Solution to the oil problem

[Andy]

There is a lot of background necessary to understand the oil issue but basically I believe that the US doesn't have oil in any significant quantity which is affordable to get out of the ground. I understand that the current political issue is between the libs preventing exploration and drilling and the cons wanting to. But I look at the huge costs of buying foreign oil and the fact that the Iraq war is for oil and I weigh that against the question of it being economical to drill for oil in the continental US. I just can't accept that it's been the libs who have prevented it. But before you start wrapping your mind around an answer to that, try to consider the quantities we are talking about. As I said, there is a lot of background necessary to even discuss this issue.

Logically, if there is a huge cost to importing oil, then obviously drilling at home is a valid solution.

Why is it difficult to accept that fact libs have prevented drilling? Do you want the specific legislation passed that prevents drilling?

Yes, I do believe that carbon from petroleum products is having a negative effect on the planet. In my opinion I think it's quite incredible that most of mainstream science is being ignored. This is not a conspiracy theory by the environmentalists nearly as much as it is a refusal to accept the facts. Declining oil will most likely answer the question for us in the near future but it's going to be a question of whether or not it's too late.

How do you claim mainstream science is being ignored? Clearly the attempts to mandate reduced CO2 emission is proof that junk science is accepted as mainstream true. If you listen to the wind bags in our congress, you'd think CO2 would end the world in 5 years.

Of course, it's all a scam. Science clearly demonstrates man made global warming is a joke. One needs only to be open minded to new evidence, and the theory falls to ashes.

 

[Andy]

So let me get this straight then Andy, you make about 24 k a year and you can afford good health insurance. Good health insurance costs about 6k if I read the others right. That is, insurance that will look after more than a toothache or a head cold!

Sure. Mine covers up to a Million. It's far cheaper than $6K/year.

I'll help out good honest Americans in need because I am a caring socialist. I don't help out slackers who can't make a decent living.

That's ok, I'd donate it all to charity anyway. I like knowing I can make it on my own. I'd be more than happy to take your money and give it to others who'd make better use of it, than a socialist.

Between you and me I would bet that I am the successful and mature of the two of us.

I'm happy with my life. So your success is relative. As far as mature, you have resorted to name calling, labeling, smearing, and cussing. You are not convincing me.

I am now a giver and long ago I ceased to be on the receiving end of the equation. Thank socialist policies for allowing me to succeed. I won't abandon my system becaue I owe my system something back now.

I'm a giver because I believe charity is not a system that steals money from one group, and gives it out to another, but rather charity is when one earns what he has himself and chooses to help others.

Money taken by force for 'charity' is really nothing more than theft.

 

[GenSeneca]

Money taken by force for 'charity' is really nothing more than theft.

Please, allow me to illustrate:

 

[Pandora]

Please, allow me to illustrate:

I like that. and its so true!

 

[Dr.Who]

He might be surprised to find that a vast majority of people are friggin mad as hell at BigOil, have no sympathy for them whatsoever, and like their representatives, the majority, in Congress, actually desire most greatly to punish BigOil for making them choose between their kids milk money and filling the tank.
.

IT is too bad that big oil only makes 9 cents on a gallon of gas. The real culprit is government. Look around the world you will see that every country pays a different amount for gas. Some pay a lot, some pay less, and some pay almost nothing. The most important difference is what country the gas pump is located in.

 

[Sihouette]

9 cents a gallon huh?



I'm not a python, so I can't swallow that...

*******

Logically, if there is a huge cost to importing oil, then obviously drilling at home is a valid solution.~ Andy

No, it isn't that obvious. Your "logical" progression is missing some key factors. Here, let me add them in...

One, the oil companies have leases on oil-producing areas already. Many of them offshore. Until they use those, Congress rightly won't allow them to beg, coerce, cajole or strong-arm any more to further their empire. They've already duped Congress into allowing expansion of their empire by lying to them about WOMDs so they could murder thousands of people, men, women and children, many of them American citizens in uniform, rob the Public Treasury to do so, all under the cloak of "freedom" and "liberation". The hubris under which these same people's puppets in government (see: The Bush Administration) are operating mandates that Congress btich-slap them. They are quite begging for that actually.

Two, the oil produced by new leases would be paltry and not save any of us any appreciable money. The environmental impact and the impact on tourism dollars to areas formally unspoiled would not be mitigated by affording more BigOil CEOs another mansion or a private helicopter..

There, that rounded out your "logical progression" with a little more reality to factor in.

Neocons and their BigOil buddies like to keep "logical progressions" as unfettered with expansive facts as they can. It keeps the "spin" easier to put on the hook and actually get people to bite the bait.

 

[Dr.Who]

9 cents a gallon huh?



I'm not a python, so I can't swallow that...

My mistake. I meant to say 9 cents per dollar of gas. That translates to a 9% profit margin. However, the most recent figures indicate a 10% profit margin. That is not an unreasonable profit margin and there are many many other industries and companies that make more.

 

[Sihouette]

Yes, but not all of those industries make threatening phone calls and worse to the competition for decades to squelch research that might threaten their monopoly.

