"Loogypicker" wrote in message
...
On May 4, 8:23 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...
On May 4, 3:39 pm, You can call me Jim wrote:





On 5/4/2010 3:13 PM, Loogypicker wrote:

On May 4, 2:54 pm, You can call me wrote:
On 5/4/2010 2:29 PM, hk wrote:

That may explain why, as the oil slick hits the Gulf Coast,
lawmakers
from the region are willing to swallow their limited-government
principles as they dangle federal aid before their constituents.
Sen.
Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he would "make sure the federal
government
is poised to assist in every way necessary." His colleague Thad
Cochran
(R-Miss.) said he is making sure "the federal government is doing
all
it
can" -- even as he added his hope that "industry" would pay.

President Obama tried to remind the government-is-the-enemy crowd of
this situation in a speech on Saturday. "Government is the police
officers who are protecting our communities, and the servicemen and
-women who are defending us abroad," he said. "Government is the
roads
you drove in on and the speed limits that kept you safe. Government
is
what ensures that mines adhere to safety standards and that oil
spills
are cleaned up by the companies that caused them."

***The private sector should pay for every damned dime spent to
clean
up
their mess, including the funds spend by the U.S., state and
municipal
governments***

Do you have any idea when the government is going to begin "ensuring
that this oil spill is cleaned up by the companies that caused it. Do
you think the government plans to lend a hand in getting this spill
cleaned up expeditiously?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wouldn't the government's help be kind of like a bailout?

Nope. It's still BP's responsibility to pay the expenses for the
cleanup.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Nope, you are wrong.

While BP is saying that it will pay for the cleanup, there's nothing
that says they have to, therefore they probably won't.

That's right. I believe I heard that they're only legally responsible for
$75M for damages. I don't know if it's applicable in this situation, but
there's a law on the books to that effect.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, right after Valdez, they came up with that.


Shameful. I hope it doesn't apply. I don't know the specifics or how it
would be applied in this case. The CEO sure was trying to deflect blame,
which seemed to be the first volley in BP's plausible deniability strategy.

On Tue, 04 May 2010 14:54:02 -0400, You can call me Jim
wrote:




Do you have any idea when the government is going to begin "ensuring
that this oil spill is cleaned up by the companies that caused it. Do
you think the government plans to lend a hand in getting this spill
cleaned up expeditiously?

the law limits liability to $75M for companies involved. the taxpayer
may get stuck for the rest...another subsidy for wealthy investors,
similar to the $500M liability liimit for nuclear power plants. i'm in
favor of nuclear power, but investors should bear the cost of these
events, not taxpayers

On Tue, 04 May 2010 16:13:41 -0400, anon-e-moose
wrote:

On 5/4/2010 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote:


While BP is saying that it will pay for the cleanup, there's nothing
that says they have to, therefore they probably won't.

You are saying it is not BP's responsibility? That's strange.

by law their liability is capped at $75M.