Presidential Address - Do you waste the...
- Thread starter Big-Foot
- Start date
Nope....actually, didn't even know it was on.
Would I have watched had I known it would be on? Well, having been in speech/debate in college, I do appreciate a good "orator", which is what I consider Obama......but, having finished a college degree in psychology I also have a healthy skepticism regarding the honesty of politicians in general.
Bottom line.....I'm sure there will be enough sound bytes today on the various TV stations to get the jist......we'll hold BP accountable (IMHO, a welcome attitude after the Bush administration stood idly by and smiled when Exxon decided arbitrarily that they had spent enough on cleaning up Prince Williams Sound after the Exxon/Valdez incident).....we'll make them pay for everything (everything, of course, that the "independent" appeals board approves).....blah, blah, blah.
I get so tired of talking heads. I am at the point where I would appreciate it if they would use some technology to replace Obama's face with Chris Rock's.....leave the voice, just let us watch somebody who is funny, not just assinine.
Thus endeth my rant.....
Doug
Would I have watched had I known it would be on? Well, having been in speech/debate in college, I do appreciate a good "orator", which is what I consider Obama......but, having finished a college degree in psychology I also have a healthy skepticism regarding the honesty of politicians in general.
Bottom line.....I'm sure there will be enough sound bytes today on the various TV stations to get the jist......we'll hold BP accountable (IMHO, a welcome attitude after the Bush administration stood idly by and smiled when Exxon decided arbitrarily that they had spent enough on cleaning up Prince Williams Sound after the Exxon/Valdez incident).....we'll make them pay for everything (everything, of course, that the "independent" appeals board approves).....blah, blah, blah.
I get so tired of talking heads. I am at the point where I would appreciate it if they would use some technology to replace Obama's face with Chris Rock's.....leave the voice, just let us watch somebody who is funny, not just assinine.
Thus endeth my rant.....
Doug
I never watch those things - regardless of who is POTUS.
I for one don't plan to watcch. I think it is crazy that BO is so full of himself that he can tell the head of a foreign corporation what they will and won't do, or have to pay. He has absolutely no authority to do any of it. He(BO) has no idea what the executive branch of government's role is or is entitled to do. This is all political theatre to impress the naive that they are REALLY doing something. Just like the photo ops of him on the beach with his shirt sleeves rolled up. Did he think he was actually going to do something there?? He would have looked just as rediculous if he had worn a tux. They have dropped the ball so bad on this issue that it is a wonder there aren't some federal suits against the government for their lack of response. It has been 50 how many days and the pres has yet to pick up the phone and talk to the heads of BP, but he is going on national TV and tell everyone what they(BP) are going to do. Or is it their ass he just wants to kick?? Unbelievable!!
Bill
Bill
Huh? I don't get it.
He's the President of our country and has some things to say he feels are important to communicate. Presidents have been doing this for as long as TV was available as a communication mode.
BO seems like a smarter, and more sincere guy, than his predecessor. I'd certainly watch any such address.
Perhaps Randy's point is really not about the address but instead that BO seems ineffective or insincere in general?? Well, maybe so, but any guy that inherited the pile of crap that BO did coming into office (depression economy, global hatred of US, rampant partisanship, etc.) who is still in office today can't be doing that bad of a job....
He's the President of our country and has some things to say he feels are important to communicate. Presidents have been doing this for as long as TV was available as a communication mode.
BO seems like a smarter, and more sincere guy, than his predecessor. I'd certainly watch any such address.
Perhaps Randy's point is really not about the address but instead that BO seems ineffective or insincere in general?? Well, maybe so, but any guy that inherited the pile of crap that BO did coming into office (depression economy, global hatred of US, rampant partisanship, etc.) who is still in office today can't be doing that bad of a job....
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
I'm not much for speeches either, but here is some action. US government gets BP to agree to pay $20 billion to those injured by the spill.
Obama: BP agrees to $20B fund; chairman apologizes :: WRAL.com
Obama: BP agrees to $20B fund; chairman apologizes :: WRAL.com
Jeff, they (BP) already did that weeks ago, and said 'whatever it takes' before any politician got near it.
No points for Obama - he is (was) way too late with this response. Not being partisan - it's not even particularly a British company anymore, and even if it was, I would always 'fess up.
