Warning: This post is very political and will offend conservatives and liberals alike. There is however, no mention of religion.
:)
Just for the sake of argument. A guy loses his job and goes on unemployment and welfare for a short time. Soon he gets a great job, paying something like $500,000 a year, along with a company car, private jet, great expense account and free housing.
Now, what if he kept getting his welfare check that kept getting larger, And what if he also got another raise in pay every month or so?
Would that be upsetting? Would you be upset at the officials or politicians who let that happen?
Well thats exactly what happened earlier in the week.
The big oil companies - who are making tremendous profits now - were allowed to keep their corporate welfare checks.
Some Senators wanted to cut the checks back - not eliminate, just cut back - but they were blocked by fellow Senators. The GOP senators were the ones doing the blocking and they had Bush's blessing.
This really happened this week. I guess I am just still angry about it.
Now don't take this to mean that I support the Democrats. There were several Dems who voted to continue the corporate welfare checks, and few Dems have spoken out. This crosses party lines. It is just that in general it was GOP senators who led the blockage of cutting back on the corporate welfare checks. It is ugly politics at its worst.
But Bush IS an oil man and this happened on his watch.
Both sides are culpable here. The GOP is encouraging obscene profits AND giving big oil companies welfare checks at the same time. This is the same party that wants to be sure no homeless mother gets too much money for milk cause she might buy a beer with some of it.
But the Dems are no better. They want to limit even responsible exploration as they suck up to the environmentalists. This is the party that supports not allowing anyone to say an offensive word to anyone but supports killing the not yet born babies.
So i guess ive offended just about everyone here. But I am angry about gas prices. I blame both parties, maybe the GOP a little more, but both parties are making things worse.
This is ridiculous. The politicians are letting the oil companies rape the citizenry and destroy the economy all in the name of big corporate profits.
If there was ever a time for a third party to emerge, NOW is that time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
51 comments:
Okay -- first explain to me about the corporate welfare checks you are talking about and then explain to me why your not upset about the government making more on a gallon of gas than the American Oil Companies? Why should the government make more in taxes off a gallon of gas than the oil companies that actually do the working refining it? Did Congress talk about their record profits from gas as they had the big oil companies in front of them questioning them? Nope, we didn't hear that. Are they talking about taking less of a share of their profit to help us out, nope -- I think it is only John McCain that is the one wanting to do that.
Sounds like to me you should be more upset at Saudi Arabia and OPEC than US oil companies. And when President Obama gets into office and brings back the windfall profit tax, guess who is going to end up paying that too? It will get passed on to us at the pump.
first explain to me about the corporate welfare checks you are talking about
>>>
Its big tax breaks , or incentives for the oil companies.
Its welfare plain and simple and they obviously do not need it.
I agree with you on everything else. Im upset at a lot of people over this :)
Im just think the GOP is just as culpable as the DEMS.
You seem to be defending the GOP in all this ?
The politicians are not doing what they should.
Regardless of party.
If I had a job that only paid me enough to have 8 BMWs in my 12 car garage, would the government give me subsidies so I could afford those last 4 BMWs? As ridiculous as that sounds, that is exactly what is going on in this case.
That's what happens when our government leaders are puppets for big business. Big business runs this country, and our politicians pander to that big business. Hell, most of them have stock in the big businesses. Unbiased? Not by a long shot. It would almost be like if one of our city commissioners had... oh, let's say a plumbing or construction business, and a big box plumbing and construction business wanted to come to town.
Looking for a third party? Check out www.constitutionparty.org.
I guess I'm not upset about oil companies or any other companies for that matter getting tax breaks, because I don't see how that directly affects me? I don't cry about companies making money because that is what we do here in America -- it's what made us great. It is the big companies that pay the little people and give us jobs. So because one company is doing good they should be penalized over another?
I think the tax breaks were to stimulate the economy and the oil companies aren't making any more off the gas now than they were before the prices went up -- they are having to pay the extra money for the oil too.
I guess I'm defending the GOP more because I am a Republican. But I agree, not too many of them seem to be doing anything about this crisis. But I have signed the "drill here, drill now, pay less" petition. I think it is our only options to get relief now and then hopefully they can get serious about some alternative fuels.
I see what you're saying
I have no problem with companies making money. I have no beef with Microsoft, Apple, GE, or any of those strong companies.
I have a friend who paid $200 for stock in a major oil company a few years ago, and recently got a dividend check for $2,800.
THey are recording record PROFITS, so you cannot say that they are not making more.
WHen you post record breaking profits EVERY quarter, you are making money.
Im not at all sure that we shouldnt view gas as a utility, just like electricity or water. THese things are governed by an commission that prevents price gouging.
We are being raped and the republican congress or the Prez won't even call the cops, let alone the medics.
Course the other side just complains about the prez and congress and do nothing to help either.
I cant see any legit defense for the oil companies here.
Don't buy the hype of either party. Both are part of the problem.
Isn't it true that every year more gasoline is sold? Demand has increased so that has something to do with their record profits. I'm as upset as anyone about the gas prices, but if it is true the oil companies make around $.04/gallon as I have heard and the government is making around $.50/gallon-- what's the beef?
And if your going to view gas as a utility then so is milk, bread, etc.
OPEC is the ones doing the price gouging. And because we are so far away from being energy independent -- we are all suffering for it. But I do think the tax Obama is proposing will just get passed onto us at the pump.
James, a minor correction. We presently have a democrat controlled congress.
You might notice that many of the changes in the last year and a half are directly related to the change of power in congress.
I feel you are missing the point.
It isnt Dems versus Republicans ... that isnt the real issue.
the real issue is our government turning a blind eye to plain old stealing, and on top of that, the are giving them more of our tax money as a subsidy.
its not just the GOP,
I wonder what AC could do to help its citizens through this crisis? Does anyone have some creative ideas? I believe they did a good thing by allowing the "mini trucks" to be driven in town (50mpg). Anything else they could do? Perhaps AC could take a bad thing and make it a positive. Are other towns focusing on energy/oil independence? Wouldn't people be interested in coming to our town if we had some inovative policies or technology which allowed its citizens to live cheaper?
Perhaps AC should put together a committee of sorts to work on some ideas. I have heard of some US cities trying to power their town on cow manure. I wonder if this works? Sounds gross, but can you imagine the cost savings?
Go to - www.americansolutions.com
to sign the petition - DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS.
Let's send a message to all parties in Washington!!
Being a city between two rivers, I wonder why we do not utilize hydro powered electricity. I believe that was how this city started. It is expensive to build, but the power is essentially free after start up. Winfield creates it's own electricity. Why can't we?
Oh, and yes! Sign the petition to drill.
I think they are using price as a means to reduce consumption. Didn't they say they thought $3.00was the price that would change the behavioral patterns-now they are saying its $4.00.
We didn't get here over night and won't get out of this anytime soon.
But we aren't the only country that is feeling the pain. Some of the other countries like India and China subsidze there gas prices and are having to drop their subsidies due to the higher price of oil. They are having riots!
As for the record profits- I don't agree with the amount the CEO's are paid but some of that money goes to retirement funds, IRAs, etc. for regular working individuals.
Also, the easy oil is getting harder to find and the cost to get that harder stuff is much more expensive. Plus the fact that the world demand is incresing and world production is dropping- at least- temporarily. We truly need to modify our transportation system. Find ways to make mass transportation convenient, comfortable and hassle-free.
Lastly, we as a country have subsidized gas prices with war.
I remember the end of the Veitnam
War during the Nixon era, Gas went from 36 cents to 72 cents in one day! Minimum wage was either $1.60 or $1.80/hr.
It's the "creative destruction of capitalism" at work!
I think they are using price as a means to reduce consumption.
>>>
If they were giving their excessive profits to charity, and if that could be verified, i might sort of kind of buy that.
They have us by the ... ahem ... throat, and they know it.
Once this was called a violation of Sherman Anti Trust laws ... now its called capitalism.
Dont be fooled, the oil companies have different names, but its all the same deal or same outfit that is gouging us.
Get the horse and buggy back out. Get the sun bonnets for the wife and kids. And then, let's start tilling this ole ground.
Little house on the Prairie, here we come.
But, honestly folks, prepare yourselves for hardships. I'm not worried about the oil companies, or the CEO's... cause, ask some of our Leadership how much of their salary are they willing to part with. They have PLENTY!
It costs the Saudis $2 per barrel to get the oil out of the ground and they are selling it for $140 a barrel.
The way oil is produced is the same way corn or cotton is. It is bought and sold on a futures or options market where people are able to purchase contracts for the purchase or sale or amazingly, both the purchase and sale (called a straddle), of oil at some time in the future.
Apparently there is a huge price speculation of the market which has restricted the delivery of as much oil as the amount that the Chinese have increased using (something like 900 million barrels) and the restriction and speculation is what is driving up the price of oil. I have talked with some oil men who say it shouldn't be above about $80 bucks, but it is.
There is a possibility that this speculation bubble will break and send the price tumbling, but it also might not and the turkeys behind it will just get richer.
The aggravating thing is it costs only 1/10 the value of the oil to tie it up in an option. It is not like they are really having to buy the oil to keep it off the market and drive up the price.
There is no real shortage.
Ok, lets dig a little deeper cause I really don't believe its as simple as we aren't out of oil.
J posted about the closing of the Total Refinery. I saw Oil Handler #2 as it was trucked down 166 E. probably to the Port of Catoosa as it was sold to Russia. The upgrades required to keep Total open were no doubt why it closed.
In the old days if you had a surplus of product in an area it was dispensed where it could meet demand.
Now due to the clean air restrictions and blended fuel that isn't always an option. I tried to Google how many different blends are required in the U.S. a while back but couldn't find very current info.
I think alot of factors together are coming in place for "The Perfect Storm".
Increased world demand
Decreasing world oil production
Poor fuel mileage vehicles
Heavily Regulated Industry
Rising prices driven by oil
An Infrastructure dependant on
oil
A reluctance to seek alter-
natives.
Why didn't we learn our lesson in the 70's and 80's.
Like it or not price is the only fair way to reduce demansd and ensure supply.
Like it or not price is the only fair way to reduce demansd and ensure supply.
Still dont buy it.
But,even if it were true. what happens to the money?
An obscene amount is being gathered by a few people - oil people.
What are they going to do with that money ... oh i know, theyll use it to lobby congressmen to get even bigger subsidies - tax dollars, to buy research stuff like private boats and jets.
Ive said i have nothing against business making a profit.
I just dont like getting robbed.
And then paying the robber extra money just for fun.
Speculators. Hedge funds. etc. that's what drives prices up. Plus emerging nation's demand for oil. i.e. China & India. The U.S. has actually decreased our usage lately. Try & tell China & India to cut back. (they ain't hearing it)
Our system is driven by:
#1.fear & #2.Greed. Those who are doing it won't stop. They can't.
News Flash: The President does not control the price of a barrel of oil. To those putting their hope in a man or a woman, you are out of luck. Congress? HAHA. they can't do anything but fight & devour each other. & They won't stop till there's nothing left.
We better pray. Pray hard. & Pray now.
Oil WILL go to $160. then to $180., then to $200. I see possibly $5.-$6 + for Gasoline.
Think you're hurting now?
Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama can't stop it.
It's on the way.
"News Flash: The President does not control the price of a barrel of oil."
Well, actually, he does. If there were better peace and stability in the Middle East, (other than one Bedouin tribe killing another, like they have for 3,000 years), there would be higher gas and oil production. If Bush weren't baiting that idiot Chavez and knew how to manipulate him, there would be much more oil from Venezuela, a major producer. If we were helping PEMEX instead of spending the money building fences, then we would have more mexican oil, which is also operating at reduced levels.
One is bad enough, but when your political blunders stretch across 5 or 6 oil producing countries, it all adds up.
I agree that a president might not be able to magically make oil and gas cheap, but through political mistakes, he can create a situation where the speculators can influence it sufficiently to raise the price of gas.
And why shouldn't he. Look who he surrounded himself with. Cheney's Halliburton / Kellogg /Brown and Root is having the biggest heyday it ever has. B&R contracts in Iraq and Halliburton drills in Okla., operating out of their swank new main offices in DUBAI !!!!!!!
The only really neat thing would be if GW Bush and Cheney would move to Dubai after the election.
I'll bet if the prez opened the national oil reserves for a long enough period to let next quarter's call options expire out of the money, it would return to the right price and burn the heck out of the speculators.
He won't do that. It's his buddies doing it. Or bin Laden. Same deal either way.
Nah, I can't agree with you this time.
Here's the deal:
If it ain't gas, it's something else. Bread, butter, groceries, clothing.... who sets the price...
argh.
Really we do!
Sweat it out, cry it out. But I bet you haven't parked your car yet. (and most of us aren't goint to)
Cause the fact is:
I want more than what I got. I want a bigger house, a newer car, a plasma tv, diamonds, and of course a big boat (gotta stay up with the Jones') I probably can't afford it, but dadgum it, I'm gonna get what I want and then if I can't pay for it... hmmmmmmm,
blame the President Bush and the Replublicans.
Ahhhh, hedge funds... You mean the ones which clear an average profit of 85%? I wonder if Obama is going to shut down their profit margins. Quite a bit more than the 8.5% that the gas companies are claiming. No, he'll probably leave these alone as most politicians are currently invested in them. Very, very interesting!
My aunt has been on me to read this book "The Oil Factor". I guess gas had to get over $4/gallon before I'd crack it open. Anyway, they claim that gas will get to $10/gallon in the near future. Can you imagine the impact?
I wonder... What will this do to AC citizens? Will soccer mom's give up their SUV's? Will people move out of Parkerville and back to town to save trips back and forth? Will the downtown see new business due to the people wanting to shop within "walking" distance?
Every person that I know works for oil companies - not gas stations - tell me that it is an obvious price gouge.
I know 5-6, i know thats not a lot, but ... they know how the system really works.
It was republicans in the senate that supported continued welfare for the oil companies. That is a fact. That just seems wrong in the face of what they are doing to us.
Bush probably cant stop the oil companies, but he has helped create a climate where they can get away with it.
Instead of calling them on it, and stopping driving our cars, people seem more interested in defending their party and blaming the other party.
Maybe the partisan politics is just a smokescreen to keep us hypnotized and busy, so we don't actually make the politicians do the right thing.
Conspiracy anyone?
It's not only gasoline people.
Oil is much more than gasoline.
Let me guess, if you had big money of your own invested... would you be screaming now?
Probably not.
Same situation within the city confines. The have nots blame the haves. The poor blame the rich.
The Reps blame the Dems. And we all know the Dems blame the Rep.
As long as we play the blame game, it gives us something to do. (something and someone to talk about)
"If there were better peace and stability in the Middle East"
Now there's a nice dream for you.
"My aunt has been on me to read this book "The Oil Factor". I guess gas had to get over $4/gallon before I'd crack it open. Anyway, they claim that gas will get to $10/gallon in the near future. Can you imagine the impact?
I wonder... What will this do to AC citizens? Will soccer mom's give up their SUV's? Will people move out of Parkerville and back to town to save trips back and forth? Will the downtown see new business due to the people wanting to shop within "walking" distance?"
Some kind of reality check, huh?
Better get ready, because, it will affect every facet of our way of life.
"If there were better peace and stability in the Middle East"
"Now there's a nice dream for you."
You're right, it will never happen, but Bush has done a whole lot to make a number of countries in the middle east who were sort of on our side regard us as an enemy, and he is continuing today.
The future president, whoever it is (and God help him), will have to straighten it out. We are regarded (by middle eastern countries) as an invading force in Iraq. But not so much so in Afghanistan. Think about it. Almost all the 911 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Libya, but nothing was done there. We invaded Iraq, which had nothing to do with it at all.
It is like having a wolf that kills your sheep and then out of rage, you go shoot your dog.
Saudi Arabia wahabists are still a threat and the tribal areas of Pakistan are still the safe havens for the bad guys. But we sent 140,000 troops to an uninvolved country. Most middle eastern kings and despots aren't baffled by Bush's rhetoric. They know it is an economic based invasion.
But Bush screwed up. He didn't have the guts to take the oil after the invasion. That is why, when we invade a major producing oil country, our oil supplies "decrease". We are burning massive oil and gas (really) on ships, aircraft and tanks and transports supporting the war. It is even another reason there is less for the public.
Gasoline in Iraq cost just a few cents per gallon. We buy it in Turkey and then ship it to Iraq on Halliburton transport trucks and sell it there for a few cents per gallon.
