View Poll Results: ?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • It helps the economy.

    12 34.29%
  • It hurts the economy.

    20 57.14%
  • I don't know.

    3 8.57%
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 106

Thread: Government stimulus

  1. #81
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Bakken is one formation;
    Yes, optimally, enough to replace imports for one year.


    according to your own link another such (the Green River) has been estimated at about 1.5 Trillion; though only 800Bn was estimated to be recoverable.
    That is a little over two years of oil that we import, and it was noted that that depends on economic and technological concerns. They add that even with new drilling techniques, as of February of this year, it is still only producing about a half million barrels a day.

    It further notes that even under "high growth assumptions" an oil shale production level of 1 million barrels per day (about 10% of what the US imports daily) is probably more than 20 years in the future.

    And they talk further about the huge costs for water, energy and environmental degradation that must somehow be addressed to make it feasible.

    With the increase in world demand in the next 20 years, not only is this not the answer to our domestic peak oil that we passed in 1971, it is likely to not even make a dent in the world oil market in 20 years.

    What else you got?


    and on top of that we also need to open up our West Coast, Alaska, near waters in the Gulf, and the East Coast to drilling.
    We are producing more oil than we have in the last decade, but that doesn't mean that we are going to abandon our concern for the environment that we all depend on for our livelihoods to try feed our oil addition for another year of two. 40 years of lack of planning and short-term greed does not now an emergency make that we have to forfeit the environment to address.

    in addition, we need to allow the building of more refineries.
    How do you force a company to build refineries they don't need. The oil companies have not felt the investment was wise given so little supply of oil in this country.


    we are the only nation currently stupid enough not to tap our own natural resources, and it is costing us. we have huge untapped resources here, and in a time seemingly laggardly growth for the next decade plus high unemployment and rising energy prices, it makes no sense not to engage in an activity that would help with all three of those problems.
    Not possible given that we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Most other countries have as well. That is why we are approaching world peak oil, and why the price for that imported oil keeps going up. You can't magically make something appear where it is not. What we need to be doing before oil becomes prohibitively expensive is to develop alternatives unless we want the rest of the world to continue the jump they have on us in this vital area.
    Last edited by Catawba; 04-25-11 at 07:30 AM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #82
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,453
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    There are some absolutes in this world in my opinion.

    One of which, is that government is terrible when it comes to influencing the economy.

    When it comes to research, most of the government funding is crowding out the private investment.
    You'll see that prior to research grants and the like, that people as independents were creating things left and right.
    People who had no formal education in the fields they created in, notable example is Samuel Morse.

    He was a painter, that only became interested in near instant communications, when his wife became ill and by the time he reached her she died.
    He wanted to solve the problem of delayed information transmitting.

    We don't see this anymore and assume all important research should come from XYZ university funded by government ABC grant.

    I think Hayak best explains this with, "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men, how little they really know about what they can imagine, they can design."

    It's why I'll always be a free markets guy, it makes much more sense logically.
    I don't see any hindrance to private development in govt research, the latter just can have other priorities.

    For example, pharmaceutical companies do research for drugs they can sell at profit. Less common conditions can fall by the wayside, as well as for-profit companies focusing on treatments rather than cures.

    I get your conviction, but markets are constantly being manipulated now, with regulation. And I'm pretty sure laissez-faire doesn't actually work in actual practice, right?

    Monopolies and interbusiness warfare and whatnot.

    In my experience, extremes are rarely good.

    Perfect order is exactly as bad as perfect chaos for the opposite reasons.

    And I don't see much in wealths track record that gives me any confidence that my life WILL be improved if they are given full free rein. Quite the contrary in fact.

    And I always understood that control of the money supply was reserved to the federal govt, which would seem to me to mean the Founders believed the central govt should have its hand on the brake, as it were.

    I understand that the issues are complex, but I have never understood why people with a Constitutional bent aren't more vocal on the two fiscal elements we have TOTALLY abandoned: central control of the money supply, and a "hard" currency.

    My grasp of economics is not perfect, but aren't "bubbles" a side effect of private control of a fiat currency? At least in creating the conditions where they occur?
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  3. #83
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,123

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Yes, optimally, enough to replace imports for one year.
    which is impressive, considering it's only one formation. Besides, I'm not interested in replacing imports; I'm interested in creating American jobs, boosting the American economy, increasing government revenues, and increasing the Oil Supply in such a manner as to reduce OPEC's control over the industry. If we keep buying from Canada (our largest importer), I'm fine with that.

    That is a little over two years of oil that we import
    i thought 3.5 Billion was how much we import a year?

    now, i took the college-math-for-dummies course, but it seems to me that 3.5 + 3.5 < 800. Just sayin....

    and it was noted that that depends on economic and technological concerns
    which are being solved even as we speak (type).

