O/T What are the real truths? What is happening right under our nose?

[Swingman]

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote

That's maybe the saving grace ... the proven reserves we don't tap now remain for more sane times, or for the Chinese when we're gone.

[Leon]

Considering that Exxon estimates that we have only used 1/3 of the world reserves I don't think I am going to be around to see us be in control. We'll only be around to see us go broke.

[Fred the Red Shirt]

messagenews: [e-mail]...

...

What matters is not how much we've used, it's how fast we are using it up.

Last I heard, the Canada tar sands alone were enough to keep the US supplied at the present rate for 'a long time' (e.g. I don't remember the number, but it was like 50 years or more).

The OPEC quotas are based, at least in part, on each member nation's remaining reserves, which encourages each to exaggerate those estimates.

I wonder if there is any similar advantage for Exxon?

[Hank]

"Leon" wrote in news:cEAQj.540$To6.404 @newssvr21.news.prodigy.net:

Absolutely not. But they didn't drill any; did they. Why do we have to pay their 'oil depetion allowance'? Nobody pays my 'I had a shitty year allowance'.

[Lew Hodgett]

10 years ago, the VP of sales of one of my principles commented to me, "Lew, we will never see another grass roots refinery built in our lifetime".

This from a guy who had spent his career in and around the "oil patch".

I agreed.

Today, if you decide you want to build a refinery in some location, it will take 20 years to overcome the neighborhood objections and the environmental impact studies, before you can start construction.

The refinery at Gaviotta, CA stood complete but not commissioned for about 5 years before some smart young oil company attorney figured out it was less expensive to fight in court than it was to let the refinery stand idle, so the law suits be damned, they started the refinery.

As far as I know, the lawsuits went away.

Lew

[evodawg]

Damn 1 good lawyer in 10,000 now that's not likely to happen again.

[Renata]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:34:44 -0700, Mark & Juanita wrote:

-snip-

-snip-

Uh,... nope. Cafe blends have been around for years. Prices hadn't "surged" like they are these days.

the gist from the article: "You see very time the Fed lowers interest rates, it weakens the dollar and the Fed has been very active slashing these rates in order to keep the big banks afloat. That dollar devaluation then raises gasoline prices at the pump, about 8 cents per gallon per each 25 percentage point cut by the Federal Reserve.

Since September there have been 12 of these cuts made - eventually costing America 96 cents extra for each gallon of gas."

entire article below

-R

The Fed pushes gasoline prices even higher by Jackie Corr | April 23, 2008

Butte, Montana | As we well know the price of a gallon of gasoline keeps going up. And nobody sees an end to this surge let alone a drop in price. For just this past weekend the price of oil per barrel jumped again to an all time record high of $117.01. The New York Times commented that "what was striking about this latest milestone was what didn't happen: there was no shortage of oil, no sudden embargo, no exporter turning off its spigot." But there is something going on and it means more bad news for the American public. And that is the Fed's Ben Bernanke has been pulling out all the stops to save Wall Street from paying for the mess they made while keeping all the profits. On Sunday in the Washington Post, the conservative writer George Will said Americans should tell the congress the free ride is over and it is time to start dismantling Wall Street Socialism. In Will's words, "the Fed has no mandate to be the dealmaker for Wall Street socialism. The Fed's mission is to preserve the currency as a store of value by preventing inflation." But that is not the way that George Bush, Treasury head Hank Paulson, Bernanke and most of the congress see it. You see very time the Fed lowers interest rates, it weakens the dollar and the Fed has been very active slashing these rates in order to keep the big banks afloat. That dollar devaluation then raises gasoline prices at the pump, about 8 cents per gallon per each 25 percentage point cut by the Federal Reserve. Since September there have been 12 of these cuts made - eventually costing America 96 cents extra for each gallon of gas. Between September 18, 2007 and March 18, 2008, the Federal fund rate was lowered from 5.25% to 2.25% and the discount rate was lowered from

