To all the day traders

[dmarc117]

I dont care WHO owns the gas stations. BP still makes a profit from them - PERIOD. My money will not go to BP in any way, shape, or form. See my post about how I said BP is a terrorist orginization. I stand by it, and I stand by saying what I said: You should be ASHAMED of yourself if you buy anything BP related, and/or invest in them.

 

As for boycotting the industry, lets be real. While yes, they all might be corrupt, the bottom line is we dont know for sure exactly how other companies operate. We do know however that BP has mismnanaged this whole debacle, and thus far, they have shown absolutely ZERO to give anyone confidence this will be fixed anytime soon. The ONLY thing they are wanting to do is continue to profit from this by collecting the oil, and not STOPPING it.

 

i guess your a better man than others

 

so you really think that bp doesnt want this capped? really?

Edited July 13, 2010 by dmarc117

[peepinmofo]

i guess your a better man than others

 

so you really think that bp doesnt want this capped? really?

Im no better than anyone else, and dont make it sound like thats what Im trying to say.

 

BP has done everything they can to continue to PROFIT from this. If they plug the well, they dont profit from it. They lose all the work they have done in tapping in to this reserve. So yes, I do believe their efforts are to be able to continue getting oil from the well instead of stopping it.

 

http://www.politicolnews.com/bp-ties-to-goldman-and-corexit/

[dmarc117]

Im no better than anyone else, and dont make it sound like thats what Im trying to say.

 

BP has done everything they can to continue to PROFIT from this. If they plug the well, they dont profit from it. They lose all the work they have done in tapping in to this reserve. So yes, I do believe their efforts are to be able to continue getting oil from the well instead of stopping it.

 

http://www.politicolnews.com/bp-ties-to-goldman-and-corexit/

 

 

im not, im being serious. i guess its too many years in this biz. i just look at the trade. if i can make money, its on.

 

what i meant about bp was that everyday this thing leaks, its costing them money. they want this thing capped.

[bpwallace49]

what i meant about bp was that everyday this thing leaks, its costing them money. they want this thing capped.

 

Ehhh . . . I dont know about that, it all depends on how much oil is being tapped into. If they pay out 30 billion but that well continues to be profitable for years to come, it could eventually make money, right? Seriously asking here, because the other thread had options like bombing the damn thing shut . . .but that wouldnt make money.

[peepinmofo]

im not, im being serious. i guess its too many years in this biz. i just look at the trade. if i can make money, its on.

 

what i meant about bp was that everyday this thing leaks, its costing them money. they want this thing capped.

Costing them money? Bah. You think the cleanup is a COST to them? Again, they are profiting from the use of dispersants (which by the way, is VERY toxic), and they simply do NOT care of what happens to the workers being exposed to the chemicals. Have you done any research on any of this, or are you only being informed by the media? Just curious...

 

The amount of money this company has is sick. They dont care about a few billion dollars... trust me. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/11/bp-four-days-spill/

 

Granted that was in May, but still, copied from that link "in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day"

 

They dont care about me, you, the environement, etc. They care about one thing only - $$$.

[dmarc117]

Costing them money? Bah. You think the cleanup is a COST to them? Again, they are profiting from the use of dispersants (which by the way, is VERY toxic), and they simply do NOT care of what happens to the workers being exposed to the chemicals. Have you done any research on any of this, or are you only being informed by the media? Just curious...

 

The amount of money this company has is sick. They dont care about a few billion dollars... trust me. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/11/bp-four-days-spill/

 

Granted that was in May, but still, copied from that link "in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day"

 

They dont care about me, you, the environement, etc. They care about one thing only - $$$.

 

 

i know that 99.999999% of everyone out there(public, politician, and business) is in it for themselves. and since everyone is a pos, i cant discriminate.

Edited July 13, 2010 by dmarc117

[peepinmofo]

i know that 99.999999% of everyone out there(public, politician, and business) is in it for themselves. so the way i see it, i have to live. and since everyone is a pos, i cant discriminate.

Make money how you will. But just know that facts are facts and this company is as evil a company as there is.

[dmarc117]

Make money how you will. But just know that facts are facts and this company is as evil a company as there is.

 

 

and so are walmart, crappy shoes from spammers, citgo, etc. im not saying they arent evil, most are.

[bushwacked]

(which by the way, is VERY toxic),

 

I have serious doubts on the validity of the claims from that website. You can find anything on the innerts; it doesn't mean it's true.

[peepinmofo]

I have serious doubts on the validity of the claims from that website. You can find anything on the innerts; it doesn't mean it's true.

I would expect nothing less from you. But dont take my word for Im saying, take this guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrK2GCnyPe0

 

Oh and go ahead and google Corexit 9500. Youll find out what the dispersants are, what they do, and why the particular one they were using is banned in Europe.

[bushwacked]

I would expect nothing less from you.

 

 

Yes, I generally consider the source of claims, and my scholastic and real life world experience in environmental cleanups, before automatically believing anything and everything posted on the world wide web. A dispersant that gets diluted in an ocean of water causing people to immediately bleed out the arse sounds suspiciously "overzealous".

Edited July 13, 2010 by bushwacked

[bushwacked]

But dont take my word for Im saying, take this guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrK2GCnyPe0

 

I guess I don't really find anything in that news report hard to believe nor did I hear anyone repeat the claims in your previous link ("rupturing blood vessels" or "bleeding from the rectum").

Edited July 13, 2010 by bushwacked

[peepinmofo]

I guess I don't really find anything in that news report hard to believe nor did I hear anyone repeat the claims in your previous link ("rupturing blood vessels" or "bleeding from the rectum").

Maybe not, but you did hear them say something about pictures he took regarding the dispersant. He obviously had something incriminating. Maybe he had pics of someones ass bleeding.

 

If you dont want to believe something, thats fine. But just because it isnt all over the main stream media, please, dont for one second think it isnt real. And on that same token, dont worry, I dont believe everything I read. I do believe much of what I read that is backed up by facts though.

 

http://www.philstockworld.com/tag/susan-shaw/

 

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/05/dis...ing-damage.html

[peepinmofo]

Oh one other note from that 2nd link...

 

Corexit was used in the response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and almost all of the cleanup crew working on the Exxon Valdez oil spill are now dead. Allegedly, the average life expectancy for an Exxon Valdez oil spill worker is around 51 years, 26.9 fewer years than the average American.

[bpwallace49]

Maybe he had pics of someones ass bleeding.

 

BeeR?

[Perchoutofwater]

Costing them money? Bah. You think the cleanup is a COST to them? Again, they are profiting from the use of dispersants (which by the way, is VERY toxic), and they simply do NOT care of what happens to the workers being exposed to the chemicals. Have you done any research on any of this, or are you only being informed by the media? Just curious...

 

The amount of money this company has is sick. They dont care about a few billion dollars... trust me. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/11/bp-four-days-spill/

 

Granted that was in May, but still, copied from that link "in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day"

 

They dont care about me, you, the environement, etc. They care about one thing only - $$$.

 

The fact that you think BP is making money because of the spill is ridiculous. Sure they might use a disbursement agent that they create, but I assure you if the people in charge of BP or their stockholders could have their way, they would much rather not have the spill to begin with, than to have to use their disbursements? How is it making them money anyway, aren't they going to pay for all of the clean up? That is just a stupid comment.

 

Now if you want to argue that the disbursement agent is harmful, you might have a point there. I question if it is as harmful as the oil itself, but that is open for argument.

[Perchoutofwater]

It shouldn't surprise anyone that I would have no problem having BP in my portfolio, though I do not own it as an individual stock, I'm quite certain (though too lazy to look) some of my mutual funds do. I invest for one reason and one reason only, to make money. If I want to do good for the world I'll donate time and money to charity (which I do), but I'm not going to let that affect my investment decisions.

[bushwacked]

I question if it is as harmful as the oil itself, but that is open for argument.

 

Open for argument? I guess. Not based on any sound piece of evidence I've read or heard. You can look at MSDS's for the material and can read up on scientific studies of the dangers. it contradicts a lot of the rogue accusations peep is linking to.

Edited July 13, 2010 by bushwacked

[Scooby's Hubby]

honestly, I am only looking at the buy transaction and the position of being long BP's stock. just wanting to know how many day traders there are out there at thehuddle.com and if anyone else in the business was also long the stock. i know some owners of brokerages who are buying and wondered if anyone else was clueing in. There really is no morale issue when owning a stock. the only issue is performance, just like in fanstasy football. i liken it to like say drafting cedric benson in the 12th round last year and getting 4th round + performance, if it the trade pans out.

[Perchoutofwater]

Open for argument? I guess. Not based on any sound piece of evidence I've read or heard. You can look at MSDS's for the material and can read up on scientific studies of the dangers. it contradicts a lot of the rogue accusations peep is linking to.

 

I was trying to be nice and throw him a bone after calling him stupid.

[Scooby's Hubby]

It shouldn't surprise anyone that I would have no problem having BP in my portfolio, though I do not own it as an individual stock, I'm quite certain (though too lazy to look) some of my mutual funds do. I invest for one reason and one reason only, to make money. If I want to do good for the world I'll donate time and money to charity (which I do), but I'm not going to let that affect my investment decisions.

 

 

thank you. i am sure there are funds either cost averaging and buying more, or maybe they sold their positions in April and are now getting back in. i am definately watching the volume numbers for any extra activity.

[peepinmofo]

The fact that you think BP is making money because of the spill is ridiculous. Sure they might use a disbursement agent that they create, but I assure you if the people in charge of BP or their stockholders could have their way, they would much rather not have the spill to begin with, than to have to use their disbursements? How is it making them money anyway, aren't they going to pay for all of the clean up? That is just a stupid comment.

 

Now if you want to argue that the disbursement agent is harmful, you might have a point there. I question if it is as harmful as the oil itself, but that is open for argument.

 

Considering this whole clusterf*ck will ultimately lead to gas that is near double what it was a few years ago, trust me, they will make their money. But Im not gonna get in to that with you because my tinfoil hat just fell off.

 

Regarding the dispersant money, I have no doubt that there is so much BS we dont know about that yes, BP is making money off this. All the companys involved are all in bed with each other. BPs own CEO made millions off it by cashing in a boatload of his stock knowing the well was going to blow. Same with Goldman Sachs. Dont tell me money wasnt made on this.

[peepinmofo]

Open for argument? I guess. Not based on any sound piece of evidence I've read or heard. You can look at MSDS's for the material and can read up on scientific studies of the dangers. it contradicts a lot of the rogue accusations peep is linking to.

Clarify how they are "rogue acusations". Also, show me what you are talking about in terms of saying Corexit 9500 is not toxic.

[bushwacked]

Also, show me what you are talking about in terms of saying Corexit 9500 is not toxic.

 

Where did I say it's not toxic? Here is a link from a legitimate news source that actually shines some accepted and verifiable scientific light on things (i.e.. it's neither non-toxic nor something like kyrptonite for humans and marine life):

 

Please ponder on the validity here without conspiring it away :

 

By last week, the EPA and Nalco had both released the ingredient list for COREXIT 9500 in response to widespread public concern. Its constituents include butanedioic acid (a wetting agent in cosmetics), sorbitan (found in everything from baby bath to food), and petroleum distillates in varying proportions—and it decomposes almost entirely in 28 days. "All six [ingredients] are used in day-to-day life—in mouthwash, toothpaste, ice cream, pickles," Ramesh argues. "We believe COREXIT 9500 is very safe."

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention agrees, noting in a document for health professionals that "the dispersants contain proven, biodegradable and low-toxicity surfactants," which are "detergentlike" and "in low toxicity solvents."

 

However, those solvents—petroleum distillates—are also known animal carcinogens, according to toxicology data, and make up 10 to 30 percent of a given volume of COREXIT. And those same everyday products can be deadly to wildlife. "It's the same products in Dawn dishwasher soap," Mitchelmore notes, which is being used widely to clean up oiled birds and other animals. "I wouldn't want to put a fish in Dawn dishwashing soap either. That would kill it."

 

Clarify how they are "rogue acusations".

 

If the claims you linked to are true; the evidence will certainly come up in the near future. But as far as I can tell you basically posted a blog and articles on two websites I've never heard of, which all link to the same thing: A toxicolgiost making statements based on nothingmore than anecdotal evidence. Did I miss something in your links, what is the lady basing this on? If the dispersant goes "right through the skin" and "ruptures red blood cells" and "causes internal bleeding, " it would be very easy to come up with scientifically accepted documentation on the hazards. Where are the photos? Where are the peer reviewed studies? What is the majority scientific opinion? At the very least, where are the other eyewitness accounts of dudes working around the stuff basically being acidified into dust? If what that toxicologist lady is saying is legitimate, it's asinine to think this can be swept under the rug.

Edited July 14, 2010 by bushwacked

[peepinmofo]

Where did I say it's not toxic? Here is a link from a legitimate news source that actually shines some accepted and verifiable scientific light on things (i.e.. it's neither non-toxic nor something like kyrptonite for humans and marine life):

 

Please ponder on the validity here without conspiring it away :

 

 

 

 

 

If the claims you linked to are true; the evidence will certainly come up in the near future. But as far as I can tell you basically posted a blog and articles on two websites I've never heard of, which all link to the same thing: A toxicolgiost making statements based on nothingmore than anecdotal evidence. Did I miss something in your links, what is the lady basing this on? If the dispersant goes "right through the skin" and "ruptures red blood cells" and "causes internal bleeding, " it would be very easy to come up with scientifically accepted documentation on the hazards. Where are the photos? Where are the peer reviewed studies? What is the majority scientific opinion? At the very least, where are the other eyewitness accounts of dudes working around the stuff basically being acidified into dust? If what that toxicologist lady is saying is legitimate, it's asinine to think this can be swept under the rug.

 

Of course you wont hear about it in the main stream media. If all you rely on is mainstream, then you will never know the truth of anything. You will always believe just what you are told. There are countless reports of workers being sick (maybe not ass bleeding, but from what I could tell, that is if it gets in your bloodstream). We are what, less than 3 months in to this whole thing, and what weve heard already is bad. Look back to the Exxon spill in 89.

 

Ill try to find the link that stated this, but regarding the Exxon spill which used Corexit:

 

Corexit was used in the response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and almost all of the cleanup crew working on the Exxon Valdez oil spill are now dead. Allegedly, the average life expectancy for an Exxon Valdez oil spill worker is around 51 years, 26.9 fewer years than the average American.

 

Trust me, we will eventually hear many more horror stories about the use of Corexit. I hope to God Im wrong, but everything Ive read has said it is no where near as safe as BP makes it sound. Then again, this leak is only averaging 5000 gallons a day, then it was 10000. BP knew all along how bad this was, they just dont want to make it more of a nightmare than it already is. Its the same with the Corexit. They know how bad it is, but they also know that if the true amount of oil was ever revealed, this whole thing would then be made publicly known how bad it really is.