    It further notes that even under "high growth assumptions" an oil shale production level of 1 million barrels per day (about 10% of what the US imports daily) is probably more than 20 years in the future.
    that's awesome. a single source can replace 10% of our imports. I cannot tell you how happy that thought makes me.

    gosh, added into drilling off of both coasts, Alaska, and the Gulf... wow, that's alot of oil.

    With the increase in world demand in the next 20 years, not only is this not the answer to our domestic peak oil that we passed in 1971, it is likely to not even make a dent in the world oil market in 20 years.
    you are right that demand is going up. which makes oil more valuable. explain to me, again, why we don't want to take advantage of a resource that we have that is guaranteed to go up in price?

    We are producing more oil than we have in the last decade
    thanks to the Bush Administration, yes. and we need to put that on turbo.

    How do you force a company to build refineries they don't need. The oil companies have not felt the investment was wise given so little supply of oil in this country.
    so little? we have the largest reserves in the world, man. it's the regulatory burden that keeps us from building new refinerys - everyone has NIMBY syndrome.

    Not possible given that we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Most other countries have as well. That is why we are approaching world peak oil, and why the price for that imported oil keeps going up.
    price jumps with world news and moves generally upward as demand increases. "peak oil" theories have nothing to do with it.

    1971 want me to waste another 3 minutes with Google and demonstrate to you how much reserves have expanded since 1971?

    You can't magically make something appear where it is not. What we need to be doing before oil becomes prohibitively expensive is to develop alternatives unless we want the rest of the world to continue the jump they have on us in this vital area.
    1. if the world wants to waste the resources hammering out the bugs before the thing becomes profitable, let them. If Spain wants to destroy chunks of it's economy and hike unemployment in vain pursuit of "green jobs", then that's their call, let them. If they ever manage to come up with something, we can then buy it from them, take the design, reverse engineer it, make it better, and sell it ourselves. The Japanese were working on miniaturizing nuclear before the Fukushima disaster - I hope they either continue to do so, or are far enough along that we can capitalize on their research and design.

    2. the rest of the world is exploiting their oil. because they are smarter than we are. Go tell Brazil or China not to drill - they will laugh in your face and inquire if you have been taking recreational drugs to suggest such a thing.

    3. if oil ever becomes prohibitively expensive, then the market will respond to the potential profit by providing alternatives which are cheaper. probably eventually it will whether or not oil changes in price. Perhaps eventually some genius will give us "Back To The Future" engines which run on banana peels and paper wrappers. but right now oil is the linchpin of our economy in a thousand ways, and it's plentiful, and it's still relatively cheap. My point here is that we have the ability to make it more plentiful and cheaper, and do so in a way that boosts our economy, our ability to conduct foreign policy, and government revenues at a time when we desperately need them. and we are stupid when we do not do so.
    Last edited by cpwill; 04-25-11 at 11:58 AM.

  4. #84
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Government stimulus

    [IMG]
    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    which is impressive, considering it's only one formation. Besides, I'm not interested in replacing imports; I'm interested in creating American jobs, boosting the American economy, increasing government revenues, and increasing the Oil Supply in such a manner as to reduce OPEC's control over the industry. If we keep buying from Canada (our largest importer), I'm fine with that. i thought 3.5 Billion was how much we import a year? now, i took the college-math-for-dummies course, but it seems to me that 3.5 + 3.5 < 800. Just sayin.... which are being solved even as we speak (type). that's awesome. a single source can replace 10% of our imports. I cannot tell you how happy that thought makes me. gosh, added into drilling off of both coasts, Alaska, and the Gulf... wow, that's alot of oil. you are right that demand is going up. which makes oil more valuable. explain to me, again, why we don't want to take advantage of a resource that we have that is guaranteed to go up in price? thanks to the Bush Administration, yes. and we need to put that on turbo. so little? we have the largest reserves in the world, man. it's the regulatory burden that keeps us from building new refinerys - everyone has NIMBY syndrome. price jumps with world news and moves generally upward as demand increases. "peak oil" theories have nothing to do with it. 1971 want me to waste another 3 minutes with Google and demonstrate to you how much reserves have expanded since 1971? 1. if the world wants to waste the resources hammering out the bugs before the thing becomes profitable, let them. If Spain wants to destroy chunks of it's economy and hike unemployment in vain pursuit of "green jobs", then that's their call, let them. If they ever manage to come up with something, we can then buy it from them, take the design, reverse engineer it, make it better, and sell it ourselves. The Japanese were working on miniaturizing nuclear before the Fukushima disaster - I hope they either continue to do so, or are far enough along that we can capitalize on their research and design. 2. the rest of the world is exploiting their oil. because they are smarter than we are. Go tell Brazil or China not to drill - they will laugh in your face and inquire if you have been taking recreational drugs to suggest such a thing. 3. if oil ever becomes prohibitively expensive, then the market will respond to the potential profit by providing alternatives which are cheaper. probably eventually it will whether or not oil changes in price. Perhaps eventually some genius will give us "Back To The Future" engines which run on banana peels and paper wrappers. but right now oil is the linchpin of our economy in a thousand ways, and it's plentiful, and it's still relatively cheap. My point here is that we have the ability to make it more plentiful and cheaper, and do so in a way that boosts our economy, our ability to conduct foreign policy, and government revenues at a time when we desperately need them. and we are stupid when we do not do so.


