Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
welcome to the reality of captialism,...
|
A common theme that is getting repeated. What alternative system does a better job? How? What has the track record been? Why hasn't that system taken dominance over capitalism? Etc. Etc. Etc. Accidents and bad things happen, regardless of the "system".
---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:54 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
And my point is that the government can't for the reason I listed above. There is no contract in place that allows BP to be fired. All they can do is revoke the license. And that isn't as simple as "one step."
|
Simplicity is not the issue. I thought "it" (I call it "fire" them) should have been done over a month ago. We can not, day after day, complain about BP's incompetence, greed and deceit, and continue the relationship. We know BP's interests are not in line with the public interest, why let this continue???? It is crazy. And to imply the government can not do this based on complexity or whatever reason is a cop-out.
---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:58 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
ace: the epa is reviewing the underlying agreement(s) that allow bp to do business in/off the united states at all. this has been happening for a couple weeks. i have no idea where things stand (i doubt anyone does, including people at epa) but the process is underway.
is that what you're talking about?
|
For a person who does not know what I am talking about, I suggest that this should have been under evaluation the day of the explosion, that the issues in question should have been known and understood before the event, and that a final recommendation on the question should have been on the President's desk within the first week. I would suggest that there be a standard process of review like this for every major "event" of this nature. And, if it were me - I would have "fired" BP by now. I would have even done it without perfect legal authority - I would let the lawyers sort it out after the fact. Every day of delay, is having a major environmental impact - we have to act in a manner consistent with doing what is in the best interest of the nation regarding this disaster. And, yes, I would risk my job to do what I think is right.
Quote:
or is this really just about trying to make some spitball that'll stick to an imaginary obama based on the phrase he used a couple days ago?
if it's the first, why go about it the way you have?
if it's the second, what's the point?
|
Read my posts on this and look at the dates, and match them to Obama's words and actions. I have been clear and consistent.