Europe gas market -how it started how its going

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

PS: Ron et al, you know why Germany/Japan exploded after WWII yet the UK did not?  Because all of their elites and power brokers were DESTROYED and crushed allowing the common man to advance, create new businesses and new improved products instead of protecting the existing power elite status.  Look at China... why did they advance recently?  Because the government made a concerted effort to lift restrictions from the common man and now they are clamping down again and will go back into destitution.  Yea yea, they also bribed the wests power elite who are corrupt with dirt cheap labor to get the ball rolling, but now the CCP is nationalizing all the businesses which were made in less restrictive times and everything is contracting.  Why did California explode in industrial might?  There was no one living there with a power infrastructure.  Everyone was allowed to move in and make something of themselves.  Now that the power elite have taken over steadily, advancement for the common man has collapsed and massively reversed. 

True, everyone in said regions described above has superlative geography, but this is just an example.  There are many more. 

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Ron, until the Campaign Finance Bill is REMOVED(limiting personal contributions), elections means nearly nothing in the USA as no one running for office can obtain funding without kowtowing to the DNC/RNC chairman unless you are personally fabulously rich or famous.  Said DNC/RNC/Libertarian chairman are massively indebted to the banks... so when the banks tell them to jump, they only ask, "How high?".  Likewise it is a guarantee those who do NOT KOWTOW will never be put in positions of power in Washington.  Look at all the good politicians(yes there are a few)... they are ALL shuffled off to useless 'jobs' without power or more importantly OVERSIGHT committees of the corrupt practices.  None of them EVER make it to whip status or into the DNC/RNC hierarchy.  If said good politicians do not get elected, do they get cushy jobs in the "think tanks?" So they can then get hired into positions of power in the Fed Government Bureaucracy?--> No. 

AT minimum we MUST pass a law making it ILLEGAL for ANY political organization to obtain a loan of ANY kind. 

Look who owns ~35% of EVERY major corporation in the USA... Black Rock, Vanguard, Prudential, Federal Pension plans, and banks(none of whom can die so power is corrupted inside said institution as it always is and is now incestuous)...  Not one single corporation can make one SINGLE step without kissing the feet of their unelected oligarchy who hide in "trusts" which never die and they tell the CEO's etc what to do.  Far as I am concerned, Trusts should live for 30years and then die.  Its not like the private businesses can do much either, as they MUST buy and sell to said major corporations and if cut off they go out of business instantly.  I mean good grief man look what the Bill and Malinda gates Foundation just got done doing in the last year or so.  Beyond disgusting. 

Take off the blinders Ron.  I hate to say it, but Thomas Jefferson is right.

"And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? " "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” "

How about public campaign financing? All the EU countries and Russia do that.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

PS: Ron et al, you know why Germany/Japan exploded after WWII yet the UK did not?  Because all of their elites and power brokers were DESTROYED and crushed allowing the common man to advance, create new businesses and new improved products instead of protecting the existing power elite status.  Look at China... why did they advance recently?  Because the government made a concerted effort to lift restrictions from the common man and now they are clamping down again and will go back into destitution.  Yea yea, they also bribed the wests power elite who are corrupt with dirt cheap labor to get the ball rolling, but now the CCP is nationalizing all the businesses which were made in less restrictive times and everything is contracting.  Why did California explode in industrial might?  There was no one living there with a power infrastructure.  Everyone was allowed to move in and make something of themselves.  Now that the power elite have taken over steadily, advancement for the common man has collapsed and massively reversed. 

True, everyone in said regions described above has superlative geography, but this is just an example.  There are many more. 

Interesting theory. Probably wrong though. Germany did not really denazify till the student protests of 1967/68 and Japan like never?

Conventional wisdom says that their manufacturing prowess was required for the Korean War. Without the colonies, the British didn't have any.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

4 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I think Hunter might already have that one lined up. 

You are just jealous! The Biden boy looks smashing with a crack pipe.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

2 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

How about public campaign financing? All the EU countries and Russia do that.

Doesn't work: Why?

Who determines who can get campaign financing? THEY are the gatekeepers.  So, if you are "friends" (You have bowed down and kowtowed properly) with the unelected gangster gatekeepers, then you can "run for office" assuming you continue to bow down the $$$ flows otherwise the $$$ gets cut off.    Have to have party affiliation as well. 

If famous or if you really want to spend your own $$$ you can still run for office in USA.  This is not possible in the countries with gatekeepers.  I'll just quote Thomas Jefferson again:

"And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? " "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

All governance slides into Corruption eventually.  Different forms of government slide into corruption faster than others is the ONLY difference.  It must be cleaned out occasionally. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

2 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Interesting theory. Probably wrong though. Germany did not really denazify till the student protests of 1967/68 and Japan like never?

Conventional wisdom says that their manufacturing prowess was required for the Korean War. Without the colonies, the British didn't have any.

All of Germanies regulations, unions, power brokers were eliminated in WWII.  They were either dead, or forcible removed.  West Germany literally had no left overs of the power brokers as  Berlin was removed by being in East Germany.  Still had amazing rivers/coal in West Germany so its geography helped regain its prominence, but it was also lack of government "oversight" which allowed Germans to go about rebuilding.  Japan was literally nothing but ashes in all its main cities and had to rebuild everything.  This ultimately led Japan to create modern cities on PRIME land without hindrance of old right of ways etc.  Ultimately this led Japan to high speed rail which was financed with modern steel production which had been leveled in WWII and an open US market.  Japan was actually a democracy prior to WWII if one looked at the sub city level and this aspect persisted AFTER WWII.  Its top leadership was consigned to dustbin of history, but not entirely. 

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Doesn't work: Why?

Who determines who can get campaign financing? THEY are the gatekeepers.  So, if you are "friends" (You have bowed down and kowtowed properly) with the unelected gangster gatekeepers, then you can "run for office" assuming you continue to bow down the $$$ flows otherwise the $$$ gets cut off.    Have to have party affiliation as well. 

If famous or if you really want to spend your own $$$ you can still run for office in USA.  This is not possible in the countries with gatekeepers.  I'll just quote Thomas Jefferson again:

"And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? " "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

All governance slides into Corruption eventually.  Different forms of government slide into corruption faster than others is the ONLY difference.  It must be cleaned out occasionally. 

Campaign finance is usually given to registered political parties which make it, and sometimes almost make it, into the parliamentary body they are running for.  Something like 5% vs 2% cutoffs are typical. Obviously, both the Republicans and the Democrats in the US are shoo ins, with close to half the vote each. The public finance scheme would arguably actually pave the way for new and regional parties.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Andrei Moutchkine

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

59 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

All of Germanies regulations, unions, power brokers were eliminated in WWII.  They were either dead, or forcible removed.  West Germany literally had no left overs of the power brokers as  Berlin was removed by being in East Germany.  Still had amazing rivers/coal in West Germany so its geography helped regain its prominence, but it was also lack of government "oversight" which allowed Germans to go about rebuilding.  Japan was literally nothing but ashes in all its main cities and had to rebuild everything.  This ultimately led Japan to create modern cities on PRIME land without hindrance of old right of ways etc.  Ultimately this led Japan to high speed rail which was financed with modern steel production which had been leveled in WWII and an open US market.  Japan was actually a democracy prior to WWII if one looked at the sub city level and this aspect persisted AFTER WWII.  Its top leadership was consigned to dustbin of history, but not entirely. 

Berlin was only 1/2 way in East Germany.

For cities allegedly built from scratch, the Japanese ones are surely maze-like. Usually don't even have meaningful house numbers.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

3 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Campaign finance is usually given to registered political parties which make it, and sometimes almost make it, into the parliamentary body they are running for.  Something like 5% vs 2% cutoffs are typical. Obviously, both the Republicans and the Democrats in the US are shoo ins, with close to half the vote each. The public finance scheme would arguably actually pave the way for new and regional parties.

The problem from the US perspective with a plan like this is that it provides the party elite with enormous leverage over who gets to run in their names.  This seems 'normal' from a parliamentary perspective, and for most European countries, but it's almost exactly the opposite of how parties in the US work. 

The Democratic and Republican parties in the US are 'umbrella' organizations for the most part, and each individual person running for office can choose to identify as a member or them, or not without having to abide by any specific rules.  For example, I could sign up to run for local office right now, and choose to register myself as a Democrat, Republican, or anything else without 'permission' from the party at all. Many people who are/want to be involved in politics do so because they have already identified as wanting to promote or advance one of the parties, but not always.  It's actually rather common for politicians first starting out to pick a party of convenience early in their careers, then change to another one later.   

Furthermore, the parties aren't even unified among themselves.  Each state has separate Republican, and Democratic parties, each of which seeks to promote different policies and objectives.  Even on a simple 'left right' approach to politics they are different - for example the policies of the  Democratic party in a conservative state like Louisiana or Oklahoma will be more conservative (to the right) of the Republican  party in a liberal state like Massachusetts or Oregon.  

So from the US perspective there are 4 massive problems with giving money to the parties

1) which parties get the money?  State parties? national parties? They are separate from each other, and sometimes to the point where they disagree on basic principals. The national parties are sort of coalitions of the regional parties in many cases, but not always, and they are actually different people representing them.  

2) how do you generate/create a mechanism where the parties 'control' who is allowed to use their names and represent them for individual elections?  Right now that doesn't exist.  Some states have mechanisms for this, such as party controlled primaries, but even in these cases they often don't have a structure set up to exclude candidates in such a way

3) Why should political parties be given such special rights?  Political parties aren't actually a part of the US political system - they aren't expected or assumed to exist in the Constitution, or in any other particular legislator or body of law.  Why should the currently dominant parties be given the 'right' to get money from the state just because they have been successful in the recent past?   

4) what about all the other parties?  There are dozens of less known, and a few well known other parties - how much money do they get (if any) and why or why not?  

Edited February 7, 2022 by Eric Gagen

[Tomasz + 1,608]

Average Gazprom export  price last year was just 270 $.

Maybe it's high time to sign long-term contracts based on oil and oil products.

If Europe wants Russia to keep alive all infrastructure to produce NG with sufficient spare capacity you have 2 options:

Long term contracts

Spot price for highest bidder Europe or Asia

Time to decide because there is Russian pivot to Asia taking place at increasing speed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

16 hours ago, NickW said:

Im amazed at the number of people running 'indoor furnaces' at 23-24 deg C.

Youve obviously met my wife!

[NickW + 2,714]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Youve obviously met my wife!

I know there is a joke in there somewhere.....

 

Many years ago when I worked in public health I noticed that it was mainly social housing where you were hit by a wall of heat (and sometimes humidity and smell) that actually made you feel ill if you spent much time in it. God knows what the heating cost was. In contrast middle class people never had their heating on so high. 

[Tomasz + 1,608]

America liquefies the last New LNG projects are ending in the US

In February, against the background of rising world gas prices, the United States will launch two new large LNG projects - the sixth line of Sabine Pass and part of the capacity of Calcasieu Pass, which, according to the plan, should reach its design capacity later this year. As a result, about 15 million tons of LNG per year will enter the market, but the vast majority of these volumes have already been contracted. The next LNG project in the US will not be launched until 2024, which limits the country's ability to influence global prices in the short term.

In February, the first new LNG capacity since March 2021 will start operating in the United States. So, on February 7, Cherniere announced the completion of commissioning at the sixth line of the Sabine Pa plant with a capacity of 5.7 million tons per year. Simultaneously, on Feb. 4, Venture Global, which is building a Calcasieu Pass plant in Louisiana, asked the regulator for approval for the first shipment, which, according to Platts, could take place on Feb. 9. Initially, only four of the planned 18 lines of 0.6 million tons each will be put into operation.

These plants are the latest of the so-called second wave of US LNG projects (the first wave was in 2016-2018). Thus, at the moment, seven plants will operate in the United States: in addition to Sabine Pass (total capacity of 34.6 million tons) and Calcasieu Pass (12 million tons), these are Cove Point (5.75 million tons), Elba (2.7 million tons), Corpus Christi (18.2), Cameron (15) and Freeport LNG (16.2).

Although there are more than a dozen more projects in the advanced stages of development in the United States, only one is under construction - Golden Pass with a capacity of 18 million tons, which is owned by Exxon and Qatar Petroleum JV. Its launch date is 2024–2025.

Thus, in the next three years, the US will not offer the world market new volumes of gas.

This is a significant circumstance given the current high gas prices, which are about $1,000 per 1,000 cubic meters for LNG spot shipments both in Europe and Asia. It also limits the ability of Europe, where European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on February 7 called the lack of additional supplies from Gazprom "a strange way of doing business" to replace Russian gas.

New American plants have a fairly significant capacity, but since the commissioning of new assets was expected by the market, they will not lead to a significant reduction in quotations over the next few months, says Ivan Timonin, a consultant at Vygon Consulting. “Most likely, growth in demand for LNG, especially in Asia, will completely absorb these volumes,” agrees Dmitry Marinchenko from Fitch. However, Sergey Kapitonov from the Skolkovo Moscow School of Energy Energy Center reminds that the increase in demand in Asia this year may not be as significant, and the European gas market is likely to shrink due to high prices and competition from coal. “Therefore, the new LNG supply could put downward pressure on prices starting in the second half of 2022,” he said.

LNG imports to Europe hit a historical record

Ivan Timonin notes that the capacities of Calcasieu Pass are almost completely contracted, Venture Global has contracts for 9.5 million tons per year, including five contracts for a total of 7 million tons per year, which have been in force since this year, the rest - from 2023. The sixth line of Sabine Pass, according to him, is contracted at the level of 70-90%, “however, in the current conditions of high demand, incomplete contracting will not become an obstacle to the work of the new stage of the plant, and all remaining production capacities will probably be used by Cheniere for deliveries on the terms spot".

In the coming year, the United States will bring almost 15 million tons of new LNG capacities to the market - this is the vast majority of the new supply, Sergey Kapitonov states. As early as 2022, projects such as Eni's floating plant in Mozambique and the third phase of BP's Tangguh plant in Indonesia could deliver new volumes to the market.

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5205610?from=top_main_8

[ronwagn + 6,290]

18 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Ron, until the Campaign Finance Bill is REMOVED(limiting personal contributions), elections means nearly nothing in the USA as no one running for office can obtain funding without kowtowing to the DNC/RNC chairman unless you are personally fabulously rich or famous.  Said DNC/RNC/Libertarian chairman are massively indebted to the banks... so when the banks tell them to jump, they only ask, "How high?".  Likewise it is a guarantee those who do NOT KOWTOW will never be put in positions of power in Washington.  Look at all the good politicians(yes there are a few)... they are ALL shuffled off to useless 'jobs' without power or more importantly OVERSIGHT committees of the corrupt practices.  None of them EVER make it to whip status or into the DNC/RNC hierarchy.  If said good politicians do not get elected, do they get cushy jobs in the "think tanks?" So they can then get hired into positions of power in the Fed Government Bureaucracy?--> No. 

AT minimum we MUST pass a law making it ILLEGAL for ANY political organization to obtain a loan of ANY kind. 

Look who owns ~35% of EVERY major corporation in the USA... Black Rock, Vanguard, Prudential, Federal Pension plans, and banks(none of whom can die so power is corrupted inside said institution as it always is and is now incestuous)...  Not one single corporation can make one SINGLE step without kissing the feet of their unelected oligarchy who hide in "trusts" which never die and they tell the CEO's etc what to do.  Far as I am concerned, Trusts should live for 30years and then die.  Its not like the private businesses can do much either, as they MUST buy and sell to said major corporations and if cut off they go out of business instantly.  I mean good grief man look what the Bill and Malinda gates Foundation just got done doing in the last year or so.  Beyond disgusting. 

Take off the blinders Ron.  I hate to say it, but Thomas Jefferson is right.

"And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? " "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” "

I have no blinders. The problems are too numerous to deal with easily. It is a multiheaded hydra which forms new heads as soon as some are cut off. Trusts are a major problem. Banks, mutual funds, and insurance companies hold all the money. Wealthy people are more concerned about their friends and cronies and building their wealth than helping America. I totally agree with the Jefferson quote. We cannot let anything override or ignore our constitutional rights. 

Right now, our best bet is taking control of the Republican Party from the RINOS who have controlled it for as long as I can remember. There are a lot of Democrats and Republicans who are fed up with the government jerking their leashes. That is the point that I know can take the power to move things in the right way. Money gained while in office should count against them when citizens vote. The election laws are full of holes. Foreign money can leak into campaigns in many ways also. A lot of money changes hands in circuitous ways that are never discussed. A lot of laws are enforced against conservatives but not against liberals. Lots of things need to be fought and changed.

Our biggest problem right now is that inflation is being used to destroy the middle class and to destroy America while subsidizing left wing groups in alliance with the Democrats.  

 

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

5 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

The problem from the US perspective with a plan like this is that it provides the party elite with enormous leverage over who gets to run in their names.  This seems 'normal' from a parliamentary perspective, and for most European countries, but it's almost exactly the opposite of how parties in the US work. 

The Democratic and Republican parties in the US are 'umbrella' organizations for the most part, and each individual person running for office can choose to identify as a member or them, or not without having to abide by any specific rules.  For example, I could sign up to run for local office right now, and choose to register myself as a Democrat, Republican, or anything else without 'permission' from the party at all. Many people who are/want to be involved in politics do so because they have already identified as wanting to promote or advance one of the parties, but not always.  It's actually rather common for politicians first starting out to pick a party of convenience early in their careers, then change to another one later.   

Furthermore, the parties aren't even unified among themselves.  Each state has separate Republican, and Democratic parties, each of which seeks to promote different policies and objectives.  Even on a simple 'left right' approach to politics they are different - for example the policies of the  Democratic party in a conservative state like Louisiana or Oklahoma will be more conservative (to the right) of the Republican  party in a liberal state like Massachusetts or Oregon.  

So from the US perspective there are 4 massive problems with giving money to the parties

1) which parties get the money?  State parties? national parties? They are separate from each other, and sometimes to the point where they disagree on basic principals. The national parties are sort of coalitions of the regional parties in many cases, but not always, and they are actually different people representing them.  

2) how do you generate/create a mechanism where the parties 'control' who is allowed to use their names and represent them for individual elections?  Right now that doesn't exist.  Some states have mechanisms for this, such as party controlled primaries, but even in these cases they often don't have a structure set up to exclude candidates in such a way

3) Why should political parties be given such special rights?  Political parties aren't actually a part of the US political system - they aren't expected or assumed to exist in the Constitution, or in any other particular legislator or body of law.  Why should the currently dominant parties be given the 'right' to get money from the state just because they have been successful in the recent past?   

4) what about all the other parties?  There are dozens of less known, and a few well known other parties - how much money do they get (if any) and why or why not?  

This is basically just a collection of excuses your political establishment made up for to prevent  any new entrants. All of this stuff really means that there is no real difference between two of your parties. Of course, is there no left and right. Both parties believe in one thing - money. See this

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-complicated-love-story/

Basically, the candidate with the most dough always wins. The difference between 100% certainty for Congress and 80% for Senate is explainable as that between perfect gerrymandering at a level of a single district, vs. imperfect gerrymandering for half a state. Obviously, the Presidential election is the most unpredictable of all, which is how you ended up with Trump. Must be the first time in US history, some kind of sideways entrant actually won.

Now, the amount of orchestration is obviously more than 20%, because both parties have the same sponsors, just in a slightly different mix. Trump was leaning towards US shale. Biden is against it? He must be in favor of Exxon, which is doing oil the old-fashioned way - by ripping off banana republics like Russia and Guiana. Both include some kind of posturing for US oil exploration tech. Say, Deepwater Horizon demonstrated that Exxon can what BP cannot. You, as an oil guy, should know that it doesn't get any more high-tech than offshore rigs. Either way, no way in heck anybody in the US is going to inflict any kind of hardships on themselves due to fossil fuels just for the sake of Greta. That's for gullible Eurofags. Only when it makes business sense.

The problem for you, an induhvidual voter, is that your politicians don't work for you. They work for the important corporate sponsors. But, if you've got the dough, they are for sale. This is how you are not getting things like public healthcare (an issue with clear majority support) The healthcare / health insurance / pharmaceutical establishment is number one sponsoring industry, even ahead of defense.

You missed the significant point of public campaign financing - everybody gets the same amount of funds, so it is sporting-like and not up for grabs for the highest bidder. I suppose you could achieve the same by introducing a hard cap. Parties do get funded at every level, there are elections. Some examples

Officially designated pro-Western liberal party in Russia, which has been around since Yeltsin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yabloko

Gets more than 2% but less than 5% for the State Duma, which means that the party gets funded with the grown-ups, but gets no seats. Does get a lot of seats at provincial and municipal level. The only useful things those guys ever did is expelling Navalny for being a Nazi (he positioned himself as far right, back when)

Now, an entirely new, pro-Western and liberal party actually does get in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_People_(political_party)

(Some 2020 regionals, followed by 2021 national) The only difference to the old guys, AFAIK, is that those are really new / not so obviously agents of foreign powers. You can see the English Wiki is a lot more critical of those. Personally, I think it is all fair up to this point. The only thing which is rigged is that no party may ever win more seats than United Russia, the officially designated ruling party (of no discernible ideology other than this. Most of your politicians from either party would fit right in) Obviously that Putin has not been assassinating washed-up opposition politicians like Nemtsov, whose electoral power was exactly known to be under 5% and who were on his payroll anyway.

