edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
I pointed out that the Rockefeller family has controlled the oil monopoly for OVER 100 years and the best you could come back with is your patented dumb act that over 100 years does not include today, and then you try to run away from your stupidity. If that isn't an unconditional surrender then nothing is.Your surrender is accepted.We are not talking 100 years ago fool.
There was more than one refinery....there have been six on the east coast plus the one in St. Croix. They were shut down because they can't process the cheaper heavier stuff. The east coast has always been a tough market especially with the export refineries in the middle east coming on line. A couple of those refineries are being restarted by investors who know that hydrocracking is what will keep them going....not standard gasoline production.
Bitumen based crudes are already semi refined (coked and hydroprocessed). You know nothing about refining....that is clear. The crudes tend to produce more gas oils and will carry more refractive sulfur and nitrogen. The yields depend on what form they arrive in. But regardless, the price is set by what the Canadians are willing to give them up for in order to sell the stuff.
This whole "conspiracy theory of yours and the lefts is just stupid.
Oil companies won't produce if it is not economical. And they have to weigh an element of risk. Quoting the O administration on oil is like quoting Romper Room.
Come back when you have some idea of what you are talking about.
BTW: This thread is about Stephanie Cutter, deputy campaign manager for Obama in 2012, being shown as a huge liar, spin doctor, and whore. Her felon comment was absoulutely in line with the liar in chiefs strategy that goes against everything he said he would do when elected.
If you want to debate (after you do a little reading) oil, I'll be happy to educate you more in that regard.
Stay on topic.
Do you support Cutter's claims made in the OP. Yes or No or Qualified ? Nobody else here seems willing to do so.
Thanks for the laugh, Ed.
You can't address anything I said and you won't get behind Cutter's comments.
And you think I surrendered !
The Rockefeller family never gave up control of their oil monopoly, all they did was switch control from a holding company to a bank. Banks are immune from anti-trust laws. For example, let's say a state, union, corporation etc., deposits their pension fund in the bank, the bank invests the fund in oil stock let's say. The pension fund owns the stock, but the bank VOTES the proxies.
Now back to Rockefeller, after his "divestment" in Standard Oil some stockholders tried to oust him from the board. He only OWNED 25% on paper, but he VOTED 60% of the proxies. He obviously NEVER gave up control of his oil monopoly, but he depends on useless idiots like you, who think they know it all, to believe he did.
Last edited: