When they were high it sure was obamba's fault. Now, not a peep about gas prices on the news or talk radio... lol

This isn't OT. Put OT shit in the OT.

Typical, but give them a day or so and they'll find something to cry about and try and blame Obama for.
Attachments:

OPEC is trying to kill the US shale oil industry. The low gas prices won't last.

Yes they will last. Why cant u.s. shale be back up above 60 dollars a barrel. Other non opec nations are increasing production as well. OPEC is on the ropes trying to protect thier market share. It will be below 75 dollars max for years. I think it may average between 55 and 65. But then again what do I know. We will see, thats my prediction on the record.

You can blame Bush for the low gas prices. If Obama hadn't done everything he could to block oil production prices would be even lower and there would be more jobs according to this report in U.S. News and World Report.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/12/05/blame-bush-for-low-gas-prices

obomber Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When they were high it sure was obamba's fault.
> Now, not a peep about gas prices on the news or
> talk radio... lol

Media is owned by anti American libs. Why would they talk about this? Low gas prices represent everything libs hate. American ingenuity, ambition, success, independence, American values and hard work. Libs despise America. To acknowledge the low gas prices would mean that lib policies to kill the US economy have failed and conservative policies are kicking the shit out of Obama.

We are increasing production to kill your US oil industry. US oil production is currently done on private lands and not government lands like before. This plan comes from your president so to rebuild America in his image. Your liberal establishment will cause your country to implode which is good for Islam.

dumbass libturdz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Media is owned by anti American libs.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! What a fucking cretin!!!!!

TheTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can blame Bush for the low gas prices.

Well, let's remember that the US average pump price for a gallon for regular was $4.05 in July of 2008. It had been $1.46 when Bush was inaugurated. That's what happens when you elect "oil men". But there's no question that the Great Recession that Bush and his assfuck laissez-faire advisors eventually managed to plunge much of the world into did cause demand to collapse, and all you Econ 101 fans certainly know what that meant.

> http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/12/05/
> blame-bush-for-low-gas-prices

LOL! This is a manufactured hack piece from the ultra-right-wing Heartland Institute, a Koch-funded propaganda mill manned by a bunch of global warming deniers who also believe that second-hand smoke is not dangerous. Co-founder Joseph Bast has no education beyond high school. Nice sourcing, pinhead,

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes they will last. Why cant u.s. shale be back up
> above 60 dollars a barrel. Other non opec nations
> are increasing production as well. OPEC is on the
> ropes trying to protect thier market share. It
> will be below 75 dollars max for years. I think
> it may average between 55 and 65. But then again
> what do I know. We will see, thats my prediction
> on the record.

Gerry will die of AIDS in 2015. But then again what do I know. We will see, thats my prediction on the record.

OPEC will lose. Americans will win. You watch. libtards will wail and gnash their teeth as Detroit goes back to producing what Americans want - big comfortable cars and trucks and American families will prosper. Anyone in US who isnt doing anything but dancing about these low gas prices is completely unAmerican and should get the hell out. Only an absolute libtard hates low gas. Republicans pushing shale for years while Democrats staunchly opposed this for environmental reasons. Dont forget to thank a Republican for today's low gas prices. Youre welcome.

Cite your sources,

> LOL! This is a manufactured hack piece from the
> ultra-right-wing Heartland Institute, a
> Koch-funded propaganda mill manned by a bunch of
> global warming deniers who also believe that
> second-hand smoke is not dangerous. Co-founder
> Joseph Bast has no education beyond high school.
> Nice sourcing, pinhead,

BTW - America refines a ton of gas. That creates jobs. Middle Eastern countries swimming in oil cant even refine it. They are third world idiots, and anyone who takes their threats seriously are libtatds. US rules and will turn the corner on energy by simply outproducing and economically outperforming them. Thats what America does libtards, love it or leave it.

Prove it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cite your sources,

See the link above, goober? Open it and note that the article is filed under "Opinion", not "News". Then click on the author's name to learn about the slimeball who so easily pulled the wool over your eyes.

Saudi Arabia has increased oil output significantly to decrease the per barrel oil price. The point was to undermine the Russian economy which is oil and natural gas based.

This was done at the request of the EU and US.

Once Putin has felt enough pain production will slow again and prices will rise. Expect sky high oil prices just in time for summer.

This is a short term affair.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OPEC will lose. Americans will win. You watch.
> libtards will wail and gnash their teeth as
> Detroit goes back to producing what Americans want
> - big comfortable cars and trucks and American
> families will prosper. Anyone in US who isnt doing
> anything but dancing about these low gas prices is
> completely unAmerican and should get the hell out.
> Only an absolute libtard hates low gas.
> Republicans pushing shale for years while
> Democrats staunchly opposed this for environmental
> reasons. Dont forget to thank a Republican for
> today's low gas prices. Youre welcome.

We should have used excise taxes to put a $1.25 per gallon floor under pump prices back in 1980, then added ten cents per year to the tax, using the excess over market prices (when one existed) to fund development of alternative energy sources and technologies. Gas would be $4.75 a gallon today, and even bargain cars would be getting 50 mpg.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> US rules and will turn the corner on energy by simply
> outproducing and economically outperforming them.
> Thats what America does libtards, love it or leave it.

OPEC oil is relatively easy and cheap to get out of the ground. Shale and offshore oil are expensive and difficult to get out of the ground, and that's not even counting the potentially very large environmental costs. We might actually be better off in buying oil from the suckers who are willing to sell it to us so cheaply, letting the value of our own oil go up and up and up as it simply sits there in the ground.

