Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Politically Incorrect Guild

Back to Guilds

For anyone who is sick of politically correct effluvium. 

Tags: Conservative, Right, Libertarian, Moderate, Unrestricted 

Reply Politics and Religion
Liability Caps?

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Vote
  Republican!
  Democrat!
  Libertarian!
  Green!
  Constitution Party!
  Gold!
View Results

Kira84

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:24 pm


I was looking through my spam mail account and found a Libertarian Party newsletter that told me something I didn't know.

...Before anyone screams 'crazy libertarians!' and runs away, let me just say that I was curious about how the different parties respond to situations, so I signed up for several newsletters. (The Green Party thinks Obama should seize BP's assets.)

Libertarian Newsletter
Libertarians say government shares blame with BP for oil spill

WASHINGTON - Wes Benedict, executive director of the Libertarian Party, issued the following statement today:

"The federal government and BP share the blame for the large oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

"When the CEO of BP appeared at a Congressional hearing yesterday, Republicans and Democrats predictably engaged in finger-pointing and blame-ducking, trying to score political points. Their fingers should have been pointed at themselves.

"When President Obama gave his Oval Office speech on Tuesday, there was one important word missing: the word 'liability.' The president never mentioned that, thanks to liability caps provided by the federal government, BP was able to engage in riskier activities than it would have otherwise. If BP had known in advance that it would be fully liable for all damages related to an oil spill, it probably would have taken greater safeguards. When you know that your liability will be strictly limited, cutting corners becomes a lot more attractive.

"The spill will cause a lot of damage to the property and livelihood of people living along the Gulf. We have a well-developed system of civil courts to help people obtain compensation. Unfortunately, the legislative and executive branches have inappropriately trampled on this territory, and they seem to be trying to take the place of the courts.

"The president has apparently convinced BP to put $20 billion in some kind of compensation account. He said in his speech that it will be 'administered by an independent third party.' Will this third party be able to decide what 'legitimate claims' are, and how much they should receive? Assessing damages should be done by courts, not by political bureaucrats appointed in backroom deals between the president and a large corporation.

"The president could have taken the opportunity to talk about getting government out of the energy industry, and allowing the free market to guide the future of energy production. Unfortunately, he instead blamed the free market for government failures, and discussed his hopes of increasing government interference in the energy industry.

"For decades, Libertarians have warned against putting trust in government regulatory bureaucracies like the Minerals Management Service (MMS). While costing the taxpayers a lot of money, these agencies generally fail to deliver the kind of protections they promise, they tend to become corrupt, and they discourage vigilance on the part of citizens by lulling them into a false sense of security.

"When large companies and the government start working together, the results can be disastrous. Congressional liability caps, the MMS bureaucracy, and BP have all cooperated to create a costly disaster that should never have happened."

Libertarian Party Site
PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 9:34 am


They're blaming the government... for liability caps? And somehow having these makes BP want to cut corners? Aren't liability cuts exactly the sort of thing libertarians want: making sure corporations don't get hurt by the government?

Sciamancer

2,750 Points
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Cart Raider 100
  • Forum Regular 100

Kira84

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:12 pm


...No. Not remotely. Libertarians are for small, very limited government. They may not want corporations to be hurt by the government, but they don't want them to be helped by the government either. They want corporations to stand or fall on their own, without any government interference, either for or against. They oppose both the Democrat and Republican parties as being too authoritarian.

The Libertarian party is extreme libertarianism though, and there are conspiracy theories that it supports... So it's important to differentiate between libertarians, who believe in small government and individual freedom (and for some this includes open borders, legal abortion and gay marriage - libertarian isn't quite synonymous with conservative); and 'capital L' Libertarians, who are more extreme and also prone to the belief that 9/11 was a government conspiracy.

Point being though, the Libertarian party does think that BP should be held liable for the damage... but the government shares the liability because of poor policy that gave the company little incentive to be careful.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 pm


Libertarians want the only government involvement to be military and, depending on branch, sometimes police and emergency forces.

Quite simply, making big companies pay ANYTHING for environmental damage and damages to small business is completely anti-libertarian. Libertarians would want NO liability, under lazy-fair (too lazy to look up the fairer spelling) capitalism.

Sciamancer

2,750 Points
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Cart Raider 100
  • Forum Regular 100

Kira84

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:06 am


I've heard from some Libertarians who don't think we should have a standing army, actually. They just want the government to... I don't know, maintain roads and such.

Paying for environmental damage may not be libertarian... I don't know. But they do believe that it should be illegal to cause another person physical or property damage. And the damage to people's livelihoods is definitely... um, damaging. In a concrete fashion (as opposed to psychological, which might be different). And not damaging through competition, which is also different.

The newsletter talks about people getting compensation in civil courts, I kind of take it that means that they think BP should be held accountable... by people effected, through the judicial branch. As opposed to the executive.

Anyway, the title of the article is 'Libertarians say gov't shares blame' - not 'BP is blameless, it's all the government's fault.'

Jeez, give them a little credit. blaugh
Reply
Politics and Religion

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum