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 (44441)	7/28/2010 6:25:39 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 71588

It is the balancing half of the equation. That statement doesn't have any clear meaning in this context. When oil company liability for their off-shore blow-outs and spills has a hard cap, (and damages exceed that cap), the costs for damage mitigation and remediation of those damages are passed to the public commons 1 - No they are felt by the people who where harmed. 2 - The issue was the government not "the commons" And --- with the other example that I gave, Price Anderson and nuclear power plant accident liability --- the risk for all damages above and beyond the statutory damages cap is SPECIFICALLY passed along to the government! Which doesn't change the point that a cap is not a transfer of liability to the government. In this case the act did more than one thing, it caped the liability of the nuclear plant operators and it moved liability to the government. Both points being in the same law still doesn't make them the same action, any more than the fact that both a CD player and a speedometer are in my car means they are the same thing.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next