Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:41 am
Originally posted by deathBOB
Gasoline prices are high because we have a shortage of processing centers and refineries... I believe oil prices themselves are lower than they would be...
Besides Shwoff, it makes sense for the companies to keep prices high, they make more money because we are willing to pay out the nose for it...
I live out here on the left coast and let me tell you... there are no shortage of processing centers or refineries.
Besides, the price per barrel has nothing to do with supply and demand nor the price we are willing to pay....
Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:15 am
Originally posted by SHWoff
...where are the benefits? Has anyone seen oil and gas prices dropping? Are we shipping oil by the tons from Iraq for consumption in the US (without paying a premium for it of course) or for sale elsewhere? I really haven't seen any justification for this argument (caveat: maybe I'm reading the wrong rags or something).
the benefit isn't price. what you now have is a secure source of oil for the future. Read up on Executive Order 13303 put into effect by Bush, which gives US oil companies free reign over Iraq's oil. The order places US oil companies above the law, meaning they can do whatever the hell they want with it in the future and theres not a thing anyone can do to stop it.
You are reading the wrong rags.
Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:26 am
Originally posted by deathBOB
Gasoline prices are high because we have a shortage of processing centers and refineries... I believe oil prices themselves are lower than they would be...
Besides Shwoff, it makes sense for the companies to keep prices high, they make more money because we are willing to pay out the nose for it...
Read the links below for a better understanding of how gasoline prices arrived where they're at. I was into unleaded gas trading about 7-8 years ago. I nearly lost my shirt because of a slick talking broker. Believe me, some make a lot of money, but many lose a lot more. It's not simply a matter of "big oil" keeping prices high on a whim. There are so many factors involved, only a very shrewd investor can understand. A few pennies up or down in the market is all it takes to make or break. It's 90% speculation, 10% luck LOL. That's why it's called Futures trading.
http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Jun/20040607Busi005.asp
http://www.ucan.org/News/DetroitNews/Lack%20of%20refineries%20contributes%20to%20soaring%20gas%20prices%20-%2003-06-04.htm
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/RTGAM/20040520/wmathlater0520
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jun2004/nf2004064_6078_db014.htm
http://www.oaoa.com/news/nw060304c.htm
Refinery output is at 96% capacity so they say. Generally, 80% is the comfort zone for most industries.
Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:32 am
shockwave says
Basically the way this reads is that we cannot use the money from Iraqi oil for any purpose other than the betterment of Iraq and that furthermore we cannot make laws to change that status.
So basically EO 13303 says that any money made from the oil in Iraq belongs to the Iraqi nation and we can't "steal" it.
The whole issue of gas prices has squat to do with Iraq or the lowered (and recently raised) levels of production of Arab oilfields. It is good old fashioned plain and simple greed. The Oil companies are out to make a profit and wether you or I think it is right is irrelevant to the fact that rich bastards always feel (and always have felt) that it is their divine right to exploit any situation in search of profit.
This goes beyond left or right, liberal or conservative, lines. The people who make money want to continue making money and any excuse to rack up the price to the average consumer and hopefully blame someone else is always cherished.
RC made several links to futures market orientated business and there in lies the rub. It take almost 6 months for the oil drilled out of the ground to reach the consumer market as products such as gasoline and oil. You aren't paying the price that company paid to get the intial crude. You are paying whatever the company marketing the product thinks they can get you to pay.
Labor (I know I spelled that wrong to you Brits:D) troubles in Venezuela? Prices up! US siezes the second largets oil reserves in the entire world? WAR SCARE! Prices up! Memorial Day weekend! Lots of people driving! Prices up!
This sadly goes beyond anything so paltry as political or religous beliefs. Its plain old greed, pure and simple.
Read up on Executive Order 13303 put into effect by Bush,
I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development
Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein,
and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever
arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests
therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and
maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development
of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. This situation
constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security
and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national
emergency to deal with that threat.
I hereby order:
Section 1. Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order,
any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other
judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void, with
respect to the following:
(a) the Development Fund for Iraq, and
(b) all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein,
and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever
arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests
therein, in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest,
that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States,
or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United
States persons.
Basically the way this reads is that we cannot use the money from Iraqi oil for any purpose other than the betterment of Iraq and that furthermore we cannot make laws to change that status.
So basically EO 13303 says that any money made from the oil in Iraq belongs to the Iraqi nation and we can't "steal" it.
The whole issue of gas prices has squat to do with Iraq or the lowered (and recently raised) levels of production of Arab oilfields. It is good old fashioned plain and simple greed. The Oil companies are out to make a profit and wether you or I think it is right is irrelevant to the fact that rich bastards always feel (and always have felt) that it is their divine right to exploit any situation in search of profit.
This goes beyond left or right, liberal or conservative, lines. The people who make money want to continue making money and any excuse to rack up the price to the average consumer and hopefully blame someone else is always cherished.
RC made several links to futures market orientated business and there in lies the rub. It take almost 6 months for the oil drilled out of the ground to reach the consumer market as products such as gasoline and oil. You aren't paying the price that company paid to get the intial crude. You are paying whatever the company marketing the product thinks they can get you to pay.
Labor (I know I spelled that wrong to you Brits:D) troubles in Venezuela? Prices up! US siezes the second largets oil reserves in the entire world? WAR SCARE! Prices up! Memorial Day weekend! Lots of people driving! Prices up!
This sadly goes beyond anything so paltry as political or religous beliefs. Its plain old greed, pure and simple.
EO 13303
Sun Jun 13, 2004 11:45 am
Sorry for my short - not so clear ramblings... Shouldn't have replied after several double-margaritas...
