• 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!

North America to Drown in Oil as Mexico Ends Monopoly

Let us drown in oil and our children drown in its consequences!

I agree, we should eliminate the airlines, ocean vessels, and trains. :roll:
 
I agree, we should eliminate the airlines, ocean vessels, and trains. :roll:

Or we could transition to clean alternative energy sources. But you guys are against that because it cuts into the fossil fuel industry's profits so they've instructed their naive followers to obstruct any progress. You don't even get paid to do their bidding, you do it for free. :lamo
 
Or we could transition to clean alternative energy sources. But you guys are against that because it cuts into the fossil fuel industry's profits so they've instructed their naive followers to obstruct any progress. You don't even get paid to do their bidding, you do it for free. :lamo

I'm against it because it can't survive without hundreds of billions in government subsidies.
 
This is probably true to a large extent, not that I'm against business making money.

Neither am I, but by the track record of western multinationals in 3rd world is not exactly stellar. Privatization after privatizations have resulted in everything from civil wars, mass murder and environmental disasters. Nigeria is a prime example. Massive amounts of oil, pretty much all being drilled by multi-nationals and very little of it going back into the economy, but the environmental damage is massive, not to mention the human cost. Or Ecuador, where Cheveron (now Exxon) have been hit by the biggest fine in history and are refusing to pay.. they literally poisoned large areas of the Amazon and nearly committed genocide on the locals.

All at a time when Mexico doesn't have their act together in its dealing with corruption and organized crime.

Yes I agree, Mexico has to deal with this crap, but letting big multi-nationals in with a massive history of promoting corruption aint gonna solve their problems. It will only make it worse.
 
Or we could transition to clean alternative energy sources. But you guys are against that because it cuts into the fossil fuel industry's profits so they've instructed their naive followers to obstruct any progress. You don't even get paid to do their bidding, you do it for free. :lamo

Actuallly you're spouting false programming, but it is funny to watch. Please let us know when you take off on the first solar powered airliner, we want to be there to roast the hot dogs.:lamo
 
"Uh...uh...what green energy subsidies for the past 20 years?"

:lamo

Do you have an argument of do you think just mentioning "green energy subsidies" is sufficient?
 
Only the oil industry in under developped countries does not create more jobs and that's been proven to be a fact. The oil workers are already there and they're getting paid less and less or in some cases not at all. So what are they prospering with? Thin air? Because they aren't getting the key factor in your argument: wages.

You've started off with a strawman. What has been argued is that in an underdevelopped country (such as Mexico) rife with corruption, labor abuses and human rights abuses, wealth is kept at the top and the prosperity only comes to those directing the projects from an executive possition. Saudi Arabia, the largest producer of oil in the world has also some of the highest poverty rates in the world. The list goes on: Venezuela, Nigeria, Kuwait. The pattern is obvious and has been explored before. In underdevelopped countries, oil does not mean prosperity for the country. It means prosperity for a select few and poverty and oppression for the rest.

The second part of your post is just laughable. What percentage of those who cross the border do oil workers constitute? The majority of those who cross the border are low skilled workers working in food manufaturing, cleaning services and grounds keeping. So what would opening up Mexico to oil field work do? Nothing. Especially considering oil companies are notorious for abusing the rights of workers and not paying wages.

Oh...so more developement in the oilfield doesn't create more jobs?

:lamo
 
Actuallly you're spouting false programming, but it is funny to watch. Please let us know when you take off on the first solar powered airliner, we want to be there to roast the hot dogs.:lamo

Your first mistake was that you decided that I wanted to end airlines, trains and ship transport. I never said that did I? Now you're saying I want to fly solar powered airplanes, again, you decided this, not me.

I support transitioning away which means doing things that use less fossil fuels and use more clean alternatives. This also involves initiatives to help make green energy financially sustainable.

If we had invested in the technology and put forth great effort we could have substantially reduced our use of fossil fuels in the last few decades but we haven't. Its never too late to start and we can begin aggressively transitioning away now, however most don't want to do that so... let the good times roll! Drill baby drill!
 
Do you have an argument of do you think just mentioning "green energy subsidies" is sufficient?

I could mention the half a billion dollar we blew subsidizing Solyndra.
 
I'm against it because it can't survive without hundreds of billions in government subsidies.

So we should end the green energy subsidies and just stick with fossil fuels... and their subsidies? And who cares about climate change anyways?

Let me add this, since you're against subsidies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies

Allocation of subsidies in the United States

A 2011 study by the consulting firm Management Information Services, Inc. (MISI)[7] estimated the total historical federal subsidies for various energy sources over the years 1950–2010. The study found that oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, $121 billion, and $104 billion (2010 dollars), respectively, or 70% of total energy subsidies over that period. Oil, natural gas, and coal benefitted most from percentage depletion allowances and other tax-based subsidies, but oil also benefitted heavily from regulatory subsidies such as exemptions from price controls and higher-than-average rates of return allowed on oil pipelines. The MISI report found that non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefitted from $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 9% of the total, largely in the form of tax policy and direct federal expenditures on research and development (R&D). Nuclear power benefitted from $73 billion in federal subsidies, 9% of the total, largely in the form of R&D, while hydro power received $90 billion in federal subsidies, 12% of the total.

