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.
The so-called (and apparently so hated) "big oil" companies are in business to provide a product that we Americans, and our various industries (trucking, for one) need. They are not our enemy!!! We need what they produce, and we always will.
The U.S. government should not be standing in the way. They are actually in violation of the Constitution, in my opinion: "We the people of the United Sates, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".
Therein describes the whole purpose (and the duty) of our elected government.
When they prevent the oil companies from providing the product that we need (oil), they are not promoting the "general welfare", nor are they "securing the blessings of liberty", and I would argue that this is hurting the common defense as well, as without oil, we could not defend ourselves (what if the foreign oil producers cut us off from that supply?).
I think you, and others, better take a hard look at this issue, because Queen Pelosi is dead wrong here, and most of the American people know it. Her Party is going to pay for this big time in November, mark my words.
The Democrats alone have put the U.S. in this serious and dangerous position. There is no shortage of oil. But we are hamstrung here by foolish energy policies that are unfavorable to our independence and threaten our very freedom.
"Take Exxon Mobil, which on Thursday reported the highest quarterly profit ever and is the main target of any “windfall” tax surcharge.
Yet if its profits are at record highs, its tax bills are already at record highs too.
Between 2003 and 2007, Exxon paid $64.7 billion in U.S. taxes, exceeding its after-tax U.S. earnings by more than $19 billion.
That sounds like a government windfall to us, but perhaps we’re missing some Obama-Durbin business subtlety. Maybe they have in mind profit margins as a percentage of sales.
Yet by that standard Exxon’s profits don’t seem so large. Exxon’s profit margin stood at 10% for 2007, which is hardly out of line with the oil and gas industry average of 8.3%, or the 8.9% for U.S. manufacturing (excluding the sputtering auto makers). If that’s what constitutes windfall profits, most of corporate America would qualify.
Take aerospace or machinery — both 8.2% in 2007.
Chemicals had an average margin of 12.7%.
Computers: 13.7%.
Electronics and appliances: 14.5%.
Pharmaceuticals (18.4%)
and beverages and tobacco (19.1%) round out the Census Bureau’s industry rankings.
The latter two double the returns of Big Oil, though of course government has already became a tacit shareholder in Big Tobacco through the various legal settlements that guarantee a revenue stream for years to come."
"Very knowledgeable people"? Who? The Democrats? They aren't "very knowledgeable" in this area, or they are just plain lying.
We absolutely can "drill our way out", and we should. This is a supply problem, but there isn't a shortage. .
Speculators have been around long before the Bush Administration ("your administration"? I thought he was President of the whole country?) Bush has not created speculators, nor has he "allowed them to flourish", as you say. I'm sorry. I don't want to sound mean, but you don't know what you are talking about. You are just parroting the Democrat Party propaganda.
Re. "Ten Reasons ... " link above: Socialist "American Progress" Website (how did I guess).
I won't even bother with the others. The first one says it all.
Pelosi is right on the money. We will never develop any other form of energy when oil is cheap from the Arabs or from fouling up the coast. The "common American" needs to cut back on using up the planet like a pig. The "common American" uses 25 times the resources other people use- even in developed nations like those in Europe. And we are not going to allow our shores to be fouled with drilling rigs and clumps of oil in the sand on our beaches. There is a reason New Orleans doesn't have beaches.
When was the last time our shores were "fouled with drilling rigs and clumps of oil in the sand on our beaches"?
Did you know that oil bubbles up naturally from the ocean bottom in various places, and it presumably can find it's way to the beach?
Foreigners are already drilling off our shores. They will do it no matter what.
Oil rigs in most cases are far enough off shore that you cannot even see them from the beach.
Drilling off shore is safe. Tell me the last time there has been a major spill, blowout, or what-have-you from an oil rig?
Even the spill from the Exxon Vadiz (sp?) has not left a trace that can be seen today.
Who is the "common American" you speak of. Does this mean I should cut back, but Al Gore does not have too?
I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about.
God forbid we are to ever live in a manner where we can coexist in complete harmony and with mutual respect with our planet.
Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya...
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneOne
It doesn't matter if 99% of the American people want offshore drilling, if she's a smart and responsible elected official, she'll do whatever the constituents in her district want her to do. If they oppose drilling, or don't mind if she opposes it, then so be it.
I disagree with her and think there should be more drilling, but using the argument that a congressman should vote for it just because the majority of the people across the country think it's a good idea is not really valid.
I think you missed the point. It's not her vote that's at issue, it's the fact that as the Speaker of the House, she's BLOCKING the house from voting on it! There's a teensie weensie bit of a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luiso
The Dems say NO to every option .
That reminds me of a very good political cartoon someone showed me the other day. I don't want to show it inline for fear of the copyright censors getting involved, so I'll just post the link - it's definitely worth the click: http://iamisp.com/energy-options2.jpg (broken link)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveTodayLez08
I could care less about the price of oil.
We need to invest in mass transit, bike trails, smart growth, etc to make us less dependent on oil.
You're very naive. You obviously live in Little Rock (btw - what's wrong with AR? Why the 'bleh'? I have family there, and I love visiting - it's beautiful country), and rarely think outside your own personal situation. You think that everyone in the country can and should live exactly as you do. Most of this country is rural - being from AR, you should already know that "mass transit" in those areas isn't a possibility.
As for the price of oil, you do know that every single thing you buy - groceries and gasoline and furniture and clothing and everything else - gets carted around the country from its point of origin to your local store in trucks, right? Big, heavy trucks that get less than 10 MPG. Do you think they get their diesel fuel for free? The increase in fuel costs gets passed onto their customers, and their customers' customers, etc., all the way down to YOU. "If you got it, a truck brought it."
Renewing our drilling programs in Alaska and elsewhere will absolutely benefit everyone in lower prices, as just the talk of authorizing more offshore drilling (according to analysts, anyway) has been a factor in the falling prices in the last couple of weeks.
Anyway, the oil companies are not the enemy here. They are trying to produce a product that America needs. For many, many years, they provided that product at affordable prices. When we cut off drilling and exploration in our own country, thereby increasing or reliance on foreign oil, our troubles began. This is a supply and demand problem, plain and simple.
Increasing supply will absolutely bring prices down. It always does. Prices are lower now partly because we are driving less, so there is an increase in supply, and as stated above, because of anticipation (speculation) of more supply due to the demand that we start drilling and producing here.
I read that the oil companies make only about 8 cents/gallon profit on gasoline. In turn the local gas stations also only make a few cents profit on gasoline. Meanwhile, the government makes more on a gallon of gasoline than the oil companies that produce it, and the government has no "cost". Talk about "windfall profit"!
Our problem here is the government. Period. We have got to allow these companies to do what they are in business to do. We have hamstrung them for far too many years. They are not evil. They are trying to provide something we need, and they should be allowed to do it at a profit. If they can't, they won't. And we will be the losers. Our very existence as a free country depends on our ability to produce energy — all that we need — at an affordable price.
We do not have to be like Europe. Why do Democrats think we should be? We have the resources. They don't. They must import their oil and gas. That's why they pay more for it. We don't have to. We have it right here, and we should be drilling and producing.
Finally, scientists now believe that the earth is constantly producing oil. So, it is not a finite resource. It does not come from dinosaurs!
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker
You must have stock in the oil companies to write such lies.
Sorry. I don't own any stock. I wish I did. I'm a self employed tile contractor living in an 1860's farm house, and can no longer afford to buy heating oil. So, we're cold in the winter.
That is my interest in this issue.
I do know something about this though, as I once worked for an oceanographic instruments company in S. California (Hydro Products, and later Sub Sea Systems). We built underwater TV systems for the offshore drilling and commercial diving industries, and also remote controlled vehicles.
In my job, I made leases of TV systems to the driling companies. We got all the newsletters from the "oil patch", and I read a lot about drilling, the cost of rigs, leasing of tracts, and various other aspects of the oil drilling industry. This was all in my former life.
I'm glad she blocked it.
Every gallon of gasoline we burn adds 20 pounds of CO2 to the atmopshere.
I could care less about the price of oil.
We need to invest in mass transit, bike trails, smart growth, etc to make us less dependent on oil.
The sooner we start drilling - the sooner oil will be flowing. There is NO reason not to drill -
As for the price of oil - you should care - for there are far more products / uses for oil than simply fuel for cars.
And as for investing in "mass transit" "bike trails" etc; great for a few areas of the country but absolutely of no assistance in a majority of the country - there are many areas where Mass transit simply does not work. Bike trails? Where the snow gets 5 feet deep? Smart growth? You are kidding -
For me to go the grocery store is a 40 mile round trip. My office is a little over 40 miles - one way. Understand, I'm not complaining because I chose to live where I do -
But, the reality is, not everyone lives in big cities - or in areas where that Mass Transit will work -
The sooner we start drilling - the sooner oil will be flowing. There is NO reason not to drill -
As for the price of oil - you should care - for there are far more products / uses for oil than simply fuel for cars.
And as for investing in "mass transit" "bike trails" etc; great for a few areas of the country but absolutely of no assistance in a majority of the country - there are many areas where Mass transit simply does not work. Bike trails? Where the snow gets 5 feet deep? Smart growth? You are kidding -
For me to go the grocery store is a 40 mile round trip. My office is a little over 40 miles - one way. Understand, I'm not complaining because I chose to live where I do -
But, the reality is, not everyone lives in big cities - or in areas where that Mass Transit will work -
Drill - start Now
Soon there will be electric cars to meet your commuting needs, unless you just don't want one and want to continue to put CO2 into the atmosphere.
I know that not everyone lives in a huge city and I know all our oil is not used just for transportation BUT the majority of it is.
Now if you chose to live where you live, what makes you think you're entitled to cheap gas when you're the one who wanted to live so far away from everything?
ROFLMAO! Give me a break. And just where do you get that from? Let me guess. Perhaps from some of Al Gores propaganda? Or some left wing blog.
Even if that was true, WHO CARES!!! Trees and plants need CO2 anyway.
Well maybe you couldn't care less, but I couldn't afford heating oil last winter, and this year I can't afford gasoline or heating oil. So, it's going to be another cold winter for me, and I have to drive for work (I'm self employed, and I drive over 20k miles/year). This is hurting me big time, and it is absolutely destroying our economy. Have you done any grocery shopping? Everything is going up by leaps and bounds, because of fuel prices that shippers must pay. You can bet I DO CARE about the price of gasoline, and I'm one of those demanding that we start drilling here.
So, we are hurt by:
Food prices
Gasoline prices
Heating oil prices
Virtually anything that depends in some way on energy prices (which is just about everything).
Wonderful. Who's going to invest in mass transit when most of the mass transit systems in the country are losing money, and besides, they rarely go where you need to go. Okay for some things, but not for day to day living.
Or, by "invest" do you mean "the government should do it"? That means taxes. No thank you. We all know how that scheme works. We'd all be getting soaked and still have the same problem.
Are you going to ride a bike to work? Wouldn't work for me. I'm in the country in an area that has WINTER.
What the heck is "smart growth"? Sounds like another liberal euphemism for something I wouldn't want.
Your listening to Pelosi and her ilk. That simply is not true. Some oil people that have called in to talk shows I listen to say that if they had the go ahead, in some areas they could be in production mode in six months or less. Depends on whether you are talking about proven reserves that are right now off limits, or completely new tracts that are as yet unknown, as to their value in terms of oil production.
The Democrats are lying about this, and they know it. Do some homework.
For some things yes. On this issue, it absolutely is the best thing for America. We simply must be energy independent, and there is no reason why we can't be. There is plenty of oil. The only thing standing in the way are the Democrats who are kowtowing to the radical leftist environmental groups; those bent on destroying America.
You really think I care that you can't afford heating oil?
The reason mass transit is losing money is because people are driving less and the money that would normally come from people buying gas is not there.
I'm not necessarily saying mass transit should be done by the government. I'm sure a private company would be successful if they decided to build their own mass transit network/system/whatever.
I want America to be independent from fossil fuels because using fossil fuels is horrible for the earth. Maybe you want to destory the earth but hey, I live on this planet too and so do billions of other people besides us.
I would most certainly ride a bike to work and I most certainly will, once it cools off. At the moment, we're having 100+ degree weather so it wouldn't be THE smartest thing in the world.
Now if you chose to live where you live, what makes you think you're entitled to cheap gas when you're the one who wanted to live so far away from everything?
I do not see anyone on the side of drilling making the point that they are "entitled" to cheap gas. It does seem however that those on the other side of the discussion do in fact believe that they are entitled to bike paths, light rail, etc.
Soon there will be electric cars to meet your commuting needs, unless you just don't want one and want to continue to put CO2 into the atmosphere.
I know that not everyone lives in a huge city and I know all our oil is not used just for transportation BUT the majority of it is.
Now if you chose to live where you live, what makes you think you're entitled to cheap gas when you're the one who wanted to live so far away from everything?
Isn't C02 in the atmosphere a good thing? I thought that is how the green stuff on our earth survived?
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.
