Iran - Are there enough PO'd people to pull it off?

THEIS

Sergeant of the Hide
Nov 27, 2017
778
1,146
93
#51
Hi,

So if Saudi tanked Petrobras, Petrochina, Sinopec Group, BP, Total SA, Pemex and Royal Dutch Shell..
How long do you think the USA based companies will last? Do you think Exxon Mobil can stay afloat if crude hit $10 per barrel?
And do you think the USA has enough capital to pay off all the creditors that will come with hands out when those countries are then required to pay SA or Russia inflated prices?

Sincerely,
Theis
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#52
98% of the US debt is owned by Americans so yeah It wont be a problem. As said in another thread, as fucked up as we are financially the rest of the world is worse off.

You mix national oil companies with market based oil companies above, you are talking two different animals. If you paid attention to the markets at all over the last 5 years you will see an attempt to crush the US oil business bu opening the taps by opec, the price of oil fell to $40, where opec thought could put the US producers out of business, the US producers just turned off the light switch and worked on efficiencies, the Saudies could not afford to have $40 oil so they pushed up their prices, that’s when the US producers turned on the light switch again. Technology has castrated Opec.

We can turn on and off the fracking switch like a light, there is no 10% loss of well head pressure with fracking like there was in the past. Fuck OPEC and Fuck Saudi Arabia. We need nothing from anyone. We have internal work that needs doing, FTW.
 
#53
Hi,

So if Saudi tanked Petrobras, Petrochina, Sinopec Group, BP, Total SA, Pemex and Royal Dutch Shell..
How long do you think the USA based companies will last? Do you think Exxon Mobil can stay afloat if crude hit $10 per barrel?
And do you think the USA has enough capital to pay off all the creditors that will come with hands out when those countries are then required to pay SA or Russia inflated prices?

Sincerely,
Theis
An why would the price they charge for their energy, effect us if we are energy independent of them in the first place? Fuel in many place on this rock is much cheaper, an other places much higher that ours. Even though most of it comes from the same well. We should be tied to their pricing if we become independent, I don't think so. Is China or anyone else tied to our cost per ton of coal or are we theirs, no we are not.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#54
Oil is fungible, my point is they don’t control the price like they used to, oil cant be a weapon or a carrot like it used to be.
 
#55
Oil is fungible, my point is they don’t control the price like they used to, oil cant be a weapon or a carrot like it used to be.
The only people that oil was used as a weapon against,... was the American people. We have, an have had, the tech to be independent with energy but, money is in war, not oil!
 
Likes: W54/XM-388
Aug 24, 2010
4,699
1,546
113
Northeast Wyoming
#56
How would the Saudis increasing to full capacity, where they only have 2M B/D spare, push oil down to $10/bbl? That's only a couple percentage points of consumption.

I'm an outsider and purely a layman on the subject, but I don't see it in the least.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#57
OPEC is 20-30% of the supply, SA is the easiest to turn on and off. 2MBD is a nominal 2% of the oil, it does not take much extra supply or much of a shortage to move prices in a very big way, especially when you have a constant demand.


So if you have demand of 120 MBD and you add 2MBD with demand staying at 120 MBD you will build to a glut very quickly, putting onward pressure on prices immediately same thing happened in reverse with a cut in supply.

This is very simple, not even going into refining and other parts of the supply chain that impact the markets in violent and crazy price moves.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#58
It might also be a bit to easy for some "accidents" to shut down the Saudi ability to ship oil to the world. Especially if US based contractors are suddenly "not available" to fix the damage.

So many choices of various groups that might "accidentally" find a bunch of toys and detailed plans on how to accomplish their wildest dreams...
And if they happen to blow themselves to paradise while getting their grove on.... they get their 72 virgins so everybody is happy.
 
Likes: RNWRKNP

MarinePMI

Battery Operated Grunt
Jun 3, 2010
2,287
726
113
San Diego, Ca
#59
This is kind of way out in left field, but I wonder if history can teach us something about the oil market.

At one time (15th-16th century) Venice essentially controlled the world economies because they controlled the world market on...yep, salt. Without refrigeration, and no other known way to preserve food stuffs at the time, salt drove the world markets. It was the petroleum of its day. Countries lived and died (literally) on the conditions of the salt trade. If a country did not have enough salt (salt poor) their population starved and/or prices on food stuffs soared. At the time there was no way to generate salt efficiently, short of mining the rock out of the ground (hence the growth of towns like Salzburg, Norwich, etc.; "sal" meaning salt, and "wich" a placename meaning "a source of salt" ). Venice cornered the trading market on salt and drove the world economy as the power behind many chairs of monarchs. Wars were fought, monarchs assassinated and untold wealth created...all over salt (and who controlled its flow).

What changed all this was the advent on new drilling technology (ironically, thanks to the Chinese) and the ability to create brine wells. Instead of digging salt from the ground, a hole was drilled into a salt deposit, water was pumped into a deposit, and the briney water was pumped up, out and then dried to create cheap, inexpensive salt crystals. Sounds a lot like fracking, eh? But I digress...

