Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
ace, dear, its not a matter of "bad things not happening." it's a matter of it being kinda predictable that something could, say, go wrong with an oil rig that's drilling at the bottom of the ocean. you'd think there'd be an actual plan for dealing with contingencies. but bp seems to have decided that the way to play things in this regard is to cut corners, avoid development and/or studies and/or regulation to the greatest possible extent and when the shit hits the fan pay the fines. they've demonstrated this "business model" for 20 years. the data's above, in this thread.
|
As a capitalist, a person who has been a corporate officer for a small public corporation and as a small business owner, I can assure you BP had plans for this contingency. These plans were known and accepted by regulators. If you saw the news conference today, everyone in the industry is in sync with BP's plans and what they are doing. By the end of this BP will have spent several billion. Now you suggest that BP "cut corners" and had no plan. Here is how it works, business people plan for "cat" losses. Planning for "cat" losses involves a lot of speculation, they are not predictable. Perhaps, your point is related to the unfortunate reality that even the best plans for "cat" losses will involve property and casualty losses and damages. In the case of this oil leak everyone knows the real solution is going to take 90 days - that was the plan. Our government knows it, BP knows it, everyone in the industry knows it. If they solve it in less time it is a bonus - but they are doing what they can to stop the leak.
That aside, my personal view is the BP should be "fired". They F'd up. If you F'd up, I would fire you, if I F'd up I would get fired. Our government needs to act, take control, fire BP, and hire another firm to fix the problem and then force BP to pay the costs.
Everything else is just commentary. Unfortunately we have an administration that won't be honest with the public for some reason.