XL Pipeline Runs Right Through Obama's Ass

[Samson]

What percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?

And what percentage is attributed to increased need for hot dog vendors and coffee shop servers? I suppose I am a tad tired of projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths.

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

 

[bripat9643]

why do we have to pay 7 billion for an oil pipeline? Why do tax payers have to pay for any oil pipeline for any amount of money when the oil industry is already very profitable?

haven't read the article yet, but is the 7 billion on us or it is just permission to cross state lines or eminent domain issues?

i know, i know, read the article....

Taxpayers aren't paying a dime for the pipeline. the oil company is paying for everything. They just need permission from the government to build it.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm still highly suspicious of the NYT article's claim that there are TX (or ANY) homeowners complaining about selling their homes in a terribly depressed real estate market, and would really be interested to know exactly who they were.

I am also highly suspicious of that since pipelines are seldom built in populated areas. It's very easy for the builder to divert around towns and cities. Why would they want to pay for very expensive land in the city when they can just move the pipeline to the side a few miles?

 

[GWV5903]

Build the pipeline, it is really that simple, they are every where...

Let's see, depressed economy, roughly 14 million unemployed and somehow we are now supposed to be worried about eminent domain issues?

At this pace we will continue down this miserable road for sometime to come...

I am sorry, but why would anyone listen to what Robert Redford has to say? Did he invent or discover our replacement yet for oil & gas?

 

[Samson]

Build the pipeline, it is really that simple, they are every where...

Let's see, depressed economy, roughly 14 million unemployed and somehow we are now supposed to be worried about eminent domain issues?

At this pace we will continue down this miserable road for sometime to come...

I am sorry, but why would anyone listen to what Robert Redford has to say? Did he invent or discover our replacement yet for oil & gas?

Apparently, Obama listens to Redford, because The Community Organizer's approval of the XL project has been paralyzed by the prospect of disappointing Robert Redford.

Interestingly, the DOS, lead by Hillary Clinton, has given the project the Green Light.

The EPA has been the obstruction: apparently preferring increased deep water wells in the GOM and relying on tanker traffic from Venezuela to supply American refiners.

 

[Wry Catcher]

What percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?

And what percentage is attributed to increased need for hot dog vendors and coffee shop servers? I suppose I am a tad tired of projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths.

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

I have no doubt you think concrete, but that's another matter. Shovel ready such a pipeline is not, environmental impact reports will be needed for every inch of the projected line. Seems to me such studies are necessary, but what is sufficient? This type of regulation needs to be streamlined but not entirely tossed out as the far right hopes. Of course the far left needs to compromise and recognize not every tree frog or spotted owl should be a road block. We've seen in recent years how wildlife is resilient - lions and bears and coyotes have all begun to return and survive on our garbage, pet cats and small dogs, even in urban environments (San Francisco now has a coyote problem).

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

What percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?

And what percentage is attributed to increased need for hot dog vendors and coffee shop servers? I suppose I am a tad tired of projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths.

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

Samson - my post was not combative nor partisan. It was a question regarding economy scales and large projects which promise to deliver jobs, but are increasingly not the jobs the USA needs - industry growth - not more mini malls.

Chillax.

ETA: there is more to life than go political team. my brain actually processes more than one complex concept regularly.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

What percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?

And what percentage is attributed to increased need for hot dog vendors and coffee shop servers? I suppose I am a tad tired of projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths.

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

I have no doubt you think concrete, but that's another matter. Shovel ready such a pipeline is not, environmental impact reports will be needed for every inch of the projected line. Seems to me such studies are necessary, but what is sufficient? This type of regulation needs to be streamlined but not entirely tossed out as the far right hopes. Of course the far left needs to compromise and recognize not every tree frog or spotted owl should be a road block. We've seen in recent years how wildlife is resilient - lions and bears and coyotes have all begun to return and survive on our garbage, pet cats and small dogs, even in urban environments (San Francisco now has a coyote problem).

Precisely, this is a large scale project which will require years to develop and for the USA to benefit.

 

[Samson]

What percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?

And what percentage is attributed to increased need for hot dog vendors and coffee shop servers? I suppose I am a tad tired of projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths.

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

Samson - my post was not combative nor partisan. It was a question regarding economy scales and large projects which promise to deliver jobs, but are increasingly not the jobs the USA needs - industry growth - not more mini malls.

Chillax.

ETA: there is more to life than go political team. my brain actually processes more than one complex concept regularly.

Niether was my post "combative or partisan:" I merely addressed your rather vague post.

For example; What are these "projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths." I'm not aware of any jobs offered in the energy sector paying less than $15/hr (double the minimum wage).

And how on earth can anyone predict, "percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?" Who cares?

 

[Samson]

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

I have no doubt you think concrete, but that's another matter. Shovel ready such a pipeline is not, environmental impact reports will be needed for every inch of the projected line. Seems to me such studies are necessary, but what is sufficient? This type of regulation needs to be streamlined but not entirely tossed out as the far right hopes. Of course the far left needs to compromise and recognize not every tree frog or spotted owl should be a road block. We've seen in recent years how wildlife is resilient - lions and bears and coyotes have all begun to return and survive on our garbage, pet cats and small dogs, even in urban environments (San Francisco now has a coyote problem).

Precisely, this is a large scale project which will require years to develop and for the USA to benefit.

Yes, Large-Scale Projects, by definition, take longer periods of time to complete.

And your point is that .....what?

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Oh, so now its not good enough that jobs are "shovel ready," they also must be proven to "not dissipate" at a certain arbitrary rate (less rapidly than those at Solyndra)?

I suppose under these criteria, the US automobile industry never should have pursued US operations because a large percentage of jobs have "dissipated," and not created "substantive career paths."

If I was Obama, I think I'd concentrate on projects like this: Creating Jobs. Period.

Samson - my post was not combative nor partisan. It was a question regarding economy scales and large projects which promise to deliver jobs, but are increasingly not the jobs the USA needs - industry growth - not more mini malls.

Chillax.

ETA: there is more to life than go political team. my brain actually processes more than one complex concept regularly.

Niether was my post "combative or partisan:" I merely addressed your rather vague post.

For example; What are these "projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths." I'm not aware of any jobs offered in the energy sector paying less than $15/hr (double the minimum wage).

And how on earth can anyone predict, "percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?" Who cares?

Decision making support analysts can predict such statistics. Not a vague post, a share my thinking post.

I never mentioned the energy sector specifically, I am saying (for the third time) large scale projects. Example of such might be city convention centers, ball parks, new malls... all of which are sold to the public with the promise of bringing jobs. What jobs you ask? Soda fountain jerks, sweepers, popcorn vendors, retail sales - but never new engineering outfits, local technical support - ya know the kind of stuff that great nations are built on....INDUSTRIES.

 

[Samson]

Samson - my post was not combative nor partisan. It was a question regarding economy scales and large projects which promise to deliver jobs, but are increasingly not the jobs the USA needs - industry growth - not more mini malls.

Chillax.

ETA: there is more to life than go political team. my brain actually processes more than one complex concept regularly.

Niether was my post "combative or partisan:" I merely addressed your rather vague post.

For example; What are these "projects creating minimum wage opportunities rather than substantive career paths." I'm not aware of any jobs offered in the energy sector paying less than $15/hr (double the minimum wage).

And how on earth can anyone predict, "percentage of the 20,000 jobs will dissipate once the pipeline is built?" Who cares?

Decision making support analysts can predict such statistics. Not a vague post, a share my thinking post.

I never mentioned the energy sector specifically, I am saying (for the third time) large scale projects. Example of such might be city convention centers, ball parks, new malls... all of which are sold to the public with the promise of bringing jobs. What jobs you ask? Soda fountain jerks, sweepers, popcorn vendors, retail sales - but never new engineering outfits, local technical support - ya know the kind of stuff that great nations are built on....INDUSTRIES.

Um.......ok sweetie....a pipeline won't require any soda fountain jerks or popcorn vendors.

Better now?

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Don't patronize me you fool.

 

[Samson]

Don't patronize me you fool.