Libtard - that was EXACTLY the LAST thing we needed in 1980. Reagan inherited 17 percent interest rates from Carter, and more taxes would have killed the economic recovery that followed in the 80s as Reagan and Republican policies gradually beat back Carter'sand set US off on a huge economic expansion. Look what deregulation of airlines did...put Southwest and JetBlue on the map so ALL could travel, not just the rich. Same idea here, You only want the rich to be able to afford cars and drive. Taxes KILL growth!

Growth was what was needed at the time to save us from the god awful Carter administration - not more liberal social engineering!

I suppose next you'll prpose "drive 55." Another brilliant liberal Carter energy policy!

You notice the pet project Keystone Pipeline has received zero press coverage now that petrol prices have plummeted. No ammo in the chamber/rationale for siphoning dirty oil across the US to moolah-making refineries along the gulf coast.

Why do libs choose Islam over America?

Pop 'n' Oil Bottles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Saudi Arabia has increased oil output
> significantly to decrease the per barrel oil
> price. The point was to undermine the Russian
> economy which is oil and natural gas based.

OPEC simply refused to cut production. OPEC is more than Saudi Arabia. Cutting production would have boosted oil prices, but they want to damage the profitability of both Russian and shale oil production. OPEC is in a much more secure position vis-a-vis low prices than either of those two. Shale isn't profitable now, and extended low prices could cause the industry to collapse, just as it did when prices fell in the 1980's.

> This was done at the request of the EU and US.

OPEC is not an arm of either the EU or the US. Like many businesses, they understand the benefits of maintaining good customer relations, but the idea that OPEC just does whats it's asked or told to do is naive in the extreme.

> Once Putin has felt enough pain production will
> slow again and prices will rise. Expect sky high
> oil prices just in time for summer.

That's like predicting that the sun will rise in the early morning hours.

> This is a short term affair.

In comparison to what? Russia and North Dakota have refused to cut production as well. Neither is on any sort of economic condition to do so. Prices will rise and fall with changes in seasonal demand, but high long-term supplies will rule your "sky high" predictions out.

By sky high I meant over $3 a gallon.

Basically, don't go out and buy a car that gets 10 miles to the gallon and also don't celebrate our president as the "great gas price lowerer" for all to hail.

This is international politics and when OPEC can begin screwing us again after a short reprieve they will.

We currently get the majority of our gas from the western hemisphere not the ME so things may change permanently in the future.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libtard - that was EXACTLY the LAST thing we
> needed in 1980. Reagan inherited 17 percent
> interest rates from Carter,

No, Volcker ramped up interest rate targets to bring monetary policy into alignment with Reagan's desire to "wring inflation out of the economy". That plan sent the economy into what was then the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Our northeast manufacturing corridor was savaged and never recovered. Unemployment was above 10% for ten straight months. Carter had nothing to do with any of it.

> ...and more taxes would have killed the economic
> recovery that followed in the 80s...

Reagan's first term was an economic disaster. The second was better if you can ignore the 1987 stock market crash, the burgeoning S&L crisis, and pushing people into home-equity debt.

As an FYI, Reagan cancelled the final third of his 1981 tax cuts in 1982 as part of what is still the largest peace-time tax increase in US history. He also enacted significant tax increases in 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1987. His signature 1986 tax legislation was intended to be revenue neutral, but it ended up being a two-year tax increase instead.

> Look what deregulation of airlines did...

Look what deregulation of financial services did.

> Taxes KILL growth!

Spending and deficits promote it. Do you favor spending and deficits?

> Growth was what was needed at the time to save us
> from the god awful Carter administration - not
> more liberal social engineering!

GDP in Carter's first three years grew by 4.6%, 5.6%, and 3.2%. Then the 1979-80 Arab oil crisis came along. In Reagan's first three years, GDP grew by 2.6%, -1.9% (that's a negative number) , and 4.6%.

> I suppose next you'll prpose "drive 55." Another
> brilliant liberal Carter energy policy!

That was Nixon's work, numbskull.

Gas was $1.87 a gallon in 2008.

<>

So what...there are many self educated people who have far more wisdom than most PHDs. But since you would like something more leftward leaning....

Try this
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/washington/19drill.html?ref=us&_r=0

Heck I'll even give you the leftie propaganda.
http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/land/oilshalebasics.php

There's plenty more...but it's probably above your education and comprehension level.

"LOL! This is a manufactured hack piece from the ultra-right-wing Heartland Institute, a Koch-funded propaganda mill manned by a bunch of global warming deniers who also believe that second-hand smoke is not dangerous. Co-founder Joseph Bast has no education beyond high school. Nice sourcing, pinhead,"

So what...there are many self educated people who have far more wisdom than most PHDs. But since you would like something more leftward leaning....

Try this
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/washington/19drill.html?ref=us&_r=0

Heck I'll even give you the leftie propaganda.
http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/land/oilshalebasics.php

There's plenty more...but it's probably above your education and comprehension level.

Pop n Oil Bottles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> By sky high I meant over $3 a gallon.

LOL!!! Until this latest drop, the pump price for regular had not been BELOW $3.00 in four years.

> Basically, don't go out and buy a car that gets 10
> miles to the gallon and also don't celebrate our
> president as the "great gas price lowerer" for all
> to hail.

It was dumb to buy a 10 mpg car fifty years ago already. All that's been noted re Obama meanwhile is that the fag-tard right-wingers loved to blame him when gas prices were high and offer only wall-to-wall crickets now that prices are low. It's the stupidity and hypocrisy of the right-wing that's on the table here.

Otherwise, Obama has supported expanding and diversifying our energy sources and efforts. Unlike Koch-bots of course, he'd like to see care taken for the environment as well. We all have to live here after all. He's promoted and invested in wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal, along with clean-coal and carbon-sequestration. He took large tracts of offshore areas off the shelf and made them available for leasing. That had to be scaled down after BP's wonderful decimation of the Gulf of Mexico by being too cheap to install safety equipment that is standard elsewhere. That's private sector ingenuity for you.

> This is international politics and when OPEC can
> begin screwing us again after a short reprieve
> they will.

OPEC has not been able to act as a cartel since the 1980's. The idea that they are more than one of many major players in the game is quite a stretch.

> We currently get the majority of our gas from the
> western hemisphere not the ME so things may change
> permanently in the future.

Ecuador and Venezuela are members of OPEC.

2013 US crude oil imports in millions of barrels per day...

OPEC: 3,493
Non-OPEC: 4,237

Oil trades in a global commodity market, so to one degree or another, every supplier ends up being in much the same boat as all the others.

LOL...Wrote

"Well, let's remember that the US average pump price for a gallon for regular was $4.05 in July of 2008. It had been $1.46 when Bush was inaugurated. That's what happens when you elect "oil men". But there's no question that the Great Recession that Bush and his assfuck laissez-faire advisors eventually managed to plunge much of the world into did cause demand to collapse, and all you Econ 101 fans certainly know what that mean."

Your gas prices don't come close to government figures which in 2012 showed gas prices in the Bush and Obama administrations were about the same.
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_21545019/trick-question-who-had-higher-gas-prices-obama

libs hate America. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gas was $1.87 a gallon in 2008.

Like it was just one price all year long. What a doofus.

Average mid-month prices for regular in 2008...

Jan -- $3.04
Feb -- $3.04
Mar -- $3.26
Apr -- $3.35
May -- $3.69
Jun -- $4.01
Jul -- $4.05
Aug -- $3.71
Sep -- $3.87
Oct -- $3.11
Nov -- $2.03
Dec -- $1.65

That's what the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression can do.

Republicans are little bitches.

TheTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what...there are many self educated people who
> have far more wisdom than most PHDs. But since you
> would like something more leftward leaning....

There are many ignorant right-wing goobers who simply make stuff up. Many of them work at phony propaganda places like the Heartland Institute. You've just been snookered by them is all.

> Try this...

It says that Bush called for an end to offshore drilling bans (Obama actually did end them) and a new open season on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Obama did not do that).

> Heck I'll even give you the leftie propaganda.

It says that shale oil is poorly understood by the public and more dangerous than most people think. Particularly I suppose when fracking is involved.

> There's plenty more...but it's probably above your
> education and comprehension level.

LOL! Go away kid, ya bother me.

TheTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your gas prices don't come close to government
> figures which in 2012 showed gas prices in the
> Bush and Obama administrations were about the
> same.

Moron. The figures I posted are entirely correct, which is why you can't actually challenge any of them. Every single one of them came from the US Energy Information Administration. You lose. In fact you are disqualified for being entirely too stupid to play.

And by the way, boasting that the worldwide economic collapse that you created served to lower gas prices is kind of feeble even for a complete idiot.

Please... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> libs hate America. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gas was $1.87 a gallon in 2008.
>
> Like it was just one price all year long. What a
> doofus.
>
> Average mid-month prices for regular in 2008...
>
> Jan -- $3.04
> Feb -- $3.04
> Mar -- $3.26
> Apr -- $3.35
> May -- $3.69
> Jun -- $4.01
> Jul -- $4.05
> Aug -- $3.71
> Sep -- $3.87
> Oct -- $3.11
> Nov -- $2.03
> Dec -- $1.65
>
> That's what the worst economic collapse since the
> Great Depression can do.

Holy shit! I forgot how low gas was with Bush. It reached record highs under Obama. Thankfully, republican policies and states are producing and refining more than ever against the will of libs and their Islamic comrades.

W.C. Oil Fields
"There are many ignorant right-wing goobers who simply make stuff up. Many of them work at phony propaganda places like the Heartland Institute. You've just been snookered by them is all."

You attack their credentials but offer nothing to refute them...how credible is that?

"It says that shale oil is poorly understood by the public and more dangerous than most people think. Particularly I suppose when fracking is involved."
That's true but it supports Bush as the supporter of fracking.

"LOL! Go away kid, ya bother me"
Thanks for the compliment...that's nice when you're over 70. :)

They just finished the Seaway Twin pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf Coast. In the past American oil companies manipulated U.S. stocks of refined products and crude oil to set off and sustain a speculative spike in the price of crude.

Well they can control the levels of these domestic market driving dynamics with absolute perfection now with the Seaway Twin pipeline.

If they want it to go up it will go up. Its not the saudis that fuck us these days, they are just a beneficiary. Its our own oil corp. But they need one thing to bring up the gas prices pain on America to satisfy thier greed again, Republicans in the White House.

They can do all they did during Bush again very easily once the glut stabilizes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2015 12:07PM by Gerrymanderer2.

"OPEC is not an arm of either the EU or the US. Like many businesses, they understand the benefits of maintaining good customer relations, but the idea that OPEC just does whats it's asked or told to do is naive in the extreme. "

No, BUT, US has huge influence. Reagan knew that and sold Sauddis AWACS, and they agreed to let the bottom drop out of oil in the 1980s for a while. Reagan did this to screw Russia AND give is 65 cent gas which stimulated the economy. Worked on both counts, look it up idiot.

Its called having a foreign policy that supports domestic economic policy.

Libtatds should look into it.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "OPEC is not an arm of either the EU or the US.
> Like many businesses, they understand the benefits
> of maintaining good customer relations, but the
> idea that OPEC just does whats it's asked or told
> to do is naive in the extreme. "
>
> No, BUT, US has huge influence. Reagan knew that
> and sold Sauddis AWACS, and they agreed to let the
> bottom drop out of oil in the 1980s for a while.
> Reagan did this to screw Russia AND give is 65
> cent gas which stimulated the economy. Worked on
> both counts, look it up idiot.
>
> Its called having a foreign policy that supports
> domestic economic policy.
>
> Libtatds should look into it.

You dont know shit. An oil super tanker was named after your
ast national security advisor for a reason you stupid fuck.

Everything was based on oil. Every God damn Bush decision. Hamed Karzai was appointed president because his ties to Chevron. You name it everything was oil based. So much so it was sickening.

Reagan repealed the 55 limit Carter kept in place. Nixon only wanted it as a TEMPORARY measure. As for "alternative energy." Republicans are all over it - but Democrats oppose nuclear. Remember the big no nukes" idiots. All big idiot liberals and same ones oppsing Keystone pipeline.

Riiiiight. ALL a big right wing conspiracy. Still blaming Romney too for your problems too? What a delusional loser you are. Dont even understand how the real world works. OK, fine if you believe that. Republicans will gladly take credit for low gas prices but liberal media doesnt want to talk about it. And Afghanistan has NOTHING to do with it!

Cant wait til Republicans are sworn in later this month and hand you your ass!

Lastly, and per Forbes...among other sources, like history books, stats show Reagan-era economic growth was far more than double the Obama rate. Read up on it. Liberals have been trying to debunk the fact Reagan expanded the economy like no other. Its all BS in line with their wacko conspiracy theories.

Now they hate the fact gas prices are low because it doesnt support their naive environmental agenda...and try and blame low gas prices on Bush? Good luck winning that arguement.

The previous Republicans weren't subservant to oil barons, they were oil barons. They viewed foriegn policy through the lenses of a oil executive with his own super power army. What dont you understand about the fact that every policy decision they made or did not make was within those very li ited parameters.

The thing about oil men is, they've learned long ago that Americans are worth nothing if a dollar can't be squeezed out of them. Even if the Saudi's get the biggest cut.

Yeah, now Nixon and Reagan were oil barons. I cant educate stupid, sorry.

Yeah...

Hahaha, Rajeswar is losing it. Fucking anti American G2 Pakistani.

hahaha. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hahaha, Rajeswar is losing it. Fucking anti
> American G2 Pakistani.


You have to bring up what you think is his real name and ethnicity. I bet you feel like a tough guy.

I don't even agree with G2 opinions.

Gas prices will bear out if fracking helps lower price of gas or not, this ones easy. Roght now, looks pretty good for fracking. Check back in a year.

The Saudis care more about thier market control and share than they do the price. They will try to keep U.S. fracking on the ropes, that means under 70 dollars a barrel max may be the new norm. I think 70 is the ceiling. The Saudis will say we're going to pump this much no matter what. OPEC can follow suit or cut production without us. Which they wont because if they do then OPEC itself will no longer exist. If the U.S. fracking industry wants to enter the market let them limit thier production they say. The Saudi's wont do it.

They know America cant profit under 45-50 dollars a barrel so they're secure. They see thier control of oil and thier market share as a national security existential necessity.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2015 01:05PM by Gerrymanderer2.

The only thing he's done is try to keep the gas prices as high as hell, so we all could buy crappy electric cars from his well off buds. Ride stink buses , walk and get mugged, ride bikes and get hit by cars, live in crime infested close in projects.

With his threatened veto's of anything that could bring cheaper fuel prices across the board, Keystone pipeline,war on Coal, now no fracking.

So where else has he been the last 6 years?? Not anywhere close to being a friend of Cheap "GAS" YOU "ASS" Ole's !

Adoption of electric vehicles in the United States would devastate the price of oil. You think the Saudis are shitting bricks now wait until electric vehicles start decreasing demand for oil in the U.S. market. Oil will be cheaper than water.

The Saudis may be the big producer but we're the big consumer. We hold a lot of power if we utilize it.

"only thing he's done is try to keep the gas prices as high as hell, so we all could buy crappy electric cars from his well off buds. Ride stink buses , walk and get mugged, ride bikes and get hit by cars, live in crime infested close in projects.

With his threatened veto's of anything that could bring cheaper fuel prices across the board, Keystone pipeline,war on Coal, now fracking?"

WELL SAID! I think real the question is who you gonna bet on...Saudis who are barely able to maintain control in the face of Islamic extremism, and desparately cant afford to tick off the United States? Or good old fashioned American ability to compete and innovate - SUPPOSEDLY with great Republican power to support them at every turn (yeah right)? Sorry, Im betting on the latter.

libs hate America. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Holy shit! I forgot how low gas was with Bush.

You've forgotten who your Mom was as well, I'm sure.

> It reached record highs under Obama.

No, asshole. US average pump prices for regular have NEVER been higher than they were in July 2008. You could look it up, but not of course at the dumbass Heartland Institute. You right-wing goobers are so full of worthless bullshit. They just don't come much dumber than you braindead droolers.

Bring on electric vehicles - AND more nuclear power. Liberals oppose nuclear, NOT Republicans.

Tesla P85D is 691 horsepower and 864 pounds of torque of instant full power acceleration. It produces a full G of pull off the line and goes 0-60 in about 3.2 seconds.


It will leave anything you can imagine standing at the line wondering what happened. A heavy sedan too. Electric cars will smoke you. They take off like a roller coaster.

Obama gas prices. Highest in US history.
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tesla P85D is 691 horsepower and 864 pounds of
> torque of instant full power acceleration. It
> produces a full G of pull off the line and goes
> 0-60 in about 3.2 seconds.
>
>
> It will leave anything you can imagine standing at
> the line wondering what happened. A heavy sedan
> too. Electric cars will smoke you. They take off
> like a roller coaster.

A car for the 1% by a company that stays alive by tax breaks and powered by coal and nuclear.

Dumbass libturd. Got it.

TheTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You attack their credentials but offer nothing to
> refute them...how credible is that?

Get a grip, asshole! You pulled out the bullshit Heartland Institute opinion piece in a failed attempt to refute previous devastating evidence of your stooge-like incomprehension concerning Carter and Reagan. You retort was pure and absolute bullshit. Defend it or admit what a uselsss historical dumbfuck you are.

> Thanks for the compliment...that's nice when
> you're over 70. :)

That's shameful. You don't come across as more than 7.

American innovation at its finest.

Can't wait for the model x!

aND loL "AKa" w.C.oILfIELDS cOuLd pOssIbLY aFFoRD oNE yOU gOObER


nOW ALL yOU LiBS sMOKE poT GeT hiGH aS UsUaL kEEp DReAMiNg bOuT dEm wINdmILLs

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, BUT, US has huge influence. Reagan knew that
> and sold Sauddis AWACS, and they agreed to let the
> bottom drop out of oil in the 1980s for a while.

LOL! The US did sell AWACS to the Saudis In 1986. By that time, OPEC was in disarray and the "bottom" under oil prices was long fucking gone.

> Reagan did this to screw Russia AND give is 65
> cent gas which stimulated the economy. Worked on
> both counts, look it up idiot.

I don't have to look stuff up, moron. I know what, 50 times as much about everything as you do just as is.

> Its called having a foreign policy that supports
> domestic economic policy.

Reagan's domestic policy was based on dumbfuck supply-side economics designed to steal from the poor and give to the rich. And ignore the burgeoning AIDS epidemic of course. God's punishment of gays, after all. If Bush-43 had not come along, Reagan would still be in the conversation for worst President of all time. "I'm going to cut taxes, increase defense spending, and balance the budget in three years." What a mindless simpleton.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Hamed Karzai was appointed president because his ties to Chevron.

It wasn't the restaurant in Baltimore? I'm shocked. Shocked, I say!

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reagan repealed the 55 limit Carter kept in place.

Fucked trying to cover up your earlier fuck-up. The 55 mph limit under the National Maximum Speed Law was in effect between 1974 (Nixon) and 1987 (Reagan) -- in his SEVENTH fucking year as President. Carter was only in for four years, you know.

> As for "alternative energy." Republicans are all
> over it - but Democrats oppose nuclear.

Obama's broaden-the-base energy policy included $54 billion in loan guarantees to back the construction nuclear power plants. Congress has not acted on that in the wake of the earthquake/tsunami meltdowns in Japan. Meanwhile, no new nuclear plant licenses had been issued since 1978. Until Obama issued two in 2012.

> All big idiot liberals and same ones oppsing
< Keystone pipeline.

Phase-1 of the Keystone Pipeline was completed in mid-2010. Phase-2 was completed in early 2011. Phase-3 was completed in early 2014. Just guessing here, but I'll bet you don't know the difference between the Keystone and the Keystone XL.

FootballIsOn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gas prices will bear out if fracking helps lower
> price of gas or not, this ones easy. Roght now,
> looks pretty good for fracking. Check back in a
> year.

It works the other way around. The price of oil has to be high enough to cover and justify the expenses of fracking. If the price stays too low for too long, everyone in Montana and North Dakota will lose their shirts. Just as happened with the last shale-boom in the 1980's.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Saudis may be the big producer but we're the big
> consumer. We hold a lot of power if we utilize it.

It's easy enough for the Saudis to say we are going to pump more or less oil out of the ground. It isn't as easy for us to say that we are only going to drive halfway to work from now on.

Obama gas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama gas prices. Highest in US history.

Dorkbrain bullshit. Your assfuck picture is of one gas-gouger station where, in Hawaii? The yardstick is the average US pump price per gallon of regular, and that has NEVER been higher than it was in July 2008.

W.C. Oil Fields Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Saudis may be the big producer but we're the
> big
> > consumer. We hold a lot of power if we utilize
> it.
>
> It's easy enough for the Saudis to say we are
> going to pump more or less oil out of the ground.
> It isn't as easy for us to say that we are only
> going to drive halfway to work from now on.

Yeah, but if people say I'm going to drive the electric car this week they're fucked.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> W.C. Oil Fields Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The Saudis may be the big producer but we're
> the
> > big
> > > consumer. We hold a lot of power if we
> utilize
> > it.
> >
> > It's easy enough for the Saudis to say we are
> > going to pump more or less oil out of the
> ground.
> > It isn't as easy for us to say that we are only
> > going to drive halfway to work from now on.
>
> Yeah, but if people say I'm going to drive the
> electric car this week they're fucked.


Nope, they're not because electric vehicles are and will be for the foreseeable future a trivial component, our oil imports continue to rise even with higher US production, and their cost of production is 1/3 of ours.

I seriously doubt our imports have risen irrespective of increased production. That's why there's a glut remember.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I seriously doubt our imports have risen
> irrespective of increased production. That's why
> there's a glut remember.

We are and have been turning away imports. Alaska recently started exporting oil to North Korea. Why is this? Because of conservative policies like fracking on private lands. As much as you libtardz continue to stifle economic progress by banning drilling on public land, Americans gave you libs a big FUCK YOU, and started fracking. America is too great for a bunch of Islamic loving, American hating libs to bring down.

Eat shit and die already with your Arab friends. Go nuclear and we have much less need for oil to fuel vehicles. Then you and your 1 percent liberal ideologues can have all the electric cars you want and you hsve no thread or anything to do.

Congress has not acted on nuclear because, up to know the House was controlled by the Democrats your retard.

By the way, I know you are unAmerican because you have been posting the whole football game while the rest of normal people wewe watching it.

Also, I know about Keystone BEER. Ever heard of it? It's swill real American workers drink becuase they work real jobs you pussy who thinks he's an economist. What were you, a GS-9 at OMB? And still blaming Romney for US problems.

Get a life, you suck, and all your dumb liberal Anti-american ideas!

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I seriously doubt our imports have risen irrespective of
> increased production. That's why there's a glut remember.

You would be correct. US crude oil imports have fallen by about 20% since 2008.

dumbass libturdz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I seriously doubt our imports have risen
> > irrespective of increased production. That's
> why
> > there's a glut remember.
>
> We are and have been turning away imports. Alaska
> recently started exporting oil to North Korea. Why
> is this? Because of conservative policies like
> fracking on private lands. As much as you libtardz
> continue to stifle economic progress by banning
> drilling on public land, Americans gave you libs a
> big FUCK YOU, and started fracking. America is too
> great for a bunch of Islamic loving, American
> hating libs to bring down.


No, it's because Obama changed the law allowing us to start exporting oil. God you're stupid. That is literally definitively because of Obama.

LibyarxEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Congress has not acted on nuclear because, up to
> know the House was controlled by the Democrats
> your retard.

Actually Republicans have controlled the House since Jan 2011. You might remember the mini-recession that resulted at the time.

> By the way, I know you are unAmerican because you
> have been posting the whole football game while
> the rest of normal people wewe watching it.

Football is a militaristic, hurt-other-people, land aggression game. Like the gladiators of Rome, it appeals to the worst and most barbaric elements of society. Both on and off the field.





>
> Also, I know about Keystone BEER. Ever heard of
> it? It's swill real American workers drink becuase
> they work real jobs you pussy who thinks he's an
> economist. What were you, a GS-9 at OMB? And still
> blaming Romney for US problems.
>
> Get a life, you suck, and all your dumb liberal
> Anti-american ideas!

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dumbass libturdz Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I seriously doubt our imports have risen
> > > irrespective of increased production. That's
> > why
> > > there's a glut remember.
> >
> > We are and have been turning away imports.
> Alaska
> > recently started exporting oil to North Korea.
> Why
> > is this? Because of conservative policies like
> > fracking on private lands. As much as you
> libtardz
> > continue to stifle economic progress by banning
> > drilling on public land, Americans gave you libs
> a
> > big FUCK YOU, and started fracking. America is
> too
> > great for a bunch of Islamic loving, American
> > hating libs to bring down.
>
>
> No, it's because Obama changed the law allowing us
> to start exporting oil. God you're stupid. That
> is literally definitively because of Obama.

Hahahaha! Exporting condensates is not lifting a ban on crude oil. It's the oil from cracking. You know, from republican states and republican policies. Besides, this would mean you support republican policies and big oil. Hahaha! You still think Ron Paul isn't a republican?
You're an idiot. Go back to Pakistan Rajeswar.

LibyarxEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
..........
>
> Congress has not acted on nuclear because, up to
> know the House was controlled by the Democrats
> your retard.
>
Hmm..this Democratic reticense about nuclear power would come as a surprise to the people of Burke, Ga., where two new plants, backed by guarantees from the Obama administration, are scheduled to come online by 2017 (http://www.11alive.com/news/article/226884/3/nuclear-reactor-approval-means-thousands-of-east-georgia-jobs -- even took the time to find a small word story from Gannett for you). These will be the first new plants since Three Mile Island, and there are five additional new plants in various stages of review and licensure.

The truth is that nuclear power is enjoying a renaissance under the Obama administration. You are confusing (nothing surprising there) ardent environmentalists with Democrats and "Liberals" in general. I, for one, am both a "Liberal", and a supporter of nuclear power. You see, I have what we call an "education", which included much more science and math than the "Jesus shows us Arithmetic" primer with which you completed your studies.

For a good little conservative, you don't show much of a mastery of Sun Tse. Mom must not have taught you about that during your home schooling career.

W.C. Oil Fields Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I seriously doubt our imports have risen
> irrespective of
> > increased production. That's why there's a glut
> remember.
>
> You would be correct. US crude oil imports have
> fallen by about 20% since 2008.


It has decreased over recent years but that's a temporary condition reflecting a decrease from the peak. The gap between domestic production and consumption is expected to remain and will increase even with higher US production. i.e., there's a deficit between US production and US consumption which continues to need to be filled by imports. As we begin to deplete the easy/less costly resources now targeted, US production will need to move to more less productive/higher cost areas. To the extent that imports are available at lower cost from cheaper production sources, they'll likely represent a higher percentage than the reference case used below.

Quote

U.S. use of imported petroleum and other liquid fuels continues to decline in AEO2014 mainly as a result of increased domestic oil production. Imported petroleum and other liquid fuels as a share of total U.S. use reached 60% in 2005 before dipping below 50% in 2010 and falling further to 40% in 2012. The import share continues to decline to 25% in 2016 and then rises to about 32% in 2040 in the AEO2014 reference case, as domestic production of tight oil begins to decline in 2022 (Figure 12)."

LibyarxEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eat shit and die already with your Arab friends.
> Go nuclear and we have much less need for oil to
> fuel vehicles. Then you and your 1 percent liberal
> ideologues can have all the electric cars you want
> and you hsve no thread or anything to do.
>
> Congress has not acted on nuclear because, up to
> know the House was controlled by the Democrats
> your retard.
>
> By the way, I know you are unAmerican because you
> have been posting the whole football game while
> the rest of normal people wewe watching it.
>
> Also, I know about Keystone BEER. Ever heard of
> it? It's swill real American workers drink becuase
> they work real jobs you pussy who thinks he's an
> economist. What were you, a GS-9 at OMB? And still
> blaming Romney for US problems.
>
> Get a life, you suck, and all your dumb liberal
> Anti-american ideas!

