No? The companies are largely free from consequence?
Maybe our system is a bit broken.
No? The companies are largely free from consequence?
Maybe our system is a bit broken.
Its kind of deceptive to talk about nearing an all time high without mentioning that the current all time high was 2 decades ago.
My point is merely that reasonable people can disagree if there was a suitable consequence to the event. Sure they're out 140 billion, but to a company like this that's not as grand as it sounds and not at all fatal. You provided your view, I am providing mine, which is that they did not suffer sufficiently.
I just said that the evidence that you are picking from tells a more complex story than "their stock is near an ATH" when it hasn't even recovered to where it was the day before the disaster.
When a company fucks up like that, it should die, and the people deemed responsible should go to jail. And if we cannot find who is responsible, then the top-level executives should go to jail. They are paid so much because they are "responsible", aren't they?
"But think about the normal employees losing their job when such a company fucks up", I hear. Well, think about the employees who lose their job when a normal company bankrupts "normally", who cares? And maybe, just maybe, there would then be whistleblowers from the inside because they would actually risk their job by just not contributing to preventing the company from fucking up that bad.
You could dissolve the corporation. The assets are sold off to competitors, including their claims to oil fields. The employees find new jobs. The shareholders (your retirement plan) might get screwed? But basically the same economic activities eventually continue under a different flag. I struggle to see what this actually accomplishes.
Financial risks should go with the benefits.
If damages and cause a bankruptcy, that also means the damaged party is getting paid.
The assets and people will go elsewhere? Saddle them with the debt.
> any board member or executive at the time of the incident should be indebted until the damage is repaired.
I do think personal culpability should play a role. Don't see how it's possible to remove profit motivations though. If people who didn't care about profit were capable of running an energy company, or any large company, how come we've never seen it happen?