It’s been awhile since I stood atop my soapbox, so, well, here you go. You have been warned.
The aftermath of BP’s oil spill will likely span decades of financial hardship for folks in the region along with the obvious damage to the environment. My first reaction, out of anger, is to boycott BP.
However, I don’t believe that boycotting BP will do any good. And here’s why.
If BP had any sort of conscience, it would set up an annuity right now for any and all claimants who can demonstrate a financial loss due to the oil spill. BP would initially fund the annuity in an amount mandated by the government to address both punitive and compensatory damages, and would contribute a percentage of its earnings for as long as BP is in business. Claimants would receive periodic payments from this annuity for as long as it exists.
I think this model addresses something that is lacking under capitalism: that a corporation’s profits do not reflect the cost to society of its environmental impact.
Under this model, BP would be forced to recognize the impact that its operations have on the region in which it operates, and it gives the regional population an incentive to ensure that BP does well financially in the future.
You know, instead of boycotting.
It’s a win-win argument, if you ask me.