Dear American Friends...about the British pensioners and the BP stock thingy...

[truebrit71]

..there seems to be a great deal of confusion on this site (and a fair amount of "fuck 'em" vitriol and bile flowing) so I want to clear some things up.

I highly doubt that there is now, or ever will be, a British pensioner that says "Sod the Gulf of Mexico, I still want all of my money", yet there seem to be a number of DU'ers that harbour venomous ill-will for these old people that may suffer economically as the entire Gulf drowns in toxic guck. It's as though somehow that assuages their own impotent anger at the endless gusher of filth currently destroying an enter eco-system.

Like anyone that buys into a mutual fund in this country, or into a company pension plan for instance, you have no control over what that particular fund manager actually buys. You hope that he buys stocks and bonds that go up, but because it is not self-directed, hope is all you have. It goes up or it goes down. That is where British pensioners are. Their pensions were/are controlled by money managers, not themselves, and inevitably these money managers bought stock in BP because it paid nice dividends, nice and dependably.

Until the accident happened.

Then everything changed.

The stock, quite rightly got hammered, but still managed to keep it's head above water, but as time dragged on, the oil kept on gushing, and the rhetoric started to heat up. The Prez gets goaded by the M$M into a game of tough-talk oneupmanship eerily reminiscent of his Connecticut Cowboy predecessor until he says he wants to kick someones ass whilst keeping his boot on the throat of the company responsible.

Fine. Except for the fact that the company whose throat he wants to apply his shoe-leather to is publicly traded and every single time Obama 'The Fastest Quip in the West' opens his mouth, the stock goes down. That doesn't just mean that the fellas in charge of BP lose money, it means that every single person and entity that owns the stock loses money too.

Including pensioners in the UK who's only crime was not having control over their pensions.

Hate BP? I get it. I am right there with you.

Want them to hurry the fuck up and fix this thing? Hell yeah!

Want them to cover every single dime that it costs to compensate, clean up and retro-fit? Fuck yes. Twice over if need be.

Tell the people that through no choice of their own have stock in that company, "tough shit" and "fuck 'em"? I don't think so. They are victims too. They might not have lost their jobs or their livelihoods or their beaches, but that doesn't mean that they're to blame either, and frankly people that think that way, or say such callous things out loud simply display a failure to properly think things through.

I feel the rage, I feel the anger at this awful, awful tragedy and I am horrified that it has gone on as long as it has, and apparently will continue to, but telling "The Brits" or "The Queen" to apologize and suck on it as their pensions lose money, is simply out of order and frankly about as constructive as shaking your fist at the moon.

And Mr President, you want some asses to kick? I suggest you take a good look at your predecessors and figure out which one of those de-regulating arseholes gets the boot applied to the throat first..

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Well said...

Finally, a voice of calm and reason.

Thank you!

[stray cat]

2. I felt bad for all those who lost their retirement after a life time of savings here

how could I feel any less for the britains who may find themselves in a similar situation. I thought progressives cared about people outside of their own borders - thanks for your post

[leftstreet]

3. America asks: What's a pension? n/t

[Oregone]

15. Its what a 401K replaced

You can see some in museums next to dinosaurs

:)




Both my inlaws have pensions. Theyll make more money retired than when working. Just normal jobs for 25 years...normal blue collar jobs, and quite the reward. Wow...thats a thing of the past.

[NNN0LHI]

19. Pensions. You can see some in museums next to dinosaurs

:rofl:

[Ignis]

60. I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry at that post.

[Blue-Jay]

4. One point. The president never made the "boot on the throat" quip.

Someone else did... Rand Paul, I think. It's since been misunderstood by some that the president uttered words to that effect.

Otherwise, K&R

[Ruby the Liberal]

6. That was Thad Allen

[Owlet]

13. Akshully, I think it was Ken Salazar

[Ruby the Liberal]

58. Doh! Thanks for the correction.

[boston bean]

14. Salazar said it a bunch of times. nt

[Turbineguy]

5. The talking heads on TeeVee

are in a contest to see who can give the most prosaic description of the mess. And of course, who can get airtime for the most outlandish speculation. Some people in the US work hard to keep from having to look for a real job.

[KittyWampus]

7. Pension funds shouldn't be invested in companies that take unsafe risks. Maybe if people rose up

and came together things would actually change.

What does it freaking take?

Pensions got invested and pensioners enjoyed the profitability. Maybe we are all to blame after all.

[JuniperLea]

10. Exactly right...

And we can't tone down our anger at BP just to keep their stock prices up.

[JuniperLea]

8. I believe some of those words are in response...

To what is perceived as whining. We've all lost a great deal in the past two years... it's a little hard for some to muster sympathy when those just now falling out of the boat are moaning to those who have been floating in the dark waters for months.

The first I saw of this was a "demand" of sorts that Americans stop bashing BP. That's not likely.

Planning a pension or private retirement is risky business these days. I lost half... I can never retire. Never. It's hard to feel sympathy when I have no future... I'm not alone, I'm one among millions.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here... just trying to explain the frame through which so many are seeing this issue.

It sucks to be everyone right now.

My ancestors are English, Irish, and Welsh... I don't condone the "tough shit" attitude, but I understand it and under the circumstances, I can't condemn it either. We're all hurting. Can't we just leave it at that?

We've been chastized and told to tone down the "rhetoric" aimed at BP because it's causing a drop in their stock... good luck with that.

[bettyellen]

79. my thoughts exactly

[mod mom]

9. Thank you for your post. rec'd

[Oregone]

11. Maybe people just shouldn't be allowed to own part of a company they don't work for....

So when a company fucks up, all they are hurting is themselves. Maybe less companies would fuck up then when every employee, up the the executives, doesn't want to be fucked. Imagine that. Real corporate responsibility from the employees all the way up

Rather, we live in a world where the preferred, unattached stock holders say fuck em all to collect their short term profits

[Junkdrawer]

12. So there are no billionaires who own BP stocks - only poor pensioners...

Or is it that the billionaires are using the pensioners for cover? :think:

[Dappleganger]

25. LOL! nt

[ljm2002]

31. By Jove, I think you've got it! n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

65. I call that the Human Shield Fallacy.

Also used to criticize taking legal action against abuse by government officials.

[blondeatlast]

16. Very well said. I decided to stay out of that dreck--er, thread. nt

[BeFree]

17. You blame Obama?

Quote:

"..every single time Obama 'The Fastest Quip in the West' opens his mouth, the stock goes down. "

Sorry, bucko, BP's stock goes down because of BP. Not because of Obama.

Geez, where will this end? Everybody but BP is to blame?

[blondeatlast]

18. Out of the entire OP, that's what you noticed?

Okaaaaayyyy.... :eyes:

[BeFree]

20. Not all

I noticed a bunch of made up bullshit meant to protect, I guess, BP's stock price.

[Dappleganger]

24. Yeah...

this one blames everyone else but who actually made the explosion happen and is claiming responsibility.

[BeFree]

33. Hard to believe the accolades for this crap

One would think the most important thing is the money lost.

Obama finally speaks up for the American people and so now it's all his fault?

[bettyellen]

80. it's unfucking beliveably nervy. total bullshit

[bettyellen]

81. .

[HipChick]

21. truebrit71...thanks for your post...the pensioners were already hurting

[WolverineDG]

45. so were folks on the Gulf Coast

they were just getting over Katrina & the recession, now this.

dg

[yowzayowzayowza]

22. Jus don't be expecting dividend checks anytime soon.

Sorry, BP gets the neck boot first and foremost as they were ultimately responsible for the project, negligently so imho.

[Dappleganger]

23. So now it's all Obama's fault??

Nice try there.

[tranche]

27. Isn't it always?

[asjr]

26. The events happening now in both countries

sort of reminds me of a "greeting" card I saw once with the figure of the devil holding a pitchfork behind a man who is standing before two doors. One door says Damned if you do and the other says Damned if you don't. The devil is saying Go on hurry and take one! That is how I feel these days.

[Bobbieo]

34. They will realy begin to feel the pain when the oil begins to wash up on British shores in a few

months from now.

[ljm2002]

28. I am sooo tired of people saying we need to "protect the pensioners"...

...whenever there's a question of reining in some crappy corporation.

That, of course, is exactly the argument they always use to try and deflect our anger. It is how they have successfully co-opted much of the middle class, buying them with whatever piddly little retirement and IRA accounts they have. "Oh, you wouldn't want to see GigantoCorp's stock go down, now would you? Why, then *you* would lose money!" "You don't want to hurt GigantoCorp, why lots of perfectly nice people work there, and own stock in them. Why *you* might even own stock in them!"

Of course, the pensioners etc. don't really have a say in how their money is invested. While the IRA holders do have some say, most are not sophisticated investors. Also, they usually have a choice of packages, not a choice of individual investments.

