The environment thread

[Jenksismyhero]

I don't particularly like Obama. It isn't about you questioning "jesus" but about the ridiculous question of "why does BP need oversight!?!"!"

 

 

The court system took 20 years to get payments for Exxon-Valdez and then drastically cut the award value. Why should the victims have to wait that long for compensation? What about environmental cleanup costs that need to be funded in the meantime? Why, exactly, is this so out of line for the executive branch of the government to get involved in the largest environmental disaster in our country?

 

This is another case where, no matter what happens, conservatives will cry about Obama. Kap is shouting about criminal negligence and Obama not doing anything and jenks is saying that Obama should have nothing to do with this at all.

 

please point me to my post where i said this. 2 pages ago i said obama should have done more, and probably still needs to appoint more people/resources to the problem. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, i.e., him taking over the administration of claims, despite the fact that it was already ongoing, and despite the fact that there's an adequate avenue of remedy in case anyone gets screwed, i'm saying he should have no part in it. God, how unreasonable of me to assume the judicial branch plays its role and isn't taken over by the executive. God f***ing forbid.

Edited June 17, 2010 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

But Exxon-Valdez is a very clear counter-point to the "let the courts handle it" non-sense. You've failed to address that.

 

What is wrong with him getting BP to agree to a $20B fund and independent oversight? How is that a shakedown? How is that worse than the courts taking decades to sort it out?

[Chisoxfn]

No, because he actually responded. It took your hero 50+ days to get even semi serious... and that took "negotiations" to take over BP.

Bush also wasn't afraid to act and help get past that stupid law related to union rights that prevented foreign employees/resources to be assisting us in coastal activities during New Orleans. Obama didn't and because of it, we could have been doing what we are doing now about 40 days ago.

[Chisoxfn]

Here's the problem and where the logic of many conservatives breaks down:

Bailing out banks a banks mess to protect the economy from diving into a deep depression is bad because government should get involved.

Bailing out an oil companies mess because it is polluting water and ruining an ecosystem is a a great idea and a role of the government.

As a major conservative, I don't think it was bad to bail out the banks and I don't think it is bad to assist an oil company. The US government is responsible for this as well. For example, lets say I'm GM and I outsource something to another manufacturer to produce product X. Product X than takes an absolute s***, GM doesn't just sit back and let the outsoruced company deal with it, they act.

 

The US government didn't do that. They sat back and watched for a long while and quite frankly, since we owned the resources and were basically just contracting BP to do the mining of our oil, I'd say that we should have been involved and privy to everything.

[Jenksismyhero]

But Exxon-Valdez is a very clear counter-point to the "let the courts handle it" non-sense. You've failed to address that.

 

What is wrong with him getting BP to agree to a $20B fund and independent oversight? How is that a shakedown? How is that worse than the courts taking decades to sort it out?

 

It's irrelevant since they paid nothing up front and BP has already paid out claims. It VOLUNTARILY chose not to take that route. Again, totally fine with Obama saying "we're not going to allow the people of the gulf coast to go uncompensated for 2 decades."

 

And "independent oversight." Who do you think he's going to appoint? If there's a politician in the group, it's no longer independent.

[Chisoxfn]

No no no, we can rely on BP to do the honest and ethical thing. Their track record proves it.

Technically, BP could have sat back, told the US gov to f*** off, and went to court. They didn't have to put down 20B of there own money in this mess. Sure they f***ed up and acted negligently and ignored warnings signs but just because something happened at one location in the entire world, doesn't necessarily mean BP is a crappy company and that upper management is full of dumbasses, etc. BP is a good, incredibly successful company that made a mistake.

[StrangeSox]

And how does Obama back up "we're not going to allow the people of the gulf coast to go uncompensated for 2 decades" if he lets the courts handle it?

 

By getting BP to establish a large fund? Oh, wait...

[Chisoxfn]

ahh, yes, we should wait for the courts to play this out, it only took the people affected by exxon mobile 20 years to get their pay. We should all make sure everyone get's f***ed over except BP. They are an amazing company because they are awesome and big and everyone is wrong except them, they should not be forced to do anything, they are competent, except to clean up the spill, the gov't should do that, the gov't should pay for it, WHY IS THE GOV'T MAKING BP PAY FOR IT..... WHY IS BP STILL CLEANING UP THEIR OWN MESS

 

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY

The fact of the matter is a spill like this is bigger than BP. There is not perfect protocal or magical method to fix it. It is why you needed a bigger party involved ensuring that as many and every resource out there is handled, including the assistance of government resources. That thing is our government, who while they don't have the expertise, has the power to reach out and get other oil companies resources involved, other countries resources (boats, etc) involved and of course the finest engineers/researchers/etc involved.

