Gas @ $3.99 and increasing to $4.25+
- Thread starter TheGunner
- Start date
What in the actual fukk are you yammering on about? You dipshits can’t even stay on point. First it’s a nonexistent pipeline that would have done nothing to gas prices. 03 stayed $500m in savings. Spread over what? So then we move on to leases and permits. Never mind there are plenty of unused leases and permits out there. But oh because you weren’t told that by Fox then I’m full of shit. And that’s just it. When presented with the counter, you just divert and backpeddle and resort to fifth grade behavior. You and the rest of your brain trust on here have been asked time and time again how a pipeline that doesn’t exist is going to help. And the ONLY response I get is from a YouTube conspiracy whacko that links me to an 11 year old opinion piece and says oh hey $500m is gonna make a hell of an impact without anything to back that up. Woo boy yeah that’s gonna do a lot. Then again, what do I expect when I’m talking to a group with the combined IQ equivalent of a dried out dog turd.
That dog turd would still be above yours. Do you just yammer to see how stupid you are or do you have some point. You are clueless about anything , keep posting the same clueless shit every day and expect a different result. My God man just give up.
Show me on the doll where religion hurt you. Someone gives you an honest answer and you’re reduced to insulting him and blaming religion as your reason for being a prick. And you must really hate religion because every single response from you is the exact same. Oh and you’re a stalker to boot. What a fukking weirdo.
Dude, you have issues. You've been given multiple valid answers now and you completely ignore them or ignore major details of them. That's not our problem, that's yours. You're such a fvcking hack that you call ME a conspiracy theorist.
"And the ONLY response I get is from a YouTube conspiracy whacko that links me to an 11 year old opinion piece and says oh hey $500m is gonna make a hell of an impact without anything to back that up."
JFC man you're dumb. The link I gave you was by a think tank. They sited studies from the Energy Policy Research Foundation (of which that study said there would be $500m saved PER YEAR by using the pipeline and not trucking the oil) as well as the Perryman Group just to name a couple. Did you even read the thing?
But keep telling yourself that the link I gave you didn't have anything to back it up. Asshole. Try reading something that isn't Dem talking points for once.
Last edited:
That infamous pipeline that "would have no effect on prices because it wasn't completed" was a year from completion when shitcanned by Biden 13 months ago so it likely would have been on line today. It would have delivered enough crude from Canada to TX refineries to more than replace the Russian oil. It would have delivered the crude much more safely and inexpensively than by trucks, trains, and ships.
Meanwhile in southern IL regular has gone from 1.89 on Nov 8, 2020 to 4.59 today. Good thing I live in the country because my lawn may go au naturale this Sumner. Don't believe I'll mow this summer.
Meanwhile in southern IL regular has gone from 1.89 on Nov 8, 2020 to 4.59 today. Good thing I live in the country because my lawn may go au naturale this Sumner. Don't believe I'll mow this summer.
So, you'd rather everyone pay high prices, even those that it hurts the most, than to have a pipeline that would have been working by now. You truly are left of left.
THE NIGHT WATCHMAN
Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle
of a desert.
Congress said, "Someone may steal from it at night." So they created
a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.
Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without
instruction?" So they created a planning department and hired two
people, one person to write the instructions,and one person to do time
studies.
Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the
tasks correctly?" So they created a Quality Control department and
hired two people. One was to do the studies and one was to write the
reports.
Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So
they created two positions: a time keeper and a payroll officer then
hired two people.
Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?"
So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an
Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal
Secretary.
Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one
year and we are $918,000 over budget, we must cut back." So they laid
off the night watchman.
NOW slowly, let it sink in.
Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter. Does anybody remember the
reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during
the Carter administration?
Anybody? Anything? Anyone? No? Didn't think so!
Bottom line is, we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support
of an agency, the reason for which very few people who read this can
remember!
Ready??
It was very simple... and at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate.
The Department of Energy was instituted on 8/04/1977, TO LESSEN OUR
DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
Hey, pretty efficient, huh???
AND NOW IT'S 2022 -- 45 YEARS LATER -- AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS
"NECESSARY" DEPARTMENT IS AT $242 BILLION A YEAR. IT HAS 16,000
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND
LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!
(THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, "WHAT WERE THEY
THINKING?")
34 years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports. Today 70%
of our oil consumption is foreign imports.
Ah, yes -- good old Federal bureaucracy.
NOW, WE HAVE TURNED OVER THE BANKING SYSTEM, HEALTH CARE, AND THE AUTO
INDUSTRY TO THE SAME GOVERNMENT? What can possibly go wrong?
Hello!! Anybody Home?
Signed.... The Night Watchman
Likely true, but how do you get from “some scientists disagree with climate change and talk about it with each other” to “there are orders of magnitude more?” Do you have information about how many scientists hold these conversations? Again, if this is not happening with public knowledge because they are afraid to speak out, how do you know about it?
Also, in another conversation you said that most scientists aren’t a part of the conspiracy to push the climate change narrative, they just are taught by people who are in universities and such, so they just don’t actually understand some of the simple scientific concepts (like the second law of thermodynamic). This would seem to be at odds with your statement here. If most scientists are innocent and have just been taught incorrectly for the sake of the narrative, that’d imply that they DO believe in climate change, just mistakenly. If, as you suggest here, most scientists DON’T believe in climate change but have to lie to the public about it, then they actually are a part of the conspiracy, even if unwillingly.
So, which is it, a few high-profile scientists perpetuate a conspiracy by incorrectly teaching the rank and file so they’ll misunderstand basic scientific concepts, thus believing in climate change, or most scientisits know what’s up, they just can’t talk about it for fear of being “canceled?”
Last edited:
The Oregon Petition project is a good source to see just how many out there disagree. That's only the ones willing to speak out and is just a drop in the bucket of all those that disagree with AGW I'm willing to bet.
To your second paragraph. There is nothing at odds with what I said. Of those that are pushing AGW, they probably do not know they are incorrectly taught certain things. This is not at odds with a large number of people being against AGW all together. Each group is their own entity. Some lie, some are duped. If you expect me to give you exact numbers then you're looking for the wrong info.
It's a bit of both. A few high profile scientists/activists (because most of the scientists pushing AGW are also activists) are pushing the fake narrative. There are also those that don't understand what is wrong with their science because they were taught improper science of the climate. THEN there are the group of scientists that know full well that AGW science is mostly nonsense. Most stay silent while some push back. Most of the ones that push back are older, established and don't have much to lose. The ones that stay silent still have some career ahead of them. If they make waves, their career could be over.
Last edited:
All of those are incredibly privatized in the US. But go off man
How would the pipeline have been working by now? There isn’t one synapse that connects to another in any of your brains. It’s truly amazing.
How dare you think something that is hypothetical would have people on both sides of the fence.
It doesn't get much better than this...I'm not denying there are some that disagree, but you said, and have reiterated here, that there are many more than are willing to say it publicly. But, thanks to your last four words, I finally got my question answered that you don't in fact have any information to support that statement, you just made it up based on your own opinion.
Like your other statement about orders of magnitude, this is, again, just your speculation. You THINK there are a bunch of scientists who disagree but are afraid to speak out. You don't have any data to support it.
No. Nearly everyone that speaks out against AGW also say that they have many colleges that email them/speak to them in private that agree with them but can't come out in public.
Ok man. See my prior response.
Honestly, I think it's WAY more ridiculous to claim that 97% of scientists agree. I would love to see the data on that, but none is ever given. Why? Because it's bullshit.
Well, for one thing, it was to be working and transporting oil by the end of 2021 and in full operation by mid to late 2022 at full capacity. Even MSNBC stated so three nights ago. And my synapsis' are perfectly in tune with my dendrites
Very few liberals with a Harris blow up doll do.
Are you talking about keystone XL? If it was supposed to be operational by later this year, back me into when it was supposed to be built?
Timeline of the Keystone XL Pipeline Project
With environmental factors and economic viability threatening the pipeline since its inception, the go-ahead of the pipeline has been a roller coaster ride. Major events over the time period include:- June 2008 – Keystone XL proposed by Trans Canada (now T.C. Energy)
- February 2010 – The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission grants permission for construction
- March 2010 – the National Energy Board approves the project
- September 2011 – The Cornell ILR Global Labour Institute published a report on the environmental, energy, and economic impact of the XL pipeline
- November 2011 – The State Department does not authorize the project and postpones it while studying alternative routes for the XL pipeline
- January 2015 – The pipeline was approved by the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives
- November 2015 – U.S. President Obama stopped the project over environmental concerns
- March 2017 – U.S. President Trump revived the project by signing a presidential permit
- July 2020 – The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the halting of all work on the Keystone XL Pipeline Project in a related case
- January 2021 – U.S. President Biden revoked a key cross-border permit required to finish the Keystone XL Pipeline Project
You are almost too easy to make fun of. For starters I have watched religion systematically tear families apart , my own included apart. Just amazes me . Hey keep on tossing money in the plate to pay someone to tell me how to live right? You have absolutely no clue . I'm not giving you details . I really don't think I've commented on religion before this, but I have watched what it does to people in extremes? Are you a religious freak or just being a d*ck? Every post Bob makes is worth a laugh so I give him one. You aren't even worth the time
What???? That's wrong. I'm surprised to even heard it stated.
Republicans make more money, have a higher average level of education, tend to be less minorities, tend to be more conservative as defined, tend to more nativism.
https://dasil.sites.grinnell.edu/2020/05/the-demographic-profiles-of-democrats-and-republicans/
Part of th' stoopidity we see, is th' result of th' igno'ance allered in our ejoocayshun system which perpetuates itse'f due t'th' systems of society thet nevahs holds enny students accountable, but corntinues t'provide various crutches an' rewards fo' not larnin'...much of ennythin'. Jo'dan aroun' 90 seconds startin' aroun' 6 minutes in points this hyar out. Meanwhile look at th' course offerin's pushed as a political ajunda instead of some real histo'ic atrocities.
The answer is that a few of those 9000+ oil leases we keep hearing about....that have not been opened yet (& actually have oil) would rely on the economics of this pipeline to go from lease to producing well.
(That is IF the company can also afford the many added regulations of this admin.)
Some of the 9000 leases we hear about were relying on the economics of the pipeline to go from lease to production.
And again, so what? The pipeline was never going to be done by now. You really need to let it go as some magic bullet that was going to curb rising gas prices.
I know economics is not your strong suit, but this is fairly straight forward....
There are alot of economics of putting a lease into actual production. Part of those economics are:
1 Added costs of regulations of this admin.
2. Added costs of moving oil to market by train over the pipeline.
3. Is there actually enough oil there to make it worthwhile?
This is why we hear "9000" leases, but few have gone from lease to production.
These outrageously inflated D produced oil prices will help those economics ....so at least there is that.
Hope that helps.
You can't seem to let go of showing us all clearly that you are stupid and don't have the first clue about anything you post. Let it go , you are wrong.
1. What added costs have been put in place by this administration?
2. The pipeline isn’t there. It wouldn’t have been done by now anyway. It’s a moot point
3. Is there enough oil where?
I saw a post on Facebook the other day (I know, I know lol) from the guy I bought my last car from. He works for a Jeep dealership. Obviously not known for great fuel efficiency. In a nutshell he brought up a handful of things:
1. His concern about gas prices. He readily acknowledged he will rethink a planned summer trip with his family
2. That the thought that any government official can change gas prices is an absurd fallacy (aka no one who wants to stay in office says yes let’s just throw on another 25 cents today), especially because of the next point
3. Why do energy companies just arbitrarily hike prices on gas when other industries don’t? Oh it’s holiday season. Let’s hike the prices. Oh there might be a conflict somewhere, let’s hike the prices now. Oh there might be a storm, so let’s hike the prices now. Other industries don’t do that at the rate the energy industry does. He also pointed out that to look at gas prices and then see that these energy industries are raking in record profits can’t be overlooked
4. He thinks competition is good. Let electric compete with fuel. If everything goes full electric, we’re back to where we started with pricing
5. Finally, as long as this country is so averse to mass transit, paying higher fuel costs is part of the deal. Biking and high speed trains and more bus routes etc aren’t looked kindly upon. Why? Well here in Indy, folks are mad that the new bus lines being put in take lanes for traffic out. There are other factors, but it’s one of them. We’re a country highly reliant on automobiles and unless some of that reliance changes, we’re at the whims of things that one pipeline aren’t going to fix.
Long post. It’s Friday. Don’t want to work and am anxious for the game tonight. But I went to fill my tank this morning and someone placed a sticker on the pump of a picture with Biden saying “I did that” and my first thought was that whoever did that knows shit about shit in regards to what’s going on.
Last edited:
Piss off with your condescension.
What does the pipeline have to do with oil leases? He said "would rely on the economics of this pipeline to go from lease to producing well."
It's Canadian oil going through that pipeline. Has nothing to do with producing through government leases.
You know that 90% of the oil produced here come from PRIVATE land right? And we're not a socialist country......so the government doesn't dictate how much oil is produced on private or public land.
"more drilling permits were approved in the first year of Biden's presidency than during his predecessor's first 365 days. The center found the Biden administration approved 3,557 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands last year (2021), outpacing the Trump administration's first-year total of 2,658."
Have Biden Administration Policies Reduced U.S. Oil Production?
Republicans have ramped up their criticism of Biden's agenda as Russia-Ukraine crisis throws the global energy market into a tailspin.
www.newsweek.com
The environmentalists are actually pissed off at Biden for not restricting oil production.
We need more people like Jordan Peterson. A true intellectual.
Actually it would have been if not really really close to done by now. But thanks to this moron in chief, we're still over a year away from it being completed.
