President Obama's energy policies result in 5 1/2 year low for oil

[RobDownSouth]

When you ignore or shrug off legitimate answers to your many questions, then ask them again, nobody is interested in indulging you.

It's taken fifteen pages for you to notice, so I thought I'd tell you directly.

Ignoring inconvenient facts is one of queery's more charming shortcomings. Like his bro busybody, he thinks that asking the same question over and over grants him some sort of legitimacy...

 

[Busybody]

Gadstone Link?:d

 

[unregistered]

 

[Que]

When you ignore or shrug off legitimate answers to your many questions, then ask them again, nobody is interested in indulging you.

It's taken fifteen pages for you to notice, so I thought I'd tell you directly.

Again, state a single "legitimate" answer to the query: Which of Obama's energy policies had the intent or the effect of increasing oil production?

The fact that oil production increased despite policies that were never intended to encourage that has no bearing on the query.

It would be a stretch, but one could maybe argue that the high oil prices that the administration's rhetorical war on fossil fuel led to incentives for oil companies to increase their efforts to drill before moratoriums took effect. That sort of was a side effect of Obama's energy policies. Clearly not their intent though.

"Indulge."

What a laugh.

Try, "Deflect and obfuscate."

 

[IrezumiKiss]

When you ignore or shrug off legitimate answers to your many questions, then ask them again, nobody is interested in indulging you.

It's taken fifteen pages for you to notice, so I thought I'd tell you directly.

I laughed.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Ooooh listen to the three little piggies squealing! Hard to tell which of the three (Vetty, busybody, or Queery) is squealing the most indigently.

Squeal on, piggies!

 

[Que]

Ooooh listen to the three little piggies squealing! Hard to tell which of the three (Vetty, busybody, or Queery) is squealing the most indigently.

Squeal on, piggies!

The squealing you hear is a feedback loop from your failure to address your own thesis for an entire month now. Not one sentence have you uttered in support of your indefensible position.

You ride in to provide encouragement to your "bro calvary" as you like to call them as they try in vain to deflect and offer nonsensical reasons for how it is that Obama Administration should get credit for the low prices resulting from increased production when all of their energy policies are designed to restrain our production of and reliance on fossil fuels.

Its OK. It is your thread; go ahead and take a victory lap, then come back and answer the question you have avoided for a month now.

 

[unregistered]

 

[NeverEndingMe]

you obaNa kind are mentally fucked

 

[Hard_Rom]

If you think anyone can produce oil at the price Saudis can you're dreaming. They can go to 20$ a barrel, the Russians 40, we in N.A. with oil sands and fracking need 60-80 to make money. They have virtual serf labour, environmental and safety standards that would never fly in N.A. Live on top of vast easily tapped fields. When they want a new pipeline or tankers, there is no long public partisan process. A royal puts his name down and it's done.

If the Saudis really turned on the taps the price would go to 25 instantly.

I believe this is aimed at Russia. The Saudis are backing a Western attack on the Russian economy in an attempt to curb Putin. The Chinese consume not produce so love low prices. With sanctions imposed as well, Russia is seriously suffering, not just inconvenienced.

 

[Que]

If you think anyone can produce oil at the price Saudis can you're dreaming. They can go to 20$ a barrel, the Russians 40, we in N.A. with oil sands and fracking need 60-80 to make money. They have virtual serf labour, environmental and safety standards that would never fly in N.A. Live on top of vast easily tapped fields. When they want a new pipeline or tankers, there is no long public partisan process. A royal puts his name down and it's done.

If the Saudis really turned on the taps the price would go to 25 instantly.

I believe this is aimed at Russia. The Saudis are backing a Western attack on the Russian economy in an attempt to curb Putin. The Chinese consume not produce so love low prices. With sanctions imposed as well, Russia is seriously suffering, not just inconvenienced.

It isn't "aimed at" anyone. That implies collusion and planning. The excess production less about 1.5% from Saudia Arabia can be attributed entirely to the increase in US production. Now it is possibly that the oil companies are actually fronts for the CIA...

The Sauds probably don't mind hurting the Russians, but they are gleeful about Iran. The American production gave them the excuse to not choose to prop the price up by cutting their production. Realistically, cutting their production as far as they would have to to boost the price will not meet their economic needs. They do not merely have to turn a profit on every barrel. That part is easy for them as you aptly point out, but they need volume as well since their citizenry will not respond well to any belt tightening and they have expenses that dictate they pump what they are pumping now at $50 a barrel. They can afford to halve production only if that would yield a price of $100 a barrel, but it won't.

If they were really looking to do something geopolitical they would pump twice what they are pumping in hopes of still making the same amount, and killing off their competitors.

 

[rippitydoo]

congratulations you are still an idiot

drink more of the obaNa juice

1] Implying they (& not you) were the idiot to begin with.

2] Implies they (again, not you, the idiot against Obama & claiming that the rest of us are idiots instead of you, the only one who really is) are posting while drunk.

 

[Busybody]

Why Obama and the Saudis Like Low Gas Prices

His political interests align with their economic interests.

By Jonah Goldberg


Have you heard about the secret conspiracy between the Saudis and the White House? I haven’t either, probably because there isn’t one. But events are playing out exactly as one would expect if such a conspiracy existed.

With no help from Barack Obama, the U.S. has launched an energy revolution, becoming the world’s leading oil and natural-gas producer. This has dismayed environmentalists and donors in and out of the Obama administration. After all, Obama bet big — really big — on green energy. The oil and gas boom is not the energy revolution Obama was looking for.

Saudi Arabia and other petro-monarchies aren’t happy about it either (which is one reason the United Arab Emirates and other OPEC states bankroll anti-fracking propaganda in the West). Until recently, Saudi Arabia was the world’s biggest oil producer, and it is still arguably the most important one in global markets because its oil is so easy to get out of the ground. The cheaper it is to extract, the easier it is to maintain profits when prices go down. That means the Saudis have an outsized ability to affect the global price of oil.




Advertisement







And that’s exactly what they’re doing. “Saudi Arabia,” writes Nathan Vardi of Forbes, “is making a massive $750 billion bet in 2015 that the oil kingdom can endure lower oil prices longer than other major oil producing countries both within and outside OPEC, even including American shale.”

If the Saudis can keep oil at or below $50 a barrel, many American fracking and offshore operations will either have to close up shop — which is already happening — or never launch in the first place, because the profit just isn’t there.

This is typical behavior for the Saudis and for OPEC, which, after all, is an international price-fixing cartel that would be illegal under our antitrust laws if it were an American outfit.


ADVERTISEMENT





The White House, meanwhile, is only too happy to take credit for low gas prices and our decreased dependence on foreign oil. It’s also happy to take advantage of them. Not only does the president boast — as he did in his State of the Union address — about low gas prices, despite having done next to nothing to make them possible (nearly all new oil and gas production has been on state or private lands), he’s taking a bow for the economic benefits as if he deserves the credit.

One small example: Obama is constantly touting a newly low unemployment rate as if it were the result of his policies. The odd thing is that, as American Enterprise Institute economist Mark Perry notes, literally all of the job gains of the past seven years were generated by one state: oil-rich Texas.

From December 2007 to December 2014, according to Perry, Texas has added 1.25 million payroll jobs and 190,000 non-payroll jobs. Meanwhile, the other 49 states and D.C. combined have 275,000 fewer jobs than they did at the start of the recession. One wonders: If Obama is responsible for all these job gains, why did he put them all in George W. Bush’s home state?

Anyway, back to the non-conspiracy. By artificially keeping oil prices low, the Saudis get to deal a powerful blow to the energy revolution in the U.S. (They also get to deliver a severe economic blow to their enemies the Iranians, which is nice.) In exchange, Obama gets an unearned political windfall and can claim vindication for his ineffectual economic policies.

Obama is paying back the Saudis by permanently taking the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve’s billions of barrels of oil off the table for all time. By doing so, he also puts the entire Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System (TAPS) on a starvation diet. North Slope oil production is half of what it once was, and if it falls below 350,000 barrels per day, the TAPS itself will start to become economically and technically unfeasible. In other words, Saudi Arabia’s short-term economic hit is an investment in future dependence on Saudi oil.

Of course, there need not be a conspiracy, just a convergence of economic and political interests. But the fact remains that Obama could never have gotten away with restricting energy development in ANWR before an election or when gas prices were high. This is Obama’s window, and it appears the Saudis are holding it open for him for as long as he needs.

 

[Busybody]

1] Implying they (& not you) were the idiot to begin with.

2] Implies they (again, not you, the idiot against Obama & claiming that the rest of us are idiots instead of you, the only one who really is) are posting while drunk.

ISIS yourself Ped Ant

 

[Que]

Good article, Busy.

In case you are wondering there was some bleating, but still no credible answer to the query that I posed on day one a month ago.

Phrodeau thinks he answered the matter then, and has repeated his nonsensical explanation a time or two since, but then again he believes that 2014 was the hottest year in all of recorded history.

 

[Busybody]

there is no answer...we know that

as I keep sayin


I have about a dozen questions I axed Robby....based on HIS words and links....that remain unanswered (but we know the answer).....some from 2004

 

[Que]

there is no answer...we know that

as I keep sayin


I have about a dozen questions I axed Robby....based on HIS words and links....that remain unanswered (but we know the answer).....some from 2004

He has sort of a set playbook. Toss something against the wall, if he is called on it, slink away from it until he hopes people forget.

If that fails, deflect.

If deflection fails, go to bluster.

If that fails break out the personal attacks so he can claim one is "butthurt"

When that fails, he slinks away and repeats the cycle again.

At each stage he seems quite sure he has "won" something.

This is bluster:

Ignoring inconvenient facts is one of queery's more charming shortcomings. Like his bro busybody, he thinks that asking the same question over and over grants him some sort of legitimacy...

The obvious question, that will have no answer for is, "What facts?" He has offered none at all in 30 days in this thread. Not even irrelevant or not supportive to his position facts. All of his posts were, "Right on, Bro Cavalry...Sic 'em!!"

He has relied on posts by Frodo and LukeTheSubstiCuke who seem to know even less about oil and economics than he does.

A couple of posters offered the weak, "Well his policies didn't harm..." which is hard to say either way. Who knows what the oil market would look like without such things as slow walking permits and denial of previously available areas for exploration.

That "do no harm" idea is not nearly the same as his claim that Obama's energy policies specifically had a positive effect on production which is the only reason for the prices we are seeing.

 

[Busybody]

You forget gay And corn and something about the military

 

[Que]

This thread amuses me. It was glaringly stupid, and he flits in and out declaring that people that point out the fact that it cannot in the least bit be true look foolish.

He could have retracted, re-stated. Nope.

He is always talking about others inability to admit when they are wrong (usually when they are actually correct.) He cannot possibly believe his thread title is correct since he has made no effort to defend it.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Nothing to retract, chum. I stand by my statements one hundred percent.

 

[Que]

Nothing to retract, chum. I stand by my statements one hundred percent.

That being the case, you should have no problem identifying which of Obama's energy policies had the intention and effect of resulting a 5 1/2 year low for oil.

Was it the "New green energy economy initiative" that was designed for and had the effect of increasing the availability and use of fossil fuels?

 

[RobDownSouth]

That being the case, you should have no problem identifying which of Obama's energy policies had the intention and effect of resulting a 5 1/2 year low for oil.

Was it the "New green energy economy initiative" that was designed for and had the effect of increasing the availability and use of fossil fuels?

No problem at all, chum. However, you seem to labor under the delusion that I somehow owe you an explanation of my opinion. I don't.

Now be sure and declare "victory"...that's what you do best, amiright?

Just like when you "won" when you deserted your then-four-year-old special needs kid that you claim to "love". That was a "victory" too... not having to put up with her on a nightly basis after you walked out on the family!

(I'm sure you pony up at least some child support every now and then when you're working, though)

 

[Que]

No problem at all, chum. However, you seem to labor under the delusion that I somehow owe you an explanation of my opinion. I don't.

Now be sure and declare "victory"...that's what you do best, amiright?

Just like when you "won" when you deserted your then-four-year-old special needs kid that you claim to "love". That was a "victory" too... not having to put up with her on a nightly basis after you walked out on the family!

(I'm sure you pony up at least some child support every now and then when you're working, though)

Thats what I thought chumly. Your "opinion" is just the stubbornness to stick with a absurdly stated position.

Thanks for confirming with the personal attack the exact sequence I already identified.

You are nothing if not consistent.

 

[Busybody]

No problem at all, chum. However, you seem to labor under the delusion that I somehow owe you an explanation of my opinion. I don't.

Now be sure and declare "victory"...that's what you do best, amiright?

Just like when you "won" when you deserted your then-four-year-old special needs kid that you claim to "love". That was a "victory" too... not having to put up with her on a nightly basis after you walked out on the family!

(I'm sure you pony up at least some child support every now and then when you're working, though)

we do have an explanation

 

[klippert]

The foresight and leadership of President Obama has resulted in $57 a barrel oil prices.

This is great news for America!

Sorry Obama'fawn King Barry's Anti-Earth Natural Energy inspired only one thing..and Proved what he's aimed to destroy..... Free Markets work. But, Gas Precises are shooting back up. Shale and Fracking, is what brought down prices.. All that Earth Natural Fuel (ENF) was produced on private land. Oh'Peckers are worried..hence King Saud Obama promised to make 12 million archers off limits to drilling... Y you ask...Because These Dis-United State has more Earth Natural Fuel under its sovereign land than the Middle East

Guess you don't like the idea King Barry is opening up off-shore drilling...Why pray-tel. Because Key-stone legislation will be on his desk and he's promised the Enviro'NUTZ a VETO...and destroy even more Union votes...