I agree with the assertion that you should never whine about "leaving where you've been all your life" because it's rooted in an unreasonable aversion to change. Yes, there's a lot involved, but it's not something that's never been done before.
However, going back to the oil problem, in some cases there is no fitting compensation other than uprooting your fishing business and moving to somewhere completely different - on an ocean instead of the gulf. Is BP going to pay for that expense? Or will they get out of it on the grounds that asking them to move you and your family and your entire business to a different, possibly more expensive area is "unreasonable"?
And how do we properly account for what might amount to irreparable damage to that particular source of food in the near- to mid-future?
But vice-versa, neither should Californians interfere with the politics of Utah (as they tried to do ~2 years ago). It is NONE of their business.
Um. What? Which interference are you referring to?
All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin