America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide

[TailingsPond + 504]

8 hours ago, notsonice said:

They create false emergencies to take power?

The millions of global covid deaths spanning numerous nations was clearly the work of the democrats in the USA.   A false emergency that unfortunately happened during Trump's term...

 

[turbguy + 1,433]

On 4/23/2024 at 7:15 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

Why revitalization of US infrastructure, loosening the chains off disposable income, lowering transportation bills across the country,lowering heating bills. The effects will stabilize the world...Russia and Iran will be nuturterd..

They call that MAGA I do believe.

I can see that adding additional petroleum supplies on the world market "should" impact "price" of those commodities, unless processing/transport costs are impediments, impacting a more local market.  It seems natural gas might be somewhat of a "fit" for that situation.  For overseas transport, It ain't very dense until someone liquefies it, adding additional costs and energy consumption to the delivered product.

However, that world market is complicated by the absolute fact of a concerted effort by OPEC (and others) to exercise control over the market to "stabilize" price at a level closer to that desired by those actors.  Petroleum does not strike me as a free market.  With these actors, It seems like a type of price fixing.  YMMV.

Thus, large and CONCERTED market players work to keep price under their control, while the immediate impact of "drill, baby, drill", is that corner of the industry obtains an immediate financial benefit (more product to sell into a controlled market), with no regard to ANY externalities.   You can chose whatever, or even if, externalities apply. 

 

I must ask, what is the thing of top value to you?

If you respond with anything other than your personal health, you probably should reflect on a bigger picture.

And those externalities, even if you ignore or refute them,  have a measurable and deleterious affect on the health of us all.

...and add that energy is SOOOOOOO addicting!  The withdrawal symptoms are something to behold.

I call that HUMAN, not MAGA.

Edited April 25 by turbguy

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,550]

A new term will be inserted into our discourse....This will be quite interesting...Or maybe not...Go Figure!

remand

Primary tabs

 

To remand something is to send it back. Remand implies a return. The usual contexts in which this word are encountered are reversal of an appellate decision, and the custody of a prisoner.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/remand#:~:text=To remand something is to,the custody of a prisoner.

Edited April 25 by Eyes Wide Open

[notsonice + 1,101]

business as usual..Payoffs and corruption in the oil Business 

 

Pay to Play just deliver the suitcases full of cash .............and you get what you want

Trump Seeks $1 Billion From Big Oil as He Vows to Reverse Biden Climate Rules

 

://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Trump-Seeks-1-Billion-From-Big-Oil-as-He-Vows-to-Reverse-Biden-Climate-Rules.html

By Charles Kennedy - May 09, 2024, 9:10 AM CDT

• Trump seeks $1 billion campaign funds from oil executives, pledging to overturn Biden's environmental policies.
• At a Mar-a-Lago meeting in April, Trump promised to scrap energy and climate policies opposed by the industry.
• Politico has recently reported that the oil industry has drafted executive orders for a potential Trump re-election.

Donald Trump has asked executives of some of the largest U.S. oil producers to raise $1 billion for his campaign to return to the White House and promised to scrap many of the Biden Administration’s environmental policies, the Washington Post reported exclusively on Thursday, quoting sources familiar with a meeting.  

Trump, who was a very pro-oil president during his tenure at the White House, met with the top industry executives at his Mar-a-Lago Club in April to hear the grievances of the American oil industry, which has constantly criticized the energy policies of President Joe Biden, focused on reducing emissions and promoting clean energy sources.

Trump’s response to the executives, “You all are wealthy enough, he said, that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House,” the Washington Post quoted the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation.

During the dinner at Mar-a-Lago, Trump pledged, if elected, to immediately reverse many of President Biden’s energy and climate policies, including the electric vehicle (EV) mandates, wind energy initiatives, and other regulations that the U.S. oil and gas industry opposes.

The sector has actually opposed nearly all of the Biden Administration’s energy and climate policies.

Separately, Politico reported earlier this week that oil industry executives and lawyers are drawing up executive orders to be presented to Donald Trump if he wins another term in the White House.

According to the report, which cites some of those involved but without mentioning names, the industry is worried that “the Trump campaign will be able to focus on energy issues as Election Day draws closer” and that Trump himself may be too distracted to focus on energy.

The executive orders being drafted focus on lowering drilling costs, supporting more natural gas exports, and increasing the number of offshore leases on offer.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

 

•  

Edited Thursday at 04:01 PM by notsonice

[TailingsPond + 504]

54 minutes ago, notsonice said:

• Trump seeks $1 billion campaign funds from oil executives, pledging to overturn Biden's environmental policies.

I wonder if he cares more about the health and welfare of the people or about his own ambitions?

Hmm...

 

[turbguy + 1,433]

2 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

I wonder if he cares more about the health and welfare of the people or about his own ambitions?

Hmm...

The disparity of perceived or real threats to human health, and capitalism's ardent reach for higher levels of profitability, is being questioned with greater vigor every day.

It is difficult to establish a connection between the potential human health damage due to continued use of Fossil Fuels.  Particularly when there are demonstrable human health benefits that result from past use of FF.

It is even more difficult to pin down FF use (and subsequent emissions) as direct cause of a series of severe weather events.  The climate must show considerable change (whatever measure that might be) that can be directly shown as caused by FF use.  I don't believe that the climate has altered significantly to cause lawmakers to enact legislation that would pin down any property damage, or human lives lost, sufficiently to withstand a challenge.

That said, the Vermont situation will be "interesting".

Somewhat like the Tobacco industry's attempt to quash health impacts of Tobacco use.

I note that tobacco products are still widely sold.

Also, Pittsburgh's (and other rust belt locales) air quality has improved considerably with the retirement of many local steel making and coal-burning facilities.

I doubt that residents of Pittsburgh will EVER allow such a mess to re-establish itself.

Edited Thursday at 07:09 PM by turbguy

[notsonice + 1,101]

5 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

I wonder if he cares more about the health and welfare of the people or about his own ambitions?

Hmm...

 

the Saudis handing  $2 billion of Oil money over to  a relative that has no investment experience speaks volumes.....

The Family benefits and All Americans are sold out

 

the price of influence is now at a minimum of $1 billion........just tell those who need favors upfront if they want policy change ...write it up and do not forget to bring the cash

The interests of the Saudis are no different than US Big Oil.........

Your Health and Welfare.........well it never really matters when one Mans greed is in charge