So the argument, bottom line is that you can't criticize these companies because it will bring their stock price down and hurt the little guys.

And people fall for it and we always end up with no muscle against the behemoths.

Fuck it. I don't care who gets hurt financially. If a company is a bad actor, they're a bad actor and need to get stomped on, beaten, crushed, and ground to a fine powder and used as fertilizer (figuratively speaking, of course -- although there are times...). Then someone can form a new company that behaves better and the pensioners' funds can be put there.

[Junkdrawer]

30. And I bet you think that business tax cuts aren't just for Mom and Pop business owners....

Dirty Commie...

[Owl]

42. Well said ljm2002.

[Violet_Crumble]

29. Very well said n/t

[Raineyb]

32. There's only one small, teeny, tiny, problem with your conclusion.

The concept of investing means that you take the chance that something will happen to the company and that should something happen you as a stock holder will literally be told "tough shit."

That is what ownership of common stock means. What would you have anyone do, not take the money from the company because the investors might get screwed? It is not mandatory that companies pay dividends you know and it is unseemly, to say the least for the company to pay out billions in dividends when there are billions in damages that it needs to pay.

[Ilsa]

37. Exactly! The liabilities need to be covered before the investors.

It's the way assets are marshalled.

That being said, I hope BP survives without bankruptcy. I hope a repayment plan can be worked out. My own father retired from ARCO which was purchased by BP. BP pays his pension. The last thing we need is for BP to stop paying his pension or kill his supplemental health insurance.

[TexasObserver]

53. Yes. Dividends are paid from profits, not from money needed to pay liabilities.

Do these investors go to a casino, and after betting on RED and losing say "but I really need that money"?

If one doesn't want to have the losses associated with risk, one shouldn't think he can have the rewards associated with risk.


Besides, this is all a massive smoke screen put out not by pensioners, but by officers and others at BP who hold BP stock and want move billions of dollars off their BP accounts and into their personal accounts before putting BP into bankruptcy. I hope the president has the SEC and Justice quickly take judicial action to prohibit BP from issuing any dividend this year or next.

[LeftishBrit]

70. The point is, that this isn't about investors, but about ordinary pensioners whose workplaces

invested in companies such as BP.

Now to make it clear: I do not blame Obama; I blame BP AND I blame the Tories, whose party helped to put us in this mess by partially privatizing pension funds, so that ordinary pensioners are more dependent on what happens to cororporations than would have been the case 30 years ago. It is interesting that the people here who are crying loudest about the pensioners are the most right-wing Tories who have never shown before that that they give much of a damn about anyone but the well-off.

So I think we're basically on the same side of the issue, but I do get frustrated when people assume that pensioners = investors, and that it's all a matter of their personal responsibility. Only true in a small minority of cases.

[Raineyb]

85. I get that. But that is how the system is set up.

And probably deliberately so. Of course they want to bring up the pensioners who likely had no choice in where the money was invested, and more than likely have a hell of a lot less invested than the fat cats. By bringing up the pensioners, they illicit sympathy which they use to garner support to allow policies that benefit their much larger stakes. But I'm not really sure what the best solution is. It really is unseemly for them to pay dividends when technically they don't have anything extra to pay out. They need to be putting money aside to pay for damages. There is no "contingencies" around this liability. It's there and it has to be paid. And I suspect that whatever money they put aside for such things is woefully inadequate.

[stranger81]

93. +1000

If one feels entitled to reap the benefits of his or her investment but to deflect any costs onto others (the gulf, the US, anywhere but where it belongs), then I have only two words for those folks: "fuck 'em."

If Britain's beaches and waters were saturated with oil right now, I guarantee those pensioners would be singing a different tune.

[baldguy]

35. Investing in the stock market is a crap shoot. You pay your money & you takes yer chances.

If the investors took their due diligence seriously, they would have found BP's lax consideration for safety was well known. They would have realized that because of BP's practices, the risks associated with investing with them were that much higher than investing with other oil companies may have been.

Those investors bet; they lost. When I look at the lives sacrificed, the tens of thousands of animals killed, the thousands of people put out of work and the economic disaster of billions of dollars lost in the mire of goo left behind - I won't be crying for the hardship of BP's investors.

[LeftishBrit]

39. This is not about people who have directly invested with BP

It is mainly about people's occupational pension funds. Ordinary people, who have no say in where their workplace invests.

It's bad for us too that big companies like BP own ordinary people's lives to some extent. But it wasn't the choice of average British people. It was not put up to popular vote!

[YankmeCrankme]

44. Then they should be complaining about and to BP. Not to us or our President. NT

[baldguy]

48. It wasn't the choice of the average Gulf coast resident

To have their ocean poisoned out from under them, either.

If you're worried about BP's stock price, blame BP for being criminally negligent - not Obama for calling them on it.

[LeftishBrit]

92. I agree completely. I blame BP. I don''t blame Obama.

My post was not directed at Obama; or intended as a defence of BP. It was against the argument that it was the pensioners' 'own fault' for not choosing a workplace (are there any?) that hadn't invested pension funds in BP. This argument is the exact equivalent of saying that it was the Gulf residents' choice to live in a place where oil drilling occurs and that they should have moved (not sure that it's been said about them, but it was certainly said about the people affected by Katrina).

I detest the Tories, who apart from this have damaged my country in many many ways.

I detest their making these excuses when they were the ones who made pensioners so dependent on private businesses in the first place.

I detest BP and its criminal negligence.

I detest the lack of regulation that *enables* the criminal negligence of such as BP.

But I also detest the 'personal responsibility', 'if you suffer it's your fault for making the wrong choices!' approach. And I know you haven't taken this approach, but the person whom I replied to did.

If the pensioners suffer, it is the fault of BP, and the fault of the politicians who made pensions so dependent on the likes of BP. It is not Obama's fault. It is not American taxpayers' fault. But it is also not the pensioners' fault. And my arguments were with someone who said that it was, not with Obama or with the Americans in general.

[TexasObserver]

54. You still don't get it. They bet and they lost in a game of risk.

It doesn't matter that the pensioners didn't personally call a broker and make the BP stock purchases. They are investors. If the managers they pay to advise them are incompetent (or dirty), then their remedy is to sue the manager.

Do know where that principle was established? England. We took that from English law and incorporated it within American law.

Don't complain to the pit boss because you lost money at the casino. Don't make bets you can't afford to lose. These pensioners should be hiring competent solicitors in England to sue BP and their fund managers, instead of piggy backing billionaires with this "but the widows" meme.

The sun never sets on British Petroleum's screw ups, and anyone who thinks they should be saved for any rationale does not know what a terrible, terrible company BP has been for decades. The world will be better off when BP is just a name on a docket sheet in a bankruptcy court in America.

[bettyellen]

82. they need to blame BP and the Tories then, not Obama. They need better operated pensions, and to

get out of BP. Sorry but the money has to come form BP , and these are all the people who reaped the rewards from the risky cost cutting measure BP took.

[LeftishBrit]

89. I agree. And most of us do blame BP and the Tories and not Obama.

The Tories are just doing their typical 'look over there' act.

[Are_grits_groceries]

36. I really wasn't mad at the Britain or the people.

Then I read this jewel.

"There is no doubt that BP, as a UK PLC, is totally committed to do everything possible to contain the oil leak and meet all its obligations in the USA."

This is total bullshit. I wish BP's leaders was totally committed. Totally committed to jail.

They aren't doing squat except rearranging deck chairs. On the other hand they are dragging their feet, lying, & still being half-assed in cleaning up or preventing more oil from reaching the shore. That's for starters.

I hadn't even thought of being mad at the British government or people. However, if they want to enter the fray slinging that toxic dispersant, then the people who say it will catch the hell they deserve.

I am aiming for the ones who come up with those kinds of statements on both sides of the pond.

[TreasonousBastard]

38. Presumably you have read this in the NY Times...

and perhaps similar thoughts floating around:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/11/business/11bp.html?hpw

It may have been posted earlier

[Duer 157099]

40. And what about the "pensioners" whose fund managers shorted BP?

They're making money when the stock goes down, what about them?

[TexasObserver]

56. They should have to buy the pensioners with bad managers a new car.

It's pretty ridiculous, isn't it?

Are we to assume these Brits with pensions are going to fly to the Gulf coast and spend their money there this summer, watching the oil stick to everything? That's gonna happen. The people I'm worried about aren't pissing and moaning about a negligible impact on their pension. They're worried about paying bills they can't pay this month because their coastal regions are decimated.

[LeftishBrit]

41. Thanks

I detest BP and its managers, but it's not the fault of Britain as a whole; nor is it just the rich or greedy who will suffer.

There may be absolutely no choice about it now, but it still isn't something to gloat over. I am not criticizing Obama; far from it; I am criticizing the occasional posts which seem to blame us all for BP -just as some Brits blame all Americans for the Iraq war, or consider all Americans as rich capitalists. Wrong on both sides.

