• 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!

Bachmann: I'll get gas under $2

Fair point but I was talking about my speculation post, that speculators are assuming obama won't drill and won't explore.

Who cares what speculators are assuming, speculating on life essential needs " oil, food,ect" should be made illegal, speculators are nothing more then blood sucking leaches feeding off of the poor and elderly
 
So once we remove ALL the regulations, let oil companies claim eminent domain on anybody's land, and give them money....

Heavily subsidized doesn't sound ANYTHING like socialism. Nope, not at all...

The land required is either already owned by the oil companies or the government itself. So the eminent domain argument is moot.

Please explain how excusing any business from Federal taxes is socialism?
 
The land required is either already owned by the oil companies or the government itself. So the eminent domain argument is moot.

Please explain how excusing any business from Federal taxes is socialism?

Please explain how letting oil companies drill on public land at below market prices is not socialism?
 
The land required is either already owned by the oil companies or the government itself. So the eminent domain argument is moot.

Please explain how excusing any business from Federal taxes is socialism?

Corporatism is socialism for corporations rather then for people.
 
Hey everybody, if you vote for me, I'll get fuel prices below one dollar. Seriously, write my name in on the ballot. I have an amazing plan. My plan is a lot like Bachmann's but does everything more aggressively. It'll work!

Why should we believe that you can pray twice as hard as Bachmann?
 
I see that you failed to mention that my plan would not work. Additionally, it's so nice to finally hear a lib admit that environmental laws are essentially a tax on the middle class. BTW: removing all environmental and governmental regulation, it would only take 6 months to build a new refinery. It is the "REGULATION" which slows down the process to a crawl.

So you are willing to destroy fresh water and food supply sources? Are you an idiot?
 
So you are willing to destroy fresh water and food supply sources? Are you an idiot?

What? Did I miss something? How does removing regulations mean destroying fresh water and food supply sources would be fine?
 
What? Did I miss something? How does removing regulations mean destroying fresh water and food supply sources would be fine?

How about if you remove such regulations, in the drive for higher profits some oil and gas exploration companies would dispose of toxic waste in fresh water sources contaminating the food supply.
 
No, I am saying the US produced more oil then it has for a decade, the US also used alot less oil then it has been ( I believe by over 1 million bpd) yet oil prices are fairly high. Speculators do not and can not control the price of oil for the long term, they do not want to get stuck with the oil actually being delievered. Over the short term certainly oil speculators can have an effect. But if the actual supply is greater then the actual demand (both being phyiscal numbers for delievery and consumption, the price will go down. As prices have remained fairly high since around the start of 2010. It is good indicator that demand is fairly high outside of the US.


Just stating the US is going to open up all areas for drilling is not going to have an effect unless those areas come on line in production, and can do so at higher rate then other areas decline. Recall the US is the worlds third largest producer of oil, yet it does not have the third largest reserves (economically proven), it does not even have the 10th largest reserves. The US can not drill its way to energy independance. It does not have the resources to economically do so ( it could do so at a cost of $200 a barrel, if it choose to)

You are conveniently ignoring this.


Oil shale — Colorado, Utah deposits rival OPEC reserve

Published: Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:07 a.m. MDT


By Joe Carroll
Bloomberg News


Colorado and Utah have as much oil as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria, Kuwait, Libya, Angola, Algeria, Indonesia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates combined.

That's not science fiction. Trapped in limestone up to 200 feet thick in the two Rocky Mountain states is enough so-called shale oil to rival OPEC and supply the U.S. for a century.

Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp., the two biggest U.S. energy companies, and Royal Dutch Shell Plc are spending $100 million a year testing new methods to separate the oil from the stone for as little as $30 a barrel. A growing number of industry executives and analysts say new technology and persistently high prices make the idea feasible.


"The breakthrough is that now the oil companies have a way of getting this oil out of the ground without the massive energy and manpower costs that killed these projects in the 1970s," said Pete Stark, an analyst at IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colo., research firm. "All the shale rocks in the world are going to be revisited now to see how much oil they contain."
 
You are conveniently ignoring this.


Oil shale — Colorado, Utah deposits rival OPEC reserve

Published: Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:07 a.m. MDT


By Joe Carroll
Bloomberg News


Colorado and Utah have as much oil as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria, Kuwait, Libya, Angola, Algeria, Indonesia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates combined.

That's not science fiction. Trapped in limestone up to 200 feet thick in the two Rocky Mountain states is enough so-called shale oil to rival OPEC and supply the U.S. for a century.

Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp., the two biggest U.S. energy companies, and Royal Dutch Shell Plc are spending $100 million a year testing new methods to separate the oil from the stone for as little as $30 a barrel. A growing number of industry executives and analysts say new technology and persistently high prices make the idea feasible.


"The breakthrough is that now the oil companies have a way of getting this oil out of the ground without the massive energy and manpower costs that killed these projects in the 1970s," said Pete Stark, an analyst at IHS Inc., an Englewood, Colo., research firm. "All the shale rocks in the world are going to be revisited now to see how much oil they contain."


I certainly was not ignoring the oil shale. Which is why I put this in my post


The US can not drill its way to energy independance. It does not have the resources to economically do so ( it could do so at a cost of $200 a barrel, if it choose to)


Oil shale is not currently economical to drill, as it is very energy intensive to extract and convert from its current form (kerogen) to something usefull. Not to mention the amount of water that would be required in an already water restricted area. The US could right now start extracting that oil, but it would be wasting a huge amount of money in doing so,
 
So you are willing to destroy fresh water and food supply sources? Are you an idiot?

No of course I am not an idiot. Idiots are those who believe that oil drilling destroys, en mass, fresh water and food supplies.
 
Originally Posted by xpiher
So you are willing to destroy fresh water and food supply sources? Are you an idiot?

No of course I am not an idiot. Idiots are those who believe that oil drilling destroys, en mass, fresh water and food supplies.

I concur with Xipher on this matter.
 
The market has proven that $3.00+/gallon gas is being sustained. There is no going back to gas under $2.00/gal. I don't care if aliens bring us a lifetime supply of crude oil. The oil companies are not going to refine any more oil than they have to.
 
You are conveniently ignoring this.


Oil shale — Colorado, Utah deposits rival OPEC reserve

You're missing one little line from there.


A growing number of industry executives and analysts say new technology and persistently high prices make the idea feasible.

So let's say they tap that. According to your model, the prices sink dramatically. Thus, making the second condition at play here go away -- you wouldn't have persistently high prices anymore.

The prices are pretty high right now, right? So given that, and assuming they have the technology to extract it cheaply, the one thing stopping them is......Obama??? :lamo
 
No of course I am not an idiot. Idiots are those who believe that oil drilling destroys, en mass, fresh water and food supplies.


its kind of like this Nevergolfpar.....some people can sit down and eat a meal and get buy with just a napkin, and maybe not even need it....... others have to wear a bib because they get food all over themselves consistantly and therefore they believe that the rest of the world is just as messy as they are because doing things in a clean and safe manner is just impossible
 
Let the crazy promises begin!!

Bachmann: I'll get gas under $2 - Dan Berman and Molly Ball - POLITICO.com



How do you think that'll happen. Isn't oil freely traded? I guess you could nationalize the oil industry and regulate gas prices. That would be nothing like socialism...

She's never going to defeat Perry with dishonest, empty statements like that. She should have instead told GOP voters that the high price of fuel was God's punishment for electing Obama.
 
This has to be one of the most absurd things I have read to date on this forum. "$1.79 was the result of the near collapse of the banking industry"? Then you follow it up with this gem; "Drilling is likely to cause OPEC to drop their production proportionately."

Listen, if you want $2.00 per gallon gas within a year (probably much less than $2.00), here is what ANY politician could propose:
1) Allow all of America's oil to be drilled and or minded.

The majority of oil that is still recoverable in the United States is not economically recoverable when oil prices are such that gas at the pump is less than 2 dollars a gallon. Take the Bakken Shale formation in North Dakota and western Montana. By some USGS estimates, there is around 270 billion barrels of oil in that formation. However, only around 2.1 billion barrels of that oil is technically recoverable with current technology, and because it is so expensive to recover shale oil, its only economically recoverable when oil prices are very high. There is oil boom in North Dakota because oil prices are near 100 dollar a barrel. If oil prices were to significantly drop, that oil would no longer be economically recoverable, and thus the North Dakota oil boom would end.

2) Eliminate any governmental/legal regulation associated with drilling, refining and transporting of the oil/gas

Thats a good idea :roll:. In the hopes that it would lead to lower prices at the pump, we could eliminate all environmental regulations on the domestic oil industry. That way they would not have to concern themselves with petty concerns "water pollution", "fowling of lands", "wildlife protection". The end result would be our oil fields would look like the oil fields in nations that don't have those "governmental / legal regulations":

Depleted%20Azeri%20oilfield[1].jpg

3) Eliminate any and all environmental regulations associated with any aspect of the supply chain.

Another great idea :roll:, that way we can have the same air and water quality that nations that lack those environmental regulations get to enjoy. Our cities get to look like this on the promise that gas will get cheaper:

china-smog74003740_0.jpg

4) Heavily subsidize through tax breaks and credits any corporate entity willing to make this investment.

Another great idea. :roll: Not only should energy companies get to fowl our land, air, and water for the promise of cheaper gas, they should get even more taxpayer subsidized corporate welfare despite being the some of the most profitable companies in the history of civilization to begin with.

There you have it, a simple 4 step plan to $2.00 oil. In other words, flood the market with supply (or the potential for supply) market prices drop...simple economics.

No, what you presented is a 4 step plan for the fowling of our air, land, and water, and the destruction of our quality of life that is made possible because of environmental regulation and oversight. The difference between our air, land, and water, and the environment in places like China are those regulations and oversight. Many of the same multinational energy companies that relatively cleanly produce oil in the United States, have also desecrated the environments of third world nations they have worked in. Our environmental protections and oversight are what prevents them from doing the same here.

Some of you guys on the anti-environment right are fools. Corporations don't pollute out of the goodness of their hearts, they mitigate pollution associated with oil extraction and production because they are legally compelled to do so in the United States. Visit a country that does not have those environmental regulations. Go to China, breath their air. Walk outside on a clear day and look up and notice how you can't even see the sun because of all the smog in the air. Notice how your eyes burn just walking down the sidewalk. Drink their water, oh, but you can't its undrinkable. Even citizens of China have to drink bottled water. You don't even hear birds in their parks there. Practically the entire country is an environmental nightmare. That is what you get when you do away with all those pesky environmental regulations.

This is what American oil companies, the same companies that drill here, have done in Nigeria when they were free from all those burdensome regulations:

niger-delta.jpg
 
Last edited:
No of course I am not an idiot. Idiots are those who believe that oil drilling destroys, en mass, fresh water and food supplies.

She's never going to defeat Perry with dishonest, empty statements like that. She should have instead told GOP voters that the high price of fuel was God's punishment for electing Obama.


*cough*



or what about that oil Exxon pipeline that broke due to flooding that the didn't turn off because it would cut into their profits earlier this year?

Unlike you, I don't trust corporation to do the moral thing when all that matters to it is profit.
 
Just as Perry killed off Bachmann, the question now is will Palin jumping in in September kill off Perry?
 
its kind of like this Nevergolfpar.....some people can sit down and eat a meal and get buy with just a napkin, and maybe not even need it....... others have to wear a bib because they get food all over themselves consistantly and therefore they believe that the rest of the world is just as messy as they are because doing things in a clean and safe manner is just impossible

or some people realize that being "clean" costs extra money, reducing profit for the investors. As such some will not be as "clean" as a means to increase returns.


Some people are not concerned about the negative effects their actions will directly have on others, especially if it would cost them money
 
You're missing one little line from there.




So let's say they tap that. According to your model, the prices sink dramatically. Thus, making the second condition at play here go away -- you wouldn't have persistently high prices anymore.

The prices are pretty high right now, right? So given that, and assuming they have the technology to extract it cheaply, the one thing stopping them is......Obama??? :lamo

If you read the article with an open mind you would see that oil comps expect to make oil at $30.00 a barrel. As I said in an earlier post oil used to drop below that but probably won’t again, I am ok with oil between $30.00 a barrel and $70.00 a barrel. That gives oil comps their “persistently high price” and gives us affordable oil. What you need to admit to yourself is you don’t want affordable oil, that is why you try to say we can never have it.
 
If you read the article with an open mind you would see that oil comps expect to make oil at $30.00 a barrel. As I said in an earlier post oil used to drop below that but probably won’t again, I am ok with oil between $30.00 a barrel and $70.00 a barrel. That gives oil comps their “persistently high price” and gives us affordable oil. What you need to admit to yourself is you don’t want affordable oil, that is why you try to say we can never have it.

If oil sells at $30/barrell, the oil companies can't make $30/barrell. They can't make their margen at $70/barrell either. They need high oil prices to make $30/barrell.
 
If oil sells at $30/barrell, the oil companies can't make $30/barrell. They can't make their margen at $70/barrell either. They need high oil prices to make $30/barrell.[/QUOT

To be honest I would be happy with consistant oil prices, anything under $100.00 a barrel that we could count on from our own reserves would make me smile. I am tired of being jerked around by OPEC.
 
Back
Top Bottom