Is this how the government is going to get us out of the economic problem, suing the crap out of BP? I think it depends on how their latest attempt goes, WATCH.

I only hope they drag Haliburton into the abyss with them.

>> ^dag:

10.7 billion dollars of liability + criminal charges + cleanup charges. BP's stock price is tanking and there is now talk that BP may cease to exist. Good.


Yes, because the corporations that'll take up the void left by BP are run by friggin saints! You know, Shell, Exxon... God bless 'em. Seriously guys, what's up with all the left-wing naivety surrounding this recent oil spill?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

A just financial punishment of BP - is the one thing that has a chance of preventing other companies like Shell and Exxon from following in BP's footsteps.

Exxon was on the hook for 2.5 billion dollars for the Valdez spill (which I worked on during my summer vacation from uni) - they appealed to the supreme court and got off. A valid argument could be made that if Exxon was punished adequately for that spill, other companies would have been a bit less reckless - and we may not be in the situation we are now.

Branding this as "left-wing naivety" is just an attempt at marginalization - and honestly, a bit lame.
>> ^campionidelmondo:

>> ^dag:
10.7 billion dollars of liability + criminal charges + cleanup charges. BP's stock price is tanking and there is now talk that BP may cease to exist. Good.

Yes, because the corporations that'll take up the void left by BP are run by friggin saints! You know, Shell, Exxon... God bless 'em. Seriously guys, what's up with all the left-wing naivety surrounding this recent oil spill?

So making one of the largest global companies not to mention global employers cease to exist is good why? BP fucked up. Well actually no, a sub-contractor fucked up. It wasn't BP's rig that went bust. So why is BP being fucked up the arse so bad? Why isn't the company the rig was leased from being fucked? It was their rig that went boom, it was their well head equipment that failed, not BP's. It just seems to be "Oh BP is the company that owns the well, and they're really big and known, so lets say it was all BP".

I'm not saying that BP are saints, far from it. BP should have better environmental procedures in place to reduce the damage from a blow out such as this, not to mention they should have more effective methods to do so. They also should have started drilling relief wells, or at least set up relief wells, ASAP whilst faffing around with other possible solutions.

I guess i'm just pissed at the fact that BP is getting a massive amount of shit when it wasnt their equipment that fucked up, and the company who owns the fucked equipment barely gets mentioned and has seemed to have gotten away with murder.

The idea that the demise of BP will seriously change things for the better (first quote) is naive. The likes of Exxon and Shell will pick up the slack and if you believe they'll suddenly grow a conscience you are badly mistaken (there were many accidents before this one that changed nothing). Meanwhile a lot of the "small guys" try to secure their retirement by building up a portfolio of so-called solid stocks. BP used to be one of those stocks, so their downfall would make alot of people bleed (and has already), not to mention all the people who'd lose their jobs. If it makes you feel better to call me lame for pointing that out, go ahead.>> ^dag:

A just financial punishment of BP - is the one thing that has a chance of preventing other companies like Shell and Exxon from following in BP's footsteps.
Exxon was on the hook for 2.5 billion dollars for the Valdez spill (which I worked on during my summer vacation from uni) - they appealed to the supreme court and got off. A valid argument could be made that if Exxon was punished adequately for that spill, other companies would have been a bit less reckless - and we may not be in the situation we are now.
Branding this as "left-wing naivety" is just an attempt at marginalization - and honestly, a bit lame.
>> ^campionidelmondo:
>> ^dag:
10.7 billion dollars of liability + criminal charges + cleanup charges. BP's stock price is tanking and there is now talk that BP may cease to exist. Good.

Yes, because the corporations that'll take up the void left by BP are run by friggin saints! You know, Shell, Exxon... God bless 'em. Seriously guys, what's up with all the left-wing naivety surrounding this recent oil spill?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I didn't (and wouldn't) call you lame - just the comment.

I would say that a threat to profits is the only real motivation that moves these corporations. It's not about them growing a conscience- it's about them worrying that a similar fate to BP (forced bankruptcy) could happen to them - and therefore mitigating that risk by taking safety into account.

The Exxon Valdez incident, unfortunately, gave just the opposite message.

>> ^campionidelmondo:

The idea that the demise of BP will seriously change things for the better (first quote) is naive. The likes of Exxon and Shell will pick up the slack and if you believe they'll suddenly grow a conscience you are badly mistaken (there were many accidents before this one that changed nothing). Meanwhile a lot of the "small guys" try to secure their retirement by building up a portfolio of so-called solid stocks. BP used to be one of those stocks, so their downfall would make alot of people bleed (and has already), not to mention all the people who'd lose their jobs. If it makes you feel better to call me lame for pointing that out, go ahead.>> ^dag:
A just financial punishment of BP - is the one thing that has a chance of preventing other companies like Shell and Exxon from following in BP's footsteps.
Exxon was on the hook for 2.5 billion dollars for the Valdez spill (which I worked on during my summer vacation from uni) - they appealed to the supreme court and got off. A valid argument could be made that if Exxon was punished adequately for that spill, other companies would have been a bit less reckless - and we may not be in the situation we are now.
Branding this as "left-wing naivety" is just an attempt at marginalization - and honestly, a bit lame.
>> ^campionidelmondo:
>> ^dag:
10.7 billion dollars of liability + criminal charges + cleanup charges. BP's stock price is tanking and there is now talk that BP may cease to exist. Good.

Yes, because the corporations that'll take up the void left by BP are run by friggin saints! You know, Shell, Exxon... God bless 'em. Seriously guys, what's up with all the left-wing naivety surrounding this recent oil spill?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Yes, poor BP. They were in charge. And from what 60 minutes said - responsible for rushing the job, and sidestepping safety to get the oil up quicker.

>> ^malakai:

So making one of the largest global companies not to mention global employers cease to exist is good why? BP fucked up. Well actually no, a sub-contractor fucked up. It wasn't BP's rig that went bust. So why is BP being fucked up the arse so bad? Why isn't the company the rig was leased from being fucked? It was their rig that went boom, it was their well head equipment that failed, not BP's. It just seems to be "Oh BP is the company that owns the well, and they're really big and known, so lets say it was all BP".
I'm not saying that BP are saints, far from it. BP should have better environmental procedures in place to reduce the damage from a blow out such as this, not to mention they should have more effective methods to do so. They also should have started drilling relief wells, or at least set up relief wells, ASAP whilst faffing around with other possible solutions.
I guess i'm just pissed at the fact that BP is getting a massive amount of shit when it wasnt their equipment that fucked up, and the company who owns the fucked equipment barely gets mentioned and has seemed to have gotten away with murder.

I doubt they would have rushed the job, because if they had, then by default, every other deep-sea well "operated" by BP would be compromised and it would be only a matter of time until they all have the same problem they had here.

I would bet that whoever first drilled the well and installed the casing and the well head would have rushed the job, and looking around a bit on the internet, it seems that the US doesnt require a remote fail-safe installed on wells. So a cock-up in US safety regulations, coupled with rushed work and a crap rig caused this. None of which are wholly down to BP.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

The job was being rushed on BP's behest. The buck should stop with them. And this.
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bps-dismal-safety-record/story?id=10763042

>> ^malakai:
I doubt they would have rushed the job, because if they had, then by default, every other deep-sea well "operated" by BP would be compromised and it would be only a matter of time until they all have the same problem they had here.
I would bet that whoever first drilled the well and installed the casing and the well head would have rushed the job, and looking around a bit on the internet, it seems that the US doesnt require a remote fail-safe installed on wells. So a cock-up in US safety regulations, coupled with rushed work and a crap rig caused this. None of which are wholly down to BP.

Compare BP's number of safety violations to other comparable oil companies and you'll find that it was sop that lead to this disaster.

After a 2 sec Google search:
http://www.businessinsider.com/bp-has-been-fined-by-osha-760-times-has-an-awful-track-record-for-safety-2010-6

evryone watched the 60minutes video right? The one where it was revealed they used a faulty Blowout preventer, faked the pressure (integrity) tests, and skipped safety procedures when they filled the hole w/ seawater.

I understand that it's not absolutely PROVEN they did those things, but we have eyewitness testimony that explains the situation with clarity.

Yet the corporate media seems to ignore ^that shit. I consider it fact. Am I wrong?

http://news.videosift.com/video/60-Minutes-Deepwater-Horizon-s-Blowout-Part-1
http://news.videosift.com/video/60-Minutes-Deepwater-Horizon-s-Blowout-Part-2

It is very simple to figure out what BP's punishment should be. It should be made very clear that the cost of cleaning up after a failure is FAR more than the cost of prevention. Corporations are beholden to the profit margin *by law*. So we as a nation have to make it clear that their bottom line cannot withstand oil spills. We failed to do this with every spill so far, so I have no doubt they will get away with it again. But if anybody is unclear about what should be their punishment, that's it in simple terms.

Oh, and if you still don't think BP should be held responsible, you haven't been paying attention. But the owners of the rig need their share of the punishment, too. Pressure from the penny pinchers at the head office is no reason to allow degradation of safety procedures.

This spill will take years to clean up. After the execs are sent to prison, I nominate that they are enrolled into a new work release program entitling them to 7 days a week of beautiful Louisiana coastline labor.

*worldaffairs

Adding video to channels (Worldaffairs) - requested by gwiz665.