If you are not with at least a 2% party, you can run as a write-in candidate, which requires collecting some amount of signatures ahead of time. Works OK at municipal level, but higher up does the amount of signatures required become astronomical. This is something of what Navalny's crowd does these days. (Never bothered to register a proper party, don't obviously want to get elected, but surely do love a good scandal. They obviously cannot get elected because of nefarious Kremlin manipulations)

Special Ukrainian variation. They had to retroactively up the fundable percentage from 2% to 5% because of this party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Shariy

making it. Kinda odd that they'd be financing a fugitive from Ukrainian justice represented by a channel on YouTube. I am not sure how much of a party there really is, but this guy is a potential Ze 2.0 on his own. (Is a really powerful investigative journalist, much better that Navalny. Certified hostile to all previous governments of Ukraine -  Yanukovych, Poroshenko, now Ze. All wanted him extradited)

And if you thought that was weird, how about making it official and make political parties accept equity shares from sponsoring enterprises, to finance the campaigns through dividents? Why does it have to be cash (or loans?)

Check this out. We just had commies actually win something. For like first time ever

https://www.euronews.com/2021/09/27/communists-win-local-election-in-austria-s-second-largest-city

Uncle Sam's is losing its touch... How did they manage? I mean, no respectable business sponsor would touch the Commies (or the actual Nazis) with a ten-foot pole. Basically, the extreme political fringe. Which also causes them to be the least corrupt political forces around, which are gaining ground onto the "centrist mainstream" which is too corrupt to be true. Think Europe going the way of Latin America?

Anyhow, our local commies could weather any storm, because they are independently wealthy. They happen to be in the oil business and own a small, but very well managed vertically integrated oil company. This one

https://turmöl.at/

USSR, when leaving, so endowed them. So, the scheme finally bore fruit, or what? It used to be impossible for Commies to win anything in any country that was a Marshal fund recipient.

If you think that it is that easy for a political party to correctly manage commercial properties, you'd be mistaken. In the olden, pre-EU days, were all the Austrian political parties also owners of major banks. The largest one (The Socialist party, really so-meh officially left of center like the German SPD) owned Creditanstalt (the largest bank. Used to belong to local Rothshilds) It ended badly. Here is the last of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAWAG#The_BAWAG_Affair

A story, in which a major Austrian bank (previously, part of the government PTT) gambled the money of Austrian trade unions (who were their majority owner!) on some fraudulent securities transactions in the Caribbean, resulting in the bank being pawned to US Cerberus Fund. Who is likely entrapped them in the first place. Too bad they gave up on this funny asset. It was fun to watch them work for a while, while they had plans for the bank.

Are you up for it? After all, it does not really say anywhere in US Constitution that US parties may not hold equity in their sponsors. Think about it. The corporate entities are already allegedly accountable according to some kind of GAAP. Having equity share in deserving enterprises would make the parties committed to the specific causes they signed up for.

Hey, individual politicians are already helping themselves. Nancy Pelosi is like the better Buffet.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/18/its-not-just-nancy-pelosi-plenty-of-government-insiders-are-trading-stocks-at-our-expense/

Thing is, that all the trading is insider trading. Venture financing 101 - successful investing is based  on asymmetry of information. Buffett's got more money than you and me because he knows shit we don't. Correspondingly, all the non-trivial investment advice he gives bound to be red herring. Which is also the name of essential Silicon Valley VC rag, known to print nothing but lies. Very useful ones, though. Check out their other project. OANN (One American News Network) the folksy, pro-Trumpish news channel from next door which must be very appealing to Ron.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/news/one-america-news-network-dropped-by-directv-a-major-financial-blow-for-far-right-network/ar-AASOCzc?li=BBnb7Kz#interstitial=3

Does anybody care about DirecTV anymore? Do you see what they are really up to? I think I do.

Maybe what you really need is a bunch of GAAP rules for public institutions? Not trivial. Apparently, nobody has ever been able to audit the Pentagon yet

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/28/why-the-pentagon-failed-another-audit.html

This means that all those billions trillions gazillions being flown around are essentially made up. Nobody really knows how much they spend. Hey, wait till you get to UN. When can one expect the government of Botswana to stop being in arrears on their dues for Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization? I mean, on one hand, do they only owe something like $20K per year and is a firm commitment to refrain from any nuclear testing a very laudable thing from the international community standpoint. On the other hand, the books never add up! What do you do?

Interestingly enough, none of this is really new. See, the British common law is the law for commoners. For those few, who actually ever had any rights in the British Empire, there was

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_(law)

(in the view of the whole enterprise as the mother of all Chartered somewhere Indies Companies)

I think, the only way to salvage your politics is to incorporate your parties as commercial, for-profit entities free to undergo mergers and acquisitions with favorite corporate sponsors of theirs. This ought to make it apparent who works for whom, Conversely, ensures deliverables. There is even a place for corporate trademarks. You could get those to endow individual Congressmen's and Senator's chairs, like they do it with professorships. Ditto for whole chartered committees in place of whole departments of the faculty. Imagine, a Chiquita Bananas committee on Honduran affairs! Suddently, no need to pretend they are doing something else.

I checked what your sizeable body of legalese says about accepting foreign funds. Boiled down, they say, "don't ask, don't tell." What about accepting contributions from enemy nations, like Russia, Iran or DPRK? You see, this is what is making them enemy nations to start with - appalingly low level of contributions to American politicians slush funds! Otherwise, it depends. It is certainly OK for Clintons to take Russian government funds (Uranium One affair) What about Trump? Inconclusive. Seems the only way to get him busted would be if he did accept the Hero of Russia title from Putin's hands. In public. It is the closest thing we've got to aristocratic order of chivalry. (for the purpose of the Emoluments clause) Yet, even that has been violated with impunity. Say, do royal titles count as foreign titles of nobility? See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Kennedy (Ó Cinnéide)

JFK managed to actually accept an Irish royal title from the Republic of Ireland and nobody bat an eyelid. What if they did? Oh well, he could just say it was rightfully his to start with, and it would certainly make it A-OK in US. Because JFK was obviously sufficiently regal-like and had an appropriate executive style hair. However back in the UK - not so much. Quite a disaster actually. So, they had to have JFK whacked. As well as many other Kennedys they could get. Because this is how dynastic feuds work - you eliminate all the potential heirs, especially males.

Basically, there is not a single word in your precious constitution, however little it actually does say, that has not been violated yet. You, the people, have no voting rights that do anything. Dollars, however, do. Or at least some of them. As in shareholder democracy. Might as well try to make it official.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

45 minutes ago, Tomasz said:

America liquefies the last New LNG projects are ending in the US

In February, against the background of rising world gas prices, the United States will launch two new large LNG projects - the sixth line of Sabine Pass and part of the capacity of Calcasieu Pass, which, according to the plan, should reach its design capacity later this year. As a result, about 15 million tons of LNG per year will enter the market, but the vast majority of these volumes have already been contracted. The next LNG project in the US will not be launched until 2024, which limits the country's ability to influence global prices in the short term.

In February, the first new LNG capacity since March 2021 will start operating in the United States. So, on February 7, Cherniere announced the completion of commissioning at the sixth line of the Sabine Pa plant with a capacity of 5.7 million tons per year. Simultaneously, on Feb. 4, Venture Global, which is building a Calcasieu Pass plant in Louisiana, asked the regulator for approval for the first shipment, which, according to Platts, could take place on Feb. 9. Initially, only four of the planned 18 lines of 0.6 million tons each will be put into operation.

These plants are the latest of the so-called second wave of US LNG projects (the first wave was in 2016-2018). Thus, at the moment, seven plants will operate in the United States: in addition to Sabine Pass (total capacity of 34.6 million tons) and Calcasieu Pass (12 million tons), these are Cove Point (5.75 million tons), Elba (2.7 million tons), Corpus Christi (18.2), Cameron (15) and Freeport LNG (16.2).

Although there are more than a dozen more projects in the advanced stages of development in the United States, only one is under construction - Golden Pass with a capacity of 18 million tons, which is owned by Exxon and Qatar Petroleum JV. Its launch date is 2024–2025.

Thus, in the next three years, the US will not offer the world market new volumes of gas.

This is a significant circumstance given the current high gas prices, which are about $1,000 per 1,000 cubic meters for LNG spot shipments both in Europe and Asia. It also limits the ability of Europe, where European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on February 7 called the lack of additional supplies from Gazprom "a strange way of doing business" to replace Russian gas.

New American plants have a fairly significant capacity, but since the commissioning of new assets was expected by the market, they will not lead to a significant reduction in quotations over the next few months, says Ivan Timonin, a consultant at Vygon Consulting. “Most likely, growth in demand for LNG, especially in Asia, will completely absorb these volumes,” agrees Dmitry Marinchenko from Fitch. However, Sergey Kapitonov from the Skolkovo Moscow School of Energy Energy Center reminds that the increase in demand in Asia this year may not be as significant, and the European gas market is likely to shrink due to high prices and competition from coal. “Therefore, the new LNG supply could put downward pressure on prices starting in the second half of 2022,” he said.

LNG imports to Europe hit a historical record

Ivan Timonin notes that the capacities of Calcasieu Pass are almost completely contracted, Venture Global has contracts for 9.5 million tons per year, including five contracts for a total of 7 million tons per year, which have been in force since this year, the rest - from 2023. The sixth line of Sabine Pass, according to him, is contracted at the level of 70-90%, “however, in the current conditions of high demand, incomplete contracting will not become an obstacle to the work of the new stage of the plant, and all remaining production capacities will probably be used by Cheniere for deliveries on the terms spot".

In the coming year, the United States will bring almost 15 million tons of new LNG capacities to the market - this is the vast majority of the new supply, Sergey Kapitonov states. As early as 2022, projects such as Eni's floating plant in Mozambique and the third phase of BP's Tangguh plant in Indonesia could deliver new volumes to the market.

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5205610?from=top_main_8

Yes, natural gas is not a scarce commodity. The Green Parties have caused the current prices by leaving all fossil fuels out of their approved fuels. Finally the E.U. has woken up and is being realistic. The Greens in Germany have been the worst and now help control the factions in power there. 

Natural gas only needs financing and the freedom to build pipelines and any other needed infrastructure. There is plenty of it ready to gather including that being flared. 

[Tomasz + 1,608]

I can see the logic of provoking Russia into doing something stupid in Belarus or Ukraine in order to derail NS2. But not otherwise.

IEA accuses RU of worsening Europe's gas crisis, NATO accuses RU of gas manipulation, US invites energy CEOs confirming no substitute gas is available,  

 US says Europe ‘on board’ with sanctions in the event of military escalation. 

An attempt to present ‘evidence’ of Russia attempting ‘to use energy as a weapon or commit further aggressive acts against Ukraine’ – as per US-DE agreement, under which DE promised to ‘take action … including sanctions’ in respect of NS2? But what is presented is NOT evidence.

For political & commercial reasons the US is not thrilled about NS2 but it doesn’t want to impose sanctions on it as not to be seen as infringing European sovereignty (hence the waiver).

But if the US wants Europe to sign up for NS2 sanctions in the event of invasion *and* continue to delay NS2 approval in the event of non-invasion, it is difficult to expect Europe agreeing to this as it would keep its energy (gas) security on tenterhooks & gas prices high.

Meanwhile, this would do nothing for Ukrainian security as if Russia were to perceive it isn't getting NS2 in any event 

Its value as deterrence (if this is the idea) would be minimal. NS2 as a leverage is only useful as long as there is an  expectation it will be certified soon

France & Germany' ability to convince Ukraine to implement Minsk 2 - as Minsk 3 couldn't possibly be better  and  Russia’s appreciation of it – would be a real test of European autonomy, Ukrainian sovereignty & Russian intentions.

In that sense, NS2 is much more than a pipeline.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Tomasz

[Tomasz + 1,608]

NS2 is irrelevant for now.

 Russia will only supply long-term contract volumes and will do this irrespective of NATO/US negotiations.

About 21 bcm worth of contracts with Gazprom expires this year (Poland+).

Those contracts will not be renewed so Nord Stream 1 + Ukraine 2022+Turk Stream will cover all of the above.

Below you can see how it will look like in 10 years time

 

 

Edited February 7, 2022 by Tomasz

[Eric Gagen + 713]

58 minutes ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

This is basically just a collection of excuses your political establishment made up for to prevent  any new entrants. All of this stuff really means that there is no real difference between two of your parties. Of course, is there no left and right. Both parties believe in one thing - money. See this

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-complicated-love-story/

Basically, the candidate with the most dough always wins. The difference between 100% certainty for Congress and 80% for Senate is explainable as that between perfect gerrymandering at a level of a single district, vs. imperfect gerrymandering for half a state. Obviously, the Presidential election is the most unpredictable of all, which is how you ended up with Trump. Must be the first time in US history, some kind of sideways entrant actually won.

Now, the amount of orchestration is obviously more than 20%, because both parties have the same sponsors, just in a slightly different mix. Trump was leaning towards US shale. Biden is against it? He must be in favor of Exxon, which is doing oil the old-fashioned way - by ripping off banana republics like Russia and Guiana. Both include some kind of posturing for US oil exploration tech. Say, Deepwater Horizon demonstrated that Exxon can what BP cannot. You, as an oil guy, should know that it doesn't get any more high-tech than offshore rigs. Either way, no way in heck anybody in the US is going to inflict any kind of hardships on themselves due to fossil fuels just for the sake of Greta. That's for gullible Eurofags. Only when it makes business sense.

The problem for you, an induhvidual voter, is that your politicians don't work for you. They work for the important corporate sponsors. But, if you've got the dough, they are for sale. This is how you are not getting things like public healthcare (an issue with clear majority support) The healthcare / health insurance / pharmaceutical establishment is number one sponsoring industry, even ahead of defense.

You missed the significant point of public campaign financing - everybody gets the same amount of funds, so it is sporting-like and not up for grabs for the highest bidder. I suppose you could achieve the same by introducing a hard cap. Parties do get funded at every level, there are elections. Some examples

Officially designated pro-Western liberal party in Russia, which has been around since Yeltsin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yabloko

Gets more than 2% but less than 5% for the State Duma, which means that the party gets funded with the grown-ups, but gets no seats. Does get a lot of seats at provincial and municipal level. The only useful things those guys ever did is expelling Navalny for being a Nazi (he positioned himself as far right, back when)

Now, an entirely new, pro-Western and liberal party actually does get in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_People_(political_party)

(Some 2020 regionals, followed by 2021 national) The only difference to the old guys, AFAIK, is that those are really new / not so obviously agents of foreign powers. You can see the English Wiki is a lot more critical of those. Personally, I think it is all fair up to this point. The only thing which is rigged is that no party may ever win more seats than United Russia, the officially designated ruling party (of no discernible ideology other than this. Most of your politicians from either party would fit right in) Obviously that Putin has not been assassinating washed-up opposition politicians like Nemtsov, whose electoral power was exactly known to be under 5% and who were on his payroll anyway.

