Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics political discourse

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-01-2010, 02:01 AM   #76
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

You have to hand it to Obama he's been pretty smart on some of this stuff - the Sotamayor nomination, letting the republicans have it at that dinner a couple months ago, the Nobel speech, the bi-partisan summit, and now giving the republicans one of their BS talking points when it's not likely to ever amount to much either way.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:21 AM   #77
ikestoys
banned
 
ikestoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: and don't vote trump/sanders
Posts: 94,444
Re: Drill, baby, drill

suzzer-

oil and energy companies get subsidies for alt energy stuff as well. They may get some other subsidies, but I'd be shocked if it wasn't a net profit for the govt.
ikestoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:25 AM   #78
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Well that still counters the idea that there's another Saudi Arabia waiting for us offshore if the stupid govt would just get out of the way.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:27 AM   #79
ikestoys
banned
 
ikestoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: and don't vote trump/sanders
Posts: 94,444
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
Well it still counters the idea that there's another Saudi Arabia waiting for us offshore if the stupid govt would just get out of the way.
Burn that strawman down buddy.
ikestoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:34 AM   #80
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

I'm relating the political part of the discussion we're having, not the practical one. I don't see how that can be a strawman and a former major campaign plank of Obama's foes.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:38 AM   #81
ikestoys
banned
 
ikestoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: and don't vote trump/sanders
Posts: 94,444
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
I'm relating the political part of the discussion we're having, not the practical one. I don't see how it's a strawman if it was a major campaign plank of Obama's foes.
No one was about to claim that all of our oil problems would be solved by drilling. The biggest claim would be that Obama and the Democrats were passing up something that could help, would make the government money and create jobs because of trumped up environmental concerns.

You're burning an absurd strawman.
ikestoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:41 AM   #82
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys View Post
The major campaign plank would have been that Obama is passing up on resources that would make the US money, create jobs and increase the US domestic oil supply. No one was about to claim that all of our oil problems would be solved by drilling. The biggest claim would be that Obama and the Democrats were passing up something that could help, would make the government money and create jobs because of trumped up environmental concerns.

You're burning an absurd strawman.
No, the other side of that argument is that the oil industry is already sitting on some 10,000 permits and they only opened one new rig during Bush's entire tenure. So how again is (or would have) Obama been stifling anything? The strawman here is that the dems have somehow been holding back the republicans from implementing all these rigs that would bring money, jobs and oil.

And if these subsidies still result in a net profit for the US as you claim, then why the hell does the oil industry need our help in the first place? Do they lack capital? Are they averse to taking too much profit for themselves? Something tells me it's a net profit for the US when everything goes right, and the taxpayers are left holding the bag when something doesn't pan out. Now the whole program may be a net oil and jobs gain for us, and therefore still determined to be worth it (go big govt action, yeah!). But if the whole program were wildly profitable I really don't see why the oil industry would need or deserve any kind of subsidies, tax breaks or gear-greasing.

Last edited by suzzer99; 04-01-2010 at 02:49 AM.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:45 AM   #83
ikestoys
banned
 
ikestoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: and don't vote trump/sanders
Posts: 94,444
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
You have to hand it to Obama he's been pretty smart on some of this stuff - the Sotamayor nomination, letting the republicans have it at that dinner a couple months ago, the Nobel speech, the bi-partisan summit, and now giving the republicans one of their BS talking points when it's not likely to ever amount to much either way.
This has just about 0 effect on the elections, as does everything else you're drooling over here.
ikestoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:49 AM   #84
ikestoys
banned
 
ikestoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: and don't vote trump/sanders
Posts: 94,444
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
No, the other side of that argument is that the oil industry is already sitting on some 10,000 permits and they only opened one new rig during Bush's entire tenure. So how again is (or would have) Obama been stifling anything? The strawman here is that the dems have somehow been holding back the republicans from implementing all these rigs that would bring money, jobs and oil.

And if these subsidies still result in a net profit for the US, why the hell does the oil industry need our help in the first place? Do they lack capital? Are they averse to taking too much profit for themselves? Something tells me it's a net profit for the US when everything goes right, and the taxpayers are left holding the bag when something doesn't pan out. Now the whole program may be a net oil and jobs gain for us, and therefore determined to be worth it (go big govt action, yeah!). But if the whole program were wildly profitable I really don't see the oil industry would need any kind of subsidies or gear-greasing.
Sigh, first off, I can't take you seriously complaining about the government giving out subsidies to anyone.

