Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (43725)	6/9/2010 9:31:26 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "that market incentives would contribute more to stopping the leak than government." Maybe yes, and maybe NO. It DEPENDS on many things. For example: how easy/successful would individual court actions be against BP, (a la the Exxon Valdez example!). How MUCH are those supposed 'market disincentives' to amount to? For example: if the pressure in that one blow-out well would naturally exhaust itself in some 'reasonable' period of time --- might it not be CHEAPER to BP to simply do nothing (a la the Pinto example I gave)? Etc., etc. There is no one and certain-for-all-time answer to your preposition. Sometimes it may go one way, while other times another. It is not always one, and only one, of those choices which is the correct 'answer'.