Re: Comment by maclin on March 5, 2011 @ 4:11 am
>I really do not understand the Halliburtons of the planet.
>They want the oil or other resources, presumably to make
>shiploads of money, but to make this money they need
>actual consumers of the products who’s extracton process
>kills off consumers. So in (my) view of that it seems kind
>of a short term money grab, plus there is no way their own
>families or families of partners, etc. will not get hurt
>by the poisons.
It is all about two things, and two things only…
Money and Power
Although, Money=Power, so in reality is only about the Power.
He who controls the resources, has the power. Using those resources in a way that restricts the supply of said resources means more power. Tightening the supply and then taking away the money from the consumer in the process means even MORE power.
If the people are dying off as a result of the extraction process or because of the resource itself, then all the better. If the consumers are worried about staying alive, they will be too distracted to notice that the supply is artifically kept restricted. Then, if you have enough of a turnover of people (because of the dying off), then subsequent generations will grow up accustomed to that condition and won’t be any the wiser.
So, it’s not so much about the short-term money grab, but about control/power. If the resource runs out or is exposed for being what it is, then they will simply move on to a different resource and continue the plundering of the wealth.
>I really do not understand the Halliburtons of the planet.
>They want the oil or other resources, presumably to make
>shiploads of money, but to make this money they need
>actual consumers of the products who’s extracton process
>kills off consumers. So in (my) view of that it seems kind
>of a short term money grab, plus there is no way their own
>families or families of partners, etc. will not get hurt
>by the poisons.