Second, your only source that the oil industry is heavily subsidized is Greenpeace.

Third, the oil industry brings in way more the number put out by Greenpeace.

Finally, the oil industry gets our help because they are influential enough to get enough people in government to help. Rent seeking behavior FTW... not that anything like that could go wrong in other industries.
ikestoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 02:53 AM   #85
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Lol way to just skip over my entire first paragraph and all the logic in my second paragraph. You admitted there were subsidies and speculated they would result in a net profit for the US (then you turn around and question my source on whether or not there are subsidies). I simply took your argument to it's logical conclusion. So in rebuttal you quibble with the numbers, then make the exact point I was making:

Quote:
Finally, the oil industry gets our help because they are influential enough to get enough people in government to help.
Great we agree. Time for bed.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 07:36 AM   #86
Wynton
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wynton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Graphville
Posts: 15,188
Re: Drill, baby, drill

I'm copying parts of today's NYT editorial, praising the decision, not because I agree but because I think it provides a good, concise summary (though I can't vouch for the accuracy):

The editorial is entitled drill, but not everywhere

Quote:
On Wednesday, President Obama struck a sensible middle ground.

He announced a decision to expand oil and gas exploration in selected areas of America’s coastal waters that will satisfy neither extreme but is, on the whole, a careful and useful addition to the steps he has already taken to reduce the nation’s energy dependence.

Mr. Obama noted pointedly and correctly that increased oil and gas drilling cannot possibly address the country’s long-term energy needs. It should be seen as just one element of his broader energy strategy — including fuel efficiency standards to be announced on Thursday, big investments in alternative fuels in the stimulus package and new loan guarantees for nuclear power.

The new strategy — the result of more than a year of work by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar — also confronts an essential political reality: the Senate will insist on offshore drilling as part of a broader bill, expected after Easter, addressing climate change and other energy-related problems. Mr. Obama is trying to anticipate and shape that discussion by identifying areas that he thinks can responsibly be opened for exploration while quarantining others.

Nearly all of America’s coastal waters have been up for grabs since 2008 when President George W. Bush lifted a longstanding presidential moratorium on drilling in the outer continental shelf. A few months later, Congress allowed a parallel Congressional moratorium to expire. Mr. Bush also lifted a separate moratorium on drilling in Alaska’s Bristol Bay that was imposed by his father in 1990 after the Exxon Valdez spill. Bristol Bay is home to America’s richest fishing grounds and is the main driver of a $2.2 billion regional fishing industry.

Under the Obama administration’s plan, Bristol Bay will once again be completely protected, which is wonderful news. Further north in Arctic waters, the plan would allow drilling on existing leases in relatively small areas of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas to proceed — which seemed inevitable, given legal and economic obstacles to reversing them. It would, however, postpone any further development pending the outcome of detailed scientific and environmental studies. Alaska’s environmentalists were encouraged, and they should be.

The rest of the plan is as significant for the areas it protects as for those it opens. Exploration will not be allowed on the Pacific Coast or along the Atlantic Coast north of Delaware. Seismic exploration — which in effect means exploratory drilling — will be allowed along the central and southern Atlantic Coast from Delaware to Florida, but, again, no new leases will be granted until the scoping process and the environmental reviews are finished.

The Interior Department’s seismic information is decades old, and one important point of the new plan is to discover what’s out there. The department’s most optimistic present estimate of the resources in the areas covered by the plan, including the Gulf of Mexico, is 63 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil.
Wynton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 07:37 AM   #87
Wynton
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wynton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Graphville
Posts: 15,188
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios View Post
Strange title for your post since it's not about drilling, it's about exploration as you indicate in your actual post.
I have always reserved the right to start threads with misleading, but catchy titles.
Wynton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 09:05 AM   #88
nick_van_exel
banned
 
nick_van_exel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,272
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Obama is opening up drilling to make himself look like a moderate.

Next will be cap and trade.

