Obama: Anyone who says we can lower gas prices by more drilling
#1
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:08 PM
Is he right?
#2
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:14 PM
#3
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:16 PM
#4
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:19 PM
#5
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:21 PM
Because as you increase our output then the middle eastern oil bloc simply lower theirs.
HHS Secretary Kathleen SEBELIUS: There also is no abortifacient drug that is part of the FDA approved contraception. What the rule for preventive care…
(R-PA) Rep. Tim MURPHY: Ma’m that is not true…Is the morning after pill or something like that an abortifacient drug?
SEBELIUS: It is a contraceptive drug, not an abortifacient… It does not interfere with a pregnancy. If the morning pill were taken, and a female were pregnant, the pregnancy is not interrupted. That’s the definition of abortifation.
MURPHY: Ma’m that is your interpretation, and I appreciate that’s your interpretation.
SEBELIUS: That’s what the scientists and doctors…
MURPHY: We’re not talking about scientists. Ma’m we’re not talking about scientists here, we’re talking about religious belief.
Is this just math that you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better?
#6
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:22 PM
#7
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:22 PM
#8
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:22 PM
Probably.Is he right?
Historically the nations that export oil control the supply to maintain price.
ETA: And if they don't, what happened to the domestic oil producers in the '80's when oil became cheap?
Edited by Bottomfeeder Sports, 23 February 2012 - 05:26 PM.
#9
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:24 PM
When Goldman starts covering their butt in anticipation of a major price spike you know things are dirty. Holder is a disaster as an AG. No one fears him cause he does nothing. He truly is a potted plant.
#10
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:24 PM
Not sure he knows the definition of supply & demand
Jeremiah 12:5If you have raced with men on foot and they have worn you out, how can you compete with horses?
#11
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:25 PM
Think it's bad here? Brent is at an all time high in euros.
#12
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:26 PM
I'm not sure I understand it either when it comes to oil. Oil seems to be impervious to basic economic supply and demand rules.Has Obama ever been well versed in economic theory?
Not sure he knows the definition of supply & demand
#13
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:28 PM
If only it were that simple.Has Obama ever been well versed in economic theory?
Not sure he knows the definition of supply & demand
#14
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:29 PM
Has Obama ever been well versed in economic theory?
Not sure he knows the definition of supply & demand
#15
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:31 PM
XBL: Ryodan5
#16
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:32 PM
#17
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:34 PM
Newt Gingrich, like Michelle Bachmann before him, pledged to bring gas prices below 2.50 per gallon if he is elected. But I don't understand how he will accomplish this.
Newt is desperate and will say anything to get attention at this point.
- Bob Weir
#18
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:38 PM
Newt Gingrich, like Michelle Bachmann before him, pledged to bring gas prices below 2.50 per gallon if he is elected. But I don't understand how he will accomplish this.Newt is desperate andPoliticians will say anything to getattentionelected at this point.
fixed... you want a politician to tell it to you straight, elect Ron Paul.. otherwise, they are all liars
#19
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:44 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
Prince Faud has said repeatedly over the last 5 yrs that he would like gas prices in the US to be between 2.50 and 2.75. The price that his advisors have assured him would preclude any forays into alternative energy. Who can forget him walking hand in hand with Bush telling the American public to fix their own house?
At this point I believe him more than any shill on Wall st. Supply and demand arguments have been immaterial for years.
#20
Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:55 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
Prince Faud has said repeatedly over the last 5 yrs that he would like gas prices in the US to be between 2.50 and 2.75. The price that his advisors have assured him would preclude any forays into alternative energy. Who can forget him walking hand in hand with Bush telling the American public to fix their own house?
At this point I believe him more than any shill on Wall st. Supply and demand arguments have been immaterial for years.
More recently the Saudis have indicated to other OPEC members that they think $100/barrel is a good number.
They've made promises to increase production to meet any shortfall from Iran.
#21
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:02 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
Prince Faud has said repeatedly over the last 5 yrs that he would like gas prices in the US to be between 2.50 and 2.75. The price that his advisors have assured him would preclude any forays into alternative energy. Who can forget him walking hand in hand with Bush telling the American public to fix their own house?
At this point I believe him more than any shill on Wall st. Supply and demand arguments have been immaterial for years.
More recently the Saudis have indicated to other OPEC members that they think $100/barrel is a good number.
