BP executives announced today they will pay their shareholders zero dividends this year and setup a fund with an initial payment of $20 billion to be overseen by a Whitehouse appointee for payouts to people affected by the oil rig accident in the Gulf.

All of this despite the law of the land that currently sets a cap on damages for oil companies at $75 million. Now, right or wrong, that is what the government under Clinton decided and this is another example, IMHO, of too much government involvement.

BP has already paid over $50 million in claims. Residents can still go to court for additional claims and Obama made clear the $20 billion is not a cap on what BP may pay.

What is wrong with this picture? This is scary stuff people. Obama is using Spain as his model for a "green economy" and last night he took the majority of his time speaking to Americans about the Gulf pushing Cap and Tax and green jobs. Take a look at Spain and tell me if you want this to be your America.


[Quoted material removed by Tony, admin.]


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us...s/17obama.html

You may have to register free to see this site:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/w...cle2559106.ece

Originally Posted by bkcunningham1

BP executives announced today they will pay their shareholders zero dividends this year and setup a fund with an initial payment of $20 billion to be overseen by a Whitehouse appointee for payouts to people affected by the oil rig accident in the Gulf.

All of this despite the law of the land that currently sets a cap on damages for oil companies at $75 million. Now, right or wrong, that is what the government under Clinton decided and this is another example, IMHO, of too much government involvement.

BP has already paid over $50 million in claims. Residents can still go to court for additional claims and Obama made clear the $20 billion is not a cap on what BP may pay.

What is wrong with this picture? This is scary stuff people. Obama is using Spain as his model for a "green economy" and last night he took the majority of his time speaking to Americans about the Gulf pushing Cap and Tax and green jobs. Take a look at Spain and tell me if you want this to be your America.




[Quoted material removed by Tony, admin.]



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us...s/17obama.html

You may have to register free to see this site:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/w...cle2559106.ece

You have a problem with BP beening held accountable for the damages they have done?

Not one bit. I just haven't seen any proof of what damages they should be legally liable to pay. That is what our system of courts is setup for cologal. There were other companies who may or may not be just as liable. I think it is disturbing to see an administration, not even Congress, pass play judge and jury with a corportation.

Plus, I know it disturbs people who want to blame BP (and big companies) for everything that ails the world, but Obama was in the Gulf eating seafood yesterday saying the seafood in the Gulf is safe, the beaches are clean...I think the government's lack of oversight and overkill of the situation has to be held accountable.

Originally Posted by cologal

You have a problem with BP beening held accountable for the damages they have done?

The majority of people have no problem with that. What we do have a problem with is, Litigation first, solutions later. As POTUS he has powers he can exercise to help facilitate the solutions, like temporarily rescinding the Jones Act to allow foreign vessels to help clean up the spill, to which he said, 'no thank you' (probably not that politely), executive orders to keep the EPA and Unions at bay allowing some of the ideas put forth by a multitude of people and companies to solve the clean up. We don't need endless studies to find out the environmental impact of these solutions. The oil is a big enough impact on the environment to trump that. Out of 1000 'crackpot ' ideas on how to fix the mess there may be 3 or 4 that may actually work on such a large scale. How do we know without checking them out? The mentality of the administration of "never let a good crisis go to waste" is very damaging. His speech was all about how to sell 'Cap & Trade' or whatever they call it today. All the 6-month moratorium on deepwater drilling did was to break the contracts of the deep-water rigs and allow them to pull up stakes to go and drill in Brazil and Venezuela. They won't be back. That means more profits for Hugo & others and more of our money going to others. I also hope you were able to divest your portfolio of any oil stocks because retirees & investors that have BP or others are going to take a nasty hit. But then I wouldn't want to confuse you with the facts, your mind is probably already made up.

Originally Posted by macro

The majority of people have no problem with that. What we do have a problem with is, Litigation first, solutions later. As POTUS he has powers he can exercise to help facilitate the solutions, like temporarily rescinding the Jones Act to allow foreign vessels to help clean up the spill, to which he said, 'no thank you' (probably not that politely), executive orders to keep the EPA and Unions at bay allowing some of the ideas put forth by a multitude of people and companies to solve the clean up. We don't need endless studies to find out the environmental impact of these solutions. The oil is a big enough impact on the environment to trump that. Out of 1000 'crackpot ' ideas on how to fix the mess there may be 3 or 4 that may actually work on such a large scale. How do we know without checking them out? The mentality of the administration of "never let a good crisis go to waste" is very damaging. His speech was all about how to sell 'Cap & Trade' or whatever they call it today. All the 6-month moratorium on deepwater drilling did was to break the contracts of the deep-water rigs and allow them to pull up stakes to go and drill in Brazil and Venezuela. They won't be back. That means more profits for Hugo & others and more of our money going to others. I also hope you were able to divest your portfolio of any oil stocks because retirees & investors that have BP or others are going to take a nasty hit. But then I wouldn't want to confuse you with the facts, your mind is probably already made up.

This administration can't win....nothing they do is right no matter what. Do you have any proof that Obama said no to the repeal of the Jones Act. The first I heard of that law was today on MSNBC. So if you have proof then please provide the link. Why not have a 6 month look at the deep water rigs? I say safety first. When this was originally proposed the cry was the oil workers wouldn't get paid so today he made sure they get paid.

If you put your portfolio before whats right ......

Originally Posted by cologal

This administration can't win....nothing they do is right no matter what. Do you have any proof that Obama said no to the repeal of the Jones Act. The first I heard of that law was today on MSNBC. So if you have proof then please provide the link. Why not have a 6 month look at the deep water rigs? I say safety first. When this was originally proposed the cry was the oil workers wouldn't get paid so today he made sure they get paid.

If you put your portfolio before whats right ......

"As the Gulf oil spill grows, President Obama has laid out a bold Oval Office plan to make things right in the Gulf and change national energy policy in the process. What Mr. Obama hasn't done is announce that he's calling in maritime mercenaries – foreign skimmers or Saudi supertankers – to help deal with the Gulf oil spill cleanup."

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/06...-foreign-boats

Oh...by the way.....

"Mr. Obama could issue a full waiver of the Jones Act, but failed even to mention the law in his speech last night. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the Bush administration didn't hesitate to waive the law completely in an emergency"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...elowLEFTSecond


I know...I know...it is all contrived...everyone is picking on this poor poor man


Do you think he may be appeasing the unions ? No..couldnt be

"CAGW Urges Obama to Waive Jones Act to Aid Spill Effort

The nation’s premier taxpayer watchdog group, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), today urged President Obama to take a significant step toward resolving the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico by waiving the Jones Act, which prohibits foreign ships from carrying cargo and passengers between U.S. ports. European countries including the Netherlands have offered their help in cleaning up the oil spill, but the Jones Act prohibits using foreign ships in the effort.

The offer of assistance by European dredging companies has not been accepted by the Obama administration due to the Jones Act. In contrast, President Bush waived the Jones Act to allow assistance from foreign countries during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

“President Obama must take prudent and necessary action by issuing an emergency exemption of the Jones Act to allow foreign ships to aid in managing the oil spill,” continued Schatz. “The President’s persistent silence on the Jones Act and his unwillingness to waive it indicates that he is more concerned with protecting labor unions than he is in the lives of those living along the Gulf,” concluded Schatz."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/CAGW-U....html?x=0&.v=1


Now since this President does not have press conferences like most other Presidents, we cannot ask him why. and there may be a good reason beyond the unions...we simply have to accept the fact that he knows, as it "appears" he wants us to do on every issue.

appreciate the help Bucco, even tho' it won't penetrate the force field around the worshippers of the 'annointed one'. No, ColoGal, the administration, no matter who is there, shouldn't win when whatever they do is detrimental to the country or the people of the country. This is what happens when power is not balanced. Doesn't matter much which party has this kind of free reign, I think it has something to do with the air or water in D.C.. Once they get there it all falls apart. I really don't know how any sane, thinking person can defend 'fundamental change to America' that cripples and destroys our core beliefs and puts us on a path to financial ruin for generations to come. You have been invited multiple times to offer examples of anything this administration and congress has done that is positive. I have yet to see any examples. All I have seen from them so far is litigate and equivocate. When that fails, blame someone else. (aren't those poll results in yet? how can we decide?) Lead, follow, or get out of the way. 0 for 3 so far.

Bucco, I think I've figured out who all these agitators are. Must be 'plants' by the administrators to keep everyone stirred up.