Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
There is a huge difference between a company failing or doing something stupid that causes its own downfall and a company doing something that causes one of the largest disasters in the history of our country.
So you think the government should just stay out of it and let the market handle this? You think that if people are mad enough about what is happening they will not buy BP products and BP will either go out of business or lose its US market share? That isn't realistic. The simple reality is that there are so many hands in the pie it is hard to know how all to boycott in order to not support those responsible for this disaster. Not to mention that one of the companies involved, Haliburton, gets billions in defense contracts from the US so we could never buy gas from BP again and they probably wouldn't be hurt.
There is no way to know just how much damage this spill will end up causing not just to the environment, but to our economy. In a case like this I think it is fine for the government to step in and demand some answers.
|
I am saying that BP should be held accountable for its liability under the law. That is a far difference from Obama promising to "put my boot heal on the throat of BP." There is a bankruptcy system in place that should have handled GM, Chrysler and AIG....... just like there are liability laws and courts in place which should be allowed to handle BP. Everyone deserves due process under the law without strong arm tactics and interference from the head of state. When the head of state determines the outcomes without regard to process then you live in a corporatist/fascist state as opposed to a constitutional republic.