BP have admitted their errors (industry standards and controllable by the Licensee - gues who?)
Be fair guys - every other exploration company out there says 'it could have happened to us' and they were just relieved it wasn't them.
Balance commercial reward against regulation and what do you get unilaterlally?
RISK
And now gentlemen - the future holds - The 'Oil Free Generation'.
Your President has promised.
This is not even close (yet) to being the World's biggest oil spill and yet the rhetoric echoes of 9/11. Serious, yes, but let's please do not let the politicians modify our lives for the sake of power and popularity.
This will be sorted and lessons learned for the benefit of future generations. There are no villians - just explorers and always remember who really needs the oil. Did anyone here see people shot dead in the '70's in California because they didn't get their gas? I did.
No points for Obama - he is (was) way too late with this response. Not being partisan - it's not even particularly a British company anymore, and even if it was, I would always 'fess up.
BP have admitted their errors (industry standards and controllable by the Licensee - gues who?)
Be fair guys - every other exploration company out there says 'it could have happened to us' and they were just relieved it wasn't them.
Balance commercial reward against regulation and what do you get unilaterlally?
RISK
And now gentlemen - the future holds - The 'Oil Free Generation'.
Your President has promised.
This is not even close (yet) to being the World's biggest oil spill and yet the rhetoric echoes of 9/11. Serious, yes, but let's please do not let the politicians modify our lives for the sake of power and popularity.
This will be sorted and lessons learned for the benefit of future generations. There are no villians - just explorers and always remember who really needs the oil. Did anyone here see people shot dead in the '70's in California because they didn't get their gas? I did.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
That's not what the article says. The article says this was a new deal that BP refused initially. They have agreed (for the first time, according to this article), to put $5 billion a year for four years (and more if necessary) in to a fund to pay for those injured by the spill. I think you are confusing that with the "whatever it takes to stop the leak" we got from BP a while back, not compensation for damages to locals.
If you have information to the contrary, post up a link.
Thanks.
Jeff
If you have information to the contrary, post up a link.
Thanks.
Jeff
Hey Jeff, I know 'our news' is sometimes different from 'your news' but BP stated unequivocally at least 2 weeks ago that they would do 'whatever it takes' to return the Gulf to it's original condition and I'm quite sure this means (as read) compensating people for loss of amenity/workplace/economy.
It's a bit of a shame though that GW didn't promise the same for NAW (leans) after the Hurricane but that IS a different subject I know.
I will find the references if you so wish but they are in the public domain if you care to search BBC news.
I do not seek to exonerate blame but your man did not 'force' anyone to apologise or put funds in place, sorry but I'm quite firm on that. The compensation format may have been instigated/suggested by OB but Hayward held his hands up long before this.
All in all, I'm pretty sad that 'compensation' for 'economic loss' has been put ahead of any environmental or future engineering/exploration concern. If I know my Gulf people correctly, there'll be many rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect no insult intended but opportunism does rear it's head at times likes this.
If as much energy had been put into getting the situation controlled early as is seemingly put into the 'cult of compensation' then perhaps the outcome would be different.
Whatever, I'm sure we would all agree that politicians anywhere in the wide world of whatever creed or colour would seek to make capital out of other people's disasters..
It's a bit of a shame though that GW didn't promise the same for NAW (leans) after the Hurricane but that IS a different subject I know.
I will find the references if you so wish but they are in the public domain if you care to search BBC news.
I do not seek to exonerate blame but your man did not 'force' anyone to apologise or put funds in place, sorry but I'm quite firm on that. The compensation format may have been instigated/suggested by OB but Hayward held his hands up long before this.
All in all, I'm pretty sad that 'compensation' for 'economic loss' has been put ahead of any environmental or future engineering/exploration concern. If I know my Gulf people correctly, there'll be many rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect no insult intended but opportunism does rear it's head at times likes this.
If as much energy had been put into getting the situation controlled early as is seemingly put into the 'cult of compensation' then perhaps the outcome would be different.
Whatever, I'm sure we would all agree that politicians anywhere in the wide world of whatever creed or colour would seek to make capital out of other people's disasters..
