It used to be that the only poor people liberals would ridicule were those of religious/Southern stock.
It used to be the EUnichs were to be envied for their forward thinking progressive ways.
NO MORE!
The dogma of Hatred for all Things Corporate must prevail voer any love for the little guy.
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:27 PM
Original message
Swell. If we crush BP British pensioners may suffer
This is not just a problem for City fat cats or a big bad oil company everyone loves to hate. BP paid £6.6bn in dividends last year – equal to £1 in every £7 paid out by all the companies in the FTSE 100 – and remains a major holding in most income-hungry pension funds.
That seemed a reasonable strategy while returns on cash deposits were negligible but BP’s share price has now plunged by 33 per cent since the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. It stood at 646p in April but traded around 433p today.
Independent statisticians Bloomberg list household name fund managers including BlackRock, Legal & General, Barclays, M&G, Scottish Widows, Threadneedle and AXA among major shareholders in BP. Some may have bought since the share price began to slide but most are sitting on massive losses.
You could even argue that BP’s survival – and the beleaguered giant is now being talked of as a takeover target – is vital to the British Government’s plans to cut budget deficits and balance its books. BP paid £5bn tax in 2009 and £10bn tax the year before when oil prices were higher.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/10000598... /
Unreal.
They don't even have to buy politicians when they own the people outright.
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yeah, well... too bad.
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'm not saying let BP off the hook but...
...if a RWers said "too bad for American retirees" would you just shrug that off?
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. LOL--I think the RW said that a long time ago. Hence, no more pensions, but 401k's.
Thank goodness!
I was afraid I was going to have to continue giving 12% of my compensation to SocSec.
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Just because they said it doesn't make it OK for it to become *our* policy
Those people deserve their pensions.
Of course people living on the Gulf deserve their homes and livelihoods as well.
Maybe they should be natonalized like GM until they can pay back their debts.
Donnachaidh (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. uhh, RWers have already said that about US pensioners
deregulating banks that played the wall street casino with pension funds, remember?
the UK made the mistake in utilizing a company with a huge track record of accidents as the basis for saving their economy. Do *we* have to suffer because of that?
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. So the RW said it
Why are we repeating it?
We're not RWers now...are we?
avaistheone1 (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. This is what happens when you invest in dirty technology that is irresponsibly managed.
This was a known risk. The pensioners should not be surprised.
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I agree--it's only fair that they go under trying to clean up OUR shores.
Edited on Wed Jun-02-10 03:35 PM by TwilightGardener
They disregarded safety, they made a mess. Boohoo for the Brits.
avaistheone1 (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. I am not shedding any tears for them.
They have been profiting richly by polluting the earth, now they should pay. They are the responsible party.
It is easy to collect the checks on their oil profits.. It is not so easy to have the checks cut off and be responsible for the cleanup and the destruction of ecosystems and lives here.
tabatha (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. The stock market concept is a huge problem.
There are no safety nets when things go wrong.
BP can be sued and held liable.
You can't do that with a socialist government, sweetums.
notesdev (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
15. People need to take responsibility for their investments
Claiming the profits when times are good and denying responsibility when catastrophic mistakes become a public emergency, that's the Goldman Sachs business model. If we're going to OK this then we may as well do away with governments entirely and let the law of the jungle rule; it would be more just than a political/financial environment geared to have everyone trying to steal from everyone else.
Jackpine Radical (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. "People" don't make these investment decisions.
The managers of their retirement funds do.
Retirement fund investment in the market sometimes ends up being a lot like setting up a hostage situation. Kind of like the bank robber who takes over an orphanage and threatens to kill all the kids unless he gets his way.
http://jackpineneedles.blogspot.com
notesdev (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. The investors have options even then
They can remove their money; they can direct certain investments and positions. If the plan locks them in so they have no choices, they can refuse to participate, or they can demand a change in the plan.
What cannot and should not be rewarded is the attitude that investments are fire-and-forget. Giving money to people has consequences and if it's your money the responsibility ultimately falls on you.
Give a banker an inch and he will stab you in the throat and screw your dog.
What if it was a consenting relationship with the banker and the dog?
Nuclear Unicorn (1000+ posts) Wed Jun-02-10 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. but this is about public/government run pensions
Akin to our Social Security.
I'm glad Bush was stopped before he could hand OUR retirement funds over to these monsters.
But now we find ourselves in the unenviable position of Solomon's Dilemma.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8469354If they aren't fighting for the little guy then who exactly are they fighting for?
Methinks it isn't about helping people as much as it is power-mongering wrapped in heavy doses of penis-envy.
