Lower Oil Prices Are a Free-Market Victory

[Bad_Doggie]

That's your big play? Compare me to Obama's non existent son?

I'm sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hurt LOL you even have to make up people to compare me to because ya got a whole lot of nothing.

.....again, I don't care you can call me a liberal till you turn blue in the face, no one except the fringe right is buying it. Liberals can't stand me any more than crazy ass libertarians like yourself do.

He's a Libertarian?

I did not get that!

Woof!

 

[cowslinger64]

He's a Libertarian?

I did not get that!

Woof!

All of forestdumps views are fluid...they are dependent upon how much he gets called on them.

 

[BotanyBoy]

He's a Libertarian?

I did not get that!

Woof!

Only when he's not giving one of his GOP butt buddies on here a reach around for their Breitbart/FOX/AmericanStinker C&P job.

All of forestdumps views are fluid...they are dependent upon how much he gets called on them.

This ^^

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He's a Libertarian?

I did not get that!

Woof!

Only when he's not giving one of his GOP butt buddies on here a reach around for their Breitbart/FOX/AmericanStinker C&P job.



This ^^

It gets drowned out with all of the Democrat screeching that passes for free speech, but it is a well-established fact; the quotes form Mises and Rothbard should be a hint to all but the brain-dead...

BB just hates me because he's a black and white thinker, a lot like George Bush, who has a with us or against us mentality and I am not with him and I do not hate Christians with a white hot passion (being married to one) so therefore I am most obviously a Republican Evangelical and at least half a racist to boot.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

PS - you just saw me on Atheism...



Did that sound like the FAUX News viewpoint on Gawd and reach-arounds and all of that, or is it more consistent with being a Libertarian?

 

[BotanyBoy]

The first one!

 

[allateup]

You're and idiot LOL

.....

 

[BotanyBoy]

.....

Ohhhh you caught an auto spell! Nothing gets past you!!

But I bet you didn't come up with anything to support eyers bullshit.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The one important thing that everyone is missing in this is that tax cuts work to stimulate economic activity and increase government revenues; the rapid decline in energy prices, is, in effect, a free-market delivered tax cut, the tax being the political one of going crazy on the people who simply say, "Drill baby drill," with the mindless mantra of it's impossible, peak oil, it will take too long, it will have no effect...


AAAAAAuuuuuhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm...




Besides, high energy prices stimulate the economy by delivering on the promise of wind and solar just like 1860's Bloody KANSAS! That's green jobs baby! Not Red Russian wheat!

 

[Que]

The one important thing that everyone is missing in this is that tax cuts work to stimulate economic activity and increase government revenues; the rapid decline in energy prices, is, in effect, a free-market delivered tax cut, the tax being the political one of going crazy on the people who simply say, "Drill baby drill," with the mindless mantra of it's impossible, peak oil, it will take too long, it will have no effect...


AAAAAAuuuuuhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm...




Besides, high energy prices stimulate the economy by delivering on the promise of wind and solar just like 1860's Bloody KANSAS! That's green jobs baby! Not Red Russian wheat!

Romney's platform was economic growth through energy production which provides jobs in that sector, keeps US dollars home, increases revenue to the treasury through oil leases and taxes and makes manufacturing cheaper and therefore more profitable and less likely to be done elsewhere.

Now that some of that has happened exactly despite Obama's policies rather than because of them, the economy should get moving a bit. We were already seeing this in Dakota and Texas. The usual suspects will hail any progress fueled in fact by fossil fuel exploration and production as evidence that Obama's "Green Energy Economy" policies did the trick.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Romney's platform was economic growth through energy production which provides jobs in that sector, keeps US dollars home, increases revenue to the treasury through oil leases and taxes and makes manufacturing cheaper and therefore more profitable and less likely to be done elsewhere.

Now that some of that has happened exactly despite Obama's policies rather than because of them, the economy should get moving a bit. We were already seeing this in Dakota and Texas. The usual suspects will hail any progress fueled in fact by fossil fuel exploration and production as evidence that Obama's "Green Energy Economy" policies did the trick.

