News Is Hatred Towards the British Justified for the Gulf Oil Spill?

[OmCheeto]

I don't hate the British. Hell, they let us use their language without asking for royalties.

I heard on the radio the other day, a little blurb that made me laugh.

"Americans being upset about the oil spill, is kind of like a drug addict being upset when his drug dealer spills crack in his lap"

Or something to that effect.

My Russian friend said that the spill was symptomatic of the "I don't want to see wind turbines from my back porch" mentality. We don't want to see oil rigs off the coast, so we push them further and further away, until eventually, dermo happens.

As I said, I don't hate the British, and I also don't hate BP. Though I do wish they'd call me back regarding the solution to the spill. They did say that with the flood of suggestions, that it might take them a few days to get back to me. hmmm... Will all those who are bombarding them with the "Just nuke the damn thing" suggestion, please STFU.

 

[chemisttree]

Transocean is also not a U.S. company for the record.

It's headquartered in Switzerland for tax purposes but it is based out of Houston, TX.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

So "Obama tells Cameron [the UK prime minister] that frustrations with BP have nothing to do with national identity".

Then why were you constantly emphasising the "British" in BP, Mr Obama? You're the one who allowed BP to lobby your government to recklessly erode safety standards...

Nonsense, and nonsense. In fact the latter statement qualifies as crackpottery. Obama has only been in office for 17 months. In the mean time, we had the financial crisis, two wars, and the health care debate.

The name of the company is British Petroleum. You are complaining because he uses the proper name? That is absurd.

Like Redbelly, this was all news to me. The first that I heard of any actual anti-British sentiment from Americans, was from the British press. And I follow the news pretty much all day, every day.

What immediately struck me - my first thought - was that the claim is so ridiculous that it must be a ploy for political sentiment in Britain. Whoever started this nonsense almost certainly has alterior motives in British politics. At the least, this is a tempest in a teapot.

But, as mentioned earlier, what occurs to me now is that this issue may result in part from a difference in cultures and perception. As stated, in the US, we vilify companies all the time. Market pressure through public perception is viewed as a key tool in protecting the public's interest. The relationships between the public, and large corporations, are often adversarial and hostile. It is starting to seem that the British don't generally share this attitude, so the hostility here towards BP seems biased, or unfair.

Again, some of the people who have the most reason to be angry - those whose lives are being destroyed - depend heavily on BP for employment. Some of those folks are the ones who oppose the moratorium on drilling! They need BP in order to make a living. So those poor folks are doubly damaged.

Just to bring it home: As an independent contractor who has worked on and designed control systems for applications raging from thrill rides, to food products, to semiconductor manufacturing, to the production of aircraft parts, liablity is ALWAYS the biggest concern. In the US, if you screw up and cause serious injury or property damage, you are supposed to pay dearly for it.

Late edit and sidebar: The biggest system that I've ever started [the first time it was run] involved 4, 600 hp motors, that had to be started simultaneously. As I switched the key bit in memory from a 0, to a 1, my hand was shaking so badly that I almost couldn't hit the correct keys on my computer. A failure could have destroyed the building and killed everyone in it. And there is nothing more dangerous than the first few minutes, when a system like this is started. It you are going to see a catastrophic failure, if you've really screwed up, that is when you will probably see it. It was definitely one of the more memorable moments of my life! [heh, I freaked out a couple of the electricians by saying that I would be out in my car, in the parking lot, and to hit this "this key" when I'm out of here. ]

 

[mgb_phys]

The name of the company is British Petroleum. You are complaining because he uses the proper name? That is absurd.

The name of the company isn't British Petroleum, it was renamed when it merged with the American Oil Company who owned the Amoco Cadiz that caused the biggest oil disaster in europe.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The name of the company isn't British Petroleum, it was renamed when it merged with the American Oil Company who owned the Amoco Cadiz that caused the biggest oil disaster in europe.

Haha, okay, I didn't even know that the name was completely dropped. Given that it was known as British Petroleum for over forty years - most of our lives - I hardly see any malice.

When the Brits figure out that Hoover isn't the only company that makes vacuum cleaners, we can talk.

 

[xxChrisxx]

I mentioned this in the Gulf spill thread a few days ago, I was getting concerned that it seemed that the US media seemed to be emphasizing the 'British' aspect of BP even though it's pretty much 50% American run. I initially edited it out as I though it would cause flames.

