View Full Version : Who to blame, who will fix?
What percentage would you place the problem of high gas prices on?
1. Speculators
2. Big Oil
3. Big Green
4. Car Manufacturers
5. George Bush and “his war”
6. Instability in the Middle East
7. Congress and their unwillingness to act on freaking anything
8. Our unwillingness to drill for oil
9. Our over-use of oil, and unwillingness to conserve
10. The weak dollar
11. Some other evil plot?
12. No refiners built in 35 years +
The way I see it, our collective problem is two fold:
1. The politicians might not want to fix, or cannot fix the problem, and that we the people are not willing to turn up the heat on them sufficiently to force change. So we may be letting them play the blame game (for political gain) rather than acting on any one of the solutions above.
2. We are admiring the problem too much, and start believing we cant do anything. We see the problem and attach one solution to it. This is moronic (in my opinion) the solution is and has to be multifaceted – so the politicians say “Its all big oil” and the next week they scream “its the evil oil speculators” when it is a complex problem that requires action on many fronts before the pitch forks come out.
Now any takers on the more important issue of the percentage breakdown on solutions?
Bronco Jamus
07-18-2008, 02:07 PM
Government needs to get out of the way.
Government needs to get out of the way.
I agree, but even to allow for drilling offshore congress woudl have to follow suite and lift the ban. So again they would have to act, to reverse their previous insane policy of intentional reduction of supply in the name of Mother earth worship.
Eventually the Gore-ites will loose the battle of self-imposed economic starvation, I just dont know how high prices have to get.
I will admitt that even though production IS an issue, I think that the falling dollar is the biggest issue right now.
socalorado
07-18-2008, 02:19 PM
What percentage would you place the problem of high gas prices on?
1. Speculators
2. Big Oil
3. Big Green
4. Car Manufacturers
5. George Bush and “his war”
6. Instability in the Middle East
7. Congress and their unwillingness to act on freaking anything
8. Our unwillingness to drill for oil
9. Our over-use of oil, and unwillingness to conserve
10. The weak dollar
11. Some other evil plot?
12. No refiners built in 35 years +
The way I see it, our collective problem is two fold:
1. The politicians might not want to fix, or cannot fix the problem, and that we the people are not willing to turn up the heat on them sufficiently to force change. So we may be letting them play the blame game (for political gain) rather than acting on any one of the solutions above.
2. We are admiring the problem too much, and start believing we cant do anything. We see the problem and attach one solution to it. This is moronic (in my opinion) the solution is and has to be multifaceted – so the politicians say “Its all big oil” and the next week they scream “its the evil oil speculators” when it is a complex problem that requires action on many fronts before the pitch forks come out.
Now any takers on the more important issue of the percentage breakdown on solutions?
See highlighted area's
Bronco Jamus
07-18-2008, 02:22 PM
I agree, but even to allow for drilling offshore congress woudl have to follow suite and lift the ban. So again they would have to act, to reverse their previous insane policy of intentional reduction of supply in the name of Mother earth worship.
Eventually the Gore-ites will loose the battle of self-imposed economic starvation, I just dont know how high prices have to get.
I will admitt that even though production IS an issue, I think that the falling dollar is the biggest issue right now.
Congress has no right to ban offshore drilling 300 miles from the coast line. I would just do it and sue the US if I was an oil company..
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
07-18-2008, 08:47 PM
What percentage would you place the problem of high gas prices on?
1. Speculators
• Oil prices fall in biggest weekly drop ever after stunning sell-off (http://www.yahoo.com/s/919677)
2. Big Oil (manipulating supply to increase profits)
3. Dollar as oil currency/OPEC countries financing our debt
4. George Bush and his war
5. Instability in the Middle East
6. Congress and the weak, spinelss, go-along/get-along Dems
7. Our over-use of oil, and unwillingness to conserve
8. Our unwillingness to pursue known domestic reserves
9. Enron boys writing energy policy
10. The weak dollar
11. Car Manufacturers
12. No refiners built in 35 years - oil companies deliberately limiting refining capacity to increse profits
peacepipe
07-18-2008, 09:27 PM
Congress has no right to ban offshore drilling 300 miles from the coast line. I would just do it and sue the US if I was an oil company..
Really,Can you establish where it says that congress has no right to what can or cannot be done on U.S. territory?
jhat01
07-19-2008, 01:00 AM
i thought our territory only extended 12 miles out to sea, i cant remember...
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
07-19-2008, 03:13 AM
Really,Can you establish where it says that congress has no right to what can or cannot be done on U.S. territory?
Sure he can!
Don't you listen to Rush? ;)
peacepipe
07-19-2008, 10:23 AM
The United States territory includes any points of extended spatial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial) location (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Location) under the control of the United States federal government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government). Various regions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region), districts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District), and divisions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_%28subnational_entity%29) are under the supervision of the United States federal government. The United States territory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territory) includes clearly defined geographical area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographical_area) and refers to an area of land (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land), air (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air) or sea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea) under jurisdiction of United States federal governmental authority (but is not limited only to these areas). The extent of territory is all the area belonging to, and under the dominion of, the United States of America federal government (which includes tracts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lot_%28real_estate%29) lying at a distance from the country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country)) for administrative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative) and other purposes.
[/URL]
[edit (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/)] Constitution of the United States
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg/222px-Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg)
Original copy of the Constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution).
Under Article IV of the United States Constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_IV_of_the_United_States_Constitution), territory is subject to and belongs to the United States (but not necessarily within the national boundaries or any individual state). This includes tracts of land or water not included within the limits of any State and not admitted as a State into the Union.
The Constitution of the United States states<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-3>[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territory#cite_note-3)</SUP>,
<DL><DD>"the congress shall have power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power) to dispose of, and make all needful rules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule) and regulations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation) respecting the territory or other property (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property) of the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be construed, so as to preclude the claims of the United States or of any state." - Article IV </DD></DL>
[edit (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/)] Congress of the United States
Congress possesses power to set territorial governments within the territory of the United States.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-4>[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territory#cite_note-4)</SUP> The power of congress over such territory is exclusive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_authority) and universal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_authority). Congress legislation is subject to no control, unless in the case of ceded territory. The U.S. Congress is granted the exclusive and universal power to set a United States territory's political divisions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_division).
[[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_territory&action=edit§ion=4"]edit (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/)] Supreme Court of the United States
All territory under the control of the federal government is considered part of the "United States" for purposes of law. The United States Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court) ruling from 1945 stated that the term "United States" can have three different meanings, in different contexts.
<DL><DD>"The term 'United States' may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution." [Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-5>[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territory#cite_note-5)</SUP>] </DD></DL>
BroncoBuff
07-19-2008, 01:24 PM
Government needs to get out of the way.
Totally disagree ... the price of oil explosion the past year has almost nothing to do with US governmental policies.
And Bob, you didn't include simple supply and demand factors ... they are the #1 single factor in my book. Oil prices, barrel prices, are globally set, (which is why the U.S. government is the wrong answer), and demand is jumping nearly 1/2 of 1 percent per month, at least it did until May-June, when U.S. demand dropped because of high prices, said drop in US demand finally caused a dip in global oil prices this past week.
Supply and demand are powerful forces - doubly powerful on a global scale. I would've thought you free-market "Blame America First" types would understand that. But instead you blame the U.S. Government ... for a global price hike?
The dollar weakening makes global commodities more expensive in dollars, too. I suppose the weak dollar - and its portion of blame for American gas prices - can be laid at the US government's door. But that's a serious reach. Though prolly not to big a reach for you "Blame America First" types.
BroncoBuff
07-19-2008, 01:28 PM
Although ... and this went little-noticed, but US Airlines CEOs met a week or two ago, and the statementthey released together blames oil speculators, almost entirely. I'll find a link to that. Sounds kinda funny, cause the nascent blame of oil-speculators has kinda been discredited lately.
Spider
07-19-2008, 01:32 PM
Totally disagree ... the price of oil explosion the past year has almost nothing to do with US governmental policies.
And Bob, you didn't include simple supply and demand factors ... they are the #1 single factor in my book. Oil prices, barrel prices, are globally set, (which is why the U.S. government is the wrong answer), and demand is jumping nearly 1/2 of 1 percent per month, at least it did until May-June, when U.S. demand dropped because of high prices, said drop in US demand finally caused a dip in global oil prices this past week.
Supply and demand are powerful forces - doubly powerful on a global scale. I would've thought you free-market "Blame America First" types would understand that. But instead you blame the U.S. Government ... for a global price hike?
The dollar weakening makes global commodities more expensive in dollars, too. I suppose the weak dollar - and its portion of blame for American gas prices - can be laid at the US government's door. But that's a serious reach. Though prolly not to big a reach for you "Blame America First" types.
Problem is supply doesnt have to be low , but yes the US does set prices , our oil speculators started hedging oil right after the enron loophole was created ... what that did was creat an artifical demand , and keep supply tight ... at one point we was b uying up to 20X's the amount of oil of our useage , now other countries see us buying oil like mad, they follow suit so they can have some , China is hoarding oil cause of the olympics ........ we facedthis once before in the 90's Clinton said he would release the national reserve , well all saw what happened to the price of oil after theat .... Bush created a panel right after he got in office to create this loophole .......
Spider
07-19-2008, 01:34 PM
Although ... and this went little-noticed, but US Airlines CEOs met a week or two ago, and the statementthey released together blames oil speculators, almost entirely. I'll find a link to that. Sounds kinda funny, cause the nascent blame of oil-speculators has kinda been discredited lately.
one of the airlines I dont remember what one was price locked in at 75.00 per barrel , so the air lines knew something was comming , but yeah it is the enron loophole that done this .....
BroncoBuff
07-19-2008, 01:56 PM
Enron loophole = speculators, right?
Yes ... here's the article:
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Airlines blame oil speculators for fuel prices
Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal
Northwest Airlines Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc. are among a consortium of 12 U.S. air carriers asking Congress to address the actions of oil speculators, whom they blame for escalating fuel prices.
The carriers issued a statement Wednesday saying, "We are urging our customers and employees to ask Congress to act quickly to curb speculation in the commodities markets. This speculation, while not solely responsible for the extraordinary rise of oil prices in recent months, continues to make the situation much worse -- harming the economy and having devastating effects on our industry."
A group of 12 airlines sent a letter to their customers through their trade association Air Transport Association of America Inc. Chief executive officers for AirTran Airways Inc. (NYSE: AAI), Alaska Airlines (NYSE: ALK), American Airlines (NYSE: AMR), Delta Air Lines Inc. (NYSE: DAL), JetBlue Airways Corp. (Nasdaq: JBLU), Northwest Airlines (NYSE: NWA), Hawaiian Airlines (AMEX and PCX: HA), Midwest Airlines (AMEX: MEH), Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV), United Airlines (Nasdaq: UAUA), Continental Airlines (NYSE: CAL) and U.S. Airways (NYSE: LCC) signed the letter. A copy also was sent to lawmakers, warning them about soaring job cuts within individual airline carriers, which are blamed mostly on escalating fuel prices.
Many of the airlines, including American and Southwest, serve Sacramento International Airport. Southwest is the airport's largest carrier.
"For airlines, ultra-expensive fuel means thousands of lost jobs and severe reductions in air service to both large and small communities," the CEOs said in the letter. "To the broader economy, oil prices mean slower activity and widespread economic pain. This pain can be alleviated, and that is why we are taking the extraordinary step of writing this joint letter to our customers."
This week alone, Northwest Airlines said it would be eliminating 2,500 positions.
In the letter to consumers and Congress, the airlines say oil speculators are currently purchasing 66 percent of all oil futures contracts, compared to 20 years ago when they acquired only 21 percent. This new balance has left speculators with more control over the end price, and airlines are picking up the bill, the air carriers claim.
"Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and then sell it to each other again and again," the airlines say in their letter. "A barrel of oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers pick up the final tab."
The airlines' CEOs say in the letter that regulatory oversight of market speculation has declined in recent years, and the industry sees a need for reform to ensure speculators do not keep overheating the market to a point that hurts the end consumer.
The news comes just a few weeks after Northwest CEO Doug Steenland urged Congress to pass legislation that would curb speculative investing in energy commodities. Testifying before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in late June, Steenland said an uptick in oil speculation in the futures markets has contributed to rising jet fuel prices, harming the airline industry.
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2008/07/07/daily35.html?ana=from_rss
This is a very recent development .... just 10 days ago. Pretty good sources, too. Airlines are really getting killed...
Bronco_Beerslug
07-19-2008, 09:30 PM
See highlighted area'sGeeeezus, at least you got one right.
Problem is supply doesnt have to be low , but yes the US does set prices , our oil speculators started hedging oil right after the enron loophole was created ... what that did was creat an artifical demand , and keep supply tight ... at one point we was b uying up to 20X's the amount of oil of our useage , now other countries see us buying oil like mad, they follow suit so they can have some , China is hoarding oil cause of the olympics ........ we facedthis once before in the 90's Clinton said he would release the national reserve , well all saw what happened to the price of oil after theat .... Bush created a panel right after he got in office to create this loophole .......
Almost all the above is entirely wrong.
Rohirrim
07-20-2008, 07:45 AM
Ronald Raygun.
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:08 AM
Almost all the above is entirely wrong.
LOL yeah sure thing .........
Oil futures are not physical oil, Spider. The volume of oil traded as futures doesn't change the amount of the stuff.
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:10 AM
Enron loophole = speculators, right?
Yes ... here's the article:
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2008/07/07/daily35.html?ana=from_rss
This is a very recent development .... just 10 days ago. Pretty good sources, too. Airlines are really getting killed...
Yeah , but more then that the enron loophole allows hedging and power buying without oversight , this is something W*GS cannot grasp ...
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:13 AM
Oil futures are not physical oil, Spider. The volume of oil traded as futures doesn't change the amount of the stuff.
you know what .Seriously sell your silly ass búll**** to someone else . i will just wind up insulting you hurting your feelings and getting nowhere ....
Your rambling misrecollections aren't arguments, nor do they have evidence or proof. Just another Spidey brain fart...
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:21 AM
Your rambling misrecollections aren't arguments, nor do they have evidence or proof. Just another Spidey brain fart...
see , so where in the hell is this getting us weatherman ? no where , you have been here long enough to know , you cant bull**** me or lie to me ..so why even bother ?
I wouldn't call some of what you write "lies", because that presumes that you know the truth first. They're just errors, or comments made in ignorance.
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:38 AM
I wouldn't call some of what you write "lies", because that presumes that you know the truth first. They're just errors, or comments made in ignorance.
I call what you wright flat out lies ....we been over this on the WACO issue ....but I am not the only one that has noticed
I call what you wright flat out lies ....we been over this on the WACO issue ....but I am not the only one that has noticed
Now you're just deflecting. Rather that prove what you claim is the truth, you just attack me. Snore.
Spider
07-20-2008, 08:42 AM
Now you're just deflecting. Rather that prove what you claim is the truth, you just attack me. Snore.
LOL you twit , we have been over this for how long now ?
Earendil
07-20-2008, 09:10 AM
I don't have a dog in this fight, but consider my drunken wisdom:
A lie involves intentional falsehood. If someone believes their own BS you can't fault them, only pity them.
Note, by the way, I've still taken no position in the debate....
Totally disagree ... the price of oil explosion the past year has almost nothing to do with US governmental policies.
And Bob, you didn't include simple supply and demand factors ... they are the #1 single factor in my book. Oil prices, barrel prices, are globally set, (which is why the U.S. government is the wrong answer), and demand is jumping nearly 1/2 of 1 percent per month, at least it did until May-June, when U.S. demand dropped because of high prices, said drop in US demand finally caused a dip in global oil prices this past week.
Supply and demand are powerful forces - doubly powerful on a global scale. I would've thought you free-market "Blame America First" types would understand that. But instead you blame the U.S. Government ... for a global price hike?
The dollar weakening makes global commodities more expensive in dollars, too. I suppose the weak dollar - and its portion of blame for American gas prices - can be laid at the US government's door. But that's a serious reach. Though prolly not to big a reach for you "Blame America First" types.
I agree with much of what you are saying demand is a big factor, very surprised I missed it... The list I created, was get folks talking, and make teh simple point that there is no ONE solution, there are many all being used at once, and there is more than one problem -- so blaming speculators alone, or Big Oil, or environmentalists alone is stupid.
Oil prices globally are set in US dollars, so as teh dollar goes down, we will pay more even if no other factors change, and as you pointed out demand globally has gone up -- India and China creating much of teh new demand. So, regarding the declining US dollar, teh government has done MUCH to crew things up by printing more dollars and over spending.
one of the airlines I dont remember what one was price locked in at 75.00 per barrel , so the air lines knew something was comming , but yeah it is the enron loophole that done this .....
It was Southwest, and I think it was for less than $75.00 -- they took a chance and "speculated" on future higher prices and were right...
This thread reminds me of the reasons why nothing is ever done misinformation and deflection, given just enough wiggle room and excuse not to act...