Talk about subjects not related to music or gear. Please keep discussions civil and follow the GGF rules of conduct at all times. Political and religious topics are not allowed.
madryan wrote:..........The US could be 100% Energy Independent if we only drilled for more oil (According to Sean Hannity) ironically, the very same Sean Hannity demonized Socialists at least 100 times while I was listening to him and implied that free markets are the way to go.
So Sean, how is it exactly that we're supposed to pump a commodity out of the ground that sells for $110 a barrel and which has an almost completely inelastic demand curve, and not let the market set the price? ........
I'm not following you on this one. Not sure what the price of oil on the world market has to do with our ability to supply ourselves with oil.
or how saying that we could be 'energy inddependent' has anything to do with socialism.
Being a shrieker for capitalism then implying that we could some how control prices on a globally traded commodity is somewhat jacked IMO. We could pump oil out of the ground all day and night as fast as we could and all it would do was make us run out faster.
energy independent has nothing to do with prices. If we could produce enough oil to satisfy all our oil needs, WITHOUT buying any from other countries - that is energy independent.
If you want to get into the subsidies and incentives the government may offer to get the oil companies to keep our oil here, and at a reasonable price - then I guess you are getting into the 'socialism' aspect of it.
Energy independence means not depending on a finite, non-renewable commodity for your energy needs. Pumping petrol out of the ground till it runs out and the whole world crashes is pretty much idiotic seeing as we've got no viable plan B.
I missed this post.
Anyway - back to the op - there is no way (however stupid) that the commentators were saying that we could be energy independent for all eternity by drilling for more oil.
but there is a benefit to being energy independent NOW - while we develop the next energy source. There are plenty to investigate - solar, tidal, geothermal, hydro, etc.
On a somewhat related note - I find it hard to believe that nobody has run for president yet on the platform of pulling our military back home, stopping our enormous foreign aid packages, and putting America first. It will happen (somebody running on this platform), and I bet they get a LOT of support.
Actually, there's zero benefit to being energy independent. You want market forces putting pressure on folks to come up with new ideas, not just philanthropic people with limited funding.
It doesn't matter where the oil is pumped out of the ground geographically, it's all owned by a relatively small group of companies. Unless someone is advocating nationalizing our oil (not necessarily a "bad" thing) then we can pump oil day and night and it'll get sold to the highest bidder regardless because my and your elected officials fucked us over and essentially gave away our very valuable resources to these companies.
I'm sure the junkets and the jets and the campaign donations were nice though.
again - the 'evil big business' rears its head.
I guess this is where we differ. I have hope for this country - both it's people, AND it's industry/business. Worshipping the almighty dollar is not going to last forever - we are living in a pyramid scheme, and are near the end. Something has to give.
madryan wrote:..........The US could be 100% Energy Independent if we only drilled for more oil (According to Sean Hannity) ironically, the very same Sean Hannity demonized Socialists at least 100 times while I was listening to him and implied that free markets are the way to go.
So Sean, how is it exactly that we're supposed to pump a commodity out of the ground that sells for $110 a barrel and which has an almost completely inelastic demand curve, and not let the market set the price? ........
I'm not following you on this one. Not sure what the price of oil on the world market has to do with our ability to supply ourselves with oil.
or how saying that we could be 'energy inddependent' has anything to do with socialism.
Being a shrieker for capitalism then implying that we could some how control prices on a globally traded commodity is somewhat jacked IMO. We could pump oil out of the ground all day and night as fast as we could and all it would do was make us run out faster.
energy independent has nothing to do with prices. If we could produce enough oil to satisfy all our oil needs, WITHOUT buying any from other countries - that is energy independent.
If you want to get into the subsidies and incentives the government may offer to get the oil companies to keep our oil here, and at a reasonable price - then I guess you are getting into the 'socialism' aspect of it.
Energy independence means not depending on a finite, non-renewable commodity for your energy needs. Pumping petrol out of the ground till it runs out and the whole world crashes is pretty much idiotic seeing as we've got no viable plan B.
I missed this post.
Anyway - back to the op - there is no way (however stupid) that the commentators were saying that we could be energy independent for all eternity by drilling for more oil.
but there is a benefit to being energy independent NOW - while we develop the next energy source. There are plenty to investigate - solar, tidal, geothermal, hydro, etc.
On a somewhat related note - I find it hard to believe that nobody has run for president yet on the platform of pulling our military back home, stopping our enormous foreign aid packages, and putting America first. It will happen (somebody running on this platform), and I bet they get a LOT of support.
Actually, there's zero benefit to being energy independent. You want market forces putting pressure on folks to come up with new ideas, not just philanthropic people with limited funding.
It doesn't matter where the oil is pumped out of the ground geographically, it's all owned by a relatively small group of companies. Unless someone is advocating nationalizing our oil (not necessarily a "bad" thing) then we can pump oil day and night and it'll get sold to the highest bidder regardless because my and your elected officials fucked us over and essentially gave away our very valuable resources to these companies.
I'm sure the junkets and the jets and the campaign donations were nice though.
again - the 'evil big business' rears its head.
I guess this is where we differ. I have hope for this country - both it's people, AND it's industry/business. Worshipping the almighty dollar is not going to last forever - we are living in a pyramid scheme, and are near the end. Something has to give.
It's not so much an "Evil big business" thing as it is a greed thing. With a few exceptions, Alaska pretty much, our nation has done a piss-poor job of equitably managing resources. The Oil is coming from our national territory, why shouldn't we all get a cut of the profits? It's not as if we can grow more. Unfortunately, that's not the way our lawmakers have been bribed into setting it up. As it is, if BP drills for oil in the US on lands they've locked the rights up to they get to keep the money. Never mind that once the oil is gone it's gone forever. At least out here in the PacNW you can grow more trees when the big timber companies clear-cut the BLM land, and for a while, our timber producing counties were getting money back from the Federal .gov because of the timber revenue coming off public lands which the lumber companies were reaping. That all dried up a while back so now they're not only out of jobs but have no money for services and schools.