My point is, technology drove the world markets away from salt as the major driver of influence that created or crushed wealth. IMHO, I think we're seeing the same thing happen in our lifetime with oil. Venice has been replaced by SA. And like Venice, they will fight tooth and nail to maintain that control, but ultimately, it is a futile effort. Even now, you see reforms in SA as they struggle to develop a capability/product/market that is not oil dependent. They are not stupid, they see the writing on the wall and are attempting to prepare for the inevitable (unlike most ME countries).

If there are any students of history reading this thread, I'd highly recommend the book "Salt". I think most would be surprised/stunned by the uncanny resemblance of the historical politics, intrigue and plots around salt, to the same sorts of things with today's oil market.

Food for thought...if we don't understand history, then we are bound to repeat it.

https://www.amazon.com/Salt-World-History-Mark-Kurlansky-ebook/dp/B00BPDN33W
 
Last edited:

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
6,695
2,835
113
50
MA
#61
This is kind of way out in left field, but I wonder if history can teach us something about the oil market.

At one time (15th-16th century) Venice essentially controlled the world economies because they controlled the world market on...yep, salt. Without refrigeration, and no other known way to preserve food stuffs at the time, salt drove the world markets. It was the petroleum of its day. Countries lived and died (literally) on the conditions of the salt trade. If a country did not have enough salt (salt poor) their population starved and/or prices on food stuffs soared. At the time there was no way to generate salt efficiently, short of mining the rock out of the ground (hence the growth of towns like Salzburg, Norwich, etc.; "sal" meaning salt, and "wich" a placename meaning "a source of salt" ). Venice cornered the trading market on salt and drove the world economy as the power behind many chairs of monarchs. Wars were fought, monarchs assassinated and untold wealth created...all over salt (and who controlled its flow).

What changed all this was the advent on new drilling technology (ironically, thanks to the Chinese) and the ability to create brine wells. Instead of digging salt from the ground, a hole was drilled into a salt deposit, water was pumped into a deposit, and the briney water was pumped up, out and then dried to create cheap, inexpensive salt crystals. Sounds a lot like fracking, eh? But I digress...

My point is, technology drove the world markets away from salt as the major driver of influence that created or crushed wealth. IMHO, I think we're seeing the same thing happen in our lifetime with oil. Venice has been replaced by SA. And like Venice, they will fight tooth and nail to maintain that control, but ultimately, it is a futile effort. Even now, you see reforms in SA as they struggle to develop a capability/product/market that is not oil dependent. They are not stupid, they see the writing on the wall and are attempting to prepare for the inevitable (unlike most ME countries).

If there are any students of history reading this thread, I'd highly recommend the book "Salt". I think most would be surprised/stunned by the uncanny resemblance of the historical politics, intrigue and plots around salt, to the same sorts of things with today's oil market.

Food for thought...if we don't understand history, then we are bound to repeat it.

https://www.amazon.com/Salt-World-History-Mark-Kurlansky-ebook/dp/B00BPDN33W
And along the line of salt think Whales.

Whaling is what made the US a world power.

Nantucket and New Bedford, MA were the Saudi Arabia of there day in the times of killing Leviathans.
 
Oct 5, 2017
181
136
43
#62
We don’t need them, opec or any other energy at all. They need us more than we need them. I been working in this. Business for 30 years, I know who needs what, and who has what. We need nothing from anyone.
Like said you need to print dollars like there is no tommorw as you are runing such deficits for past 50+ years. Only thing that prevents $US to going into tailspin is Saudi OPEC

Oil is the worlds most traded commodity and due to US Saudi alliance its traded in USD , that mean everyone buying oil in OPEC is buying dollars first to pay for it . Most of this OPEC $$ ends up reinvested in US , doubling the gain. You need sauds far more that they need you.

Its not about oil any more US is selfsufficient at that , but FED can only print near endless amounts of fiat $$ as long as rest world buys oil in fiat $.
 
Last edited:

AviCado

My cans are just okay, really.
Jul 23, 2018
160
62
28
St Louis
#64
This is probably as much pipe dream as anything else, but I'd expect solar and other renewable energy to be the most important way to slay the OPEC dragon. If I could get a 300+ mile range SUV or light duty pickup that doubled as a giant battery bank, I'm sold.
 

FatBoy

Chris Hayes, Nashville TN
Jul 29, 2001
776
211
43
44
Nashville, Tennessee
#65
This is probably as much pipe dream as anything else, but I'd expect solar and other renewable energy to be the most important way to slay the OPEC dragon. If I could get a 300+ mile range SUV or light duty pickup that doubled as a giant battery bank, I'm sold.
The grid won't support it. It's too inconsistent and there is no current way to ramp power output up and down for demand on the fly. I'll try to find a link to the program, but there are companies working on kinetic system to buffer renewable and make it viable . What I took away from it was, if you're going to rely heavily on renewable the grid needs to be small. Tiny. like a neighborhood or a small city, completely removed from the three main grids. This has possibilities in places like AZ, HI, etc. Not really a nationwide thing IMO, but what do I know, they may get it figured out.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#66
Right now it takes 1.3 gallons of petroleum equivalent to make 1 gallon of bio fuel. If we committed to nuke energy we could build out the grid and make major dents using electric, nuke, clean coal tech, natural gas.

BP, Shell, and Exxonmobil put out energy outlooks that outline their view, so does DOE. Do some reading on your own and stop using rumor, innenuendo and fake goddam news as your sources for idea formulation, its damaging your brains ability to do critical thinking.

Here is a shell view, you can find DOE and the other oil companies on your own. You should read them all as there is some nuance.

https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios.html
 
May 20, 2006
1,791
783
113
Winnipeg, Mb.
#68
"And Now For Something Completely Different...."

There are so many supporters for Solar (and Wind) and at the same time there are so many detractors of it/them too.

I don't know the particulars at all, but maybe somebody here does, regarding the ISS. They obviously aren't tied to any grid, and yet have operated on Solar only for quite some time. I realize they have HUGE Solar panels, but what they generate, store, and use each day and compare with "decay" of infrastructure....

Throw this into the Oil/Energy supply discussion.
 
Likes: W54/XM-388

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#70
"And Now For Something Completely Different...."
There are so many supporters for Solar (and Wind) and at the same time there are so many detractors of it/them too.
I don't know the particulars at all, but maybe somebody here does, regarding the ISS. They obviously aren't tied to any grid, and yet have operated on Solar only for quite some time. I realize they have HUGE Solar panels, but what they generate, store, and use each day and compare with "decay" of infrastructure....
Throw this into the Oil/Energy supply discussion.
Try pricing out multi-junction photovoltaic cells. Built with a combination of several layers of gallium arsenide, indium gallium phosphide, and germanium.

There is a big cost difference between those and the normal "solar panels" everybody is used to seeing.
 

AviCado

My cans are just okay, really.
Jul 23, 2018
160
62
28
St Louis
#71
The grid won't support it. It's too inconsistent and there is no current way to ramp power output up and down for demand on the fly. I'll try to find a link to the program, but there are companies working on kinetic system to buffer renewable and make it viable . What I took away from it was, if you're going to rely heavily on renewable the grid needs to be small. Tiny. like a neighborhood or a small city, completely removed from the three main grids. This has possibilities in places like AZ, HI, etc. Not really a nationwide thing IMO, but what do I know, they may get it figured out.
I think battery banks or similar are necessary. Some of the kinetic deisgns look interesting.

At a certain point I think we'll also need to start looking at making our way of living more energy efficient, breaking the trend of increasing useage as we increase efficiency.
 
Jan 6, 2012
3,694
2,494
113
#72
I think battery banks or similar are necessary. Some of the kinetic deisgns look interesting.

At a certain point I think we'll also need to start looking at making our way of living more energy efficient, breaking the trend of increasing useage as we increase efficiency.
Absolutely. That's why I remove the internals from the catalytic converters on my vehicles. Much better fuel efficiency.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#73
At a certain point I think we'll also need to start looking at making our way of living more energy efficient, breaking the trend of increasing useage as we increase efficiency.
Too many people (such as the stupids in California) get hung up on that idea as some religious doctrine. However that's on the Communist side of the equation, there is only one pie, so you can't have more, you must live with a tiny little dim light in some dystopian future that the greenies want where you huddle in your unheated government flats with just your allotted cubic room.

Be on the capitalist side and the freedom side... Make tons more pie so everybody can have enough... and some people might want to be a bit more efficient simply because then they don't have to pay for more pie delivery.

Energy is what drives society and human progress, the more energy you have available to put to use and the cheaper it is, the more you can enjoy a great lifestyle & progress as a society.

I of course have always been a big proponent of cutting edge nuclear power and pouring tons of research into both better full cycle fission based stuff as well as funding fusion based research. But that is not the only way, the sun puts out huge amounts of energy free for the taking you just have to find a way to convert, store & use it. Add in to that of course wind and water.
 

AviCado

My cans are just okay, really.
Jul 23, 2018
160
62
28
St Louis
#74
Too many people (such as the stupids in California) get hung up on that idea as some religious doctrine. However that's on the Communist side of the equation, there is only one pie, so you can't have more, you must live with a tiny little dim light in some dystopian future that the greenies want where you huddle in your unheated government flats with just your allotted cubic room.

Be on the capitalist side and the freedom side... Make tons more pie so everybody can have enough... and some people might want to be a bit more efficient simply because then they don't have to pay for more pie delivery.

Energy is what drives society and human progress, the more energy you have available to put to use and the cheaper it is, the more you can enjoy a great lifestyle & progress as a society.

I of course have always been a big proponent of cutting edge nuclear power and pouring tons of research into both better full cycle fission based stuff as well as funding fusion based research. But that is not the only way, the sun puts out huge amounts of energy free for the taking you just have to find a way to convert, store & use it. Add in to that of course wind and water.
I know Communism is still the boogieman for a lot of people who were mad the Wall fell, but this is a thermodynamics issue. We don't have an infinite system, we have to ensure we are preserving our environment and not just dumping excess waste. At a certain point there is a limit. Progress for the sake of progress means nothing if my grandchildren or great-grandchildren have to try to hunt whitetailniver a toxic waste dump instead of in beautiful Midwestern hills.
 

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
6,695
2,835
113
50
MA
#79
"And Now For Something Completely Different...."

There are so many supporters for Solar (and Wind) and at the same time there are so many detractors of it/them too.

I don't know the particulars at all, but maybe somebody here does, regarding the ISS. They obviously aren't tied to any grid, and yet have operated on Solar only for quite some time. I realize they have HUGE Solar panels, but what they generate, store, and use each day and compare with "decay" of infrastructure....

Throw this into the Oil/Energy supply discussion.
Does it rain or snow with 100 percent cloud cover in space?
 
Likes: RNWRKNP

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
6,695
2,835
113
50
MA
#81
I know Communism is still the boogieman for a lot of people who were mad the Wall fell, but this is a thermodynamics issue. We don't have an infinite system, we have to ensure we are preserving our environment and not just dumping excess waste. At a certain point there is a limit. Progress for the sake of progress means nothing if my grandchildren or great-grandchildren have to try to hunt whitetailniver a toxic waste dump instead of in beautiful Midwestern hills.
Beautiful Midwest?

I was horrified by the ruination of the open spaces via windmills.....

By day


At night



Yeah, real green.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#83
I know Communism is still the boogieman for a lot of people who were mad the Wall fell, but this is a thermodynamics issue. We don't have an infinite system, we have to ensure we are preserving our environment and not just dumping excess waste. At a certain point there is a limit. Progress for the sake of progress means nothing if my grandchildren or great-grandchildren have to try to hunt whitetailniver a toxic waste dump instead of in beautiful Midwestern hills.
That's the argument of people who don't want us to progress, such as the communist infested earth worship cult. They keep saying that of course we will ruin everything.... Because they won't let us fix things properly... They want problems not solutions... because they are not interested in solutions but just more control.... This is the most blatant when it comes to the scam of "endangered species"... which could be solved easily by science, freedom & capitalism... but they don't want to actually save the animal species, just have more power to ruin people's lives.

Then of course there are the interests of corporations & marketing types that run contrary to what would make the people have a better life.. and the government / military complex that needs constant problems to stay in power.

We can have all we could ever want and have a much more pleasant world to live in.
People believe this communist sponsored "green" propaganda about how we are ruining things, the facts are that in the west we have actually been steadily improving a lot of how life in the urban cities and surrounding areas is on the whole over the past half century once technology started taking off.

You want to see a toxic pile of garbage, try European cities up till about 100 years ago.

Progress for the sake of progress is a great idea, you just need to progress on all important fronts and not destroy your home in the process.
Humanity needs to progress or what is the point?
(Of course the communists/earth worshipers/Red Shield Team want us to live like animals as the little slaves in small amounts for the benefit of our "betters" but that's no future).

Now if you are worried about pollution & toxic waste... get your ass over to China & India and do something about those two countries who are actually polluting the planet & pouring out more toxins that the rest of the west put together. (Don't listen to the BS they try to say about "carbon dioxide" as the be all end all. The stuff China and India pollute the world with are what is going to cause long term damage).
 
Likes: RNWRKNP

Greg Langelius *

Resident Elder Fart
Aug 10, 2001
5,282
581
113
Arizona, good place for me...
#84
The biggest potential source of power is gravity, in the the form of tides. The oceans are in consent motion; creating tidal empoundments and tapping the tidal flow in and out of them to drive turbines is a source of energy that cannot be stopped by overcast, dying winds, or any other means short of sabotage. The tidal empoundments would simply be civil engineering levee projects.

Greg
 
Last edited:

AviCado

My cans are just okay, really.
Jul 23, 2018
160
62
28
St Louis
#86
That's the argument of people who don't want us to progress, such as the communist infested earth worship cult. They keep saying that of course we will ruin everything.... Because they won't let us fix things properly... They want problems not solutions... because they are not interested in solutions but just more control.... This is the most blatant when it comes to the scam of "endangered species"... which could be solved easily by science, freedom & capitalism... but they don't want to actually save the animal species, just have more power to ruin people's lives.

Then of course there are the interests of corporations & marketing types that run contrary to what would make the people have a better life.. and the government / military complex that needs constant problems to stay in power.

We can have all we could ever want and have a much more pleasant world to live in.
People believe this communist sponsored "green" propaganda about how we are ruining things, the facts are that in the west we have actually been steadily improving a lot of how life in the urban cities and surrounding areas is on the whole over the past half century once technology started taking off.

You want to see a toxic pile of garbage, try European cities up till about 100 years ago.

Progress for the sake of progress is a great idea, you just need to progress on all important fronts and not destroy your home in the process.
Humanity needs to progress or what is the point?
(Of course the communists/earth worshipers/Red Shield Team want us to live like animals as the little slaves in small amounts for the benefit of our "betters" but that's no future).

Now if you are worried about pollution & toxic waste... get your ass over to China & India and do something about those two countries who are actually polluting the planet & pouring out more toxins that the rest of the west put together. (Don't listen to the BS they try to say about "carbon dioxide" as the be all end all. The stuff China and India pollute the world with are what is going to cause long term damage).
I don't accept that all the problems can be solved by "capitalism, freedom, and science" just because you say so. Capitalism is busy trying to roll back environmental protections and cut education funding. The western way of life is only possible because we keep exporting pollution elsewhere and exporting jobs to people who can do it more cheaply and don't care about pollution. Endangered species are endangered because we bulldoze their habitat to build condos, or because we replaced business and elk with cattle farms and got mad when wolves killed the cattle, or because increase carbon-dioxide leases to bleaching of coral reefs.

I grew up on Star Trek and I want nothing more than a replicator that can provide what we need without worrying about pollution or sourcing raw materials, but you don't get there by just assuming everything will be fine, and you certainly don't progress if you only look at things from a national model, trying to blame China for pollution while buying the goods they pollute to manufacture.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#87
The only people that were mad the wall fell were communists in the west, the Soviets, the Cubans, the Chinese, and hundreds of dictators they were supporting in the third world so shut your fucking stupid pie hole, you dumb fuck.

I know Communism is still the boogieman for a lot of people who were mad the Wall fell, but this is a thermodynamics issue. We don't have an infinite system, we have to ensure we are preserving our environment and not just dumping excess waste. At a certain point there is a limit. Progress for the sake of progress means nothing if my grandchildren or great-grandchildren have to try to hunt whitetailniver a toxic waste dump instead of in beautiful Midwestern hills.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#89
I don't accept that all the problems can be solved by "capitalism, freedom, and science" just because you say so. Capitalism is busy trying to roll back environmental protections and cut education funding. The western way of life is only possible because we keep exporting pollution elsewhere and exporting jobs to people who can do it more cheaply and don't care about pollution. Endangered species are endangered because we bulldoze their habitat to build condos, or because we replaced business and elk with cattle farms and got mad when wolves killed the cattle, or because increase carbon-dioxide leases to bleaching of coral reefs..
I can see where you could easily think that as it's propaganda spread wide and far. The reality is very different.
You pretty much give your self away as being fully indoctrinated by the statement "Capitalism is busy trying to ....... cut education funding"
We have never spent as much on education in the history of the world as we do now and it is very reasonable to argue that the results on average have been going down for the past 40 years as ever more cries for more money have been bandied about. We NEED to cut funding for the stupidity and liberal BS in education and get back to actual real knowledge and real skills taught in less time by people who are not political commissars.
Try going back and finding a set of 1 through 6 McGuffee readers from the late 1800s and you'll see what I mean about the average Kindergarden through High School modern education not being all it is cracked up to be.

Endangered animals are endangered because the stupid communists won't let us actively assist in making habitats better and actively have an economic and personal interest in having more of the "endangered" animals around. Apparently they would prefer the animals to starve or die of thirst "naturally" rather than simple things like let people build water catchment / drinking areas. They set up Endangered animals as the enemies of people and their personal properties rather than simply doing proper capitalist based solutions. Simple example... here is my town every so often when "endangered birds" might be coming through, the official word is that you can do everything you can to make them stay away because if they stick around and build a nest, somebody is going to essentially come chase you out of your house or shut down the local park etc.... so everybody makes sure they can't move in... What if instead, they said, hey these birds are protected... If you have some, let us know and the more chicks that successfully hatch on your property / in your city and grow to fly off, the more money we'll pay you..... Instantly there would be huge amounts of habitat for them to breed in & the population would boom.

Also most animals are actually pretty good at learning to get along with humans in areas where things are a bit more spread out like the suburbs, Eagles, Hawks, Birds, smaller mammals all actually do better around humans with a bit of planning due to extra waste resources available and extra water resources, especially if you design it for them to be attracted. We don't need to have tons of wolves and things we don't like, those can be small in number and in parks and places we don't need for us, we don't have to save all the animals, a few are better scarce.

Then of course there is the issue with our lifestyle requiring us to export pollution... that again is communist lies... the real problem is that we don't actually do Capitalism, rather we do Corporate socialism. Your $1000 iPhone could just as easily be made here in the USA in a nice clean non polluting factory... but that would mean possibly a 30% profit for Apple that they would then have to pay taxes on vs a 60% profit that they can stick offshore to fatten their bank accounts. Enabled by our government giving "most favoured nation" status to China specifically so all the companies could head over there for bigger profits & letting a whole bunch of tax loopholes get written so they can get out of taxes by stashing stuff overseas in paper companies. Then we let companies get away with products, packaging and designs that pollute & are hard to reuse because they pay off the government buddies to let them do such things. We let them build products with built in obsolescence because again... corporate welfare is the name of the game. Half the "durable" goods & electronic waste could be ended by requiring long warranties, penalties for designed obsolescence, the need for the companies to take back and recycle products, the right of anyone to repair or upgrade and regulation that repair parts be readily available or else anyone could step in and make it.
 

AviCado

My cans are just okay, really.
Jul 23, 2018
160
62
28
St Louis
#90
I can see where you could easily think that as it's propaganda spread wide and far. The reality is very different.
You pretty much give your self away as being fully indoctrinated by the statement "Capitalism is busy trying to ....... cut education funding"
We have never spent as much on education in the history of the world as we do now and it is very reasonable to argue that the results on average have been going down for the past 40 years as ever more cries for more money have been bandied about. We NEED to cut funding for the stupidity and liberal BS in education and get back to actual real knowledge and real skills taught in less time by people who are not political commissars.
Try going back and finding a set of 1 through 6 McGuffee readers from the late 1800s and you'll see what I mean about the average Kindergarden through High School modern education not being all it is cracked up to be.

