Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

Biden is begging OPEC because his historically low approval rating. He is desperate. You disagree....ok whatever.  Welcome to America

So what pipelines did he shut down that led to this as you claimed? What energy policies led to this as you claimed?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Raises hand:  The price of oil is rebounding after a period of artificially low demand brought on by the pandemic.  At least that's what I would infer from this data that does not just compare 2020 to 2021.  If a President had a direct impact on this it looks like the end of Obama was less expensive than most of Trump except for the shut-down.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=f000000__3&f=m

image.png.6f31bb781ba4b4ea0edfb89515aab056.png

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
3 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

Raises hand:  The price of oil is rebounding after a period of artificially low demand brought on by the pandemic.  At least that's what I would infer from this data that does not just compare 2020 to 2021.  If a President had a direct impact on this it looks like the end of Obama was less expensive than most of Trump except for the shut-down.

Beyond that, there was a price war between Russia & Saudi that drove the price of oil lower just BEFORE the pandemic slowdown occurred.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
58 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

You’re welcome to read and look at the context. There’s not much to it. 
 

This is the most boring “conspiracy theory” out there in that they’re discussing and planning it out in the open. I didn’t have to sneak into a secret meeting or anything. It’s all on their website and discussed extensively by the chairman of the organization. The truth is stranger than fiction. 
 

 

I read it and there is nothing nefarious in it. It's a pie in the sky proposal not some power grab by the elites to establish the new world order.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

So which pipelines closing caused this? And which energy policies caused this?

It's hard to quantify the damage done by shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline construction...You, me, or nobody else has any ideal how many fossil fuel development, and investment projects that pipeline could have led to in the future...

What we do know is we are not anywhere close to meeting our energy needs with renewable energy, green options, etc...We are barely even putting a dent in it with renewables and won't be anywhere near meeting the demand for decades so why would Biden shutdown the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline when we could eventually get cheaper  oil from our friendly neighbors instead of having to beg OPEC and Russia to increase production?  

 

Edited by Azbadlands
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 4
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

It's hard to quantify the damage done by shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline construction...You, me, or nobody else has any ideal how many fossil fuel development, and investment projects that pipeline could have led to in the future...

What we do know is we are not anywhere close to meeting our energy needs with renewable energy, green options, etc...We are barely even putting a dent in it with renewables and won't be anywhere near meeting the demand for decades so why would Biden shutdown the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline when we could eventually get cheaper  oil from our friendly neighbors instead of having to beg OPEC and Russia to increase production?  

 

So a lot of words to say that @immortal13 post about the pipelines and policies haven’t been a driver of current pricing. Got it.

I wish he could just tell us what he meant. His criticisms seemed to be completely legitimate and not made up nonsense.

Edited by hobbes2702
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

so why would Biden shutdown the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline when we could eventually get cheaper  oil from our friendly neighbors instead of having to beg OPEC and Russia to increase production?  

Because shipping Canadian oil across US land represents an extraordinary environmental risk?  Not all petroleum products are identical.

Edited by jimmyjazz
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
It's hard to quantify the damage done by shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline construction...You, me, or nobody else has any ideal how many fossil fuel development, and investment projects that pipeline could have led to in the future...
What we do know is we are not anywhere close to meeting our energy needs with renewable energy, green options, etc...We are barely even putting a dent in it with renewables and won't be anywhere near meeting the demand for decades so why would Biden shutdown the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline when we could eventually get cheaper  oil from our friendly neighbors instead of having to beg OPEC and Russia to increase production?  
 

3 sections of the Keystone are running. Section 4 was going to transport oil from Canada to Texas to a ship to I believe China. Show me where shutting that down damages us..
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Because shipping Canadian oil across US land represents an extraordinary environmental risk?  Not all petroleum products are identical.

The dudes first post in this thread claimed Trump didn’t need to “go crawling on his knees to beg them to make his administration look better”. 
And he was serious when he typed that. Trolls are trolls 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
On 11/16/2021 at 8:33 AM, Satoshi said:

Wasn’t sure where else to put this, but all the CR talk about Trump being an authoritarian or fascist was always fear mongering. The administrative state was never there to carry out anything he could’ve wanted outside the usual Constitutional channels. As this man notes, authoritarianism far more likely to arise from the left and in some ways is already here. It wasn’t where the interviewer expected the question to go. 
 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
36 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

It's hard to quantify the damage done by shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline construction...You, me, or nobody else has any ideal how many fossil fuel development, and investment projects that pipeline could have led to in the future...

What we do know is we are not anywhere close to meeting our energy needs with renewable energy, green options, etc...We are barely even putting a dent in it with renewables and won't be anywhere near meeting the demand for decades so why would Biden shutdown the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline when we could eventually get cheaper  oil from our friendly neighbors instead of having to beg OPEC and Russia to increase production?  

 

How hard is it to spell "idea" correctly?

Posted
16 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How hard is it to spell "idea" correctly?

 

Just now, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

got caught in the russian-english translator

is this like idoit/idiot?

Posted

gotdamn some lazy halfassed trolling in here, there really is a labor shortage i guess. that plus the source material is rather tame at the moment lol

 

tenor.gif

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Goofyboy said:


3 sections of the Keystone are running. Section 4 was going to transport oil from Canada to Texas to a ship to I believe China. Show me where shutting that down damages us..

Shipping the oil to China is just DEM politician talking points they've used for years now to get everyone against the Pipeline...Do you really think we would have this massive Pipeline built all the way across the US and only foreign countries would benefit from the oil in it?

Edited by Azbadlands
  • Fuck You 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

Shipping the oil to China is just DEM politician talking points they've used for years now to get everyone against the Pipeline...Do you really think we would have this massive Pipeline built all the way across the US and only foreign countries would benefit from the oil in it?

This poster seems likely to be an actual child.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted

He doesn’t really seem to grasp the absolute basics like who would own the pipeline, who would benefit from it, how the global oil market works, etc. He sounds like a twelve-year-old who has listened to his dad rant about stupid libs a lot and adopted his dad’s dumb fact-free arguments.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

Shipping the oil to China is just DEM talking points they've used for years now to get everyone against the Pipeline...Do you really think we would have this massive Pipeline built all the way across the US and only foreign countries would benefit from the oil in it...

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/anthony-swift/department-energy-data-shows-keystone-xl-export-pipeline
 

Quote

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has released export data that clearly corroborates President Obama's recent assertion that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is primarily about export. Politico reports that refineries in Port Arthur and Houston - which would be the primary recipients of crude oil delivered by the Keystone XL pipeline - exported over 60% of their refined product in 2014.

 

But wait, there’s more

Quote

Looking at the production and exports of the Texas Gulf Coast refineries that would receive the vast bulk of Keystone crude and that coincidentally all have access to deep water berths in Port Arthur and along the Houston ship channel, it is abundantly clear that export has become the primary market for these refineries.

But don't just take our word for it. Ask Valero, the refining company which has committed to the largest share of Keystone XL's capacity. It told investors in a February 2015 presentation that it intended to increase its capacity to export gasoline and diesel from its Gulf Coast refineries by nearly 20% in 2015 (from 667,000 bpd to 780,000 bpd).

Valero's Port Arthur refinery has installed equipment specifically to refine tar sands crude that it hopes to receive via Keystone XL stating that this equipment will convert the heavy crude to diesel for the export market.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

I never said none of it would be exported to other countries...My point is do you really think the US would not benefit from and receive some of this oil for having the pipeline running all the way across our land?  Do you think if we did not benefit from it in some way if it were up and operational that our government could not step in and make it happen?

Edited by Azbadlands
  • Fuck You 5
Posted
18 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

I never said none of it would be exported to other countries...My point is do you really think the US would not benefit from and receive some of this oil for having the pipeline running all the way across our land?  Do you think if we did not benefit from it in some way if it were up and operational that our government could not step in and make it happen?

This is good stuff. Keep going

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Posted
40 minutes ago, Azbadlands said:

I never said none of it would be exported to other countries...My point is do you really think the US would not benefit from and receive some of this oil for having the pipeline running all the way across our land?  Do you think if we did not benefit from it in some way if it were up and operational that our government could not step in and make it happen?

I like lamp.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 4
  • Haha 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Azbadlands said:

Shipping the oil to China is just DEM politician talking points they've used for years now to get everyone against the Pipeline...Do you really think we would have this massive Pipeline built all the way across the US and only foreign countries would benefit from the oil in it?

Another poster making statements about things they have zero clue about.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 hours ago, Goofyboy said:


3 sections of the Keystone are running. Section 4 was going to transport oil from Canada to Texas to a ship to I believe China. Show me where shutting that down damages us..

Source?   Cursory search came up empty

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Trump won’t ever win again. He’s an anchor not a balloon.

I hope that you're right, obviously. But on my most recent cross-country flight, 5 people commented how awesome the guy behind me's "Let's go Brandon" shirt was. I don't think I've ever experienced someone making a political statement on an airplane before. A lot of the people who voted for Joe are going to forget how awful it was under Trump.

Edited by aggie08
Posted
Source?   Cursory search came up empty

Found the source and it was a political comment that was floated around a bunch. From articles, it looks like mostly Latin America was in the works - not China. My apologies.
Posted
It is pretty fucking funny to hear some of our posters who obviously know jack shit about world energy markets opining about what is driving price increases.  

Either that are they're pissed off Albertans.
Posted
I hope that you're right, obviously. But on my most recent cross-country flight, 5 people commented how awesome the guy behind me's "Let's go Brandon" shirt was. I don't think I've ever experienced someone making a political statement on an airplane before. A lot of the people who voted for Joe are going to forget how awful it was under Trump.
Ummm, no we won't. Trump and those that still enable his supporters will forever be known as huge pieces of shit.
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:


Lol@this getting zero tapalikes.

I don't think he should run. He was a much better candidate than Trump, but it's not his fault that the bench isn't deep. The Republican party I left is not something I can support, not DeSantis, not Pompeo--they are strongmen and Pompeo especially would not be good for the nation as a whole. Forget Trump. I will never cast a vote for him.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:
11 hours ago, aggie08 said:
I hope that you're right, obviously. But on my most recent cross-country flight, 5 people commented how awesome the guy behind me's "Let's go Brandon" shirt was. I don't think I've ever experienced someone making a political statement on an airplane before. A lot of the people who voted for Joe are going to forget how awful it was under Trump.

Ummm, no we won't. Trump and those that still enable his supporters will forever be known as huge pieces of shit.

I wish I had your faith in society. 

I think the number of people that think Joe Biden is the primary cause of their high gas prices and inflation is higher than we care to admit (because most people are idiots), and it's rising every day.

A lot of people held their noses last November and voted for a dreaded liberal as their "anyone but Trump" candidate, not because they gave a shit about Joe Biden. Some of them are absolutely talking themselves into "it was never this bad, was it?" Most Americans would vote for Pol Pot if they were promised a $500 annual tax savings.

As far as his supporters also being cast aside, if an election was held tomorrow, you don't think Ron DeSantis would wipe the floor with Biden?

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I don't think he should run. He was a much better candidate than Trump, but it's not his fault that the bench isn't deep. The Republican party I left is not something I can support, not DeSantis, not Pompeo--they are strongmen and Pompeo especially would not be good for the nation as a whole. Forget Trump. I will never cast a vote for him.

While I dislike Biden, the incumbency advantage he has is too great to squander, strategically speaking. It’s why I always said he would run for re-election if he won in 2020.

And the Dems do have a deep bench IMO.  Biden came in fourth in Iowa and fifth in New Hampshire in the 2020 primaries.  Lots of dem voters believe there are better options than Biden for President. 

Posted
29 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

As far as his supporters also being cast aside, if an election was held tomorrow, you don't think Ron DeSantis would wipe the floor with Biden?

"This DeSantis guy seems sharp." - 50% of Americans.

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

While I dislike Biden, the incumbency advantage he has is too great to squander, strategically speaking. It’s why I always said he would run for re-election if he won in 2020.

And the Dems do have a deep bench IMO.  Biden came in fourth in Iowa and fifth in New Hampshire in the 2020 primaries.  Lots of dem voters believe there are better options than Biden for President. 

The best option, in the eyes of many, will not be running again.



×
×
  • Create New...