Monkey Clumps wrote:
> On Jun 27, 10:39 am, "Bob Eld" <nsmontas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> "Monkey Clumps" <spacebrai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> news:671eda19-0d12-42b0-8762-13a9aefe5bc2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 26, 3:58 pm, "Bob Eld" <nsmontas...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> That's not really the sort of thing you can get a CITE for since oil
>>> companies are private. However, common sense suggests that if they
>>> had access to large finds on areas they already lease, they would be
>>> putting them into production now. Oil companies aren't fools. They
>>> are very good at their business and their business is finding oil and
>>> extracting it. The simple fact is this, if we want to increase
>>> domestic production we need need to allow more area to be explored and
>>> put into production. The democrats needs need to cut the obfuscation
>>> and decide whether they are for increasing domestic production or
>>> against it. If they are against it they should own up to the fact and
>>> face the American public.
>>>
>> Snip....
>>
>> Yes well, that sums up one of the major problems doesn't it? Oil
companies
>> are PRIVATE companies dealing in a very public national resource. One
we
>> apparently know little about according to you. Furthermore, their end
>> products are commodities that are necessities. The idea that they are
>> altruistic benign entities always operating in the public interest is
>> absurd.
>>
>
> So what are you suggesting, that oil companies should be
> nationalized? That has been happening actually. Look at Venezuela.
> The nationalized, kicked the private companies out and are now in the
> process of running their industry into the ground through gross
> incompetence. Private companies have always been far more efficient
> than government companies.
>
>
that is their rant. Not true.
>> Furthermore it is absurd to believe that they will just drill for more
oil
>> to make more money, when in fact, the opposite is true. It is in their
>> interest to keep supplies tight and that's exactly what they are doing.
It's
>> economics 101.
>>
>
> Maybe with a monopoly, which the oil industry hardly is. In an open
> market rising prices tend to cause supply to increase. That's how the
> system self-regulates. When prices are high there is an incentive to
> sell. Haven't you heard sell high, buy low? With oil prices at an
> all-time high, every oil company wants to sell as much oil as they can
> suck out of the ground. That's economics 101.
>
You've got it only half right. As there is a finite supply of oil,
there is a finite demand. If OPEC upped production, if a magic wand
were waved forcing our oil companies to start pumping from their
thousands of capped wells, demand would increase minutely and the price
would go down down down.
In a related aside, a bevy of economists re****ted on CSPAN the other day
that Bush's appointee to the FED caused the current situation when he
clued the world in advance that he was about to lower the FED interest
rates, thereby lowering the value of our dollar.
>
>> Why would any company want to increase supply when the MONEY
>> is in doing the opposite?
>>
>
> Dude, do you understand how markets work? You seem very confused.
>
>
You could stand to take a few lessons from him. His understanding of
world economics is light years beyond yours.
>> Exxon made more money last year that any
>> cor****ation in HISTORY. Why the hell would they want to change that?
"Oil
>> companies aren't fools" You said it! No, but we the people are.
>>
>
> Let me try to explain this to you in the simplest terms possible.
> High prices are a massive incentive for Exxon to produce and sell as
> much oil as they possibly can *right now*.
Let me try to explain this to you in the simplest terms possible. Exxon
and the other pirates are already meeting the demand. Dumping any more
oil on the market would in fact lower the demand--and the prices.
> Exxon doesn't control oil
> prices. Its not even close. The Saudis try to but even they don't
> have enough market share. Since Exxon doesn't control the price, they
> want to max out production and sales when the price is at $140 not
> years down the road where thing may have settled and the price might
> be $50.
>
pure propaganda. The oil companies are not American; they are
international, they are cor****ate and therefore their "patriotism" is to
their profits. They sell everywhere, including to China.
If they maxed out production they would exceed current demand, and the
price--and profits--would drop.
>> Maybe it's time to revisit our anti trust legislation of the 1910's.
Maybe
>> it's time to break up the vertical integration in the oil business and
allow
>> more competition in the business. Maybe it's time to manage our
NATIONAL
>> resources as though they belonged to the public and not to Exxon. Maybe
its
>> time to look at petroleum supply and fuel as a public utility.
>>
>
> Oh geez. We're facing an energy crisis that requires innovation and
> efficiency to get through and you suggest we solve the problem with
> socialism and government intervention, a guaranteed destroyer of
> innovation and efficiency. Sounds like a brilliant plan. *roll eyes*
>
>
I'll remind you that it was government working with private enterprise
(universities) that developed the internet. That most of the scientific
advances during the past 50 years came about through government funding
(NASA, etc). That universities and NIH laboratories discovered most of
the miracle drugs now being sold for exorbitant profits by private
pharmaceutical companies.
--
"Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we
Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets
and lynched."
--- George Herbert Walker Bush, in an interview with Sarah McClendon, 1992
|
