Putin schools Obama again

  • DSK
  • 10-06-2015, 08:58 AM
Tell the Lama...he is scared shitless that Russia may control half the worlds oil supply. Yet numbnuts like you want to sell our oil to other nations! He wants to go to war over oil and you want to sell ours! God Damn... Originally Posted by WTF
That oil is not "ours" it is privately owned you fucking socialist. Don't you fuckers believe in free trade?

The oil monopoly has been broken. Fracking has changed everything.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 10-06-2015, 09:49 AM
That oil is not "ours" it is privately owned you fucking socialist. Don't you fuckers believe in free trade?

The oil monopoly has been broken. Fracking has changed everything. Originally Posted by DSK
Oh you mean the oil the government sold to oil companies when the rules were you could not sell on the open market....that oil. BIg oil wants to change those rules....Does big oil want to pay the government more to change the rules of that understanding?
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 10-06-2015, 10:00 AM
Wanna explain exactly why we shouldn't lift the export ban? Or why lifting it is inconsistent with worrying about the rest of the world's oil?

. Originally Posted by lustylad
We should not lift the ban because it keeps our natural resources here in this country. Where they belong. When Big oil bought those mineral rights....it was with that fact that it was for domestic consumption. Should all the folks that sold their mineral rights get to renegotiate with big oil to reflect the change you advocate?

Next ... if we have plenty of oil in this country...it makes War'ing in the Middle East over that resource , pointless. Understand? No Iraq war. No point. We have plenty of oil.

Should we sell our Western water overseas ... when we have California in a drought? California , which supplies much of our fruits and vegetables? Would it benefit , the person with the water rights? Yes, I suppose , but at the expense of all. We do not do stupid shit like that. Or we used to not before these large Companies washed your pea brain with CaCa.

We are talking about natural resources....not something produced. We limit sales of other things to other countries all the time in the name on national interests.

Are you advocating selling centrifuges to Iran in the name of Free Trade?

Come on lustladyboy....thinking before you ask a stupid question will save us all a little time.
A "significant military capability"??? ROFL>. they took 10 YEARS to fight to a draw, against a country we defeated in 100 hours of ground combat. Yeah.. real "significant"

But its good that you and Obama think they are dangerous. Obama, being the BULLY he is, would have already bombed them if he thought they were "weak and defenseless" like the SEVEN other countries Obama's already bombed, right? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

What country would that be? You better go back and figure out what happened after those first 100 hours.
Arguing that we should go to war with Russia over what is going on in Syria is stupid. Period. Dali, try to post something when you're not fucking drunk or high next time.

It is a stupid idea. And, you are an idiot if you subscribe to it or even think for one second that anything beneficial to the interests of the United States would occur as a result of pursuing that policy.

DUMB.
RedLeg505's Avatar
Arguing that we should go to war with Russia over what is going on in Syria is stupid. Period. Dali, try to post something when you're not fucking drunk or high next time.

It is a stupid idea. And, you are an idiot if you subscribe to it or even think for one second that anything beneficial to the interests of the United States would occur as a result of pursuing that policy.

DUMB. Originally Posted by timpage
The only idiots talking about war with Russia are the leftist Odumbo followers when they trot out the false dilemma of "Let Putin do what he wants or go to war with Russia"

Is that describing you Timmy??
RedLeg505's Avatar
What country would that be? You better go back and figure out what happened after those first 100 hours. Originally Posted by timpage
Don't need to figure anything out Timmy, I was there. We're you? The 100 hours refers specifically to the period of GROUND COMBAT it took to defeat the "4th largest army in the world" You know the same Army Iran barely managed a draw with after 10 years of fighting. And we should fear Iran... why? Oh, yeah, Obama wants to let them build nukes so there is something to fear there hmmmm?
lustylad's Avatar
We should not lift the ban because it keeps our natural resources here in this country. Where they belong. When Big oil bought those mineral rights....it was with that fact that it was for domestic consumption. Should all the folks that sold their mineral rights get to renegotiate with big oil to reflect the change you advocate?

Next ... if we have plenty of oil in this country...it makes War'ing in the Middle East over that resource , pointless. Understand? No Iraq war. No point. We have plenty of oil.

Should we sell our Western water overseas ... when we have California in a drought? California , which supplies much of our fruits and vegetables? Would it benefit , the person with the water rights? Yes, I suppose , but at the expense of all. We do not do stupid shit like that. Or we used to not before these large Companies washed your pea brain with CaCa.

We are talking about natural resources....not something produced. We limit sales of other things to other countries all the time in the name on national interests.

Are you advocating selling centrifuges to Iran in the name of Free Trade?

Come on lustladyboy....thinking before you ask a stupid question will save us all a little time. Originally Posted by WTF

Your arguments are preposterously stupid. So what if oil is a natural resource? We don't ban exports of coal or copper or sulphur or zinc or corn or wheat, do we? A ban on oil exports made sense back in 1975 when we had price controls and rationing. It was needed to keep crooks like Marc Rich (whose crimes were pardoned by your corrupt libtard pal Slick Willie in return for library and foundation donations) from cheating (look up how he did it). The ban makes zero sense today when oil prices are set globally. All recent studies show lifting it would result in lower gas prices and protect US drilling/fracking jobs.


WSJ Editorial
Sept. 1, 2015 7:28 p.m. ET

Good news, and from an unlikely source: The federal Energy Information Administration came out Tuesday with its long-awaited study on the effects of lifting the 1975 U.S. oil export ban. The headline is that ending the ban won’t raise American gasoline prices—and might even lower them.

This matches the findings of more than a dozen high-profile economic studies finding that U.S. exports would increase global oil supplies and thus, all other things being equal, put downward pressure on prices. U.S. gas prices tend to follow the global oil price. Meanwhile, access to new energy markets would also offset some of the economic damage that the decline in global oil prices has done to U.S. oil and gas drillers by forcing layoffs and steep cuts in capital investment.

President Obama has the authority to lift the ban unilaterally—where’s an executive order when you really need it? And the Administration has been allowing exports here and there—most recently to Mexico. The President may be hoping this will soften the call for a legislative repeal of the ban, while satisfying his green allies who want to keep the ban to deny U.S. producers access to world markets and squelch the U.S. drilling boom.

Momentum is nonetheless growing in Congress to pass a legislative repeal, and the EIA report is a powerful new political argument to do so. Supporters can put opponents on the spot to explain why they are against exports that would create more U.S. jobs and cut domestic gasoline prices. Senate Democrats from oil states such as Colorado’s Michael Bennet are under growing pressure to repeal the ban. House Speaker John Boehner recently said repealing the ban would be an autumn priority, and now is the time to move.


.
The only idiots talking about war with Russia are the leftist Odumbo followers when they trot out the false dilemma of "Let Putin do what he wants or go to war with Russia"

Is that describing you Timmy?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505
You're quickly moving to the front of the line in the dumbass contest.

Go back. Read the string again. Then, come back and type "I am an illiterate fucking idiot" 50 times.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 10-06-2015, 04:53 PM


[I]WSJ Editorial
Sept. 1, 2015 7:28 p.m. ET

Good news, and from an unlikely source: The federal Energy Information Administration came out Tuesday with its long-awaited study on the effects of lifting the 1975 U.S. oil export ban. The headline is that ending the ban won’t raise American gasoline prices—and might even lower them.

This matches the findings of more than a dozen high-profile economic studies finding that U.S. exports would increase global oil supplies and thus, all other things being equal, put downward pressure on prices. U.S. gas prices tend to follow the global oil price. Meanwhile, access to new energy markets would also offset some of the economic damage that the decline in global oil prices has done to U.S. oil and gas drillers by forcing layoffs and steep cuts in capital investment.





. Originally Posted by lustylad
You stupid muther fucker....just how is oil we get a discount now ....being sold on the global market going to lower our gasoline prices?

It will not. Yes gas prices tend to follow global oil prices but we are already at at fucking discount you moron.

All will will be doing is selling sweet crude now only for future generations of Americans to have to by heavy crude from assholes abroad.

Are you a Russian? God Damn Saudi? We have a competitive advantage with cheaper crude prices so shut your anti American rant the fuck up.

Thirty years ago numbnuts like you were trotting out studies that tobacco products were good for you
Your arguments are preposterously stupid. So what if oil is a natural resource? We don't ban exports of coal or copper or sulphur or zinc or corn or wheat, do we? A ban on oil exports made sense back in 1975 when we had price controls and rationing. It was needed to keep crooks like Marc Rich (whose crimes were pardoned by your corrupt libtard pal Slick Willie in return for library and foundation donations) from cheating (look up how he did it). The ban makes zero sense today when oil prices are set globally. All recent studies show lifting it would result in lower gas prices and protect US drilling/fracking jobs.


WSJ Editorial
Sept. 1, 2015 7:28 p.m. ET

Good news, and from an unlikely source: The federal Energy Information Administration came out Tuesday with its long-awaited study on the effects of lifting the 1975 U.S. oil export ban. The headline is that ending the ban won’t raise American gasoline prices—and might even lower them.

This matches the findings of more than a dozen high-profile economic studies finding that U.S. exports would increase global oil supplies and thus, all other things being equal, put downward pressure on prices. U.S. gas prices tend to follow the global oil price. Meanwhile, access to new energy markets would also offset some of the economic damage that the decline in global oil prices has done to U.S. oil and gas drillers by forcing layoffs and steep cuts in capital investment.

President Obama has the authority to lift the ban unilaterally—where’s an executive order when you really need it? And the Administration has been allowing exports here and there—most recently to Mexico. The President may be hoping this will soften the call for a legislative repeal of the ban, while satisfying his green allies who want to keep the ban to deny U.S. producers access to world markets and squelch the U.S. drilling boom.

Momentum is nonetheless growing in Congress to pass a legislative repeal, and the EIA report is a powerful new political argument to do so. Supporters can put opponents on the spot to explain why they are against exports that would create more U.S. jobs and cut domestic gasoline prices. Senate Democrats from oil states such as Colorado’s Michael Bennet are under growing pressure to repeal the ban. House Speaker John Boehner recently said repealing the ban would be an autumn priority, and now is the time to move.


. Originally Posted by lustylad
So you favored govt intervention and control in 75, but not now. Interesting. Good to know you're a waffling chickenshit
You're quickly moving to the front of the line in the dumbass contest.

Go back. Read the string again. Then, come back and type "I am an illiterate fucking idiot" 50 times. Originally Posted by timpage
He's already there. You have to explain it to him as if he were a retard... because he is.
lustylad's Avatar
You stupid muther fucker....just how is oil we get a discount now ....being sold on the global market going to lower our gasoline prices?

It will not. Yes gas prices tend to follow global oil prices but we are already at at fucking discount you moron.

All will will be doing is selling sweet crude now only for future generations of Americans to have to by heavy crude from assholes abroad.

Are you a Russian? God Damn Saudi? We have a competitive advantage with cheaper crude prices so shut your anti American rant the fuck up.

Thirty years ago numbnuts like you were trotting out studies that tobacco products were good for you Originally Posted by WTF

Meltdown much? Why are you mad at me, fagboy? I'm just repeating the conclusions of the IEA and more than a dozen other "high profile studies" by economists and think tanks, including the liberal Brookings Institution. The IEA is part of the federal government - do you think their views are "anti-American"? You sound like one of those tea party types you always bitch and moan about.

Look, I don't have time to school you and sewer rat in basic economics. Here is another, more detailed explanation of why it is a good idea:


The Oil Export Ban: A Relic of the 1970s


Lifting it would help keep rigs running and workers working—and it would even lower gas prices at the pump.

By JOHN HESS
April 24, 2015 6:15 p.m. ET

While one can debate the reasons for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries’ decision in November to continue flooding the oil markets, the fact is that this is squeezing many U.S. shale oil producers out of business. Oil prices have dropped by 50% in the past six months, and crude oil inventories in the U.S. have grown from 350 million barrels last year to more than 480 million barrels today.

Part of the reason inventory has ballooned is that crude produced in the U.S. is literally trapped here, because American firms are not allowed to sell it overseas. An antiquated rule bans crude oil exports from the lower 48 American states, even though producers could earn $5-$14 more per barrel by selling on the world market. At this moment the U.S. government is considering lifting sanctions on Iranian crude oil exports. Why not lift the self-imposed “sanctions” on U.S. crude exports that have been in place for the past four decades?

The export ban is a relic of a previous era, put in place around the time of the 1973 Arab oil embargo against the U.S., when Washington thought very differently about ensuring America’s energy needs. Other measures related to the 1973 embargo, such as price controls and rationing, were eliminated decades ago, as policy makers realized that they impeded, rather than aided, American energy security. But the ban on crude oil exports persists.

There is no defensible justification for the continued ban on the export of U.S. crude oil. Some hold a misplaced fear that the price of gasoline at the pump would rise if our crude were able to be exported, but the opposite is true. Gasoline prices in the U.S. are correlated to the global price of crude oil. Repealing the export ban would increase global oil supplies, which would put downward pressure on prices and therefore help lower U.S. gasoline prices, as numerous studies, including ones by the Brookings Institution and IHS, have shown.

The U.S. already exports more than 3.5 million barrels a day of refined products such as gasoline and diesel fuel. American producers export natural gas and soon liquefied natural gas as well. Why not crude oil? The U.S. is the only major oil-producing country in the world that bans the export of crude, putting U.S. producers at a competitive disadvantage. No other industry is treated this way. Jobs are being lost and investments cut. The number of operating rigs has already dropped to 932 rigs from 1,900 in September. One Forbes analyst suggests the oil and gas industry has shed 75,000 jobs worldwide, most of those in the U.S. At Hess, our company has reduced our rig count in the Bakken oil basin in North Dakota from 17 a year ago to eight today to preserve our financial strength.

The key point is that what is good for shale energy is also good for the U.S. economy. “Lifting the ban on crude oil exports from the United States will boost U.S. economic growth, wages, employment, trade and overall welfare,” two scholars with the Brookings Institution, Charles Ebinger and Heather L. Greenley, wrote last year.

Ten years ago, almost no one would have predicted America’s transformation into an energy powerhouse. But the shale revolution has been a great success, buoying the national and state economies, filling tax coffers, and cutting energy-related carbon-dioxide emissions by more than 10% since 2007 as natural gas replaces coal in electricity generation. The U.S. shale industry employs two million people, about 25% of the jobs created since the 2008 financial crisis. Shale firms invest about $100 billion a year, or about 7% of our country’s total annual capital investment. Any shakiness in this sector will cause serious headwinds for the economy as a whole. We need to act now.

While the U.S. cannot control global oil prices, it can allow American oil producers to compete on a level playing field. The government could lift the federal ban on crude exports, eliminating a hardship and allowing the industry to get back on its feet. All it would take is a presidential executive order or an act of Congress.

Thanks to the boom in shale oil, the U.S. has become an energy powerhouse. It is time to start acting like one by giving the green light to crude oil exports.

.
RedLeg505's Avatar
You're quickly moving to the front of the line in the dumbass contest.

Go back. Read the string again. Then, come back and type "I am an illiterate fucking idiot" 50 times. Originally Posted by timpage
Sorry, Woomby-tunes and Yippee have me beat by a long shot. Does that achieve your writing assignment since both are illiterate fucking idiots and I just typed their names? Hell, they are such huge fucking idiots, I may well have achieved your "50 times" command.. what with them both being 50 times the fucking idiot anyone else here can achieve. I know you are sad you can'can't match them, but keep trying Timmy I have faith in your ability to become an even larger fucking idiot than you are now.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 10-06-2015, 05:32 PM
you d o understand that there is a certain business sector that does not want that embargo lifted.

I will provide counter links when I get home