Romney said racist things in a satire piece written by someone else, so like Sarah Palin as portrayed by Tina Fey, was too damaged to ever be a President. Don'tcha know, she claimed to be able to see Russia from her front porch?

Who says, "Drill baby drill" anyway???

 

[RobDownSouth]

Now that some of that has happened exactly despite Obama's policies rather than because of them...

Still clingin' to that fiction, I see.

#SchmottGuy

 

[Que]

Still clingin' to that fiction, I see.

#SchmottGuy

Still haven't defended your assertion that is stated in the title of your own thread.

Hard to whine that you don't have to play "defense" when it is word-for-word your position, No inference or ascription necessary.

I don't see a role for you in the book version of the history of Literotica, but there is a huge part for you in the cartoon.

 

[Ajax_Prime]

Still clingin' to that fiction, I see.

#SchmottGuy

Bitch please

Just one...name just one thing that Obama has done which has had remotely anything to do with increased oil or gas production in this country.

Just one.

Good luck.

Let's revisit these little gems...

http://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/federallands/

For some context, keep in mind that the lead time for production increases takes YEARS. This isn't the same as building a Taco Bell on a military base.

GoM projects can take 2-5 years to ramp up.

Your link says offshore oil drilling is down 5% and onshore drilling is up 8%.

So? Does the math escape you how that's true, yet overall production is still down 4% year on year?

Are you fucking serious?

Back in 2008, Iraq's oil production was crippled, resulting in higher oil prices.
Less of a commodity, higher prices....get it?

Because the price of oil was so high, it made economic sense to drill for shale oil, which is really expensive to make, but you can do and make a profit when oil is over $100 a barrel.

What's happening now is that Saudi Arabia wants to put those shale oil folks out of business. (Most shale oil is Canadian). So instead of lowering their crude oil production to keep prices high, they kept their production levels the same, and all the new Canadian oil has caused a glut and prices are falling.

Oil is $72 a barrel now and the shale oil folks are losing money...exactly as the Saudis had planned. The Saudis want to trigger an oil crash, not unlike 1986, so they can stay on top.

I hope this lessens your colossal ignorance somewhat, but I seriously doubt it will.

That last bit is the LULZ

 

[Que]

Bitch please

Just one...name just one thing that Obama has done which has had remotely anything to do with increased oil or gas production in this country.

Just one.

Good luck.

Let's revisit these little gems...



That last bit is the LULZ

Take a look at his thread on the politics board. He asserted that Obama gets the credit then bailed on his own thread, except for the brief cameo when he patted his chief economist Disgustipated on the head for the brilliant observation:

Does Q-Bert not understand that consumer confidence and economic growth can contribute increased oil production without a policy?

To which I responded:

1) "Consumer confidence" might lead to increased demand but it has nothing to do with the ability of the producers to meet that demand. When oil was well over $100 a barrel, clearly demand was not the issue.

2) Increased demand brought on by as you suggest "consumer confidence" has the opposite affect on price. It would have raised, not lowered the price of oil.

3) "Economic growth" will not fuel energy production to the degree energy production will in sundry ways fuel economic growth. Increased oil production is a large part of what GDP growth we have seen. Nearly all the rest of it can be attributed to the artificial stimulus of the market by the Federal reserve. It isn't housing, It isn't manufacturing that is showing the minor growth we have so far. It is oil, led by such states as North Dakota and Texas. It is circular logic to say that economic growth in the oil sector fueling the economy causes increased demand for fuel in the energy sector and therefore fuels the growth of the oil sector.

4) "Economic growth" might lead to increased demand but it has nothing to do with the ability of the producers to meet that demand. When oil was well over $100 a barrel, clearly demand was not the issue.

5) Increased demand brought on by as you suggest "economic growth" has the opposite affect on price. It would have raised, not lowered the price of oil.

6) Talk about moving the goal posts...even if any of what you suggest is true (and as you can see above- it is exactly backwards)....Rob's premise is that the low cost of oil was not just due to the general environment fostered by unnamed policies of the administration writ large, rather his contention is that it was specifically the <fossil-fuel discouraging> energy policies of the Obama administration that has directly resulted in the low price of oil. Suggesting that it maybe happened "without a policy" is actually in harmony with my position, not Rob's indefensible one.

Thanks for advancing my argument even if you don't have a grasp of the basics to be able to advocate for either point of view.

Then realized Robbie seemed to agree with Disgustipated, his Chief Economist:

I think at some level he understands this, but he doesn't want to jeopardize his budding relationships with his new "bros" Ishmael and AJ, so he can't admit it.

So, I sought further clarification:

I realize you are a dilettante on matters of economics, but the first building block is to understand supply and demand. It is common knowledge that Disgustipated is a "dummy" as he likes to say, but et tu?

Did you read what he wrote, or did you just grasp for any lifeline offered to keep from drowning in your thread?

It is interesting I have been trying to get you to acknowledge for days that your two positions of "restrictive energy policies do not lead to higher fuel prices" and "doing nothing about restrictive energy policies does not lower fuel prices," are not only mutually exclusive, the are both incorrect.

Here you go starting a thread directly and clearly stating the very policy I inferred from your positions that you claimed I was ascribing to you.

You know what isn't ascription? Quoting your premise in the title of the thread word-for word.



You, so far, have not offered one word to support that bold statement.

The year is young. You still have 15 hours this ear to 'splain yourself.

I am still waiting for a reply.

Maybe next year?

 

[BotanyBoy]

The one important thing that everyone is missing in this is that tax cuts work to stimulate economic activity and increase government revenues;

Eh...only to a certain extent.

the rapid decline in energy prices, is, in effect, a free-market delivered tax cut,

How so?

Please explain how free market magic, in effect, got rid of gas taxes. I gotta hear this one.

Oh look! you already included an attempt.

the tax being the political one of going crazy on the people who simply say, "Drill baby drill," with the mindless mantra of it's impossible, peak oil, it will take too long, it will have no effect...
!

http://troll.me/images/bert/what-the-fuck-is-this-shit.jpg

 

[Ishmael]

I see everyone is still on the "shale oil" mantra. What a crock of shit.

The Saudi's goals have NOTHING to do with the US oil production. Not even close to their goal, they want to fuck over the Iranian's. And they're doing a pretty good job of it. Venezuela and Russia are just beneficial side effects for the US.

As far as the US wells are concerned, as Query has already pointed out, they can be capped now and brought back on line again as prices rise and the Saudi's are as well aware of that fact as we are.

While the US economy is certainly effected by oil prices, our economy is not dependent on oil production. The Iranian's, Venezuelan's, Russian's, and other nations are totally dependent on oil production to support their economy. If they don't ship oil at at least break even market prices their economies go into a death spiral and they don't have the luxury of capping the wells and waiting for the prices to rise again.

To complete the picture, the US is still a net importer of oil (Close to 50/50 now. We import approx. 300K bbl/mo. and produce approx. 300K bbl/mo.). Cheap oil is cheap oil, doesn't matter whether it comes from S. Dakota or Saudi Arabia. The overall economy is NOT damaged even though certain local economies might suffer in the short term.

In summary the whole "shale oil" being the target of the Saudi's is a myth cooked up in the minds of morons ignorant of the economics of the situation. The Saudi's are imposing their own economic sanctions on the Iranians in the absence of the current US administrations willingness to do so.

Ishmael

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I see everyone is still on the "shale oil" mantra. What a crock of shit.

The Saudi's goals have NOTHING to do with the US oil production. Not even close to their goal, they want to fuck over the Iranian's. And they're doing a pretty good job of it. Venezuela and Russia are just beneficial side effects for the US.

As far as the US wells are concerned, as Query has already pointed out, they can be capped now and brought back on line again as prices rise and the Saudi's are as well aware of that fact as we are.

While the US economy is certainly effected by oil prices, our economy is not dependent on oil production. The Iranian's, Venezuelan's, Russian's, and other nations are totally dependent on oil production to support their economy. If they don't ship oil at at least break even market prices their economies go into a death spiral and they don't have the luxury of capping the wells and waiting for the prices to rise again.

To complete the picture, the US is still a net importer of oil (Close to 50/50 now. We import approx. 300K bbl/mo. and produce approx. 300K bbl/mo.). Cheap oil is cheap oil, doesn't matter whether it comes from S. Dakota or Saudi Arabia. The overall economy is NOT damaged even though certain local economies might suffer in the short term.

In summary the whole "shale oil" being the target of the Saudi's is a myth cooked up in the minds of morons ignorant of the economics of the situation. The Saudi's are imposing their own economic sanctions on the Iranians in the absence of the current US administrations willingness to do so.

Ishmael

The Saudi's cut production after a steady increase starting in 2009. They went from 9,819,000 barrels per day in 2009 to a peak in 2012 of 11,725,000 barrels. Since then they have cut production to 11,600,000 barrels per day in 2013.

Source

One would think, if Saudi production were affecting the price of oil that the price would be going UP, not down due to their steady cut in production over last couple of years.

The US alone has added 4 million new barrels of crude oil per day to the global market since 2008. (Global crude production is about 75 million barrels per day, so this is significant.)

The drop in oil prices has a lot more to do with US and Canadian production and the fact that Libya opened two key export terminals in 2014 than it has to do with the Saudis, who have continued cutting production (slowly) to try to prop up prices.

 

[JeanLaFlu]

The Saudi's cut production after a steady increase starting in 2009. They went from 9,819,000 barrels per day in 2009 to a peak in 2012 of 11,725,000 barrels. Since then they have cut production to 11,600,000 barrels per day in 2013.

Source

One would think, if Saudi production were affecting the price of oil that the price would be going UP, not down due to their steady cut in production over last year.

But you are not also considering the concurrent worldwide drop in consumption.

That drop in consumption, the magnificent emergence of the shale plays in the states, the control Saudi Arabia holds over OPEC; it's the perfect storm to bring specifically- and enormously-sanctioned Shia Iran and Putin's Novorossiya to their respective economic knees.

We're witnessing a publicly undeclared economic war taking place and if I was the king of the CIA/NSA, I'd have all fine ears tuned to all communication between Iran and Russia. If you remember, similar sanctions and economic measures are what many contend led Imperial Japan to bomb Pearl Harbor.

 

[Que]

The Saudi's cut production after a steady increase starting in 2009. They went from 9,819,000 barrels per day in 2009 to a peak in 2012 of 11,725,000 barrels. Since then they have cut production to 11,600,000 barrels per day in 2013.

Source

One would think, if Saudi production were affecting the price of oil that the price would be going UP, not down due to their steady cut in production over last couple of years.

The US alone has added 4 million new barrels of crude oil per day to the global market since 2008. (Global crude production is about 75 million barrels per day, so this is significant.)

The drop in oil prices has a lot more to do with US and Canadian production and the fact that Libya opened two key export terminals in 2014 than it has to do with the Saudis, who have continued cutting production (slowly) to try to prop up prices.

The Sauds are not cutting back even to the previous levels that the were at before we flooded the market they still are producing more then they were 2 years ago, not less at a time we are doing the same.

They know this.

The are not making the kinds of cuts or encouraging others to do so with them to bring those prices back up. They are letting the steady increase in US production erode the price.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

The Sauds are not cutting back even to the previous levels that the were at before we flooded the market they still are producing more then they were 2 years ago, not less at a time we are doing the same.

They know this.

The are not making the kinds of cuts or encouraging others to do so with them to bring those prices back up. They are letting the steady increase in US production erode the price.

Check the data. Saudi production has tapered off slow and steady since 2012. They are producing less now than they were in 2012. Small, nothing more than token cuts in production.

The increase in US and Canadian production along with 2 new export terminals reopened in Libya and tapering demand in Asia and Europe (thanks to weakened economies) has caused the prices to fall. The Saudis have done next to nothing. Which puts a big hole in Ishmael's argument.

 

[Ishmael]

But you are not also considering the concurrent worldwide drop in consumption.

That drop in consumption, the magnificent emergence of the shale plays in the states, the control Saudi Arabia holds over OPEC; it's the perfect storm to bring specifically- and enormously-sanctioned Shia Iran and Putin's Novorossiya to their respective economic knees.

We're witnessing a publicly undeclared economic war taking place and if I was the king of the CIA/NSA, I'd have all fine ears tuned to all communication between Iran and Russia. If you remember, similar sanctions and economic measures are what many contend led Imperial Japan to bomb Pearl Harbor.

What can either of them do? They aren't being denied a resource, world markets are merely preventing them from selling at the price they desire. I suppose they could sabotage the Saudi production, at the risk of pissing off the Chinese. And if anyone is gong to make a stupid military move I would put my money on the Persians.

They're caught in a very clever economic trap.

Ishmael

 

[JeanLaFlu]

What can either of them do? They aren't being denied a resource, world markets are merely preventing them from selling at the price they desire. I suppose they could sabotage the Saudi production, at the risk of pissing off the Chinese. And if anyone is gong to make a stupid military move I would put my money on the Persians.

They're caught in a very clever economic trap.

Ishmael

To me, it's one of those situations where you're can't be completely sure what they will do, but you're fully aware of what they're both capable of doing.

It would also not surprise me in the least if China hasn't been taken into the confidence of the Americans and Saudis on the matter, because China's big picture certainly isn't big enough yet to conquer either, but having Russia and Iran be put in a very submissive place surely entrenches their current ranking much more solidly.

It seems to me President Obama is trying to lead Iran out of the coming quagmire with a bushel of carrots, and I think Iran will eventually allow itself to be led out - for now; they can read the tea leaves. But I also believe they're still just playing the delaying game and as soon as they're nuke sated, we'll see the real Islamic Republic of Iran completely unveiled again.

Putin doesn't have the luxury of dealing and/or waiting; he stepped in the sanction trap big-time with his outright aggression against Ukraine. And he's set himself alone as the only person in Russia responsible for what's going on now. As you brought up, Russia's economy is direly dependent on the oil trade and the nose-diving Russian economy is proving that out.

So far it seems China is more interested in solidifying their ranking in place instead of uncharacteristic, wide-ranging, forceful expansion. They're showing they're not quite ready to make overtly forceful moves towards those expansion plans I believe they're intent on enacting in the not so distant future. A very economically weakened Russia can only be an exquisite treat to them as they wait.

If we begin to hear of massive protests and military/police suppression from Russia in this new year, I believe things are going to change for the good big time. But if the anti-Americanism Putin has purposely championed in the Fatherland is as stout as some of the propaganda issuing forth from Russia offers, then it ain't going to be pretty going to physical war against such a great people.

 

[Que]

Check the data. Saudi production has tapered off slow and steady since 2012. They are producing less now than they were in 2012. Small, nothing more than token cuts in production.

The increase in US and Canadian production along with 2 new export terminals reopened in Libya and tapering demand in Asia and Europe (thanks to weakened economies) has caused the prices to fall. The Saudis have done next to nothing. Which puts a big hole in Ishmael's argument.

11,715,000 to 11,600,000 is nothing. That is not a cut to speak of. That is an enhanced maintenance cycle at best. 2% or something? Negligible. US more than covered that. hence the (planned) drop in prices.

 

[Conager]

I got sent to North Dakota for a spell to do some upgrades last summer. Sleepy little places are booming.

Didn't see oil wells everywhere, but I guess most people do something related to it. It's not like are paid in buckets of oil. Whatever they are working on I don't think stops if oil changes prices for a week or a month.