I’ve been saying repeatedly that speculation has raised the cost of oil and gasoline, just as it has recently dropped the cost of oil and gasoline. You claim it is only about the law of supply and demand. While that has a lot to do with it, it isn’t everything.

When Enron drove up the energy prices in the western states because they had a monopoly on it and could raise it and lower it whenever they chose to, they proved that supply and demand didn’t have that much to do with it. It had more to do with speculation. The more Enron controlled supply and demand by shutting off normal supply lines, they were able to drive up prices by speculators that had nothing to do with Actual expenses/cost and ACTUAL supply. That was because of DEREGULATION. That same policy of DEREGULATION caused the investment banks and the mortgage companies to drive up the cost of housing by selling homes at prices that were driven up, by increasing sales of homes by lowering requirements on the part of the borrowers. That was part of Bush’s “ownership society”. Unfortunately, Bush was pushing nothing down deals, with no stable income from stable jobs, and allowed Banks and Mortgage Companies to sell high risk loans off to other banks, which is now causing many banks to fail. If Bush would have supported increasing jobs here in the U.S. rather than supporting companies to ship those jobs overseas, we might have had the stability in the job market to support the mortgages that are now going into default.

Economics 101 – the law of supply and demand. You leave out one simple factor. WE CAN’T DRILL ENOUGH TO REPLACE THE OIL THAT WE IMPORT. You talk about adding supply to reduce the cost to consumers. Tell me then, why it is that our “patriotic” oil companies are EXPORTING 28% of the oil that we get from drilling HERE IN THE U.S.? If we needed that oil so much to keep our gas and heating costs down, they why aren’t we keeping it here at home?

Go to: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/MTTEXUS1a.htm to see the increasing trend of EXPORTING from 1980 to 2007.

The oil companies are multinational. They have no interest in patriotism for this or any other country. They put their headquarters overseas so they don’t have to pay any corporate taxes to the country that they get their oil from, or sell their oil products to.

Oil companies get their massive riches because of the fact that the United States Government – the PEOPLE – sell them access to the oil via LEASES, at minimal cost to the oil companies. When oil companies charge so much that they start to destroy other companies in the United States and damage our overall economy, wouldn’t that be considered damaging to our National Security? After all, if all these companies that build cars, and trucks or weapons of war, can’t do so because the cost of doing it is so high, then we aren’t in a position to be able to defend ourselves, are we?

Keeping the energy costs to a reasonable level, rather than at levels that the market CANNOT bear, isn’t against the American Dream, it is patriotic, because it protects everyone’s American Dream, not just the oil company barons. Besides, don’t you think that the PEOPLE of the United States have a right to decide how much they should reasonably pay for fuel prices when they are allowing access to the oil companies to drill on our lands and use US Government Resources?

If Americans would finally get smart, they would deny drilling access to the oil companies that are raking us over the coals, and grant access to those companies that are showing that they operate safely, with proper environmental concerns, conserve our national resources, and provide citizens with reasonable prices for fuel in return for oil companies continued access to it.

I am concerned for you because you can’t separate what is good for this Nation versus what is good for greedy oil companies that do whatever they want to make themselves rich, while they destroy this country.

You seem to believe that they should be allowed to do whatever they want regardless of the damage they do to this country and the citizens of this country.

You raise some interesting points. However, you can’t deny that the free-market works. Americans themselves drove the prices down at the pumps, when gas tanked at close to 4.50 per gallon. -WE DROVE LESS, used less gasoline, and the prices dropped.

-AND adding more supply into the market will always drive the prices down — Economics 101: “The laws of Supply and Demand”.

I am concerned for you though because you seem to have a problem with businesses when they are successful. The American dream is still available for anyone willing to take a risk, and work hard in their chosen venture. Are you saying you want the government to hinder success,. By taking more money they are not entitled to take?

AND I guees you’re just ashamed of your own name. . .

