American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (44397)	7/28/2010 5:00:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 71588

You SAID that my description of the situation as a lesser incentive for the oil companies (the federal liability cap on economic damages from off-shore drilling spills) "doesn't really work" as a description. Saying that your description of hte incentive doesn't as lesser doesn't really work != saying "the federal liability cap on off-shore oil drilling is 'not any kind of incentive' to oil drilling, is not a taxpayer assumption of LIABILITY RISK". They are two different points. It doesn't work well, because the cap usually doesn't apply in big liability situations, so its really not just "lesser incentive", but "potentially but not likely lesser incentive". And its also still a massive and reasonably effective incentive. Absent the cap its very likely there would have been no difference in what happened with the spill (including no difference in what BP pays for the spill, and even no difference in what BP pays had it fought as hard as possible over every penny paid out). And whether or not its a lesser incentive it doesn't equal a tax payer assumption of liability risk. It may lead to such an assumption but it is not itself the assumption.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next