• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling

apdst

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,938
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
What an asshole. People losing jobs everyday in this country and this dip stick subsidizes oil exploration, in Brazil, with 2 billion of our dollars. This is surreal.

You read that headline correctly. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration is financing oil exploration off Brazil.

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil's planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

President Obama Finances Offshore Drilling in Brazil - WSJ.com
Click to expand...
 
apdst said:
What an asshole. People losing jobs everyday in this country and this dip stick subsidizes oil exploration, in Brazil, with 2 billion of our dollars. This is surreal.
Click to expand...

Someone needs to send this child to the romper room, he's like Dennis the Menace.
 
Please read the rules for the breaking news section. Opinion pieces do not belong here.
 
You must have caught some serious hell for posting on the wrong forum and that's why you're such a pain in the ass about little mistakes.
 
apdst said:
What an asshole. People losing jobs everyday in this country and this dip stick subsidizes oil exploration, in Brazil, with 2 billion of our dollars. This is surreal.
Click to expand...

It's a loan, not a grant, so I don't really have a beef with it in that way

It strikes me as odd, though. Is it unusual for the US gov to loan money to a private, foreign corporation? If it is (as I'd guess after my superficial look at the situation) what is the US getting out of the deal?
 
Kernel Sanders said:
It's a loan, not a grant, so I don't really have a beef with it in that way

It strikes me as odd, though. Is it unusual for the US gov to loan money to a private, foreign corporation? If it is (as I'd guess after my superficial look at the situation) what is the US getting out of the deal?
Click to expand...

Why not do the same for American oil companies and put Americans back to work?

Perhaps George Soros's ownership of 5.8 million shares of Petrobras has something to do with PBO giving them the jack?
 
apdst said:
What an asshole. People losing jobs everyday in this country and this dip stick subsidizes oil exploration, in Brazil, with 2 billion of our dollars. This is surreal.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Exxon Mobil a Dallas Texas based company loves this.
 
Redress said:
Please read the rules for the breaking news section. Opinion pieces do not belong here.
Click to expand...

I've copied this to Word pad and will post this on every new topic for you. :mrgreen:
 
apdst said:
Why not do the same for American oil companies and put Americans back to work?

Perhaps George Soros's ownership of 5.8 million shares of Petrobras has something to do with PBO giving them the jack?
Click to expand...

This would seem pretty ridiculous if true.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Obviously in an era of peaking worldwide production and increasing worldwide demand, our resident extremists on the right would rather China get that oil than us.
Click to expand...

I'd sure like us to get our OWN oil, too.
 
Harshaw said:
I'd sure like us to get our OWN oil, too.
Click to expand...

Thats great, but the problem is that we don't have nearly enough. Our domestic oil production peaked 30 years ago and no amount of drilling is going to change that. Thus we have to secure access to production abroad.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Thats great, but the problem is that we don't have nearly enough. Our domestic oil production peaked 30 years ago and no amount of drilling is going to change that. Thus we have to secure access to production abroad.
Click to expand...

Production peaked 30 years ago???? And there has been no new technology since?

Oil
(Billion Barrels)
Oil & Gas Journal
January 1, 2009
United States (See footnotes 2
21.317

2 BP p.l.c., BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2008, except United States. Oil includes crude oil, gas condensate, and natural gas liquids.
United States oil data, including both crude oil and natural gas liquids, and United States natural gas data are from the Energy Information
Administration, U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves, 2007 Annual Report, DOE/EIA-0216(2007)
(February 2009). BP notes that for oil its "Canadian proved reserves include an official estimate of 21.0 billion barrels for oil sands 'under
active development'." BP does not include but separately reports an additional 152.2 billion barrels of Canadian oil sands defined as
"'remaining established reserves', less reserves 'under active development'." BP says of its data sources for oil reserves that "the estimates
in this table have been compiled using a combination of primary official sources, third-party data from the OPEC Secretariat, World Oil, Oil & Gas Journal
and an independent estimate of Russian reserves based on information in the public domain." Likewise for natural gas reserves, BP states that
"the estimates in this table have been compiled using a combination of primary official sources and third-party data from Cedigaz."
Click to expand...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

That's 21,317,000,000 barrels of known reservers... and I'm sure if the oil companies were turned loose to drill they would find one hell of alot more, after 30 years of not being able to look or drill.

Drill now, drill often.
 
Crunch said:
That's 21,317,000,000 barrels of known reservers... and I'm sure if the oil companies were turned loose to drill they would find one hell of alot more, after 30 years of not being able to look or drill.

Drill now, drill often.
Click to expand...

The oil co's only pick the low hanging fruit first, they're not going to drill for the hard to get stuff until oil goes back to $5 a gallon.

Back to the OP I see no reason to fund any oil exploration. I say we get off the dinosaur juice asap. Take that money and give everyone a few solar panels instead.
 
Joe1991 said:
The oil co's only pick the low hanging fruit first, they're not going to drill for the hard to get stuff until oil goes back to $5 a gallon.

