How Much Credit Should Obama Get For The Recovery?

[Listening]

You really don't know anything, do you?

Home sales are not off 80%. Housing is a universal human need.

Homes will always be bought and sold.

And you just described a defationary spiral in the housing industry.

You just proved yourself wrong in your own post.

Actually, I think this was his way of calling you ignorant or a liar.

Given your stupid statement about refining, I'd almost agree with him.

When you Republicans have no facts, you fall back on insults.

I feel bad for you.

Just pointing out that some of your statements are pretty ignorant (and you seemed to disappear off the thread when I showed you how mistaken you were). Seems that I am not the only one that feels that way.

No insults...just facts....liar.

 

[Listening]

Actually, I think this was his way of calling you ignorant or a liar.

Given your stupid statement about refining, I'd almost agree with him.

When you Republicans have no facts, you fall back on insults.

I feel bad for you.

Yeah, righties like to get personal and insulting. It's the 30% way...

Find those bombers yet ?

You are a fraud.

 

[Lakhota]

I usually don't either blame or credit presidents for the economic situation. Mainly what happens is beyond their control. But this time I think it may be a little different. Obama's taken some steps some other presidents would be afraid to go. He's taken some political risks, in other words, which appear to be paying off. Should he get more than normal credit for the recovery?

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

 

[Chris]

In short, the reason for not adding more refineries is straightforward: It's hard, and it's expensive. The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.

FactCheck.org : U.S. Oil Refining Capability

 

[Listening]

I usually don't either blame or credit presidents for the economic situation. Mainly what happens is beyond their control. But this time I think it may be a little different. Obama's taken some steps some other presidents would be afraid to go. He's taken some political risks, in other words, which appear to be paying off. Should he get more than normal credit for the recovery?

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

 

[Lakhota]

I usually don't either blame or credit presidents for the economic situation. Mainly what happens is beyond their control. But this time I think it may be a little different. Obama's taken some steps some other presidents would be afraid to go. He's taken some political risks, in other words, which appear to be paying off. Should he get more than normal credit for the recovery?

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

Not even Obamacare?

 

[Chris]

Actually, I think this was his way of calling you ignorant or a liar.

Given your stupid statement about refining, I'd almost agree with him.

When you Republicans have no facts, you fall back on insults.

I feel bad for you.

Just pointing out that some of your statements are pretty ignorant (and you seemed to disappear off the thread when I showed you how mistaken you were). Seems that I am not the only one that feels that way.

No insults...just facts....liar.

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

 

[Chris]

I usually don't either blame or credit presidents for the economic situation. Mainly what happens is beyond their control. But this time I think it may be a little different. Obama's taken some steps some other presidents would be afraid to go. He's taken some political risks, in other words, which appear to be paying off. Should he get more than normal credit for the recovery?

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.

Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.

Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, created 19 straight months of private sector job growth, created 7 straight quarters of GDP growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.

 

[Lakhota]

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.

Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.

Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, created 19 straight months of private sector job growth, created 7 straight quarters of GDP growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.

Amen and praise Gawd.

 

[Listening]

In short, the reason for not adding more refineries is straightforward: It's hard, and it's expensive. The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.

FactCheck.org : U.S. Oil Refining Capability

And the article does not address why it is so hard and why it is so expensive. And lest you forget the rest of the numbers, our consumption is going up.

Where is that coming from ??? Hhhhhmmmmmm

Well, as someone who works in the industry, I can tell you. There have been several export refineries built in Saudi Arabia and India in the last several years. Much of this was pointed at China and Europe, but they supply to the U.S. too. Especially the east coast where we just learned about 750,000 BPD of capacity reduction by BP and Sunoco. So how does someone build a refinery half way around the world and still manage to outdo local refining (that is already paid for in some instances) ?

Well, those refineries on the East Coast run Brent..which is running low. The companies can't get enough of a feeling from the government to justify the kind of investment needed to "sour" up and so the refineries just go away.

You also failed to cite the very refinery I was talking about. The one they have been trying to construct in AZ for almost 30 years (the article is wrong...the company has changed names twice....and has been at this since the early 1980's....they finally got the permits they need, but the environmental regs are such that the price of the refinery has gone through the roof. The refinery was permitted with a stipulation that no liquid catalyst be utilized to make alkylate. That pretty much wipes out an FCC and as I understand it, they are going to do more hydrocracking...that is why the payout is so crappy.

And in AZ, there are still all kinds of lawsuits against constructing the thing, mainly from environmentalists.

So, expensive is right...to the point that existing assets can't be reused and that export refineries can ship refined product half way around the world and run our local refineries out of business.

Wyden's statements were so far off the mark (just like his brain is so far up his backside, it isn't funny). Big companies have been selling assets to get out of the business. They don't need to rationalize things. That is where compaines like Tosco and Valerio (both owned one refinery in the mid 1980's...Valero owns fiftenn...Tosco was at twelve before being bought by Phillips who is now selling off it's refining assets).

And guess who is looking to buy Valero ? The large indian company that is running those big export refineries....Reliance. And when the get them, they will shut them down and make terminals out of them to distribute the products that they will bring in from offshore.

No one will enter the fray because of the uncertainty of new government regulations (how do you build a refinery to make 500 ppm S diesel just to have the regs changed ot 15...or invest 50 million in an MTBE plant because Uncle Same said you needed oxygenates...just to be told MTBE is outlawed ?) or the cost associated with existing regs which makes it uncompetative.

Sorry, Chris. When you want to quote a source to answer a questions, make sure you know a little something about what is being said.

 

[Chris]

In short, the reason for not adding more refineries is straightforward: It's hard, and it's expensive. The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.

FactCheck.org : U.S. Oil Refining Capability

And the article does not address why it is so hard and why it is so expensive. And lest you forget the rest of the numbers, our consumption is going up.

Where is that coming from ??? Hhhhhmmmmmm

Well, as someone who works in the industry, I can tell you. There have been several export refineries built in Saudi Arabia and India in the last several years. Much of this was pointed at China and Europe, but they supply to the U.S. too. Especially the east coast where we just learned about 750,000 BPD of capacity reduction by BP and Sunoco. So how does someone build a refinery half way around the world and still manage to outdo local refining (that is already paid for in some instances) ?

Well, those refineries on the East Coast run Brent..which is running low. The companies can't get enough of a feeling from the government to justify the kind of investment needed to "sour" up and so the refineries just go away.

You also failed to cite the very refinery I was talking about. The one they have been trying to construct in AZ for almost 30 years (the article is wrong...the company has changed names twice....and has been at this since the early 1980's....they finally got the permits they need, but the environmental regs are such that the price of the refinery has gone through the roof. The refinery was permitted with a stipulation that no liquid catalyst be utilized to make alkylate. That pretty much wipes out an FCC and as I understand it, they are going to do more hydrocracking...that is why the payout is so crappy.

And in AZ, there are still all kinds of lawsuits against constructing the thing, mainly from environmentalists.

So, expensive is right...to the point that existing assets can't be reused and that export refineries can ship refined product half way around the world and run our local refineries out of business.

Wyden's statements were so far off the mark (just like his brain is so far up his backside, it isn't funny). Big companies have been selling assets to get out of the business. They don't need to rationalize things. That is where compaines like Tosco and Valerio (both owned one refinery in the mid 1980's...Valero owns fiftenn...Tosco was at twelve before being bought by Phillips who is now selling off it's refining assets).

And guess who is looking to buy Valero ? The large indian company that is running those big export refineries....Reliance. And when the get them, they will shut them down and make terminals out of them to distribute the products that they will bring in from offshore.

No one will enter the fray because of the uncertainty of new government regulations (how do you build a refinery to make 500 ppm S diesel just to have the regs changed ot 15...or invest 50 million in an MTBE plant because Uncle Same said you needed oxygenates...just to be told MTBE is outlawed ?) or the cost associated with existing regs which makes it uncompetative.

Sorry, Chris. When you want to quote a source to answer a questions, make sure you know a little something about what is being said.

I figured you would ignore the facts.

The big oil companies bought out the smaller refineries and closed them, so there would be less competition and they could keep the prices higher.

 

[Chris]

“As observed over the last few years and as projected well into the future, the most critical
factor facing the refining industry on the West Coast is the surplus refining capacity, and the
surplus gasoline production capacity. The same situation exists for the entire U.S. refining
industry. Supply significantly exceeds demand year-round. This results in very poor refinery
margins, and very poor refinery financial results. Significant events need to occur to assist
in reducing supplies and/or increasing the demand for gasoline.”
Internal Texaco document, March 7, 1996

“A senior energy analyst at the recent API (American Petroleum Institute) convention
warned that if the U.S. petroleum industry doesn’t reduce its refining capacity, it will never
see any substantial increase in refining margins…However, refining utilization has been
rising, sustaining high levels of operations, thereby keeping prices low.”
Internal Chevron document, November 30, 1995

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

 

[Listening]

In this case Obama deserves almost total credit - because he's been doing all the heavy lifting with no help from the right.

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.

Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.

Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, created 19 straight months of private sector job growth, created 7 straight quarters of GDP growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.

I keep seeing you post this drivel Chris......

He exceeded his constituional authority and made a shambles of our federal government.

You'll never prove he saved us from anything and he showed he can buy votes with the rest of them by saving GM for the unions all the while he did nothing for the stockholders. He also did nothing for small businesses that failed.

So much for lookinig out of the little guy. What a load of crap.

Tiny GDP growth and stagnant unemployment (despite statements from his minions that his bloated stimulus would keep it below 8%).

His approval is at 45% and his disapproval is at 49%.

A real potential one-termer.

 

[Listening]

In short, the reason for not adding more refineries is straightforward: It's hard, and it's expensive. The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.

FactCheck.org : U.S. Oil Refining Capability

And the article does not address why it is so hard and why it is so expensive. And lest you forget the rest of the numbers, our consumption is going up.

Where is that coming from ??? Hhhhhmmmmmm

Well, as someone who works in the industry, I can tell you. There have been several export refineries built in Saudi Arabia and India in the last several years. Much of this was pointed at China and Europe, but they supply to the U.S. too. Especially the east coast where we just learned about 750,000 BPD of capacity reduction by BP and Sunoco. So how does someone build a refinery half way around the world and still manage to outdo local refining (that is already paid for in some instances) ?

Well, those refineries on the East Coast run Brent..which is running low. The companies can't get enough of a feeling from the government to justify the kind of investment needed to "sour" up and so the refineries just go away.

You also failed to cite the very refinery I was talking about. The one they have been trying to construct in AZ for almost 30 years (the article is wrong...the company has changed names twice....and has been at this since the early 1980's....they finally got the permits they need, but the environmental regs are such that the price of the refinery has gone through the roof. The refinery was permitted with a stipulation that no liquid catalyst be utilized to make alkylate. That pretty much wipes out an FCC and as I understand it, they are going to do more hydrocracking...that is why the payout is so crappy.

And in AZ, there are still all kinds of lawsuits against constructing the thing, mainly from environmentalists.

So, expensive is right...to the point that existing assets can't be reused and that export refineries can ship refined product half way around the world and run our local refineries out of business.

Wyden's statements were so far off the mark (just like his brain is so far up his backside, it isn't funny). Big companies have been selling assets to get out of the business. They don't need to rationalize things. That is where compaines like Tosco and Valerio (both owned one refinery in the mid 1980's...Valero owns fiftenn...Tosco was at twelve before being bought by Phillips who is now selling off it's refining assets).

And guess who is looking to buy Valero ? The large indian company that is running those big export refineries....Reliance. And when the get them, they will shut them down and make terminals out of them to distribute the products that they will bring in from offshore.

No one will enter the fray because of the uncertainty of new government regulations (how do you build a refinery to make 500 ppm S diesel just to have the regs changed ot 15...or invest 50 million in an MTBE plant because Uncle Same said you needed oxygenates...just to be told MTBE is outlawed ?) or the cost associated with existing regs which makes it uncompetative.

Sorry, Chris. When you want to quote a source to answer a questions, make sure you know a little something about what is being said.

I figured you would ignore the facts.

The big oil companies bought out the smaller refineries and closed them, so there would be less competition and they could keep the prices higher.

Killer rebutal there Chris:

What facts did you present ? You posted an article that answers a question about refining capacity. It didn't say why it was expensive. I just showed you.

Are you a Lokhota sok ?

You pretty much seem to be a fraud yourself.

 

[Chris]

In the mid-1990s too much refining capacity, not too little, concerned the nation’s major oil
companies. At that time, the oil and gas industry faced what they termed “excess refining
capacity,” a circumstance they viewed as a financial liability that drove down overall profit
margins. The industry reduced the total amount of potential supply by closing down more
than 50 refineries in the past decade. Since 1995 alone, 24 refinery closings have taken
nearly 830,000 barrels of oil per day.
In September 1999, I released a report looking into the anti-competitive practices of zone
pricing and redlining by West Coast oil companies. At the time of the 1999 investigation,
industry officials explained higher gas prices as the result of refinery fires in California and
worldwide production cuts spurred by OPEC. They did not blame inadequate domestic
refining capacity as the culprit for restricted supply or high prices.
Today, the nation’s major oil companies are experiencing record profits, thanks in no small
part to higher prices at the pump. Despite the across-the-board financial gains of the
industry, the Bush administration’s recently released National Energy Policy seeks to
provide incentives, perhaps including relaxed environmental regulations, to quickly boost
refining capacity.
Information I have received during my ongoing investigation raises serious concerns that
the nation’s major oil suppliers have set out in a strategic effort to orchestrate a financial
triple play, a coordinated effort that would reduce supply, raise prices at the pump and
relax environmental regulations. Unfortunately, in each case, it is the consumer who
takes the hit.
While the documents target activity on the West Coast and refinery closings in 11 states,
they point to practices with significant national ramifications. The companies involved
are national companies that operate in multiple states. In addition, gas and oil is a
fungible commodity and the amount of capacity that has been taken offline is significant
enough to affect national markets.

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

 

[Chris]

He gets 100% of the credit for nothing.

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.

Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.

Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, created 19 straight months of private sector job growth, created 7 straight quarters of GDP growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.

I keep seeing you post this drivel Chris......

He exceeded his constituional authority and made a shambles of our federal government.

You'll never prove he saved us from anything and he showed he can buy votes with the rest of them by saving GM for the unions all the while he did nothing for the stockholders. He also did nothing for small businesses that failed.

So much for lookinig out of the little guy. What a load of crap.

Tiny GDP growth and stagnant unemployment (despite statements from his minions that his bloated stimulus would keep it below 8%).

His approval is at 45% and his disapproval is at 49%.

A real potential one-termer.

Wow. That was a weak post.

Your really have nothing.

 

[Listening]

“As observed over the last few years and as projected well into the future, the most critical
factor facing the refining industry on the West Coast is the surplus refining capacity, and the
surplus gasoline production capacity. The same situation exists for the entire U.S. refining
industry. Supply significantly exceeds demand year-round. This results in very poor refinery
margins, and very poor refinery financial results. Significant events need to occur to assist
in reducing supplies and/or increasing the demand for gasoline.”
Internal Texaco document, March 7, 1996

“A senior energy analyst at the recent API (American Petroleum Institute) convention
warned that if the U.S. petroleum industry doesn’t reduce its refining capacity, it will never
see any substantial increase in refining margins…However, refining utilization has been
rising, sustaining high levels of operations, thereby keeping prices low.”
Internal Chevron document, November 30, 1995

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

Wow...your going to stay with statements made fifteen years ago ?

And what do these prove anyway, nothing.

Texaco is big partner in CALTEX. An offshore conglomerate that would love to see capacity in the U.S. shut down so they can come in with refined products.

Fifteen years ago.

Does the real estate market care about fifteen years ago ?

Good grief.

 

[Listening]

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.

Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.

Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, created 19 straight months of private sector job growth, created 7 straight quarters of GDP growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.

I keep seeing you post this drivel Chris......

He exceeded his constituional authority and made a shambles of our federal government.

You'll never prove he saved us from anything and he showed he can buy votes with the rest of them by saving GM for the unions all the while he did nothing for the stockholders. He also did nothing for small businesses that failed.

So much for lookinig out of the little guy. What a load of crap.

Tiny GDP growth and stagnant unemployment (despite statements from his minions that his bloated stimulus would keep it below 8%).

His approval is at 45% and his disapproval is at 49%.

A real potential one-termer.

Wow. That was a weak post.

Your really have nothing.

Did Obama bail out small businesses ?

