[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] ClearChannel Plays It Safe
- To: <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] ClearChannel Plays It Safe
- From: Scott A Crosby <crosby(at)qwes.math.cmu.edu>
- Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 20:49:19 -0400 (EDT)
- cc: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- In-Reply-To: <OF3D19A1AB.F28AF26B-ON88256ACD.0051E717@aero.org>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org wrote:
> Does the revenues and taxes on the minerals pay for the clean up.
> NO. Does it pay for dealing with the Local economics after the
Please supply a reference and/or evidence for this assertion.
> mine closes NO. But a lot of people enjoy the benefits of commerce from
Please supply a reference and/or evidence for this assertion.
Furthermore, please explain why a company has a responsibility to
remain open in a money-losing venture if the venture just happens to
have a company town resting on it.
> extraction and later cleaning up the land-a small number. Take the TOTAL
I dunno. High prices will signifitantly harm everyone. An oil crunch
teaches this lesson.
> revenue minus the cost of clean up and you find that the GENERAL public
> takes a loss for the benefit of the few.
Please supply a reference and/or evidence for this assertion.
Please also define 'clean up'. Does cleanup mean altering the land again
back to rock, farmland, scrub land, desert, etc. Or removal of toxic
remains.
I await you clarification, evidence, and elaboration.
Scott.