Dems are walking off a cliff
nick_van_exel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 09:19 AM   #89
DrModern
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DrModern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,340
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
Personally I'm not opposed to all drilling if the economics make sense and the environmental impact is determined to be minimal. I just think putting the majority of our efforts towards renewable makes a lot more sense. For one thing if the oil can't profitably be extracted without a subsidy, forget it.
If you think putting the majority of "our" efforts toward renewable energy alternatives makes sense, I suggest investing in companies that are working on renewable energy technologies, contributing to renewable energy subsidies directly, or any number of entrepreneurial actions. But why is your determination that renewable energy is preferable supposed to be valid for others who have different sets of priorities and preferences?

Furthermore, why would you expect that a profit-hungry oil company would undertake an unprofitable venture? If the harm in allowing drilling is supposed to be that it causes damage to the environment, a good that people value, a simple solution is to price the right to drill in accordance with the magnitude of the environmental harm. Even if the venture requires a subsidy to be undertaken, if it improves overall social welfare, why should the mere fact of requiring a subsidy change our views? Presumably you find other government-subsidized public goods perfectly acceptable on precisely the same grounds (maximization of social welfare).
DrModern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 10:34 AM   #90
Brian J
TOTP Master
 
Brian J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Posts: 10,650
Re: Drill, baby, drill

man i so wanted to be able to give Obama credit for something, because unlike many conservative leaning people i actually kind of like the guy and admired some of what he said during the campaign. Unfortunately the more i look into this the more I agree with the belief that this is just posturing.
Brian J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:01 AM   #91
Wynton
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wynton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Graphville
Posts: 15,188
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian J View Post
man i so wanted to be able to give Obama credit for something, because unlike many conservative leaning people i actually kind of like the guy and admired some of what he said during the campaign. Unfortunately the more i look into this the more I agree with the belief that this is just posturing.
Can we just chalk this up to a benign action then?

I mean, if you want to give him credit, maybe you can say that he's not doing any harm.

Start with baby steps, then later you can take the big leap to give him credit for something positive.
Wynton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:15 AM   #92
Brian J
TOTP Master
 
Brian J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Posts: 10,650
Re: Drill, baby, drill

yeah, well these are the real effects of what Obama's announcement added up to:

* Cancelled five lease sales off the Alaska coast that were planned over the next 2 years. One of the areas is estimated to hold up to 77 billion barrels of oil, or more than 3 times US reserves.

* A study of the southern Atlantic OCS, with the findings due back next year....no leasing.

* Delayed a planned lease sale off Virginia until at least 2012.
Brian J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:37 AM   #93
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrModern View Post
If you think putting the majority of "our" efforts toward renewable energy alternatives makes sense, I suggest investing in companies that are working on renewable energy technologies, contributing to renewable energy subsidies directly, or any number of entrepreneurial actions. But why is your determination that renewable energy is preferable supposed to be valid for others who have different sets of priorities and preferences?
Well the point is that until we throw out our whole system of govt (coming soon I'm sure), our tax dollars will continue to go toward energy extraction and generation (in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, govt funded studies, govt taking on risk, etc). When you do the math and consider something like a 100 year timeline and how we will be poised for the future, renewable energy just makes tons more economic and political stability sense. If you look at a 20-year profit window, maybe fossil fuel makes more sense. Which do you think our kids and grandkids would rather us look at? If you're running out of food, how much time and energy do you spend buying food from your neighbors, or frantically searching the house for every last morsel, before you consider planting some seeds?


Quote:
Furthermore, why would you expect that a profit-hungry oil company would undertake an unprofitable venture? If the harm in allowing drilling is supposed to be that it causes damage to the environment, a good that people value, a simple solution is to price the right to drill in accordance with the magnitude of the environmental harm.
I don't understand your point. A subsidy means we give them money or some kind of other break to explore and drill. Maybe we're charging them a price to drill, but we're giving them so many breaks in other areas it's a net loss for the US govt on a lot of ventures. I don't think anyone is really disputing that the fossil fuel industry gets tons subsidies now, which leads one to question the overall profitability of extracting the not-so-low-hanging fruit that we have left in terms of oil reserves.


