On May 15, 9:31 am, "M. Johnson" <micha...@america.net> wrote: > "In this context there’s less to the contrast between government regulation > and corporate self-regulation than meets the eye. Self-regulation in a > corporate state does not constitute the free market. When companies are > sheltered in any substantial way from the competitive market’s disciplinary > forces, incentives turn perverse. Moreover, “state capitalism” and > thecorporate form (pdf)– with itsagency problem– can produce the temptation > to cut costs imprudently in order to make the next quarterly report look > attractive to shareholders. > "“Putting profits before people” is a feature of state, or crony, capitalism > not the free market."
It's a product of greed, which is exactly what free market capitalism is. > Why did BP have problems? The Times goes on: “Some analysts say the safety > problems indicate that BP has not yet reined in the culture of risk that > prevailed under Mr. Hayward’s predecessor, John Browne…. Mr. Browne set > aggressive profit goals, and BP managers drastically cut costs to meet their > quarterly targets. After the 2005 explosion in Texas City [killing 15 > workers], investigators found that routine maintenance that might have > averted the accident had been delayed because of pressure to reduce expenses.” So that they may contribute more to Republican candidates? > What we seem to have is a company that, in pursuit of short-term profits, was > less than meticulous about safety (other people and their property, that is) > while it and its industry effectively vetoed government safeguards that might > have prevented the explosion that killed 11 workers and caused the damaging > spill. > Some will defend BP in the name of the “free market” or minimize the event, > protesting that the Obama administration’s remedial measures will “undermine > our capitalist system.” Meanwhile, the “progressive” statists will declare > that once again the free market has failed. I suspect those that minimize it and blame Obama will be Republicans. The "free market" does fail occasionally, and I doubt that "progressives" are saying "the entire free market is a failure". > The coziness between government and the oil industry is also apparent in > thecap on liabilityfor damages – a paltry $75 million from offshore oil > spills (not including cleanup costs). The interesting question is whether > BP’s dubious conduct would have been different without the cap. Hayward, > theWall Street Journalreports, “admitted the U.K.-based oil giant had not had > the technology available to stop the leak, and said in hindsight it was > ‘probably true’ that BP should have done more to prepare for an emergency of > this kind.” The coziness is far more cozy when it's a Republican in power. > Transocean, owner and operator of the rig, is petitioning tolimit its own > liabilityto $26.7 million. Good luck with that! > (Moral hazard matters, but the story is complicated. Oil spills have > beendecreasing, and no energy development is without its risks.) Oil spills have not been decreasing at all. It's the *reporting* of oil spills that decreased under Bush Jr. I would even venture to guess that if Bush Jr. was still President, he probably would have made it very difficult for reporters to investigate the matter. And the media most likely would have gotten very conservative numbers in as far as how many gallons were leaking. And possibly even blamed a fictitious source of the oil spill in part or entirety. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
