The Economist makes another good point. A socialist Obama isn't, but he has very little attachment to the concept of private property rights (not entirely surprising given his previous political office being in Chicago).
The Economist makes another good point. A socialist Obama isn't, but he has very little attachment to the concept of private property rights (not entirely surprising given his previous political office being in Chicago).
Hope is the denial of reality
It's an escrow account, with a small percentage of their cash, controlled by a third party as an "insurance" against bankruptcy claims. You guys are overreacting. In the end, it probably won't even cover half of future liabilities.
I understand the two sides here: one who wants to hate on bp and the other who wants to hate on Obama.
The legal liability is capped at $75 million. Obama has manhandled BP into accepting to possibly pay out 29 times the amount it is obliged to pay.Originally Posted by GGT
It's an escrow account, with a small percentage of their cash, controlled by a third party as an "insurance" against bankruptcy claims. You guys are overreacting. In the end, it probably won't even cover half of future liabilities.
I understand the two sides here: one who wants to hate on bp and the other who wants to hate on Obama.
It wouldn't surprise me if this is mostly caused because he's pissed about the coincidence of this shit happening only days after he decided to allow off shore drilling.
Congratulations America
It's irrelevant. It's not Obama's job to tell a private company how to pay its damages.It's an escrow account, with a small percentage of their cash, controlled by a third party as an "insurance" against bankruptcy claims. You guys are overreacting. In the end, it probably won't even cover half of future liabilities.
I understand the two sides here: one who wants to hate on bp and the other who wants to hate on Obama.
No, it's one side that respects the law and another that's so blinded by hatred for BP that they're willing to abandon the rule of law.
Hope is the denial of reality
Bp said they would pay "all legitimate claims" long before the cap was discussed. Their speeches even dismissed the notion of such a small cap.
Also, Obama isn't all of congress, senate, or the many agencies involved in this mess. Figure head with the bully pulpit, of course.
Property Rights? Who "owns" the Gulf of Mexico? Who "owns" the Gulf states involved? Certainly not Bp or its shareholders.
Legitimate claims, and now they're paying people who aren't even near the Gulf
Congratulations America
Whose job is it to punish law-breakers? Hint: not the president's.
Hope is the denial of reality
Then does Bp's legal team suck that bad? I doubt it.
Hint: you shouldn't keep blaming Obama for every political or PR move, even when it's made by a multi-national mega-corporation and not a court of law.
Wussing out?
You mention law-breakers and back away. You think all those in the Gulf should just wait until after the lawyers and court delays have strung this out for twenty years?
Explain that, really. The escrow account is just as much a positive PR move for Bp as anything else. But of course, if you want to find a way to hate Obama, this is just as good as any other excuse. Where's your blame for MMS or Cheney's Dept of Interior that set up this corrupt culture in the oil business?
Or you actually follow the law. Have the government make reasonable payment now and then sue BP for those payments plus interest. You know, according to our constitution, not opinion polls.
Hope is the denial of reality
That's not in the constitution, either.
But everyone sees the potential scheme---commit negligent crimes, ruin a whole coast, then declare bankruptcy to avoid paying "legitimate claims". You can't get blood from a turnip, but you can keep bleeding the tax payer?
Riight, love those freeee market principles at work.
WTF, at which point did BP threaten to declare bankruptcy? Are you confusing the cries of chicken littles like yourself with BP? The same BP that makes a profit of nearly $20 billion a year?
Hope is the denial of reality
I'm not a chicken little. But I know a company that large has all things "on the table" as they plan for their bottom line.
In fact, bp is courting 7 banks for $1 billion loans from each, because that might be less expensive than messing with bonds. They're also divesting some assets to raise cash, trying to appease shareholders' anxiety. After the escrow account was confirmed, their stock value went up.
Bankruptcy isn't a declaration of being broke, but a legal way to shelter assets from law suit liabilities. You damn well know that.
I'll ask again, why do you expect the victims and the Gulf states to wait 20 years for this to move through courts (as it did for Exxon Valdez)? You think the gummint should step in and advance them their cash losses, hoping to regain it later from Bp? Really? A government "bail-out" for Bp?
Well, as things stand, BP is going to bail out your government. Because legally your government is on the hook for whatever this spill costs more than 75m.
Oh, and BP isn't just 'big business', it's also how millions of people have provided for their pensions.
So let's impose a dictatorship just because it makes things easier.
Hope is the denial of reality
On a tangent raised by the article, blaming US officialdom for the all of the drop in BP's stock price is ridiculous.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Uh. . . it is the Executive branch's job, as a matter of fact. The courts don't punish, they rule on guilt or innocence when asked by the Feds, states, or other parties involved in enforcement.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Yeah, and how would the courts rule on a fact like the oil spill if applying actual law rather than apply lynch mob rule like the Obama administration is doing right now?
Congratulations America
No, the Executive Branch brings cases to trial. The courts decide the punishment.
Hope is the denial of reality
Which then is enforced by the Executive.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
If you want to be pedantic.
What? Someone here wants to be pedantic?
I never thought something like that would happen.
Never.
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
Define what you mean by actual law. How would the courts rule on torts seizing more than $75 million if the legal context is limited solely to the $75 million cap? They'd strike it down, but you frame it tautologically. The fact is the courts are going to look favorably on legislative and executive efforts to go beyond the cap, and they have a number of ways to do so without violating the constitution.
Or, you know, if you want to be accurate since you're insisting on a strict demarcation between seeking to punish someone and actually punishing them in the first place. Every legal theorist in the country will tell you that the courts are limited to deciding on what the facts are. They may use that function in all sorts of indirect ways, but that is all they directly do.No, the Executive Branch brings cases to trial. The courts decide the punishment. If you want to be pedantic.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
The law that says that there is no liability in the case of oil spills beyond the amount of 75 million dollars that is the law of the US as we are speaking? Which would be the Oil Polution Act of 1990.
Oh, courts aren't just limited to ruling on innocence and guilt, they are also setting the punishment in those cases where the law doesn't have a mandatory one. And we would have to conlude that in those cases the mandatory penalty is set by the legislative, not the executive.
Congratulations America
The cap limit is removed if negligence is proven, and according to accounts of the rig workers, thats not going to be hard to do. Thats all already been posted.
That doesn't mean it is up to the President to play prosecutor, judge and executioner all at once in a meeting in the White House. It is indeed the way things are done in the Russian Federation, it is not the way things are done in a country that knows the rule of law.
Congratulations America
BP claimed they would pay out within days of the oil spill beginning, you may recall Dread using this claim to attack Obama's first line of harsh words. This new turn is because they weren't paying out fast enough, or in the link I provided earlier, paying out properly.
Both sides are playing a PR game at this time. BP paying now covers them later. This has nothing to do with the President playing an executioner.
OH come on, BP was manhandled into paying up for groups of people for whose losses they could have no justifiable liability.BP claimed they would pay out within days of the oil spill beginning, you may recall Dread using this claim to attack Obama's first line of harsh words. This new turn is because they weren't paying out fast enough, or in the link I provided earlier, paying out properly.
Both sides are playing a PR game at this time. BP paying now covers them later. This has nothing to do with the President playing an executioner
Congratulations America
Do you have a list or something? You keep saying this, but maybe I lost your source in all of your back and forth.
BP has shown it doesn't exactly follow directives, with the way they tried to handle the EPA. So I'm still curious how you think BP paying out is againist what they publicly acknowledged they would do from the beginning, when Obama was still claiming that BP was the best entity to deal with the problem. Maybe it has something to do with your confusion on how the $75 million cap won't apply due to their negligence.
This isn't some broad attack on business. Its an attack on a single business that has ignored safety regulations, lied and hidden information from the very beginning, and dragged its feet into accountability for years.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 06-20-2010 at 04:35 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote