If the BP oil leak didn't shut down fishing in the Gulf, the IRS just might. BP's request for tax records poses a problem for some residents of fishing communities in southeastern Louisiana — the nonconformists who haven't kept records or reported their cash income. The first step for a commercial fisherman or coastal business seeking compensation for losses suffered in the oil spill seems simple enough: Submit copies of a commercial fishing license, proof of residence and tax statements. But the request for tax records poses a serious challenge to some residents of close-knit fishing communities on the swampy edges of southeastern Louisiana, which for generations have harbored self-reliant nonconformists who don't pay much heed to everyday rules and regulations. In other words, they often get paid in cash — and don't always report it.
Yeah that is going to be rough for the fisherman, sure they should have paid taxes but that does not mean they should not be compensated for what is likely to be a very significant loss of revenue.
True but BP has every right to ask of some documentation supporting a claim of loss. If not, one could pull absurd numbers from their imanginations.. Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
It's a wash in the end. They did not pay taxes for years. Saved X amount of dollars. Now they got effed up by the good folks at BP and will loose Y amount of dollars. As long as X is greater or equal to Y, it's a wash. If Y is greater then X... let's just call it fees and penalties. Karma is a biatch and takes many different shapes.
In today's sad story of a life altered forever as the result of the oil spill in the Gulf, BP CEO Tony Hayward wishes he could have his life back. Poor Tony [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIA_sL4cSlo]YouTube - BP CEO On Need To Stop Oil Spill: 'I Would Like My Life Back'[/ame]
I am sure his life of record breaking profits and not really working that hard for it would be exceptional compared to the mess they have in Gulf right now. Frankly, he should be looking at being fired, and even possibly being imprisoned for this mess. HIS company did this. HIS company did not follow regulations. HIS company has no contingency plan. HIS company has created a disaster on a global scale that is unsurpassed and has no end in sight. I would like to see him and his board of directors brought up on formal charges.
I empathize with the anger. And the full cost of this event should be borne by BP. But, unless you have evidence I haven't seen of the BOD or CEO personally approving activities which violated federal or international law, I think it's a bit reactionary to jump ahead to the "throw them all in prison forever" response. Unless we're also throwing the US Administrative branch in prison along with them... because Minerals Management appears to be just as culpable... and if the BP buck stops with the CEO and BOD, then the US Administrative buck has to stop with The One. And... "global scale"? Certainly a massive scale as far as the US and perhaps Mexico is concerned... but it's a pretty big globe. That said... personally, I don't think any of this should be a federal issue in the first place. But I'm probably in the minority here on that particular position.
If you seriously think this won't spill over into the other oceans of the world, you are being rather short sighted. The Gulf Stream alone will make sure this spreads to the Atlantic and beyond with unimaginable efficiency. I am angry and rightfully so. These companies operate beyond the law and make a fortune doing it. Regarding the government being responsible as well, I totally agree. But this ranks so far down on an extremely long list of things our government should be answering for in a court of law right now, I didn't feel it needed mentioning... It also appears the Feds are thinking the same way I am: Criminal Investigation
I love a good lynching as much as anyone... But sometimes, all failsafes fail. We've managed to prove that with two space shuttles, and countless military and civilian aircraft. Given the large number of offshore oil wells in existence, and the relatively small number of well-based spills, somebody has been doing something right the VAST MAJORITY of the time. I'm sure there were some bad decisions made in this case by many parties, that led to this event. But to characterize that there were no failsafes, no contingency plans, and that BP execs need to be tarred and feathered is a bit of an oversimplification. And I repeat my earlier point... this probably wouldn't have happened if we had let them drill as much as they wanted to in Alaska. Nor if we had let them drill all they wanted to in shallow water. We restrict their ability to drill to the technically most difficult option... such that they have to invent large amounts of technology to accomplish it... that is so advanced that our government and military don't have any similar technology... then we act outraged when something breaks.
Might be said that all of us have some responsibility in this, as if there were no demand there would be no rich oil executives to take the blame.. Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
From what I have read, they ignored the warnings. People died (and yes, it was some of the ones who ignored the warnings, but still...) and unimaginable damage is happening to an already stressed eco-system. I am not lynching anyone, but at some point, consequences for one's actions need to come back into play in this country or we might as well close up shop and not even bother anymore. This mentality of too big to fail is a joke. BP is nothing but a company. A company run by people who made bad decisions and have caused a disaster that is going to have ramifications we will not even know about for decades. Those people should be held responsible. For them to reap all of the benefits of good decision making, but never face the consequences of poor decision making is not any way to do business.
I'm mostly in agreement - responsible parties must be held accountable - in ALL matters - private, commercial, and governmental. My only issue is with the assumption that the "responsible" parties in this case are the most senior executives and board members. Should there be an investigation? Absolutely. But, until a thorough and systematic investigation occurs, I'm not ready to identify the culprits. Waaaaaaay too many people (both businesspeople, and government officials, and environmentalists, and others) involved in this who either have an ax to grind, or want to deflect blame from themselves. I don't know what a "reliable source" might be for good preliminary information. Better to withhold judgement until the proper discovery process has occurred. While we need to protect evidence in the case, we do NOT need to start the witch hunt just yet. I've found that people tend to remain more highly focused on solving problems when they're allowed to do that, vs. spending all their time with their attorneys preparing for testimony...
I find it funny that you keep calling this a witch hunt. There is no hunt. We know that BP's well (or some independent that they are paying) is the one that blew up. We know it is pumping X amount of gallons of raw crude and natural gas into the Gulf at an alarming rate and that the procedures to help eliminate that possibility were ignored and lied about. This isn't some panic inspired by priests about people who MIGHT have magical powers being burned at the stake. This is about big business and big government covering up massive mistakes -- no, not mistakes, LIES -- that are going to kill entire ecosystems and have killed the entire Gulf region's shrimp, fish and oyster business, put thousands of more people out of work and destroyed their livelihood, and are still scratching their butts wondering what they are going to do to stop the flow. If the systems are in place and everything is being done as it was supposed to have been done, there would be no discussion because this would have never happened. According to what I have read, which I am sure is limited, the falsifying of records and test results is a common practice in the oil business. If an example is made that that kind of crap is not going to be tolerated anymore, then it would go a long way in eliminating that kind of shoddy business. Unfortunately, it is all too easy to say we don't want a "witch hunt" and allow the perpetrators of this mess walk free and clear and continue with business as usual. So instead, we just let it all go or let some poor schlub take the fall and the "kings" go free. THAT is the kind of crap we need to stop doing both in business and as a country. It is like we have lost the stomach to hold those responsible for anything actually responsible. From making our soldiers stand on trial for slapping some enemy combatant IN A WAR SITUATION (ok, from now on just shoot the SOB's -- fine with me), to the GM and Chrysler bailouts, we are rewarding the people who are responsible and our enemies by giving audience to this crap that they are above reproach. I love how the population of New Orleans can throw out endless crap that GW Bush can conjure a hurricane, but they are remarkably silent about the Messiah and his role in NOT doing anything to get this problem solved... Same goes for our politics. Nobody is being held responsible and we keep sliding further and further into the quicksand. Anyone got a vine?
No one is forcing them to drill anywhere. They are not required to meet market demand. They choose to. With choice comes responsibility.
The usual cause of multiple-failsafe failure is complacency. You have a period free of incident, and people tend to get complacent. They start cutting corners to increase profit, or avoid cost and/or effort. This is just human nature. Doesn't matter if it is a huge global conglomerate, or a guy in a shed. This is how people are. As a result of this human characteristic, it pretty much guarantees that whatever we do, no matter how many fail-safes we design into a system, there is going to be a total failure at some point. This needs to be considered when extremely dangerous enterprises are taken on. We accept the risks with space flight because the consequences are limited to a small number of people who understand the risk, and believe the reward is worth the risk. In the case of deep water drilling, those at risk had very little knowledge of the possible consequences or the risk level. I agree that the sentiment is over-simplified. That is a sin that the population loves, and media caters to. Most issues are vastly over-simplified. There is another aspect to it. Consequences are not just to punish the guilty. That really doesn't do anyone much good, unless there is an aspect of deterent in it. The main justification for punishment in our society is to deter others from doing the crime. Whatever the reality is regarding the actual cause of the disaster, executives at all levels of other oil corporations must feel the fear, so they take measures to insure they don't cause such a disaster. If nothing happens to BP--they weasel through it unscathed (not likely)--then other companies would have little incentive to pour money and effort into researching ways to make it safer. Not likely. All the oil in Alaska, and USA shallow waters would not sate the appetite for oil. There would be enough incentive to drill deep.
Seeing your peer have his stock price / market cap drop 50%, and being held liable for billions of dollars of remediation costs isn't an incentive? Perhaps. Perhaps not. We'll never know. Because we were too concerned about upsetting a few caribou and condo owners.
I wonder how the Cubans and Mexicans are regulating / overseeing / preventing catastrophes for all the non-US-controlled interests who are drilling in non-US-controlled waters in the Gulf?
You seem pretty confident in your position. I'm pretty sure the folks in Salem were pretty confident that they were really burning witches, too. The statements above, and many others on this topic, mix some absolute facts (oil platform exploded, blowout preventer failed, oil is gushing) with some innuendo (procedures ignored? Lies told? Regulators complicit? Obama appointees incompetent?) and some passionate and well-intentioned speculation (ecosystem will be destroyed? business killed? livelihoods destroyed? etc.). We are supposed to be a nation subject to the rule of law. I am 100% in favor of determining who was legally negligent and liable for this fiasco and holding them financially accountable. I'm also 100% in favor of finding out why one of the seemingly most stringent regulatory regimes failed in preventing this AND in being prepared for it. The public sector folks will inevitably call it a lack of sufficient regulation, instead of blaming themselves for insufficient application of the existing regulations. What I'm not in favor of is making up rules retroactively to "punish" (or act as a future deterrent to) folks who were working within the legal context that had been previously established. Trials, juries, judges... any of that sound familiar. "Sir, do you know you were going 50mph back there?" "Yes, but the speed limit is 55." "Well, I think that's too fast. So I'm lowering the limit to 30 and citing you for 20mph over the limit." "Sir, do you know that you made too much money off the financial crisis?" "I made a lot of money, but I was following the rules you had established." "Well, that's too bad for you. I'm slapping you with a 90% windfall tax."
What you call innuendo, I have been reading as facts... So please do tell, where are you getting YOUR info? Why don't you go on down to the Gulf coast and start asking for a fishing trip or to go out and lend a hand on an oyster boat and we will see how much "well intentioned speculation" I am stating. Better yet, go check out some of the marshland around that area and see how well the creatures that exist(ed) there are faring. I was being fair when I said whole ecosystems... I have a feeling, since the well is still a pumping with no hope in sight, that the whole planet will be feeling this one. THAT is speculation, but not one based in some fairy tale world.