5.75% to 2.50%. Check the dates: In Butte on October 3, 2007 the price of a regular gallon of gas was $2.80. On New Years Day $3.06. St Patrick's Day $3.25. As of this writing the price is $3.50 ($3.49.9) a gallon and it will go even higher in the coming weeks, roughly $3.75 a gallon, as a result of the Fed's giving in to Wall Street. Of course, the Fed has yet to mention this gasoline price surge in statements concerning those rate cuts for Wall Street and for good reason. As George Will pointed out, continued dollar deflation means higher and higher prices for the American public and even more $ billions for Wall Street investment banks like Goldman Sachs. And there's more. Before the current Fed cuts in the interest and discount window mentioned above run their course, regular gasoline prices will have reached $3.76 per gallon according to the Fed formula, nearly a dollar increase since last October. And like the moon follows the sun, a higher price for gas further pushes up already rising food prices. So it's no wonder people want change and the hell with experience. "Bailout Ben" Bernanke, Hank Paulson (a former Goldman Sach's CEO) and of course, Alan Greenspan, the former Fed guy, are long on experience and look where they got us. And we might also remember the present disaster originated in the unregulated Wall Street investment banks who were set free to plunder and loot after Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin in 1999 deep-sixed the old New Deal banking law, Glass-Steagall. And what have they learned? Needless to say, the Wall Street guys and gals are still calling for more tax cuts even with a war going on that is further bankrupting us.

[Renata]

the whole story, they're not crying publicly about how nearly 1/2 their mega, record setting profits are being turned over to the guvmint.

R

[Renata]

" I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net."

30/40 = 75%

But, what I didn't take into account until I saw some financial tables spelling this stuff out was that their profit was 72B - minus 30B taxes. The tax rate is on the 72B, not the 40B remaining after taxes. THAT was my error.

Renata

[Dave in Houston]

WOW! I never knew THEY were in those secret, closed-door energy policy meetings headed by President Cheney! It's no wonder that regular-unleaded has gone from .79/gal to 3.50/gal and diesel to 4.10/gal and oil company profits reach record highs every quarter (not to mention Halliburton). Who knew?

Dave in Houston

[Doug Winterburn]

I don't know why it wouldn't be the whole story - if it's not, somebody is going to the slammer. I also don't know why they would cry publicly as corporate income taxes run almost the same rate for all big corporations. By the time you add in federal and state gasoline taxes (not to mention Exxon-Mobil employees income taxes), who do think is making the more money from Exxon-Mobil's business - Exxon-Mobil or guvmint?

[depictureboy]

Well dont forget either that govt is also getting taxes at the pump per gallon. I dont know the exact number but I had heard that govt actually makes more per gallon from taxes than the oil company.

[Doug Winterburn]

That's what I was referring to when I mention "federal and state gasoline tax" - currently averaging 47 cents per gallon. And since any corporation figures income tax as a cost of doing business, we rather than Exxon-Mobil pay their $30 billion income tax. If they get hit with a "windfall profits tax", they will simply raise the price of their goods and we will pick up the tab.

[jo4hn]

Yuppers. It's the 97% that give the other 3% a bad name...

[Mark & Juanita]

and just where in those "secret" meetings did Cheney and company declare we would NOT drill in ANWR, would NOT drill offshore, would NOT build more refineries, would NOT exploit the North Dakota oil finds?

Don't blame this @#$% on Cheney or the oil companies, they aren't the ones screaming bloody murder when some arctic caribou gets inconvenienced by having to walk around an oil derrick (that will take up less than a few tenths of a percent of the total available land area in that region).

[Mark & Juanita]

You do understand the difference between net and gross, right?

[Mark & Juanita]

Uh, yes. Every spring at changeover time, gas prices have surged. Look up comments last year at about this same time. In the past, there has always been a run-up prior to Memorial Day and the summer driving season, but with the advent of cafe blends, the runup has been larger and higher.

[Renata]

Surging since September (well, really, longer, but we'll just focus here for the moment). We ain't seen surges like this for some time if ever. Yet, we've had the annual, actually, bi-annual, blend changeover for some time. Hmmm.

According to you, it's ALL the environmentalists' fault for wanting to protect the caribou and have clean air.

Oh, and maybe if the oil companies would keep the refineries they already have open (closed one recently in CA) they wouldn't need to build new ones.

R

[Renata]

Nah. Why doncha 'splain it...

R

[Fred the Red Shirt]

Probably right before the part about how we were going to invade Iraq.

Of course since those meetings were secret, and no one in the Justice Department has had the balls to prosecute the attendees for lying to Congress about attending them, we may never know.