A Step in the Right Direction

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
This is absolutely surreal.

http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/index.html#a54ef44,2008-06-18

[i]

Urgent: House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries
Per Pergram-Capitol Hill
House Democrats responded to President’s Bush’s call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling.

This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live. Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow.

At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that “there were multiple reasons for the postponement” including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.

Here are the highlights from briefing
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling
1115
We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.
Hinchey on why they postponed the Appropriations markup
1119
I think there aren’t enough votes for the Peterson amendment. It wasn’t taken up (the Interior spending bill) because of the omnibus Appropriations bill. That’s the main focus of the Appropriations Committee.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)
1116
They (Republicans) have a one-trick pony approach.
Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV), Chairman of the Resources Committee
1106
You cannot drill your way out of this.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chairman of the House Select Committee on Global Warming
1111
The White House has become a ventriloquist for the oil and gas energy. The finger should be directed back at them. They had plenty of opportunity to (arrange an energy policy). But they did not put an energy policy in place.
Markey
1123
The governors of California and the governors of Florida are going to scream this is not the way to go.
Hinchey
1125
There are a lot of arrows in the President’s quiver that he decided not use.
Hinchey
1128
What we do has to be in the interest of the American people. Not major corporations.
Emanuel
1131
It’s like when I talk to my kids. Before we’re going to talk about dessert, we’ve got to talk about what’s on your plate. I hope I’m a little more successful with the oil industry than I am with my kids.
Markey7
1132
There are so many red herrings out there they might as well construct an aquarium.
From House Majoirity Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) when I asked him if the markup was cancelled because of potential Democratic defections on the Peterson amendment…

“No. The reason the markups aren’t going through is because we’re trying to get the supplemental on the floor tomorrow.”
Andfrom a Senior Republican House Appropriations Aide…

"There were multiple reasons for the postponement including ongoing negotiations on the (supplemental) and a (Democratic) wish to avoid debate and votes on the energy amendments.
[/i]

Good God. Anyone who thinks that the US is not being pushed into collectivism, is blind. This shit is scary.

Chavez wold aprove…[/quote]

Somewhere, 100m/lumpy is smiling, and also aproves…

62

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
tedro wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Do you really think the Oil companies want cheap oil. All drilling in America will do is screw the Arabs , that is not such a bad Idea

Take a look at recent profit margins from the big oil companies, and look at the trends of the last few years. Go ahead and look at the stock prices while you are at it.

The skyrocketing price of crude is killing the companies’ margins. They would love to see cheap oil, especially now that we would welcome with open arems $2 or even $2.50 gas. Their margins would be great if the price of crude dropped back to $70 or so.

Quit blaming the US oil companies, they really are on our side.

the last I read Oil companies were posting record profits

So?

Are you against companies making a profit? And how much is too much profit for a company to make? Who will determine this limit on profit?..
[/quote]

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH OIL COMPANIES MAKING PROFITS, IT IS JUST MORE DIFFACULT FOR SOME ONE AS YOUR SELF TO CONVINCE SOME ONE AS MY SELF THAT THE OIL COMPANIES FEEL MY PAIN.

63

I really recommend you guys stream that radio program above. It was fascinating.

Senator Menendez said that oil companies already have 68 million acres approved for exploration/drilling. And it’s just sitting there! So why are these companies so eager for more rights to explore and drill?

His supposition was that oil companies are looking to improve their standing on wall street by showing that they have larger untapped reserves on their balance sheet.

Also, even the pro-drilling guests seemed to believe that drilling in these places will only have a very negligible effect on price, even 10-20 years from now.

I’m not saying any of this is true - just passing it on.

64

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
I really recommend you guys stream that radio program above. It was fascinating.

Senator Menendez said that oil companies already have 68 million acres approved for exploration/drilling. And it’s just sitting there! So why are these companies so eager for more rights to explore and drill? His supposition was that oil companies are looking to improve their standing on wall street by showing that they have larger untapped reserves on their balance sheet.

Also, even the pro-drilling guests seemed to believe that drilling in these places will only have a very negligible effect on price, even 10-20 years from now.

I’m not saying any of this is true - just passing it on. [/quote]

Menendez typical liberal…ATTACK!, ATTACK!, ATTACK!

or Zap and Bigflamer are just complete frauds.
sources say…the latter.

