Brits angry at Obama as BP shares fall

[sharkman]

And Obama's only making things worse. His 6 month ban on all existing oil rigs will cost 200,000 jobs. It's a punch in the stomach to the states already dealing with the aftermath of the leak.

Losing all of those jobs in the face of a non hiring private sector will produce some really ugly unemployment numbers in the coming months. This guy really doesn't know what is he doing, he's worse than Carter, and that takes some doing. The mid-terms can't come soon enough.

[kimmy]

If you invested in a company and the company releases a product that flops in the market place, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and their competitor releases a way better product, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and they get caught doing shady accounting that overstates their sales, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and they get into legal trouble, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company that creates an incredibly expensive disaster to clean up, your investment loses money.

People who think that it's not fair that their investments lost money should have bought government bonds instead of investing in the stock market.

-k

[sharkman]

I guess as an investor one needs to be aware of the kinds of moves the administration makes. For instance, if he's an oil industry hating tree hugger, you might steer shy of oil companies that conduct the majority of their business in the U.S. On the other hand, since he's shown he'll prop up huge financial corporations when needed, parking your money in those stocks would be a smart move.

I again say that whatever your opinion, if Obama squeezes BP too hard for too long, there will be consequences.

[BubberMiley]

I again say that whatever your opinion, if Obama squeezes BP too hard for too long, there will be consequences.

Do you have an alternative?

[sharkman]

Yeah, only squeeze so much.

[bjre]

Daily Mail reveals the reason why Obama does not like Brits.

Barack Obama's grandfather 'tortured by the British' during Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1091499/Barack-Obamas-grandfather-tortured-British-Kenyas-Mau-Mau-rebellion.html#ixzz0rOUCuMZT

Barack Obama's grandfather was imprisoned for two years and tortured by white British soldiers during Kenya's bloody fight for independence, his family have said.

Hussein Onyango Obama, the U.S. President-Elect's paternal grandfather, worked as a cook for a British army officer after the war.

He became involved in Kenya's independence movement, which spiralled into a terrifying uprising by guerilla fighters known by the mysterious name 'Mau Mau'.

Hussein Onyango was arrested in 1949 and jailed for two years in a high security prison as the British struggled to quell one of Africa's bloodiest and most desperate rebellions against colonial rule.

'The African warders were instructed by the white soldiers to whip him every morning and evening till he confessed,' Sarah Onyango, Hussein Onyango’s third wife, told The Times.

Describing how white soldiers visited the prison every two or three days to carry out 'disciplinary action', the 87-year-old said her husband was subjected to horrifying violence.

'That was the time we realised that the British were actually not friends but, instead, enemies,' Mrs Onyango said. 'My husband had worked so diligently for them, only to be arrested and detained.'

Mr Obama refered briefly to his grandfather’s imprisonment in his best-selling memoir, Dreams from My Father, but stated that his grandfather was 'found innocent' and held only for 'more than six months'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1091499/Barack-Obamas-grandfather-tortured-British-Kenyas-Mau-Mau-rebellion.html#ixzz0rOUcQges

[BubberMiley]

Yeah, only squeeze so much.

So you think they are voluntarily complying with too much squeezing and the taxpayer should endure the remaining squeezes?

Edited June 20, 2010 by BubberMiley

[eyeball]

If you invested in a company and the company releases a product that flops in the market place, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and their competitor releases a way better product, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and they get caught doing shady accounting that overstates their sales, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company and they get into legal trouble, your investment loses money.

If you invested in a company that creates an incredibly expensive disaster to clean up, your investment loses money.

People who think that it's not fair that their investments lost money should have bought government bonds instead of investing in the stock market.

-k

The same thing will happen to people who invest in a government who through negligence or complicity contribute to any of the above. It's probably not fair to people who inherit the consequences but who ever said life was fair?

[sharkman]

So you think they are voluntarily complying with too much squeezing and the taxpayer should endure the remaining squeezes?

No. You are making assumptions again.

[kimmy]

I guess as an investor one needs to be aware of the kinds of moves the administration makes. For instance, if he's an oil industry hating tree hugger, you might steer shy of oil companies that conduct the majority of their business in the U.S. On the other hand, since he's shown he'll prop up huge financial corporations when needed, parking your money in those stocks would be a smart move.

Do you think any President would leave the American taxpayer to pick up the tab for this while BP shareholders continue to collect their dividend cheques?

I again say that whatever your opinion, if Obama squeezes BP too hard for too long, there will be consequences.

Of course. Is anybody here saying that Obama should grind BP into the ground? Nobody benefits if they aren't around long enough to pay for this. And they will be around, and they will pay for this, and if setting up the $20 billion escrow fund means that BP shareholders don't get divident cheques for a few quarters, I can't imagine why I should feel any more sympathy for them than I feel for anybody else who invested money in stocks that go downhill.

Still picturing English grannies in their sitting rooms sipping tea and telling each other "That Mister Obammer isn't giving BP a fair go." "He doesn't like the British, you know. It goes back to the colonial days."

Why are they different from any other investor who had a stock market setback?

-k

[Shady]

Well, in order to prevent another incident like this, you bet your ass that things are going to get put on hold and things investigated and scrutinized. I'd expect Harper to do the same for Canada if this happened or will happen off our coast.

Something is obviously broken. Let's pause, take a step back, learn and understand what happened to prevent it from happening again.

I could understand that for new drilling. But not existing rigs. The experts apparently disagree as well.

When President Obama last month announced his six-month deepwater moratorium, he pointed to an Interior Department report of new "safety" recommendations. That report prominently noted that the recommendations it contained—including the six-month drilling ban—had been "peer-reviewed" by "experts identified by the National Academy of Engineering." It also boasted that Interior "consulted with a wide range" of other experts. The clear implication was that the nation's drilling brain trust agreed a moratorium was necessary.

As these columns reported last week, the opposite is true. In a scathing document, eight of the "experts" the Administration listed in its report said their names had been "used" to "justify" a "political decision." The draft they reviewed had not included a six-month drilling moratorium. The Administration added that provision only after it had secured sign-off. In their document, the eight forcefully rejected a moratorium, which they argued could prove more economically devastating than the oil spill itself and "counterproductive" to "safety."

Link

As they point out, Obama's moratorium could be more economically devastating than the oil spill itself.

[BubberMiley]

No. You are making assumptions again.

That's because your posts are so vacuous they require assumptions in order to apply your ideas to the real world. It's a rather typical Republican response these days to criticize without offering alternatives.

[BubberMiley]

As they point out, Obama's moratorium could be more economically devastating than the oil spill itself.

Not as environmentally devastating though as another spill, but of course you don't care about that.

[GostHacked]

I could understand that for new drilling. But not existing rigs. The experts apparently disagree as well.

Why would you not want to bring existing rigs up to spec? All of it needs to be re-examined.

As they point out, Obama's moratorium could be more economically devastating than the oil spill itself.

Remember this is not the first time something owned/operated by PB blew up.

[Shady]

Remember this is not the first time something owned/operated by PB blew up.

I agree. But not every rig is owned or operated by BP. Why would you punish other companies who have much better records? Who haven't cut the same corners? Who haven't had the same problems? Answer. You shouldn't.

[BubberMiley]

Answer. You shouldn't.

Nope. Answer: Because they have the same inept clean-up plans that BP had.

[Shady]

Looks like a judge is going to be ruling very shortly on the Obama drilling ban. My guess is that Obama loses. But I guess you never know.

[Shady]

Once again I'm proven correct. A judge put a stop to Obama's unconstitutional behavior. At least for a little while. I'll post a link soon.

[GostHacked]

Once again I'm proven correct. A judge put a stop to Obama's unconstitutional behavior. At least for a little while. I'll post a link soon.

But... but... but , the oil is natural Shady, so we don't need to rush down this road.

[GostHacked]

Here is your link Shady.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-22/u-s-deepwater-oil-drilling-ban-lifted-today-by-new-orleans-federal-judge.html

But, how is this going to resolve the current crisis in the Gulf of Mexico?

[eyeball]

I agree. But not every rig is owned or operated by BP. Why would you punish other companies who have much better records? Who haven't cut the same corners? Who haven't had the same problems? Answer. You shouldn't.

It would certainly be prudent to suspect other companies. The same government that allowed BP to cut corners in all likelihood also allowed the other companies to cut the same corners. It wouldn't be fair to other companies if they didn't. The poor things.

[Bonam]

I think kimmy's posts on this topic make the most sense. Investing in stocks involves risk. Risks associated with investing in major international corporations include political risks.

[sharkman]

Looks like a judge is going to be ruling very shortly on the Obama drilling ban. My guess is that Obama loses. But I guess you never know.

Right you are, sir, and the Obama administration takes another blow. The guy is getting bad advice.

[eyeball]

I think kimmy's posts on this topic make the most sense. Investing in stocks involves risk. Risks associated with investing in major international corporations include political risks.

Yes and by the exact same token, trusting that politicians are properly overseeing the regulatory framework that protects things like the ecosystems that major international corporations operate in comes with risks.

If you happen to have a stake in that ecosystem, say you live in it for example...you'd have to be an idiot to think your stake is insured or protected. Not in this day and age.

Why should the rest of the nation be bailing out the people impacted by BP's spill? It's their own damn fault for trusting the government was properly regulating BP.

[bloodyminded]

He is clear in what He asks and clear in what He offers. The choice is up to us.Isn't it incredible that NY Escort God leaves the choice up to us? Think about it. There are many things in life we can't choose. We can't, for NY Escorts example, choose the weather. We can't control the economy.We can't choose whether or not we are NY Asian Escorts born with a big nose or blue eyes or a lot hair. We can't even choose how people respond to us. But we NY Asian Escort can choose where we spend eternity.

That's some sophisticated marketing technique. Very subliminal.