I do believe that there is the right way to apply pressure and the wrong way. With economies being as sensitive as they are right now, publicly bashing a company that is such a large part of the economy to the extent the Obama had had not helped matters. I can understand why he did, as politically he needs to appear tough on the situation. So it's not really a case from the UK of siding with BP, it's a case of the words that are coming out of the Presidents mouth are now starting to affect our economy more than it otherwise would do.

I just think it's not been handled tactfully by either sides. It was a HUGE mistake on BP's part sending Hayward to deal with this, it just emphasised the 'foreigness'.

 

[mgb_phys]

Haha, okay, I didn't even know that the name was completely dropped. Given that it was known as British Petroleum for over forty years - most of our lives - I hardly see any malice

It works both ways, "BAe Systems" becomes British Aerospace whenever it is lobbying for UK government special treatment even though it is majority US owned and 60% of it's workers are in the US

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To my knowledge, the only issue that came up was Tony Hayward ordering the press around. He may not know it, but he has no power to do that on public beaches. It was not only insulting to Americans that a CEO of any company would try to order the press around, but for someone who isn't a US citizen to do it was even worse. But this wasn't about BP being British, this was about Tony Hayward not knowing his place. That was a real no-no. It was a fundamental insult to our notion of a free press.

Journalists are still complaining that BP is blocking their access to information that is supposed to be public, but that would likely be true in any case. There is nothing uniquely British about that problem. It just sounds worse when the company isn't generally considered to be US owned. And some journalist may try to hype this in order to put as much pressure on BP as they can. It would be unfortunate if this tactic was exploited to any significant degree.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Imo, BP made a pr mistake by putting Hayward in front of the cameras. They should have put an American face on this, right from the start - presumably the top BP person in the US. That would have helped to prevent cultural and political faux pas that the press likes to spotlight. I think Hayward has done a terrible job of message control. And he keeps insulting people.

 

[rootX]

It is obivious that British government does not want BP to fail and go bankcrupt. I believe They are supporting BP financially in cleaning this mess.

"The government must put down a marker with the US administration that the survival and long-term prosperity of BP is a vital British interest," the former British ambassador to the US, Sir Christopher Meyer, has told the BBC.
..

BP paid £930m in UK tax on its profits in 2009, which was well down on the £1.7bn it had paid in each of the previous three years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10282777.stm


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10282448.stm

 

[jreelawg]

It's headquartered in Switzerland for tax purposes but it is based out of Houston, TX.

Do you have a source?

All I found was this.

"Transocean employs over 25,000 people worldwide, and has a fleet of 139 offshore drilling units and three ultra-deepwater units under construction as of April 2010. The company is based in Vernier, Switzerland, near Geneva, and it has offices in 20 countries, including major offices in Switzerland, United States, Norway, Scotland, Brazil, Indonesia and Malaysia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transocean

 

[Evo]

jreelawg, speaking of sources, I need you to respond to this before you post again.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2758282&postcount=30

 

[shoehorn]

My best friend lives in England and he's not aware of any "high level of Anti-Americanism among the British people".

I live in England and I'm perfectly aware of it. It's not that we hate individual Americans, of course, it's just that we don't like your capitalist running-dog ways.

Of course, saying things like this about us doesn't help matters much either:

[PLAIN]http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/922/drudgem.png

Finally, an English spill that America appreciates.

 

[mgb_phys]

At least when we have a 'world' championship in a sport we allow other countries to play.

 

[Proton Soup]

^^heh, that's funny. especially considering that 99% of americans could care less about soccer.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I think we should reinstate "Britisher" as the noun for British people. Much better than Briton (and no one can remember Briton anyway seeing as people always write "Brit" or find a way around it).

 

[Borek]

When the Brits figure out that Hoover isn't the only company that makes vacuum cleaners, we can talk.

That will be probably abut the time we will (in Poland) finally learn that calling vacuum cleaner elektroluks doesn't make sense, neska (as in nescafe) is not a synonym of a soluble coffee and - the most difficult one - that bicycle is not rower (no v in Polish).

 

[Phrak]

All this British love is making me weep. I need Kleenix. That would be Kleeniv is Polish and tampon in British, I think.

 

[madness]

^^heh, that's funny. especially considering that 99% of americans could care less about soccer.

It's "couldn't care less", that's what I hate about Americans.

 

[lisab]

It's "couldn't care less", that's what I hate about Americans.