A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[8] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 2002–2008 period. The study estimated that subsidies to fossil-fuel based sources amounted to approximately $72 billion over this period and subsidies to renewable fuel sources totaled $29 billion. The study did not assess subsidies supporting nuclear energy.

The three largest fossil fuel subsidies were:

Foreign tax credit ($15.3 billion)
Credit for production of non-conventional fuels ($14.1 billion)
Oil and Gas exploration and development expensing ($7.1 billion)

The three largest renewable fuel subsidies were:

Alcohol Credit for Fuel Excise Tax ($11.6 billion)
Renewable Electricity Production Credit ($5.2 billion)
Corn-Based Ethanol ($5.0 billion)
 
As far as people go: I'm currently in Mexico and no one here is happy with this. As it is, companies already get away with some of the biggest labor abuses here. With the new investors that will come, the prediction by locals is that the government will be used as a punishing force to anyone who dares oppose oil companies. The comparisons to Nigeria aren't exactly helping. Nigeria is rife with human rights abuses, destruction of habitat and labor abuses. Most Mexicans are already predicting it will also happen here. The next elections will be very interesting to watch. It's already a given that the PRI will lose power federally. The oil producing states of Chiapas, Veracruz and Tabasco are already looking at serious demonstrations. People are well aware of the way in which the government has abused its power to enforce the wishes of corporations.

The violence: The Gulf of Mexico is a place of interest for most as it is currently controlled by the Gulf Cartel and Zetas. When/if Mexico succeeds in luring interests, most Atlantic Ocean states will likely see an increase in violence and even the possibility of an upsurge in kidnappings. It's already happening with the mining industry. Cartels have taken over some mines as well as kidnapped important mining figures in the states of Guanajuato, Zacatecas & San Luis Potosi.

The economy: It is a given that in Mexico, wealth does not trickle down. Governors in the state that I'm in have a history of 1) Using violence/kidnappings to establish their position 2) Steal outrageous sums of money/benefits/licenses from coffers and 3) leave the state. So people are more than convinced that once oil companies are allowed to invest in Mexican oil fields, governors will charge a "fee" for them to operate, siphon the money from whatever levy/taxes are paid by oil companies and then leave. Essentially, for most this means that corruption in the state will actually grow.

My opinion: The only people who seem to be celebrating are those who are those outside of Mexico. Few are actually aware the level of corruption that exists within the country and future investors should be ready to pay out a lot of cash to 1) local governors, 2) cartels and 3) federal employees before they even think about investing here. They will also have to think twice about the violence that will follow their investment. Mexico is not ready for companies to invest in it - not by a long shot.

I agree with your insight, but is the way to less corruption and violence really a reduction in foreign investment? If corruption and violence are already prevalent in Mexico prior to this occurring, then what does maintaining the status quo actually accomplish? Rather, I think this would be a good time for Mexico to use the opportunity to make a major investment in their oil fields as leverage to ensure protections and use the additional funds to strengthen the fight against cartels. The key is that Mexico has to take the initiative to reform and reduce violence. Whether or not that happens is independent of whether they allow foreign investment in their oil fields.
 
Your first mistake was that you decided that I wanted to end airlines, trains and ship transport. I never said that did I? Now you're saying I want to fly solar powered airplanes, again, you decided this, not me.

I support transitioning away which means doing things that use less fossil fuels and use more clean alternatives. This also involves initiatives to help make green energy financially sustainable.

If we had invested in the technology and put forth great effort we could have substantially reduced our use of fossil fuels in the last few decades but we haven't. Its never too late to start and we can begin aggressively transitioning away now, however most don't want to do that so... let the good times roll! Drill baby drill!

Green Energy is not sustainable, all those failed companies on the taxpayer dime proved that during this administration.

Green energy will always be a small and very costly contributor to our overall needs
 
1) oil companies don't get subsidies

2) if green is so great, let it compete

3) climate change is bull****

1) Are you saying the link I provided is all lies?

2) Let it compete against an industry that has had over a century to mature with a 1/3 of a trillion dollars of U.S. subsidies and still receives about 50b a year in subsidies?

3) The scientists are all lying about climate change? Its all manufactured?

Notice how your arguments all hinge on saying that all evidence that is contrary to your position are lies.
 
Oh...so more developement in the oilfield doesn't create more jobs?

:lamo

You really should learn to understand what it is you're reading. Check my post again and pretend you've understood it. It'll probably help a lot more.
 
Green Energy is not sustainable, all those failed companies on the taxpayer dime proved that during this administration.

Green energy will always be a small and very costly contributor to our overall needs

So you hope. Because its hard we should just quit? If we put our full effort into it we could it make it work.

Not to mention rigging the market in favor of fossil fuels is completely backwards from what we should be doing. Gasoline should be more expensive, not less. Level the playing field and the alternative energy industry would take off.
 