Endangered animals are endangered because the stupid communists won't let us actively assist in making habitats better and actively have an economic and personal interest in having more of the "endangered" animals around. Apparently they would prefer the animals to starve or die of thirst "naturally" rather than simple things like let people build water catchment / drinking areas. They set up Endangered animals as the enemies of people and their personal properties rather than simply doing proper capitalist based solutions. Simple example... here is my town every so often when "endangered birds" might be coming through, the official word is that you can do everything you can to make them stay away because if they stick around and build a nest, somebody is going to come chase you out of your house.... so everybody makes sure they can't move in... What if instead, they said, hey these birds are protected... If you have some, let us know and the more chicks that successfully hatch on your property and grow to fly off, the more money we'll pay you..... Instantly there would be huge amounts of habitat for them to breed in & lots of protection...

Also most animals are actually pretty good at learning to get along with humans in areas where things are a bit more spread out like the suburbs, Eagles, Hawks, Birds, smaller mammals all actually do better around humans with a bit of planning due to extra waste resources available and extra water resources, especially if you design it for them to be attracted. We don't need to have tons of wolves and things we don't like, those can be small in number and in parks and places we don't need for us, we don't have to save all the animals, a few are better scarce.

Then of course there is the issue with our lifestyle requiring us to export pollution... that again is communist lies... the real problem is that we don't actually do Capitalism, rather we do Corporate socialism. Your $1000 iPhone could just as easily be made here in the USA in a nice clean non polluting factory... but that would mean possibly a 30% profit for Apple that they would then have to pay taxes on vs a 60% profit that they can stick offshore to fatten their bank accounts. Enabled by our government giving "most favoured nation" status to China specifically so all the companies could head over there for bigger profits & letting a whole bunch of tax loopholes get written so they can get out of taxes by stashing stuff overseas in paper companies. Then we let companies get away with products, packaging and designs that pollute & are hard to reuse because they pay off the government buddies to let them do such things. We let them build products with built in obsolescence because again... corporate welfare is the name of the game. Half the "durable" goods & electronic waste could be ended by requiring long warranties, penalties for designed obsolescence, the need for the companies to take back and recycle products, the right of anyone to repair or upgrade and regulation that repair parts be readily available or else anyone could step in and make it.
Yeah, Betsy Devos is busy trying to cut education funding, we cut funding for Pell Grants and reclassifying tuition as income manages to ensure postgraduate research students go further in debt. Spending more total dollars is not the same as actually funding education, and to compare education funding over time can't be done in whole dollars, but should be done in ratio of GDP. Self-funding through loans or self-pay is the opposite of funding education. I have seen a what passed for education in the 1800s and I'm not impressed.

Most animals do not do better in the suburbs. That's straight up bullshit.

If iPhones cna be made pollution-free in the US, then why is nobody doing that? Compete with apple, sell the Patriot phone 7, advertise made in America, using all the rare earths mined in America, all the raw materials manufactured in America? In fact if the only problem is corporate greed, how do we as the consumer solve that without government no intervention? It sounds like what you're describing as the solution is actually a socially-minded regulated market, not capitalism. When you describe special loopholes, you're talking about crony capitalism. Socialism
 

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
6,695
2,835
113
50
MA
#91
Yeah, Betsy Devos is busy trying to cut education funding, we cut funding for Pell Grants and reclassifying tuition as income manages to ensure postgraduate research students go further in debt. Spending more total dollars is not the same as actually funding education, and to compare education funding over time can't be done in whole dollars, but should be done in ratio of GDP. Self-funding through loans or self-pay is the opposite of funding education. I have seen a what passed for education in the 1800s and I'm not impressed.

Most animals do not do better in the suburbs. That's straight up bullshit.

If iPhones cna be made pollution-free in the US, then why is nobody doing that? Compete with apple, sell the Patriot phone 7, advertise made in America, using all the rare earths mined in America, all the raw materials manufactured in America? In fact if the only problem is corporate greed, how do we as the consumer solve that without government no intervention? It sounds like what you're describing as the solution is actually a socially-minded regulated market, not capitalism. When you describe special loopholes, you're talking about crony capitalism. Socialism
Common Core and teachers unions are destroying education....

Sportsmen that kill animals have done more to save animals than any tree hugger. FACT!

We dont make shit in America because it was decided our standard of life must fall in order to "raise" the standard of living in the shit holes of the world. So much for the Global Economy. Living life by the standard of the lowest common denominator.

Avicado is that child in distress and anger meme with the caption "Why does shit cost money!"
 

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
6,695
2,835
113
50
MA
#92
Communism is a "Pet Rock"

Remember the Pet Rock?

As a kid I so wanted a Pet Rock during that craze and got one as a stocking stuffer for Christmas.

One sentence in the instructions shattered my illusions of the Pet Rock.

It went something like this....

"Place your Pet Rock on the ground and walk approximately ten feet away. Turn toward your Pet Rock and start walking toward it as you call it by name. Amazingly, you will note your Pet Rock coming closer to you!"

I was about 4-5 years old and remember right now thinking back than "Of course it's coming closer, I'm walking toward it!"

Avicado has not had his Pet Rock moment yet regards Communism.
 
Last edited:
#93
This whole money grubing, war mongering, shit show, would have never happened if Edison had won out over Westinghouse. Then again those milking this cash cow, would have had to get a real job. It's not about generation as much as, it's about usage, distribution an transmission. If Edison had won out the world would be a totally different place than it is now.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#94
This whole money grubing, war mongering, shit show, would have never happened if Edison had won out over Westinghouse. Then again those milking this cash cow, would have had to get a real job. It's not about generation as much as, it's about usage, distribution an transmission. If Edison had won out the world would be a totally different place than it is now.
Edison was a control freak jerk in his dealings with others which is why so many of his inventions were sidelined & the ideas reworked in a different manner. Why for example Hollywood got started up across the country in California. There is a reason all the record players went to the Victor company system instead of the original Edison system.... Nobody wanted to be only allowed to record things that he personally approved.

Who would have made the world different is Tesla if he wasn't too scary for everybody as he envisioned an actual free world with near free power & technology.. and probably could have gone a long way towards making it happen.
 
Jan 28, 2011
2,647
426
83
GA
#95
98% of the US debt is owned by Americans so yeah It wont be a problem. As said in another thread, as fucked up as we are financially the rest of the world is worse off.

You mix national oil companies with market based oil companies above, you are talking two different animals. If you paid attention to the markets at all over the last 5 years you will see an attempt to crush the US oil business bu opening the taps by opec, the price of oil fell to $40, where opec thought could put the US producers out of business, the US producers just turned off the light switch and worked on efficiencies, the Saudies could not afford to have $40 oil so they pushed up their prices, that’s when the US producers turned on the light switch again. Technology has castrated Opec.

We can turn on and off the fracking switch like a light, there is no 10% loss of well head pressure with fracking like there was in the past. Fuck OPEC and Fuck Saudi Arabia. We need nothing from anyone. We have internal work that needs doing, FTW.
I'm calculating about 40% of US debt is foreign owned (top 3 are below), up from 32.5% in 2016, and that is up from 13% in 1988, and 25% in 2007. As a % of the portion of the debt held by the public it is a bit larger, obviously. While foreign held debt has grown U.S. oil and gas production has also grown. The United States became the world’s largest producer of petroleum hydrocarbons in 2013 and has been the world’s largest producer of natural gas since 2009. In crude oil production, the United States is in a dead heat with Russia and Saudi Arabia to lead the world.


https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2018/opds052018.prn

http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

Absolutely the rest of the world is worse off. We dive, they dive worse. The fact that the US is a consumer of oil and gas is mitigated by our ability to go get it wherever and whenever we need, should energy security be threatened. But still, with the portion of debt in foreign hands, not to mention the sheer magnitude of it, I wonder how cautiously we tread versus less deferential decision making if we did not have so much foreign financing.
 
Last edited:
Aug 24, 2010
4,699
1,546
113
Northeast Wyoming
#96
OPEC is 20-30% of the supply, SA is the easiest to turn on and off. 2MBD is a nominal 2% of the oil, it does not take much extra supply or much of a shortage to move prices in a very big way, especially when you have a constant demand.


So if you have demand of 120 MBD and you add 2MBD with demand staying at 120 MBD you will build to a glut very quickly, putting onward pressure on prices immediately same thing happened in reverse with a cut in supply.

This is very simple, not even going into refining and other parts of the supply chain that impact the markets in violent and crazy price moves.
I certainly understand that part of the market, it just seemed extreme that a 2% change in volume produced could result in a 85% price drop, especially when considering at least a moderate consumption increase and shale/sands oil production decrease that would come with any significant drop in price. I may have only taken a college class in macroeconomics and another in basics of energy, but I'm fairly certain that short of a globally enduring economic depression, we will never see the likes of $10/bbl crude again.

@W54/XM-388, I'm 100% behind advanced nuclear reactors as well and believe it's the best future for energy production, right along with their desalination capabilities assisting with our freshwater thirst driving the water wars in the western US. Maybe one day nuclear won't be the villain and we can begin building new plants instead of just new reactors, but the odds of that happening anytime soon seems to be next to nil. NIMBY is still alive and well there.

Progress for the sake of progress is the American, and quite frankly the human, way of life. Without progress, humankind would still be in the Dark Ages. Championing responsible growth is present throughout business and, dare I say, capitalism, as that is the trend present in today's business climate. If anyone can't handle that, I recommend a mud hut, hoe and seed, and most of all no internet.

I rather like my Fifth Amendment protections of personal property as much as I like my Second Amendment protections to have the capability to take part in the insurrection against any and all who feel the need to infringe upon them through socialist seizures by the government. I remember my oath to uphold and defend the Constitution I took several times as a Marine, do you @AviCado?
 
#97
Edison was a control freak jerk in his dealings with others which is why so many of his inventions were sidelined & the ideas reworked in a different manner. Why for example Hollywood got started up across the country in California. There is a reason all the record players went to the Victor company system instead of the original Edison system.... Nobody wanted to be only allowed to record things that he personally approved.

