[Samseau]

Another victory for the Obama administration!


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...1M7LAV.DTL



i can only imagine what sort of fucked up policies make it so oil companies can hold a cartel over the rest of the American public

[kosko]

I am confused to how it involves Obama? If you have a stockpile of petrol gas and the closest available buyer isn't interested what do you do? These refineries, especially on the Gulf Coast run almost 24-7. A lot of that Oil is coming from the tar sands, and those refineries are the only ones close enough to handle the shitty bitumen sand we send down.

Market oil prices have very little to do with gas prices at the pump. There are many stages in between that chain which effects why the price is. Getting stuff out of the ground, speculation. wholesale markets, etc.. all have to do with it.

Yes it sucks. But by the argument being presented Canada should have gas as cheap as the Middle east. Canada still has to import oil, since the USA govt won't let us build a continues pipeline to the Eastern part of Canada. We are one of the top producers on the globe and still pay sky high prices. The oil industry has us by the balls, Obama is a slave to them just as much as we are.

[speakeasy]

This is the free market that people like Tenderman and Brian want.

[Samseau]

BEFORE this gets into the whole free-market debate....

See, I don't think this is free-market issue here.

But there are two arguments, for and against; are markets being manipulated or not?


FOR:

If it was a free-market, the surplus gasoline would be sold to American consumers, no? Only government interference could prevent the gas from being sold to Americans despite record prices.


AGAINST:

Even though Americans are paying sky-high gas prices today, other countries are paying even more money for gas. Therefore it's in the interest of oil companies to ship their gas overseas.



As for Obama:


No matter how you look at the situation, there is high demand for gas. There should be more refineries built to meet this demand, but there are not. Since Obama is directly in charge of agencies which allow refineries to be built, I'll place the blame at the Executive branch's feet.

[tenderman100]

(12-07-2011 03:05 AM)kosko Wrote:  

I am confused to how it involves Obama? If you have a stockpile of petrol gas and the closest available buyer isn't interested what do you do? These refineries, especially on the Gulf Coast run almost 24-7. A lot of that Oil is coming from the tar sands, and those refineries are the only ones close enough to handle the shitty bitumen sand we send down.

Market oil prices have very little to do with gas prices at the pump. There are many stages in between that chain which effects why the price is. Getting stuff out of the ground, speculation. wholesale markets, etc.. all have to do with it.

Yes it sucks. But by the argument being presented Canada should have gas as cheap as the Middle east. Canada still has to import oil, since the USA govt won't let us build a continues pipeline to the Eastern part of Canada. We are one of the top producers on the globe and still pay sky high prices. The oil industry has us by the balls, Obama is a slave to them just as much as we are.

Very well said, except for the final part "the oil industry has us by the balls."

No, oil and oil refining is a big part of the American economy, plus our economy RUNS on oil....it's OIL that is critical, though I would question the phrase "got us by the balls."

[tenderman100]

(12-07-2011 03:16 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

This is the free market that people like Tenderman and Brian want.

So, then we do....well WHAT exactly? Have some bureaucrat in Washington tell some oil refinery manager in Texas how much gasoline he should produce? Where he should ship it too? And what price he should charge?

Railing against the "free market" is demagoguery. Next time you set up a fuck-close date by text, remember that it is the "free market" that produced that cell phone in your hands.

[kosko]

(12-07-2011 03:36 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

BEFORE this gets into the whole free-market debate....

See, I don't think this is free-market issue here.

But there are two arguments, for and against; are markets being manipulated or not?


FOR:

If it was a free-market, the surplus gasoline would be sold to American consumers, no? Only government interference could prevent the gas from being sold to Americans despite record prices.


AGAINST:

Even though Americans are paying sky-high gas prices today, other countries are paying even more money for gas. Therefore it's in the interest of oil companies to ship their gas overseas.



As for Obama:


No matter how you look at the situation, there is high demand for gas. There should be more refineries built to meet this demand, but there are not. Since Obama is directly in charge of agencies which allow refineries to be built, I'll place the blame at the Executive branch's feet.

You can't fault Obama on this. Or the market. The Gas industry has set things up this way.

There are no 'gas surpluses' Refineries are running at full blast, each drop is being used. Gas companies have scaled back refining, to below the 115% they we're doing when prices we're sky high. Now they are at about 85%, and use this to fudge around prices.


How can you demand to sell something to Americans that is not theirs? It isn't American oil that is being refined its Exxon, Suncor, etc. Does the Chinese factory worker have to be sold Nike shoes even though they make it? No. It is still Nike product at the end of the day and they sell it where they please.

The price of gas is the same across the board. There is a market price set at the exchange. If the price of petrol is cheaper in one country vs. the next it is because it is either taxed or subsidized. In Countries where the Gas/Oil companies are state run they offer subsides to locals which makes gas dirt cheap. America was just like this, when stuff was exploding out of the wells all over the Country, and Big Oil mostly serviced the American market. Those days have passed though, America ate through all of its own large oil wells in by the 70's.

Refineries are extremely expensive to build. The old beasts on the Gulf Coast should of been replaced a long time ago. But no funds exist for this. Plus there is little money to be made in refining this - is why the private corps have been capping capacity and slowing selling off plants. There is little to no net gain to build a new plant. This is where the Government F-ed things up. The same issue that is present with refineries exists with nuclear technology also. Government roadblocks and regulations has made these two projects some of the most costly ventures to take on.

The large oil crops started cutting capacity to meet with American loss of demand. The recession/contraction of the economy caused a disappearance of demand for energy.

Plus its difficult to simply "ramp up" production. My buddy who worked at a up-grader would work their "ramp ups" or "shutdowns" when they would re-organize things and tinker stuff to get going for a big run or a scale back.


And yes Big Oil does have us by the balls. Tenderman, you even stated it yourself. The Economy = Energy. With no energy you have no capacity for growth. Energy facilitates the expansion of credit because you need surplus to entice investment* (*speculation).

Big Oil knows this and will continue to rape, they are so arrogant and behind they don't even have any new technologies ready for when oil starts to dry up (this has been known for 20 years), the nose dive will be their biggest pay day and they are just waiting to cash in. How messed.

[Samseau]

(12-07-2011 12:09 PM)kosko Wrote:  

Samseau Wrote:

As for Obama:

No matter how you look at the situation, there is high demand for gas. There should be more refineries built to meet this demand, but there are not. Since Obama is directly in charge of agencies which allow refineries to be built, I'll place the blame at the Executive branch's feet.

You can't fault Obama on this.

Yes I can.

Let's use your own logic:

Quote:

Refineries are extremely expensive to build. The old beasts on the Gulf Coast should of been replaced a long time ago. But no funds exist for this. Plus there is little money to be made in refining this - is why the private corps have been capping capacity and slowing selling off plants. There is little to no net gain to build a new plant. This is where the Government F-ed things up. The same issue that is present with refineries exists with nuclear technology also. Government roadblocks and regulations has made these two projects some of the most costly ventures to take on.

And who is in charge of these roadblocks?

http://www.petrostrategies.org/Links/gov...encies.htm

The executive branch is. The DOA, EPA, etc. Obama has total control over this.

[hydrogonian]

Railing for the "free market" is also demagoguery. This is reinforced by the example used after tendermanns statement, which is also one of his maligned 'false choices'. This guys rhetorical strategies are only valid insofar as they benefit him, I'm sure.

"Believe in the free market or you won't have cell phones". Bang! Demagoguery and a 'false choice' in one sentence.

It works both ways.

Also, I'm surprised at the lack of acceptance as to the fact that "demagoguery" is the way politics works, now and forever, on both sides of the fence. Why? Because fear works. You will never be able to counter large scale fear with logic. Now, the question that remains is are you going to only see the "demagoguery" when it doesn't benefit your views, or will you have a normal, balanced view free from dogma and irrational idealization of a particular camp? Anyway, I'm actually just talking to myself. The question is 'rhetorical'.

[kosko]

The "Free Market" and the "State" are both the enemy. Both leach off each other and tango step in step. The State thrives off the built in inadequacies that the market produces, and on the other side the market is protected by rules and regulations put forth by the state. A balance to both is needed, but we sit picking one over the other, are arguments keep the music going as they both tango to are very own destruction. Railing for either is shortsighted, each needs each other to thrive. The State expands every time the market fucks up, and when the state "contracts" (sells off assets, pounds away at regulations and protections, etc.) the market flourishes.

Politics = Keeping both sides distracted thus keeping the music going so both The Market and State can continue their "dance".

Every topic one side does more harm then the other. But in regards to oil/energy I am hesitant to blame either. The situation has spiraled out of control that neither the market or the State can do much. Big Oil runs the show. Energy is the life blood of everything from credit creation to agriculture. Though The State and the Market play big roles in how energy is dolled out. The Big Players in the Board rooms in Houston, London and Calgary can effect every facet of human life from the wars raged, starving populations, and financial recessions.

[scotian]

(12-07-2011 03:05 AM)kosko Wrote:  

I am confused to how it involves Obama? If you have a stockpile of petrol gas and the closest available buyer isn't interested what do you do? These refineries, especially on the Gulf Coast run almost 24-7. A lot of that Oil is coming from the tar sands, and those refineries are the only ones close enough to handle the shitty bitumen sand we send down.

Market oil prices have very little to do with gas prices at the pump. There are many stages in between that chain which effects why the price is. Getting stuff out of the ground, speculation. wholesale markets, etc.. all have to do with it.

Yes it sucks. But by the argument being presented Canada should have gas as cheap as the Middle east. Canada still has to import oil, since the USA govt won't let us build a continues pipeline to the Eastern part of Canada. We are one of the top producers on the globe and still pay sky high prices. The oil industry has us by the balls, Obama is a slave to them just as much as we are.

Kosko, don't we already have a pipeline running from Alberta to Sarnia? The main reason our gasoline is so expensive in Canada is due to high federal and provincial taxes, and that "shitty bitumen" from the "tar sands", helps our country sustain such a high standard of living and employs hundreds of thousands of Canadians, myself included!

Oh ya, Obama just put a stop the the expansion of the Keystone pipeline which would have delivered even more Canadian oil to the Gulf Coast refineries, which would have in turn created something like 20,000+ jobs state side!

[kosko]

(12-08-2011 10:04 PM)scotian Wrote:  

(12-07-2011 03:05 AM)kosko Wrote:  

I am confused to how it involves Obama? If you have a stockpile of petrol gas and the closest available buyer isn't interested what do you do? These refineries, especially on the Gulf Coast run almost 24-7. A lot of that Oil is coming from the tar sands, and those refineries are the only ones close enough to handle the shitty bitumen sand we send down.

Market oil prices have very little to do with gas prices at the pump. There are many stages in between that chain which effects why the price is. Getting stuff out of the ground, speculation. wholesale markets, etc.. all have to do with it.

Yes it sucks. But by the argument being presented Canada should have gas as cheap as the Middle east. Canada still has to import oil, since the USA govt won't let us build a continues pipeline to the Eastern part of Canada. We are one of the top producers on the globe and still pay sky high prices. The oil industry has us by the balls, Obama is a slave to them just as much as we are.

Kosko, don't we already have a pipeline running from Alberta to Sarnia? The main reason our gasoline is so expensive in Canada is due to high federal and provincial taxes, and that "shitty bitumen" from the "tar sands", helps our country sustain such a high standard of living and employs hundreds of thousands of Canadians, myself included!

Oh ya, Obama just put a stop the the expansion of the Keystone pipeline which would have delivered even more Canadian oil to the Gulf Coast refineries, which would have in turn created something like 20,000+ jobs state side!

Yes we do! But the rest of Canada past that is left in the dark. Eastern Canada still has to import internationally. Plus America has messed around with us potentially building a key Pacific Pipeline to open up the doors to the Chinese.

The Keystone fiasco upsets me. How toothless we are to not give the USA any serious ramifications for fucking us over like that. Are lips are sealed tightly on Obama's cock. Proof? Harper jets down to D.C. to "meet" with Obama and he only gives him 30 mins of his time.

Obama has tossed aside the Keystone issue for post-election because he doesn't want that mess brewing up during his campaign. In the meantime we Canadians are left sit and wait as potential money burns away.

The Tar Sands ? Well I have no "major" qualms about the Tar Sands, it is dirty as hell and resource intensive - but it is what it is. My major issues come to that fact that Canada can't exploit the tar sends to its best interests like other nations can their own oil, such as Norway for example.

[scotian]

[/quote]


Yes we do! But the rest of Canada past that is left in the dark. Eastern Canada still has to import internationally. Plus America has messed around with us potentially building a key Pacific Pipeline to open up the doors to the Chinese.

The Keystone fiasco upsets me. How toothless we are to not give the USA any serious ramifications for fucking us over like that. Are lips are sealed tightly on Obama's cock. Proof? Harper jets down to D.C. to "meet" with Obama and he only gives him 30 mins of his time.

Obama has tossed aside the Keystone issue for post-election because he doesn't want that mess brewing up during his campaign. In the meantime we Canadians are left sit and wait as potential money burns away.

The Tar Sands ? Well I have no "major" qualms about the Tar Sands, it is dirty as hell and resource intensive - but it is what it is. My major issues come to that fact that Canada can't exploit the tar sends to its best interests like other nations can their own oil, such as Norway for example.

[/quote]

I don't like to comment about USA politics but when they cancelled that pipeline expansion, it directly affected my job security! I agree that Obama did this to get re-elected, but I think you're over stating Canada's ability to do anything to the states, because of our NAFTA commitments, we are America's little bitch and we'll take whatever they give!

We export something like 95% of our oil state side, and until the cancellation of the pipeline, they had been a great customer! This may actually be a blessing in disguise, as it may force us to build more refineries in Alberta, and build that pipeline to the Pacific coast, if the Americans don't want our oil, I"m sure the Asians will!

From a Canadian perspective, Bush was actually better for us than Obama, he was a pro-business oil man who understood the economic and security benefits of importing oil from Canada rather than from rogue states like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya,etc.

How do you figure we're not able to best exploit our oil resources like Norway?