Anyway, I read the EO the same way that Ingus does.
After further research, the only knock against the order is the *speculation* that it may absolve those working for the development fund efforts from human rights and environmental abuses.
Anyway, I read the EO the same way that Ingus does.
After further research, the only knock against the order is the *speculation* that it may absolve those working for the development fund efforts from human rights and environmental abuses.
Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:19 pm
Well, I read that little UN report that proves the internet newspaper's article. Amazing. i really like this part:
In general, from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured a variety of dual-use biological and chemical items and materials, including chemicals, equipment and spare parts. To date, UNMOVIC has found no evidence that these were used for proscribed chemical or biological weapon purposes. Although some of the goods may have been acquired by Iraq outside the framework of mechanisms established under Security Council resolutions, most of them were later declared by Iraq to UNMOVIC in its semi-annual monitoring declarations.
This is one of many reports made over a 3 month period. All it is doing is summerizing what they have been doing over this time. In no way is it saying WMD are there, they found them, etc.
This little internet newspaper has done nothing but turn this report into something it is not.
In general, from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured a variety of dual-use biological and chemical items and materials, including chemicals, equipment and spare parts. To date, UNMOVIC has found no evidence that these were used for proscribed chemical or biological weapon purposes. Although some of the goods may have been acquired by Iraq outside the framework of mechanisms established under Security Council resolutions, most of them were later declared by Iraq to UNMOVIC in its semi-annual monitoring declarations.
This is one of many reports made over a 3 month period. All it is doing is summerizing what they have been doing over this time. In no way is it saying WMD are there, they found them, etc.
This little internet newspaper has done nothing but turn this report into something it is not.
Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:15 pm
Originally posted by JimmyTango
Well, I read that little UN report that proves the internet newspaper's article. Amazing. i really like this part:
In general, from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured a variety of dual-use biological and chemical items and materials, including chemicals, equipment and spare parts. [B]To date, UNMOVIC has found no evidence that these were used for proscribed chemical or biological weapon purposes. Although some of the goods may have been acquired by Iraq outside the framework of mechanisms established under Security Council resolutions, most of them were later declared by Iraq to UNMOVIC in its semi-annual monitoring declarations.
This is one of many reports made over a 3 month period. All it is doing is summerizing what they have been doing over this time. In no way is it saying WMD are there, they found them, etc.
This little internet newspaper has done nothing but turn this report into something it is not. [/B]
What do you think they were making, mosquito repellent?
Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:26 pm
Originally posted by RCglider
What do you think they were making, mosquito repellent?
Well were they making bug spray?
It seems that WMD's weren't being made there according to some of the US presidental canidates.
Did Bin Laden and Al Qaeda aquire some WMD's? Who will they blow up?
Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:41 pm
Originally posted by igloo17
Well were they making bug spray?
It seems that WMD's weren't being made there according to some of the US presidental canidates.
Did Bin Laden and Al Qaeda aquire some WMD's? Who will they blow up?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4771882/
There's one place
Sun Jun 13, 2004 3:37 pm
Originally posted by RCglider
What do you think they were making, mosquito repellent?
They were making WMD. So many of them, we are tripping over them in Iraq. We are finding them left and right.
Just because they have a chemical that is typically used for X, but can be used in a WMD, doesn't mean they are using it for WMD.
That UN .pdf even states there is NO evidence it was used for WMD, yet now you are trying to say it was because 'what else would it be used for?' LOL. I will go buy what THEY say, not the few selected sentences you, and that completely bullshit website, use to make up stories.
I am not saying they never were, or that they for sure were not up until we went i there. I am saying there is NO PROOF now, and there was NO PROOF when our cowboy President lied to the American people to go to war.
Sun Jun 13, 2004 8:45 pm
Originally posted by JimmyTango
They were making WMD. So many of them, we are tripping over them in Iraq. We are finding them left and right.
Just because they have a chemical that is typically used for X, but can be used in a WMD, doesn't mean they are using it for WMD.
That UN .pdf even states there is NO evidence it was used for WMD, yet now you are trying to say it was because 'what else would it be used for?' LOL. I will go buy what THEY say, not the few selected sentences you, and that completely bullshit website, use to make up stories.
I am not saying they never were, or that they for sure were not up until we went i there. I am saying there is NO PROOF now, and there was NO PROOF when our cowboy President lied to the American people to go to war.
Bush lied, Bill Clinton lied, Albright lied, the UN lied.....they all lied before the war, is that what you're saying? So did Iraq's top scientists, captured/defected Generals/officers and top government officials....after the war. What do you want, a big sign that says "WMD Storage Warehouse" on it?
Iraq violated every single cease fire agreement for 12 years....that alone was cause for war and much overdue. Part of the agreement was a declaration of all their WMD's which Iraq continually and consistently refused to do. The corrupt U.N. had no intentions of ever enforcing it's resolutions because it was part of the problem.
The burden of proof was on Iraq, not the world to provide evidence of the destruction of their WMD programs.
I would have supported President Clinton had he had the guts to conduct a war, but instead he just lobbed a few missles into aspirin factories and empty buildings for show.
BTW, where did that sarin gas 155mm warhead come from used in a IED roadside bomb? No big deal I guess, although the terrorists that claimed to have orchestrated the attack say they have many more and will use them.
Now let's go back to 1981 and the bombing of Iraq's nuclear power plant. Iraq claimed it was not being used for nuclear weapon development. Uh huh.....
Mon Jun 14, 2004 12:03 am
I'm with RC all the way. Well spoken my man.