Makes the toy badge carrying commissioners look smart by comparison.
Yes. Blame Bush. (I don't care who you blame, Bush is just an easy target) Not to say he's done everything right either. He hasn't.
Next 4 years someone will be blaming Obama or McCain. (doesn't matter )
If the Lord Jesus Christ himself were president, even He couldn't make the people of the Mideast like each other or even get along. They want all Jews, Christians, & Hindus killed or at least turned into slaves or concubines.
Then, once they've killed us all, they will turn on each other. (they've already turned on each other in Iraq)
Good luck with that.
f the Lord Jesus Christ himself were president, even He couldn't make the people of the Mideast like each other or even get along.
>>>
He tried it once and they crucified him.
He's coming back, and is not in a good mood.
Good post.
It is true that there will never be peace in the Middle East.
Gosh. Wow. I don't blame Bush because he is an easy target. That would be a terribly stupid thing to do.
I blame him because he invaded Iraq with no reason whatsoever other than a personal (and probable business) fight he was having with the leader of the country, Saddam Hussein.
They say war is the continuation of policy by other means. The implied first step of diplomacy is the point that Bush has missed, whether with Iraq, Iran, Venezuela or Mexico. He is a phony and America will be better off when someone else starts straightening out the screw-ups he leaves as his legacy.
Blame the world. Blame the people of the world. Blame the Lord, some are blaming God.
Just Blame Somebody else.
And, oh by the way, saying our difficulties in the middle east are caused by the muslims and their internecine squabbling and not caused by the fact we have killed millions of Iraqis is just, well indescribable.
Say we had a re-emergence of the Klan in Kansas like it was in the 30's. Whites vs blacks and Lagondas. The Canadians felt they could help the situation by being a peace keeping force and invading, but killed thirty thousand people in the process. As would be likely, the Klan could then recruit more people, not for racist warfare, but to kill the Canadians.
The average Kansan might help to shield their hillbilly neighbors and cuzzins because they would feel the Klansman would be supplying whup-a55 payback to the Canadians for the thousands of Kansans they killed.
Imagine the Canadians would then pose for the TV cameras (back home) showing how they were rescuing a toddler from a Klansman's bomb, when the only reason the Klansman made the bomb in the first place was to kill Canuck soldiers and convince them to return to Canada.
Then the person running for Prime Minister in Canada was saying he was going to be in Kansas for 100 years.
I think even I would join the Klan at that point.
That is how the Iraqi's see us.
Saddam held Iraq together with an iron fist like Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev did. Iraq "will" break apart when left to their own, just like the soviet block did with perestroika. The north will split and become separate, and the 2 religious groups will separate in the south, and it is already happening today.
There will be war. But it will be an Iraqi war and will make new countries that are just as stable as the balkans are today. (not real stable, but not at war).
We need to accept it, try to establish a basis for diplomacy and interaction in the south (forget about the north, it is already separated) and go home. The 4th of July would be a good time to start.
Good post Lagonda.
Wish i knew who you are.
The middle east trouble goes back to Abraham ... Jacob and Easau in the bible. Nearly 2000 b.c.
To think we can fix that is just a fantasy.
Do we have a right to impose democracy on others?
"Do we have a right to impose democracy on others?"
Do they have the right to impose a Muslim theocracy on us?
No to both questions.
George Bush, what were you thinking?
Come on really. It's like this: we are imposing democracy ("freedom") on the Iraqis.
How can any country impose "freedom" on another country, where the "freedom" requires the imposing country to set up base camps and occupy the "free" country for many years to force them to have a government they wouldn't have if the occupying forces weren't there?
Let's just cut the cr@p and get down to it. If we are going to occupy, forget about freedom and let's set up an american government, move in the oil companies and start pumping some regular unleaded from our new colony in the middle east. Change the name. Iraq makes no sense. We could call it Freedomland.
But we have no guts, and these things don't last anyway (remember the Shah of Iran? The CIA put him in place with "democratic elections").
If we are not going to colonize, we should try to place things in the least explosive condition possible, apologize carefully, and extract the U.S. troops as quickly as possible with a doubled emphasis on diplomacy and efforts to prevent the powder keg we created from blowing up any more.
Funny thing is the Saddam was keeping a stable lid on it, but now he is dead.
You are right, but it was not Abrahim.
The middle east problem started after the death of Muhammad. It was a very similar conflict to the one in Christianity after the death of Christ.
The Christian church split into two branches, the jewish christianity which was led by James, a relative, and the gentile orthodox, or scripture based Pauline christianity. The original church faded and the Pauline christianity prevailed and turned into the Catholic Church we have today.
The Muslims had the same type of schism. One group (sunnis) feels the religious leadership should choose the successor to Mohammad which was Abu Bakr. This is similar to the Pauline schism.
The shiites feel that the blood relatives (Ali Talib, cousin and son-in law: married Fatima, daughter of Muhammad) are the successors of Islam. The sons of Ali were Hasan and Husayn, Muhammad's grandchildren, and the leaders of the middle east claim a direct decendency from the bloodline of Muhammad through Husayn. (example King Hossein of Jordan, Saddam Hussein, etc.) When we killed Saddam, we killed a direct decendent of their Jesus character. Serious business that they probably won't forget.
The reason Iran is run by a religious council is they believe in the Abu Bakr successorship thing.
The religious fanatics in both groups are very serious about God and believe those in the other group are heretics and unbelievers. Both groups feel the Americans and Israelis are heretics and unbelievers, and they are right.
Even if we did nothing, we are like satanists to them, in many ways "because" of our freedoms.
And we are trying to fit them into our American freedom mold. Won't work.
If Condi, George and Dick were smarter, they would have known this.
In a nutshell.
The middle east problem started after the death of Muhammad. It was a very similar conflict to the one in Christianity after the death of Christ.
>
I think it was going on long before muhammed. He was around 500 a.d., >? 600 maybe?
That was big, but the conflict goes way back before that.
>>>>>
The Christian church split into two branches, the jewish christianity which was led by James, a relative, and the gentile orthodox, or scripture based Pauline christianity. The original church faded and the Pauline christianity prevailed and turned into the Catholic Church we have today.
>>>
Ive studied a lot of church history and have a different take on that.
There was not that much of a difference between the Jerusalem Church - James, and the church at Ephesus, which John led, and later Paul,
Ephesus was the "other" capital of early christianity..
Read the NT book of Galatians, it explains the schism pretty well.
Ill get flack for it, but I believe the catholic church goes all the way back to Peter, in name at least.
It didnt't really get corrupted until after 400 a.d. and it took hundreds of years to get to where a reformation was needed in the 1500's
Id say its so republicanized in the U.S> now, that we are due for another major reformation of orthodox christianity.
The gnostics - hellenists showed up around 100 a.d., and that was the huge split.
that was a bigger split than James and Paul.
That led to the cannonization of the NT
and what we now call orthodoxy
(I mean orthodox teaching, not Greek orthodox)
The gnostics versus what we now call christianity was the real battle ground.
it continues today with the New Age movement.
Sure. There were a number of splits, the Pauline schism just being one of them and they all add up to make Christianity what it is today.
My point was more about the Muslim schism which, unlike the Christian schisms, is still a very major factor today.
It is similar to the Christian split where one group sought to have the successors determined by those who were closest to (and related to) Jesus, and the others who wanted to have a religious council determine the successor.
As we know today, the Pope, the leader of the Catholic Church, is determined by the College of Cardinals, a religious council. And that is not the whole picture, with Baptists and Lutherans, Methodists, Gnostics, etc, but that is the comparison.
In the Muslim world there are two major active branches of Islam, those determined by the vote of a religious council and those who have blood-line decendency from Muhammad. These groups go to war and kill each other.
Did you see John McCain, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Forces Committee (and a member since 1987) stated that Iran was harboring al-qaeda camps? Lieberman corrected him.
Iran hates al-qaeda as much as we do. Not because they are terrorists, but because they are infidels. Go figure.
McCain, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Forces Committee (and a member since 1987) stated that Iran was harboring al-qaeda camps? Lieberman corrected him.
>>>
Maybe if he gets elected he can go after their weapons of mass destruction.
Oh wait,
thats already been done
We need to keep an eye on their nukes, but with the right diplomacy, they could be an ally in the battle against al-qaeda.
