Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It sounds like you are not for the people but for big BIG corporations.
That's what far right republicans are. Screw safety, who cares about the environment, to hell with the sea life, tax cuts to big business and only the wealthiest of americans,... Who cares about anything else? As long as it boosts the profit margins even higher and higher for big business/oil, nothing else matters to them. I wouldn't be surprised to see even more republicans bowing down to their master.
That's what far right republicans are. Screw safety, who cares about the environment, to hell with the sea life, tax cuts to big business and only the welthiest of americans,... Who cares about anything else? As long as it boosts the profit margins even higher and higher for big business/oil, nothing else matters to them. I wouldn't be surprised to see even more republicans bowing down to their master.
And I'm surprised to see so many Democrats on the side of big business these days. They used to be all for social stuff..guess they got a taste of $$$ from the big business lobbyists.
Money and greed seems to be the root of every major disaster.
I'm not sure how or why the US government itself would be "responsible" here, in the financial sense.
Because the government made a deal with oil companies to take the liability for spills in exchange for pushing them further out into deep water..
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn
I doubt the government gave BP a specific license to allow a blowout of an oil well...
Thats just ridiculous.. The government revoked BP's permit to build the well in 500 feet deep water, and forced them into 5,000 feet deep water.. Again, knowing full well that the government would be liable for any damages..
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn
And it seems like a bizarre argument to make for a proponent of free markets.
Not many support the government being liable, but I do support the law, and that is the law... If you are going to force companies to be more dangerous, then have a plan beforehand on how to deal with potential disasters. Neither BP nor the government obviously has a plan.. THEY BOTH FAILED, and the government shouldnt be let off the hook..
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn
If we say that the US federal government is responsible for the errors of private oil companies, isn't that the same as saying we might as well nationalize all drilling operations in order to bring them under complete government oversight?
Ahh no.. Not the same.. The government regulates and allows the oil companies to drill.. They and they alone dictate the locations and the depths at which oil companies can drill. Oil companies would much prefer to drill on land or near the coastline because its cheaper.. Government wont allow them...
I thought Republicans don't apologize to foreign countries for US What happened? It this guy another RINO?
Who said?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
I guess he would prefer to use taxpayer money to pay for the clean up.
Dont you ever get tired of repeating that same old line which has been proven wrong over, and over, and over again? Seriously.. Its like you cant learn FACTS and can only resort to the same old garbage..
Money and greed seems to be the root of every major disaster.
Might want to add booze to that list when thinking of the Exxon Valdiz
Obviously this Barton clown isnt thinking of the people directly affected by this oil disaster,seems he'd be happy if the payouts were tied up in the courts for the next 10 years,as for shakedown? the meeting seemed like an amicable agreement between the American gvmnt and BP.
The government revoked BP's permit to build the well in 500 feet deep water, and forced them into 5,000 feet deep water
I don't really understand that argument, either. If conditions were too risky at that depth, BP had a responsibility to refrain from drilling altogether. Once they commenced drilling operations, they gave an implicit assurance that they knew what they were doing.
For example, if the federal government tells me that I can't build a radio mast on a particular piece of land, but I can build it on several other areas, I'm still responsible if I choose to build it in a swamp, and it collapses. That's because no one "forced" me to build it in the first place; I chose to do so. And by doing so, I made an implicit assurance that I would build a sound structure. If I could not build a sound structure, I would have a responsibility not to put it up.
The argument here seems to be that deepwater drilling simply cannot be made safe at all. But is that actually true? Or did BP's faulty approach cause the incident in the first place?
It would be one thing if the US federal government had given BP a detailed drilling plan, and BP had followed it to the letter, and the well blew out. Going back to my radio mast example, it would be the same as if the government had both ordered me to build the structure, and then told me how to build it, and it fell down.
But that isn't what happened here. BP intentionally chose to drill a well that it could just as easily have never drilled. And it drilled on its own terms, in terms of the approach used.
I don't see how any of that would give rise to US government liability. Do you?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