 

BP has done a lot wrong, but lets not act as if they are intentionally failing to clean this thing up. This is a really delicate situation that needs a s***load of attention and unfortunately is heavily a trial & error process.

[Jenksismyhero]

And how does Obama back up "we're not going to allow the people of the gulf coast to go uncompensated for 2 decades" if he lets the courts handle it?

 

By getting BP to establish a large fund? Oh, wait...

 

lol, you just love ignoring my entire statement to suit your argument.

[StrangeSox]

Technically, BP could have sat back, told the US gov to f*** off, and went to court. They didn't have to put down 20B of there own money in this mess. Sure they f***ed up and acted negligently and ignored warnings signs but just because something happened at one location in the entire world, doesn't necessarily mean BP is a crappy company and that upper management is full of dumbasses, etc. BP is a good, incredibly successful company that made a mistake. long series of short-cuts in order to boost profits and finally it added up to a disaster.

 

 

First, financially successful and "good" are not the same. Not even close.

 

Second, their safety record is abysmal and the emails detailing the design considerations of this well show a corporate culture of cutting corners to maximize profits. I linked to the document dumps a few pages ago.

 

Third, this seems like you're supporting the idea of the fund instead of litigating it all like jenks wants.

 

But maybe jenks just wants to get in on the case.

[NorthSideSox72]

Technically, BP could have sat back, told the US gov to f*** off, and went to court. They didn't have to put down 20B of there own money in this mess. Sure they f***ed up and acted negligently and ignored warnings signs but just because something happened at one location in the entire world, doesn't necessarily mean BP is a crappy company and that upper management is full of dumbasses, etc. BP is a good, incredibly successful company that made a mistake.

In the past few years, something like 95% of all the safety violations handed out to all oil companies by the US went to BP. So, yeah, the ARE a s***ty company, top-down.

 

 

[GoSox05]

Made a mistake? Dumping millions of gallons of oil into the gulf is not a mistake. It's a disaster of epic proportions.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

lol, you just love ignoring my entire statement to suit your argument.

 

How does Obama fulfill the promise "we're not going to allow the people of the gulf coast to go uncompensated for 2 decades" without having the executive branch step in?

[Chisoxfn]

In the past few years, something like 95% of all the safety violations handed out to all oil companies by the US went to BP. So, yeah, the ARE a s***ty company, top-down.

Well in that instance, why the hell didn't we walk away? Why did the US government continue to allow them to do this? Where were we to step in. That is pretty deplorable and to me I'd like to think we'd handle the safety issues hard-core.

 

Again, I don't know what these 95% of violations were for and I don't know how they mediated the situations, etc. Are these violations handed out to particular sites (i.e., more off-shore than onshore, etc?). Does BP tend to do almost all in one area?

 

I'm not an expert on oil safety and everything. I can state from a financial perspective BP has been a tremendous company. I can't comment on how they handle safety because quite frankly a lot of that information tends to remain and be handled internally until there is a major f-up. The same thing happens in the pharmaceutical business and I'm sure many other industries.

[StrangeSox]

Well in that instance, why the hell didn't we walk away? Why did the US government continue to allow them to do this? Where were we to step in. That is pretty deplorable and to me I'd like to think we'd handle the safety issues hard-core.

 

Well, we have terrible regulation for a variety of reasons.

 

But you don't blame the effect for the cause. If BP wasn't a crappy company, they won't need such tight oversight. Government failed here, sure, but the root cause is still BP.

[Chisoxfn]

First, financially successful and "good" are not the same. Not even close.

 

Second, their safety record is abysmal and the emails detailing the design considerations of this well show a corporate culture of cutting corners to maximize profits. I linked to the document dumps a few pages ago.

 

Third, this seems like you're supporting the idea of the fund instead of litigating it all like jenks wants.

 

But maybe jenks just wants to get in on the case.

All I am stating is that BP did not have to go this way. So I would say they seem to be willing to put the money out there. Now this is probably because they know they completely screwed up massively and really ignored the signs that would have prevented the explosion and tried to cover up the magnitude of the leak immediately following. Two terrible things and quite frankly, criminal things in my mind. Do I know that for a fact though, hell no. That is my pure speculation that they covered up the leak (and I'm sure if they did it was in a way that they had plenty of evidence to support there claims, the #'s they used just tended to be ones that were most in there favor and far less conservative).

[StrangeSox]

In addition, conservative Republican Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota was quoted as telling the Heritage Foundation think tank on Tuesday that the escrow account was a "redistribution-of-wealth fund."

 

"And now it appears like we'll be looking at one more gateway for more government control, more money to government," she said, according to the Minnesota Independent.

 

Barton is the biggest recipient of oil and gas industry campaign contributions in the House of Representatives, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

 

Its data showed that Barton has collected $1,447,880 from political action committees and individuals connected with the oil and gas industry since 1989.

 

So, after demanding that Obama commandeer boats from private owners, Bachmann is back to whining about Big Government and "redistribution of wealth." Yes, that wealth is and should be redistributed to those harmed by BP's massive f***ups, you moron.

[Jenksismyhero]

How does Obama fulfill the promise "we're not going to allow the people of the gulf coast to go uncompensated for 2 decades" without having the executive branch step in?

 

Pull its licenses or permits? Levy huge fines? I'm tired of the executive taking s*** over when there's no need. When there becomes a need (if BP had said f*** you all, we're going home) then he can do something about it. Until then, leave it to the justice system we put in place for the last 250 years.

 

Here there was ZERO indication that would happen. They created a system for claims, they're paying those claims.

 

Oh, and not that I care about this because I think Obama saying f*** you to BP was correct, but I am a little surprised not many people are worried about how his response has really pissed off one of our closest allies. And he's about to royally piss them off since something like one in every six pounds of pension money is coming to Americans, and not Brits.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, we have terrible regulation for a variety of reasons.

 

But you don't blame the effect for the cause. If BP wasn't a crappy company, they won't need such tight oversight. Government failed here, sure, but the root cause is still BP.

That's my point.

 

TO be clear Jas, I completely agree that the US government's oversight of these operations, as well as the slow and inept response to the disaster, have been awful. They too displayed incompetence top-down. but make no mistake, BP caused this, and it wasn't just some aberrant event. It was the result of documented, systemic corporate culture that has gone decidedly down the wrong path.

 

At this point, in addition to making BP pay for this huge mess, I want to see the US government do four things:

 

1. Begin debarment of BP from everything and anything they reasonably can (they can't do it all, certain areas are just too dependent on them). This will send a HUGE message to oil companies on the need to change their behavior.

 

2. Flush out and re-tool the MMS, replacing basically all top level people and anyone found to be complacent in these safety checks.

 

3. Suspend all NEW offshore drilling for quite a while, possibly permanently, but at least until the safety regulations and mechanisms can be cleaned up.

 

4. Come up with solid contigency and communication plans for future oil/gas disasters.

 

[StrangeSox]

All I am stating is that BP did not have to go this way. So I would say they seem to be willing to put the money out there. Now this is probably because they know they completely screwed up massively and really ignored the signs that would have prevented the explosion and tried to cover up the magnitude of the leak immediately following. Two terrible things and quite frankly, criminal things in my mind. Do I know that for a fact though, hell no. That is my pure speculation that they covered up the leak (and I'm sure if they did it was in a way that they had plenty of evidence to support there claims, the #'s they used just tended to be ones that were most in there favor and far less conservative).

 

Well, then we both agree here. I do think this a positive move for BP and for those affected. I don't think $20B will be enough, but it's a good start and much better than waiting for decades for litigation. It shows good faith on the part of BP, though I think your speculation as to why is dead on.

[Chisoxfn]

Well, we have terrible regulation for a variety of reasons.

 

But you don't blame the effect for the cause. If BP wasn't a crappy company, they won't need such tight oversight. Government failed here, sure, but the root cause is still BP.

Again, what came first, the chicken or the egg. In a capitalistic society, people are going to push the envelope to earn money and that is why oversight to an extent is necessary. Oversight in areas where the issues either impact national security, safety, etc, or when things are too big and will impact our very well being (see case of the banks....we were so close to going into Marshall Law 2 years ago and I don't think people quite realize just how close we were to complete and utter chaos).

 

Did BP fail, yes. Did the Gov fail, yes. Whats the freaking point here? I'm not saying BP didn't fail. I am saying they have responded pretty well and haven't been "cheap" in there response. Now maybe there is a terrible tone from the top down and the company flat out ignores laws/safety regulations/etc. I have no idea. I don't know what 95% necessarily means. Sure it sounds pretty terrible, but that might only be 10 issues, the hell if I know. The severity of those issues, I don't know.

 

Maybe you guys do, I don't know, but I'd assume most of that data isn't public knowledge.

 

I do know that BP is handling claims pretty freaking well, is putting cash into the situation when it didn't necessarily have to and they seem to be responding well in many ways (not all...see how they kept the info so private at first).

 

And I'd like to think when you have a situation go wrong, you look at the many causes/effects. Sarbanes Oxley caused us to have massive controls in place to prevent massive financial frauds like Enron from happening again. I think most of it is stupid, but there are some good things about Sox (and some bad), but one of the key things is to actually have oversight on those controls.

 

Just cause you have controls, doesn't mean s*** if you aren't monitoring them and it would certainly appear that if BP was this safety disaster that you guys are claiming than the monitoring organization certainly f***ed the hell up too for not shutting them down.

[StrangeSox]

Pull its licenses or permits? Levy huge fines? I'm tired of the executive taking s*** over when there's no need. When there becomes a need (if BP had said f*** you all, we're going home) then he can do something about it. Until then, leave it to the justice system we put in place for the last 250 years.

 

This isn't even wrong.

 

Getting BP to agree to a large fund voluntarily = Evil Socialist President usurping the court's role

 

Fining BP to get the right amount = A-okay!

 

The justice department failed in a case with drastically less impact to give fair and timely compensation.

 

Here there was ZERO indication that would happen. They created a system for claims, they're paying those claims.

 

For now. They could stop tomorrow or make unreasonable determinations as to what constitutes a valid claim. This offers independent oversight.

 

Oh, and not that I care about this because I think Obama saying f*** you to BP was correct, but I am a little surprised not many people are worried about how his response has really pissed off one of our closest allies. And he's about to royally piss them off since something like one in every six pounds of pension money is coming to Americans, and not Brits.

 

Britain's fake outrage is laughable. BP destroyed a good chunk of our coast and millions of people's way of life. They deserve all the scorn they get. And the company should lose money and investors should lose money over this.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah, people in the UK who seem to be personally offended by this, as if it was US vs UK, can go f*** themselves. No one is upset at the UK as a country, hell a lot of people probably think its an American company. They are upset at BP, not B.

 

[Chisoxfn]

That's my point.

 

TO be clear Jas, I completely agree that the US government's oversight of these operations, as well as the slow and inept response to the disaster, have been awful. They too displayed incompetence top-down. but make no mistake, BP caused this, and it wasn't just some aberrant event. It was the result of documented, systemic corporate culture that has gone decidedly down the wrong path.

 

At this point, in addition to making BP pay for this huge mess, I want to see the US government do four things:

 

1. Begin debarment of BP from everything and anything they reasonably can (they can't do it all, certain areas are just too dependent on them). This will send a HUGE message to oil companies on the need to change their behavior.

 

2. Flush out and re-tool the MMS, replacing basically all top level people and anyone found to be complacent in these safety checks.

 

3. Suspend all NEW offshore drilling for quite a while, possibly permanently, but at least until the safety regulations and mechanisms can be cleaned up.

 

4. Come up with solid contigency and communication plans for future oil/gas disasters.

Matt, I definitely don't have a problem with those things. I don't know if I'd jump to the conclusion that we shouldn't be drilling off-shore. I'd just make sure that we have the proper oversight to ensure that a disaster of this magnitude can be as preventable as possible. One thing that people aren't talking about is just how much freaking oil was here. This is a huge freaking oil find. I don't quite think anyone believed the well to be as big as it appears to be given the volumes that are pumping out.

 

And I do think BP should be tried for what is going on here. Investigations clearly need to be made to see why this happened, what caused it, and if it is found out that BP was negligent (and it appears a lot of evidence is already out there that they acted unethically and improperly), I have zero problem bringing down our law on them. I also think it is important to consider how BP compares to the rest of the industry.

 

Are they the only company acting this way and they just happened to be the ones caught? Or do the rest tend to run better from the safety standpoint? I don't know the answer, but my guess is the entire industry is relatively similar.

[bmags]

The fact of the matter is a spill like this is bigger than BP. There is not perfect protocal or magical method to fix it. It is why you needed a bigger party involved ensuring that as many and every resource out there is handled, including the assistance of government resources. That thing is our government, who while they don't have the expertise, has the power to reach out and get other oil companies resources involved, other countries resources (boats, etc) involved and of course the finest engineers/researchers/etc involved.

 

BP has done a lot wrong, but lets not act as if they are intentionally failing to clean this thing up. This is a really delicate situation that needs a s***load of attention and unfortunately is heavily a trial & error process.

 

BP is not the only one doing this, they have a bunch of people from all the other companies working on it, and the government has enlisted a bunch of people from other countries to help out.

 

In 1979 it took 10 mos. to end the spill. This one is even deeper and worse. It appears relief wells are all that will stop it. Maybe we learned our lesson and the only law we'll pass after this won't be "Let's cap the pay the oil company would need to pay in case this ever happens again."