Back to the OP I see no reason to fund any oil exploration. I say we get off the dinosaur juice asap. Take that money and give everyone a few solar panels instead.
Click to expand...

agreed. we could all have self sufficient homes if we used solar shingles instead of what we use now.
 
Crunch said:
Production peaked 30 years ago???? And there has been no new technology since?



http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

That's 21,317,000,000 barrels of known reservers... and I'm sure if the oil companies were turned loose to drill they would find one hell of alot more, after 30 years of not being able to look or drill.

Drill now, drill often.
Click to expand...

They have looked everywhere. ANWR is only the last 5% of the Alaskan North Slope not already open to drilling. I am fine with opening it up (given sufficient environmental protections), but you are still talking a peak production there of around 800,000 barrels a day. Open up all the coasts and you might get another million barrels a day. That gets us to about 1990 levels of domestic oil production at best.

A lot of those "proven oil reserves" are **** like oil shale or oil that is only economically recoverable at exorbitant oil prices. The point is, we sit on around 3 to 5% of the world's oil reserves, our domestic production peaked in the early 70s and that is just the way it is. We are dependent on foreign oil until someone invents something else we can run all our crap on.

Even the oil industry will tell you that we need to drill more but we are not going to ever see the kind of production we had 30 years ago.
 
formerroadie said:
agreed. we could all have self sufficient homes if we used solar shingles instead of what we use now.
Click to expand...

Setting aside the fact that this is obviously false, you're also completely ignoring the question of cost.
 
apdst = Fail.

WASHINGTON, DC -- Small and large US companies may benefit from a nonbinding preliminary commitment of $2 billion in financing from the Export-Import Bank of the US (Ex-Im Bank) to encourage purchases of US goods and services by Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras). Pending final approval, the financing is anticipated to support more than $2.2 billion of US exports to Petrobras.

Ex-Im Bank anticipates that this preliminary commitment will give Petrobras the opportunity to identify potential US exporters for its projects over the next two years. Upon conversion of the preliminary commitment to a final commitment, the financing could be used to support US exports on repayment terms of up to 10 years, including a potential conversion of part of the financing to establish a medium-term (one to seven years) credit guarantee facility.
Click to expand...

Ex-Im-Bank commits $2.2 billion to support US exports to Petrobras

This is essentially US corporate welfare. Giving money to a foreign business so they can buy US goods and US services from US companies.

That WSJ opinion was piss poor journalism. The only time "export" came up was discussing Brazil's exports, not that the financing would be used to pay for US exports.
 
Last edited:
RightinNYC said:
Setting aside the fact that this is obviously false, you're also completely ignoring the question of cost.
Click to expand...

Exactly, a lot of people don't seem to get that what ever we replace oil with has to be as cheap or cheaper than oil.

If the majority of Americans were willing or able to pay two to three times the price for a good simply because it was produced in a more environmentally or socially responsible manner, then Whole Foods would be bigger than Walmart.

I am a strong advocate of conservation, but its got to be economically viable for the average joe. You can't just tell everyone to carpet their roof in solar panels when it will take them decades to recoup the costs.
 
Kernel Sanders said:
It's a loan, not a grant, so I don't really have a beef with it in that way

It strikes me as odd, though. Is it unusual for the US gov to loan money to a private, foreign corporation? If it is (as I'd guess after my superficial look at the situation) what is the US getting out of the deal?
Click to expand...

Loan, grant, apdst doesn't care, he just likes to show his patriotism by calling the President names.

Facts, proper perspective be damned. A good spin and apdst is off to the races....
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Exactly, a lot of people don't seem to get that what ever we replace oil with has to be as cheap or cheaper than oil.

If the majority of Americans were willing or able to pay two to three times the price for a good simply because it was produced in a more environmentally or socially responsible manner, then Whole Foods would be bigger than Walmart.
Click to expand...

Largely because most externalities are not priced into goods. Imagine if the cost of environmental and economic damage in the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico was priced into our agricultural goods. Goods from nations with low environmental protections don't have the damage of the pollution priced in. I suspect if we start to actually price externalities into goods rather than pay for them in taxes, Whole Foods may not appear to be that expensive.
 
hazlnut said:
Loan, grant, apdst doesn't care, he just likes to show his patriotism by calling the President names.

Facts, proper perspective be damned. A good spin and apdst is off to the races....
Click to expand...

It's just corporate welfare. All the plan really does is financing exports from US companies. The US government gives a foreign company money so that the foreign company can buy US goods. That's all it comes down to. The plan is actually supporting US businesses that deal with oil services and equipment. Add apdst to the long list of people who just don't research. Apdst just called Obama names for supporting US businesses.

Seriously, I don't care if you give Obama ****. In fact he deserves quite a bit. But at least get it right. Given Obama **** for supporting corporate welfare. Not for the asinine reason Apdst did.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...rites-offshore-drilling-2.html#post1058201205
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom