Biden's National Security Director vows to release report on Khashoggi murder. Is it time to add to Brent futures long position ?

[Roch + 537]

This report could disrupt the relative calm in the Mideast.  Saudi Arabia has had to deal with descent on several fronts as human rights, poor economy and oil industry downturn.    Is Biden about to throw a match on the gasoline ?

Last week Biden said he would treat Saudi Arabia as a "pariah" .  Not too smart.  Looks like Biden will quickly destroy Trump's historic gains toward Mideast peace.  

I suspect Wall Street powerhouses Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley , etc might intervene to save Saudi Arabia from the exposure.  They don't want to jeopardise their lucrative Investment Banking business with Saudis .  Joe owes them.  

The easy way out for Saudi Arabia would be to give Joe's brother Jim a multi million dollar construction contract or better yet give Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz's Rosemont Seneca Hedge Fund a few Billion dollars to manage. Simple. 

"Joe Biden’s nominee for national intelligence director has pledged to release a report on who was responsible for the murder of Saudi critic Jamal Khashoggi, a decision that could embarrass the kingdom’s crown prince and strain its relationship with its key ally.

Avril Haines, who would be the nation’s first woman to oversee U.S. intelligence agencies, made the promise at her confirmation hearing on Tuesday. .  .   .  .   .

Edited January 22, 2021 by Roch

[Boat + 1,324]

That’s what Biden wants. I want to see the gold in Fort Knox and proof of aliens. I also want to know the reasoning for staying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Dig into all those meetings. In a Sunni dominated country why the heck did GW give the country to the Shiite. This was the beginning of the end for Republicans. They started doing crazy 😝 shyt.
I also want to know where every troop is in the world is and why. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

55 minutes ago, Boat said:

That’s what Biden wants. I want to see the gold in Fort Knox and proof of aliens. I also want to know the reasoning for staying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Dig into all those meetings. In a Sunni dominated country why the heck did GW give the country to the Shiite. This was the beginning of the end for Republicans. They started doing crazy 😝 shyt.
I also want to know where every troop is in the world is and why. 

By jove, man, run for President!  

But seriously, cut the heck out of domestic production and transportation, and THEN shut off supply out of the middle east?  Wind, solar and fairy dust here we come!  I think they mean it.   

Edited January 21, 2021 by Dan Warnick

[Roch + 537]

1 hour ago, Boat said:

That’s what Biden wants. I want to see the gold in Fort Knox and proof of aliens. I also want to know the reasoning for staying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Dig into all those meetings. In a Sunni dominated country why the heck did GW give the country to the Shiite. This was the beginning of the end for Republicans. They started doing crazy 😝 shyt.
.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Roch

[waltz + 140]

Next an end of weapons sales to the Kingdom, followed by an oil embargo and ban on US domestic production.  Thinks look promising 😩.  With the end of the petro-dollar it won’t matter what the FED does because borrowing costs will skyrocket.   All this before vaccines are widespread and a skyrocketing minimum wage.  Yikes, the new administration does not seem to be playing around.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

3 hours ago, Roch said:

This report could disrupt the relative calm in the Mideast.  Saudi Arabia has had to deal with descent on several fronts as human rights, poor economy and oil industry downturn.    Is Biden about to throw a match on the gasoline ?

Last week Biden said he would treat Saudi Arabia as a "pariah" .  Not too smart.  Looks like Biden will quickly destroy Trump's historic gains toward Mideast peace. 

Don't forget, Saudi Arabia didn't sign on to a treaty acknowledging Israel; they were about to and then the Biden votes started coming in. 

Saudi Arabia should be treated as a pariah. They have been dishonest brokers. They have manipulated the market repeatedly. They're getting worse, not better--in the last five years they've crashed the market twice by intentional market-flooding, the last being during a damn pandemic when people were hurting.

I am one of those people who applauded Harold Hamm, who flew to Washington with his mask on, pleaded with President Trump to order the Saudis to turn their ships around. He didn't. The futures market turned turtle to the tune of -$47/barrel. Lots of that was due to the fact that Mr. Trump had also stood down the EPA, and allowed shale producers to vent and flare to keep on drilling--the pipes got full, there was no stopping the input, and speculators bought pipeline reservations. But the message was clear: protect the prince. 