    [/IMG]

    Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #85
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,123

    Re: Government stimulus

    well hey, lookit that - production keeps increasing!

    oh, but it's predicted to fall..... based on the notion that no other reserves will ever be discovered, and technology that allows us to rehit reserves we closed earlier will never be developed....

    ...gosh, it seems so odd that they would keep predicting that production will fall, yet production keeps rising.... yet people still believe them when they scream that production will fall, despite the fact that we have the ability to increase it with the legal snap of a finger.....

    ....anywho I couldn't care less. because it makes no difference whatsoever to the benefits of drilling here at home. you might as well argue against solar energy because the sun will run out in a mere few billion years.
    Last edited by cpwill; 04-26-11 at 02:03 AM.

  6. #86
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    I don't see any hindrance to private development in govt research, the latter just can have other priorities.

    For example, pharmaceutical companies do research for drugs they can sell at profit. Less common conditions can fall by the wayside, as well as for-profit companies focusing on treatments rather than cures.
    If something is profitable, someone will sell it.
    Not all drug companies operate on the same wavelength.
    So if one decides to sell treatments, another will decide to sell cures.

    Who wouldn't want to be the guy/company that cures cancer?
    And just because you cure that instance of it, doesn't meant that it goes away forever.

    Government money towards research displaces more efficient private allocations towards research.


    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    I get your conviction, but markets are constantly being manipulated now, with regulation. And I'm pretty sure laissez-faire doesn't actually work in actual practice, right?

    Monopolies and interbusiness warfare and whatnot.

    In my experience, extremes are rarely good.

    Perfect order is exactly as bad as perfect chaos for the opposite reasons.
    When you do some serious digging into monopolies and "laissez-faire" economics you'll find that most, if not all monopolies develop from government privilege and not because of natural capitalist markets.

    One arguable exception could be DeBeers but they are no longer a monopoly.
    So it shows that someone will find a competitive solution to end them.
    No monopoly can last forever.

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    And I don't see much in wealths track record that gives me any confidence that my life WILL be improved if they are given full free rein. Quite the contrary in fact.
    The "track records" we learn about are half truths or blatant falsehoods.
    It's hard to give a good example but if you could be more specific I can.

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    And I always understood that control of the money supply was reserved to the federal govt, which would seem to me to mean the Founders believed the central govt should have its hand on the brake, as it were.

    I understand that the issues are complex, but I have never understood why people with a Constitutional bent aren't more vocal on the two fiscal elements we have TOTALLY abandoned: central control of the money supply, and a "hard" currency.

    My grasp of economics is not perfect, but aren't "bubbles" a side effect of private control of a fiat currency? At least in creating the conditions where they occur?
    Most free marketeers hate the current manipulation of the money supply.
    It's 2 fold though, one comes from The Fed and the other comes from government spending on their various projects, from Medicare to bridges.

    If you notice something though, the Fed is partially private and a monopoly.
    They couldn't get that way without government privilege.

    Bubbles are typically a condition of easy credit combined with industry favoritism through legislation.
    All it takes after that is for people to realize the at first easy profit and for the rest to jump on board.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  7. #87
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    well hey, lookit that - production keeps increasing!
    In the US, production hasn't been as much as consumption since 1971.

    And note the dates when half of the other oil producing nations passed peak oil:

    Last edited by Catawba; 04-26-11 at 04:23 AM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  8. #88
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Government stimulus

    Stimulus helps the economy during recession, and hurts the economy during growth.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  9. #89
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,123

    Re: Government stimulus

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    In the US, production hasn't been as much as consumption since 1971.
    yeah. again. we stupidly decided to cut off our production. and again, i don't want to produce 100% of the oil we consume - that's not the goal. boosting production, GDP, employment, revenue, and lowering energy prices is.

    And note the dates when half of the other oil producing nations passed peak oil
    i'm thinking this chart doesn't have the ability to predict the future any more than anyone else.

  10. #90
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    10-25-11 @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    116

    Re: Government stimulus

    Depends on how it's spent. I'm more down with building a high speed rail system than giving money to corporations who turn around and use it for fancy trips and bonuses. I was not against a huge stimulus plan, but it was so terribly mis-managed.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •