Goleta Exxon Admits "Greed Is Good"

Here's the full size photo:

http://bp3.blogger.com/_vCDH74BiAG8/SFvn...

This is not an Exxon advertising campaign, but an ad for gambling website www.wallstreet.com. Not sure why the ad is still up there too, because the gambling site ceased operations and the domain name was put up for sale recently:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jh...

I guess you can try to insinuate some kind of irony in relation to Exxon hosting the ad, but it has nothing to do with Exxon. Also, as much as it's chic to hate oil companies, the south coast seems to be giving them decent business. I mean, according to city-data.com, 10.4% of Goleta households have 4 or more vehicles.

Why not actually discuss issues that would lead to decreased demand? Commuter rail between Ventura & Santa Barbara? What ever happened to that? How about creating affordable housing so that the working class don't have to commute 35+ miles each day? I guess that's not as fun as bitching about oil companies.

I was disappointed to see the headline and writeup accompanying this photograph. Thank you, rc251, for the clarification.

Other local Web sites are losing their credibility. One runs press releases with bylines, expecting us to believe they're news stories written by reporters. Another posts photos with captions reflecting the Webmaster's personal opinions, with no regard for accuracy or sensitivity to the people photographed.

Indy, you've been one of the few reliable sources for news and integrity on the South Coast. Please don't let us down.

Yeah, I can't think of a worse thing than putting up a light-hearted, ironic photograph; because that would render moot any other serious coverage of the issues which create the irony, either in the past or future by the Independent.

Coming up: rc251 and Moonrunner's campaign to bring out the actual goodness Greka brings to Santa Barbara county ("What's all this about spilling a little oil?")

It should also be noted that the service station makes hardly anything on selling the gas, it's all about the minimarket or (in some cases) auto repair services as far as making any money is concerned.
Still, kind of dumb ad to put up anywhere near a gas station even if it has nothing to do with the gas.
I've almost given up driving my car completely, and am considering doing away with it entirely (like my girlfriend has for the last ten years). I take it to work once a week and bundle the trip with all possible errands that could in any way necessitate the use of a car. Otherwise it's the bus or the bike between SB and Goleta the goodland. I will enjoy the $500 a year or so bonus.

I understand that the article was supposed to be light hearted humor, but it didn't really make it clear what the origin of that sign was.

Also, I'm not saying I love the oil companies, but they provide a product that is gobbled up pretty quickly by the public. The only reason they continue to make so much money is that most of us still have a dependency on vehicles. That's why I think instead of complaining about oil company profits, we should think of ways at reducing the demand.

The problem is that many suggestions end up, ironically, pissing off "environmentalists". For example, the issue of doubletracking the Union Pacific tracks is hard to get by the Coastal Commission, plus our great residents of Montecito are too special to have their land taken away for the greater good. I've proposed developing a shopping center on some of Camino Corto Open Space in Isla Vista, because currently Isla Vistans have to stream out to Camino Real and Fairview to take care of basic services, causing major traffic problems and polluting the environment. Though Camino Corto is within very close biking distance of all of IV, it would never happen.

But judging to see how the third rate leadership of Santa Barbara functions, all of these issues that cause South Coasters to heavily depend on cars will never be solved. Of course, some will still blame the oil companies for all these woes.

I might have noticed this myself except that I've been boycotting Exxon since 2001. It is the only U.S. employer that has ever rescinded both (a) a non-discrimination policy covering sexual orientation and (b) domestic partner benefits. It is also the only Fortune 10 company that does not have a non-discrimination policy covering "sexual orientation." Get your gasoline at Shell, Chevron, or Arco!

Yep, It's too bad that one cannot make even the most harmless joke without "offending" somone who thinks they then need financial compensation to overcome their offendedness.

Our vaunted public employees have made an art of this (lest we forget Firebum Tennie Pierce, et al).

Our "I'm entitled to be rich by filing nuisance lawsuits (for half the payout)" legal community backs them right up.

The non-whites, women and gays play this like a game. The tragic story of the young kid killed in Oxnard, egged on by his gay administrator is a perfect example of what happens when you push to hard. I wonder how much that lawsuit is going to cost the school district...

One day Alice, bam! to the moon!

Lest you think I'm exagerating...

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Foxwoods.Ca...

"It was vulgar and disgusting," added Lori Francisco. "Rude crude comments about each and everyone of us."
They also made comments about the sexual orientation of one of the women who was there.

...They were also told that one worker was fired.
But the women say that payoff did not make up for the emotional damage they suffered. All nine ladies are suing the casino for $500,000.

But Wait...The best part:

"the casino claims that because it is owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, it is immune to lawsuits in state court"...Bwahahaha