Human Nature Led To The Oil Spill In The Gulf

It has now been three plus months since BP’s Macondo oil well began spilling oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The spill has had little immediate effect on the people living in Florida’s 3^rd Congressional District (FLCD-3); however, I believe the spill highlights the challenge we face in solving any problem, whether it is inner city poverty, unemployment or a disaster such as the oil spill. The challenge is us, more specifically, human nature.

In the case of the oil spill, BP is responsible, but so is the US federal government. The common element between these two entities is humans. Humans by nature want more of something (it) than less (i.e. greed), want it now versus later (i.e. impatient), and want it by incurring the least labor/cost (i.e. lazy). This type of human behavior has led to the invention of the remote TV control, the dishwasher, the washing machine, etc… This type of behavior has also led to the Macondo oil well spill.

BP wanted the well producing oil ASAP (i.e. greed & impatient). The company pursued actions that contained costs (i.e. greed & lazy) and allowed the company to proceed expeditiously, actions that in hindsight are now considered by all to be irresponsible. Obviously, BP forgot or just did not know my mother’s axiom, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Similarly, our federal government acted irresponsibly; the people running Minerals Management Service trusted the industry they were tasked to monitor instead of incurring the cost of time and labor to ensure proper oversight (i.e. lazy).

Government is not the solution. Neither is private enterprise. We, as individuals, are the solution. However, as individuals we can not solve large problems on our own, we need each other. As such, we should seek interdependence, but to achieve interdependence we should first seek independence. We must take responsibility for our own actions because once we do that, we can then hold others accountable for their actions and respect others who hold us accountable for own actions. Whether in private enterprise or government, I believe we will be able to achieve more when we all think of the consequences of our actions (i.e. cause and effect).

The question you may be asking is how does this all relate to FLCD-3? In the case of FLCD-3, the people need a hand-up, not a handout. Private enterprise will not do it because there is little money (i.e. greed) to be made in giving a hand-up; however, it is easier (i.e. lazy) for government to give a hand-out then designing/creating programs that help people stand on their own two feet.

It is in Corrine Brown’s best interest to "deliver" handouts to her constituents by taking other people's money (arguably those that live outside the district because they make more money than those in the district) via federal taxes because it keeps her in power (i.e. greed). I just wonder when her constituents will wise up to the difference between a handout and a hand-up and say enough is enough and seek more out of life (i.e. greed).

I suspect her constituents could care less where the money for the handouts comes from even though they should. I contend her constituents should care because I suspect it will become increasingly hard to take other people's money to continue these handouts. Once the handouts start to diminish, life will become harder. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

I contend those with the money should also care. I believe it is in their best interest to ensure that folks in communities such as those like FLCD-3 receive hand-ups not handouts. Both cost money (via government taxes of middle and upper class Americans), but hand-ups will eventually produce dividends and will help reduce the demand on the middle and upper class to pay for future government programs. In other words, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.