What's with the low oil prices?

[RKMBrown]

That is awesome!!!
What policy did Obama change to increase our production?

Morons think you push a button and oil comes out.

If that were true, Obama would never push the button.
Now the morons want to give him credit for something he opposed.

Ayup... they want the credit for limiting production to save the planet from global warming, and simultaneously demand the credit for increasing production to save our economy. But either way, it's Bush's fault.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It costs more than $50 to extract from the sea per barrel, oil prices are going to be at that, ie, it's not viable if OPEC decide it isn't. Maybe Obama just save a load of people a load of money.

No. The potential for supply enhancement in and of itself impacts prices immediately.
The potential for supply restriction does the same in the reverse direction. The costs of extraction, getting product to market, etc., is just weeds.

Yes, supply can impact demand, we've seen a massive rise in prices because China has developed massively in the last 14 years, and wants oil. However if you can't make money from extracting oil, why would you do it? Also if your company moves into a position where you think you might lose money, your share prices will go down, the viability of your business is at major risk, and if you actually start losing money, then you will go bankrupt. It's quite simple.

If OPEC push the price below what it costs, then what happens?

Then they hurt themselves.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

They've been run by dictatorial madmen who employed and employ terrorist and other similar tactics aimed at the the US and similar interests. Duh.

I'm lost, what is your point?

The madmen referred to were opposed by the US not because of their leverage in the oil market, as was suggested, but more because they posed and pose a very real threat to national security.

"National security" being oil prices huh?

Saddam threatened the US how? Chavez threatened the US how? Gadaffi threatened the US how? Iran threaten the US how?

Terrorism, regional instability, etc.
You're being obtuse.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What's with the low oil prices?

Obama is trying to crash the Russian economy.

Why not? He already fucked up ours.

What by having increased employment, productivity and everything else that points towards the positive?

That response explains your obtuseness. You're a lefty shill.
Obama's energy policy has kept our economy in the hole. Any ostensible improvement is offset by his damage. Two steps back, one step forward is not a net improvement.

 

[OnePercenter]

Oil Skids as Saudis Adjust Prices
Kingdom Cuts Selling Price for Oil to U.S.
By
Nicole Friedman
U.S. oil prices tumbled to a fresh two-year low Monday on news that Saudi Arabia cut its selling price for oil to the U.S., suggesting that the kingdom is trying to compete with U.S. shale oil.

Suggesting? Except gasoline in the UK is down $1.00/gallon. The answer: Putin/Russia.

 

[OnePercenter]

What's with the low oil prices?

Obama is trying to crash the Russian economy.

Why not? He already fucked up ours.

Obama was President in 2007-2008?

 

[OnePercenter]

Yes, supply can impact demand, we've seen a massive rise in prices because China has developed massively in the last 14 years, and wants oil. However if you can't make money from extracting oil, why would you do it? Also if your company moves into a position where you think you might lose money, your share prices will go down, the viability of your business is at major risk, and if you actually start losing money, then you will go bankrupt. It's quite simple.

If OPEC push the price below what it costs, then what happens?

Cost is $10.00/bbl. Long way to go.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What's with the low oil prices?

Obama is trying to crash the Russian economy.

Why not? He already fucked up ours.

Obama was President in 2007-2008?

That would be the democrat-controlled congress. Obama has kept us in the hole those dems created.

 

[boilermaker55]

What part of proving your statement don't you get.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

That is the lamest statement.
No proof that it was caused by President Obama.
Simple mind , simple statement.

Slowed the recovery, How?
Can you elaborate and do you have some proof?
Or is this pure conjecture on your part?

Wages are down or stagnant and consumer goods prices are up. That's all you need to know about an economy.

Yet you couldn't respond with any points. Just disparagement. That's just like a lefty.

You're doing the Monty Python Black Knight routine.
What part of stagnant and lower wages against higher prices did you not understand?

 

[OnePercenter]

Every temporary dip in oil prices does nothing more than provide another excuse to put off the inevitably necessary shift to alternative energy sources.

It makes alternative energy more affordable.

 

[boilermaker55]

And I admit it.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

That is the lamest statement.
No proof that it was caused by President Obama.
Simple mind , simple statement.

Slowed the recovery, How?
Can you elaborate and do you have some proof?
Or is this pure conjecture on your part?

Wages are down or stagnant and consumer goods prices are up. That's all you need to know about an economy.

Yet you couldn't respond with any points. Just disparagement. That's just like a lefty.