If you are not with at least a 2% party, you can run as a write-in candidate, which requires collecting some amount of signatures ahead of time. Works OK at municipal level, but higher up does the amount of signatures required become astronomical. This is something of what Navalny's crowd does these days. (Never bothered to register a proper party, don't obviously want to get elected, but surely do love a good scandal. They obviously cannot get elected because of nefarious Kremlin manipulations)

Special Ukrainian variation. They had to retroactively up the fundable percentage from 2% to 5% because of this party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Shariy

making it. Kinda odd that they'd be financing a fugitive from Ukrainian justice represented by a channel on YouTube. I am not sure how much of a party there really is, but this guy is a potential Ze 2.0 on his own. (Is a really powerful investigative journalist, much better that Navalny. Certified hostile to all previous governments of Ukraine -  Yanukovych, Poroshenko, now Ze. All wanted him extradited)

And if you thought that was weird, how about making it official and make political parties accept equity shares from sponsoring enterprises, to finance the campaigns through dividents? Why does it have to be cash (or loans?)

Check this out. We just had commies actually win something. For like first time ever

https://www.euronews.com/2021/09/27/communists-win-local-election-in-austria-s-second-largest-city

Uncle Sam's is losing its touch... How did they manage? I mean, no respectable business sponsor would touch the Commies (or the actual Nazis) with a ten-foot pole. Basically, the extreme political fringe. Which also causes them to be the least corrupt political forces around, which are gaining ground onto the "centrist mainstream" which is too corrupt to be true. Think Europe going the way of Latin America?

Anyhow, our local commies could weather any storm, because they are independently wealthy. They happen to be in the oil business and own a small, but very well managed vertically integrated oil company. This one

https://turmöl.at/

USSR, when leaving, so endowed them. So, the scheme finally bore fruit, or what? It used to be impossible for Commies to win anything in any country that was a Marshal fund recipient.

If you think that it is that easy for a political party to correctly manage commercial properties, you'd be mistaken. In the olden, pre-EU days, were all the Austrian political parties also owners of major banks. The largest one (The Socialist party, really so-meh officially left of center like the German SPD) owned Creditanstalt (the largest bank. Used to belong to local Rothshilds) It ended badly. Here is the last of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAWAG#The_BAWAG_Affair

A story, in which a major Austrian bank (previously, part of the government PTT) gambled the money of Austrian trade unions (who were their majority owner!) on some fraudulent securities transactions in the Caribbean, resulting in the bank being pawned to US Cerberus Fund. Who is likely entrapped them in the first place. Too bad they gave up on this funny asset. It was fun to watch them work for a while, while they had plans for the bank.

Are you up for it? After all, it does not really say anywhere in US Constitution that US parties may not hold equity in their sponsors. Think about it. The corporate entities are already allegedly accountable according to some kind of GAAP. Having equity share in deserving enterprises would make the parties committed to the specific causes they signed up for.

Hey, individual politicians are already helping themselves. Nancy Pelosi is like the better Buffet.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/18/its-not-just-nancy-pelosi-plenty-of-government-insiders-are-trading-stocks-at-our-expense/

Thing is, that all the trading is insider trading. Venture financing 101 - successful investing is based  on asymmetry of information. Buffett's got more money than you and me because he knows shit we don't. Correspondingly, all the non-trivial investment advice he gives bound to be red herring. Which is also the name of essential Silicon Valley VC rag, known to print nothing but lies. Very useful ones, though. Check out their other project. OANN (One American News Network) the folksy, pro-Trumpish news channel from next door which must be very appealing to Ron.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/news/one-america-news-network-dropped-by-directv-a-major-financial-blow-for-far-right-network/ar-AASOCzc?li=BBnb7Kz#interstitial=3

Does anybody care about DirecTV anymore? Do you see what they are really up to? I think I do.

Maybe what you really need is a bunch of GAAP rules for public institutions? Not trivial. Apparently, nobody has ever been able to audit the Pentagon yet

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/28/why-the-pentagon-failed-another-audit.html

This means that all those billions trillions gazillions being flown around are essentially made up. Nobody really knows how much they spend. Hey, wait till you get to UN. When can one expect the government of Botswana to stop being in arrears on their dues for Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization? I mean, on one hand, do they only owe something like $20K per year and is a firm commitment to refrain from any nuclear testing a very laudable thing from the international community standpoint. On the other hand, the books never add up! What do you do?

Interestingly enough, none of this is really new. See, the British common law is the law for commoners. For those few, who actually ever had any rights in the British Empire, there was

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_(law)

(in the view of the whole enterprise as the mother of all Chartered somewhere Indies Companies)

I think, the only way to salvage your politics is to incorporate your parties as commercial, for-profit entities free to undergo mergers and acquisitions with favorite corporate sponsors of theirs. This ought to make it apparent who works for whom, Conversely, ensures deliverables. There is even a place for corporate trademarks. You could get those to endow individual Congressmen's and Senator's chairs, like they do it with professorships. Ditto for whole chartered committees in place of whole departments of the faculty. Imagine, a Chiquita Bananas committee on Honduran affairs! Suddently, no need to pretend they are doing something else.

I checked what your sizeable body of legalese says about accepting foreign funds. Boiled down, they say, "don't ask, don't tell." What about accepting contributions from enemy nations, like Russia, Iran or DPRK? You see, this is what is making them enemy nations to start with - appalingly low level of contributions to American politicians slush funds! Otherwise, it depends. It is certainly OK for Clintons to take Russian government funds (Uranium One affair) What about Trump? Inconclusive. Seems the only way to get him busted would be if he did accept the Hero of Russia title from Putin's hands. In public. It is the closest thing we've got to aristocratic order of chivalry. (for the purpose of the Emoluments clause) Yet, even that has been violated with impunity. Say, do royal titles count as foreign titles of nobility? See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Kennedy (Ó Cinnéide)

JFK managed to actually accept an Irish royal title from the Republic of Ireland and nobody bat an eyelid. What if they did? Oh well, he could just say it was rightfully his to start with, and it would certainly make it A-OK in US. Because JFK was obviously sufficiently regal-like and had an appropriate executive style hair. However back in the UK - not so much. Quite a disaster actually. So, they had to have JFK whacked. As well as many other Kennedys they could get. Because this is how dynastic feuds work - you eliminate all the potential heirs, especially males.

Basically, there is not a single word in your precious constitution, however little it actually does say, that has not been violated yet. You, the people, have no voting rights that do anything. Dollars, however, do. Or at least some of them. As in shareholder democracy. Might as well try to make it official.

I'm only telling you what the excuses are - some of them are very good reasons and some of them are terrible, but they are all strongly held by powerful groups or people who will fight against the proposal.  I don't have a solution. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Right now, our best bet is taking control of the Republican Party from the RINOS who have controlled it for as long as I can remember.

 

Yea, you know why?  The RHINOS hold the RNC chair and jump as high as the bankers they are indebted to tell them.  So, anyone who for instance, wants to run as a tea party member calling for a balanced budget and paying down the National Debt got ZERO funding.  After all that was cutting into the bankers slush funds and ability to print money allowing the fat cat first mover position.  Saw it multiple times with my own eyes.  The result?  Surprise surprise, they get voted out of office when their RHINOS run against them with a boat load of cash from the RNC or a democrat wins... 

If there should be ANY limit in campaign spending it should be by anyone out of STATE and from the RNC/DNC. 