Who would have made the world different is Tesla if he wasn't too scary for everybody as he envisioned an actual free world with near free power & technology.. and probably could have gone a long way towards making it happen.
If Edison would have won over Westinghouse the world would have been DC, which is were it should be. A/C puts the power into the hands of a few, where as DC would have put the power where it belongs, the end user. Had we went DC I can only guess where solar would be today? If you look at the solar homes that are built today from the ground up, (no grid tie at all) they are very energy efficient, an very comfortable. Yes they cost more than a grid dependent, but had we been D/C from the late 1800's until now I would think oil would be just aircraft fuel, lubes an plastics. I have a 3500# battery bank that backs up the grid, as the grid here is nothing but extension cords an tooth picks being fed with chip monks in a cage (think TVA an a coop(aka noop)). Wish I had done it back in the late 60s on my first place.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
5,132
3,200
113
#98
our real debt including IOU's for entitlements, Social Security is a bit over $220 Trillion right now. Foreign debt is inconsequential, they dont vote in elections, the leeches taht have been bamboozled and are now crying will steal their $200 T before the Chinese get theirs, hell they are stealing money from their own grand kids right now the Chinese an all foreign debt holders are last in line.

Dont be a bamboozled, our debt is huge much more than 20 Trillion, the party line ignores the bribe money paid out for votes over the past 60 years. If you are over 60 you should hang your head in shame, if you are under 60 the over 60 people fucked you and continue to fuck you, remember this if you get appointed to a death panel.

Soylent and Green you MFers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnma...ies-our-government-cant-fulfill/#2796f82665b1

Again though, we are in better shape than the rest of the world but still fucked up.

I'm calculating about 40% of US debt is foreign owned (top 3 are below), up from 32.5% in 2016, and that is up from 13% in 1988, and 25% in 2007. As a % of the portion of the debt held by the public it is a bit larger, obviously. While foreign held debt has grown U.S. oil and gas production has also grown. The United States became the world’s largest producer of petroleum hydrocarbons in 2013 and has been the world’s largest producer of natural gas since 2009. In crude oil production, the United States is in a dead heat with Russia and Saudi Arabia to lead the world.


https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2018/opds052018.prn

http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

Absolutely the rest of the world is worse off. We dive, they dive worse. The fact that the US is a consumer of oil and gas is mitigated by our ability to go get it wherever and whenever we need, should energy security be threatened. But still, with the portion of debt in foreign hands, not to mention the sheer magnitude of it, I wonder how cautiously we tread versus less deferential decision making if we did not have so much foreign financing.
 
Likes: FatBoy

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
2,126
1,582
113
Dallas, TX
#99
If Edison would have won over Westinghouse the world would have been DC, which is were it should be. A/C puts the power into the hands of a few, where as DC would have put the power where it belongs, the end user. Had we went DC I can only guess where solar would be today? If you look at the solar homes that are built today from the ground up, (no grid tie at all) they are very energy efficient, an very comfortable. Yes they cost more than a grid dependent, but had we been D/C from the late 1800's until now I would think oil would be just aircraft fuel, lubes an plastics. I have a 3500# battery bank that backs up the grid, as the grid here is nothing but extension cords an tooth picks being fed with chip monks in a cage (think TVA an a coop(aka noop)). Wish I had done it back in the late 60s on my first place.
DC is good for small and local stuff as in your own house using & generating the power, or a small power station for your street. But I don't think it can be efficiently scaled up in transmission distance and energy quantity delivery very much before the conductor size & meltdown potential get way out of line. As I recall Edison's solution was to put a power plant on every street corner... Considering the NIMBY way just about everybody seems to be these days, I'm not sure it would have taken off.

What I do think is stupid is how we run AC into our houses and then a good part of it gets transferred back to DC power in small inefficient ways.
Just about every single one of your modern electronic devices / charges and LED lights is busy running their own little AC/DC converter. If you were to say wire a house for AC plugs for things that were best with AC and then run a 24v DC circuit off a single well built efficient transformer, you could save a fair bit of energy lost as well as that energy being converted to heat.

Much as I think it's funny that you cool your house, but your AC and fridge pump heat back into your house, if you could have an outside heat exchanger for the fridge/freezer, it would save a fair bit of money.
 
Jan 28, 2011
2,647
426
83
GA
our real debt including IOU's for entitlements, Social Security is a bit over $220 Trillion right now. Foreign debt is inconsequential, they dont vote in elections, the leeches taht have been bamboozled and are now crying will steal their $200 T before the Chinese get theirs, hell they are stealing money from their own grand kids right now the Chinese an all foreign debt holders are last in line.

Dont be a bamboozled, our debt is huge much more than 20 Trillion, the party line ignores the bribe money paid out for votes over the past 60 years. If you are over 60 you should hang your head in shame, if you are under 60 the over 60 people fucked you and continue to fuck you, remember this if you get appointed to a death panel.

Soylent and Green you MFers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnma...ies-our-government-cant-fulfill/#2796f82665b1

Again though, we are in better shape than the rest of the world but still fucked up.
From that perspective we are on the same page, yet I am not entirely sure large foreign debt holders don't vote in some kind of way. And yes, I think the below is well understated.


http://www.usdebtclock.org/
 
Top Bottom