Is that your opinion?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What part of proving your statement don't you get.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

That is the lamest statement.
No proof that it was caused by President Obama.
Simple mind , simple statement.

Wages are down or stagnant and consumer goods prices are up. That's all you need to know about an economy.

Yet you couldn't respond with any points. Just disparagement. That's just like a lefty.

You're doing the Monty Python Black Knight routine.
What part of stagnant and lower wages against higher prices did you not understand?

Don't blame me for your lack of math skills.

 

[boilermaker55]

I am glad you admit it that you don't know how to prove your point.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

Yet you couldn't respond with any points. Just disparagement. That's just like a lefty.

Is that your opinion?

No, it was a pointed response to disparagement.

Funny I see no facts. I see no links, all I see is your pointed response, Opinion.

Wages are down and costs are up. Facts. I won't repeat it again. You are on your own.

 

[boilermaker55]

Nice try, but there is no math involved in your statement.

What part of proving your statement don't you get.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

That is the lamest statement.
No proof that it was caused by President Obama.
Simple mind , simple statement.

Yet you couldn't respond with any points. Just disparagement. That's just like a lefty.

You're doing the Monty Python Black Knight routine.
What part of stagnant and lower wages against higher prices did you not understand?

Don't blame me for your lack of math skills.

 

[OnePercenter]

Which bank got in trouble in 2008 with derivatives?

Directly and indirectly, all of them.

 

[OnePercenter]

That would be the democrat-controlled congress. Obama has kept us in the hole those dems created.

Except the 'hole' was caused by the 'At the pleasure of the President' appointees such as the SEC.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

That would be the democrat-controlled congress. Obama has kept us in the hole those dems created.

Except the 'hole' was caused by the 'At the pleasure of the President' appointees such as the SEC.

The hole was created by CRA and the market doing its darwinistic thing. The current hole was started and is still maintained by democrat energy policy.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I am glad you admit it that you don't know how to prove your point.

Post some points that have substance, you have none. Just like the tea party crowd.
Big bags of wind and opinion.

Is that your opinion?

No, it was a pointed response to disparagement.

Funny I see no facts. I see no links, all I see is your pointed response, Opinion.

Wages are down and costs are up. Facts. I won't repeat it again. You are on your own.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It costs more than $50 to extract from the sea per barrel, oil prices are going to be at that, ie, it's not viable if OPEC decide it isn't. Maybe Obama just save a load of people a load of money.

No. The potential for supply enhancement in and of itself impacts prices immediately.
The potential for supply restriction does the same in the reverse direction. The costs of extraction, getting product to market, etc., is just weeds.

Yes, supply can impact demand, we've seen a massive rise in prices because China has developed massively in the last 14 years, and wants oil. However if you can't make money from extracting oil, why would you do it? Also if your company moves into a position where you think you might lose money, your share prices will go down, the viability of your business is at major risk, and if you actually start losing money, then you will go bankrupt. It's quite simple.

If OPEC push the price below what it costs, then what happens?

Then they hurt themselves.

They do, but not enough. They can see that control over the market matters more LONG TERM than making money now. If they lose their power to inflate prices, then how much money will they lose in the future? If they can put competition out of business, how much will they make when they're in charge of the market?

 

[frigidweirdo]

They've been run by dictatorial madmen who employed and employ terrorist and other similar tactics aimed at the the US and similar interests. Duh.

I'm lost, what is your point?

The madmen referred to were opposed by the US not because of their leverage in the oil market, as was suggested, but more because they posed and pose a very real threat to national security.

"National security" being oil prices huh?

Saddam threatened the US how? Chavez threatened the US how? Gadaffi threatened the US how? Iran threaten the US how?

Terrorism, regional instability, etc.
You're being obtuse.

Terrorism. From Chavez? Really? What terrorism did Saddam do against the US? There's no evidence he was supporting Islamic extremism, probably because Saddam was a Nationalist and not a Muslim extremist. Gadaffi has links to the Lockerbie bombings, but that wasn't the reason for bombing Libya.

Regional instability. Er.... Saddam was part of the regional stability. No one got rid of him before because they could see what would happen in the region if the strongman disappeared, and it happened. Chavez was part of regional instability in that Columbia has been ruled by people who are more right wing, due in a large part because of FARC, and there were a few issues, but not enough to affect anything to do with the US. Gadaffi was also not a threat to regional stability.

So, it's all great coming out with a few words, and then trying to back it up with trying to tell be I'm being obtuse, but the reality is I'm not being.