Comments on: Court Rewards Exxon for Valdez Spill

By: 420

420 — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 04:36:28 +0000

Exxon-Mobil cleared $40.6 billion profit in 2007, or $500 million every 4.5 days.

At $404 billion in 2007 sales total, $500 million is less than half a day’s income. Hardly “punitive.”

By: zhann

zhann — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:02:15 +0000

Very interesting article. I am curious, but why isn’t this more common knowledge? I understand that media outlets control their media, but if there is evidence for these claims why isn’t this news being made more public?

With that said, as tragic as this ruling was, I can’t say that I was surprised in the least. It is important to keep in mind who made the latest Supreme Court appointments and where his allegiances lie. Oil companies, more importantly Oil Prices, need to be strictly regulated. Fines need to be standardized where, at the very least, each barrel spilled is equivalent to a fine of $X and profit needs to be capped and closely monitored.

Let’s be honest with ourselves here, insurance companies have very similar practices, construction companies, and just about all forms of big business.

By: Brian Koontz

Brian Koontz — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 01:21:10 +0000

The point in having insufficient penalties is to appease the people that “something is being done about the spill” without anything being done about the spill. It’s corporatism, pure and simple.

It’s the same purpose behind having “steroid hearings” on capitol hill. “Something is being done about steroids” in order for nothing to be done about steroids.

Or, when Barack Obama makes “Change” his campaign mantra in order for nothing to change upon his presidency.

Image, deception, rhetoric, and propaganda. It’s what’s for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

By: Glis

Glis — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:30:19 +0000

I think what they are trying to say is that if Exxon had paid for all the safety and counter measures it would have been a much larger number than the value of the oil spilled. Usually when someone cuts corners to lower their bottom line and something bad happens because of this, the penalties are many times what they ’saved’. What’s the point in having penalties if you win either way?

By: Barbara

Barbara — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:21:49 +0000

I have read, and wonder if someone can verify, that oil spilled from the Exxon Valdez was far more profitable to Exxon, than had it been sold gallon by gallon?

By: David Sugar

David Sugar — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:29:28 +0000

It is worth noting that while a constructive trust was forced upon Exxon for the original $5.2 billion dollar judgment, they only had to add 6% in additional interest per year while appealing. They were however often able to turn 14% per year on the original amount. In fact, they were recently making $400-$500 million alone in profits off that cash for EACH YEAR they managed to stall this case.