Man, Meaning, and Freedom

While the Associated Press blames the disaster in the Gulf on the lack of regulatory oversight, the White House's call for increasing the liability cap on oil companies belies the real culprit in this mess.  Previous legislation capped oil company liability at 75 million.  What reason could there possibly be for limiting the liability of a corporation by law?  While BOP is still on the hook for the actual clean-up costs, which may run over a billion dollars, according to the law, they don't have to worry about any claims brought against them by businesses and individuals who have been harmed.  Thus, the government created moral hazard and encouraged risky drilling and extraction of oil. 

How would things be different in a just society?  There would be no limit to the liability of BP.  They would be on the hook for any and all damages caused to anyone by their mistakes and/or accidents.  Claims could be brought against BP by anyone who was harmed in any way by the disaster--fishermen, residents of the coast, tourist destinations, hotels and other business along the coast, businesses anywhere that depend on Gulf products.   Heck, environmental groups could even try to sue BP for indirect damage to them through the spill's effects on the larger environment and so on their lives.  If BP were subject to such claims and not under the protection of a corrupt government, I'll bet they would be much more likely to think twice before drilling in mile-deep water, or else they would make sure they had safeguards in place.

As it is, however, they had no need to be careful, and they weren't, and the taxpayers (British and American) may even get stuck with the bill, and the mess.