Thread: Obama needs to give BP a one-two punch

Originally Posted by atheist

Why can't their assets continue to generate revenue when they are no longer owned by those specific criminals?

How would they do that?

I would ask for specifics but, following your "Whatever FDR used" argument in the other thread, it's glaringly obvious that you are incapable of discussing specifics.

Should the assets be invested? Because, if you do that, you stand the risk of losing the investment; that's part of the "investing" game. It's a gamble.

But, go ahead, try to offer up something concrete on how those assets would continue to generate revenue. You know, something "specific"...

The assets would not disappear into thin air.

That would depend on who was managing those assets. Left to this particular administration, it would surprise no one if, in fact, those assets did disappear...

Your evasiveness is retarded.

"Whatever laws FDR used!"

Yes, me not paying for the fuckups of others is a good thing. It's kind of like not wanting to pay for a ghetto mother's ninth child, or an illegal immigrant's medical costs. Do you understand yet?

Far better than you.

If you seize the assets of BP, they are no longer BP's assets. Therefore, BP is not paying for the clean-up, we are. We're just using what used to be theirs. But the absolute ass-fucks running the show in this government right now are, at the very best, incompetent fools. They'll piss the money away, and it'll be gone.

And they won't be able to get another nickel from BP.

But, if BP can still operate here, they can still be in a position to pay for the clean-up. You know, as long as some retarded fucking idea like yours gets into play. If that happens, mark my words, the money will be spent, the Gulf won't be cleaned, and people like you will be to blame...

How are the assets worth more if X, and not Y, owns them?

BP is a pretty profitable company. They sure know how to make money a Helluva' lot better than the US government, which only knows how to spend it.

Why not let the people who know how to make it continue to make it? Is it because you want them to realize no profit?

If you have a respectable IQ, then you'll explain why it is so critical that another party does not own and operate these assets.

I just did.

If you had a respectable IQ, you'd understand it...

I'd like to point out that the majority of BP assets are not necessarily in the States. They are major investors in Russian oil as well as Equitorial Africa so I think they may be quite happy for you to take over the forecourts and the wells they have in the Gulf if that will let them off the hook. America will still buy their oil - wherever it comes from. You are the sponge that demands the oil. The rest of the world are cutting back on requirements as fast as they are able (Most probably because they have no money after American banks stuffed their economies)

To be honest we are getting pissed off over here with your collective whinging and whining. America does not have a great record of corporate integrity and our "special relationship" is wearing very thin. America does not have many friends so it does not need to pressurise the one it does have for no great reason. Why not go onto a few UK political forums and see what people have to say about you.

Originally Posted by Amazulu

I'd like to point out that the majority of BP assets are not necessarily in the States. They are major investors in Russian oil as well as Equitorial Africa so I think they may be quite happy for you to take over the forecourts and the wells they have in the Gulf if that will let them off the hook. America will still buy their oil - wherever it comes from. You are the sponge that demands the oil. The rest of the world are cutting back on requirements as fast as they are able (Most probably because they have no money after American banks stuffed their economies)

To be honest we are getting pissed off over here with your collective whinging and whining. America does not have a great record of corporate integrity and our "special relationship" is wearing very thin. America does not have many friends so it does not need to pressurise the one it does have for no great reason. Why not go onto a few UK political forums and see what people have to say about you.

China still has high demand for oil as does Australia.

Originally Posted by Amazulu

I'd like to point out that the majority of BP assets are not necessarily in the States. They are major investors in Russian oil as well as Equitorial Africa so I think they may be quite happy for you to take over the forecourts and the wells they have in the Gulf if that will let them off the hook. America will still buy their oil - wherever it comes from. You are the sponge that demands the oil. The rest of the world are cutting back on requirements as fast as they are able (Most probably because they have no money after American banks stuffed their economies)

To be honest we are getting pissed off over here with your collective whinging and whining. America does not have a great record of corporate integrity and our "special relationship" is wearing very thin. America does not have many friends so it does not need to pressurise the one it does have for no great reason. Why not go onto a few UK political forums and see what people have to say about you.

Provide a few links to some; I'll do it.

Fuck the UK...

About the english opinion on the oil spill, I think there are some links to sustain it.

Without looking so far there are two articles. One is from the Telegraph asking if Barack Obama is poisoning the special relationship. I wouldn't trust the polls but the article itself is of some interest. The second article comes from the Independant, about The guilty parties. It mainly asks why BP is the only accused.
Actually to get a better perspective of the english opinion, there may also be another article from the Independant showing Letters presumably from the readers.

I've also tried british politic forums without consistent results yet. It is to note that, apart from those articles cited above, most of the english press follows the trend and accuses BP too.
It is up to interpretations now.

Originally Posted by Moonglow

China still has high demand for oil as does Australia.

Everyone's on Obama's ass to do something. IMO everything that can be done (according to the experts who understand the problem) is being done in respect to the spill. At least it's a news bonanza for CNN and other news gathers to beat the drums and keep one on edge. Be patient. If I were part of the group charged with capping the well I would announce that it may be a year before we get the job done. "Don't bother me while I wrest with the problem".

What remains otherwise is to hew out a means of determining damages on BPs part and how to extract our pound of flesh without causing further damages to ourselves. No one here really knows how to go about that.....
but it will be solved. Back off !