...a perfect example of what we love in Brits, ahahahah...

 

[vertices]

...a perfect example of what we love in Brits, ahahahah...

Hey, I really like some Americanisms (like "go figure" or "do the math", especially because I can really wind my brother up by speaking those words in an American accent ) but I've also got to take issue with that expression.

The whole point of language is to convey meaning and "I could care less" epically fails at this!

 

[vertices]

Nonsense, and nonsense. In fact the latter statement qualifies as crackpottery. Obama has only been in office for 17 months. In the mean time, we had the financial crisis, two wars, and the health care debate.

Consider: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965?RS_show_page=0

 

[Proton Soup]

It's "couldn't care less", that's what I hate about Americans.

it's a perfectly good idiom, and I've decided to keep it

 

[jreelawg]

jreelawg, speaking of sources, I need you to respond to this before you post again.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2758282&postcount=30

I did respond to that post, except, it happens my link was 4 years old, and so you gave me an infraction for posting an old article. Go figure.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

LONDON – President Barack Obama reassured Prime Minister David Cameron on Saturday that his frustration over the mammoth oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is not an attack on Britain as the two leaders tried to soothe trans-Atlantic tensions over the disaster.

Cameron's Downing St. office said the two leaders held a "warm and constructive" telephone conversation for more than 30 minutes...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100612/ap_on_bi_ge/us_oil_spill_us_britain

 

[chemisttree]

Do you have a source?

All I found was this.

"Transocean employs over 25,000 people worldwide, and has a fleet of 139 offshore drilling units and three ultra-deepwater units under construction as of April 2010. The company is based in Vernier, Switzerland, near Geneva, and it has offices in 20 countries, including major offices in Switzerland, United States, Norway, Scotland, Brazil, Indonesia and Malaysia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transocean

From the source you provided…

The company started out as Southern Natural Gas Company which acquired DeLong Engineering and formed The Offshore Company from that acquisition. That company became a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Natural Gas Company and changed its name to Sonat Offshore Drilling. Sonat acquired a Norwegian company named Transocean ASA. The new acquisition was renamed Transocean Offshore. This company later merged with Schlumberger’s Sedco Forex and the new company was named Transocean Sedco Forex. This new company was headquartered in Houston, TX. (circa 2000) During this time frame, the company changed its ‘headquarters’ to the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes. This new company acquired R&B Falcon in 2000 and Deepwater Horizon along with it. In 2003 the name was simplified to Transocean. Merged with GlobalSantaFe Corporation in 2003 (also a Houston-based company). For tax purposes the new company moved its ‘headquarters’ to Switzerland and lowered its tax rate from the mid thirties to the mid teens! 12 people work for the company in Switzerland.

Hardly a REAL headquarters don’t you think?

 

[mheslep]

[...]
The name of the company is British Petroleum.

The company name is BP, period. The company name is not 'British Petroleum', as was referenced earlier in this thread.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The company name is BP, period. The company is name is not 'British Petroleum', as was referenced earlier in this thread.

And I acknowledged this as well. I knew that the name was not generally being used for advertising purposes, so at first I didn't get the point. I thought it was still technically British Petroleum.

Note also that in today's email from Obama, he uses the BP name.

The BP oil spill in the Gulf Coast is the worst environmental disaster of its kind in our nation's history. I am returning to the region today to review our efforts and meet with families and business owners affected by the catastrophe.

We are working to hold BP accountable for the damage to the lands and the livelihoods of the Gulf Coast, and we are taking strong precautions to make certain a spill like this never happens again...

 

[mheslep]

So "Obama tells Cameron [the UK prime minister] that frustrations with BP have nothing to do with national identity".
[...]
You're the one who allowed BP to lobby your government to recklessly erode safety standards...

There is a fairly good argument to be made for that last statement based on the actions of the US Interior Department (MMS) under Obama:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html"

The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year [April 2009], according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely. [...]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yep, Obama has already admitted that he screwed up. BP claimed to have the means to handle an accident like this, and he didn't demand proof. He didn't believe the environmental impact study was needed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28obama.html

But this doesn't speak to deregulating for issues of safety. Who waived the requirement for the accoustically actuated valve intended to prevent a disaster like this?

And now, those whose entire platform is based on the premise that less government is better, are asking, where's the government?? Why didn't THEY prevent this? Why don't THEY do something? Where is our consoler and chief?

Where are the tea drinkers now?