I agree with your insight, but is the way to less corruption and violence really a reduction in foreign investment? If corruption and violence are already prevalent in Mexico prior to this occurring, then what does maintaining the status quo actually accomplish? Rather, I think this would be a good time for Mexico to use the opportunity to make a major investment in their oil fields as leverage to ensure protections and use the additional funds to strengthen the fight against cartels. The key is that Mexico has to take the initiative to reform and reduce violence. Whether or not that happens is independent of whether they allow foreign investment in their oil fields.

The problem is that any future investors will have to think twice about the rent they'll have to pay to both cartel and local governments. The additional funds will go to both sides and the problem will simply get worse. Also, will there be outrage when companies eventually start abusing workers here?
 
Horrible news. More massive profits for fat American companies and none for the average Mexican.

How much is the average Mexican getting now? How do you know the only companies to benefit will be American?
 
So you hope. Because its hard we should just quit? If we put our full effort into it we could it make it work.

Not to mention rigging the market in favor of fossil fuels is completely backwards from what we should be doing. Gasoline should be more expensive, not less. Level the playing field and the alternative energy industry would take off.

that is bull****, ethanol nor bio diesel have proven to be sustainable and are incredibly expensive. Wind energy is ok but nothing to jump up and down about, same with solar power. None of these technologies can replace fossil fuels without driving the economy out of reach even for the middle class.
 
that is bull****, ethanol nor bio diesel have proven to be sustainable and are incredibly expensive. Wind energy is ok but nothing to jump up and down about, same with solar power. None of these technologies can replace fossil fuels without driving the economy out of reach even for the middle class.

I never said replace, I said transition. And what makes you so sure? Do you have scientific proof its impossible? What are we going to do when we run out of oil? Humanity will mostly be wiped out because its impossible to do anything else sustainably?

That is utterly ridiculous.

EDIT: An example since you said ethanol has not been proven to be sustainable. No its not perfect but it is one tool in the toolbox and can work for certain regions. Alternative energy success is an integrated solution that involves many different sources and technologies. They all add up to create a significant benefit in the long run.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

Brazil is the world's second largest producer of ethanol fuel, and until 2010, the world's largest exporter. Together, Brazil and the United States lead the industrial production of ethanol fuel, accounting together for 87.8 percent of the world's production in 2010,[1][2] and 87.1 percent in 2011.[3] In 2011 Brazil produced 21.1 billion liters (5.57 billion U.S. liquid gallons), representing 24.9 percent of the world's total ethanol used as fuel.[3]

Brazil is considered to have the world's first sustainable biofuels economy and the biofuel industry leader,[4][5][6][7] a policy model for other countries; and its sugarcane ethanol "the most successful alternative fuel to date."[8] However, some authors consider that the successful Brazilian ethanol model is sustainable only in Brazil due to its advanced agri-industrial technology and its enormous amount of arable land available;[8] while according to other authors it is a solution only for some countries in the tropical zone of Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa.[9][10][11]
 
Last edited:
How much is the average Mexican getting now?

not much but that will still be far more than if all profits go overseas no?

How do you know the only companies to benefit will be American?

Because American companies dominate the industry and it is in their back yard. Only ones that might be able to persuade the Mexicans elsewhere is China but I doubt the US would allow that.
 
The problem is that any future investors will have to think twice about the rent they'll have to pay to both cartel and local governments. The additional funds will go to both sides and the problem will simply get worse. Also, will there be outrage when companies eventually start abusing workers here?

Wait, I thought you said that this abuse already happens?

Besides, if US companies were getting busy in Mexico making investments, I'd imagine that they would want to be safe from said cartels. Like it or not, that may be an avenue for the US government to assist Mexico in its local cartel war.
 
I never said replace, I said transition. And what makes you so sure? Do you have scientific proof its impossible? What are we going to do when we run out of oil? Humanity will mostly be wiped out because its impossible to do anything else sustainably?

That is utterly ridiculous.

EDIT: An example since you said ethanol has not been proven to be sustainable. No its not perfect but it is one tool in the toolbox and can work for certain regions. Alternative energy success is an integrated solution that involves many different sources and technologies. They all add up to create a significant benefit in the long run.

Ethanol fuel in Brazil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do YOU have scientific proof that its feasible? Do YOU have scientific proof that we could make a full transition away from fossil fuels? No... you don't.
 
So you hope. Because its hard we should just quit? If we put our full effort into it we could it make it work.

Not to mention rigging the market in favor of fossil fuels is completely backwards from what we should be doing. Gasoline should be more expensive, not less. Level the playing field and the alternative energy industry would take off.

So you want to make energy more expensive across the board. Let's review what the effects of that would be. First, you'd be passing on higher electricity and transportation bills onto the average American consumer, thus reducing demand. Then you would be making factory production of even the most basic products more expensive in the US, both driving jobs out of this country and reducing supply. Essentially, you want to completely squeeze out our economy. Luckily the rest of the American people do not share your radicalism.
 
Back
Top Bottom