The prince who has never been told no, does pretty much what he wants to do, no matter the carnage. I voted twice for Mr. Trump but I can tell you firsthand that he did nothing positive for the small oil and gas producer and quite a bit that was pure negative. I voted for him because I felt Mr. Biden was dangerous to oil and gas specifically, and American defense in general--the military still runs on fossil fuels. 

So yes, this report could disrupt the relative calm of the Middle East--let it. The historic gains toward Middle East peace are between small governments--Emirates, Bahrain; not the bad actors, Iran, Yemen--and Israel. Those peace accords were manufactured from flatus and moonbeams, for show. For business. For politics.

Is Biden about to throw a match on the gasoline? One can only hope! Trump did some good things but he also could have given a tinker's dam about oil and gas--he thought the lower the price of gasoline at the pump the better his approval rating would be. I'm not accusing you, but the great problem on this oil price forum is that Trump supporters won't say a critical word about him and Biden supporters won't say an approving word about the outgoing president. Mr. Trump has some fleas on him where oil and gas were concerned: he was all for the biggest companies--Exxon, Chevron--but not for shale. And right now, shale is almost all we have . . . though Guyana is going to be huge.

I personally take Mr. Biden at his word: he appointed an American Indigenous Peoples woman with a hell of a chip on her shoulder as his Sec. of Interior, which is ultimately the dispenser of oil and gas leases. She has railed for years against fracking, even though the billion or two a year saved New Mexico from abject poverty. Biden owns Congress. He is going to pump money into renewables, make it hard for oil and gas in order to drive up the price so high that people bitch about it. To Mr. Biden, unlike any president in our hallowed past, high prices at the pump are wonderful, because they allow him to make his shift to renewables much, much faster. 

But you're right: in the process he's going to make the world a more dangerous place. I've learned one thing in oil and gas since watching it from 1952: you can't have both peace on earth and decent oil and gas prices. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Gerry Maddoux
correction

[Roch + 537]

22 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

Don't forget, Saudi Arabia didn't sign on to a treaty acknowledging Israel; they were about to and then the Biden votes started coming in. 

Saudi Arabia should be treated as a pariah. They have been dishonest brokers. They have manipulated the market repeatedly. They're getting worse, not better--in the last five years they've crashed the market twice by intentional market-flooding, the last being during a damn pandemic when people were hurting.

I am one of those people who applauded Harold Hamm, who flew to Washington with his mask on, pleaded with President Trump to order the Saudis to turn their ships around. He didn't. The futures market turned turtle to the tune of -$47/barrel. Lots of that was due to the fact that Mr. Trump had also stood down the EPA, and allowed shale producers to vent and flare to keep on drilling--the pipes got full, there was no stopping the input, and speculators bought pipeline reservations. But the message was clear: protect the prince. 

The prince who has never been told no, does pretty much what he wants to do, no matter the carnage. I voted twice for Mr. Trump but I can tell you firsthand that he did nothing positive for the small oil and gas producer and quite a bit that was pure negative. I voted for him because I felt Mr. Biden was dangerous to oil and gas specifically, and American defense in general--the military still runs on fossil fuels. 

So yes, this report could disrupt the relative calm of the Middle East--let it. The historic gains toward Middle East peace are between small governments--Emirates, Bahrain; not the bad actors, Iran, Yemen--and Israel. Those peace accords were manufactured from flatus and moonbeams, for show. For business. For politics.

Is Biden about to throw a match on the gasoline? One can only hope! Trump did some good things but he also could have given a tinker's dam about oil and gas--he thought the lower the price of gasoline at the pump the better his approval rating would be. I'm not accusing you, but the great problem on this oil price forum is that Trump supporters won't say a critical word about him and Biden supporters won't say an approving word about the outgoing president. Mr. Trump has some fleas on him where oil and gas were concerned: he was all for the biggest companies--Exxon, Chevron--but not for shale. And right now, shale is almost all we have . . . though Guyana is going to be huge.

I personally take Mr. Biden at his word: he appointed an American Indigenous Peoples woman with a hell of a chip on her shoulder as his Sec. of Interior, which is ultimately the dispenser of oil and gas leases. She has railed for years against fracking, even though the billion or two a year saved New Mexico from abject poverty. Biden owns Congress. He is going to pump money into renewables, make it hard for oil and gas in order to drive up the price so high that people bitch about it. To Mr. Biden, unlike any president in our hallowed past, high prices at the pump are wonderful, because they allow him to make his shift to renewables much, much faster. 

But you're right: in the process he's going to make the world a more dangerous place. I've learned one thing in oil and gas since watching it from 1952: you can't have both peace on earth and decent oil and gas prices. 

GM

I agree with your thoughts on Saudi Arabia.  However , I think your off on some other complaints are misplaced.

I believe Trump #1 goal as President was to accomplish what no previous President could before him, Sign Comprehensive Mideast Agreement. There is a reason none others were successful, it's damn hard.  Many thought impossible.

I was the first to condemn the Prince bin-Salman for killing Khashoggi.  I repeatedly, called out Trump lack of response to Saudis dumping oil on U.S. Gulf Coast market. The dumping was a clear violation of international dumping law. 

I believe this was all for one reason. Get Saudis to buy into the Peace Plan.  I think Trump was close.  I think Saudis were waiting out the Nov 3rd election before they sign on. That opportunity is now gone.  

Would a Mideast Peace in our time worth letting Prince Mohamed bin-Salman slide on butchering Khashoggi with medical saws ? You decide.

As for :

A.  Allowing venting.  You want help for the small producer. The small producer can't afford to stop methane leaks or implement natural gas capture , transport and sale. Venting would only (1) put small producers out of business (2) make U.S. oil exports less competitive on the international market.

B.  You say , "  .  .  .  he thought the lower the price of gasoline at the pump the better his approval rating would be.". Go back and read Trump's statements on price.  He never supported the lower the price the better.  Trump didn't want extremely high gasoline e prices. He actually agreed with his friend (and yours) Harold Hamm. Harold had  said during this period " $70 is a fair price for oil ".  Trump showed concern as the price per bbl was in the high $60s and moving higher.  He then made a public statement parroting Harrold's , " $70 is a fair price , no more"

It's not just Shale .  There is just too much oil for now.  

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Roch

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

7 minutes ago, Roch said:

I was the first to confirm the Prince for killing Kashoggi.  I repeatedly, called out Trump lack of response to Saudis dumping oil on U.S. Gulf Coast market.

I believe this was all for one reason.  Get Saudis to buy into the Peace Plan.  I think he was close.  I think Saudis were waiting out the Nov 3rd election before they sign on.  That opportunity is now gone.  

Maybe that was the reason for allowing the Saudis to pump and dump, however, in doing that he bankrupted quite a few Americans, stuck a finger in Harold Hamm's eye, absolutely changed the optics of the shale oil concept. I strongly suspect that Mr. Trump's motives were far more connected to Trump Family enterprises than to the overall peace process. 

Prince Mohammed bin Salmon is a murderous thug. Saving people like him while demeaning the memory and contributions of some American like John McCain are precisely the reasons why Mr. Trump isn't president. 

Don't confuse being a disruptive "New Republican" with being pro-oil and gas. Or with being a bridge-builder. Mr. Trump was neither. And it's high time that the Khashoggi records was released for all to read--we're the country associated with condoning his death, taking the side of his Saudi killers rather than the American citizen who was the sacrificial lamb. 

I'm obviously angry about that whole sad chapter. For sounding strident I'm apologetic. For my feelings I'm not.

[NickW + 2,714]

5 hours ago, Roch said:

This report could disrupt the relative calm in the Mideast.  Saudi Arabia has had to deal with descent on several fronts as human rights, poor economy and oil industry downturn.    Is Biden about to throw a match on the gasoline ?

Last week Biden said he would treat Saudi Arabia as a "pariah" .  Not too smart.  Looks like Biden will quickly destroy Trump's historic gains toward Mideast peace.  

I suspect Wall Street powerhouses Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley , etc might intervene to save Saudi Arabia from the exposure.  They don't want to jeopardise their lucrative Investment Banking business with Saudis .  Joe owes them.  

The easy way out for Saudi Arabia would be to give Joe's brother Jim a multi million dollar construction contract or better yet give Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz's Rosemont Seneca Hedge Fund a few Billion dollars to manage. Simple. 

"Joe Biden’s nominee for national intelligence director has pledged to release a report on who was responsible for the murder of Saudi critic Jamal Khashoggi, a decision that could embarrass the kingdom’s crown prince and strain its relationship with its key ally.

Avril Haines, who would be the nation’s first woman to oversee U.S. intelligence agencies, made the promise at her confirmation hearing on Tuesday. .  .   .  .   .

Goodie. 

Thats more Eurofighters, less F15's on the order book😀

[Roch + 537]

17 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

Maybe that was the reason for allowing the Saudis to pump and dump, however, in doing that he bankrupted quite a few Americans, stuck a finger in Harold Hamm's eye, absolutely changed the optics of the shale oil concept. I strongly suspect that Mr. Trump's motives were far more connected to Trump Family enterprises than to the overall peace process. 

Prince Mohammed bin Salman is a murderous thug. Saving people like him while demeaning the memory and contributions of some American like John McCain are precisely the reasons why Mr. Trump isn't president. 

Don't confuse being a disruptive "New Republican" with being pro-oil and gas. Or with being a bridge-builder. Mr. Trump was neither. And it's high time that the Khashoggi records was released for all to read--we're the country associated with condoning his death, taking the side of his Saudi killers rather than the American citizen who was the sacrificial lamb. 

I'm obviously angry about that whole sad chapter. For sounding strident I'm apologetic. For my feelings I'm not.

Trump should not have criticized McCain's military service and vietnam POW experience.  There was so much more He could have punched back with.  He wouldn't have criticized him if not for McCain responding to a question from a reporter the day before calling , "Trump is a Clown ".  Is that anyway to treat a person running for the Republican nomination. 

McCain ran the worst Presidential campaign in modern history.  He let Obama walk all over him.  When he ran in 2000 the Dem's blasted him for being too "angry" , too "aggressive".  The neutered him. He let Democrats define him. 

So when running against Obama , McCain turned into milquetoast .  He had a 1980 style campaign in 2008.  I remember him on his McCain "Bus Tour".  A nightly news program did a piece on the bus tour.  I remember them showing his daughter Meghan lounged out on the back of the bus couch eating a box of brownies and playing on her laptop PC.  Then John and Cindy saying , " We're do proud of her she started a blog to reach out to voters".  In the meantime Obama was developing databases with tens of millions of voters, doing internet analytics and internet targeted advertising and e-mailings.

Cindy McCain didn't defeat Trump. She wasn't seen anywhere near the voting machines in Minneapolis , Milwaukee , Detroit , Philadelphia or Atlanta . There was an unreported Cindy sighting near the Phoenix vote counting building.  But it turned out to be false. 

  You said :

"Don't confuse being a disruptive "New Republican" with being pro-oil and gas."

Is anybody pro oil and gas today ?   You don't understand , Trump is good as you're gonna get.  

As for Mohamed bin-Salman, you would not believe the amount of Saudi lobbying the Biden Administration.  Biden Administration could play this card to their advantage.  I'd bet that report (or a revised softer report) never gets released.  They will have some vague excuse for not releasing.  The real deal will never be revealed. 

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Roch

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

John McCain was a "cowboy" in the worst form of the word: crashed three several-million-dollar jets, took silly chances, was arrogant and demeaning, tossed aside his wife, who'd been disfigured in a car-wreck while he was away. 

John's persona didn't have anything to do with it. Trump could have easily avoided all that by just saying nothing and lowering the flag to half-staff. Cindy McCain's internationally-televised speech cost Trump the election. 

Trump couldn't stay out of his own way. It would be a drastic mistake for the Republican Party to hang onto him, to try to make him president again. 

And for us in oil and gas, his return would be catastrophic: he was not a friend of "small-ball" oil and gas. He was a friend of Big Oil. Harold Hamm helped make him president and the president turned his back on him in favor of a murderous Saudi prince who should have fallen prey to his own tribal thugs long ago. 

I'm not singing John McCain's praises, merely pointing out the facts as I see them. Trump cared nothing for oil and gas.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

Interesting to see all the takes on this investigation, if one wants to use a crystal ball take a look back at the original Obama admin efforts.

With that being said i can now see Iran given the green light to pump&dump as Mr. Maddoux point out...courtsey of John Kerry.

The Saudis will align with Israel and this new ME formation...or go it alone, they are not fools. Interesting new alliance's

1. Wealth 

2. Nukes/Iron dome

3. Manpower& ruthless

Now how will the Turks and Russian play, just look back at Obama's admin.

Edited January 22, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

17 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

John McCain was a "cowboy" in the worst form of the word: crashed three several-million-dollar jets, took silly chances, was arrogant and demeaning, tossed aside his wife, who'd been disfigured in a car-wreck while he was away. 

John's persona didn't have anything to do with it. Trump could have easily avoided all that by just saying nothing and lowering the flag to half-staff. Cindy McCain's internationally-televised speech cost Trump the election. 

Trump couldn't stay out of his own way. It would be a drastic mistake for the Republican Party to hang onto him, to try to make him president again. 

And for us in oil and gas, his return would be catastrophic: he was not a friend of "small-ball" oil and gas. He was a friend of Big Oil. Harold Hamm helped make him president and the president turned his back on him in favor of a murderous Saudi prince who should have fallen prey to his own tribal thugs long ago. 

I'm not singing John McCain's praises, merely pointing out the facts as I see them. Trump cared nothing for oil and gas.

Just the power it represented across the world. I do agree with your opinion on McCain..being a vet and living in private society is one thing, wearing the badge he was given due to war and using it as political capital??? Game over it was his own honor to keep....or throw away. Your Cowboy analogy was very precise.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Roch + 537]

17 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

John McCain was a "cowboy" in the worst form of the word: crashed three several-million-dollar jets, took silly chances, was arrogant and demeaning, tossed aside his wife, who'd been disfigured in a car-wreck while he was away. 

John's persona didn't have anything to do with it. Trump could have easily avoided all that by just saying nothing and lowering the flag to half-staff. Cindy McCain's internationally-televised speech cost Trump the election. 

Trump couldn't stay out of his own way. It would be a drastic mistake for the Republican Party to hang onto him, to try to make him president again. 

And for us in oil and gas, his return would be catastrophic: he was not a friend of "small-ball" oil and gas. He was a friend of Big Oil. Harold Hamm helped make him president and the president turned his back on him in favor of a murderous Saudi prince who should have fallen prey to his own tribal thugs long ago. 

I'm not singing John McCain's praises, merely pointing out the facts as I see them. Trump cared nothing for oil and gas.

I respectfully disagree. 

If McCain fought back against Obama 1/10 as much as he criticised  Trump he might have had an outside chance of beating Obama.  

A milquetoast will never be elected President.  Well maybe not.  Look what we just elected.

McCain wasn't just a cowboy, he was not too bright.  If not for his father he would not have gotten within 100 miles of Annapolis.   He would have been thrown out for his grades or after he crashed the first jet into the Potomac. It's probably good McCain didn't win.  He never met a war he didn't like.  It's  not worth talking about now.  

But remember -

Again, is anybody pro oil and gas today ?

You don't understand Trump is good as you are gonna get. 

The establishment Republicans under estimated Trump. "He will never win the nomination , he's a Clown" they laughed.

They were wrong.

Today the establishment Republicans (and you)  think Trump's popularity will fade and disappear.

They (and you) are wrong.

Just my opinion.  Don't take it personally. 

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Roch

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

Goodie. 

Thats more Eurofighters, less F15's on the order book😀

Nobody should sell to them. 

If this world is to have any chance then Europe and US needs to find a common ground. Starting with Europe stepping up and taking charge of our security. American can foucs on China and we can collaborate on space. 

[NickW + 2,714]

18 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Nobody should sell to them. 

If this world is to have any chance then Europe and US needs to find a common ground. Starting with Europe stepping up and taking charge of our security. American can foucs on China and we can collaborate on space. 

They will just then turn to Russia or China

The UK's on its own now. Might as well capitalise on our rather good defence sector. Everything else is knackered. 

[Roch + 537]

1 hour ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

 

Gerry, serious question.

If you were elected President in 2016 what would you have done to support oil and gas industry.

1. You would have turned back the 40 Saudi tankers.  I agree.

How about beyond that ? 

What if you were Joe Biden ? What would you do going forward ?

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

2 hours ago, Roch said:

A.  Allowing venting.  You want help for the small producer. The small producer can't afford to stop methane leaks or implement natural gas capture , transport and sale. Venting would only (1) put small producers out of business (2) make U.S. oil exports less competitive on the international market.

B.  You say , "  .  .  .  he thought the lower the price of gasoline at the pump the better his approval rating would be.". Go back and read Trump's statements on price.  He never supported the lower the price the better.  Trump didn't want extremely high gasoline e prices. He actually agreed with his friend (and yours) Harold Hamm. Harold had  said during this period " $70 is a fair price for oil ".  Trump showed concern as the price per bbl was in the high $60s and moving higher.  He then made a public statement parroting Harrold's , " $70 is a fair price , no more"

It's not just Shale .  There is just too much oil for now.  