Sounds like the wackjob has really gone over the edge. The game must have riled up whatever tiny reservoir of testosterone he has left. Maybe now he'll be forced to get the help he so desperately needs.

That loser actually has a fact to correct! First time ever! It was the Senate Democrats not House controlled until end of this month. That is why nothing got done.

"Reticence" and "renaissance" my ass! Here's another fact. The whole "no nukes" movement was huge liberal program. Look it up. It set us back decades!

NOW you want to admit the Liberals were wrong on nuclear power? Better late than never I guess, but you cost us 30 years of progress toward energy independence.

The reason why the other five plants are being held up is because the libtards are fighting them too - and throwing every obstacle they can in the way.

I accept your "coming around" though. I wont charge you for this history lesson on the "No nukes" movement. You have nobody to blame but yourselves.

LibyarxEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also, I know about Keystone BEER. Ever heard of it?

Yes. It's skunk-piss, ranking right down there with Buckhorn amd Olde English.

> It's swill real American workers drink because
> they work real jobs you pussy who thinks he's an
> economist. What were you, a GS-9 at OMB? And still
> blaming Romney for US problems.

No, much higher than that. Up where people are capable (as you aren't) of understanding concepts, such as the fact that Romney is shorthand for a pernicious and destructive force that is loose in society.

Lngtime environmental activist named Anna Gyorgy wrote a book. She says she it is a testament to grass-roots "democratic action."

In it she describes the anti-nuke movement she witnessed and participated in and points to timeliness of that same grass-roots organizing against the natural gas pipeline project currently proposed to confront global climate disruption.

And last tme I checked Jackson Browne isnt a Republican either.

Keystone beer is shorthand for the whole other America that want cheap energy out there you don't understand and doesn't accuse anyone of being pernicious and evil, just stupid. Like we actually drink that stuff.

Lighten up G2.

vYuT4 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It has decreased over recent years...


The ones that were under discussion.

> ...but that's a temporary condition reflecting a
> decrease from the peak. The gap between domestic
> production and consumption is expected to remain
> and will increase even with higher US production.
> i.e., there's a deficit between US production and
> US consumption which continues to need to be filled
> by imports. As we begin to deplete the easy/less
> costly resources now targeted, US production will
> need to move to more less productive/higher cost
> areas. To the extent that imports are available
> at lower cost from cheaper production sources,
> they'll likely represent a higher percentage than
> the reference case used below.

All well and good, though projections of flows in volatile commodities are always to be taken with a grain of salt. We waste an awful lot of oil on transportation energy. Any sort of breakthrough in hydrogen, electric, or biomass technology could sharply alter the curves in the graph. What is fairly evident though is that the past was quite different from the present. That alone is enough to make me think that the future is apt to be as well.

W.C. Oil Fields Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> vYuT4 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It has decreased over recent years...
>
>
> The ones that were under discussion.
>

Which was in response to the statement that imports will continue to increase even with the recent increases in US production.

>
> All well and good, though projections of flows in
> volatile commodities are always to be taken with a
> grain of salt. We waste an awful lot of oil on
> transportation energy. Any sort of breakthrough
> in hydrogen, electric, or biomass technology could
> sharply alter the curves in the graph. What is
> fairly evident though is that the past was quite
> different from the present. That alone is enough
> to make me think that the future is apt to be as
> well.


"Breakthroughs" are rare and much less likely. Even if they did happen, the transportation sector takes long periods of time to respond due to long-lived existing equipment and infrastructure. That tends to be on the order of decades, not years (unless maybe in the case of some dire driving need, e.g., required due to war, etc.). They also become less likely with low prices because less emphasis is placed on finding and implementing them. e.g., We could justifiably go to nat gas or hydrogen-based transportation now but the costs would be huge, would take many years, and there's not a driving need forcing it so we won't. Also, certain inherent aspects of fuels/energy sources don't change even then and as a liquid fuel with a high energy content relative to alternatives, oil continues to have various advantages versus alternatives. That's why we started using it to begin with versus electricity, gas, steam, solid fuel, etc., which all existed.

More likely are increases/decreases due to economic and other social/political factors. The EIA reference case assumes rather modest economic growth. Increase economic activity, consumption increases, and that gap increases. Lower world oil prices to the point that cost/risk of financing for US projects increases, there will be less activity, higher costs, less production, and that gap increases. Which is kind of the whole point of the Saudi strategy now.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That loser actually has a fact to correct! First
> time ever! It was the Senate Democrats not House
> controlled until end of this month. That is why
> nothing got done.
>
> "Reticence" and "renaissance" my ass! Here's
> another fact. The whole "no nukes" movement was
> huge liberal program. Look it up. It set us back
> decades!
>
> NOW you want to admit the Liberals were wrong on
> nuclear power? Better late than never I guess,
> but you cost us 30 years of progress toward energy
> independence.
>
> The reason why the other five plants are being
> held up is because the libtards are fighting them
> too - and throwing every obstacle they can in the
> way.
>
> I accept your "coming around" though. I wont
> charge you for this history lesson on the "No
> nukes" movement. You have nobody to blame but
> yourselves.

You write like someone whose entire understanding of nuclear power comes from reading the occasional groundless screeds of tea party bloggers with "some college" listed as their educational attainment.

