Dems change tune after mocking GOP for ‘drill, baby, drill’

As a liberal, I laughed at the "drill baby drill" mantra, because it was a stupid claim regarding energy independence. The corporations that are drilling are not selling only to America and are not giving Americans any free oil. This claim regarding energy independence because we allowed more of America's soil to be made toxic was an idiotic falsehood being passed off as prudence.

Fletch said:

This thread is about how foolish liberals look having mocked 'drill, baby drill.'

Click to expand...

Im not a liberal but ill continue mocking that stupid slogan. You cant simply drill your way into low prices, it takes a combonation of factors which have already been explained in post #3. Another reason I'll mock that bumper sticker slogan is because of a either a peak oil scenario or when it becomes so uneconomical to drill deeper and deeper to find that oil.

disneydude said:

LOL....this post simply shows that you don't have any understanding as to why the price of case has lowered dramatically over the last several months. It has little, if anything to do with increased drilling. Relying on FauxNews for this kind of information is like relying on the National Enquirer to get accurate information about current events.

Click to expand...

Perhaps it is you who does not understand.

"Increased U.S. Output Bolsters Oil Glut Fears Sending Prices Back Down"
Fundamentally Changed’

"U.S. crude production increased by 60,000 barrels a day in the week ended Jan. 9, the EIA reported yesterday. Stockpiles expanded by 5.39 million barrels to 387.8 million, more than 9 percent above the five-year average for this time of year, according to the Energy Department’s statistical arm. Inventories at Cushing, Oklahoma, the delivery point for New York-traded futures, climbed for a sixth week.

Crude may fall below a six-month forecast of $39 a barrel and rallies could be thwarted by the speed at which lost shale production can recover, Jeff Currie, New York-based head of commodities research at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., said in an interview on Bloomberg Television yesterday.

“Shale has fundamentally changed this market,” he said. “The lead time between when you put money in the ground and when you get production has collapsed from three to four years, all the way down to 30 days.”

Increased U.S. Output Bolsters Oil Glut Fears Sending Prices Back Down - Bloomberg

TheDemSocialist said:

Im not a liberal but ill continue mocking that stupid slogan. You cant simply drill your way into low prices, it takes a combonation of factors which have already been explained in post #3. Another reason I'll mock that bumper sticker slogan is because of a either a peak oil scenario or when it becomes so uneconomical to drill deeper and deeper to find that oil.

Click to expand...

See post #28

ironhorse said:

Perhaps it is you who does not understand.

"Increased U.S. Output Bolsters Oil Glut Fears Sending Prices Back Down"
Fundamentally Changed’

"U.S. crude production increased by 60,000 barrels a day in the week ended Jan. 9, the EIA reported yesterday. Stockpiles expanded by 5.39 million barrels to 387.8 million, more than 9 percent above the five-year average for this time of year, according to the Energy Department’s statistical arm. Inventories at Cushing, Oklahoma, the delivery point for New York-traded futures, climbed for a sixth week.

Crude may fall below a six-month forecast of $39 a barrel and rallies could be thwarted by the speed at which lost shale production can recover, Jeff Currie, New York-based head of commodities research at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., said in an interview on Bloomberg Television yesterday.

“Shale has fundamentally changed this market,” he said. “The lead time between when you put money in the ground and when you get production has collapsed from three to four years, all the way down to 30 days.”

Increased U.S. Output Bolsters Oil Glut Fears Sending Prices Back Down - Bloomberg

Click to expand...

No one is denying we have increased production.... But you are also missing the bigger picture as which was posted in post #3. The increase production is just a small part of the bigger picture..

ironhorse said:

"If it wasn’t clear before, it should be now. The Saudis have put a bull’s-eye on the U.S. shale industry: Sapient Global Markets’ Chip Register that examines the recent plunge in oil prices and potential responses for the U.S. market to consider.

Last week the Kingdom cut the selling price for its crude for the second straight month in a row. But unlike the last time, the Saudis only cut their price for oil bound for the U.S. market and nowhere else. Indeed, they actually increased the selling price of its oil to Asia and Europe, much to the relief of fellow OPEC members."


As Saudis Target Shale Industry, U.S. Considers a Response

Click to expand...

Interesting article, but you know OPEC basket price is the same for everyone.....

TheDemSocialist said:

No one is denying we have increased production.... But you are also missing the bigger picture as which was posted in post #3. The increase production is just a small part of the bigger picture..

Click to expand...

Not a small part. a vital part. Before we ourselves had so much of our own oil OPEC just lowered production when demand went down which kept prices up. Now they can't do that and are in fact not cutting production in an attempt to make oil so cheap that our oil won't be profitable.

Sooda said:

Interesting article, but you know OPEC basket price is the same for everyone.....

Click to expand...

The basket price is an average price and is not relevant to my comment. OPEC is selling oil to America cheaper than it sells it to other countries because they are trying to destroy our new found oil supplies.

ironhorse said:

The basket price is an average price and is not relevant to my comment. OPEC is selling oil to America cheaper than it sells it to other countries because they are trying to destroy our new found oil supplies.

Click to expand...

I have seen NO evidence that Saudi is selling oil cheaper to the US.

OPEC daily basket price stood at $41.65 a barrel Wednesday, 14 January 2015

ironhorse said:

Not a small part. a vital part. Before we ourselves had so much of our own oil OPEC just lowered production when demand went down which kept prices up. Now they can't do that and are in fact not cutting production in an attempt to make oil so cheap that our oil won't be profitable.

Click to expand...

The oil boom in the US has been happening for around 6 years now. It wasnt until recently prices have fallen at this rate. If increased proudction was the vital part we would have felt this impact years ago. It wasnt until the sanctions on Iran, Libya oil reenters the market, weaker deman in Asia the EU, more green energy, and the Saudis decisions did we see this giant decrease in price. Was increased prduction in the US have an effect? Yes. Was it the biggest? In my opinion, no.

TheDemSocialist said:

The oil boom in the US has been happening for around 6 years now. It wasnt until recently prices have fallen at this rate. If increased proudction was the vital part we would have felt this impact years ago. It wasnt until the sanctions on Iran, Libya oil reenters the market, weaker deman in Asia the EU, more green energy, and the Saudis decisions did we see this giant decrease in price. Was increased prduction in the US have an effect? Yes. Was it the biggest? In my opinion, no.

Click to expand...

Are you familiar with SUSRIS?

The fundamentals of the oil price slide: where

Sooda said:

I have seen NO evidence that Saudi is selling oil cheaper to the US.

OPEC daily basket price stood at $41.65 a barrel Wednesday, 14 January 2015

Click to expand...

I gave you the link in post #31

"Last week the Kingdom cut the selling price for its crude for the second straight month in a row. But unlike the last time, the Saudis only cut their price for oil bound for the U.S. market and nowhere else. Indeed, they actually increased the selling price of its oil to Asia and Europe, much to the relief of fellow OPEC members."

TheDemSocialist said:

The oil boom in the US has been happening for around 6 years now. It wasnt until recently prices have fallen at this rate. If increased proudction was the vital part we would have felt this impact years ago. It wasnt until the sanctions on Iran, Libya oil reenters the market, weaker deman in Asia the EU, more green energy, and the Saudis decisions did we see this giant decrease in price. Was increased prduction in the US have an effect? Yes. Was it the biggest? In my opinion, no.

Click to expand...

The US oil boom for 6 years was going on at the same time the China and Asia were increasing demand so the price of oil did not drop because of US oil production but it did not rise as fast or as high as it would have without US oil on the global market. Now that the Chinese and Asian economies have stalled the price of oil is dropping because there is more supply than there is demand and this is because of US oil production. If OPEC still held the reigns they would just lower production to match demand and keep the price of oil high but they are no longer in the drivers seat. "Drill baby drill" worked.

ironhorse said:

It's called supply and demand, get it now DNC? Get it now Obama?
Be sure to watch the video, it's hilarious.


Back when gas topped $4 a gallon, Republicans chanted "drill, baby, drill" at rallies across the country -- arguing more domestic drilling would increase supplies, reduce dependence on foreign oil and boost the U.S. economy.

Democrats, almost universally, mocked the GOP plan. In 2012, President Obama called it "a slogan, a gimmick, and a bumper sticker ... not a strategy."

"They were waving their three-point plans for $2-a-gallon gas," Obama told a laughing audience during an energy speech in Washington. "You remember that? Drill, baby, drill. We were going through all that. And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem."

"'Drill, baby, drill' won't lower gas prices today or tomorrow," Rep. Janice Hahn, D-Calif., echoed on the floor of Congress in 2012. "But it will fuel our addiction to fossil fuel."


Dems change tune after mocking GOP for

Click to expand...

OPEC is the reason why the gas prices have fallen. Granted, it is as a result of US fracking, but at any time OPEC or US fracking companies will decide to reduce production to cut losses from cheaper oil prices, which will force prices back up. So in an essence, yes, drill baby drill was a good motto, but there is not telling how long gas prices will stay this low. I can't stand any federal energy subsidy or favoring one sector over the other, so naturally I am against this big oil boom in the US. This is because I am almost certain the US is padding the losses of these new American oil producers in order for them to continue production at the same levels to not only help the American people but to hurt Russia.

iacardsfan said:

OPEC is the reason why the gas prices have fallen. Granted, it is as a result of US fracking, but at any time OPEC or US fracking companies will decide to reduce production to cut losses from cheaper oil prices, which will force prices back up. So in an essence, yes, drill baby drill was a good motto, but there is not telling how long gas prices will stay this low. I can't stand any federal energy subsidy or favoring one sector over the other, so naturally I am against this big oil boom in the US. This is because I am almost certain the US is padding the losses of these new American oil producers in order for them to continue production at the same levels to not only help the American people but to hurt Russia.

Click to expand...

Supply and demand will work. As prices get to low for US oil to be profitable those sources will shut down and prices will come back up to a point of even keel. If prices go too high, production will ramp up and prices will come down that is a good thing and how it should work. When OPEC ran things they artificially controlled supply and kept prices artificially high but with America capable of so much production now they cant do so and that too is a good thing. "Drill baby drill" worked.

ironhorse said:

Supply and demand will work. As prices get to low for US oil to be profitable those sources will shut down and prices will come back up to a point of even keel. If prices go too high, production will ramp up and prices will come down that is a good thing and how it should work. When OPEC ran things they artificially controlled supply and kept prices artificially high but with America capable of so much production now they cant do so and that too is a good thing. "Drill baby drill" worked.

Click to expand...

Its not supply and demand though. The US government provides BILLIONS in subsidies for these American companies. Thats not the market, thats the government manipulating the market.

ironhorse said:

It's called supply and demand, get it now DNC? Get it now Obama?
Be sure to watch the video, it's hilarious.


Back when gas topped $4 a gallon, Republicans chanted "drill, baby, drill" at rallies across the country -- arguing more domestic drilling would increase supplies, reduce dependence on foreign oil and boost the U.S. economy.

Democrats, almost universally, mocked the GOP plan. In 2012, President Obama called it "a slogan, a gimmick, and a bumper sticker ... not a strategy."

"They were waving their three-point plans for $2-a-gallon gas," Obama told a laughing audience during an energy speech in Washington. "You remember that? Drill, baby, drill. We were going through all that. And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem."

"'Drill, baby, drill' won't lower gas prices today or tomorrow," Rep. Janice Hahn, D-Calif., echoed on the floor of Congress in 2012. "But it will fuel our addiction to fossil fuel."


Dems change tune after mocking GOP for

Click to expand...

OK look...


First, Obama is a follower not a leader. Some months ago he championed the Keystone XL pipeline for the same reasons the Republicans are today...

In March of last year, President Obama stood among KXL pipe produced by workers in Arkansas and famously announced that he was approving the Southern portion of KXL. Extolling the virtues of the pipeline extension for job creation and economic prosperity when he announced, “Today, I’m directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles, and make this project a priority, to go ahead and get it done.”
Keystone Pipeline - Five Years And Counting - Forbes

Click to expand...

Now its "Canadian oil" and "a few hundred jobs". No more about "energy security" or any of that crap.

World oil prices are down because OPEC is glutting the market, over-supplying to drive prices down and send a message that that Canadian crude cannot be allowed to ship to their last real growth market: China.

So, now you have a policy to stop Canadian oil from reaching market, and prevent further domestic exploration, especially in the "climate sensitive" Arctic.

The reasons they give you are bull****, as evidenced by Obama's unflinching support of Keystone some months ago changing to a political war with the right the next. It has nothing to do with the environment, little frogs, potential leaks from the safest oil transport system in the world, and everything to do with keeping the Saudi's very happy....


But don't despair prices will begin inching upward again soon.....and Canadian crude WILL ship to market. China wants it.

Fearandloathing said:

OK look...


First, Obama is a follower not a leader. Some months ago he championed the Keystone XL pipeline for the same reasons the Republicans are today...



Now its "Canadian oil" and "a few hundred jobs". No more about "energy security" or any of that crap.

World oil prices are down because OPEC is glutting the market, over-supplying to drive prices down and send a message that that Canadian crude cannot be allowed to ship to their last real growth market: China.

So, now you have a policy to stop Canadian oil from reaching market, and prevent further domestic exploration, especially in the "climate sensitive" Arctic.

The reasons they give you are bull****, as evidenced by Obama's unflinching support of Keystone some months ago changing to a political war with the right the next. It has nothing to do with the environment, little frogs, potential leaks from the safest oil transport system in the world, and everything to do with keeping the Saudi's very happy....


But don't despair prices will begin inching upward again soon.....and Canadian crude WILL ship to market. China wants it.

Click to expand...

China and Saudi Arabia are building a new refinery.

See half way down the page.

The Review | SUSTG

We actually saved more oil due to increased vehicle efficiency since 2008 than we have brought online via tight oil. Moreover, while tight oil has boosted worldwide supply, its only profitable at higher oil prices. The reduced oil prices today are more the result of reduced demand coupled with OPEC not cutting production in an attempt to increase market share.

Point being there is a little more to the supply / demand equation in regards to the current oil markets than the poster in the OP seems to realize.

Sooda said:

China and Saudi Arabia are building a new refinery.

See half way down the page.

The Review | SUSTG

Click to expand...

relevance?

China and Canada are building a second LNG plant in BC.

How does that affect one word I posted?


Please, in future read ALL of what is posted OK?

Fearandloathing said:

relevance?

China and Canada are building a second LNG plant in BC.

How does that affect one word I posted?


Please, in future read ALL of what is posted OK?

Click to expand...

Well Keystone won't create many permanent jobs and we may not need it with there being such a glut on the market... Also China owns a good bit of Canada's production new.

Sooda said:

Well Keystone won't create many permanent jobs and we may not need it with there being such a glut on the market... Also China owns a good bit of Canada's production new.

Click to expand...

Link?

I do not believe you have even read original material on the 35 year Keystone project, have not one clue about how many jobs have been created nor how existing Keystone pipelines are part of a once held idea by presidents from Carter to Reagan to Bush to Clinton to Bush about North American oil self sufficiency. I do not believe you even know the meaning of the post where your faultless president one day is fast-tracking the deal FOR JOBS while soon after claims there are no real jobs....a meme you regurgitate without even having Googled "keystone xl"

I do not see how your posts add anything to the debate, nor can they if you are buried under the pile of manure propaganda flowing out of the White House's ass hole.

Sooda said:

Well Keystone won't create many permanent jobs and we may not need it with there being such a glut on the market... Also China owns a good bit of Canada's production new.

Click to expand...

In case you might ask..

here's how reliable your faultless president is about jobs and keystone....

Obama’s pronouncements set the U.S. media into a fact-checking frenzy. What about the 42,100 jobs that could result from the economic development—3,900 construction jobs, with tens of thousands more resulting from the ripple effect—over the one to two years it would take to build the pipeline?

The discrepancy seems to be on what one’s definition of “job” is. Is it a two-year construction job that leaves someone out of work once the pipeline is built? Is it a rash of services such as sandwich joints to feed those hungry workers? Or should only the ones that would provide long-term employment be counted among the benefits of such an enormous project?

Read more at The Truth Hurts? Obama's Stark Jobs Estimate for Keystone XL Pipeline - ICTMN.com

Click to expand...

Cool, simply change the definition of "job?" and yes, you can keep your plan.

It's not a matter of which side of the aisle is lying....but by how much;

ick a number between 100 and 1 million, and surely someone somewhere has used it to estimate how many Keystone pipeline jobs would be created if construction were allowed to begin on the $7 billion project to carry oil from Canada to Texas Gulf Coast refineries.

It's no joke.
Keystone Pipeline Jobs - How Many Would Be Created

Click to expand...

Not one of the government's figures includes "spin off jobs", nor long term support and service for the $112 million a year to monitor and upgrade the hundreds of miles of pipeline.

Now does the White House talk about the income from land-lease agreements for right of way for the pipeline.

And...here are some more reliable numbers, provided you are prepared to accept the standard definition of "job"


But then, whenever the White House and its stooges get caught in a lie and get totally destroyed in their lies, they do change the meaning of the word...Obama sure has changed the words "leader" and "honest"

iacardsfan said:

Its not supply and demand though. The US government provides BILLIONS in subsidies for these American companies. Thats not the market, thats the government manipulating the market.

Click to expand...

Oil comps subsidies are a different subject and a myth. This thread is about supply and demand but I will humor you.

"If you were to survey people and ask the question “Should we subsidize oil companies?” — the overwhelming majority would undoubtedly respond “ No!” The idea that we are subsidizing oil companies generates outrage in many people, but in this article I will show why these subsidies aren’t going to go away any time soon. The reason may surprise you.

So let’s ask the question in a different way: “Should we allow oil companies to take a tax deduction also available to any U.S. manufacturer such as Apple or Microsoft?” A lot of people will still answer “ No” to that question, but certainly fewer than answered “No” to the original question.

Now ask the question “Should farmers be allowed a fuel tax exemption for the fuel they use on the farm?” In this case, some people are going to say “ No”, but farmers are going to be near unanimous in saying “Yes!” Let’s ask one final question: “Should we fund programs like the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) that help low-income families with their heating bills?” The irony in this question is that some of the people who are the most vehemently opposed to fossil fuel subsidies will argue that this is an important program that helps keep poor people from freezing to death in winter, and thus it would be inhumane to eliminate it.

Yet unless you answered “ No” to all four questions you support programs that have been specifically identified as fossil fuel subsidies."

The Surprising Reason That Oil Subsidies Persist: Even Liberals Love Them - Forbes

Fearandloathing said:

In case you might ask..

here's how reliable your faultless president is about jobs and keystone....



Cool, simply change the definition of "job?" and yes, you can keep your plan.

It's not a matter of which side of the aisle is lying....but by how much;



Not one of the government's figures includes "spin off jobs", nor long term support and service for the $112 million a year to monitor and upgrade the hundreds of miles of pipeline.

Now does the White House talk about the income from land-lease agreements for right of way for the pipeline.

And...here are some more reliable numbers, provided you are prepared to accept the standard definition of "job"


But then, whenever the White House and its stooges get caught in a lie and get totally destroyed in their lies, they do change the meaning of the word...Obama sure has changed the words "leader" and "honest"

Click to expand...

There won't be that many jobs... Maybe a few for monitoring pipeline flow and pressure.. Its done in real time at a distant computer bank these days.. And the construction jobs will be temporary and only around a thousand.