Ron, inflation is caused by RNC/DNC jumping to banks demands and their own greed for pork by printing tons and tons and tons of fake money.  They printed 40% of every USD in the last 2 years Ron.  Of course there is going to be inflation... 40% inflation.  We are just getting started on the inflation as inflation will track perfectly with printing of $$$ until NO ONE uses it and then it crashes into toilet paper or wallpaper status. 

[nsdp + 449]

On 2/5/2022 at 11:27 PM, ronwagn said:

Please explain casing head gas problems. 

The problem is the propane plus in the gas stream. casing head is very rich in these components .  It is like a retrograde condensate reservoir like Whitney Canyon or Carter Creek in reverse.   In the Permian Basin as the gas moves down the line, pressure drops cooling the gas stream.  Starting with Heptane on down to propane , you cross the condensation point of the hydrocarbon and they fall out as a liquid.    That liquid does not continue down stream , but collects in puddles before the next compressor station .   This liquid increases the resistance to flow and reduces the cross sectional area for the flow of the line.  That is why operators have to "pig" the lines.  Something they did not do ahead of last year's event. Prior to cold weather. the casing head propane-heptane spread must  be stripped from  from the natural gas stream to create "dry gas about 1000-1010 btu/cubic foot.  the heavy components do not work well with gas compressors. Another lowering of pipeline capacity.    Using a processing plant to remove these very valuable hydrocarbons means you have to have storage or a pipeline for these gas/liquids.  The Permian is short of all three:plants , storage and pipelines.   It is not critical in  warm weather(propane and butane stay barely  gaseous), but trucking the excess in cold weather and roads closed  stops transportation.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

22 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Yea, you know why?  The RHINOS hold the RNC chair and jump as high as the bankers they are indebted to tell them.  So, anyone who for instance, wants to run as a tea party member calling for a balanced budget and paying down the National Debt got ZERO funding.  After all that was cutting into the bankers slush funds and ability to print money allowing the fat cat first mover position.  Saw it multiple times with my own eyes.  The result?  Surprise surprise, they get voted out of office when their RHINOS run against them with a boat load of cash from the RNC or a democrat wins... 

If there should be ANY limit in campaign spending it should be by anyone out of STATE and from the RNC/DNC. 

Ron, inflation is caused by RNC/DNC jumping to banks demands and their own greed for pork by printing tons and tons and tons of fake money.  They printed 40% of every USD in the last 2 years Ron.  Of course there is going to be inflation... 40% inflation.  We are just getting started on the inflation as inflation will track perfectly with printing of $$$ until NO ONE uses it and then it crashes into toilet paper or wallpaper status. 

For some strange reason you are not blaming the Democrats as well as the RINOS. There are a few conservative Democrats so I am not blaming them. I would prefer there were no parties. None are mentioned in the constitution. The point is that we are failing as a nation due to overspending. This is the goal of the Alinskyites and has been since he wrote his book while Hillary Clinton visited him when she was a college student. 

https://farleftfacts.org/far-left-ideology/radicalization-attributes/cloward-piven/ 

https://bolenreport.com/saul-alinskys-12-rules-radicals/

https://quadcorral.com/hillary-clinton-saul-alinsky-paper

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

3 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

This is basically just a collection of excuses your political establishment made up for to prevent  any new entrants. All of this stuff really means that there is no real difference between two of your parties. Of course, is there no left and right. Both parties believe in one thing - money. See this

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/money-and-elections-a-complicated-love-story/

Basically, the candidate with the most dough always wins. The difference between 100% certainty for Congress and 80% for Senate is explainable as that between perfect gerrymandering at a level of a single district, vs. imperfect gerrymandering for half a state. Obviously, the Presidential election is the most unpredictable of all, which is how you ended up with Trump. Must be the first time in US history, some kind of sideways entrant actually won.

Now, the amount of orchestration is obviously more than 20%, because both parties have the same sponsors, just in a slightly different mix. Trump was leaning towards US shale. Biden is against it? He must be in favor of Exxon, which is doing oil the old-fashioned way - by ripping off banana republics like Russia and Guiana. Both include some kind of posturing for US oil exploration tech. Say, Deepwater Horizon demonstrated that Exxon can what BP cannot. You, as an oil guy, should know that it doesn't get any more high-tech than offshore rigs. Either way, no way in heck anybody in the US is going to inflict any kind of hardships on themselves due to fossil fuels just for the sake of Greta. That's for gullible Eurofags. Only when it makes business sense.

The problem for you, an induhvidual voter, is that your politicians don't work for you. They work for the important corporate sponsors. But, if you've got the dough, they are for sale. This is how you are not getting things like public healthcare (an issue with clear majority support) The healthcare / health insurance / pharmaceutical establishment is number one sponsoring industry, even ahead of defense.

You missed the significant point of public campaign financing - everybody gets the same amount of funds, so it is sporting-like and not up for grabs for the highest bidder. I suppose you could achieve the same by introducing a hard cap. Parties do get funded at every level, there are elections. Some examples

Officially designated pro-Western liberal party in Russia, which has been around since Yeltsin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yabloko

Gets more than 2% but less than 5% for the State Duma, which means that the party gets funded with the grown-ups, but gets no seats. Does get a lot of seats at provincial and municipal level. The only useful things those guys ever did is expelling Navalny for being a Nazi (he positioned himself as far right, back when)

Now, an entirely new, pro-Western and liberal party actually does get in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_People_(political_party)

(Some 2020 regionals, followed by 2021 national) The only difference to the old guys, AFAIK, is that those are really new / not so obviously agents of foreign powers. You can see the English Wiki is a lot more critical of those. Personally, I think it is all fair up to this point. The only thing which is rigged is that no party may ever win more seats than United Russia, the officially designated ruling party (of no discernible ideology other than this. Most of your politicians from either party would fit right in) Obviously that Putin has not been assassinating washed-up opposition politicians like Nemtsov, whose electoral power was exactly known to be under 5% and who were on his payroll anyway.

If you are not with at least a 2% party, you can run as a write-in candidate, which requires collecting some amount of signatures ahead of time. Works OK at municipal level, but higher up does the amount of signatures required become astronomical. This is something of what Navalny's crowd does these days. (Never bothered to register a proper party, don't obviously want to get elected, but surely do love a good scandal. They obviously cannot get elected because of nefarious Kremlin manipulations)

Special Ukrainian variation. They had to retroactively up the fundable percentage from 2% to 5% because of this party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Shariy

making it. Kinda odd that they'd be financing a fugitive from Ukrainian justice represented by a channel on YouTube. I am not sure how much of a party there really is, but this guy is a potential Ze 2.0 on his own. (Is a really powerful investigative journalist, much better that Navalny. Certified hostile to all previous governments of Ukraine -  Yanukovych, Poroshenko, now Ze. All wanted him extradited)

And if you thought that was weird, how about making it official and make political parties accept equity shares from sponsoring enterprises, to finance the campaigns through dividents? Why does it have to be cash (or loans?)

Check this out. We just had commies actually win something. For like first time ever

https://www.euronews.com/2021/09/27/communists-win-local-election-in-austria-s-second-largest-city

Uncle Sam's is losing its touch... How did they manage? I mean, no respectable business sponsor would touch the Commies (or the actual Nazis) with a ten-foot pole. Basically, the extreme political fringe. Which also causes them to be the least corrupt political forces around, which are gaining ground onto the "centrist mainstream" which is too corrupt to be true. Think Europe going the way of Latin America?

Anyhow, our local commies could weather any storm, because they are independently wealthy. They happen to be in the oil business and own a small, but very well managed vertically integrated oil company. This one

https://turmöl.at/

USSR, when leaving, so endowed them. So, the scheme finally bore fruit, or what? It used to be impossible for Commies to win anything in any country that was a Marshal fund recipient.

If you think that it is that easy for a political party to correctly manage commercial properties, you'd be mistaken. In the olden, pre-EU days, were all the Austrian political parties also owners of major banks. The largest one (The Socialist party, really so-meh officially left of center like the German SPD) owned Creditanstalt (the largest bank. Used to belong to local Rothshilds) It ended badly. Here is the last of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAWAG#The_BAWAG_Affair

A story, in which a major Austrian bank (previously, part of the government PTT) gambled the money of Austrian trade unions (who were their majority owner!) on some fraudulent securities transactions in the Caribbean, resulting in the bank being pawned to US Cerberus Fund. Who is likely entrapped them in the first place. Too bad they gave up on this funny asset. It was fun to watch them work for a while, while they had plans for the bank.

Are you up for it? After all, it does not really say anywhere in US Constitution that US parties may not hold equity in their sponsors. Think about it. The corporate entities are already allegedly accountable according to some kind of GAAP. Having equity share in deserving enterprises would make the parties committed to the specific causes they signed up for.

Hey, individual politicians are already helping themselves. Nancy Pelosi is like the better Buffet.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/18/its-not-just-nancy-pelosi-plenty-of-government-insiders-are-trading-stocks-at-our-expense/

Thing is, that all the trading is insider trading. Venture financing 101 - successful investing is based  on asymmetry of information. Buffett's got more money than you and me because he knows shit we don't. Correspondingly, all the non-trivial investment advice he gives bound to be red herring. Which is also the name of essential Silicon Valley VC rag, known to print nothing but lies. Very useful ones, though. Check out their other project. OANN (One American News Network) the folksy, pro-Trumpish news channel from next door which must be very appealing to Ron.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/news/one-america-news-network-dropped-by-directv-a-major-financial-blow-for-far-right-network/ar-AASOCzc?li=BBnb7Kz#interstitial=3

Does anybody care about DirecTV anymore? Do you see what they are really up to? I think I do.

Maybe what you really need is a bunch of GAAP rules for public institutions? Not trivial. Apparently, nobody has ever been able to audit the Pentagon yet

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/28/why-the-pentagon-failed-another-audit.html

This means that all those billions trillions gazillions being flown around are essentially made up. Nobody really knows how much they spend. Hey, wait till you get to UN. When can one expect the government of Botswana to stop being in arrears on their dues for Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization? I mean, on one hand, do they only owe something like $20K per year and is a firm commitment to refrain from any nuclear testing a very laudable thing from the international community standpoint. On the other hand, the books never add up! What do you do?

Interestingly enough, none of this is really new. See, the British common law is the law for commoners. For those few, who actually ever had any rights in the British Empire, there was

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_(law)

(in the view of the whole enterprise as the mother of all Chartered somewhere Indies Companies)

I think, the only way to salvage your politics is to incorporate your parties as commercial, for-profit entities free to undergo mergers and acquisitions with favorite corporate sponsors of theirs. This ought to make it apparent who works for whom, Conversely, ensures deliverables. There is even a place for corporate trademarks. You could get those to endow individual Congressmen's and Senator's chairs, like they do it with professorships. Ditto for whole chartered committees in place of whole departments of the faculty. Imagine, a Chiquita Bananas committee on Honduran affairs! Suddently, no need to pretend they are doing something else.

I checked what your sizeable body of legalese says about accepting foreign funds. Boiled down, they say, "don't ask, don't tell." What about accepting contributions from enemy nations, like Russia, Iran or DPRK? You see, this is what is making them enemy nations to start with - appalingly low level of contributions to American politicians slush funds! Otherwise, it depends. It is certainly OK for Clintons to take Russian government funds (Uranium One affair) What about Trump? Inconclusive. Seems the only way to get him busted would be if he did accept the Hero of Russia title from Putin's hands. In public. It is the closest thing we've got to aristocratic order of chivalry. (for the purpose of the Emoluments clause) Yet, even that has been violated with impunity. Say, do royal titles count as foreign titles of nobility? See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Kennedy (Ó Cinnéide)

JFK managed to actually accept an Irish royal title from the Republic of Ireland and nobody bat an eyelid. What if they did? Oh well, he could just say it was rightfully his to start with, and it would certainly make it A-OK in US. Because JFK was obviously sufficiently regal-like and had an appropriate executive style hair. However back in the UK - not so much. Quite a disaster actually. So, they had to have JFK whacked. As well as many other Kennedys they could get. Because this is how dynastic feuds work - you eliminate all the potential heirs, especially males.

Basically, there is not a single word in your precious constitution, however little it actually does say, that has not been violated yet. You, the people, have no voting rights that do anything. Dollars, however, do. Or at least some of them. As in shareholder democracy. Might as well try to make it official.

Just wondering... Do you get paid to write these multiple treatises everyday?   You must.  No sane person has this much time on their hands. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

20 minutes ago, nsdp said:

The problem is the propane plus in the gas stream. casing head is very rich in these components .  It is like a retrograde condensate reservoir like Whitney Canyon or Carter Creek in reverse.   In the Permian Basin as the gas moves down the line, pressure drops cooling the gas stream.  Starting with Heptane on down to propane , you cross the condensation point of the hydrocarbon and they fall out as a liquid.    That liquid does not continue down stream , but collects in puddles before the next compressor station .   This liquid increases the resistance to flow and reduces the cross sectional area for the flow of the line.  That is why operators have to "pig" the lines.  Something they did not do ahead of last year's event. Prior to cold weather. the casing head propane-heptane spread must  be stripped from  from the natural gas stream to create "dry gas about 1000-1010 btu/cubic foot.  the heavy components do not work well with gas compressors. Another lowering of pipeline capacity.    Using a processing plant to remove these very valuable hydrocarbons means you have to have storage or a pipeline for these gas/liquids.  The Permian is short of all three:plants , storage and pipelines.   It is not critical in  warm weather(propane and butane stay barely  gaseous), but trucking the excess in cold weather and roads closed  stops transportation.

Thank you nsdp! Something I can understand, you write well. We live near a natural gas pipeline pumping station, my nomenclature😊.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,191]

22 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

For some strange reason you are not blaming the Democrats as well as the RINOS. There are a few conservative Democrats so I am not blaming them. I would prefer there were no parties. None are mentioned in the constitution. The point is that we are failing as a nation due to overspending. This is the goal of the Alinskyites and has been since he wrote his book while Hillary Clinton visited him when she was a college student. 

https://farleftfacts.org/far-left-ideology/radicalization-attributes/cloward-piven/ 

https://bolenreport.com/saul-alinskys-12-rules-radicals/

https://quadcorral.com/hillary-clinton-saul-alinsky-paper

Why would I blame Demonrats?  They are doing what they SAY they are going to do.  Steal and destroy.  Rhinos on the other hand SAY they are going to do something and instead do the opposite, lining their pockets. 

As for the rest... that is a religious issue.  Politics flows from religion.  Demonrats are just following their Atheist religion morals.  You want things to change?  Change peoples religion and hunt down and lambast all the openly perverted hypocrites.  Otherwise, stop wasting your time.  Its religion that is the problem, not politics.