Trump sells out base .. . .

(edited)

Trump Whitehouse just released a report from Council of Economic Advisors that said high oil prices are good for US economy.  A little "wink and a nod" to oil.

Trump recently stated, " I'm comfortable with $65 oil."  

That's not a free market pricing.

High oil prices for oil companies and their partners does not outweight the benefit to the consumer and economy . It doesn't even come close.

$50 to $55 oil would set the U.S. and world economy booming.  

Trump wrote about OPEC HIGHLY  INFLATED PRICES in his 2011 book. He campaigned to control OPEC IN 2016. He sold out the working class public to please buddies like Harold Hamm of Continental Energy, Oil Companies and the Wallstreet boys that sat down with OPEC at Ceraweek for a nice dinner.  It has been reported that about two dozen firms attended.

One unnamed invitee said that it was clearly a threat to ruin them if the US SHALE Industry did not cut back.

Some (5) oil companies rightfully declined the invitation such as Conoco.  The CEO stated they are Market driven and will live with the volatility.

Sad.  The oil found under the United States is a valuable "Natural Resource" but it is also a valuable "National Resource"  and should benefit all.

 The oil companies sell the oil at cost to their offshore companies whose headquarters are a P.O Box in Bermuda, Cayman Islands or other low tax/no tax domicile , who in turn sells it to enduser. The US does not collect any Corporate tax.  But the Trump friends get richer and the working class will be paying up for it.

Just like Trump reneged on his campaign promise regard the HUGE Wallstreet tax loophole "carried interest". He now does so oil as a favor to his buddies.

TRUMP 2020 has already raised $180 Million in donations.  Take a look at the list of contributors.  Surprise. . . . .  Surprise. . . . .   Surprise.  

When the traders see this oil will be up today.  Need to wait for new pipelines. . . . Q4. 

Oil stabilized in the $50's would set both the US and World economies on fire.  

Trump new slogan, " Make My Friends Richer Again  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..   and Again and  Again."

2016 Campaign Hillary, Clinton Foundation and Bubba Speaking LLC received most of Oil and Wallstreet donations.

2020 TRUMP should a majority of donations.  

Edited by JJCar
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying that the little bait and switch with the Saudis to crash oil prices for the mid terms was selling out the public?  LOL!  Why don't you stick to oil instead of posting political crap?

  • Like 6
  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, wrs said:

So you are saying that the little bait and switch with the Saudis to crash oil prices for the mid terms was selling out the public?  LOL!  Why don't you stick to oil instead of posting political crap?

I'm not sure he knows oil...certainly not on a global scale.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

There was no Bait and Switch.

  To think that Saudi's/OPEC would ever sacrificed for the benefit of the United Stated or world economy is dilutional. They tried to take out US oil enterprise in 1970's , 1985 -1986,  1998-1999 and just  recently 2015.

 They do take care of the US  PresidentS going back to at least the 1980's,.  After the US presidents term ended they were invited to Saudi Arabia or Kuwait to give a speech for $1 Million.  Bubba liked the idea so much he started a whole new guest speaker industry out of it.  The Saudi's during Obama Administration decide "why wait" until after the term and the King gave Michelle Obama two necklesses  vslued over $1.5 million.  .As was stated on Bloomberg the major sell off in December was more a supply problem than a demand problem.

As soon as Trump announced  in May '18 that sanctions would go into effect in November prices steadily increased and Saudi exports went straight up.  Not because they were doing Trump a favor it was because demand from their clients.  They did very well May to Oct.

 If you are a major importer of OPEC oil and you hear that sanction are going to effect in Nov  what do you do ? ? ? You top off your tanks with crude. . . . . . .  you turn up the volume at your refineries to stock pile finished product of gas, diesel, etc. (which all of Asia did)  When sanctions had to be delayed and did not materialize  the demand/price dropped for a while.  

Trump was under extreme pressure due to European and Asian economic downturns. He didn't want to cause a recession . So he delayed the sanctions. 

MONEY TALKS

During the 2016 election the big money from Oil and Wallstreet went to.Hillary.  She knew where her bread was buttered.  Why do you think her State Department approved the Keystone XL.  The State Department had a study done on the Keystone XL . The consulting contract was awarded to a firm that was run by two former Clinton Campaign workers. After her approval the Canadian Chamber of Commerce gave the Clinton Foundation a large donation. Several large oil companies with interest in the Cd Tar Sand gave the Clinton Foundation large donations. A setup. 

Before she announced in 2016 Clintons personal Lawyer and Clinton Foundation Lawyer was put on the Board of Blackrock the World's largest Hedgefund whose CEO Fink was an outspoken critic of legislation to end carried interest.