You made a typical uninformed error when you talked about how much profit the oil companies made versus the state and federal taxes that are collected on a gallon of gasoline. What you are referring to is the retail profit and the taxes on the retail sale. It has nothing to do with the actual profits that the oil companies are making.

Oil companies operate like most large distribution operations, with a central clearinghouse type operation. When they sell their gasoline to the wholesalers and retailers, they’ve already made their profits. You are only referring to the profits and taxes that the RETAILERS collect from the consumers. While it is true that the retail operations don’t make much profit, that doesn’t mean that the oil companies aren’t making huge profits.

What the oil companies make in profits are taken well before the gasoline is sold to the consumer at the gas pump.

Last quarter the big six oil companies in the U.S. made $51.5 Billion in PROFIT, from $82.9 Billion in Revenues. That means that 62% of what they took in was PROFIT. That profit is also a 40% increase over the previous quarter. Last year revenues were $56.1 Billion for the same time period. That’s an increase of $26.8 Billion in revenues, (mostly going toward profits), even though consumption is down by about 800,000 barrels of oil a day in the United States because of the high prices that consumers can’t afford to pay.

If you google oil company record profits you’ll get 3.6 million articles about them, so it isn’t as if you can’t find enough evidence that documents the record profits of oil companies for the last eight years under Bush.

For the record, when Bush took office, gasoline was selling for $1.46 a gallon. In 2000, a barrel of oil was selling for $27.39 or $34.16 if you adjust it to 2007 dollars. Here’s the link to the historical data: http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Table.asp

Bush and Cheney are both oil men, and they claimed that they would be able to provide us with cheap, easily available oil because of their tight connections with the Saudis.

Remember when Wolfowitz claimed that the Iraq War would cost less than $50 Billion and that it would be paid for primarily by the Iraqi’s and their oil? When have the Iraqis paid for any part of this war?

And while you claim that the oil companies have huge expenses, many of the leases that the oil companies are supposed to be paying for, haven’t been paid to the Interior Department of the U.S. Government since about 1998. Apparently the Interior Department is too busy to collect on the debts that are owed to the Government by oil companies. Maybe it was because the oil companies lavished cocaine, marijuana and sex to the regulators.

In addition, you can find many articles that prove that rather than spending the money on searching for new oil or drilling for new oil, most of the money that is spent, as reported by the oil companies themselves, is going toward buying stock back from disgruntled investors who aren’t getting much back from their investments. Why are the oil companies buying back their stock and not paying out much in dividends? Because they want to go private and not have to report their finances publicly. When that happens, there will be no way for anyone to find out how much they make or where their money is being spent. And when that happens you can say goodbye to any market transparency.

Back in May of this year, in a campaign stop in Greendale, Wisconsin, Senator McCain claimed that “[W]ith those resources, which would take years to develop, you would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels,” McCain said when asked about offshore drilling. “We are going to have to go to alternative energy, and the exploitation of existing reserves of oil, natural gas, even coal, and we can develop clean coal technology, are all great things. But we also have to devote our efforts, in my view, to alternative energy sources, which is the ultimate answer to our long-term energy needs, and we need it sooner rather than later.”

His position on offshore oil drilling reversed three weeks later after getting $2 million in donations form the oil companies who lobbied for his support to drill offshore.

But there are multiple problems in the logic behind the argument that we could have lower gasoline prices if offshore oil drilling was allowed.

First of all, if that was possible, then why didn’t the Republicans force that law through Congress when they had complete control of both houses for the first six years of Bush’s Administration? It would have been easy for them to do that. They did it with everything else.

Secondly, the oil companies don’t want to drill here because the oil they produce in the U.S. costs more than the oil that they import. That is why we import 70% of the oil that we use. That, in spite of the fact that much of the oil coming out of Alaska is actually being exported to Asia, because the oil companies make more money selling to Asian markets than selling it here at home. Remember, oil companies are global, they have no patriotism to country – its all about profit.