65

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
…

And no govt not the problem, logistics,exploring and infrastructure the actual problem, hence the decade or two to see the 75 cent reduction in a barrel of oil which equals a penny or 2 at the pump. 20 years from now. So please stop hyping this horseshit already.

Complete and utter crap.[/quote]

Oh so you’re going with Glenn Beck’s estimate then which is what 100 trillion barrels a day?

but of course sensible people know this won’t help at all with gas prices…

hell even non-sensible know this, witness:

“Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior advisor to McCain�??s campaign, acknowledged in a conference call to reporters that new offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on supplies or prices.”

I guess he too is a POS.

or you’re still just a total lying sham.

66

[quote]100meters wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
I really recommend you guys stream that radio program above. It was fascinating.

Senator Menendez said that oil companies already have 68 million acres approved for exploration/drilling. And it’s just sitting there! So why are these companies so eager for more rights to explore and drill? His supposition was that oil companies are looking to improve their standing on wall street by showing that they have larger untapped reserves on their balance sheet.

Also, even the pro-drilling guests seemed to believe that drilling in these places will only have a very negligible effect on price, even 10-20 years from now.

I’m not saying any of this is true - just passing it on.

Menendez typical liberal…ATTACK!, ATTACK!, ATTACK!

or Zap and Bigflamer are just complete frauds.
sources say…the latter.[/quote]

To say that drilling for more oil will not have an effect on the price of oil is fraudulent. To say that only manipulating the demand side of the supply/demand equation is the only credible path to fixing the energy crisis is fraudulent. You and your entire argument is fraudulent.

Tell me, from where did you draw your numbers stating that increased domestic drilling will only have a five cent decrease in the price of gas, over the course of twenty years?

Lumpy, are you making shit up? tsk, tsk…

67

A fine article that illustrates the same point I have been making. We need a multifaceted solution for a multifaceted problem. I also agree with the author in that the US has more than likely made that transition to really wanting to develop reliable alternative energy sources. But the fact remains, we need to ramp up domestic drilling right now.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?

url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/20

08/06/mccain_scores_with_offshore_dr.html

June 19, 2008

[i]McCain Scores With Offshore Drilling Proposal
By Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

John McCain has drawn first blood in the political debate following Barack Obama’s victory in the primaries. His call yesterday for offshore oil drilling ��" and Bush’s decision to press the issue in Congress - puts the Democrats in the position of advocating the wear-your-sweater policies that made Jimmy Carter unpopular.

With gas prices nearing $5, all of the previous shibboleths need to be discarded. Where once voters in swing states like Florida opposed offshore drilling, the high gas prices are prompting them to reconsider. McCain’s argument that even hurricane Katrina did not cause any oil spills from the offshore rigs in the Gulf of Mexico certainly will go far to allay the fears of the average voter.

For decades, Americans have dragged their feet when it comes to switching their cars, leaving their SUVs at home, and backing alternative energy development and new oil drilling. But the recent shock of a massive surge in oil and gasoline prices has awakened the nation from its complaisance. The soaring prices are the equivalent of Pearl Harbor in jolting us out of our trance when it comes to energy.

Suddenly, everything is on the table. Offshore drilling, Alaska drilling, nuclear power, wind, solar, flex-fuel cars, plug-in cars are all increasingly attractive options and John McCain seems alive to the need to go there while Obama is strangely passive.

During the Democratic primary, he opposed a gas tax holiday and continues to be against offshore and Alaska drilling and squishy on nuclear power. That leaves turning down your thermostat and walking to work as the Democratic policies.

McCain has also been ratcheting up his attacks on oil speculators. With the total value of trades in oil futures soaring from $13 billion in 2003 to $260 billion today, it is increasingly clear that it is not the supply and demand for oil which is, alone, driving up the price, but it is the supply and demand for oil futures which is stoking the upward movement.

The Saudis have made a fatal mistake in not forcing down the price of oil. We could have gone for decades as their hostage, letting their control over our oil supplies choke us while enriching them.

But they got greedy and let the price skyrocket. The sudden shock which has sent America reeling is just the stimulus we need for a massive movement away from imported oil and toward new types of cars.

