WIP Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Sure but that won't stop them from whining and accusing gas stations of price fixing when the price inevitably goes back up. Yes, just like the last time. A lot of people must think the oil gets re-stocked as it's pumped down. It wouldn't be the first time the geniuses in the Pentagon shot themselves in the ass trying to get the Russkies. Don't forget, they essentially underwrote the creation of the Taliban to go after the Soviets in Afghanistan. I kind of wonder if it will take at least a year to figure out what the hell has happened and why. And it could just be stupid, poorly thought out reasons like you mentioned. They certainly didn't think through the full repercussions of working with the Pakistani CIA to create the Taleban in the first place! Maybe, they thought they would just go away after the Russians left Afghanistan. And, it's been noted in a number of places already that cheap oil, just like costly oil harms and benefits allies and adversaries alike. The run up in oil prices benefited Western Canada and maybe the Maritimes...a little, the unconventional oil in the U.S., along with the 'renewables' industries - which Obama has been trying to claim the credit for up till now, and the Saudis and Gulf allies of the U.S. These same allies get hammered for the same reasons that the countries on the enemies list get hit. So, I'm surprised that nobody in the Pentagon or wherever, thinks that oil might be too dangerous a weapon to use, because of all the collateral damage that's going to happen. The Saudi royal family is just the last in a long line of brutal dictators supported and propped up by American administrations going back to the end of the second world war. Others (including Saddam and Noriega) went from being supported by America to deposed by America. It's not out of the question that could happen to the House of Saud. I think the Saudi-U.S. relationship goes back at least to the 1930's, but after they found that big huge oil deposit, Saudi Arabia allowed the U.S. to elbow England out of the way as the global military and financial power, after WWII. I don't know how close U.S. officials were with Saddam...it seemed like most of their alliance was a matter of convenience while it lasted. But Noriega....I haven't read a great deal about the Panama debacle, which I think was the first place they applied the regime change strategies that have become so common in the last 20 years. And....I don't know how much supporting evidence there is behind the claim - but a number of sources who have tried to study the goings on in the Iran-Contra Affair and related evidence of close relationships between CIA and major drug traffickers, present a picture that Manuel Noriega was a facilitator between the drug lords and the U.S. Government.....until he was no longer necessary and got in the way! Edited January 2, 2015 by WIP Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 ....I'm just hoping you guys can articulate how on the one hand you believe this is a promise that Michele Bachmann could deliver, but on the other hand something that Barack Obama should receive no credit for. Go ahead and entertain us with some mental gymnastics. But is exactly the point of this thread....neither Rep. Bachmann or President Obama had anything to do with $2.00 gas, but the very idea was excoriated in the media along with her and Gov. Palin's "Drill, baby drill" mantra. Their political and economic critics argued that the only way it could happen would require complete economic collapse of the U.S. and other western economies. "Even Canadians" are enjoying lower gas prices, and Canada had nothing to do with Bachmann or Obama. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 If it's about Russia, it's mainly the U.S. trying to put on the squeeze, and Saudi would be in alliance for their own objectives: attacking Iran and Syria. The U.S. energy boom was well underway long before recent fun and games with Putin, and will continue regardless of him as well. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 I think the word you're looking for is "accomplice", not ally. And that is exactly what the US looks for every time it feels the need to attack some dark-skinned people in a poor part of the world. But I don't think you have much reason to implicate Canada in supporting the brutal Saud regime. You're on your own. Sure I do...see "Canada" and "oil services contractors". Your premise is very selective with respect to Canadian mining interests partnering with "oppressive regimes" around the world, regimes that have/had U.S. support. But that is typical on this forum. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) ....A finite resource that is consumed in order of most profitable sources, will eventually reach the point where energy-return on energy-invested is too high to make the effort worthwhile! If we were sensible as a global community, we would be preparing now for the time when oil and most other non-renewable resources are starting to run out! Is Canada doing that ? Ontario's actions have led to economic ruin and record provincial debt. We actually find Canada exploiting a low grade oil resource that is the most expensive to recover and refine, all while refusing to build the domestic infrastructure to do it. No wonder Obama laughs his ass off about Keystone XL. Edited January 2, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
WIP Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 Is Canada doing that ? NO, did I say the Canadian Government, or any other government in the world is addressing the problem of declining resources? Just like dealing with carbon emissions and resulting climate change has turned out to be much more difficult to address than first expected, or hoped for; dealing with resource depletion would require a radical reformation of all of the fundamental economic assumptions we have been living under for....well at least since the start of the age of enlightenment in Europe, if not longer. In other words, it's a mess! It's like being stuck in a car that's going over a cliff, and not only can't we find the brakes, most of the passengers can't even see the end of the road approaching. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 ...In other words, it's a mess! It's like being stuck in a car that's going over a cliff, and not only can't we find the brakes, most of the passengers can't even see the end of the road approaching. Maybe for you...but not for me...and billions of other people around the world who benefit from the hydrocarbon economy. We can always panic later. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
