Hypocracy

**Aenlic** · 08-26-2005, 15:04

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

A)B) So you see the wisdom of opening Alaska to oil drilling.

There is just about enough oil under the Anwar to supply this country's gluttonous oil comsumption needs for... wait for it... 6 months. That's it. That's the whole shebang.

The problem isn't oil production. It's oil consumption. The U.S. is one of the world's leading producers of petrochemicals - already! We're the third largest oil producer behind Saudi Arabia and Russia. But, because we have all of the self-control of a 4 year old in a toy store, we are also the world's largest consumer of petrochemical products. We consume more than 3 times more oil than the next largest countries, China and Japan. We consume more than twice what we produce; but if we cut our consumption down to just what the next largest consumer country uses each year, then our production capacity would allow us export about as much oil as Venezuela and make us somewhere around the 6th or 7th leading exporter of oil, fixing our trade deficit and a lot of other things. So our production can't meet our needs and we have to import massive amounts of oil from other countries. But we won't fix that problem. Because we just have to have our toys, like that 4 year old who wants it all.

So keep on driving that gas-guzzling SUV, it's doing wonders for our economy and our international relations. Think about the fact that more half of the gas you use comes from overseas suppliers. And consider that a significant portion of that amount from overseas comes from Saudi Arabia. And that a significant amount of the profit from the purchase from Saudi Arabia goes into the hands of members of the royal family who then send a portion of that to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. What could possibly be more stupid?

If we fix our consumption, we'd turn our economy from a debtor nation in trade to an exporter nation with a trade surplus. Duh uh. But I'll bet we don't do it. We'd rather get that gleam in our eyes and say "gimme! gimme! I want!"

**Gawain of Orkeny** · 08-26-2005, 15:45

Blaming it on the left won't work. They've been far closer to being accurate on this than the right.

Baloney. Are you telling me groups like Greenpeace and the Seirra club are rightwing organizations? Is it the right who opposes more drilling. Is it they who oppose building new refineries and nuclear plants.Lets have a little intellectual honesty here shall we.

They don't think "conservation" is a dirty word for starters.

No thats all they can think of instead of increasing supply.

We've been using your policy for a long time.

Man speaking of hypocracy. Hows that? You mean weve been using your policy for a longtime. It has led to the higher prices and thats the point. Come gentlemen at least admit its hypocrital of the left to complain that Bush has caused oil prices to rise when one, they want higher prices and two they are the cause of it and three they continue to limit supply through legislation.

At least Ichi got the point of this thread. I didnt want t to be a debate about oil but about hypocracy. The right is no better off on this matter. The republicans claim to be for smaller government and fisical responsiblity yet Bush has been spending money like a drunken sailor and the government just keeps getting bigger and more intrusive. This is what Im talking about. I want your examples of hypocracy not a long dragged out debate over oil. Weve done that countless times before.

**Steppe Merc** · 08-26-2005, 17:10

Thank you Red Harvest for your assistance.

Oh, natraul grease was free for my cousin. The food places just gave it too him. Of course, if more people use it, they might start charging for it. But somehow, I doubt too many people will jump on the band wagon.

Gawain, you are probably right, it is a bit unfair to blame soley Bush. But can I blame the people who refuse to go to logical alternative energies for not converting?

Ok, let me think of a hypocracy... Oh, ok. I don't want to start a whole big argument, but I don't understand how a place can claim to have a culture of life for just preventing abortions while executing criminals and being in wars.

**Gawain of Orkeny** · 08-26-2005, 17:13

Ok, let me think of a hypocracy... Oh, ok. I don't want to start a whole big argument, but I don't understand how a place can claim to have a culture of life for just preventing abortions while executing criminals and being in wars.

Well we now have a culture of death. I oppose both as should anyone whos not a hypocrite

IM also against war. But thats beyond my control.

**Crazed Rabbit** · 08-26-2005, 17:15

I have this farcical notion that killing a baby in cold blood is not similar to executing a criminal after a trial.

Crazed Rbbit

**Steppe Merc** · 08-26-2005, 17:24

But it's still life. You are either a culture of life, protetecting all life, or you aren't.
And I do think there is a difference. I really don't see an abortion while done during the first trimester as a human. I don't think life begins at conception. I'm not saying that abortions are good, and I do think more should be done to prevent as many abortions as possible as well as changing the current laws, but the option has to be open.

**Red Harvest** · 08-26-2005, 18:09

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Baloney. Are you telling me groups like Greenpeace and the Seirra club are rightwing organizations? Is it the right who opposes more drilling. Is it they who oppose building new refineries and nuclear plants.Lets have a little intellectual honesty here shall we.

Ok, I'll give you some brutal honesty.

This seems to have gone so far over your head that it is comical. You still don't get it. Refineries aren't the issue (We can and do add capacity as we need it. The lack of a big gap between refined products and oil refutes the refinery bottleneck theory.) Opposing drilling isn't it either, drilling our way out doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You are busy chasing wild geese rather than looking at the problem with intellectual honesty. The easy to extract (and refine) oil is being depleted faster than it can be replaced, meanwhile global demand has accelerated.

Man speaking of hypocracy. Hows that? You mean weve been using your policy for a longtime. It has led to the higher prices and thats the point. Come gentlemen at least admit its hypocrital of the left to complain that Bush has caused oil prices to rise when one, they want higher prices and two they are the cause of it and three they continue to limit supply through legislation.

Considering the Republicans have had control for several years and have set the "energy policy" without input from the other side who they clearly snubbed, we'll just label this theory: MYTH BUSTED. Myopia, that's the problem. Consumers of all political affiliations think they gave some Constitutional guarrantee of cheap gas, somewhere in the Bill or Rights perhaps. Short sighted thinking has been the norm and political leadership plays to that. Those presently in charge are doing a great deal to illustrate the evils of short term thinking. Look at oil, look at Iraq, look at the national debt, look at the trade deficit, look at health care costs.

By the way, it is spelled "hypocrisy."

**Xiahou** · 08-27-2005, 00:41

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Ok, I'll give you some brutal honesty.

This seems to have gone so far over your head that it is comical. You still don't get it. Refineries aren't the issue (We can and do add capacity as we need it. The lack of a big gap between refined products and oil refutes the refinery bottleneck theory.) Opposing drilling isn't it either, drilling our way out doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You are busy chasing wild geese rather than looking at the problem with intellectual honesty. The easy to extract (and refine) oil is being depleted faster than it can be replaced, meanwhile global demand has accelerated.

Hey professor (or should I say Chicken Little?), maybe you need the lesson, not Gawain - I'll provide some for you.

from MSNBC

Traders are concerned about any potential disruption, however small it may be, because of slim unused refinery capacity. Last year’s Hurricane Ivan damaged Gulf facilities and forced a severe dip in output for several months.

Analysts say this fear is likely to linger and lend support to prices, which are at least 50 percent higher than a year ago. On an inflation-adjusted basis, oil prices would need to hit about $90 a barrel to match the highs of 25 years ago.

Oil prices are effected by refinery capacity and your evidence about oil inventory vs gasoline is total nonsense because when there is a refining bottleneck, business will not keep blindly buying and stockpiling oil that they can't use- particularly when it's at near record prices. But then, I guess Im not a wizened economist like yourself....

Here is an article by economist Mike Moffat that addresses your tired 'sky is falling' approach to oil markets.

**Red Harvest** · 08-27-2005, 05:16

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Hey professor (or should I say Chicken Little?), maybe you need the lesson, not Gawain - I'll provide some for you.

There was nothing in either link of note, they were both facile. The MSNBC link was a short term price retreat. SOOOO??? Are you saying this is some sort of indication that oil is overpriced by t $30/bbl or what? It has zero relevance. Instead, it provides a perfect example of your myopic horizon for oil. It retreated from an all time high, and that is some sort of proof? LOL.

The quote you made...care to explain how oil price doubled and refined products too, if refining is the real culprit? You can't, it defies basic economic principles. If refining was the real limit in the U.S. then U.S. gas would skyrocket, but global oil prices would not. Econ 101. You are looking at a small segment of the market, and making an erroneous projection. The seasonal run up is normal, I've been watching it for years, but not off a base line that is more than DOUBLE what it was 1 or 2 years ago.

If you want to learn something, go look at global crude supply projections. They show current "excess capacity" as about 1% of the total usage (and prices indication that this projection is optimistic.) Refining is at ~95% of capacity typically. Do the math... Refining excess is about 5 times that of production.

Your link to Moffat is particularly amusing as he fails to discuss the inelasticity of energy demand. He should get his money back on that Econ 101 course as he can't seem to apply it in the real world. In the real world to cut back energy demand by a few percent prices shoot through the roof on the short term scale.

**Xiahou** · 08-27-2005, 05:35

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

The quote you made...care to explain how oil price doubled and refined products too, if refining is the real culprit? You can't, it defies basic economic principles. If refining was the real limit in the U.S. then U.S. gas would skyrocket, but global oil prices would not. Econ 101. You are looking at a small segment of the market, and making an erroneous projection. The seasonal run up is normal, I've been watching it for years, but not off a base line that is more than DOUBLE what it was 1 or 2 years ago.

Again, I think you're the one 'in over your head' and these statements prove it. Save your condescension.