The political will for major change in our energy policy is now here and those, like Obama, who don’t get it need to rethink their positions. To quote FDR, �??this great nation calls for action and action now�?? on the energy issue. What has been a back-burner problem now has moved onto center stage and McCain has put himself in the forefront.

The Democratic ambivalence stems from liberal concerns about climate change. The Party basically doesn’t believe in carbon based energy and, therefore, opposes oil exploration.

That’s why Obama pushes the windfall profits tax on oil companies - a step that tells them �??you drill, you find oil, and we’ll take away your profits.�?? But Americans have their priorities in order: more oil, more drilling AND alternative energy sources, flex-fuel cars, plug in vehicles and nuclear power.

With his willingness to respond to the gas price crisis with bold measures, McCain shows himself to be a pragmatist while Obama comes off as an ideologue to puts climate change ahead of making it possible for the average American to get to work.

Of course, the high price of gas makes it inevitable that the US will lead the world in fighting climate change. With $5 gas, Americans will switch en masse to cars that burn less gasoline. Already we have cut our oil consumption by 500,000 barrels a day in the past year (about a 3% cut).

The move away from oil will be exponential from here on out, dooming radical Islam and reversing climate change at the same time. But while we are getting new cars, we need more oil and McCain has flanked Obama on this issue. Big time.[/i]

68

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

With his willingness to respond to the gas price crisis with bold measures, McCain shows himself to be a pragmatist while Obama comes off as an ideologue to puts climate change ahead of making it possible for the average American to get to work.
[/quote]

Funny how stupid they pretend to be. “Bold Measures” is known as pandering to stupid voters (the Micks, Bigflamers, and Zaps of the world).

No mention of how the pennies saved a decade from now is going to help get Americans to work. (wouldn’t want to educate clueless voters don’t ya know!)

69

[quote]100meters wrote:
…“Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior advisor to McCain�??s campaign, acknowledged in a conference call to reporters that new offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on supplies or prices.”

I guess he too is a POS.

or you’re still just a total lying sham.[/quote]

You keep coming back to this strawman argument. No one expects an immediate price reduction if we start new drilling today.

You ignore the economic reality that more drilling = more supply = better prices = more money staying in the US instead of lining Hugo Chavez’s pockets.

I just don’t know how to deal with idiots like you.

70

[quote]100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:

With his willingness to respond to the gas price crisis with bold measures, McCain shows himself to be a pragmatist while Obama comes off as an ideologue to puts climate change ahead of making it possible for the average American to get to work.

Funny how stupid they pretend to be. “Bold Measures” is known as pandering to stupid voters (the Micks, Bigflamers, and Zaps of the world).

No mention of how the pennies saved a decade from now is going to help get Americans to work. (wouldn’t want to educate clueless voters don’t ya know!)

[/quote]

This is idiotic. We need oil in the future. We need to drill now to get it. You offer no solution whatsoever.

71

The liberals do not want to drill because they do not want the price of oil to drop. They want high oil prices because oil is evil. Of course if you increase supply dramatically (which we can) the price will go down - econ 101!!! Supply and demand apparently works with everything except oil. Amazing.

Congress will not vote on this unless enough dems feel heat in their district and are worried about getting re-elected.

If the coasts are opened up the markets will sense that it is a matter of time before ANWR and everything else is on the table - thereby causing the market to realize that supplies will only be increasing.

And don’t forget about natural gas - we have even larger quantities of natural gas.

72

Interesting article. A few questions:

  1. isn’t a large percentage of the oil price increase due (Saudi greed aside) to the weakened/ing dollar?

  2. If oil refineries have been the bottle neck, shouldn’t this be part of the solution too?

  3. If oil companies have 68 million acres alloted for exploring/drilling, and they haven’t touched it, how can they claim they need more oil fields? or that a democratic congress has prevented oil exploration, etc. What do you think about this?

  4. isn’t the price for oil set globally? If we explore/drill in new places, it’s not like we here in the US get to hoard and exclusively use that oil. That oil becomes part of a global market - a world “pool” if you will - that is subject to very large and growing demand forces beyond our control (China, India, etc.) That is why it won’t effect prices that much - because in that context the additional oil truly is a mere drop in the bucket.

Where am I going wrong?