WIP Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 Maybe for you...but not for me...and billions of other people around the world who benefit from the hydrocarbon economy. We can always panic later. I figured you would say that! But, anyone who actually does claim to have concern for those who come after us and have to inherit this world, need to stop living in denial and consider the prospects of slow extinction to be pretty much the same as fast extinction....like the asteroid or comet hitting the Earth we see almost on an annual basis coming out of Hollywood! If it were the asteroid that was coming and going to kill us all in....let's say six months, there would be no limit to what people would be willing to do or to sacrifice to get Bruce Willis or whoever up there and destroy that meteor and save the planet! But, if we're told this world is going to continue to degrade, and extinctions will continue increasing, life will keep getting more and more difficult, until at some point, this planet cannot support humans or most other creatures....it just doesn't motivate people to take much of an interest....and I don't consider giving money to "green" charities, buying a solar panel or windmill, or marching to stop pipelines or marching to somehow bring atmospheric CO2 levels back to 350ppm to be quite the same thing as addressing an obvious systemic problem. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 I figured you would say that! But, anyone who actually does claim to have concern for those who come after us and have to inherit this world, need to stop living in denial and consider the prospects of slow extinction to be pretty much the same as fast extinction....like the asteroid or comet hitting the Earth we see almost on an annual basis coming out of Hollywood! Maybe you watch too much Hollywood. Biologists estimate more than 99% of all species that have ever lived went extinct...long before mankind ever started to burn petroleum. Those who inherit this world will actually have it better than those who have come before. They already live much longer. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
ReeferMadness Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 Sure I do...see "Canada" and "oil services contractors". Your premise is very selective with respect to Canadian mining interests partnering with "oppressive regimes" around the world, regimes that have/had U.S. support. But that is typical on this forum. You'll have to do better than that. What mining interest? And how does some company that happens to have its HQ in Toronto doing business internationally compare with the CIA teaching dictatorships how to torture people? And helping choose which people need torturing. You're reaching, buddy. As I said, it's obviously accomplices you're after, not allies. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) You'll have to do better than that. What mining interest? And how does some company that happens to have its HQ in Toronto doing business internationally compare with the CIA teaching dictatorships how to torture people? And helping choose which people need torturing. You're reaching, buddy. As I said, it's obviously accomplices you're after, not allies. More denial....not unexpected. Canadian mining interests around the world get very cozy with many unsavory governments. But we will let you pretend otherwise. We will let you ignore all the reports of Canadian oil service workers fleeing Libya, and that fun photo of PM Martin in Ghadaffi's party tent...buddy. Edited January 2, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
ReeferMadness Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 More denial....not unexpected. Canadian mining interests around the world get very cozy with many unsavory governments. But we will let you pretend otherwise. We will let you ignore all the reports of Canadian oil service workers fleeing Libya, and that fun photo of PM Martin in Ghadaffi's party tent...buddy. that's the best you can do? your CIA teaches torture techniques and you have a picture of a party tent? Sure, that's practically the same thing. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 that's the best you can do? your CIA teaches torture techniques and you have a picture of a party tent? Sure, that's practically the same thing. Do you want me to post photos from Somalia ? What does any of this have to do with lower gas prices ? Oh yeah....tree hugging socialists hate cheap oil ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted January 3, 2015 Report Posted January 3, 2015 Like the Rapture? -k Well, not yet, anyway. Quote
WIP Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) More denial....not unexpected. Canadian mining interests around the world get very cozy with many unsavory governments. But we will let you pretend otherwise. We will let you ignore all the reports of Canadian oil service workers fleeing Libya, and that fun photo of PM Martin in Ghadaffi's party tent...buddy. If there were Canadian oil service companies working in Libya, that would be just a minor offense compared to what Canadian gold and nickel and other ventures are doing in our name, as they leave behind depleted mines here for new opportunities in the Third World. A little light reading for anyone interested in the subject: Digging for Gold, Mining Corruption One of Africa’s Poorest and Most Embattled Countries is Prey to Canadian Mining Companies Searching for the Last Great Gold mine Canadian mining doing serious environmental harm, the IACHR is told Operations in nine Latin American countries continue with explicit Canadian state support, says report Canadian mining firms worst for environment, rights: Report Canadian mining companies are far and away the worst offenders in environmental, human rights and other abuses around the world, according to a global study commissioned by an industry association but never made public. Edited January 4, 2015 by WIP Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
WIP Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Maybe you watch too much Hollywood. Biologists estimate more than 99% of all species that have ever lived went extinct...long before mankind ever started to burn petroleum. Those who inherit this world will actually have it better than those who have come before. They already live much longer. Except those paleontologists and geologists also note that most animals (and plant species also....let's not forget them) become extinct during climate change events that cause large scale extinctions. Most extinctions have been caused by large scale volcanic activity...that's how important maintaining a proper balance of CO2 levels is for long term flourishing of life. Of five - what are considered 'mass' extinction events (prior to the one we are already beginning now) the major contributing factor has been sudden spikes in sequestered carbon and methane gas release caused by a rapid warming in global average temperatures....it's important to note that even the most famous extinction...because it took out the dinosaurs, was actually the 2nd largest extinction in planetary history. The Cretaceous/Tertiary Event approximately 63 million years ago, has now been determined to have had a strong volcanic contributing factor (it wasn't just the asteroid that did it) when India slammed into the continent of Asia and resulted in large volcanic flows leaving behind a desolate rocky formation today called the Deccan Traps. Prior to the Cambrian "Explosion" when most groups of animal species arose, there is another extinction during the long age that Earth could only support microbes. I forget the exact era in geologic history it happened, but from what little can be determined about age of one-celled organisms, the introduction of photosynthesizing cells that left behind oxygen as a waste product, killed off most of the anaerobic bacteria that were living above ground at the time. So, this one would be the only other extinction where a single species was the root cause of extinction! But, everything worked out in the end, as new life flourished. The danger of planetary volcanic extinctions is that they carry the potential of wiping out life on Earth...at least complex life, maybe not the microbes. Some paleontologists believe that the Permian/Triassic Extinction 250 million years ago, almost did the job and ended life on Earth. So, it's not something to make light of and definitely not something to pass off as part of some natural cycle of life...like these idiot oil-funded climate change denying lobbyists do all across right wing media. The Earth supports a complex biosphere as long as it is able to maintain a careful balance, which has included the gradual increase of carbon sequestration over the millenia - in response to the Sun's increasing warming and energy release. Eventually, carbon levels won't be reduced enough to prevent overheating and ending life on Earth. But, by natural processes, that would take another 500 to 1 billion years before that time came along! The human race and a whole lot more species could come and go before that time. What we are doing right now, is a chemical experiment on the natural life support system of this planet. Past evidence tells us that it's when GHG levels suddenly rise and temperatures increase, that extinctions become a problem...and large numbers of plants and animals die off and the ecosystems have to rebuild themselves. But, if our present gamble with how much stored carbon can be returned to the atmosphere fails, then we or future generations are screwed! So much for children and future generations watching everything fall apart, and so much for any sort of legacy. Only a complete nihilist can be satisfied with these prospects. And only the delusional and self-deluded can keep living in denial of the obvious! Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Michael Hardner Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Well, she was right at least this once. No, she wasn't right. She isn't president and the president didn't do this. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Posted January 4, 2015 No, she wasn't right. She isn't president and the president didn't do this. She was right....$2.00 gas was not only possible, but it was achieved with ease and without economic calamity. Drill...Baby...Drill !! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Michael Hardner Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 She was right.... "In 2011, the MSM mercilessly mocked Michele Bachmann for saying that if she became president, gas prices would fall to under $2/gallon. " Wrong. She's not president, although still hugely mockable. And hopefully she can stay in the spotlight for a bit longer. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Posted January 4, 2015 "In 2011, the MSM mercilessly mocked Michele Bachmann for saying that if she became president, gas prices would fall to under $2/gallon. " Thank you for proving the point. Michele appreciates your support ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Michael Hardner Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Thank you for proving the point. Not the president. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
GostHacked Posted January 5, 2015 Report Posted January 5, 2015 You keep biting that hook Mike. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) Michele Bachmann's supply side promise came true.....gas is down to $0.50/liter in my neck of the woods, and the "oil" comes from Canada ! Edited January 5, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
WIP Posted January 5, 2015 Report Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) She was right....$2.00 gas was not only possible, but it was achieved with ease and without economic calamity. Drill...Baby...Drill !! Except that this blithering idiot didn't really understand the issue anyway....and neither did the other "drill, baby drill" parrots! Because, the latest real information on what's happening with the global oil business, is that falling world demand (especially in China) was the main contributing factor for the collapse in oil prices/ that, and a lack of will by OPEC and other major oil producers to scale back their oil production...as they usually do when they want to keep prices in the comfort zone...their comfort zone, not ours...led to the collapse in oil prices. This lengthy interview with Arthur Berman in Oilprice.com explains much of the factors behind the price changes, as well as providing some necessary insight into the still-existing crisis facing the oil industry: the costs of production and refining of new oil will continue to increase, and has already reached levels where the global economies go into recession because of those prices. So, every time the price of oil goes over $100 a barrel (where the producers of shale, tar sands, and deep sea oil need them to make a profit) economies go into recession and demand for oil drops. And when demand drops, oil prices fall, and at below $50 a barrel, the price is already too low to keep producing...let alone start up new ventures in unconventional oil development! This may not be good news for the economy; but in the long run it is good news for everyone! Think of it as the world being forced to take the bitter medicine of having to move away from an until-now cheap/ but environmentally destructive source of energy and products (plastics, fertilizers etc.). In the long run, we don't have a choice about ending the petroleum age. It will end one way or another...whether the prices are too high or too cheap. And it would be smart to start planning for the future. Too bad consumer capitalistic economies are not designed for long term planning. Some way, somehow, it will all need a complete overhaul! Edited January 5, 2015 by WIP Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
guyser Posted January 5, 2015 Report Posted January 5, 2015 Except that this blithering idiot didn't really understand the issue anyway....The GOP fanciers have only straws to grasp , Michele is their straw today. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.