Reply With Quote
ing sociopathic 1%er
ing commie
ing sociopathic 1%er
you've been proven to be demonstrably wrong time and time again with this tired talking point. Yet you continue to parrot it like a good little sheep.
Ehhh... I wouldn't mind some trading of excess capacity, but you definitely want to make sure you don't place exports in the long run over internal demand... this isn't the government exporting the gas, so this whole "stimulus" angle is somewhat baloney... what's likelier to happen is companies stashing the earnings offshore anyways. Call me a cynic, but this happens all the time.
When there's an oil boom, you can bet your ass the citizens in the areas affected see it as a stimulus.
where's there's an oil/gas boom, you can bet your ass the citizens will pocket a tiny fraction of the benefits.
Also, I see where infrastructure destruction/insufficiency and lenders who know how booms go bust are reluctant to lend for contruction because they figure the loans will go bad in the bust.
I don't disagree you could see a boost in jobs in that certain area, but if the tradeoff is raising gas prices for *everyone*, I'm not sure it's a wise tradeoff.
I've already disproven this asinine narrative of yours as I've given multiple instances of how the tax revenues from drilling and producing benefit the communities involved.
Also, you apparently know nothing about lending in a petroleum environment. Those loans are out there right now. https://www.wnbonline.com/Energy-Banking
I know these guys. They're killing it.
Yeah, commodities often behave like that. I don't like paying more for things down here than in other parts of the country. However, I'm fortunate enough to live where the oil is. The trade off, as you put it, also involves less public assistance spending since more roughnecks are making bank rather than lining up for food stamps and assistance. Trade offs go both ways and you've yet to make the case for rising gas prices unless you are assuming a normalization of artificially low nat gas prices. Probably need to quantify that before you pull the trigger on a conclusion.
Boo is just a know nothing socialist luddite.
Can't be. Jobs only get created when it's the gubment spending money.
Right!
Any 99%er wanting the nation's wealth shared more equitably is slandered as a communist, socialism!, etc, etc.
The same slanderers fully support the unlimited confiscation/redistribution/concentration of wealth from the 99% to the 1%.
lol strawmen
lol simpleton
I think the energy market in general, because of how many things it affects, is one where you have to be very careful where you draw the line between allowing maximizing profits for individual companies vs the ripple effect of those decisions.
Which is the reason most every oil producing country subcontract private companies to do the work, but retain the decision-making...
The implication you've made is that the latter method is the best way to handle this? If so, why is that way demonstrably better?
If I were to hazard a guess, I suppose it might be lower domestic fuel prices.
I'm liking this. They are starting to drill on my fishing buddies ranch and he is trading in his little boat for a bigger boat we can all sleep on when we take it to the Bahamas.
This is the little boat we have been fishing on:
Cool.I'm liking this. They are starting to drill on my fishing buddies ranch and he is trading in his little boat for a bigger boat we can all sleep on when we take it to the Bahamas.
This is the little boat we have been fishing on:
He may have to hire a staff to run his new boat.
More jobs!
He already hires 2 to run this one.
Right, and thus drive compe iveness, since fuel prices are an important factor in any modern economy, even more so when it's a seemingly scarce resource.
"better" is a relative term. "better" for the businessman is selling to the highest bidder, which doesn't necessarily aligns with what's "better" for the nation.
Looks like the "fiscal cliff" won't be a problem for him. Glad to see the economy is going well for at least some under socialist Barry...
But will he buy the boat in the US with those extra taxes he would have to pay, or will he buy from a different country?
You're asking the wrong person
I don't expect you to have the answer, but what would you do? Pay the extra "luxury taxes" you have to pay to buy a nice boat here, or buy it from a different country?
You know, years ago, when that tax was implemented, it really hurt the US boat industry. All in the name of taxing the rich more.
Not into sailing, so I wouldn't have that problem...
OK, consider it a hypothetical question. Would you buy US and pay the extra taxes, or by from somewhere else?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
