POLL: Democrats are calling for nationalization of the oil industry. Do you feel the government should also nationalize (McCain, Putin)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We need not make the same mistakes we have made in the past by interfering in the market. We need not go the route of China or Venezuela, who are doomed to failure but at least they feel good today. Please, embrace a market solution and turn away from this disastrous idea that nationalization can ever be a good thing.
The gas lines, as I remember, were during the Carter regime and his bumbling
ineptitude at trying to solve the problem. That does, however, tend to validate your statement regarding government intervention.
As for good intentions, the Sherman Antitrust Laws were written to regulate companies with bad intentions, which Exxon has clearly demonstrated by their unbridled greed at the expense of the american consumer.
As far as embracing a market solution, we have been doing that for the last 4 years and the results are still soaring gas prices.......
What do expect when we pay huge salaries to execs at GM, for example. Yesterday their stock was at iys lowest since 1975 - You know when Detroit was making the big gas hog cars and then Toyota & Honda came in with small cars and took away their market. (Kind of like the SUV's today) "Those that can't remember the past etc. And these are the imbeciles we expect to anticipate another future oil shortage. They couldn't figure it out then.
Honda just produced the first hydrogen car - GM and Ford, HELLO OUT THERE- Where have you guys been. You shouldv'e known that big oil was going to dump you sooner or later.
The big three were doing what capitalism is supposed to do. Exploit the situation, make giant cars instead of a diverse fleet. Refuse to invest in being more efficient. So they would have to pay less on research and development in order to maximize profits for stockholders.
The gas lines, as I remember, were during the Carter regime and his bumbling
ineptitude at trying to solve the problem. That does, however, tend to validate your statement regarding government intervention.
As for good intentions, the Sherman Antitrust Laws were written to regulate companies with bad intentions, which Exxon has clearly demonstrated by their unbridled greed at the expense of the american consumer.
As far as embracing a market solution, we have been doing that for the last 4 years and the results are still soaring gas prices.......
No, we haven't embraced market solutions for going on 100 years. What about Sarbox? That was legislation written to clarify accounting among public companies. Our markets have suffered as a result. London gains more influence in the financial sphere everyday, because the costs imposed through Sarbox lead companies to seek greener pasture elsewhere. Please, you can't actually be a proponent of benevolent government, can you? Soaring gas prices are nothing more than the result of supply and demand. The world needs more oil than drillers can supply. Harsh, yet simple. Regulation, like central planning is a tricky business, that humans are not adept at. The Soviets are no more...the Chinese are better capitalists than we are...there is a hint there somewhere...
The big three were doing what capitalism is supposed to do. Exploit the situation, make giant cars instead of a diverse fleet. Refuse to invest in being more efficient. So they would have to pay less on research and development in order to maximize profits for stockholders.
DITTO _ And the collossal mistake of GM was to recall the perfectly good
electric car. Tom Hanks will attest that it was a wonderful vehicle.
Bet they wish they had it on line now..............
No, we haven't embraced market solutions for going on 100 years. What about Sarbox? That was legislation written to clarify accounting among public companies. Our markets have suffered as a result. London gains more influence in the financial sphere everyday, because the costs imposed through Sarbox lead companies to seek greener pasture elsewhere. Please, you can't actually be a proponent of benevolent government, can you? Soaring gas prices are nothing more than the result of supply and demand. The world needs more oil than drillers can supply. Harsh, yet simple. Regulation, like central planning is a tricky business, that humans are not adept at. The Soviets are no more...the Chinese are better capitalists than we are...there is a hint there somewhere...
We have a different understanding of antitrust laws. To me, they are not regulation, they are laws on the books. The problems stem from collusion between big oil and politicians who have a stake and interest in not solving
the rising price. Why are you so stuck on their propaganda about supply and demand issues. I trust neither them nor the the bureuracrats.
Pelosi was on Fox last week and Greta asked her why the oil companies aren't drilling on the leased land and Nancy said she didn't know. Thats unbelievible.
They lease millions of acres to iol companies but they don't know why ???
Wake up Baby !!!!!!!!!
We have a different understanding of antitrust laws. To me, they are not regulation, they are laws on the books. The problems stem from collusion between big oil and politicians who have a stake and interest in not solving
the rising price. Why are you so stuck on their propaganda about supply and demand issues. I trust neither them nor the the bureuracrats.
Pelosi was on Fox last week and Greta asked her why the oil companies aren't drilling on the leased land and Nancy said she didn't know. Thats unbelievible.
They lease millions of acres to iol companies but they don't know why ???
Wake up Baby !!!!!!!!!
Look, if you hold the view that simple supply and demand issues don't dictate the price of oil, there isn't anything I can do other than point you in the direction of an introductory econ text. Oil companies lease more land than is useful simply because its cheaper to lock up the land before hand than if oil is discovered on the land. If they're not drilling, its not economically feasible. It sucks, I know. But this is reality, not the X-files.
Look, if you hold the view that simple supply and demand issues don't dictate the price of oil, there isn't anything I can do other than point you in the direction of an introductory econ text. Oil companies lease more land than is useful simply because its cheaper to lock up the land before hand than if oil is discovered on the land. If they're not drilling, its not economically feasible. It sucks, I know. But this is reality, not the X-files.
Like you I had Econ in school. And from that I think a fifth grader could deduce that it isn't just simply supply and demand. There is no single answer. I try to think on 3 demensional levels and I still don't understand why you want to give big oil the easy out here. You appear to try to rationalize everything they are getting away with. You can rationalize anything.
The very fact that you say government lets big oil lease these lands and not drill presupposes collusion between the two. Why do they get a free pass to lease and no one else. There is excellent documentation about independents
being prevented from starting a refinery because of governmental red tape
purposefully created to stop them. Kinda like how the credit card companies wrote the draft for Bush's new bankruptcy law - You know the one that made it harder to claim credit cards in a bankruptcy.
Like you I had Econ in school. And from that I think a fifth grader could deduce that it isn't just simply supply and demand. There is no single answer. I try to think on 3 demensional levels and I still don't understand why you want to give big oil the easy out here. You appear to try to rationalize everything they are getting away with. You can rationalize anything.
The very fact that you say government lets big oil lease these lands and not drill presupposes collusion between the two. Why do they get a free pass to lease and no one else. There is excellent documentation about independents
being prevented from starting a refinery because of governmental red tape
purposefully created to stop them. Kinda like how the credit card companies wrote the draft for Bush's new bankruptcy law - You know the one that made it harder to claim credit cards in a bankruptcy.
Wow, and so you find examples of "collusion"...and you're still willing to cede MORE control to government!!! If someone is willing to take the risk to build a refinery, now, with crack spreads ensuring operation at breakeven or a loss, then they should be allowed to. Government should have no hand in that decision. I push the free market simply because we have recourse if we find wrongdoing. You no longer buy their product, or you buy less, or you create an alternative that spells the end. When you give control to the Feds, you have no recourse; even if you vote them out, the laws stay on the books in nearly all circumstances. They don't fluctuate in size according to need, they just grow ever larger. What exactly do you think they're going to do? Do you HONESTLY believe that they can run Exxon nearly as efficiently as Exxon can? Are they going to take Exxon's profits and funnel them into alternatives? They can't run the senate restaurant, let alone develop world shattering technology. NASA isn't nearly the organization it was in the '60s and '70s; the next time we go to the moon, it will be corporate sponsored. Further, by what inane logic should Exxon or anyone else be forced to take profit and put it to work developing "alternatives"? Do you honestly think they will work diligently to develop the technology that will spell their doom? Or, really, will you pay MORE so they can make up the spread?
Again, I not advocating nationalization. Enforcement of antitrust laws, already on the books will suffice for now as previously stated.
Unless you own a horse, not buying gas in todays world is hardly an option for survival.
I must admit that I do not want government programs to supplant free enterprise. But one thing our modern politicos do well is investigative committees (The Steriod Fiasco, for example).
What I continue to press for here is jumping into their s---. A punch in the nose, you might say, to let them know that they no any business can walk all over people. If they can do it to Bill Gates, they can do it to big oil.
And thanks for admitting that they are only out for their own self-aggrandiziment, and no one else matters one iota to them. We have e real beast on our hands and it needs to reined in before it not only destroys itself, but the rest of this country with it. Much bigger threat than terrorism or any of the other x-filers.
Maybe while seeking alternatives, we can nationalize in the process, to hold down prices and use money to find those alternatives........
Your words Pawporri...And that steroid investigation mess, was the damndest thing I've ever seen. I didn't know I paid my representatives to question baseball players about whether they jab a needle in their ass or not...Listen, you're hurting and you're angry. I get it. You want SOMEBODY to pay for rising gas prices. I semi-understand. You don't want to go down this road however. Until alternatives are acheived, the oil suppliers have pricing power. If they're pissed and extra costs are imposed on them, they'll pass that on to the consumer. I would be careful with trotting out "anti-trust" laws just to dole out some punishment, because you'll get plenty in return. With regard to oil companies acting in their own self-interest, should it be any other way? They're not there to snuggle...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
