yipeee 100 $ a barrel oil

Superfreak said:
This country certainly did go to war to protect oil interests desh. Oil is currently the lifeblood of our economy. We are far too dependent on foreign oil and because of that we end up with the shit that we are in today.

But that does NOT change the fact that the oil companies are no more profitable than other companies their size and in many cases they are LESS profitable. Yet you continue to bitch about their record profits.
Click to expand...


This country certainly did go to war to protect oil interests desh. Oil is currently the lifeblood of our economy

Wow. How the worm has turned.

I can recall like it was yesterday, when Desh used to be dogpiled for stating that your war was, in large part, about oil.
 
Desh said:
Profits are not in themselves evil. Profiting off the deaths of Americans is.
Click to expand...

This is what you are failing to understand. They are not profiting off of the deaths of Americans. They are profitting of the ever increasing demand for oil from Americans and growing countries like China and India. Their profit margins have not increased due to the war.
 
thats so ignorant.
If sadam gets Kuwaits oil in the 90's and we do nothing you could easily
be looking at $300 oil.
If you want to say Bush went to war for our economic interest and oil. Ok, but it was to keep it cheap(er) and not have Sadam totally destroy our economy.
 
Top what do you think the odds are that OPEC is going to go to the PetroEuro and what will that do to the dollar if anything?
 
Topspin said:
thats so ignorant.
If sadam gets Kuwaits oil in the 90's and we do nothing you could easily
be looking at $300 oil.
If you want to say Bush went to war for our economic interest and oil. Ok, but it was to keep it cheap(er) and not have Sadam totally destroy our economy.
Click to expand...

top, you work in oil and gas, surely you're more sophisticated than this.

Its not merely about the price of oil.

Its about american interests, which is a confluence of both oil price, influence, and control. We are able to control the kuwaitis and saudis. We can cajole and influence them to keep the oil spigot on, and to keep and moderate production at levels that remains in a sweet spot that is both advantagious to american consumers, and the profitiability of mulitnational corps. And, we are able to leverage our influence with the saudis and kuwaitis to engage in business transactions with them, and make sure they keep using petro dollars to fuel our debt and our economy.

Saddam was a wild card. He was sitting on the (mostly) untapped second largest black gold deposits in the world. And our goverment and our corporations were terrified about what he might do if sanctions were lifted...for all the reasons I mentioned previously
 
alright lets set the vet and the housewife straight once and for all.
Superfreak gets it and basic economics and oil business is prob all we agree on.

Turbo-libs can't have it both ways. We went to war this time to make oil more expensive but you can't reconcile that with going to war as Pappa Bush did to kick Sadams ass out of Kuwait which kept oil low.

Also. Since oil took off in 2002 households net worth has doubled and the stock marked soared. Energy is way less of the houshold budget than is was 20 yrs ago. It's pure ignorance of the numbers to argue otherwise.:clink:
Energy maybe the only thing these Republicans got rigth.:clink:
 
Topspin said:
alright lets set the vet and the housewife straight once and for all.
Superfreak gets it and basic economics and oil business is prob all we agree on.

Turbo-libs can't have it both ways. We went to war this time to make oil more expensive but you can't reconcile that with going to war as Pappa Bush did to kick Sadams ass out of Kuwait which kept oil low.

Also. Since oil took off in 2002 households net worth has doubled and the stock marked soared. Energy is way less of the houshold budget than is was 20 yrs ago. It's pure ignorance of the numbers to argue otherwise.:clink:
Energy maybe the only thing these Republicans got rigth.:clink:
Click to expand...

While I certainly agree that Saddam would have loved to drive up the cost of oil and that if we had done nothing he would have. We most certainly went into Iraq in part to keep him from doing that.

As for the rest.... please provide the data set you are using that shows energy is less of the household budget than it was 20 years ago. Because that part I find hard to believe, though I admit it is possible I just haven't seen the data.
 
Socrtease said:
Top what do you think the odds are that OPEC is going to go to the PetroEuro and what will that do to the dollar if anything?
Click to expand...

Iran and Venezuela have already begun to shift (as much as they can). The problem they are running into is that the vast majority of contracts are done on the London and US exchanges and they are being done in dollars.

Venezuela could be on the verge of taking over the number one slot from Saudi. Iran has dropped to fifth, behind Venezuela, Saudi, Canada and Russia. Out of the other three, I doubt Saudi or Canada switch. Russia is a wildcard.

Iraq, Kuwait and the UAE are the next three. Iraq and Kuwait will not switch. I doubt the UAE does, but like Russia could be a wildcard.

After those it is the US and Mexico and Mexico will be highly unlikely to switch.

Should Russia, Iran, Venezuela and UAE all completely convert.... it would effect the dollar in the short term, but bottom line it will not effect the currency much in the long run.
 
I have no doubt if Iraq and Kuwait had little oil we would never have gone to war.
Next time I see the chart I'll copy it, Kulow showed it today about 8% now vs 12% 20 yrs ago.

Take a look at gasoline inflation since 1960 vs Housing you'll be surprised. Housing is way harder to afford than energy.:clink:
 
It seems that Desh (like most leftists) believes that corporations consist solely of the CEO and other lofty positions, and that people randomly provide this select few with obscene amounts of money for the hell of it.

Nevermind the thousands of employess and the service provided by these companies.
 
I do agree that CEO's and board members are virtually stealing money from shareholders. But SEC regs is a whole nother debate. You are right, exxon has millions of mom's and dads buying the stock.
 
Topspin said:
I do agree that CEO's and board members are virtually stealing money from shareholders. But SEC regs is a whole nother debate. You are right, exxon has millions of mom's and dads buying the stock.
Click to expand...
and probably thousands of moms and dads actually doing the work for them in the field.
 
I think that straw man is built alreay guys you can quit now.

Do you really think the lobbiest for the oil companies give money to people who are going to give them tax cuts and hire them to massive no bid contracts for the sake of their field workers?

Ill answer for you ....NO.

You just want to play like the oil CEOs are polyannas?


Grow up.
 
I'm anti CEO's accross the board. But don't hammer all the stockholders (millions of regular people) because CEO's and lobbyist are milking us. Let's get Obama/Edwards to empower the SEC to crack down.
 
Topspin said:
I'm anti CEO's accross the board. But don't hammer all the stockholders (millions of regular people) because CEO's and lobbyist are milking us. Let's get Obama/Edwards to empower the SEC to crack down.
Click to expand...


I was not hammering the stock holders.

I was hammering home the idea that this adminstration is nothing more than a tool for the monied interests.
 
Superfreak said:
yeah, but they aren't REAL americans.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Exxon lobbyists are not, broadly speaking, looking out for the interests of Exxon pipefitters, and drilling roughnecks. They're representing the stockholders and management.

The pipefitters union and their lobbyists are looking out for the pipefitters interests.
 
And STILL you all continue with the class envy class warfare line of thought. The Exxon CEO's and lobbyists are not REAL americans because they to look out for their interest and the interest of their bosses who are the stock holders and will have their ass fired if they don't continue to make money for them. The RICH are NOT your enemy. They are REAL americans and they do not deserve to be vilified because you are upset that they like to make even MORE money than they are making now. Anyone here really wanna make less money this year than last? Really raise your hands those of you that want to be worse off one year from now than you are today.
 
Topspin said:
what's wrong with the stockholders and management- that's me
Click to expand...

I didn't say there was anything wrong with stockholders.

I was saying that Exxon lobbyists, in general, are not representing rank and file exxon employees, particulary the blue collar ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top