Now, now, now.......don't get upset: Your masquera will run......

 

[Metzor]

Will this pipeline cross the mississippi? If so, I'm against it. All the oil east of the river comes in plastic bottles labeled "10W30". Any deviation from this highly complex, alpha numeric system will upset the equilibrium established by the TVA and the Kudzu Council for the Arts. Such a drastic change would necessarily force the entire state of Ohio into a mad search for 3-in-1 oil and WD40 and we all know you can't cook with that stuff. People will die, man!

 

[flacaltenn]

Best read on what the effects of the processing of the tar sands are on the environment. Just another way of stretching out the time we are dependent on resources that are not ours, resources that diminsh the environment and create a lessor future for the children and grandchildren of this nation.

For Baruch Menachem --- That there ABOVE is what the Dear Leader Obama is thinking..
Forget about logical or rational triage.... It's to save the children...
He just can't help it. Too much Daily Kos...

 

[TruthSeeker56]

ANYTHING written in the New York Times should be held in great suspicion. Most of what the NYT produces are OPINION pieces passed off as "news reporting".

As for Robert Redford, he has been a crackpot for as long as I can remember. ANY cause that makes the United States look bad, and ANY cause that taints and embarrasses our history, is a cause that Redford supports. Redford has made his millions by ridiculing and fabricating lies about the country that made him rich. He's just another Hollywood bottom feeder.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

why do we have to pay 7 billion for an oil pipeline? Why do tax payers have to pay for any oil pipeline for any amount of money when the oil industry is already very profitable?

haven't read the article yet, but is the 7 billion on us or it is just permission to cross state lines or eminent domain issues?

i know, i know, read the article....

We're not.


Read the article.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Will this pipeline cross the mississippi? If so, I'm against it. All the oil east of the river comes in plastic bottles labeled "10W30". Any deviation from this highly complex, alpha numeric system will upset the equilibrium established by the TVA and the Kudzu Council for the Arts. Such a drastic change would necessarily force the entire state of Ohio into a mad search for 3-in-1 oil and WD40 and we all know you can't cook with that stuff. People will die, man!

No it won't cross the Mississippi.

 

[Trajan]

why do we have to pay 7 billion for an oil pipeline? Why do tax payers have to pay for any oil pipeline for any amount of money when the oil industry is already very profitable?

haven't read the article yet, but is the 7 billion on us or it is just permission to cross state lines or eminent domain issues?

i know, i know, read the article....

uhm we are not paying a dime..its all Trans Canada money.




some things to remember-

-the greens says hey its a disaster, stop it, don't do it....ok, well as long as you realize we, here will stop NOTHING. Trans Canada, will just railhead (until the build a pipeline thru British Col. ) the Oil to the coast, so as to sell it to China who has already expressed an interest.
So, the big carbon footprint they say is being created wills till be crated -even if we say no.

- the pipeline is the safest delivery mechanism there is, bar none.

- the 20K jobs are a dead set certainty, there are another 100K jobs in ancillary services that will spin off for the next 5 years once the project starts.....

- the pipeline has been vetted by;

the state dept.
the interior dept.
the dept. of transportation
the dept of eneregy
and of course, the EPA

10,000 pages, not one of them could find a reason to say no, its footprint will be minimal and its safety is not in question.

-the tar sands are a heavy crude, like Venezuela's, which requires more costly and time consuming refinement, which the gulf refinerys have the capacity for, so I thinkl we should give our money to Canada and ween ourselves of of chavez's..a dollar less in his pocket is a good thing, no?

No offense but I giggled at questions directed to its job making potential, I wasn't aware we were in [a] position to get picky? I mean seriously folks...come on.....

and as far as any eminent domain issues,a) they will be minimal, b) you don't build pipelines thru residential neighborhoods, c) Kelo? Hello? not a THING has been built, those folks were thrown out of their homes by a lib SC, here we are actually building something (pfizer bailed on new london), d) that will benefit everyone in the country, not just one cities tax base and the usual crony insider real estate moguls who thought Pfizer was going to make them rich. this is exactly what ED was created to address.