I realize it sounds paradoxical, but there are dozens of small producers out there who are doomed. The CEO is paying himself $2M a year and they're drilling only because they could vent and flare without repercussions. They go hole to hole on the flush from the last well. These companies are basically bankrupt, upside down, but the CEO is making out like a bandit. They are driving the price of oil down. They are filling the pipelines. The Texas Railroad Commission fed their habits. There are dozens of these. 

On the other side are some--very few--really great small drillers who are methodical and careful. They are being harmed too. 

I've read every statement Mr. Trump made on gasoline. He must have mentioned how low the price at the pump was at a hundred rallies. 

57 minutes ago, Roch said:

Again, is anybody pro oil and gas today ?

You don't understand Trump is good as you are gonna get. 

You're likely right. At this point, it really doesn't matter. It would appear--as you pointed out in your initial post--that Mr. Biden is set on tightening the screws on American on-shore production while also putting the prince on the rack. Oil prices are going up. The KSA is very likely going to be parasitized by rival Middle Eastern countries. Since Mr. Biden declared KSA a "pariah state," it is unlikely that we're going to be supplying them with the latest and greatest of defense weaponry, but Russia will certainly supply Iran, so we can expect some fireworks out of the Middle East. 

Mr. Biden wants the price of gas at the pump to go upward. Very high upward. The higher the better, because it makes it easier to implement the "Biden New Green Deal." 

However, at some point we'll also have a conflict to tend to, and we're going to need oil and gas. At some point the stock market is going to crash, because you can only inflate a bubble so much. At some point international poverty is going up, because central banks are ruining the system. At some point we're going to see at least $100 oil again--I suspect sooner rather than later.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

6 minutes ago, Roch said:

Gerry, serious question.

If you were elected President in 2016 what would you have done to support oil and gas industry.

1. You would have turned back the 40 Saudi tankers.  I agree.

How about beyond that ? 

What if you were Joe Biden ? What would you do going forward ?

1. Immediately gotten the Keystone Pipeline built out so we could use heavy crude from Canada to mix with our light, sweet crude from the shale fields, picking up Bakken oil on the way to the Gulf.

2. Stopped doing business with the KSA. 

3. Enforced TRRC and NDIC and Oklahoma Corporation Commission rulings on venting (24 hours) and flaring (10days) natural gas.

4. Provide a subsidy to old refineries to upgrade to be able to use pure light, sweet shale oil. 

5. Do a serious deal with President Xi, to provide him with LNG and crude oil: five year contract, fixed price. In return he stops using coal-fired utility plants to charge EV's with electricity.

6. Make a serious deal with Mexico to supply them with NG. 

7. Would NOT subsidize renewables: if they're good enough, they'll stand on their own two feet.

[waltz + 140]

Gerry,  I would agree that in a perfect world MBS would literally be thrown to the wolves but if one takes a realist view on foreign policy is not the continuation of the petro-dollar more important?  You may not be comfortable with this; I may or may not be comfortable with this but seemingly an easy argument can be made to leave “well enough alone”. The new President seems to want,  no matter the justification, to use less oil.  Not that he will acknowledge that using less oil means less output and production and a lower standard of living for the country as a whole.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

If you look back at history, FDR formed a pact with the old Saudi king aboard a US vessel in the Bitter Lake region of the Suez Canal, some time in 1945. The deal was that if the KSA would be an honest broker re' our oil needs, we would in turn provide expertise in developing their oil fields and also providing the finest surveillance and defense systems available. 

We have stood by our the deal. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, treated us to an oil embargo, which could easily have put us in jeopardy, as we were in the grips of the Cold War. They repeatedly manipulated the oil market. We didn't say much. But then they committed the greatest atrocity against the United States possible: 9/11. It was no coincidence that 15 of the 17 terrorists were Saudis, or that the mastermind, Osama bin Laden, was from a prominent Saudi family. Not only did we let them get away with it, we invaded the wrong country! Well, that part's on us, but the fact is, in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attack, we helped hundreds of Saudis board airplanes back to the KSA. You'd think that would have left a positive impression. 

