Am I the only one who thinks Richard Parker and Bricker need their own regular head-to-head segment on Comedy Central? We could call it Red Lawyer, Blue Lawyer.
Since they are both named Richard, how about A Couple of Dicks Arguing?
Bricker’s not exactly the reddest lawyer around. More like…pink. And if I’m blue lawyer, wouldn’t 'luci have my back? So let’s call me violet. Our show will be called Pink Lawyer, Violet Lawyer, and we’ll mostly give fashion tips.
That assumes total destruction of the fishing industry in that area for 30 years. Highly unlikely.
Fish oil production should rise dramatically.
Granted, but the $50 billion estimate of mine (yep, it is just a guess) is a lowball estimate. The affected areas have a better than $2 billion a year industry. If it turns out this thing whips around Florida and up the East Coast, fuggedaboudit. And who knows- the ecosystem was already under stress before this happened. It may just become a big sewer- it is not as if there will be a shitload of flora oxygenating the waters down there anytime soon. Who can say for sure?
Anybody aware of any more reliable damage estimates to the fishing industry? Who can answer questions like ‘How long does it take an ancient oyster bed utterly wiped out by an oil spill to recover?’
Too soon to tell? Ah, maybe it is also too soon to cap the damages, no?
Leave the cap off, send 'em the bill.
You’ve got a quick, cheap, and painless plan to eliminate our dependence on oil overnight?
Or do you think that perhaps maybe you’re being a little ridiculous?
I can see that the damages may be divvied up in various ways before this is over. My position is that BP ought to be on the hook for their full share of it. $10 billion ain’t it.
Help me understand this.
Let’s say that three States file a brief showing that the oil spill has cost a combined $30 billion dollars in damages . If BP is only going to pay $10 billion, who is going to come up with the $20 billion short fall? I’m curious, too. Do these caps persist for all industries? If BP hypothetically owned a nuclear facility that turned Philadelphia to Pittsburgh into a moon crater - assuming it was really accident - BP would only have to pay 10 billion dollars to the State of Pennsylvania? Right?
See post #30. The extra comes out of a fund (which itself is only a billion or two and has to pay for things beyond the damage cap). Presumably once they’ve maxed out of the fund, it will be covered by the feds, who will then be repayed by a general tax on oil companies.
As for Princhester’s wider point, its the only semi-reasonable justification for the cap I’ve heard. I’m still fairly skeptical of it, however. The cap was only established ~1990, surely large oil companies were active in off-shore drilling before then?
I guess to some extent, its just the feds forcing oil companies to buy insurance against oil spill damages. Presumably the “worse case scenario” spills are bad enough so that regular insurance companies wouldn’t be able to cover them, so the government itself manages the spill insurance.
Just to clarify, Squink, you’re showing that large oil companies were involved in drilling and spilling prior to 1990? I’m not familiar with “Union Oil”, so I’m not really sure what your trying to demonstrate.
Union Oil/Unocal used to be a major player.
Gottcha, thanks.
So yea, I’m skeptical lack of a cap kept pre-1990’s big name oil companies from drilling (or apparently, spilling) for oil of the US coast.
Amen. I don’t have direct knowledge of the oil patch, but I have a little knowledge about Superfund sites, arguably a similar situation. My impression is that Superfund sites are disproportionately created by small businesses that are more willing to take the gamble that the regulatory agencies will overlook what their little operation is doing. As an alternative, the US could require something like bonding before a well is drilled. This would throw the responsibility back to the market and could allow both big and small companies to compete, but this also has its limits.
Assuming that the choice is either liability caps or the big guys bowing out, then the best option is probably to have taxes on production pay for the government to be ready to clean up. It may not be the best answer, but the public is the only group that is guaranteed to still be around after the mess happens.
I meant to comment on this but was too busy.
The rhetoric is more persuasive than most, however, the entire project fails for lack of comprehensiveness in the term ‘good long-term policy’.
Blowout disasters can’t happen. Period. BP has to go.
BP’s liability cap needs to be equal to their cap on political contributions.
Zero risk is just rhetoric much beloved of people who don’t actually have any responsibility for achieving anything and consequently don’t have to concern themselves with the fact that the only way to achieve zero risk is to do nothing at all ever.
Its a nice stab, but sorry. You lose.
Oh. Damn. Thanks for letting me know anyway. In future if I need to know whether I’ve won or lost I’ll be sure to check with you from now on.
Guys, take note: Try2B Comprehensive is the decider on whether any of us have won or lost. I think we should all try to respect that. Agreed?
You’re comparing preparing for a blowout to some unachievable zero risk mathematical model??