Quote:
Even if the venture requires a subsidy to be undertaken, if it improves overall social welfare, why should the mere fact of requiring a subsidy change our views? Presumably you find other government-subsidized public goods perfectly acceptable on precisely the same grounds (maximization of social welfare).
Because oil is a diminishing resource, and all other things being equal we will be in better position for the future if we put our govt initiatives toward renewable energy. Getting off foreign oil is good. Getting off a very finite resource like fossil fuel entirely is better.

I am willing to admit that there could be a case where an oil subsidy makes the most overall sense for the country - but I sure would like to see a more sweeping renewable plan in place first, so that the oil is just a bridge to get us to sustainability.
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:38 AM   #94
kimoser22
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: the land of pleasant living
Posts: 3,196
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrModern View Post
If you think putting the majority of "our" efforts toward renewable energy alternatives makes sense, I suggest investing in companies that are working on renewable energy technologies, contributing to renewable energy subsidies directly, or any number of entrepreneurial actions. But why is your determination that renewable energy is preferable supposed to be valid for others who have different sets of priorities and preferences?

Furthermore, why would you expect that a profit-hungry oil company would undertake an unprofitable venture? If the harm in allowing drilling is supposed to be that it causes damage to the environment, a good that people value, a simple solution is to price the right to drill in accordance with the magnitude of the environmental harm. Even if the venture requires a subsidy to be undertaken, if it improves overall social welfare, why should the mere fact of requiring a subsidy change our views? Presumably you find other government-subsidized public goods perfectly acceptable on precisely the same grounds (maximization of social welfare).
Meh, theoretically this would be fine with me but achieving a correct price for the environmental harm caused would not be feasible IMHO.
kimoser22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:40 AM   #95
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian J View Post
man i so wanted to be able to give Obama credit for something, because unlike many conservative leaning people i actually kind of like the guy and admired some of what he said during the campaign. Unfortunately the more i look into this the more I agree with the belief that this is just posturing.
drudgesiren.gif

*cough* concern troll *cough*

drudgesiren.gif
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 11:41 AM   #96
suzzer99
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
suzzer99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on top of the bell curve
Posts: 80,452
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_van_exel View Post
Obama is opening up drilling to make himself look like a moderate.

Next will be cap and trade.

Dems are walking off a cliff
What does this even mean? What is Obama going to do with cap and trade?
suzzer99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:27 PM   #97
Brian J
TOTP Master
 
Brian J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Posts: 10,650
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99 View Post
Well the point is that until we throw out our whole system of govt (coming soon I'm sure), our tax dollars will continue to go toward energy extraction and generation (in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, govt funded studies, govt taking on risk, etc). When you do the math and consider something like a 100 year timeline and how we will be poised for the future, renewable energy just makes tons more economic and political stability sense. If you look at a 20-year profit window, maybe fossil fuel makes more sense. Which do you think our kids and grandkids would rather us look at? If you're running out of food, how much time and energy do you spend buying food from your neighbors, or frantically searching the house for every last morsel, before you consider planting some seeds?
Are you arguing that if we allow oil companies to explore and extract oil it takes away "resources" for future technologies? the possibility that more profit would allow more research I guess is totally foreign for you.

I'm not even going to get into the fact that you are making it sound like the resources is government dollars.
Brian J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:28 PM   #98
Brian J
TOTP Master
 
Brian J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Posts: 10,650
Re: Drill, baby, drill

I saw an estimate recently where immediate exploration in the gulf and Atlantic around Florida could result in 200,000 new jobs. Seems kind of important in a state hit hard by the economy unless in the end you don't really care about jobs.
Brian J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:35 PM   #99
USC Cheats
veteran
 
USC Cheats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,494
Re: Drill, baby, drill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian J View Post
I saw an estimate recently where immediate exploration in the gulf and Atlantic around Florida could result in 200,000 new jobs. Seems kind of important in a state hit hard by the economy unless in the end you don't really care about jobs.
And I heard from my cousin's brother's step-father's grandson's teacher's sister that there is a 10% chance that drilling will kill all ocean life within a 100 mile radius.
USC Cheats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2010, 12:48 PM   #100
Brian J
TOTP Master
 
Brian J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Posts: 10,650
Re: Drill, baby, drill

fine, it will create no jobs
Brian J is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online