking, even at least one anecdotal case would be offered. It's comical often enough when someone mistakes the plural of anecdote for data, but Mark and company have not even gotten that far. What we see here is not someone suggesting dancing caused baldness because they have a bald friend who dances, but instead we have such a claim made generally and without even the lone case.

Already the misappropriation of definitions has begun, as force now apparently means, "doing anything whatsoever."

Which is more comical: that Mark and company still stand behind his laughable statement, or that, in the true fashion of Elsworth Toohey, any one of us could take their side of the argument and at least make one case (despite a fraudulent one)?

don said...

Yeah, speaking of Making Believe What They Want, you guys are all true believers despite not having any evidence or examples of corporate force.

juris imprudent said...

And just to [fucking] reiterate - "to me, that's force" is NOT an argument, nor is it the definition of force in effect ANYWHERE in the real world.

I sent this link to a friend who's only comment was "you sure killed that thread".

Also, lest M level his spurious charge about my "right-wing-inner-rage" - I alluded to Sam Kinison for a reason; I don't hate a single person here, no matter how brain-dead they seem to be. [Yes, it's true, I do hate stupidity, so you only need fear me if you self-identify as stupid.] Whether you ever choose to question your BELIEFS is not my problem; someday, if you never do, it may well be YOUR problem.

Meanwhile, unlike the respect for private property shown by Centerpoint and RMR, the Supreme Court of the United States (in Kelo) and the Appeals Court of New York have shown decidedly less respect for the property owned by those vulnerable to the predations of govt power.

Read 'em and weep.

GrumpyOldFart said...

I'm curious what part of

"If you do not call immediately, Centerpoint Energy will be required to take appropriate legal action to obtain access."

and the word "Force" you found to be incongruent? To me, that's force. If it's not to you, we will just have to agree to disagree.


I agree 100%. That's force. But it's still worthless as an example to us to answer the question, "What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you?"

Yes, it's force. Force used by the government against the corporation.

Note this:

"If you do not call immediately, Centerpoint Energy will be required to take appropriate legal action to obtain access."

Required by whom? Not by you. Not by the Centerpoint Board of Directors. By the government, that's who, as noted by the phrase "appropriate legal action", which in this context means, "using the government to force compliance with their rule. Their rule, not the company's.

While I haven't been accused of having the opinion that "all government regulation is bad", I'd still like to address this.
As I have shown above, government regulations are, by definition, means by which government uses force against the citizenry through intermediaries, such as the gas company. All government action of any kind is force, that's the only tool they have. The question becomes whether or not such force is justified in specific instances.

I stand by an assessment I have made elsewhere concerning government's use of force, up to and including "regulation". It is only justified where a) the consequences of inaction cannot be practically limited to those who created the situation, and b), the private sector, which has no force but only influence at its disposal, has been tried and seen to fail first.

In this case, I have to side with the government. I've seen pictures of the area around a small home propane tank that exploded. It nearly totaled 9 other houses in the neighborhood and killed 2 people. No, inattention to gas system integrity has consequences that the homeowner cannot reasonably expect to limit to himself and his own property. I am assuming, and might change my opinion on "who I side with" if I find otherwise, that the reason such regulation was put into place was that the private sector (in other words, the gas companies themselves) had failed to deal with checking system safety before filling tanks, and that therefore there were explosions and people injured or killed who had nothing to do with the transaction.

Personally, I would prefer a solution where if you refuse to let them inspect for system safety, they refuse to put their employees at risk filling a tank they can't verify to be safe. No government involvement necessary.

GrumpyOldFart said...

As a side note, I'd like to clarify something at the end of the previous comment:

"...people injured or killed who had nothing to do with the transaction."

Stipulate that:

1) You own the propane truck, and the gas in the tank.

2) Damage from any explosion and fire cannot possibly affect anyone except the person wanting to buy the propane.

In such an instance, I'd be fine with no regulation at all. If the homeowner doesn't care if he dies in the fire, and the seller doesn't care if he's putting propane into a leaky or otherwise unsafe system that may go boom at any time.... more power to em, say I. They're grownups, they're allowed to be terminally stupid if they so choose, and goodness knows the world can certainly afford to do without some of the teeming millions of terminally stupid people we have.

juris imprudent said...

I agree 100%. That's force. But it's still worthless as an example to us[e] to answer the question, "What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you?"

That's well said GOF - the only problem I have with it is that M will stop at the second period and never read/comprehend the rest. Then he will turn around and claim that you agreed with him.