During 2012 campaign Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Insisted the carried interest tax loophole had to be eliminated and attacked Romney for benefiting from carried interest. The next election cycle guess who received the largest portion of the donations from Hedge Funds  . . . .  that's right the good Senator Chucky Schumer.  He never mentions Carried Interest again.

Democrat or Republican  ..  ..  ..   they're all the same.  Show me the Money.

Doesn't anyone believe in free markets anymore.  I think Supply and Demand economics prevails. When the three new pipelines start pumping Q4 2019 thru Q2 2020 OPEC will be unable to influence the control of prices.

Before then oil should continue to rise.

 

 

Edited by JJCar
Typo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, JJCar said:

Trump Whitehouse just released a report from Council of Economic Advisors that said high oil prices are good for US economy.  

Not true .  He sold out the working class public to please buddies like Harold Hamm of Continental Energy and the Wallstreet boys that sat down with OPEC at Ceraweek.

Sad.  The oil found under the United States is a valuable "Natural Resource" but it is also a valuable "National Resource"  and should benefit all.  The oil companies sell the oil at cost to their offshore companies whose headquarters are a P.O Box in Bermuda, Cayman Islands or other low tax/no tax domicile , who in turn sells it to enduser.  The US does not collect any Corporate tax.  But the Trump friends get richer and the working class will be paying up for it.

Just like Trump reneged on his campaign promise regard the HUGE Wallstreet tax loophole "carried interest".

TRUMP 2020 has already raised $180 Million in donations.  Take a look at the list of contributors.  Surprise. . . . .  Surprise.  

When the traders see this oil will be up today.  Need to wait for new pipelines. . . . Q4. 

Oil stabilized in the $50's would set the US and World economies on fire.  

Trump new slogan, " Make My Friends Richer Again and Again and  Again."

Well if you have such a big shale oil industry and  China = your biggest geopolitical rival is also a biggest oil importer imho  oil in the 70's is better than in 50's. Because today China imports something like 8 to10 times more oil than USA.

Edited by Tomasz
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tomasz said:

Well if you have such a big shale oil industry and  China = your biggest geopolitical rival is also a biggest oil importer imho  oil in the 70's is better than in 50's. Because today China imports something like 8 to10 times more oil than USA.

I think China has invested heavily in oil producing regions to gain control just in case oil prices rise considerably.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Oil_Engineer said:

I think China has invested heavily in oil producing regions to gain control just in case oil prices rise considerably.

Agreed. China has invested heavily in Venezuelan oil in making large loan for oil deals, and now it is doing the same in South Sudan. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yours is an interesting interpretation and conclusion, probably from the Bloomberg article. Consider the following 4 excerpts from that same report.

"...increased production has undoubtedly served as a boon to the
American position internationally as well as a buffer for American consumers’
sensitivity to oil prices"

"As the United States continues to expand its position as an exporter in
global oil markets, it better insulates itself from the adverse welfare and GDP
consequences of high oil prices and price spikes"

"A second effect of the changing U.S. net petroleum position is that it
may increase protection from the business cycle that is exacerbated by high
oil prices"

"Kilian and Vigfusson (2017) observe that in the period since 1974,
U.S. economic recessions have been universally preceded by increases in the
price of oil"

These 4 quotes are consistent with more US oil on the market and lower prices. The last quote especially indicates it's doubtful the Trump administration desires high oil prices and would be contradictory to Mike Pompeo urging oil companies to continue pumping just 2 weeks ago. Not that it would be unprecedented for government to say contradictory things but I think it's quite clear the US government wants 'low' oil prices.

Here is the quote Bloomberg extracts, leaving out the first sentence.

"The shrinking level of U.S. net imports of petroleum provides indirect
benefits through macroeconomic channels by reducing sensitivity to oil price
shocks. If the United States becomes an annual net exporter of petroleum,
higher oil prices would, on average, help the U.S. economy. In this case, the net
gains for producers, and to their private partners that own mineral deposits,
would outweigh the higher costs for consumers. Such a change would have a
number of important policy implications"

Granted the second to last sentence does seem to favor higher prices but seems to be contradicted by the first and the above 4 quotes. And it then seems to stress, in the last sentence, that it is not advocating for higher prices but that it is a consequence that must be considered when choosing policies. It would not be unheard of for advisors to have conflicting views and is typical of bureaucratic infighting.

You can always count on Bloomberg, or most of the msm for that matter, to write a clickbaity headline with no substance in the story and a questionable interpretation (along with a twitter insert). I think the writer simply went to the conclusion of the report and pulled those sentences out without reading anything else and put "Trump wrong" in the headline. She has a deadline to beat after all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2019 at 10:56 AM, Rodent said:

Agreed. China has invested heavily in Venezuelan oil in making large loan for oil deals, and now it is doing the same in South Sudan. 

Throwing good money after bad never ends well

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2019 at 3:30 AM, Tomasz said:

Well if you have such a big shale oil industry and  China = your biggest geopolitical rival is also a biggest oil importer imho  oil in the 70's is better than in 50's. Because today China imports something like 8 to10 times more oil than USA.

China imports ~10MM bopd, US ~7 but with liquids it is more https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38672

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 3/28/2019 at 10:45 AM, mthebold said:

Whether the US wants higher or lower prices depends on the immediate circumstances.

I make this short. 

First when you say "Whether US wants higher or low prices . . .  "

Whom are you referring to when you say " . .  US . . " ?  Trump Administration ? US consumers ? US oil companies ?  Politicians? 

What all of them should want is Free Market economics.  

Supply and Demand Market.

Stabil $50 bbl oil would create the world's largest economic boom ever.  For ALL countries.  Including emerging markets.  Why fill the 22,000 Saudi Prices pickets with cash. . .   get a job.

Edited by JJCar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JJCar said:

I make this short. 

First when you say "Wether US wants higher or low prices . . .  "

Whom are you referring to when you say " . .  US . . " ?  Trump Administration ? US consumers ? US oil companies ?  Politicians? 

What all of them should want is Free Market economics.  

Supply and Demand Market.

How ignorant to think the world runs on free market.  Most of the world is closed dictatorships/oligarchies whom we have STUPIDLY allowed into our free market and then this statement is not true either, as the rest of "market driven economies", the EU have ~ no oil, so in effect would be a monopoly and DID act this way as the USA was the #1 DOMINANT oil producer in the world for its first 50 years.  Oil has NEVER worked on free market principles. 

For this reason it is one reason why Thorium salt water  thermal reactors can NOT get funding outside of China.  If anyone can get them to work, Coal, oil, NG, wind, solar, geothermal  will disappear overnight.  Why?  EVERYONE has Thorium in their country.  It is a waste product from nearly every single mining operation around the world.  We were very close to getting them to work in the 70's but Nixon happened who hated any industry outside of S. California and cut anyones funding outside of this region to zero. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 3/28/2019 at 12:29 PM, Wastral said:

How ignorant to think the world runs on free market.  Most of the world is closed dictatorships/oligarchies whom we have STUPIDLY allowed into our free market and then this statement is not true either, as the rest of "market driven economies", the EU have ~ no oil, so in effect would be a monopoly and DID act this way as the USA was the #1 DOMINANT oil producer in the world for its first 50 years.  Oil has NEVER worked on free market principles. 

For this reason it is one reason why Thorium salt water  thermal reactors can NOT get funding outside of China.  If anyone can get them to work, Coal, oil, NG, wind, solar, geothermal  will disappear overnight.  Why?  EVERYONE has Thorium in their country.  It is a waste product from nearly every single mining operation around the world.  We were very close to getting them to work in the 70's but Nixon happened who hated any industry outside of S. California and cut anyones funding outside of this region to zero. 

I agree the World doesn't run on a free market. SAUDI's sold US Refiners $3.00 oil for $120.00 in 2006.

BUT THE U.S.  RUNS ON A FREE MARKET ECONOMY.  

PRICE FIXING IS AGAINST THE U.S. ANTI-TRUST LAWS AND SHOULD BE ENFORCED TO THE FULLEST.

As to your other point . . . . . I just bought a THORIUM SALT WATER THERMAL REACTOR AT HOME DEPOT LAST WEEK.  

My other one just went on me.  I had to take cold showers for three days until I could replace it.

Edited by JJCar
Tupo
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello JC ,,,, as far as I know one of the leaders in the field of Thorium Reactor Technology is Moltex Energy. www.moltexenergy.com. it looks very promising and the Canadian Government is reviewing this technology at this time.Conceptually it looks pretty darn good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fred czubba said:

Hello JC ,,,, as far as I know one of the leaders in the field of Thorium Reactor Technology is Moltex Energy. www.moltexenergy.com. it looks very promising and the Canadian Government is reviewing this technology at this time.Conceptually it looks pretty darn good.

Lots of things look good, conceptually.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 3/28/2019 at 2:08 PM, Fred czubba said:

Hello JC ,,,, as far as I know one of the leaders in the field of Thorium Reactor Technology is Moltex Energy. www.moltexenergy.com. it looks very promising and the Canadian Government is reviewing this technology at this time.Conceptually it looks pretty darn good.

A lot of things look good conceptually. They've been working on fusion reactors forever.  I'm all for new technology . . . .  but I wouldn't hold your breath.

I used to be pissed off when GE wouldn't bring to market that light bulb they invented that never burned out. . . . .  Then there was the Goodyear car tire that lasted for 500,000 miles but never saw the light of day . . . Then . . .  

Edited by JJCar
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JJCar said:

I agree the World doesn't run on a free market. SAUDI's sold US Refiners $3.00 oil for $120.00 in 2006.

BUT THE U.S.  RUNS ON A FREE MARKET ECONOMY.  

PRICE FIXING IS AGAINST THE U.S. ANTI-TRUST LAWS AND SHOULD BE ENFORCED TO THE FULLEST.

As to your other point . . . . . I just bought a THORIUM SALT WATER THERMAL REACTOR AT HOME DEPOT LAST WEEK.  

My other one just went on me.  I had to take cold showers for three days until I could replace it.

If the USA cared about price fixing, I agree we should, then we should be massively increasing tariffs on everyone.... actually I have argued for this, but for freedom reasons.  WTO is the dumbest thing ever as it ACTIVELY works against freedom as it gives power to greedy power hungry oligarchs around the world. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JJCar said:

BUT THE U.S.  RUNS ON A FREE MARKET ECONOMY.

yes and no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2019 at 10:36 PM, shadowkin said:

yes and no

YES. ...  and the law should be enforced to the fullest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know why Gasoline Supplied to Market has been trending down year over year for the last four weeks?  Tracking EIA’s Weekly Liquid Supply Estimates I show this metric down by 3.07% or -290,683 BPD over the last four weeks year over year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Higher prices at the pump mean higher Oil prices.  Higher Oil prices mean new Wells.  New Wells means Leasing Agents, Title Agents, Surveyors, equipment operators, welders, pipe fitters, etc, etc, have more work and new jobs.  I seriously do not see how that hurts the Working Class since these people ARE the working class.  Please come out from behind your computer and get out in the field where higher gas prices equal new jobs, new schools and new opportunities.  $75 a barrel oil and $3.00 at the pump is a small price for high paying jobs and money spent in local communities.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

I personally don't think high oil price is bad.

High fuel price encourages efficiency.   More energy efficiency is a good thing.

What I think is bad is when people buy big heavy inefficient vehicles which they don't actually need.

And I'm not only talking about internal combustion engines.  Heavy electric cars can be ineffficient too *cough* Tesla *cough*

If Trump decided to ban import of Russian oil to piss off all the Kremlin-funded Russian trolls on social media, that would be fine with me.

Edited by Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2019 at 1:01 PM, JJCar said:

BUT THE U.S.  RUNS ON A FREE MARKET ECONOMY.  

You've been drinking the spiked kool aid.

Look at the tax code, incentives, disincentives, etc.. Not even remotely free market. Something in the range of 35-40% of the GNP is government. Does anyone here think big medicine, the financial sector, or big agriculture even remotely resembles a free market economics. 

There is a lot of pure play free market on the micro level. But on the macro level, not even close. 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

51 minutes ago, John Foote said:

You've been drinking the spiked kool aid.

Look at the tax code, incentives, disincentives, etc.. Not even remotely free market. Something in the range of 35-40% of the GNP is government. Does anyone here think big medicine, the financial sector, or big agriculture even remotely resembles a free market economics. 

There is a lot of pure play free market on the micro level. But on the macro level, not even close. 

Since it appears this is a political crap thread about the USA...

I would love to get rid of the farm bill, department of non education(zero, de nada, zilch kids taught and $70B down the drain), medicare(utter joke), CIA, TSA, USDA, and social absurdity as well.  For good measure throw in the department of Interior(this isn't the wild west anymore)... That would be a good start.  Oh, and fire 100% of everyone in the State department and DoD pentagon who has been there more than 10 years empire building and then place a moratorium at hiring ANYONE out of any IVY league or CA,NY university(Cough Justices for supreme court and district courts).  Oh yes, get rid of Federal District courts 100%, this is not the horse and buggy days anymore where that system made sense....

While I am whining, can we PLEASE, change our moronic dating schedule to YEAR, MONTH, DAY, instead of the moronic idiotic brain dead stupidity of month, day, year???? I mean WTH!  Speaking of stupidity: Can we please please have 2 doors on trains, just as we do on buses?  One to get on... one to get off... This is NOT complicated!

yea good luck there..... Can I get some cheese to go with my whine?  Hrmm I do not even like wine....

PS: Get rid of the moronic new UL code as well demanding windowed outlets and arc fault breakers turning $2 into $50 times number of circuits/outlets.... Its not like houses were burning down and people were dying left and right.... Those that were dying?  Electricians, not residential occupants. 

Edited by Wastral
Proper opening sentence...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/31/2019 at 8:24 PM, John Foote said:

You've been drinking the spiked kool aid.

Look at the tax code, incentives, disincentives, etc.. Not even remotely free market. Something in the range of 35-40% of the GNP is government. Does anyone here think big medicine, the financial sector, or big agriculture even remotely resembles a free market economics. 

There is a lot of pure play free market on the micro level. But on the macro level, not even close. 

What ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites