You knew I was a snake ...

 WSJ.com Mobile Edition The oil spill in the Gulf is a disaster, without a doubt. And BP should face whatever civil and criminal punishments that fit the circumstances. But as I read this article, I couldn't help noticing the similarities in the rhetoric compared to that of the financial crisis. And then I had a realization: they're only doing what we let them.

It's kind of difficult to impose a "moral obligation" on a company. Sure, there are people that are directing the company. But they have other obligations too; to the shareholders, the employees, their families, and others. And they can be replaced. A company's reason for existing is to make money, and to repeat that over and over. So that's why I'm not surprised that BP is probably going to pay its quarterly dividend to shareholders.

BP is largely at fault here. As I said above, they deserve the coming repercussions. But the government and regulators share a part of the blame. Companies are going to operate within the boundaries set for them. If you relax the boundaries - like we did with the financial and oil industries - the companies will take advantage of any new opportunities the relaxed regulatory environment provides.

On its face, that sounds like a very "big government" perspective. In many instances, financial penalties deter unwanted actions or make up for any damage that results. And other times the world's economy circles the bowl and the Gulf fills with oil. The downsides sometimes require strict enforcement of effective regulations because companies can't be expected to always police themselves.

That's not an indictment of the companies. It's what they do and we knew that at the start. But it's also the reason the government has a role in regulatory enforcement. Maybe I feel this way because I'm a government auditor; then again, that might give me the right perspective.