I've spoken lately about the free market and how much liberals hate and despise it. You could have very easily ignored that and called me a kook.
Now it is in the open. At the recent (May 23rd) congressional committee meeting with the oil executives, Congresswoman Maxine Waters bluntly, though falteringly, and maybe accidentally, told them that they had to do something or they (the liberals) would nationalize the oil companies.
Here are a couple points of interest:
1. The liberals are precisely why we are in trouble. They have not allowed exploration, building of new refineries (though part of the blame for this lies with the oil companies, to be honest), and have continuously screwed around with the free market.
2. When was the last time the government did anything efficiently, correctly, and properly, other than defend us? All non-military jobs are by definition, non- productive and add nothing to the GNP.
Now that it is in the open, I hope that each and every one of you will wake up and see your enemies for who they are. I don't care if they are Democrats or Republicans, these liberal, socialistic, anti-free market, anti-capitalism, anti-people radicals are not our friends.
Wake, up. Be Prepared.
The Hammer
Copyright Crickard Publishing 2008. All rights Reserved
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 38
Hardly. Liberals reflect the the will of people. Dare tell how this is false.
Understand I am talking about Neo-Libs, not classic Libs such as H. Humphrey, Pres. Truman, etc. I would say JFK or RFK, but if read their speeches, they are really closer to classic conservatives. Humphrey would be disowned by the Neo-Libs.
Government is NOT the end-all but the obstruction in the road to the future.
Again, Liberals reflect the will of the people. Dare tell how this is false and I then shall direct you to a speech wrote by Benjamin Franklin given September 17th, 1787.
As for Truman the classic Lib you say he was, well, a Liberal yes and one whose administration I say the crippling damage inflicted by to these United States yet unfolds today.
When is it the will of the people to be taxed into oblivion, to have their lives regulated from cradle to the grave, or have their "will" as you put it manipulated for the benefit of a few politicians?
Current system needs reform
Solution=More Government
I am Shocked
Gee, what a shocker...a righwinger that's got it completely wrong. Better right this down on the calendar, since it happens SO rarely.
FWIW, there has been more exploration and drilling in this country since the mid-70's than one could even fathom. The FACT is, in spite of what the rightwing loons will say, this country reached peak oil production in about 1974. Ever since then, despite there being exponentially more wells operating, production in this country has fallen.
Recently a massive oil deposit was identified and quantified in western ND. It's been thought to exist for decades, but wasn't definitively marked and quantified until very recently. This deposit may well contain more oil reserves than Saudi Arabia. Although drilling and extraction is significantly more difficult than what we've uncovered as "easily recoverable reserves," the technology does at least exist now to make it happen.
The key issues with oil and gas prices are multi-fold, but can be generally narrowed to some combination/level/degree of the following, in a nutshell:
1. Oil has been stupidly tied to the US dollar, so as the dollar goes, so goes the cost per barrel. Since republiCONs can't help themselves from driving the nation deeply into debt with their utter inability to be fiscally responsible in any way, shape, or form, the fed is forced to print massive amounts of money, in order to try to stave off interest spikes, due to the fact that money falls into short supply while we're shipping tens of billions of dollars overseas to satisfy interest on our massive debt every month.
This increased printing of cash causes a devaluation of our currency, which naturally causes the price-per-barrel of oil to rise. Cause. Effect. Devalue the backing currency of oil, and it takes more of that currency to buy it. Simple.
2. Global demand is increasing dramatically at a time when peak production has, in all likelihood, been passed. Gigantic societies like India and China are becoming production juggernauts, and are devouring massively more oil than they previously did as a result. Supply down. Demand up. Price up. Simple.
3. Next to nothing has been done in this country to bring about sweeping changes in energy consumption, or in the manner in which we derive our energy. After Carter brilliantly introduced a plan that would've made a marked difference, and would've had us well on our way to energy independence by now, Redink Ronnie completely ended that program, and brought us to our knees by dramatically increasing our dependence on foreign oil. Stupid move, but obviously a payback to the oil industry that brought him into power.
4. Private companies in this country have been allowed to monoplize the industry, and then to conspire to limit refinery capacity and artificially drive the cost of gas through the ceiling. Internal memos that have been recovered prove that oil companies conspired for this decades ago. Today, virtually the entire oil industry in this country shares their books. In decades gone by, oil companies were kept separate, and had to compete with one another as a result. That is no longer the case. They have become a monopoly, and we are being held hostage as a result.
5. The illegal occupation of Iraq has a significant impact on the world's available oil supply, and we're paying for the result at the pump. Supply again is decreased, while demand is once again increased.
6. Oil is traded as a commodity on world markets. Anything that causes speculators to predict a future rise in this commodity causes them to buy more of that commodity on the world markets, thus driving the price of that commodity higher and higher. Without speculation, the price of oil would be significantly lower than it is today. The "free market" once again costing us all bigtime.
Solving the problems won't be at all easy, but it will definitely require a massive move towards conservation and alternative energy development, rather than a continued move away from those solutions. Our federal government, under this worst president in US history (an entire administration, not surprisingly, considering our current plight, comprised of oil industry execs) has been rewarding the purchase of massive gas hogs, such as SUVs, while at the same time, virtually punishing the purchase of economical hybrid and electric vehicles. The entire thrust of this administration, since day one, has been to consume more and more fuel.
That mindset must change. Mandating that all non-military government vehicles be hybrid, hydrogen, or electric powered by a given year would have a massive impact. Not only would it significantly reduce the fuel consumption nationwide, instantly, but it would also bring about the installation of hydrogen, ethanol (not my favorite alternative), and electric fueling stations, which would then encourage and bring about consumer demand for these alternative energy vehicles. Nobody wants to buy a hydrogen powered car when you have to drive 300 miles to fuel up.
Also, a massive "Apollo project" should be unrolled, to build wind farms, solar farms, tidal energy farms, geothermal energy fields, etc. The effect would be multi-fold. In the short term, it would serve to employ probably millions, and would create massive wealth as companies sprang up to meet the challenges. It would also bring us much closer, much sooner, to energy independence, and would cause a great reduction in pollution and CO2 production. There are no bad effects that would come about as a result of this move.
"2. When was the last time the government did anything efficiently, correctly, and properly, other than defend us?"
Prior to the corrupt, diseased, monstrously failed bush crime family poisoning the government, pretty much every government agency was a model of efficiency. After Bush I nearly destroyed FEMA, Clinton resurrected it into a cabinet level and it received glowing reports to the way that it responded to emergenies. Bush II once again demolished it to the point of uselessness.
Medicare has ALWAYS been, since its inception, THE most efficient means of delivering healthcare in this country. It is exponentially more efficient and effective than our disastrously failed privatized system.
The public portion of the pentagon, our military, is the world's most efficient killing machine, bar none. The command structure maintains itself as a pillar of success for a government-run entity. The privatized portion of the pentagon, however, is an entirely different story that I don't think even the most delusional rightwingnut would pretend is working.
Social security is also another slam dunk success for a publicly run program. Rightwingnuts will pretend and try to mislead you by suggesting that it's a "poor rate of return for you investment," but in fact, the program was NEVER intended to be a retirement vehicle. It is, was, and always has been, a safety net, to prevent the poorest among us from suffering and dying in the streets in despair and shame. Very few would want the naked greed of an ENRON/TYCO/Global Crossings/Etc to be fully in charge of that safety net. We've all seen all too well what naked, unbridled, unrestricted capitalism brings about, and it ain't pretty to anyone but the gluttonous pigs that run these companies into the ground, and then scurry away with hundreds of millions in pretty golden parachutes, at the expense of the masses.
"All non-military jobs are by definition, non- productive and add nothing to the GNP."
Yet more delusion from the delusional rightwing. Take a wild guess at how much profit a private company would earn if there were no transportation systems, no communications systems, no electrical power grids, no legal system, no police and fire protection, no educated society to draw productive workers from, no prisons to keep raw criminals from destroying society, etc., etc., etc.
This is the greatest single failure of rightwing ideology, imo. The mistaken, foolish belief that there is such thing as a "free market." There simply is not. Without a public infrastructure, NOTHING HAPPENS. Go visit a wild tribe in Africa or South America sometime, and see what kind of market capitalization they've got going on. Then, take a look at what China is becoming, after 15 years of massive investment in the public infrastructure. America didn't rise to the world's leading economic producer by accident, nor was it simply the result of "hard work."
"Just give me one example of these "liberals" as to when they did something for the good of the people. Not 20 things, just one."
Sorry...I didn't see this soon enough. I guess I provided about 20. My bad.
" Communists tend to do the same things as liberal Democrats. Chavez recently 'nationalized' much of what was privately owned. A dream come true for dims. "
And look at what it's done for the benefit of the people of that nation. The US is the only oil-producing nation that has a fully privatized (though heavily publicly subsidized) oil industry.
Venuzuala is paying $0.12/gallon for gas. We're paying $4.00 now, and rising.
Solution=More Government"
No, that would be SO wrong, wouldnt' it? After all, it's the privatized system that has brought us to our knees...CLEARLY what we all need is MORE privatization, right? Any idiot could see that.
"and just for the Record Clark applauded Chavez"
Oh gee, that's awful, isn't it? After all, he booted out the private monopoly oil industry and handed the wealth over to the masses to lift them out of poverty. That's horrible. How could he be so vicious and cruel?
You people seriously need to educate yourselves a bit, and get a grip on reality.
"A broken clock is right twice a day".
After that rant, we can see who is delusional.
I've included that as one of the reasons. There are several that you're ignoring, that are equally as important. Speculation alone is NOT the only issue. Btw, what's your perfect solution to speculating? Let the "Free market" sort it out by allowing more speculation?
"Clark you are a socialist who just wants government to be the end all be all."
Not so at all. I AM a socialist, because that's what Jesus the Christ was, and I figure if it was good enough for Him, it's good enough for me. However, I'm not foolish enough to believe that government should be entirely in control of all, unlike typical rightwingers, who foolishly believe that NO government is the best solution.
We've seen what "no government" produces...massive corruption and fraud, illegal wars, disastrous disaster relief efforts, unfathomable national debt, collapsing bridges, insufficient armor and poisoned food for soldiers, massive collapse of massive companies, outright robbery of the public by corporate thieves, utter lack of accountability at any level, etc., etc., etc. It doesn't work any better than state ownership of all. It takes a balance between capitalism and socialism.
"Sorry that is not the government we set up in America. There is that pesky little thing called a Constitution to protect us from people like you "
Actually, the constitution never set up a purely, 100% capitalistic economy in this nation. Check your facts. What it actually set up was "equality for all," which is patently socialistic. Sorry. It seems that the constitution is there to protect us from people like YOU.
Translation: "I'm feeling a bit outclassed and unprepared to respond to what obviously makes more sense than I'd have ever expected. I think I'll just find some pathetic way to try to get people to ignore the fact that I've just had my ass handed to me..."
I have promoted alternative energy sources for over 30 years.
The problem with most of them (though that shouldn't stop us from working on them) is that most, especially solar is extremely inefficient. In the future i am sure that will change.
Building micro-nuclear reactors, a massive rebuilding of our railway systems, and gasification of coal (both environmentally safe and efficient) would reduce our consumption of energy by huge amounts, now.
The problem is that it is too efficient and there's no way for control freaks such as yourself to get a handle on them.
I apologize for the personal remark, but after everything thing you have said, I believe I am entitled.
It always amazes me when anyone brings Jesus into a discussion that is not a spiritual debate. It lowers their credibility immediately. I doubt seriously if He would quote you.
Since you brought it up. Jesus stood for helping the poor, uplifting the downtrodden, clothing the naked, feeding the hungry. Classical conservatives are the only ones that want to do this on a permanent basis, help those in need to help themselves. Liberals want to give them just enough to make them dependent so they can exercise control of them, and get their votes.
So, you DO like having men handle your ass then, is that it? Interesting. Seems to be a fairly common trait amongst rightwingers, for some reason.
"I have promoted alternative energy sources for over 30 years. "
You must've been horrified when Redink Ronnie rolled back Carter's program.
"The problem with most of them (though that shouldn't stop us from working on them) is that most, especially solar is extremely inefficient. :"
Actually, that's no true anymore, and will become even less so as aggressive funding produces better and better technologies. Will it instantly produce the equivalent of $0.65/gallon gas? Obviously not, but many of the reasonably developed alternative energies will compete very well with $4.00/gallon and higher gas.
"Building micro-nuclear reactors"
Extremely wasteful, short-sighted, and foolish. Of course, the nuclear industry is closely tied to the fossil fuel industry, so it's obvious why it is still bandied about as a viable future energy source, even though it's really not.
"gasification of coal"
The by-product of this is CO2 production. I think we're already producing enough of that. However, there's a brilliant example of symbiotic co-relation of this and oil production going on between western ND and Alberta Canada. The gasification plant in Beulah ND produces natural gas from highly abundant ND bituminous coal, and pipes the CO2 up to Alberta, where it's pumped into the ground and acts as a solvent to remove oil from rock that would otherwise make it impossible to extract. The CO2 changes positions with the oil. We get natural gas from a filthy form of coal, the CO2 produced in the process is captured rather than dumped into the atmosphere, it's then pumped into the ground to extract oil. A win-win-win.
"The problem is that it is too efficient and there's no way for control freaks such as yourself to get a handle on them."
Oh, so anyone that wants things to work properly is a "control freak," huh? How about you and yours, who obsessively want things NOT to work? Are you not exhibiting control freak characteristics with your obsession with unfettered, unregulated, unrestricted capitalism? However, instead of allowing the PUBLIC to control how things are done, you're forcibly handing control to the crony capitalists. That's how things get broken, in case you hadn't noticed.
"I apologize for the personal remark, but after everything thing you have said, I believe I am entitled. "
I've said far, far worse in my mildest posts. I'm immune to personal attacks, as I've been a hated, high-profile target of the "right" for several years now. Apology certainly accepted, but by no means necessary.
Good for you. I'm so happy to see you say that, as if it matters one tiny bit. You use whatever desperate means you feel you have to in order to attempt to marginalize me or what I've said. Whatever makes YOU feel even slightly more signficant by, in your mind, somehow tearing someone else down, is what you should run with.
There's an old saying: There are two ways to have the tallest building in town. You can either tear everyone else's around you down until yours is the tallest, or you can build yours up so that it towers above all others. The choice is within each of us to do as we best see fit.
Btw, Jesus WAS a socialist, by the purest definition of the word. Sorry to break that one to you.
(*Sitting on couch munching popcorn and waiting for Round II: The GOP Mudslinging Non-response or...could it be? The ubiquitous wild card 'Clinton' being played.*)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Nothing like bringing some facts to a feast of ranting.
Sometimes in these discussions, however, it's simply best to mutally agree to disagree. There are obviously things that left and right will simply never agree upon, regardless of how much "fact" either side presents. The beatiful thing about political discussions is the matrix of complexities involved, but that also makes it the weak point of discussing politics. Aside from some inescapable truths, much of our ideological beliefs is guided by what we have come to see as the "right" way of doing things, and, to a degree, either side can claim "victory" on most issues.
The fact is, we can argue about minutia until the cows come home, and never reach agreement on anything definitive. Usually, truly common ground is only found in broad, sweeping discussion. There are virtually NO rightwing voices who would agree that the republican party of the past 30 years has been even remotely "conservative," and there are virtually no liberal voices who would proclaim pure communism the world's most effective economic policy. Most of us aren't idiots, if we're discussing politics back and forth, after all.
Where in that precious document does it state that this country should be a fascist dictatorship, as you and your lunatic friends have advocated?
At last there appears to be an avenue of discussion.
I know that I come from a strong scientific foundation. I am not some kook waiving a sign on the street corner. Statistics are available (as are scripture passages) to prove any point, that is why I seldom refer to them.
The bottom line is that new sources of energy must be found, on that we both agree on. Our approach my be different, but that search is the necessity of the future.
In the process, our individual rights should not be up for grabs by anyone. As I said before and agree with you classical conservatives and liberals today would be left out of everything as the Neo-Cons & Neo-Libs try to exert complete control.
I for one, will not go down without a fight. I have kids and hopefully they will have children, and at this time that is my main concern. Corporate America has to have a lease put on it, but I disagree on how to do it.
I wish you (and your friends) the best that life has to offer, that my dear friend is a very conservative way to state it.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
We've been in this business for over 25 years. Does that mean that we CANNOT be liberals? That we don't see the need and wisdom for regulation in the market? Do tell. Because we are...and we do. And we can tell you many reasons why regulation of the markets is a good thing.
You guys with your "free market" crap don't know a damn thing about the markets. You just like to spout that jargon when you hear something on right-wing talk radio like you really understand what you are talking about.
Did I mention that we're liberals and Democrats? Do you even know the real definition of the word "liberal"?
All the rules which you already have and can dream up, aren't going to stop that kind of corruption.
As long as you allow companies to be born, die, and go bankrupt like humans, you will have that. The only safe and accountable system is stock companies, where every stock holder is responsible. With the corporations founded under the Corporate Law of 1898, you have no accountability, just as you don't have any accountability with government at any level.
Furthermore, the more rules and regulations you have, the more difficult it is to stop crooks like Enron, and the old Savings & Loan companies.
You can't have it both ways. Sometime, somewhere, there has to be accountability. Liberals want someone else to be responsible for everything. You have to be responsible and accountable for your own actions, and stop trying to make everyone a victim.
Of course you can be in business and be a liberal, some of my best friends fall into that category, but they are NOT Neo-Libs. they are decent human beings just as I am sure you are. I doubt seriously that you want to run anyone's life but your own.
However, you can not say that about the current leadership of either party. For the last 16 years power and control is all that has existed in DC and it looks like we're headed for another 4, no matter who wins.
We dont live in a facist dictatorship there clark. Get over it. You just dont like it when the people voted for someone other than your choice.
What you seem to be railing against, Bert, is regulation of the oil industry. It used to be regulated. Most countries regulate it to some extent because they realize that it, like utilities, are necessary to the safe, secure and normalized life of their citizens. To de-regulate a vital piece of the economy and let it run wild is what we have seen over the past years of a Republican-dominated Congress and Executive.
To put the regulations back into place is not "socialism"...it's not "communism"...it makes perfect sense from a market perspective. We see egg-headed things happen all the time in the market. It just means that there are greedy, unethical people in the "market" trying to make a fast buck off other people's hard-earned money. And over the past few years of the reign of the "free market" types, they have been able to do just that. The "free market" types seem to actually believe that the market regulates itself. What a crock. The market, since the Big Crash has done very well with regulations, until the Bush Admin got there hands into it and started de-regulating and turning their heads away from the people breaking the existing regulations, all the while crying "free markets"!
Don't you see? It's an excuse for the greedy to run wild. And it will be the downfall of this country if we continue down that path. In the oil market...in every market. We've seen what happened when the greedy, unethical people came up with their sub-prime scam. Ethical people in the industry went to Washington about that years ago....telling them that they needed to look at these jokers and put constraints on them. The Republicans would not listen and cried "free market". Look what those idiots have done.
I resent being thrown into any "named" group and have insults lobbed at me. I am FOR regulation. I am FOR heavily regulated utilities, including oil. I am FOR protecting the markets in areas that are most vital to our national security and overall health and welfare. You "free market" guys want to call that socialism, then big deal. Call it any name in the book that you would like....we need more regulation in the oil industry. We need to close up the Enron loophole. We need more detailed and stricter regulation on futures trading in these areas. We need to have a whole group of regulators out there watching over the hedge fund managers.
Regulations drive up costs. It is that simple.
Free markets correct themselves. What you have now is a combination of speculation and the end results of years of regulations. In a truly free market Enron could not have happened. If it had been a stock company, it could not have happened.
Encourage more drilling, encourage alternative energy if you want, I'm all for it. But don't think you can regulate prices in anything. Nixon found that out the hard way.
Whether you want to admit it or not, liberals have had their way for over 90 years with a brief pause from 1980-1988, and look where it has gotten us.
Regulation of the food industry through farm subsidies (since 1957) has given us a bunch of corporate farms with no real investment in keeping the land or environment healthy. They just dump fertilizer and grow whatever they can. I grew up on a farm and in the country and this breaks my heart.
I am NO FRIEND of the oil companies because they have sat back and let a lot of this happen, but after taxes and cost of regulations already in place, they make less percentage wise than grocery stores do. I know both you and I could not survive on that low a margin. Making money is good not bad.
When is it the will of the people to be taxed into oblivion, to have their lives regulated from cradle to the grave, or have their "will" as you put it manipulated for the benefit of a few politicians?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well, here is that speech I told you about: "
In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other."
Free markets correct themselves. "
Bert - you have proven to me that you know nothing about the history of the markets, regulation of the markets and what "free markets" really mean.
I suggest you go back and study the history of the stock and commodity markets in the US. And then take a look at why the SEC laws came into being. Then look at who is regulated right now, and who is not regulated under those laws. Then I want you to look at where the problems have come from over the past few decades.
When you understand what you are talking about, then we can continue our conversation.