I haven't "come around" or changed my thinking on this since I was an engineering student during the Carter administration. And I certainly couldn't learn anything from the likes of you.

While I support advocacy and people's right to express their interests as healthy to democracy (you know, the thing that your sacred constitution was written for), the truth is that the "no nukes movement" was only tangentially responsible for the nuclear hiatus in the U.S. from the late 1970s until midway through the last decade. The "liberal program" (???) your narrative so stupidly blames only impacted the Energy companies in so far as they feared lawsuits, community objections, and stockholder backlash.

From the Washington Public Power Supply System ("Whoops" to the media) debacle in Washington state, through the ineptness of Long Island Power and Light, to Three Mile Island, this industry has been plagued with insipid slogans ("Electricity will be too cheap to meter"), incompetent management (who would build a plant on Long Island with virtually no evacuation routes?), poor public relations (TMI) and wildly optimistic budgets. If you want to lay the blame at some group's feet, I'd suggest the culprit you seek is the grossly overpaid senior management of XYZ Power Company. You know, those job creating, risk taking 1%ers who needed loan guarantees from the Obama Energy department before they'd turn the first shovel of dirt.

Oh, one more thing...if you want to argue, and least have a modicum of understanding about the situation. The five plants in the pipeline for approval...aren't being opposed by any "libtards".

9wTWJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The EIA reference case assumes rather modest economic growth.

Yes, yes...conservative, plain vanilla, and MOR. A strength and a weakness at the same time. What I'm suggesting is that this is not a self-contained system, nor are the equilibria that the system may seem to come to necessarily stable. From experience, I would expect that any sort of fine-grained conclusions are apt to turn into examples of over-confidence in the stability and reliability of the model.

W.C. Oil Fields Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 9wTWJ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The EIA reference case assumes rather modest
> economic growth.
>
> Yes, yes...conservative, plain vanilla, and MOR.
> A strength and a weakness at the same time. What
> I'm suggesting is that this is not a
> self-contained system, nor are the equilibria that
> the system may seem to come to necessarily stable.
> From experience, I would expect that any sort of
> fine-grained conclusions are apt to turn into
> examples of over-confidence in the stability and
> reliability of the model.


Obviously so.

The original point though was that the current talking point belief that the recent increases in US production will eliminate our dependency on imports and put the Saudis, et al., out of business is greatly overstated.

Obama and the Democrats are working overtime to get the gas prices back up.. Way up, just hang in there.

You have no modicum of political understanding yet think you are educated. If you always supported nuclear power, your party sure didn't.

Don't believe me, you beloved Washington Post even admits the GOP base has always been enthusiastic about nuclear energy, while the Democratic base is skeptical (at best, libtards remain staunchly opposed.)

They go on to admit, Republican politicians support assistance to the industry such as loan guarantees for nuclear developers, while many Democrats oppose them.

WHAT? Read that lasy sentence again slowly. Washington Post, not me.

So either you are wrong or your party mouthpiece which actually is more right than you are on this. Go ahead, challenge your own party on this! Youll lose as they appease the far left. Only reason why any Democrats have come around at all on this is what they call climate change.

Republicans never gave up on it. Thank them if you ever get an electric car.

Pew poll found...

Larger shares of Republicans (62 per cent) vs Democrats (45%) support expanding the use of nuclear power to generate electricity.

Yet, how could scientists and caveman Republicans be on the same side of this?

So if you are a Democrat claiming to support nuclear power, you are certainly in a minority.

Build them all in your backyard. We support it. I want them in Alabama and Texas and Oklahoma. All of them.

We'll see what you supposedly support. You repukes have no idea what you're talking about half the time.

What are you even talking about? They already ARE in our backyard! Where do you live? In Fairfax? We have two nke plants nearby in Calvert Cliffs MD and near Lake Anna. Where did you think they were?

No put your money where your mouth is. I want them built in deep red jurisdictions only.

They are anyway because its best to keep them away from civilized populations of people. But this is a way for todays republicans to prove how republican they are.

Look at it this way. If theres radiation leakage and poisoning, Republicans are retards anyway. It may fix em up hopefully. What if radiation turns the average Republican into a well rounded and informed intellectual.

Radiation turned the Republican into a Liberal. Lets do it.

It'll probably turn you into ax welding super republitards tho that would have to be put down. Still, its a price we're willing to pay.

And now you want only Republican RED districts to take all the risk and provide you free energy? Typical socialist thinking. Yeah, that will happen.

Hey put your money where your mouth is. On this very thread all you do is say how pro nuclear you are. Now you want it built everywhere not just near you? Thats not very pro nuclear.

See when it comes to the details and down to it becoming shovel ready Republicans are all talk.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OPEC will lose. Americans will win. You watch.
> libtards will wail and gnash their teeth as
> Detroit goes back to producing what Americans want
> - big comfortable cars and trucks and American
> families will prosper. Anyone in US who isnt doing
> anything but dancing about these low gas prices is
> completely unAmerican and should get the hell out.
> Only an absolute libtard hates low gas.
> Republicans pushing shale for years while
> Democrats staunchly opposed this for environmental
> reasons. Dont forget to thank a Republican for
> today's low gas prices. Youre welcome.


LOL funniest thing I've read all day. Just curious though, do you wear a tin foil helmet?

Dont Worry Be Happy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama and the Democrats are working overtime to
> get the gas prices back up.. Way up, just hang in
> there.

I thought they were already working overtime to take away your guns. And raise your taxes. And ruin this Great White Country by importing millions of brown-skinned basket cases. These must be very busy people.

Obama has ruined the economy by record corporate profits, record stock market reducing unemployment, reducing the deficit - by almost any metric Obama has ruined the US economy by making it better.

Thanks Obama