And not all those industries would have the iron g'nads to lie to Congress to get funds and military muscle to invade a sovereign nation to murder people (innocent men, women and little children) that stood in the way of furthering their empire.

It's those pesky little differences with BigOil that need a little closer looksie when examining how much of "their" money they're allowed to keep..

A rollback of their taxcuts would be just a tip of the iceberg of sanctions and fines Congress must impose. If you or I did what they did, they would crucify us without blinking an eyelash.

If Congress was really smart, they'd take those huge revenues and earmark them only for alternatives that would most likely result in the total phasing out of the BigOil monopoly. It would serve as a lesson to other industries that "crime doesn't pay". They're always using that logic when prosecuting vastly lesser crimes; why not across the board?

 

[Dr.Who]

Yes, but not all of those industries make threatening phone calls and worse to the competition for decades to squelch research that might threaten their monopoly.

And not all those industries would have the iron g'nads to lie to Congress to get funds and military muscle to invade a sovereign nation to murder people (innocent men, women and little children) that stood in the way of furthering their empire.

It's those pesky little differences with BigOil that need a little closer looksie when examining how much of "their" money they're allowed to keep..

A rollback of their taxcuts would be just a tip of the iceberg of sanctions and fines Congress must impose. If you or I did what they did, they would crucify us without blinking an eyelash.

If Congress was really smart, they'd take those huge revenues and earmark them only for alternatives that would most likely result in the total phasing out of the BigOil monopoly. It would serve as a lesson to other industries that "crime doesn't pay". They're always using that logic when prosecuting vastly lesser crimes; why not across the board?

Hopefully congress won't act on conspiracy theories.

 

[Andy]

9 cents a gallon huh?

Last time I had data on this, the going industry margin was 4%. $4.00 X 0.04 = 16¢. Total tax on gasoline, not including corporate taxes and capital gains, is around $1.00 per gallon. Of course I have to buy the gas with money that was already taxed. Basically we pay tons on tons of taxes.

One, the oil companies have leases on oil-producing areas already.

If they are producing, then there's no issue.

Many of them offshore. Until they use those, Congress rightly won't allow them to beg, coerce, cajole or strong-arm any more to further their empire.

Seems to defy your "BigOil owns Congress" theory huh? I don't see where in the constitution it says Congress has the right to own land or sell leases. If BigOil isn't going to drill, why not let them lease and pay us money for the lease? Congress is getting money from them for leases that are not being used. Are you not in favor of taxing them? If so, why not use the lease system to do it? You argument isn't logical.

They've already duped Congress into allowing expansion of their empire by lying to them about WOMDs so they could murder thousands of people, men, women and children, many of them American citizens in uniform, rob the Public Treasury to do so, all under the cloak of "freedom" and "liberation".

Prove it. First you'll have to disprove the Rockefeller report which stated everything Bush and Congress said, wasn't a lie.

The hubris under which these same people's puppets in government (see: The Bush Administration) are operating mandates that Congress btich-slap them. They are quite begging for that actually.

Yeah, they own congress and now the congress that they own is stopping them? Brilliant!

Two, the oil produced by new leases would be paltry and not save any of us any appreciable money.

Evidence? Every barrel produced, is one less imported, is it not? I every single imported barrel mitigated by domestic production, is less money flowing out of the country, and instead remaining here. That's a massive benefit in and of itself.

The environmental impact and the impact on tourism dollars to areas formally unspoiled would not be mitigated by affording more BigOil CEOs another mansion or a private helicopter..

Yes, which is why California and Florida are completely dead tourism wise.

There, that rounded out your "logical progression" with a little more reality to factor in.

Actually, you didn't make a single point at all. Not one. You made some empty claims that are unfounded on any real evidence, and mixed in some opinion and hearsay, and claimed you added reality.

 

[Andy]

My mistake. I meant to say 9 cents per dollar of gas. That translates to a 9% profit margin. However, the most recent figures indicate a 10% profit margin. That is not an unreasonable profit margin and there are many many other industries and companies that make more.

Wow... My company operates on a 35% margin.

 

[Andy]

Yes, but not all of those industries make threatening phone calls and worse to the competition for decades to squelch research that might threaten their monopoly.

There is no monopoly.

And not all those industries would have the iron g'nads to lie to Congress to get funds and military muscle to invade a sovereign nation to murder people (innocent men, women and little children) that stood in the way of furthering their empire.

There were no lies. The rockefeller report proved that.

It's those pesky little differences with BigOil that need a little closer looksie when examining how much of "their" money they're allowed to keep..

A rollback of their taxcuts would be just a tip of the iceberg of sanctions and fines Congress must impose. If you or I did what they did, they would crucify us without blinking an eyelash.

If Congress was really smart, they'd take those huge revenues and earmark them only for alternatives that would most likely result in the total phasing out of the BigOil monopoly. It would serve as a lesson to other industries that "crime doesn't pay". They're always using that logic when prosecuting vastly lesser crimes; why not across the board?

 

[Andy]

I had a revelation the other day after finishing my post. It actually shocked me, which is rare given that nutty stuff you get on forums. This is for everyone's consideration.

BACKGROUND
Me and USHadIT, have been discussing his socialized health care in Canada. I correctly pointed out the vast numbers of pregnant women shuffled to the US for care because their native hospitals were unable to service them. Even telling them that their pregnancy were not viable, a polite way of saying, your child is going to die. After this, they end up in US hospitals that not only have the space to accept them as patients, but also save the life of the child.

Meanwhile, USHadIT has only had about two nails to bang on. One, a report by a group of socialists who give ratings on health care systems that most, if not all, have never actually used or been treated by. Ratings which value how socialized the system is, over it's actual effectiveness or the opinions of those who have had to use it.

The second is the infant mortality rate that Canada has that's better than the US. Now I correctly pointed out that there are cultural differences that effect this rating, more than the quality of the health care system.

REVELATION
Then it hit me. Their system is sending their mothers, to our hospitals, to save their children. Do you get what this means? Just think it through...

He keeps using the infant mortality rating to say his system is better... which sends their mothers to our hospitals... which saves the lives of their children... which improves their infant mortality rating... which they say proves their system is better... which sends their mothers to our hospitals... which save the lives of their children...

Are you catching that??? WE... the U.S.A... OUR system... makes their system look good! It is because of US... that they have a as good a rating that they do. Think about it in reverse... if we did not exist, if there was just water between Mexico and Canada, all those hundreds of babies we saved, would have just DIED in Canada. Their rating would be worse... if not for us!

Yet they claim it proves their system is better. What a joke.

SIDE NOTE
If you look through the past 20 posts you'll also notice another trend. Even though he claimed repeatedly how greedy our Capitalist system was, he constantly used 'cost' as a reason their system was better. He said over and over, it's free here, I don't pay anything, it costs me nothing. Over and over again, the money issue was raised as a reason his system was better.

Which one of us is motivated by money then? The one willing to pay for the services he gets (me)? Or the one repeatedly demanding he be serviced for free (him)?

To me, the greed motivation clearly shows up with the one constantly talking about not wanting to pay for it.

 

[Pandora]

I had a revelation the other day after finishing my post. It actually shocked me, which is rare given that nutty stuff you get on forums. This is for everyone's consideration.

BACKGROUND
Me and USHadIT, have been discussing his socialized health care in Canada. I correctly pointed out the vast numbers of pregnant women shuffled to the US for care because their native hospitals were unable to service them. Even telling them that their pregnancy were not viable, a polite way of saying, your child is going to die. After this, they end up in US hospitals that not only have the space to accept them as patients, but also save the life of the child.

Meanwhile, USHadIT has only had about two nails to bang on. One, a report by a group of socialists who give ratings on health care systems that most, if not all, have never actually used or been treated by. Ratings which value how socialized the system is, over it's actual effectiveness or the opinions of those who have had to use it.

The second is the infant mortality rate that Canada has that's better than the US. Now I correctly pointed out that there are cultural differences that effect this rating, more than the quality of the health care system.

REVELATION
Then it hit me. Their system is sending their mothers, to our hospitals, to save their children. Do you get what this means? Just think it through...

He keeps using the infant mortality rating to say his system is better... which sends their mothers to our hospitals... which saves the lives of their children... which improves their infant mortality rating... which they say proves their system is better... which sends their mothers to our hospitals... which save the lives of their children...

Are you catching that??? WE... the U.S.A... OUR system... makes their system look good! It is because of US... that they have a as good a rating that they do. Think about it in reverse... if we did not exist, if there was just water between Mexico and Canada, all those hundreds of babies we saved, would have just DIED in Canada. Their rating would be worse... if not for us!

Yet they claim it proves their system is better. What a joke.

SIDE NOTE
If you look through the past 20 posts you'll also notice another trend. Even though he claimed repeatedly how greedy our Capitalist system was, he constantly used 'cost' as a reason their system was better. He said over and over, it's free here, I don't pay anything, it costs me nothing. Over and over again, the money issue was raised as a reason his system was better.

Which one of us is motivated by money then? The one willing to pay for the services he gets (me)? Or the one repeatedly demanding he be serviced for free (him)?

To me, the greed motivation clearly shows up with the one constantly talking about not wanting to pay for it.

Ah dang I read every one of your posts to u**** and never caught on to that. Thanks for pointing it out and you are right. When things are more difficult for them, they send the people here.

also you were right about cost. They dont think they are paying for it, they think its free. If they got the full pay check then had to give back what the government demanded from them, they would not say it is free.

I have a friend in Ontario, she is actually an american who married a canadian. their child was born with a rare disease. she gets some help for the child, i dont think she complains about it but to help the system she has started a website and asking for donations so the government has more money to research her daughters illness. But she is american by birth and knows better than to sit on her duff and wait for the government to come to her rescue

 

[GenSeneca]

WE... the U.S.A... OUR system... makes their system look good!

------------------------------------------

Hopefully we can get back on topic now... since comparing healthcare systems does nothing to find a "Solution to the oil problem". We can start with whether its better to retrieve the oil we have or let it sit in the ground. Or the "No More Oil" people can explain exactly what we have available, right now, in viable quantities to replace all the things derived from oil.