When he does that is when I really wonder if he is a decent (if IMO misguided) person. Or do you actually have to be something worse to hold and argue the positions he does (and almost never admitting he was wrong). That's why Westboro Baptist keeps coming to mind - just swap out "fag" for "corporation" and you have M, sara, alan, dick nixon, the whole merry band.

sw said...

hahahaha Juris, good one.

juris imprudent said...

M said They have all the money. They can do whatever the fuck they want to do.

I missed this earlier, which is okay because it deserves a comment, hell a post, all on its own.

This is the basic Markadelphia envy at work again, just like his bitch about some executive that has a bigger house, or a second, or even third, house. A prettier wife, a cooler car. Anything that M himself wants and can't have - or won't work hard enough to attain. Thus he sees himself as part of the oppressed poor, not as a member of the middle class - and his status is the fault of the cruel rich.

I gotta say dude, for someone who professes to be a Christian, you have a MAJOR case of a deadly sin.

If money allowed ANYONE to do ANYTHING they want, this would be one fucked up country. And while there are examples of some rich people who have gotten away with some serious shit (I think it was some duPont that got away with murder of an Olympic athlete), aberrant behavior is NOT skewed toward wealth. Because you really, generally can't get rich fucking over other people - it is a big disincentive for people to do business with you.

And just to bring this point back home, neither Centerpoint nor RMR were even willing to TRESPASS (a petty crime) on M's property to do what they were federally required to do. They asked for cooperation and said that absent that, they would go to court to resolve it. That way, if M still wanted to be an asshole, he would be handled by the COURT, not the COMPANY.

That is way FUCKING far from "doing anything they want". At least it is for anyone who isn't blinded by a religious dogma.

Kevin said...

juris FTW. Seriously. Marky, you got took to the woodshed on this one.

Corporations can IN NO WAY be as powerful as government. If you're not buying what they're selling, they CANNOT imprison or kill you. Why can't you people get that simple fact through your heads?

dorrie said...

"If you're not buying what they're selling, they CANNOT imprison or kill you."

Blackwater was selling security and they killed people in Iraq. I'm curious as to why you can't understand that the corporations of the world are the ones that run the show, not governments. They're basically like the mafia who pay off policemen and mayors to do their bidding.

juris imprudent said...

Blackwater was selling security

To the govt. Blackwater wouldn't have existed without govt contracts. How can you drooling idiots NOT GET that?

How can you SERIOUSLY compare Blackwater (which I agree is a problem) with WalMart, Ford and Microsoft - because they ALL are corporations, right?

If there is NO difference between Blackwater and Centerpoint/RMR - why is M still around to tell the tale?

juris imprudent said...

So, M, are you really still standing by this as an example of how a corporation can do anything it wants, how one used force to make you do something you didn't want to do? How that corporation could just waltz into your house and do anything - take your property, assault you or your family - all with impunity?

Or, can you man up and say, "okay, not such a good example. I'll try again, harder."

juris imprudent said...

Well, one more post from M, and this will fall off the page and through his memory hole.

Really sad that you couldn't, no - wouldn't - learn anything from this teach.

GrumpyOldFart said...

The only mention of the government in all of this is a federal statue that says that this private company can invade my home any time they want to...

Really, you only got one word wrong.

Exchange "can" for "must" and it'll be right.

Mike W. said...

Wow, Marky shows off his brilliance yet again. The Federal government REQUIRES this safety inspection.

Marky, that means that the Federal government is directly involved in this. Without the statute mandating the safety inspection this would not be an issue.

Unknown said...

I received the same postcard from this company with legal threats if I do not comply. I read on several blogs written by employees of RMR that this company hires people with criminal records and people with substance abuse. Being an elderly single woman I am fearful to allow such people in my home. I also find reprehensible the dictatorial and threatening tone of the correspondence from RMR. Perhaps, instead of taking such a confrontational attitude this company could explain the benefit of their mandatory meter inspections. I do feel victimized by the aggressive and threatening rhetoric of this company. PMM

Unknown said...

Are these representatives of RMR Services licensed/certified by the state to perform these gas meter inspections? I also was informed that these gas meter inspectors are not paid a wage by RMR Services but paid by “piece meal” as to how many gas meters they can inspect. Can this payment by productivity alone ensure competent and thorough inspections? Also, Center Point stated that failure to comply with RMR Services gas meter inspections will result in shut of gas services (in the winter) and a $100 dollar fine. Center Point is most certainly committing corporate abuse. I have taken upon myself to file a complaint against RMR Services and Center Point with
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office.