[YankmeCrankme]

57. Well if some people think this is Britain's fault, they're dense.

BP is a corporation that happens to be based partly in Britain and that's who gets the blame for me. I don't know what the public sentiment is over in England, but if they aren't tearing BP up for their incompetence in running their operations and greed before safety, they get no sympathy from me.

Also, I agree with Obama about Tony Hayward. The man should have been fired with no golden parachute. Instead of complaining about us, perhaps the pensioners should seek redress in the courts to recover their lost pension money.

[LeftishBrit]

77. I agree...

and as I said in another post, what's unbelievable about the Tory attitude to life and to BP is that some of them are actually considering hiring Lord Browne (Tony Hayward's predecessor) as one of several 'outside experts' to advise the government on where to make cuts and how to run government departments more efficiently!!!

I'm not even all that bothered if someone blames Britain as such; what upsets me is when people blame the individual pensioners for not *choosing* their occupations according to where the workplace invests its pension funds. Like most people have that sort of a choice.

[WolverineDG]

43. Less income is better than no income

sorry for the pensioners, but at least they don't have to worry about health care costs.

dg

[kirby]

46. Dividends are not an entitlement...

Investing is risky. Dividends are a way for a company to pay out excess earnings to its share/bondholders. Considering the magnitude of
responsibility that BP is on the hook for, do you really think that money should be paid out? It should be pretty much common sense to think they are going to need that money in the not to distant future. Once it is paid out, the only way to 'get more money' is to raise prices on the customers, rather than use these undistributed earnings.

[Geek_Girl]

47. I hope that BP goes belly up

and I'm glad our president is talking tough. The Brit pensioners may suffer somewhat financially meaning they may not get to retire when they want. Well welcome to the Global economy we're all in the same boat buddy.

While Brits get to worry about their retirement, fisherman and their families will be financially devastated. The residents of the Gulf coast are literally fucked. I'm sorry but I can't muster much sympathy.

[TexasObserver]

49. The fact that Brits have money invested in BP is not our problem.

The problem is the Brits whose funds have invested in BP, even when wiser managers chose to get out. The remedy for the Brits whose funds are hurt is to sue their fund managers for being idiots and keeping them in the BP stock so long. THAT is who lost the money for them, not president Obama, not anyone else.

All this wailing about the "widows and the orphans" by major BP stock investors and by BP is pathetic. Don't invest the money of widows and orphans in sleazy companies like BP and you won't lose your shirt.

BP should be prevented by the US government from issuing dividends this year. They should have the SEC all over BP, and if BP is giving dividends, it is moving money from its liability funds to its shareholders, effectively making the Gulf coast victims look elsewhere for the costs of clean up and damage.

BP is likely going under in the next two years, so their stockholders may lose every dollar they have invested in BP. Wrap your head around that.

[neverforget]

50. BP fucked up big time. They have to pay up big time. They chose to cut

corners to make more money for their shareholders and now it's time to pay the piper. I'm sorry the pensioners are losing money but BP should have been a responsible corporation. When all that matters is the bottom line, shit like this oil volcano happens.

[Better Believe It]

51. Go after the fund managers who held and are still holding!

They know how to sell.

And if they couldn't have figured out weeks ago the BP stock was going to go way down they should not be managing penny stocks!

SELL!

SELL NOW!

Or get crushed.

[treestar]

52. We have to deal with the oil spill and the dangers of drilling

What do they expect us to do - BP is at fault, not the President.

The POTUS has a right to kick whoever's asses caused this problem.

[tnlefty]

55. Oh, goody another don't be pissed at BP sentiment.

We're all getting screwed, but are those pensioners gonna take a good hard look at the multinational corporation who is doing the screwing? Greg Palast and others have written about the mega sins of BP in the past.

Brits have written some nasty op-eds telling Americans to basically quit whining (a term that I despise, BTW) as it isn't whining it is a white hot rage. The people that I talk to are furious, heartsick and still anxious, waiting for the other shoe to drop, i.e., how bad is this going to be?

I'd love to have every BP exec's head on a silver platter along with those in the MMS who looked the other way and allowed this to happen. Bottom line is don't goad people who are furious and anxious while the catastrophe is still unfolding.

There are a couple of posters who seemed to have just recently signed up and who are pushing this 'don't be mad at BP' crap, and it will not fly right now, probably not EVER, and "The Fastest Quip in the West" is being mild, if only I had a bullypit.

[B Calm]

59. Just another "Too Big to Fail" corporation. . . .

[eilen]

61. Investing in stock is taking a risk

Gains are not guaranteed. It is gambling. The pensioners should write to their pension's trustees and demand they invest in less abusive risky companies.

It reminds me of the Lloyd's scandal in the 80's.

Madoff's vicitms... I know some union carpenters who can never hope to be pensioners now.

[NihiloZero]

62. The last line of the post was the best...

I essentially agreed with the entirety of the post, but the last line is the one which really seems to offer some hope for the future to come out of this epic disaster. Obama should own up to his own complacency and participation and say... OK, I messed, I continued down the same road as my corrupt and inept predecessors -- but now that all changes. He should bring the troops home to clean up the gulf. He should heavily regulate polluting industries. And he should do a number of other things to promote peace, freedom, and sustainability. Unfortunately... I don't believe that's what he'll really do.

[ShamelessHussy]

63. Investing in the stock market has risks, as well as rewards

expecting BP to meet it's obligations first to the disaster, should go without saying.

however, in our corrupt world of privatized rewards and socialized risk, we have created such a moral hazard that many think there should not be any more risks for the investor class (well at least those in that class, and especially those at the top).

I feel for the pensioners, but the people, animal and plant life, business, impacted by this catastrophe should come first, as far as resources and compensation are concerned, imho.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

64. Why didn't the funds administrators cut their losses straight away?

BP is what percent of those funds? So they lose 40% of that percentage (which can't be more than 5%). Bad, but hardly bankruptcy-inducing.

Human shield fallacy.

[blueworld]

66. It's always "different" when it's your pension

The fund managers are supposed to select, as much as possible, decent companies dealing with integrity & let the chips fall where they may. Unless the chips bring down the stock prices & your (or their) pensions. How many Brits were crying & lighting candles when American pensioners went broke if their stocks were invested in tobacco companies or textiles or whatever?

Americans, historically even, love the Brits. People are not governments. I truly feel for any British pensioners who will suffer over this. But the Americans in the Gulf states will be financially devastated for years & may not have pensions to collect thanks to the greed & arrogance of BP. With the complicit help of the US gummit to be sure, but nonetheless, my family & friends will be devastated for decades.

If the British pensioners & the UK gummit wants to be furious, be furious at BP who betrayed you as well as us.

[dorkulon]

67. Divest from BP. Problem solved. /nt

[Whisp]

68. thank you - rec'd

I don't think people really understand these connections and how intertwined we all really are with the rotten system.

[WeDidIt]

69. They chose to invest money. There is always risk involve

Welcome to the down side of risk.

I say this a s a person who has holdings that are invested in BP. This is precisely why my holdings are diverse.

[moondust]

71. And responsibility.

Like it or not the investor is part owner of the corporation. As such he/she bears his/her share of responsibility for the actions of the corporation. Anyone who is not willing to bear that responsibility and risk should not be playing the game.

[LeftishBrit]

72. The point is that this is NOT about the people who chose to invest...

it is about the people whose occupational pension funds are partly invested in BP. The workers aren't responsible for where the companies that employ them invest their funds.

Let's make it clear, I think that BP are totally hypocritical and practically treating these people as 'human shields', and that the Tories are also total hypocrites. When before did the more RW Tories care about ordinary pensioners? They're the people whose privatization policies helped to MAKE people so vulnerable to such factors, and dependent on Their Lordships the Corporations. And right now there are Tory proposals to bring in 'experts' from the business world to advise government departments on how to be more economically 'efficient', and guess who is one of the 'experts' they are proposing to call in? Yes, Lord Browne, Tony Hayward's predecessor as Chair of BP. Obviously, the disaster didn't happen under his watch, but I don't think that their cost-cutting, corner-cutting policies all began in the last three years; it's almost certainly a long-term issue. So I don't trust our Tories, especially those on the Right who've been making the most noise, further than I could throw them; but then I never did.

So I'm basically on your side about BP; but I always object to assumptions that people's problems are generally a matter of choice and personal responsibility. Most people just don't have that sort of choice.

[WeDidIt]

73. Those people DID choose to invest.

They chose their occupation. They chose to work at a place that provided a pension heavily invested in BP.

They assumed the risk when they accepted the job. They are 100% responsible for their choice and all choices have risk. IF they did not investigate all aspects of the job they chose, that's their own fault.

[LeftishBrit]

74. This is unbelievably RW....

And I am NOT saying it because in this particular case the people are British. I would say just the same with regard toAmericans - e.g. if someone said that about the affected fishermen 'choosing their job', or the people affected by Katrina 'choosing to live there'.

Do you honestly think that, with all the restrictions that people have on the jobs they can do, and with significant unemployment in recent years, people - ordinary people - can just 'choose' their job on the basis of where their employers invest their money? Even if they could find out, which isn't always the case?

Once again: I do NOT think that BP should be able to protect itself by using these people as 'human shields'. Sometimes it is necessary to close down an organization that is causing enormous damage, even if this affects innocent bystanders. I support Obama on the particular issue. BUT to say that it is ordinary people's 'own fault' if they work for people who invest wrongly (what if the only alternative is to go on the dole? - and you may not even be *able* to be on the dole if you refuse employment offered to you!) is just the sort of right-wing, Thatcherite, 'it's all a matter of personal responsibility and if you suffer, it's your own fault, you suckers!' attitude that helped to create this whole system where ordinary pensioners *could* so easily become the human shields of the corporations!

[WeDidIt]

75. I have ALWAYS explored how a potential employer runs their retirement

Interviews are a two way process. The potential employer is interviewing you, but if you fial to interview your potential employer, you are autmoatically accepting whatever they throw at you.

If you fail to understand the risks associated with the employer whose offer you accept, it's your own damned fault.

[LeftishBrit]

76. And lucky old you to have the luxury of that sort of choice!

I have been lucky to have usually had choices in employment too - though not always. And in fact, mostly through sheer luck, I am NOT one of the people likely to be seriously affected by this particular issue (though I may have other pension problems for unrelated reasons). But I realize that I'm lucky - especially in having had THROUGH SHEER GOOD FORTUNE enough savings to tide me over during periods of no-job - and that this doesn't make me more virtuous or prudent than others who have had less choice; it just makes me - and you - more LUCKY.

But many people do NOT HAVE A CHOICE, and it is NOT THEIR OWN DAMNED FAULT IF THINGS DON'T WORK OUT!!!I am NOT saying that BP should have impunity because of innocent bystanders being affected; I'm just saying that we should recognize that they ARE innocent bystanders who are unavoidably affected, and not treat them as though it's THEIR fault!

I *hope* that your comments on this matter are due to your natural anger at BP (which I share) clouding your judgement on this one occasion, and do not reflect a general right-wing tendency to blame those who undergo misfortunes and bad times for not exercising 'personal responsibility'.

[WeDidIt]

78. Choices carry risk. They DID make a choice.

One chooses to accept a job offer. One also chooses to continue at a job instead of finding a different job if the current job carries more risk than is acceptable.

No sympathy for anybody whose pension is affected by BP's poor judgment.

None.

They made their choices (and yes EVERYBODY has a choice). They accepted the risk. Now they are experiencing the down side of risk.

[LeftishBrit]

86. OK So their choice is is to go on the dole? And then be kicked off the dole for not taking the job

offered them?

The kindest interpretation that I can give for your comments is that you are interpreting this as meaning just workers directly or indirectly employed by BP. No. MOST job pension funds have some investments with BP. Some more, some less.

Also - where is it written that BP is/was the ONLY risky company? In this world of lack of regulation of banks and corporations, almost ANY pension fund is 'risky'. For other people, it was the Bank of Iceland going bust. For others, it will be the next corporation or bank that goes belly-up. So someone may have avoided the risk of BP, only to find that their pension is run down by *another* corporation collapsing.

The only real solution to the problem is (a) much tighter regulation of corporations; (b) a reversal of the partial privatization of pensions over here (and equivalent elsewhere).

As I say: I am not suggesting that American workers and taxpayers should be punished because of BP's negligence and cost-cutting. And I understand that you are angry at BP. We all are. However, if you *truly* think that - in general, as well as re BP - 'everyone has a choice' and that those who suffer for their employers' mistakes deserve 'no sympathy', then you are in the same category as those who voted for Thatcher and Reagan and thus started the harshly individualistic economic policies that contributed to this disaster in the first place.

[WeDidIt]

94. You find another job.

You are not tied to your job forever. You are free to find another one and it is wisest to find a new job while you are currently employed.

They chose to accept the risk. They now are experiencing the down side of risk.

NO SYMPATHY!

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WeDidIt]

97. You sitll refuse to face the fact

ALL INVESTMENT CARRIES RISK!

Pensions are invested, ergo they carry risk.

End of story.

NO SYMPATHY.