And even if we did produce more oil in the U.S. the oil refineries are maxed out. And before you complain that Democrats have had too many environmental restrictions on refineries for the oil companies to build new ones, the fact is, again, that the oil companies don’t want to build new oil refineries. If they had wnated to, they could have easily pushed through new legislation to reduce the environmental restrictions, just like they did with the “Clean Air Act”, which increased pollution by allowing pollutors to buy credits from companies that had taken action to reduce their pollution.

The oil companies would rather blame the Democrats so that they don’t have to build new refineries and increase their overhead, even while giving the public excuses for increasing their profits.

Come again?

The oil companies aren’t drilling and aren’t building new refining to keep their overhead low. Yet they claim that their expenses are high so that they need to raise their prices, thus justifying the high profits (because people like you don’t recognize that they ARE PROFITS).

When the oil prices jumped to $147 a barrel in June of this year, the oil companies blamed the increased gasoline prices on their expenses, even though the increase in the price per barrel was due, not to costs, but to speculation.

They were playing the market and forcing the prices up, but people can’t continue to pay for the gas and keep those prices high, so the speculators are losing the money that they bet on the price going up. There just isn’t any support for the price of oil to continue to be as high as it is. That’s why oil prices dropped to under $92 a barrel today. But the oil companies haven’t bothered to cut the price of a gallon of gasoline to the consumers. Even though the price of a barrel of oil has dropped by over $50 a barrel, the price of a gallon of gas today is almost the same as it was at its peak of $147 a barrel back in June.

And the price of a barrel of oil hasn’t dropped because of increased production, as Republicans have argued for, because the U.S. oil production has been largely shut down in the Gulf because of hurricanes for several weeks! The price of oil has Dropped even though domestic oil production has had a huge reduction!

The argument for drilling to drop the price of gasoline, just doesn’t match the facts.

The price of gasoline is high because the oil companies have set the price of gasoline artificially high, and justified it by driving up the oil prices through speculation. But the speculators are very likely the oil companies themselves. Just like Enron, they drive up the price of oil by speculation, and make money in the markets, while keeping the actual cost of the oil production low by keeping operations here lean.

They make their money both by profiting from the actual low cost of oil while selling it high, while also profiting from their market speculation!

If you don’t understand what I just said, that is exactly why the American public has been repeatedly duped with the same con job that has been pulled by Enron and the Banks and the Insurance companies, and the healthcare industry.

This is exactly why Bush 1 was able to con the American public into bailing out the Savings and Loans in the 1980s and early 90′s, because of frauds perpetrated by S&L officials, and why Dubya was able to pull the same fraud with the Banks today. If you think $1.4 Trillion was a lot back then, you haven’t seen anything yet. The bank bailouts and the losses that are going to be forced onto investors due to the bank and insurance frauds today will make the losses from the 1980′s losses look like chump change.

McCain will do the same thing that the Bush’s have done. His son has already demonstrated that with the failing of Silver State Bank, the 11th bank failure of a federally insured bank.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/silver-state-bank-in-nevada-is-shut/n20080905235709990024

I’ve been threatened too many times online to share the rest of my name with you. I also don’t give a shit if you think any less of me or my positions for it.

I’m not here to impress, I’m here to say whatever I believe from the mass of media I take in. The majority of which is absorbed directly through c-span because I don’t like the entertainment television that passes itself off as news these days. I learn directly from the horse’s mouths with as little filtering as is possible.

People who whine about paying taxes should be left to their own devices. Stay off the roads. Stay out of parks. Live in their own excrement. Put out their own fires.

Lines for healthcare? What would cause that in the United States? Perhaps all those poor folks would be able to get in line with the better off folks? Would there be a flood of new people that would overwhelm the medical system? Do you think they shouldn’t be allowed in line with the better off folks because they don’t have enough money? Are MRI machines going to be abandoned in a field because now Uncle Sam is collecting the insurance dollars and the operators of said machines wont like to make money touched by Uncle Sam? I don’t get it. It’s a full of shit argument that’s old and tired. The problems that other countries have are no indicator of how well an American system would do. If you no longer had to pay $50 for health care then I imagine an increase of $30 in taxes wouldn’t be much bother.