73

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
The liberals do not want to drill because they do not want the price of oil to drop. They want high oil prices because oil is evil. Of course if you increase supply dramatically (which we can) the price will go down - econ 101!!! Supply and demand apparently works with everything except oil. Amazing.

Congress will not vote on this unless enough dems feel heat in their district and are worried about getting re-elected.

If the coasts are opened up the markets will sense that it is a matter of time before ANWR and everything else is on the table - thereby causing the market to realize that supplies will only be increasing.

And don’t forget about natural gas - we have even larger quantities of natural gas.[/quote]

I agree. Natural gas should actually be a huge part of the solution imo. I wonder if anyone’s done research on the relation between future (< 5 years away) supply of oil and current prices. I do get the sense the that the enviros are rather excited about this high price - they often talk about the environmental costs of more drilling/oil, and skirt the question of the importance of getting the price of oil down.

74

[quote]100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:

With his willingness to respond to the gas price crisis with bold measures, McCain shows himself to be a pragmatist while Obama comes off as an ideologue to puts climate change ahead of making it possible for the average American to get to work.

Funny how stupid they pretend to be. “Bold Measures” is known as pandering to stupid voters (the Micks, Bigflamers, and Zaps of the world).

No mention of how the pennies saved a decade from now is going to help get Americans to work. (wouldn’t want to educate clueless voters don’t ya know!)

[/quote]

Pennies??? You really are clueless. Did someone dump somem dirty oil on you as a child? You really seem to hate the stuff.

75

Sue OPEC … nationalize the refineries … put an extra tax on the oil companies.

I think we can safely assume that any pretense that these guys are NOT marxists has been officially dropped at this point. The mask is off …

76

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
Sue OPEC … nationalize the refineries … put an extra tax on the oil companies.

I think we can safely assume that any pretense that these guys are NOT marxists has been officially dropped at this point. The mask is off …[/quote]

It really makes you want to beat your head against the wall wondering why more people can’t see this. Half the country wants change but they have no clue what kind of change.

77

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
Sue OPEC … nationalize the refineries … put an extra tax on the oil companies.

I think we can safely assume that any pretense that these guys are NOT marxists has been officially dropped at this point. The mask is off …[/quote]

Socialism is the future. How long it takes to get here is the only question. I say this because capitalism creates problems that capitalism cannot fix. According to holonic theory, things organize themselves according to hierarchies. Oppressive hierarchies are to be avoided, but all hierarchies synergize AND suppress qualities of those holons that are below.

To use chemistry or physics as an example - atoms synergize (organize) subatomic particles but also suppress some of their qualities. Molecules organize AND suppress the qualities of atoms - the chlorine atoms in NaCl behave very differently than elementally pure chlorine atoms behave. One is essentially nutritious while the other is toxic.

Capitalism is creating problems it cannot solve - this is the driving force of system evolution. Hence, some new organizing structure must evolve to solve the problems of capitalism. We have not hit the tipping point, but we are closing in on it. At that point, the energy of the collapsing capitalist system will fuel the rise of the next system. The next system will then create problems even MORE complex than our current problems - prompting yet another evolutionary jump.

Unless we cannot organize ourselves quickly enough to correct the current systems problems - in that case, we will simply become extinct. Typically, self-preservation causes us to correct…but at every new jump forward, there is the possibility we’ve hit our adaptive limit.

78

[quote]wirewound wrote:
Capitalism is creating problems it cannot solve. [/quote]

Example?

79

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Interesting article. A few questions:

  1. isn’t a large percentage of the oil price increase due (Saudi greed aside) to the weakened/ing dollar?

[/quote]

Yes

Yes but the price per barrel of oil is also a factor now. Both situations need to be addressed.

Because the oil companies have a better idea of where they want to drill than Congress or you or I. If they think ANWR or coastal drilling is more productive than somewhere else then they should get a crack at it.

It will stabilize the price of oil globally to have more oil available. Keeping the US petrodollars in the US will strengthen the dollar and provide many jobs. A double boost to the economy.

[quote]

Where am I going wrong? [/quote]

I don’t think you are.

80

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
wirewound wrote:
Capitalism is creating problems it cannot solve.

Example? [/quote]

Socialism creates problems socialism cannot fix. You cannot tax your way to prosperity.

Capitalism does have its problems, not much incentive to take care of the environment for example.