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
No, I think this is a different issue and an important concession. As I understood it, BP was offering to do whatever it took to stop the leak, and clean up.
This goes beyond that. It is a compensation fund of $20 billion for those injured by the spill.
I may be missing something, but everythign I read states this is a significant concession by BP.
This goes beyond that. It is a compensation fund of $20 billion for those injured by the spill.
I may be missing something, but everythign I read states this is a significant concession by BP.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
British Petroleum merged with Amoco (formerly Standard Oil of Indiana) in December 1998,<SUP id=cite_ref-28 class=reference>[29]</SUP> becoming BP Amoco plc.<SUP id=cite_ref-namechg_29-0 class=reference>[30]</SUP> In 2000, BP Amoco acquired Arco (Atlantic Richfield Co.)<SUP id=cite_ref-30 class=reference>[31]</SUP> and Burmah Castrol plc.<SUP id=cite_ref-31 class=reference>[32]</SUP> In 2001 the company formally renamed itself as BP plc<SUP id=cite_ref-namechg_29-1 class=reference>[30]</SUP> and adopted the tagline "Beyond Petroleum," which remains in use today. It states that BP was never meant to be an abbreviation of its tagline. Most Amoco stations in the United States were converted to BP's brand and corporate identity. In many states, however, BP continued to sell Amoco branded gasoline even in service stations with the BP identity as Amoco was rated the best petroleum brand by consumers for 16 consecutive years and also enjoyed one of the three highest brand loyalty reputations for gasoline in the US, comparable only to Chevron and Shell. In May 2008, when the Amoco name was mostly phased out in favour of "BP Gasoline with Invigorate", promoting BP's new additive, the highest grade of BP gasoline available in the United States was still called Amoco Ultimate
Nobody anywhere ever accepts 'blame' willingly for anything in advance especially when the 'perps' were using accepted practice and permitted by laws of the region.
Jeff, I really don't thinks that BP were/are ducking anything here but naturally as is usual, there is not just one element to 'blame'.
Exxon Valdez. What did we learn? Don't put drunks in charge of Supertankers. Seems obvious now but that disaster WAS preventable - this disaster (still not the biggest oil spill) is as a result of a number of errors and ommissions coming together at a critical moment just like air accidents, and as long as people demand cheap oil commercial risks will be taken. I think the rhetoric is over the top and ultimately counter productive.
I just don't subscribe to the blame culture as long as the disaster is still happening and people are being affected - it just doesn't sit right.
If it comes down to Hayward? String him up by his balls AFTER the fix. In the meantime you don't get to head a multi-national like BP for being totally incompetant unless we are talking Enron perhaps
Whatever, all pull together and sort it - then shoot the guilty.
My hero Joseph Stalin famously once said: "Death solves ALL problems. No man, no problem."
Jeff, I really don't thinks that BP were/are ducking anything here but naturally as is usual, there is not just one element to 'blame'.
Exxon Valdez. What did we learn? Don't put drunks in charge of Supertankers. Seems obvious now but that disaster WAS preventable - this disaster (still not the biggest oil spill) is as a result of a number of errors and ommissions coming together at a critical moment just like air accidents, and as long as people demand cheap oil commercial risks will be taken. I think the rhetoric is over the top and ultimately counter productive.
I just don't subscribe to the blame culture as long as the disaster is still happening and people are being affected - it just doesn't sit right.
If it comes down to Hayward? String him up by his balls AFTER the fix. In the meantime you don't get to head a multi-national like BP for being totally incompetant unless we are talking Enron perhaps
Whatever, all pull together and sort it - then shoot the guilty.
My hero Joseph Stalin famously once said: "Death solves ALL problems. No man, no problem."
I dont get it either. A smarter more sincere president? How do we know how smart he is, he will not release his school transcripts, sincere? give me a break. He did inherit a mess though, and succeeded in making it far worse and getting us much further in debt, all the while never missing a chance to blame the previous administration. He needs to man up and remember it is his ball now. God help us
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Keith, honestly, that's not what I'm talking about. I agree there is lots of blame to go around.
This thread started by highlighting how ineffective President Obama's speech was. I tend to agree.
But it then completely ignored the fact that today, BP got called in, told they were going to be fined "X" if they didn't set up an independently run $20 billion escrow, and BP caved and agreed to do it.
I'm just as put off by government sometimes as you guys, but here, it appears we actually had something worthwhile done. That is all I am saying.
Thanks.
Jeff
This thread started by highlighting how ineffective President Obama's speech was. I tend to agree.
But it then completely ignored the fact that today, BP got called in, told they were going to be fined "X" if they didn't set up an independently run $20 billion escrow, and BP caved and agreed to do it.
I'm just as put off by government sometimes as you guys, but here, it appears we actually had something worthwhile done. That is all I am saying.
Thanks.
Jeff
Hi Jeff thanks for replying. I am beginning to see where you're coming from and one of the issues is that we are subject to very different reporting methods and content. As you can imagine, our news has been full of the BP fund issue and much is made of the "grilling" that Hayward will face at Congress later today plus a highlight of some of the unintentional gaffs he has made which have not endeared him to small businessmen in the Gulf or to American politicians either I should imagine. I believe he is a bit shell shocked right now so it would be interesting to see how he handles himself later, but I'm not holding out any great hopes that he will command much respect. Our news people, never shrinking violets when it comes to doorstepping and embarrasing big business if they sniff a scandal, are quite mute of the subject, reporting that Obama Admin and BP "have agreed this & agreed that". Very different from the "Obama forces concessions" etc. I just wonder where the politicing stops and the truth creeps in. (if ever)
Interestingly, BP share prices have shot up over here in response to the news that shareholder dividends will not be paid this year only and the clear up/compensation funding will be spread over 2 years.
The reason that this is so important is that many institutional investors in the UK have always invested heavily in 'blue chip' BP and their dividends fund personal pensions. We are already in a dreadful state regarding pensions through various bank crises and a 'broke' BP will seriously affect many hundreds of thousands of pensioners over here many of whom are already on hard times, so I hope you can see my perspective here, where the 'blame game' is ultimately counter productive to some of the not-so-obvious other victims of this crisis.
Interestingly, BP share prices have shot up over here in response to the news that shareholder dividends will not be paid this year only and the clear up/compensation funding will be spread over 2 years.
The reason that this is so important is that many institutional investors in the UK have always invested heavily in 'blue chip' BP and their dividends fund personal pensions. We are already in a dreadful state regarding pensions through various bank crises and a 'broke' BP will seriously affect many hundreds of thousands of pensioners over here many of whom are already on hard times, so I hope you can see my perspective here, where the 'blame game' is ultimately counter productive to some of the not-so-obvious other victims of this crisis.
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
I agree with Jeff. It would appear some folks complain that the prez shouldn't be telling a foreign corporation what to do, but in the same breath, complain about his inaction. So if both of those actions (forcing BP to pay, or not doing anything) are unacceptable, the third option would be...put it on the tax payer?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
<o
></o>
So I guess an acceptable solution is to allow BP to privately rake in profits, but allow socialized losses from the spill. If, (for whatever mechanism or cause), the price of energy increases as a result of this incident then that is the "market", plain and simple. Risk and accountability are part of what drives a market, and manipulation by government (or industry through lobbying) to reduce tort or spread accountability to the consumer of whatever product it is, is in essence, subsidizing that product if enabled by our government (Isn't subsidizing the hated word for those that promote this practice?).<o></o>
<o></o>
I hate this situation worse than anybody (but for different reasons), and I think it could have been handled differently from the beginning, but this is the bellwether that has been stifled for too long. We cannot sustain our present dependence (in the big picture) on fossil fuels. I use them like everybody else, but that doesn't mean it's the best path to continue down. <o></o>
<o> </o>
So I’m done, and it’s time to go out into the garage and face the conundrum of the above viewpoint, and the project I’m feverishly trying to finish.<o></o>
></o>So I guess an acceptable solution is to allow BP to privately rake in profits, but allow socialized losses from the spill. If, (for whatever mechanism or cause), the price of energy increases as a result of this incident then that is the "market", plain and simple. Risk and accountability are part of what drives a market, and manipulation by government (or industry through lobbying) to reduce tort or spread accountability to the consumer of whatever product it is, is in essence, subsidizing that product if enabled by our government (Isn't subsidizing the hated word for those that promote this practice?).<o
></o><o
></o>I hate this situation worse than anybody (but for different reasons), and I think it could have been handled differently from the beginning, but this is the bellwether that has been stifled for too long. We cannot sustain our present dependence (in the big picture) on fossil fuels. I use them like everybody else, but that doesn't mean it's the best path to continue down. <o
></o><o
> </o>So I’m done, and it’s time to go out into the garage and face the conundrum of the above viewpoint, and the project I’m feverishly trying to finish.<o
></o>
Last edited:
Kieth,
Your statement that there will be some folks in the gulf states that will look on BP as the fatted calf is very correct. There are always greed miesters waiting for a sucker to come along, and with BP's jugular exposed, these lowlifes will take advantage. The Fed could agree with BP to prosecute those guilty of fraud if they want to be fair, but that hasn't come forth from Eric Holder and the rest of the AG's. Instead, those fools want to criminalize an accident or a mistake in engineering that MIGHT have been preventable. No one can say for sure, since the "science" of oil drilling is 70% educated guesses and 30% luck. People take for granted that oil exploration is a sure thing, but that is far from the truth. As long as there is gas at the pump when they need it, they go about their daily lives with nary a thought of how it got there. Most states don't even want refineries since the EPA got involved. Maybe that is why Texas has the highest industrial pollution in the US...because the only new refineries built in the US in the last 20 years has been in Texas and Oklahoma, our neighbor.
Let's see how the tree huggers feel about a new refinery being built in California, Florida, Georgia, Arizona, New York, or any number of other states.
The truth is, BP has stepped up to their accident from the beginning and as far as I can tell they are doing everything they can to correct the problem. Time will tell.
Obama needs to shut up and drive.
Garry
Your statement that there will be some folks in the gulf states that will look on BP as the fatted calf is very correct. There are always greed miesters waiting for a sucker to come along, and with BP's jugular exposed, these lowlifes will take advantage. The Fed could agree with BP to prosecute those guilty of fraud if they want to be fair, but that hasn't come forth from Eric Holder and the rest of the AG's. Instead, those fools want to criminalize an accident or a mistake in engineering that MIGHT have been preventable. No one can say for sure, since the "science" of oil drilling is 70% educated guesses and 30% luck. People take for granted that oil exploration is a sure thing, but that is far from the truth. As long as there is gas at the pump when they need it, they go about their daily lives with nary a thought of how it got there. Most states don't even want refineries since the EPA got involved. Maybe that is why Texas has the highest industrial pollution in the US...because the only new refineries built in the US in the last 20 years has been in Texas and Oklahoma, our neighbor.
Let's see how the tree huggers feel about a new refinery being built in California, Florida, Georgia, Arizona, New York, or any number of other states.
The truth is, BP has stepped up to their accident from the beginning and as far as I can tell they are doing everything they can to correct the problem. Time will tell.
Obama needs to shut up and drive.
Garry
Terry, BP's roots may well have been "British Petroleum" but it's a true multi-national now with major American stakeholdings as a result of mergers with American Corporations. Traditionally, as a 'former' UK Blue Chip company, it naturally features a higher than average institutional investment over here hence my comments about pensions. The rig is operated by an American Company, the drilling company is American. My comments are not intended to be partisan in the slightest but really despising these (on both sides of the pond) that seek to make capital out of other's misery, and I'm not necessarily talking about Mr O here.
Our own polticians have been remarkably silent on this issue - not even the recently put in Opposition Labour Party have said anything. What are they hiding? Or is that being cynical?
Or should they all just shut up and let the professionals deal with it. No-one anywhere wants this disaster to continue - least of all BP.
My point exactly, Keith.....BP spent who knows how many millions drilling this well, why would they have any intention of letting any of that expensive oil leak out if they could capture or contain it? Now, compound that "loss" with the "punitive" damages being extorted (is that too strong a word?) out of them by Bee-Oh and his hard-line talking heads....nobody gains anything from this fiasco (expept the previously poor shrimpers who can now afford to buy expensive imported shrimp with the wages BP is paying them to lay out booms), least of all BP (as you so profoundly put it :thumbsup: ).
Doug