Originally Posted by John Drake

Tort reform is bullshit. A con myth. The best research is that medical liability costs adds next to nothing to the cost of medical liability insurance or the overall cost of healthcare

If Oil is this goddam dangerous then maybe it SHOULDN"T be so goddam cheap that every one with two pennies can go looking for it. If maybe the TRUE cost of oil INCLUDING the environmental hazards were included in the cost for the Sacred Entrepreneur rather than just passed on to the victims and the taxpayers then maybe alternative sources would start to look a little better.

My own personal Doc closed his office about 15 years ago. He had a small family practice. When I asked him why he was retiring early, he told me he could no longer afford the insurance. Real life scenerios should be given credence, and fuck the studies. I doubt most studies are grounded in reality these days.

For anyone to think that oil can be replaced by green energy, is indulging in a pipe dream. We do not have the technology to do so, today. The best plan is to move to natural gas, which we have plenty of, and then work like hell with alternite energy sources. Might be able to come up with something within the next hundred years or so. That would be affordable. Blue

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

My own personal Doc closed his office about 15 years ago. He had a small family practice. When I asked him why he was retiring early, he told me he could no longer afford the insurance. Real life scenerios should be given credence, and fuck the studies. I doubt most studies are grounded in reality these days.

The problem, though, is that libs aren't smart enough to consider them "real life scenarios". They see them as "anecdotal" and, as such, consider them dismissable...

Originally Posted by Steve

Provide a few links to some; I'll do it.

Fuck the UK...

BP bashing and Obama's anti British stance Page 6 - UK Debate Forum

Typical arrogant response. Our involvement in YOUR incursions to Afghanistan is costing us 20billion, we have to make savings of 60billion this year brought on by YOUR banks. Wish to God we had not acceeded to your requests for assistance in this whole mess.

Originally Posted by Amazulu

BP bashing and Obama's anti British stance Page 6 - UK Debate Forum

Typical arrogant response. Our involvement in YOUR incursions to Afghanistan is costing us 20billion, we have to make savings of 60billion this year brought on by YOUR banks. Wish to God we had not acceeded to your requests for assistance in this whole mess.

All I see there are a shitload of whiney Brits. I was hoping for something that required, you know, thought...

Originally Posted by Amazulu

BP bashing and Obama's anti British stance Page 6 - UK Debate Forum

Typical arrogant response. Our involvement in YOUR incursions to Afghanistan is costing us 20billion, we have to make savings of 60billion this year brought on by YOUR banks. Wish to God we had not acceeded to your requests for assistance in this whole mess.

Took a quick look at your link - do the British people actually think that Americans are blaming them personally or something? You know, we are well aware that BP is it's own multi-national company, and not some kind of petroleum company owned by the British people. I have heard no one blame Great Britain for this, only BP, the oil company.

Furthermore, some people on that site seem a bit perturbed by the fact that BP is the only company being blamed, while other companies who were involved with the drilling operation are not being blamed. Fact is, BP owns the drilling rights, and they subcontracted the work out to other companies. When BP took on this contract, they took full responsibility (in writing) for any potential spills and subsequent cleanup. BP hired the other companies. If BP feels that some other company under their subcontract is repsonsible, it is up the them to pursue damages from that company. In the meantime, BP holds sole responsiblity for this mess.

That's how these things work. If Toyota sells cars with faulty brakes, they hold sole responsibilty for those faulty brakes, not the subcontractor who made the brakes for Toyota.

BP owned 65% of the hole, the balance owned by American companies so BP was not the "only" company involved. Obama and the American people continually blamed "British Petroleum" when it has not been that since the 1990's and the way only BP was blamed. That is why they have accepted responsibility but that does not mean they were actually to blame for the blow out. That fact may never be found out. Yes we did take it personal. It took a call from Cameron before Obama stopped calling it by the wrong name.

"All the co-owners of the leasehold interest previously entered into a written operating agreement under which BPXP would act as "operator" and be responsible for conducting operations in MC252, but that the parties would share the costs of operations, including the cost to clean up any spill resulting from drilling the MC252 exploratory well, according to their respective ownership interests in MC252.

Further, all the co-owners of the leasehold interest filed documents with the U. S. federal government clearly certifying that each would be jointly and severally liable, together with any other responsible parties, for oil spill removal costs and damages in accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990."

BP share price (BP.): share prices, tips, news and analysis

Originally Posted by Amazulu

BP owned 65% of the hole, the balance owned by American companies so BP was not the "only" company involved. Obama and the American people continually blamed "British Petroleum" when it has not been that since the 1990's and the way only BP was blamed. That is why they have accepted responsibility but that does not mean they were actually to blame for the blow out. That fact may never be found out. Yes we did take it personal. It took a call from Cameron before Obama stopped calling it by the wrong name.

"All the co-owners of the leasehold interest previously entered into a written operating agreement under which BPXP would act as "operator" and be responsible for conducting operations in MC252, but that the parties would share the costs of operations, including the cost to clean up any spill resulting from drilling the MC252 exploratory well, according to their respective ownership interests in MC252.

Further, all the co-owners of the leasehold interest filed documents with the U. S. federal government clearly certifying that each would be jointly and severally liable, together with any other responsible parties, for oil spill removal costs and damages in accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990."

BP share price (BP.): share prices, tips, news and analysis

BP should not be the only ones paying for the clean up. BP have, IMHO, acted honorably in stepping up and volunteering massive funds for the cleanup (and to pay workers who are unemployed because of Obama's edict).

Obama has been marginal at best, and he needs / wants this incident so he can be the "tough guy". His lemming-like followers here in the US (and for some reason in Canada) eat that stuff up.