Please pray tell...share.

Speaking of nothing.....hows your sok doing ?

 

[Listening]

In the mid-1990s too much refining capacity, not too little, concerned the nation’s major oil
companies. At that time, the oil and gas industry faced what they termed “excess refining
capacity,” a circumstance they viewed as a financial liability that drove down overall profit
margins. The industry reduced the total amount of potential supply by closing down more
than 50 refineries in the past decade. Since 1995 alone, 24 refinery closings have taken
nearly 830,000 barrels of oil per day.
In September 1999, I released a report looking into the anti-competitive practices of zone
pricing and redlining by West Coast oil companies. At the time of the 1999 investigation,
industry officials explained higher gas prices as the result of refinery fires in California and
worldwide production cuts spurred by OPEC. They did not blame inadequate domestic
refining capacity as the culprit for restricted supply or high prices.
Today, the nation’s major oil companies are experiencing record profits, thanks in no small
part to higher prices at the pump. Despite the across-the-board financial gains of the
industry, the Bush administration’s recently released National Energy Policy seeks to
provide incentives, perhaps including relaxed environmental regulations, to quickly boost
refining capacity.
Information I have received during my ongoing investigation raises serious concerns that
the nation’s major oil suppliers have set out in a strategic effort to orchestrate a financial
triple play, a coordinated effort that would reduce supply, raise prices at the pump and
relax environmental regulations. Unfortunately, in each case, it is the consumer who
takes the hit.
While the documents target activity on the West Coast and refinery closings in 11 states,
they point to practices with significant national ramifications. The companies involved
are national companies that operate in multiple states. In addition, gas and oil is a
fungible commodity and the amount of capacity that has been taken offline is significant
enough to affect national markets.

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

If all you are going to do is hide under Ron Wyden's skirt, why not just admit that you don't know what it is that you are talking about. He is a liberal from Oregon who hates refining.

What does econcomics teach ....if there are profits....more competition enters the market. It has.....as pointed out....from Saudi and India.

Please explain to me how they can do it cheaper than we can ?

I will be waiting.

 

[Chris]

In the mid-1990s too much refining capacity, not too little, concerned the nation’s major oil
companies. At that time, the oil and gas industry faced what they termed “excess refining
capacity,” a circumstance they viewed as a financial liability that drove down overall profit
margins. The industry reduced the total amount of potential supply by closing down more
than 50 refineries in the past decade. Since 1995 alone, 24 refinery closings have taken
nearly 830,000 barrels of oil per day.
In September 1999, I released a report looking into the anti-competitive practices of zone
pricing and redlining by West Coast oil companies. At the time of the 1999 investigation,
industry officials explained higher gas prices as the result of refinery fires in California and
worldwide production cuts spurred by OPEC. They did not blame inadequate domestic
refining capacity as the culprit for restricted supply or high prices.
Today, the nation’s major oil companies are experiencing record profits, thanks in no small
part to higher prices at the pump. Despite the across-the-board financial gains of the
industry, the Bush administration’s recently released National Energy Policy seeks to
provide incentives, perhaps including relaxed environmental regulations, to quickly boost
refining capacity.
Information I have received during my ongoing investigation raises serious concerns that
the nation’s major oil suppliers have set out in a strategic effort to orchestrate a financial
triple play, a coordinated effort that would reduce supply, raise prices at the pump and
relax environmental regulations. Unfortunately, in each case, it is the consumer who
takes the hit.
While the documents target activity on the West Coast and refinery closings in 11 states,
they point to practices with significant national ramifications. The companies involved
are national companies that operate in multiple states. In addition, gas and oil is a
fungible commodity and the amount of capacity that has been taken offline is significant
enough to affect national markets.

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/gas_prices/pdfs/wyden_oil_report.pdf

If all you are going to do is hide under Ron Wyden's skirt, why not just admit that you don't know what it is that you are talking about. He is a liberal from Oregon who hates refining.

What does econcomics teach ....if there are profits....more competition enters the market. It has.....as pointed out....from Saudi and India.

Please explain to me how they can do it cheaper than we can ?

I will be waiting.

You must be joking.

The oil companies spent years buying up all these small refineries, so they could corner the market and jack up the price.

And that is exactly what happened.