They had a short memory. In 2016 they flooded the market with oil, in the process ruining hundreds of American shale drillers, frackers, workers and royalty owners. They bankrupted companies. We let them get by with it. Then they killed and dismembered an American citizen. My dog--who is no bloodhound--could follow the trail back to MbS. We let them get by with it. And then, unbelievably, right smack in the middle of the greatest pandemic in a century, they flooded the oil market again, only this time they had the cheek to cut a deal with President Xi, discounting oil to the very regime that turned this coronavirus loose on the world!

So no, I suppose I don't feel that much of anything should derail us from calling them out as a pariah state led by a cold-blooded killer. I think we should immediately cease and desist in any aid, defense, or protection and let them have a go of it on their own. The Saudis have been begging to be paid in gold for decades. Now they're wanting (and getting) cryptocurrency in certain instances--completely bypassing the petrodollar. It is only a matter of time until they betray us again . . . this time very likely with the Chinese. 

How much of this should we tolerate? 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

3 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

I realize it sounds paradoxical, but there are dozens of small producers out there who are doomed. The CEO is paying himself $2M a year and they're drilling only because they could vent and flare without repercussions. They go hole to hole on the flush from the last well. These companies are basically bankrupt, upside down, but the CEO is making out like a bandit. They are driving the price of oil down. They are filling the pipelines. The Texas Railroad Commission fed their habits. There are dozens of these. 

On the other side are some--very few--really great small drillers who are methodical and careful. They are being harmed too. 

I've read every statement Mr. Trump made on gasoline. He must have mentioned how low the price at the pump was at a hundred rallies. 

You're likely right. At this point, it really doesn't matter. It would appear--as you pointed out in your initial post--that Mr. Biden is set on tightening the screws on American on-shore production while also putting the prince on the rack. Oil prices are going up. The KSA is very likely going to be parasitized by rival Middle Eastern countries. Since Mr. Biden declared KSA a "pariah state," it is unlikely that we're going to be supplying them with the latest and greatest of defense weaponry, but Russia will certainly supply Iran, so we can expect some fireworks out of the Middle East. 

Mr. Biden wants the price of gas at the pump to go upward. Very high upward. The higher the better, because it makes it easier to implement the "Biden New Green Deal." 

However, at some point we'll also have a conflict to tend to, and we're going to need oil and gas. At some point the stock market is going to crash, because you can only inflate a bubble so much. At some point international poverty is going up, because central banks are ruining the system. At some point we're going to see at least $100 oil again--I suspect sooner rather than later.

Not $100 a barrel IMHO but high enough to possibly elect a Republican congress. Maybe enough people will see through the Green Fog which seeks to hide the worldwide Oligarchy. Higher consumer prices for heating, air conditioning, taxes etc. are coming. Inflation is coming. Unemployment is coming. People will not be able to afford to eat out because overall prices will be too high with $15 minimum wages. More people will depend on welfare. More immigration will mean more competition off the books too. 

Blue states will want billions to save their failing economies. More people will move to Red states. I would move out of Illinois if my real estate prices in Decatur weren't the lowest in the country.  

I hope I am wrong and the overall economy booms, but that is what I see coming. Am I wrong?

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

If you look back at history, FDR formed a pact with the old Saudi king aboard a US vessel in the Bitter Lake region of the Suez Canal, some time in 1945. The deal was that if the KSA would be an honest broker re' our oil needs, we would in turn provide expertise in developing their oil fields and also providing the finest surveillance and defense systems available. 

We have stood by our the deal. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, treated us to an oil embargo, which could easily have put us in jeopardy, as we were in the grips of the Cold War. They repeatedly manipulated the oil market. We didn't say much. But then they committed the greatest atrocity against the United States possible: 9/11. It was no coincidence that 15 of the 17 terrorists were Saudis, or that the mastermind, Osama bin Laden, was from a prominent Saudi family. Not only did we let them get away with it, we invaded the wrong country! Well, that part's on us, but the fact is, in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attack, we helped hundreds of Saudis board airplanes back to the KSA. You'd think that would have left a positive impression. 

They had a short memory. In 2016 they flooded the market with oil, in the process ruining hundreds of American shale drillers, frackers, workers and royalty owners. They bankrupted companies. We let them get by with it. Then they killed and dismembered an American citizen. My dog--who is no bloodhound--could follow the trail back to MbS. We let them get by with it. And then, unbelievably, right smack in the middle of the greatest pandemic in a century, they flooded the oil market again, only this time they had the cheek to cut a deal with President Xi, discounting oil to the very regime that turned this coronavirus loose on the world!

So no, I suppose I don't feel that much of anything should derail us from calling them out as a pariah state led by a cold-blooded killer. I think we should immediately cease and desist in any aid, defense, or protection and let them have a go of it on their own. The Saudis have been begging to be paid in gold for decades. Now they're wanting (and getting) cryptocurrency in certain instances--completely bypassing the petrodollar. It is only a matter of time until they betray us again . . . this time very likely with the Chinese. 

How much of this should we tolerate? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Khashoggi#Political_views  Better or worse than the existing leadership regarding Islamic extremism? Opinions? 

[SUZNV + 1,197]

18 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

Maybe that was the reason for allowing the Saudis to pump and dump, however, in doing that he bankrupted quite a few Americans, stuck a finger in Harold Hamm's eye, absolutely changed the optics of the shale oil concept. I strongly suspect that Mr. Trump's motives were far more connected to Trump Family enterprises than to the overall peace process. 

Prince Mohammed bin Salmon is a murderous thug. Saving people like him while demeaning the memory and contributions of some American like John McCain are precisely the reasons why Mr. Trump isn't president. 

Don't confuse being a disruptive "New Republican" with being pro-oil and gas. Or with being a bridge-builder. Mr. Trump was neither. And it's high time that the Khashoggi records was released for all to read--we're the country associated with condoning his death, taking the side of his Saudi killers rather than the American citizen who was the sacrificial lamb. 

I'm obviously angry about that whole sad chapter. For sounding strident I'm apologetic. For my feelings I'm not.

Back in 2016 when Trump was running for election, I recalled he said US need to do something with the Saudi. Since then he was president after that he didn't touch the Saudi, so I think the deal is about peace more than personal gain. If I were him and worrying about my Enterprise or investment, I wouldn't persuade a political career let a long to run for president. I guess most of his customers/partners would be in the elite class and his business surely would be targeted by political opposition. If I were a billionaire at  retirement age, I would enjoy life more with little time left instead of jump in a political war. Ideology can be good or can be bad (Bin Laden) but ideology demands  personal sacrifice.

Kim is a far worst murdering dictator, but Trump would have to make deal with him too, although it failed. 

[SUZNV + 1,197]

12 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Not $100 a barrel IMHO but high enough to possibly elect a Republican congress. Maybe enough people will see through the Green Fog which seeks to hide the worldwide Oligarchy. Higher consumer prices for heating, air conditioning, taxes etc. are coming. Inflation is coming. Unemployment is coming. People will not be able to afford to eat out because overall prices will be too high with $15 minimum wages. More people will depend on welfare. More immigration will mean more competition off the books too. 

Blue states will want billions to save their failing economies. More people will move to Red states. I would move out of Illinois if my real estate prices in Decatur weren't the lowest in the country.  

I hope I am wrong and the overall economy booms, but that is what I see coming. Am I wrong?

There is a trend of Tech workers move out of Cali but it is simply because of the condition of working remotely and want to save more or improve standard of living. They don't really think the system is failed.

I have lots of Cali friend and they seem really proud with their welfare state and they keep saying they contributed more to Red States. Actually if people face hardship and unemployment and want for a better living with a job, they would get out of Cali long time ago but they are bound to the welfare rather than take a big move. 

Quote

 

It was true for a long time — California was long on a list of "donor states," prompting former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to complain that the state received just 78 cents back for each dollar of taxes.

But a recent report by the Rockefeller Institute of Government in New York found that California had become a revenue-neutral state, receiving about $1 from Washington, D.C., for every $1 it contributes in federal taxes, per The San Francisco Chronicle.

California receives federal funds from retirement checks, like Social Security and veterans benefits, Medicare and Medi-Cal, and food assistance, on top of funds for transportation, education, and housing.

The report, released in 2020, used data from Fiscal Years 2017 and 2018, and also included federal contracts with companies in the states and wages and benefits for federal workers and the military.

It's possible that California will return to its "donor-state" status when future analysis factors in the full effect of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which raised the state's taxes.

 

With the tax on capital in Cali and low interest rate, the house prices at the moment is crazy in a close to crisis time.