- Joined
- May 30, 2007
- Messages
- 9,595
- Reaction score
- 2,739
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
The first element in the mix is a no-nonsense liability system that fastens full responsibility on the parties who run dangerous operations, no excuses allowed. Accordingly, we have to be especially wary of statutory caps on tort damages, including the current law, under which, in the case of the oil industry, the "total of liability . . . with respect to each incident shall not exceed for an offshore facility except a deepwater port, the total of all removal costs plus $75,000,000." That $75 million is chicken feed. Fortunately, the law removes that cap if the incident was caused by "the gross negligence or willful misconduct" of any party, or its failure to comply with any "applicable Federal safety, construction, or operating regulation."
If we had this in place, Im willing to bet that BP wouldve been more careful
Richard A. Epstein: BP Doesn't Deserve a Liability Cap - WSJ.com
Frankly, I dont see why there's a limit on the damages. BP made a mistake due to their own sloppiness and they need to rectify that, to take responsibility for their error. If that mistake costs them their business, then so be it. It's not our job to clean up other people's messes, especially when they are capable of cleaning it up themselves.
If this was a regional company that had maybe 10-20 million dollars to their name, ok, that I can see. They couldnt possibly even begin to cover the damages. However BP is a multi-national corporation with annual gross profits in the hundred of billions of dollars, they can afford to rectify their mistake.
Gross profit is irrelevent, what matters is their net profit. BP is going to pay for the damages, but thinking it will be a walk in the park for them is somewhat foolish in my opinion.
Frankly, I dont see why there's a limit on the damages. BP made a mistake due to their own sloppiness and they need to rectify that, to take responsibility for their error. If that mistake costs them their business, then so be it. It's not our job to clean up other people's messes, especially when they are capable of cleaning it up themselves.
If this was a regional company that had maybe 10-20 million dollars to their name, ok, that I can see. They couldnt possibly even begin to cover the damages. However BP is a multi-national corporation with annual gross profits in the hundred of billions of dollars, they can afford to rectify their mistake.
Or, with their stock plummeting, they could file bankruptcy and walk away altogether. Careful what you wish for.
Gross profit is irrelevent, what matters is their net profit. BP is going to pay for the damages, but thinking it will be a walk in the park for them is somewhat foolish in my opinion.
If, in paying for the damage that they've caused, BP goes broke then we will have still paid a significant portion of what will be needed and what assets remain can be siezed and sold to further compensate and clean with the federal government covering the rest. To me, that seems better than expecting the federal government to pick up the tab and then HOPE that BP will make enough to pay it back or that they will even pay it back at all.Obviously you have NOT followed YOUR OWN argument through to it's logical end.
If BP go broke/out of business, the Government of the US will ineviatbly have to pay for the clean up.
If the above were to happen then those who are due compensation might eventually get paiid a few cents on the Dollar.
It is in everyone's interest to keep BP alive and solvent and in business and profitable, BECAUSE THEY WILL THEN BE ABLE TO PAY CLEAN UP, COMPENSATION, FINES AND ALL OTHER COSTS.
Now which part of that do you fail to understand
Because...
A drop in a large bucket | Philadelphia Inquirer | 06/19/2010
The only forseable problems BP is going to have is getting license to operate as long as a Democratic Adminstration or Congress stay in power, thus expect large amounts of money to flow to Republicans come November. The capacity of oil firms to drag out actually paying and then getting lines of credit to cover their annual costs is well proven. This won't significently hurt them especially considering their net cashflow. Right now, BP looks like a real value stock considering the irrational behavior playing out on its stock price.
Something Americans need to consider. When does this corporate bashing and extra legal taking of assets turn off foreign investment into the U.S. Without which we would not be able to afford the lifestyle we are living on a credit card.
Doesn't it ever occur to anyone that that lifestyle is the problem?
I agree. If a company thinks they can make more money off of a risky move than it'll cost to clean up or fix, there's no reason NOT to do it. Especially if they know they'll only have to pay a certain amountBP screwed up, and all this liability cap does is encourage risky behavior.
I think it's worth pointing out that, even though BP is mostly responsible for this mess (apparently), we ourselves also share some of the blame. If oil companies followed all applicable regulations to the "T", oil would be more expensive to produce. At a guess, based on nothing more than my own familiarity with the industry, gas prices would gain 25%-50%. We would all be shouting at the oil majors to lower prices and quit "gouging" us.
Government regulators who let gross negligence slide were responding as much to that pressure as they were to pressure from the oil companies.
I agree. If a company thinks they can make more money off of a risky move than it'll cost to clean up or fix, there's no reason NOT to do it. Especially if they know they'll only have to pay a certain amount
Then we should allow for more drilling in shallow waters, and on land. Right?
j-mac
Better to work faster at an alternative, as that is where the future is.
I'm still not sure why the federal government should spend a dime cleaning up BP's mess.
I have no problem with liberals working on their alternatives, never have. However, the reality of the situation today is that this nation, and the world's economic engine runs on fossil fuels, and petroleum based products.
When the call was to drill ANWAR you Joe, argued that it would take ten years to see any of that oil. Yet, you are willing to cripple the nation in favor of unproven technologies that experts say will take at least ten years to become even remotely viable, that is if they ever do?
What about the mean time Joe? huh? What are we supposed to heat our homes with? What are we supposed to get to work in? Do you even realize just how much of your life is tied to oil?
j-mac
I'm still not sure why the federal government should spend a dime cleaning up BP's mess.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?