The ruling class will rescue BP--just a question of how?

[European Socialist]

Maybe the Supreme Court will swoop down like they did in Bush v Gore. I don't really know how the BP spill can be compared to the Exxon Valdez --The damage has to be 100 times greater and will really need a bankster size bailout that even BP can't afford.

[Catherina]

1. On our fucking backs n/t

[TroglodyteScholar]

6. Dingdingdingdingdingding n/t

[customerserviceguy]

2. Isn't there a law limiting damages

to $75 million, or something like that? A change in the law now would surely not apply to something that happened before the law took effect, ex post facto laws are forbidden by the Constitution.

BP is not going to go bankrupt, belly-up, or any of the similar alternatives. They have way more money than it will take for their lawyers and rented politicians to get them out of this.

[w4rma]

3. Yup. Politicians will whine about holding BP accountable but will vote against removing the cap that

will hold BP accountable.

[tblue]

8. Yep. Having it both ways.

This is so disgusting.

[European Socialist]

4. I think Congress can still change the law since no damage....

awards have been made yet.

[customerserviceguy]

5. But those damage awards

would be related to an incident that occurred prior to the law change.

Let's say that I'm driving drunk, and hit your car with mine, and you have injuries that are ongoing as a result. If the state where this happened suddenly enacted a law that makes a driver responsible for triple damages if he's loaded while he causes an accident, that wouldn't apply to our situation.

The final decider? The SCOTUS, and Kennedy is going to side with BP on this.

[European Socialist]

10. If you are right,, why would Congress even be talking about it?

Maybe it depends on the types of damages?

[customerserviceguy]

12. Our government always has a knack

for closing the barn door with a mighty shove and a bang, after the horse is gone. They're talking about this to look tough on big oil for the voters, but none of it is going to have any effect on BP as a result of this disaster.

[Statistical]

14. Also most of the talk about raising the cap is a compromise at $10B.

Now $10B is better than $75M but if that law passed and the cap was $10B BP stock would rally massively. Why? Because the uncertainty is gone and $10B cap is far better than 100% damages.

Just like HCR caused Health Care stocks to rally massively. There are something they don't like but it could have been much much worse (for Health Insurance companies).

[Spike from MN]

21. Well, they granted retroactive immunity in the FISA bill

so they could do the same thing here. Of course, they won't because it's totally different. The retroactive immunity in the FISA Amendment Act was a big, wet kiss to the telecoms to thank them for illegally spying on us. Retroactively raising the cap on the damages that BP will be required to pay wouldn't be in BP's favor so it won't happen. BP will get bailed out and the poor and working class will foot the bill for it. That's how it always works in this country.

[customerserviceguy]

22. It's easy to extend a benefit retroactively

but to impose a punishment retroactively brings out lawyers for the punished who will raise the ex post facto law.

I can't think of any taxes that were retroactively raised, but I can think of tax cuts that were made retroactively.

[Jamastiene]

7. There is ALWAYS money for war, because the rich dammit get what they want.

There is never any money for social programs to help the poor, but dammit there is ALWAYS money to help the rich, wage wars for oil, and help greedy corporations who cut corners. You can bet on that, always, Dem or Repub.

It'll be a bailout of some sort for BP, although Congress might try to do it quietly by passing legislation down the road, and at that, it will be hidden deep inside some other bill for some totally unrelated topic.

[scarletwoman]

9. Of course they will. They'll set it up so that WE'LL pay for it. nt

[autorank]

11. k*r Thank you for this. You're right - SCOTUS to the rescue!

SCOTUS is doing everything it can to keep The Money Party in power. The campaign finance ruling is one such move. Rescuing BP will be another.

Then when we demand impeachment for the majority on that decision, we'll hear all this bull shit about a nation of laws, etc. We're a nation of oligarchs, incompetent, incapable, and failed ones at that.

[MilesColtrane]

13. Britain will have to bail them out.

Maybe it would have been politically possible for them to receive American money if they'd have changed their name?

Briterca Petroleum?
Global Petroleum?
Anglo-American Petroleum?

We have no problem throwing money at Bank of America and American International Group.

[HughMoran]

15. $10B is nothing to them

They don't need help to survive.

[mod mom]

17. $ 10B? I believe that is a gross underestimation.

:( the following says a conservative estimation is $28 billion:

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/bofa-a-conservative-estimate-is-that-deepwater-will-cost-bp-28-billion.php?ref=fpi

[KharmaTrain]

16. A "Restructured Bankruptcy"

It's the latest rage for corporations that want to screw their investors. I wouldn't be surprised to see BP declare some kind of bankruptcy that would also protect them from any real litigation while their status is "determined". BP then will submit some bullshit plan where their "debt" is restructured; wiping out small investors (thus less dividends...sorry pensioners) and then eventually emerging with most of its assets and current corporate structure intact.

BP's game is to stall, delay, defer and drag the economic impact of this catastrophe out as long as possible. In the meantime they will continue to bring in billions in profits; which under bankruptcy, can be protected. Eventually they will have to do some payouts, but by that time the bottom line will look very nice and the amount of the payouts will be spread out and mimimal on the overall company's value.

I don't see BP needing a bailout as much as using whatever mechanisms they can to skip out on much of the clean-up costs and any long-term impact. Remember, this company is making billions even as the oil spews.

[European Socialist]

18. It might be easier to say what won't happen....

BP paying 300 billion over 10 years which will probably be needed.

[KharmaTrain]

19. The Lawyers Will Be Very Busy...

My bets are the legal strategy is to drag out any and all civil suits as long as possible...just like Exxon did with many of the Valdez claimants. We're already seeing how they're trying to define what liabilities they have and it's all in preparation for forthcoming law suits. Those most affected will have to play lots of games to collect...or be willing to spend years in court. My hopes are there are criminal prosecutions that will speed up any civil litigation.

[goforit]

20. The best way to get BP off the hook is to clean up this mess asap with the help of ALL!!