They've made promises to increase production to meet any shortfall from Iran.
The Saudis have consistently dealt with projectable numbers designed to calm business markets. Yet they get no credit because we can't rein our people in.
Hence my utter contempt for Eric Holder.
#22
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:06 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
Prince Faud has said repeatedly over the last 5 yrs that he would like gas prices in the US to be between 2.50 and 2.75. The price that his advisors have assured him would preclude any forays into alternative energy. Who can forget him walking hand in hand with Bush telling the American public to fix their own house?
At this point I believe him more than any shill on Wall st. Supply and demand arguments have been immaterial for years.
More recently the Saudis have indicated to other OPEC members that they think $100/barrel is a good number.
They've made promises to increase production to meet any shortfall from Iran.
The Saudis have consistently dealt with projectable numbers designed to calm business markets. Yet they get no credit because we can't rein our people in.
Hence my utter contempt for Eric Holder.
Not sure I understand you here. What specifically would you like Holder to do?
#23
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:07 PM
XBOX: SCUTTFARKAS
#24
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:14 PM
http://m.lubbockonli...-obama’s-plan
#25
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:14 PM
so they end up with far less revenue/profit...why is that a bad thing?Yes.
Because as you increase our output then the middle eastern oil bloc simply lower theirs.
Jeremiah 12:5If you have raced with men on foot and they have worn you out, how can you compete with horses?
#26
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:17 PM
How does it help us?so they end up with far less revenue/profit...why is that a bad thing?
Yes.
Because as you increase our output then the middle eastern oil bloc simply lower theirs.
#27
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:17 PM
#28
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:18 PM
so they end up with far less revenue/profit...why is that a bad thing?
Yes.
Because as you increase our output then the middle eastern oil bloc simply lower theirs.
It might not be.
In reality though it would be almost entirely Saudi Arabia lowering production because most of the other OPEC countries can't afford to.
#29
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:19 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
#30
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:23 PM
Don't really think so. It would make sense for OPEC to decline their production as soon as we increased ours.
OPec yes, Saudis no. They talk about shared goals often but flout production levels all the time. And their business partners understand the political realities they face. It's a long term strategy designed to help all of opec partners.
Honestly, since the early 70's when OPEC was formed and these countries started flexing their economic muscle the Saudis have been more than reasonable in smoothing out the rough edges. There's reason our politicians never have a bad word for them, they dont deserve it.
#31
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:23 PM
I am working as a petroleum engineer up in north dakota, one of the hottest places for new oil production. These wells have millions of dollars worth of costs associated with them that oil wells in years past did not have. They drill down to the reservoir, then they drill horizontally through the reservoir for 2-3 miles. This horizontal drilling is not cheap as it effectively doubles the drilling time.
Even after a wells exposing 2 miles of reservoir the well will not produce very much oil, it has to be fracked, and fracking greatly increases the cost of the well.
To greatly ramp up oil production means we will be drilling in more remote areas, that require even more expensive technology.
America can produce alot of oil at 100 dollars a barrrel, but we are running out of the cheap stuff.
Edited by MTskibum, 23 February 2012 - 06:26 PM.
#32
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:24 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
#33
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:27 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
#34
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:29 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
Oil wells are permitted and planned out years in advance. The oil wells being drilled now were permitted under a republican president.
#35
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:30 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
I'll answer your question- oil production hasn't nearly quadrupled under their watch, not even close.
#36
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:31 PM
I think he's right--because the program Sucks. The oil companies sell our oil to China and then we buy it for inflated prices from somewhere else....he says that we can't lower prices by increased drilling, and anyone who says otherwise is not telling the truth...
The oil companies are no longer American--why the hell do we want to give them more of our oil??
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail...but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"
"If you don't like the way I'm living--you just leave this long-haired country boy alone."
#37
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:31 PM
It still doesn't really answer the question. Whatever Obama's motivations were, we have more drilling now than we did when he took office. Yet oil prices keep rising. This at least suggests that there is no correlation between increased oil drilling and prices, no?
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
Oil wells are permitted and planned out years in advance. The oil wells being drilled now were permitted under a republican president.
#38
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:32 PM
I saw that figure reported on CNN. Do you have information which suggests otherwise?
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
I'll answer your question- oil production hasn't nearly quadrupled under their watch, not even close.
#39
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:33 PM
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
Because he can't mandated ME oil output from Washington, like he can mandate the gulf of Mexico drilling would be my guess.
#40
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:33 PM
anyone who says otherwise is not telling the truth.
Is he right?
You should note in his speech he also said, "In fact, we have always been at war with Eastasia."
#41
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:35 PM
It still doesn't really answer the question. Whatever Obama's motivations were, we have more drilling now than we did when he took office. Yet oil prices keep rising. This at least suggests that there is no correlation between increased oil drilling and prices, no?
In 2008 Barack Obama told us he liked gasoline prices at $4 per gallon. Obama thought that along with destroying the coal industry, high oil prices would push us to use less energy and to drive electric cars and travel more by bicycle. In December 2008, when Obama was putting together his White House team, Dr. Steven Chu was selected to become Secretary of Energy. Prior to the General Election, Chu was even more enthusiastic about raising gasoline prices than was Obama, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
http://m.lubbockonli...%E2%80%99s-plan
Assuming that this was their goal, why did oil production actually nearly quadruple under their watch? That doesn't make any sense.
First there is nothing to assume. He said it.
OK. But how would you answer my question?
Oil wells are permitted and planned out years in advance. The oil wells being drilled now were permitted under a republican president.
I thought i covered this in a previous post. It costs more to produce oil now. Horizontal drilling, fracking, deeper depths, and drilling into geothermic regions that require expensive drilling fluid systems.
Not to mention new regulations on cleaning up and disposing drill cuttings that didnt exist a decade ago.
All of these add to the cost of oil.
#42
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:36 PM
The president can order international corporations to drill for oil?... like he can mandate the gulf of Mexico drilling would be my guess.
#44
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:40 PM
The president can order international corporations to drill for oil?
... like he can mandate the gulf of Mexico drilling would be my guess.
Actually I was talking about the drilling being shut down after the bp spill.
But he can order insurance company's on what they have to provide, so he probably thinks he can.
#45
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:40 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
New here?
#46
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:40 PM
Are some of you really that ignorant about what is going on in Iran and Libya right now, and the concept of OPEC?
Prince Faud has said repeatedly over the last 5 yrs that he would like gas prices in the US to be between 2.50 and 2.75. The price that his advisors have assured him would preclude any forays into alternative energy. Who can forget him walking hand in hand with Bush telling the American public to fix their own house?
At this point I believe him more than any shill on Wall st. Supply and demand arguments have been immaterial for years.
More recently the Saudis have indicated to other OPEC members that they think $100/barrel is a good number.
They've made promises to increase production to meet any shortfall from Iran.
The Saudis have consistently dealt with projectable numbers designed to calm business markets. Yet they get no credit because we can't rein our people in.
Hence my utter contempt for Eric Holder.
Not sure I understand you here. What specifically would you like Holder to do?
Announce in the WSJ that his office was going to look hard into the oil markets and prosecute any speculators that were guilty of wrong doing or the appearance of market manipulation.
The threat of investigation is more than enough to dampen enthusiasm in market manipulation.
Look at it this way, as a small business man just the threat of an IRS audit is enough to make a crooked man fly straight. A clean operation pays a lot to get thru the process so it's expensive either way. Inviting that cost? Foolhardy.
So he wakes up every morning with this power, given by the citizenry to protect their interests and he does nothing. Potted plant.
#47
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:42 PM
I saw that figure reported on CNN. Do you have information which suggests otherwise?
I'll answer your question- oil production hasn't nearly quadrupled under their watch, not even close.
Try googling US Oil production by year. Or, use common sense- does it sound right to you that we've quadrupled the amount of oil produced in just 3 years?
Edited by humpback, 23 February 2012 - 06:47 PM.
#48
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:44 PM
I saw that figure reported on CNN. Do you have information which suggests otherwise?
I'll answer your question- oil production hasn't nearly quadrupled under their watch, not even close.
Try googling US Oil production by year. Or, use common sense- does it sound right to you that we've quadrupled the amount of oil produced in just 3 years?
Quit arguing with yourself
#49
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:46 PM
If it's too much, it's Holder's fault.Does anyone know what percentage of our domestic drilling is exported overseas?
City living and consumerism is, at its essence, unamerican.
..::sp::..
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users










