Terminalcoffee discussion

He would authorize drilling for oil in the United States.

If you think we don't have enough, read this:

http://www.kiplinger.com/businessreso...

That would be a start, but I just fundamentally disagree with most everything he does. So, I probably will not.

I will vote for him as long as he's running.

Tell me, how does drilling for oil here help anything? With oil sold on the world market, what is gained (for the U.S.) by pulling it up locally? Sure, the oil companies make a few billion more, but what does it do for the country?

jobs.

A lot depends on who is running against him. I'm waiting for the right to put forth a viable candidate.

Keep waiting, RA. From what I saw last night (at least what little I saw), they can't seem to shoot straight. But 18 months is a very long time between now and Election Day 2012.

The Decemberists offered to let Michelle Bachmann use the Calamity song for free in her campaign if she wants it.

Really?

Never pegged that band for Bachmann fans. I figure only the truly insane seem to appreciate her.

Gus wrote: "Really?

Never pegged that band for Bachmann fans. I figure only the truly insane seem to appreciate her."

I don't think it was an appreciation.
"Had a dream/You and me and the war of the end-times"

Very subtle, Ko!

RandomAnthony wrote: "A lot depends on who is running against him. I'm waiting for the right to put forth a viable candidate."

I hope you have a comfy chair and lots of popcorn because I think it'll be a long wait if last night's debate is any indication.

Phil wrote: "I will vote for him as long as he's running."

Ditto.

And then the next level, protecting "real" Americans from the evil other. Herman Cain saying he would be uncomfortable with a Muslim in his administration, and Ron Paul saying that Christian speech should be protected etc.

I'm with Phil. Obama again. Bill Clinton if it was possible. My dream ticket, Clinton and Clinton. Hillary and Chelsea.

Alright then, what is President Obama doing to lower oil prices?

Lower oil prices will give the middle class more spending money which will help create jobs.

And an increase in supply will lower oil prices.

The president has asked for tighter regulations for speculators. He has also consistently pressed for incentives for alternate energy sources and innovation. Meanwhile, congress has sat on its collective fat ass and continued giving billions to oil companies (who keep reporting record profits).

We don't need more oil, we need to use less oil.

Misha wrote: "What I want are sensible policies based in facts and not perception or whether said policies are likely to allow a particular party to either gain power or continue to hold power. That's it. I don't care which party the policies come from. I just want them to make sense and be good for the country — the entire country and not just the small segment that holds the most wealth."

Yep.

I also don't want policy based on interpretations of 2000 year old books.

Phil wrote: "The president has asked for tighter regulations for speculators. He has also consistently pressed for incentives for alternate energy sources and innovation. Meanwhile, congress has sat on its coll..."

True, but it hasn't worked.

Cjl wrote: "We don't need more oil, we need to use less oil."

I agree but until we can find a better energy source we are stuck with it. So we need to make it cheap to grow our economy.

There's nothing Obama can do to lower oil prices (short of interfering with the markets and instituting price controls, which would/could not happen). Increased drilling in America won't lower oil prices. As this article points out, "The United States simply doesn't have enough oil to move world markets. Plus, any increase would be offset by OPEC."

"This drill drill drill thing is tired," said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service, which calculates gas prices for the motorist organization AAA. "It's a simplistic way of looking for a solution that doesn't exist."

"In fact, more domestic oil is just what we've been seeing and gasoline prices are still going up.

Including liquids from natural gas, biofuels and other products that are all used to make gasoline, the United States now produces 9.7 million barrels of oil a day, according to EIA. That's the most oil this country has pumped in 20 years, and puts it just behind Saudi Arabia and Russia as the world's top producer."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/25/news/...

If it weren't for government subsidies to the oil, gas, coal, nuclear industries, those forms of energy would be the most expensive. $30 per gallon of gas without the subsidies.
Compared to that, wind, solar, geo-thermal, etc. are real cheap.

Lobstergirl wrote: "There's nothing Obama can do to lower oil prices (short of interfering with the markets and instituting price controls, which would/could not happen). Increased drilling in America won't lower oil..."

Former Shell Oil executive John Hofmeister believes drilling in the U.S. will lower prices . The problem with doing it is the government. The government will not allow drilling in a lot of places. Judges also block drilling. They are driving up the price of oil and inflation with it.

Cjl wrote: "If it weren't for government subsidies to the oil, gas, coal, nuclear industries, those forms of energy would be the most expensive. $30 per gallon of gas without the subsidies.
Compared to that, ..."

Cjl, wind, solar and geothermal can not power a car or an electric power plant.

Geothermal is promising for home heating.

It would be a great idea to eliminate all subsidies and let the market determine which way is best.

I was only trying to make the point that non-renewable energy has benefited from govt subsisies, while renewable hasn't.
I feel that we're at the point now where we've killed all the whales in the Atlantic, and now we have to sail all the way from Bedford, Mass. to the Pacific to get whales for their oil.
It can't happen overnight, but we have to get our eyes off all those whales in the Pacific. But the answer lies in renewable sources. That's where our attention, money, labour, should go. And we should tax the hell out of non-renewable resources to force people to make changes. I'm a firm believer in Krugman's proposal for a $5 a gallon tax on gasoline, with an increase of $1 per year.
"I believe in the future
We shall suffer no more.
Maybe not in my lifetime,
But in yours I feel sure."

Renewable energy receives subsidies. They get about $12 billion according to http://solar.calfinder.com/blog/solar....

If you tax the carbon fuels the economy will suffer even greater.
Most Americans do not live in big cities with public transportation. Heating a home will drain the money from a family. Those who live in apartments will pay much higher rent to cover the cost.

Frankly, I think Paul Krugman doesn't understand the plight of most rural Americans.

At one time we had local bakeries and local dairies that supplied us without all the travel costs. And a local hamburger joint that bought its meat from a local butcher.
When the Dodgers were still in Brooklyn, the majority of the players lived close enough to the park where they could walk to work.

Well said BunWat. I have lived rural and urban (right now I live in the ex-urbs, at least two hours from any form of life). I have been poor (how poor? As a child I had to shovel coal for heat. My parents didn't have a car until I was in the 5th grade. No TV, no telephone. I didn't get my first new clothes until I received Confirmation (12 years old?), up until then I got hand-me downs from my brother and cousin) now I'm rich.
And being rich does allow me the freedom to make choices that the poor can't make. But, I do remember going without. I remember my mother shopping once an week. If we ran out of something we had to wait for the next shopping trip to get it. We didn't just jump in a car and drive to the local Wa_wa because we were in the mood for Ben and Jerrys.
There was a time in America when things were different. Cheap energy made a lot of things possible, but we have paid a great price for it. And it was like the frog in the boiling pan of water.
And I don't buy into the 'Less is More' philosophy. Less is definitely less. But we have to learn to do with less.
Except for the celibacy part, we should all live like Shakers.

BunWat wrote: "When the price of gas and other petroleum derivatives goes up, people complain a lot.

They also;
buy smaller and more fuel efficient vehicles, stop driving as much, combine trips together to..."

That may have been true in the past however jobs are scarce, moving and buying a smaller car or invest ing in solar panels is not affordable to many. A lot of people have to drive far to find work, if they are lucky.

Cjl wrote: "Well said BunWat. I have lived rural and urban (right now I live in the ex-urbs, at least two hours from any form of life). I have been poor (how poor? As a child I had to shovel coal for heat. My ..."


We may need to live like Shakers but we will more likely be living like the garbage eating cult if oil keeps rising.

I know people who made changes. They installed geothermal heating in their homes. They changed because they can afford to.

I think prices are high enough to initiate change. There is only one reason change has not happened. It is because of lack of $$$$$$$$$$.

I don't know what generation is going to make the change though. I hope it's this one. During the 60's I thought it would be 'my' generation, but most of them became Reaganites. I find hope in the Brooklynites who are supporting local businesses. Community farming groups. Ben and Jerry's.
It would be nice if it was a siesmic shift, rather than the slow process that us into this mess.

Arminius wrote: "Former Shell Oil executive John Hofmeister believes drilling in the U.S. will lower prices . The problem with doing it is the government. "

How does he think it will lower prices? Even if the U.S. suddenly increased oil production by 1 million barrels a day, OPEC has the capacity to cut production by an equal, offsetting amount, in order to keep global prices level. Does he think OPEC would not do that?

There is definitely a regional difference when it comes to driving. It also bugs me when people who have no children complain about SUV's. Try taking a couple of kids to hockey practice with all their gear and backpacks, etc. in a Prius or a Smart car. If you have a family, often a larger vehicle is needed just to tote kids around, go to Costco, Home Depot and the like. I on the other hand just love gas guzzling SUV's in the snow and on the big hill to my house.

In a snowy area, a good sport utility vehicle has actual utility. I don't object to people who need larger vehicles using them. I object to companies churning out 2 wheel drive SUVs with terrible gas mileage and no discernible purpose, and to people buying them for no reason. Minivans and station wagons are safer, cheaper, and have better gas mileage for everyone who doesn't need to tow, off road, or get through snow drifts, which is most of us. I had a roommate with a small SUV that was so light that it became useless in an inch of snow.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Arminius wrote: "Former Shell Oil executive John Hofmeister believes drilling in the U.S. will lower prices . The problem with doing it is the government. "

How does he think it will lower prices?..."

No, I see no reason for OPEC to cut production.

Arminius wrote: "No, I see no reason for OPEC to cut production. "

But they will. That's what they do.

So they cut production. They have done it before when we weren't increasing American production.

However, I think they will increase production due to the competition provided by America.

No, Arminius, OPEC will not increase production, they will lower it so that they continue to make huge profits.

Oh, I give up, nobody has ever made a dent in your ironclad opinions.

Arminius wrote: "
However, I think they will increase production due to the competition provided by America."

I'm not sure that I have heard a more incorrect statement in quite awhile, but it is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

They can lower it now if they want. We can't control them but we can control ourselves.

Arminius wrote: "They can lower it now if they want. We can't control them but we can control ourselves."

But where is the incentive? Why sell more to make the same amount or less? I'm pretty sure our oil companies don't want to flood the market with oil to bring the price down. Then you have the problem of refinery capacity.

Speculators control the price of oil as much or more than any other influence.

And the thing with oil is that we are captive to it and they know it. We WILL fill our cars regardless of the price and the hardship. There's no incentive for them to lower the price. It's not like we as individuals can take our buying power elsewhere and affect them in any way.

BunWat wrote: "That makes no sense Armenius. Historically OPEC has always tried to manage production so as to keep the price up as high as they can manage. The only reasons they have let the price fall have bee..."

If America produces more oil the demand for OPEC produced oil will drop.

Prices will drop if supply is greater than demand. Using less is possible but not feasible. Producing more is possible.

Speculators are betting that oil prices will increase because demand exceeds supply. If the opposite happens they will bet the other way.

I can speak knowledgeably about pony pricing, if we need to move on to that subject. The Shetland boom and subsequent bust? Buying medium versus buying large? I got ya covered.

BunWat wrote: "Armenius wants cheap oil. And a pony."


LOL, very true.

Here is a good article about the pricing of oil. However, the author thinks conservation is the answer.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/0...

I love being able to take the bus most of the time, and thumb my nose at all the oil corporations.
Can I have a pony, too?

Jackie, you can definitely have a pony.

Yay! I get a pony!
:::skips down the halls in glee:::

Jackie "the Librarian" wrote: "Yay! I get a pony!
:::skips down the halls in glee:::"

You'll stop skipping when you come home from work to find her in your mailbox with a big bow around her neck.