Again, you non liberals can continue to pay $50 for your “better” healthcare.

I’ve no intention of responding item by item to everything you decide to type. Just because I don’t respond doesn’t mean I agree or that you’re right. It just means I didn’t respond.

Fox is not real journalism. It’s got so littler actual journalism involved that it’s far more of an entertainment venue for neo-cons. It’s owner doesn’t even pretend. Brit Hume? Why not Rush Limbaugh? Give me a break.

If the candidates thought there would be a bias in the moderator they wouldn’t go. That’s why the Dems wont do any Faux News debates. The bias is obvious and open. Don’t kid yourself or think you’re going to get anyone to believe it.

If the government runs healthcare, it will not be free, as it is neither in Canada nor in the UK (who recently just had to swallow an across the board tax increase twice the rate of inflation to pay for their FREE National Health Service). In countries with government run healthcare there are enormous waiting lists for major procedures, which is why many travel abroad for treatment. Even Peter Jennings admitted his mother (a Canadian citizen) often came to the US to avoid the long wait for healthcare.

I am not a Republican, and most likely will never be. Rather I am a conservative who has been disappointed with both parties drifting too far to the left, and seeking to change our democratic republic to the left brand of neo-socialism. You can call it what you like, but you are an ascribed socialist whether you want to admit it or not. You proved it when you stated that “the people” should reap the benefit of corporations who cover their own expense to search for oil deposits cover their own expense to drill, pay for permits and all of the government fees to allow them to drill and all for the increased costs due to environmental regulations pay for the refining of such oil, pay for the transport, and after all of their hard work, the oil companies’ profit is about 8 cents per gallon of the gross sales. The federal government gets about 18 cents per gallon, in Wisconsin alone, when you add state and local taxes, the total government take is currently about 60 cents per gallon (including the fed’s 18 cents). If “the people aren’t seeing anything from the profits, they shouldn’t be looking to the oil companies for a free handout, the government is already getting roughly 8 times what the oil companies earn.

The free market works (supply and demand). Socialism does not; –and If Senator Obama thinks we should pay more for gas, why does he try to use “high gas prices” against Senator McCain. After all senator McCain has offered solutions to bring the gas prices down, and more drilling is only a small part of his plan.

It sound to me like you’d be much happier living in Cuba.

Hey Jack what is full name? Are you too ashamed of your socialist positions to include your name?

I have no problem with Obama saying that he doesn’t mind high gas prices IF he in fact said it. It doesn’t show that he doesn’t care about high prices. It shows that he’s able to see and prepare for what the addiction to fossil fuels has brought us. And YES, global warming is real and is being accelerated by the over use of fossil fuels. The Earth is not flat either. Those two facts go hand in hand. Go ahead and deny it. It’s worked so well so far.

Republicans like to say that government is inept, then they get elected and prove it.

Under the current republican administration the government has increased far more than under any Democratic government. Just a fact. Don’t waste your time typing otherwise. It’d just be untrue.

I’m not a socialist. I do however believe that government has a responsibility to it’s people. I don’t believe that the government should take over everything. I believe that they should offer an alternative. Go ahead and pay an unreasonable amount for health insurance. The government should offer it’s people the ability to seek and receive good professional health care. That’s not socialized, it’s responsible. Go ahead and enjoy your private sector health insurance. If you feel better paying unreasonable amounts for the same care you should be free to do so. But know that when you get so sick that you lose your job and the health insurance that comes with it you’ll not lose everything you’ve worked hard for in your life. Know that if a parent has made mistakes in their life their kids aren’t going to be left without proper health care through no fault of their own. Health insurance, another wonderful boondoggle brought to you by the all powerful private sector. The private sector is doing so well so far.