And I'll thank you to stop with the personal attacks.

[bettyellen]

83. no one is angry at the pensioners, but we are LIVID at the politicans hiding behind them

hope that clarifies the matter for you

[LeftishBrit]

87. So am I. And I am even more angry at the politicians hiding behind them because they (the Tories)

are also directly damaging my country by their policies - and did so dramatically before, under Thatcher.

And THEY are largely responsible for the fact that pensioners CAN be so readily affected by a corporation's fate.

And to top it all off, they (or some of them) are considering hiring Hayward's predecessor Browne to advise government's departments on how to cut costs! Yes, just the person to go to for advice on that!

For the rest: I know that most people on the board are blaming BP and the Tories and other politicians involved, not the ordinary pensioners. But the see the posts to which I've been replying.

[Raineyb]

88. That reasoning is just ridiculous. People don't pick a profession,

when they do pick a profession rather then ending up doing whatever they can make a living at doing, your logic is as asinine as that of the right winger who blames poor people for being poor as though they don't work or anything.

We cannot avoid going after BP because it will harm the pensioners. They are victims of this as well, but to go so far as to blame the pensioners for choosing the wrong profession? That is RW bullshit spin and you sound like a freeper when you use it.

[moondust]

91. Granted, I don't know how the pension system works.

In the U.S. people typically have some choices as to where to direct their retirement funds: stocks, bonds, a variety of mutual funds, annuities, money market accounts, simple interest-bearing savings accounts, etc. In most cases the choices that offer the greatest potential earnings carry the greatest potential risk. It is up to the investor to choose an acceptable balance of risk/responsibility and reward from the above choices.

If British pensioners do not have any choice at all in how their pensions are invested, then with all due respect I would suggest that the pension system itself has a problem.

One of my own reservations about market-based economies has always been that the owners of the publicly traded corporation (shareholders) are too far removed from the day-to-day actions of the corporation. For example, Nike athletic apparel may be operating sweat shops in Malaysia but the shareholders/owners might never know about it unless some large shareholders divest and the stock price tanks. Nevertheless, the shareholders/owners remain legally and morally liable just as would be the private pub owner whose beer was found to be tainted with E. coli.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

84. this type news allows us to see how much control big oil has on media....

Now when BPs CEO gets his bonus, they'll have an excuse for defaulting on pensions.

[mulsh]

90. Exactly how is the British Government rushing to help this pilar of

the British economy? Why the hell shoud the US Government bail this British/multi-national company out? Its something I haven't read much about.

That's where most of my vitriol against the British is aimed. oh that and the pathetic attempt to shift the focus from British Petroleum or BP or what ever they decide to change their name to next to antipathy against the British people ( which as usual in these situations is mostly derived from PR hacks and dishonest "journalists"

Sorry if pensioners are getting hurt. I got burned severely in the credit melt down so I know how it feels.

[Waiting For Everyman]

95. I fault all investors for global corporatism - for demanding excessive unrealistic profits.

Pensioners could've put their money into safer, lower-yielding assets or insured CD's. But no, their greed enabled the funds' greed. The sharks hid behind the skirts of these pensioners to do their dirty work, and the pensioners have known that for a long time.

That's why the vast majority of people - who have NO DISCRETIONARY INCOME to invest - are being further bled dry under the predatory rules that the investor-class has created... to suck excessive profits to the top and their own nest-eggs.

It was their responsibility to exercise some restraint over the "investment industry", and they did not. We're all paying for it now, in the form of a giant behemoth corporatist structure which is killing us all.

It's the pensioners everywhere who enabled this, and cheered it on. Just because the lower class are poor, doesn't mean we're stupid. Or uninformed.

The plea for empathy doesn't mean much from those who had none for us years ago, when we were trying to get the boot off our necks, and the fat and happy would have none of it. They had their way. It blew up in their own face too, and now they cry to us about it? If they had had any moral concern for those they were wrongfully milking all that time, this wouldn't have happened.

Karma's a bitch. The drag of it is that this also, again, harms "the bottom" even though we knew better and had no choice about it. But even now, there's no boo-hooing for us, is there?

Pensionsers fueled the class war, and now the chickens have come home to roost. When BP's fiasco starts harming the lower (sub-investor) class in Britain, then I'll get sympathetic.

***

edit to add:

I'd like to see a survey done on how each of the BP pensionsers feels about strong unions and minimum wage increases. 'Nuff said. That would tell the tale, right there.

[glinda]

98. Well said.