I won't debate the religious aspects of the Iraq turmiol and liberation. I agree that the hate is carried from one generation to the next.
The question I would like you to answer is What responsibility did we assume by putting Sadam in power in Iraq?
We no doubt backed him in the Iraq-Iran war. We also backed the Afganistan rebel forces in their war with Russia.
I wonder if the Saudis and their neighbors were really looking for us to deal with the problem we created.
Daddy Bush should have solved the problem in 91! If we were more consistant with our policies we might have a better reputation around the world. Because we change our administrations at various intervals I don't think the rest of the world knows what to expect!
Its kind of like our disagreement in house spills all over the rest of the world!
I do think that our Corporations are our biggest ambassadors! They can do what Governments can't if they do it for the right reasons and aren't too greedy!
Congrats!!!
You've solved everything, yet you've solved nothing.
But, oh well, what's new?
"Congrats!!!
You've solved everything, yet you've solved nothing.
But, oh well, what's new?"
And next you will say something is negative, and then call someone a name.
Do you have any knowledgeable opinion at all about anything?
I love it when people embrace the argument that the oil bigs are barley breaking even. It's with monopoly money that they are kicking out dividends to stockholders to the tune of 12% to 16% quarterly. Imagine owning 1million shares of oil stock (conservatively face value of approx $90/share) and getting a check representing a 15% return on the investment.
Talk about poverty, man. I can't imagine how anyone could live off that paltry sum of money.
Add to that those investors who brought the stock for only $35 or $40 per share. Anyone who buys the argument that the oil bigs aint rolling in it is simply burying their head in the sand.
The national oils (Middle East and South America) for years settled for modest profits off crude exported to industrialized countries. In modern times, some of their leaders have become somewhat capitalistic themselves.
In doing so, they demanded a greater percentage of oil revenues from the bigs. Political agenda (or oil wars) seek to remove unreasonable leaders who demand a greater percentage from office (Hussein for example)
In recent times, several of the Bigs have incurred what they call stranded capital when the nationals have evicted them and seized their refining or drilling operations rather than negotiate percentages. Chavez is the most recent.
Libya and Liberia are also nations where westerners had to emergency evacuate workers to avoid casualties as military forces seized control.
Oops, I am off topic. Bottom line is being a stock owner of the energy bigs tales some of the sting out of the price at the pump.
Amen, Charles.
Don't you wish you'd purchased early? I sure do.
;)
Talk about poverty, man. I can't imagine how anyone could live off that paltry sum of money.
Then consider that one of the smaller countries in the Middle East makes enough every three days off their oil sales to buy GM.
Enough to make every citizen of that small country a million aire!
They thank you for your support!
You gotta be wondering what the heck we're doing fighting their battles. In the first Iraq war, we were fighting the Iraqis to liberate Kuwait. The Kuwaitis numbered about twice the population of Wichita and almost all had moved and relocated to London.
But it was all about oil then too. Brent Scowcroft was the Dick Cheney, Dick was there and everybody was about as deep in financial conflict of interest as the GWB administration is now. At least at the end, the Kuwaitis paid us 17 billion for the favor. That won't happen this time. We are actually losing oil over the deal.
Is it time to start war protests again, like during the Vietnam thing ?
Well before this blog topic simply fades into oblivion.
Have you ever thought by changing our behavioral patterns we can have a positive impact on the present and future?
Ex. Have you ever looked at how many people rush to the Sonic for Happy Hour. I can't see where theres any savings at the current price of gas.
Or
Drive across town to Wal Mart for a single item! One person per vehicle!
Or
Have you tried to cross the four lane on 77 between 3.30-4:00 P.M. and 11:30-12:00 P.M. When the thundering herds come out of Strother Field. Often with only one person per vehicle.
I think there might be an opportunity to provide a service between specific points in our area. (Bus or Trolley)
Because we are so fickle in nature and independent cusses.
It might take a subsidy from the cities and/or county to get a company to provide that service.
Might even provide a few new jobs.
But to work it would have to be used.
Well the other alternative is to get in your car look in the mirror and say I'm the problem and I don't care!
Carry on!
You can't blame the rest of the world because we are addicted to oil! What are you going to do when the war protest turn to the streets as gas protests?
Good One!!!!
Post a Comment