The right wingers tell lies and half truths and when the responsible media corrects them with the truth they’re the liberal media. I believe that the majority of the media reports neutral. They seek the truth. The problem is that the republican party has nothing to offer 99% of the population. When McCain says that the economy is doing so well it’s not a liberal media that says otherwise. It’s a fact.

The republicans want the government to step in and legislate a woman’s uterus and I’m the socialist? The republican party keeps increasing the amount of money to fight their war on drugs and the left is socialist? The republican party looks to legislate morality on everyone and the Democrats are commies? The argument that Democrats and Liberals are socialist is bullshit. It’s old and tired and nothing more than another word fed to the American people to instill fear. The commies are coming… The commies are coming… Whatever.

There will be debates. Here’s the schedule…

September 26, 2008: Presidential debate with domestic policy focus, University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

October 7, 2008: Presidential debate in a town hall
format, Belmont University, Nashville, TN

October 15, 2008:Presidential debate with foreign policy focus, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

A town hall format on October 7th.

Even one for the Vice Presidential nominees.

October 2, 2008: Vice Presidential debate, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

I believe that the debates will be moderated fairly and I also know that when McCain looks like an out of touch funny little old man it will be because of his own inability and not the fault of the so called liberal media.

Have a nice day Commie’

In using the term LEFT or LIBERAL, I am simply referring to those who hold dear your ideology of BIG government that raises taxes on EVERYONE, especially businesses who create jobs (thus causing us to loose more) to pay for programs that it can’t possibly manage. It is their mission to bring about the end of our true democratic republic and usher in their favored brand of socialism, which separates the classes and puts the government in charge of everyone and everything. Incidentally, congress can’t even run their own restaurant, which is why, finally after decades of heaping more tax dollars into their failed venture, they turned it over to a small business in the private sector. –and they wonder why the democrat run congress only has a 9% approval rating. . .

They love the fact that fuel prices are so high because now they believe they will even be able to dictate what type of transportation we use. Senator Obama himself seaid, he did not have a problem with high gas prices; he only wished it would have happened a bit more gradually.

You’re correct you do have the right to use any word you desire. My only point was to try to lead in an intelligent conversation without resorting to gutter language, because that’s when I stopped taking you seriously.

You right wingers always toss out the word “Liberal” as if it’s a bad thing.

Here’s the definition of Liberal. Explain to me exactly what part of it is negative.

lib·er·al /?l?b?r?l, ?l?br?l/ Pronunciation[lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl]
–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

I suppose it can be a bad thing. Like how the republicans like to spend liberally in another country. Our infrastructure crumbles while the liberal spender in the White House builds the surplus in Iraq. The Thief-in-Chief gives tax breaks to his rich friends liberally so they can get more people to work, but the unemployment rate keeps going up.

As far as my language goes, I’ll use whatever language I like. The freedom to speak as I please is another liberal value I hold dear. Surely you’re grown up enough to realize that they’re words. They can’t come and get you in a dark alley or anything. Financial institutions are folding and the economy is flying down the toilet worse than any time since the great depression. There are far more important things to worry about than my language.

As to those who prefer any style it is your liberal candidates who only agree to debates moderated by media (self proclaimed) liberals such as Bob Schieffer, Charlie Gibson, the late Tim Russert and the like, who only ask softball questions of their preferred candidates with little or no follow up questions.

-and you can keep the (BS) language out of your posts

But once again the right wing is treating the American people like they’re dumb enough to believe their lies despite the evidence.

The race could be more focused on the issues? Is a town hall style debate the only way McCain is capable of having a responsible discussion involving the issues? I don’t think the American people need a president that is only capable of dealing with issues in a town hall style.

As for lies, Senator Obama continues to misrepresent his close associations and business dealings with convicted criminal Tony Rezko and the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers.

Please keep on thinking that Obama is infallible…PLEASE.

Better get your PFDs

I’m glad he at least unleashed the 527s, but I worry that it’s too late.