36
   

Spill baby spill, slippery politics

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 10:55 am
@rosborne979,
rosborne979 wrote:
The question is, "what is the cost of reasonable cleanup", and the answer is, "how much do you have to spend".


In Canada, the reasonable cost of modification by an employer for a disabled employee has been determined to be just before the point of bankruptcy.

I'm curious to see what the reasonable cost in this case is determined to be.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 01:07 pm
You know what's really weird, the residents along the gulf coast are watching their entire environmental world (natural environment) being destroyed, yet they still want off-shore drilling jobs.

Even with all the damage to their living area and to so many people's way of life (fishing and tourism and restaurants), they still want the jobs that come with drilling, more than they want to preserve that area.
CarbonSystem
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 01:28 pm
@rosborne979,
rosborne979 wrote:

You know what's really weird, the residents along the gulf coast are watching their entire environmental world (natural environment) being destroyed, yet they still want off-shore drilling jobs.

Even with all the damage to their living area and to so many people's way of life (fishing and tourism and restaurants), they still want the jobs that come with drilling, more than they want to preserve that area.


I haven't heard about the whole aspect of jobs in the gulf and offshore drilling. I was talking to a friend who'd travelled through there recently for work, the mood was of utter depression and devastation. It actually smelled terribly, an affect which I hadn't considered, and they said the people of course hated BP. Rightfully so. Their wanting still to drill offshore is very wierd and surprising.
Swimpy
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 03:05 pm
This article explains the difficulty in just boycotting BP gas.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/your-money/12money.html?nl=&emc=aua21
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 04:01 pm
@hawkeye10,
And the way I read it BP is only responsible for 75 million in damages.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 04:25 pm
@CarbonSystem,
CarbonSystem wrote:
I was talking to a friend who'd travelled through there recently for work, the mood was of utter depression and devastation. It actually smelled terribly, an affect which I hadn't considered, and they said the people of course hated BP.

I suspect that the smell will get worse too. As the whole gulf begins to die there will probably be a lot of "dead" smells wafting over Florida and other inland cities. Bacteria will eventually dominate the gulf waters and the entire ecosystem will be altered to accommodate decomposition.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 04:52 pm
Following up on the developing story regarding BP's dividend. The BBC is reporting that, come Monday, the board of directors will suspend the dividend for this quarter.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 04:54 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

Following up on the developing story regarding BP's dividend. The BBC is reporting that, come Monday, the board of directors will suspend the dividend for this quarter.


Excellent news!

The rumors on the Liberal side of the web today are speaking to a massive new Gulf Cleanup act coming up the pipe, sort of a Tennessee Valley situation, which revolves around... diverting the Mississippi river!

Cycloptichorn
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:02 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
BPGlobalPR wrote:
DO NOT ask your reps to support Clean Energy. Buying their votes back will take a lot of money away from the cleanup effort. #bpcares


BPGlobalPR wrote:
Yes, our "spill" is a "trickle" and "hurricanes" are "drizzles". Hope it doesn't "drizzle" on our "trickle". That'd be a "pickle".
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:05 pm
@DrewDad,
i love that twitter account
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:06 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Excellent news!


Obviously Cyclo has no BP shares. He just has a heart of gold. The simple fact that hearts of gold would still be swinging in the trees seems to be on Ignore.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:13 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
Excellent news!


Obviously Cyclo has no BP shares. He just has a heart of gold. The simple fact that hearts of gold would still be swinging in the trees seems to be on Ignore.


It is excellent news! BP will need all the money it has to pay for the massive cleanup operation, and reparations for the livelihood of all the people whose businesses they fucked with their shoddy work. They have no money to pay as a dividend.

Who gives a **** if you or others have BP shares? Those shares are not magical money machines for British citizens to enjoy as an entitlement; they are bets that sometimes will go up and sometimes will go down. It's about time people were reminded of this fact.

The entire 'Britain relies on BP dividends!' argument is bullshit and I really could care less.

Cycloptichorn
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:29 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
In case you're not up to date Cyclo BP is 40% owned by British investors and 39% by American ones. To what extent the British investors are owned by American investors or vice versa I don't know. It's a grey area in a globalised economy.

The cause of the problem has not been determined yet but your phrase "they fucked with their shoddy work" does determine the level of your hysterical indignation.



Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 05:32 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
The cause of the problem has not been determined yet


Oh, come on. Don't sling bullshit at me. There exists ample evidence that BP was ignoring safety measures and rushing things to get it done as quick as possible.

Cyclotpichorn
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 05:58 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Everyone ignores safety measures. A work to rule is as effective as a strike in a lot of cases. I'll bet that if every safety measure was adhered to strictly all the rigs would cease production.

It is the drive to keep gas at $2.80 that is the sole cause. If you've been bargain hunting for gas Cyclo you have done your bit.

"Ignoring safety measures" is a meaningless expression. The world is a real one and not an abstract idea.

And another thing--somebody going from a neighbourhood welfare clinic in Illinois to kicking oilmen's asses is ridiculous however impressive it sounds to the Women's Institute.
Swimpy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 07:25 am
@spendius,
Quote:
It is the drive to keep gas at $2.80 that is the sole cause.



Ding ding ding ding ding! You are correct, sir. We are all responsible, at least all of us in the USA, who vote out every politician who even hints at raising the gas tax.

That said, BP has a horrendous safety record. http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/bp-safety-record-0517

It's unfortunate that the British are being badmouthed because this multinational corporation that just happens to have the British moniker is one of the worst of the bad actors in the oil biz.
hamburgboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 01:22 pm
@Swimpy,
the BP will be mounting a PR campaign in an effort to show them as a concerned but also feisty corporation .
money that could have gone towards clean-up will now go to PR advisers - that's the way to clean the oil from the beaches !

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7148612.ece

Quote:


BP seems more concerned about PR than cleanup - that's the way i read it .
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 08:32 pm
Quote:
In thinking about governmental reform, one place to start is the 1990 Oil Pollution Act, enacted after the Exxon Valdez accident. The law fines companies $1,000 for every barrel spilled, $3,000 if they were found negligent
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/business/13view.html?hpw

OK...we now know why PB has turned away the scientists who wanted to find a good number for what they are putting into the gulf..

Next question...why did our government not protect our interests as taxpayers by getting a good number???....OOOPS...Thank you President Obama...
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 08:43 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In thinking about governmental reform, one place to start is the 1990 Oil Pollution Act, enacted after the Exxon Valdez accident. The law fines companies $1,000 for every barrel spilled, $3,000 if they were found
negligenthttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/business/13view.html?hpw

OK...we now know why PB has turned away the scientists who wanted to find a good number for what they are putting into the gulf..

Next question...why did our government not protect our interests as taxpayers by getting a good number???....OOOPS...Thank you President Obama...
I get $1,300 a minute difference in the payments to the US Treasury assuming negligence (is there any doubt??) between that BP said they were pouring into the gulf and what we now believe to be true....and these numbers are probably not done going up.

I'd call that incentive!
0 Replies
 
morell
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2010 10:12 pm
BP may have been ignoring safety measures but it is clear that the malfeasance occured with the full knowledge of the MSM- the agency under Mr. Salazar.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 08:34:19