Obama will be the death of the car companies

[drgnbkr]

The auto industry, already reeling from the economy, the unions and govt. interference, are being dealt the death blow by obama and the warming hoaxers. As the lots sit full of hybrids and other "green" cars that no one will buy, obama has jacked the mileage requirements to levels sure to tickle the fancy of all car buyers!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agqPp0iSPbp4&refer=worldwide

[Slim-Rob]

Do these idiots not pay attention to the facts?

There is no global warming...wtf are these idiots doing :confused:

[BDB]

then how bout focus on the fact that it's bad for health, if global warming is a hoax?

[GoOwls]

then how bout focus on the fact that it's bad for health, if global warming is a hoax?

cigarettes are bad for health......

alcohol is bad for health......

recreational drugs are bad for health....

misuse of prescription drugs are bad for health....

eating red meat, eggs, refined sugar, sodium, pork, monosodium glutimate, etc., is bad for health.....

not going to your doctor for regular checkups is bad for health....

not taking drugs your doctor has prescribed for you and as prescribed is bad for health.....

not taking a bath is bad for health....

driving over the speed limit is bad for health....

having unprotected sex is bad for health.....

etc.

I assume that you are willing for the federal government to get inside your pocket and regulate all these and other things that people think are bad for health.....right?

So much for freedoms and The Constitution and the Bill of Rights. :rolleyes:

[pied]

The auto industry, already reeling from the economy, the unions and govt. interference, are being dealt the death blow by obama and the warming hoaxers. As the lots sit full of hybrids and other "green" cars that no one will buy, obama has jacked the mileage requirements to levels sure to tickle the fancy of all car buyers!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agqPp0iSPbp4&refer=worldwide

I filled up this morning, and my mpg for the last tank was 36.985. I'm cool with it.

How long before we complain again that we are at the mercy of foreign oil? It is painfully obvious that it is simply political rhetoric, because when the rubber meets the road, people really don't want to do the things necessary to do so. It seems a National Energy policy will never come to fruition.

[pied]

cigarettes are bad for health......

alcohol is bad for health......

recreational drugs are bad for health....

misuse of prescription drugs are bad for health....

eating red meat, eggs, refined sugar, sodium, pork, monosodium glutimate, etc., is bad for health.....

not going to your doctor for regular checkups is bad for health....

not taking drugs your doctor has prescribed for you and as prescribed is bad for health.....

not taking a bath is bad for health....

driving over the speed limit is bad for health....

having unprotected sex is bad for health.....

etc.

I assume that you are willing for the federal government to get inside your pocket and regulate all these and other things that people think are bad for health.....right?

So much for freedoms and The Constitution and the Bill of Rights. :rolleyes:


The government already regulates most of these things. Surgeon General Warnings, the USDA, the FDA....

[Firebird]

cigarettes are bad for health......

alcohol is bad for health......

recreational drugs are bad for health....

misuse of prescription drugs are bad for health....

eating red meat, eggs, refined sugar, sodium, pork, monosodium glutimate, etc., is bad for health.....

not going to your doctor for regular checkups is bad for health....

not taking drugs your doctor has prescribed for you and as prescribed is bad for health.....

not taking a bath is bad for health....

driving over the speed limit is bad for health....

having unprotected sex is bad for health.....

etc.

I assume that you are willing for the federal government to get inside your pocket and regulate all these and other things that people think are bad for health.....right?

So much for freedoms and The Constitution and the Bill of Rights. :rolleyes:

Every single thing I highlighted is something that, if you choose to do, will be bad for YOUR health and no one elses'. However, if you choose to smoke cigarettes in the booth next to me or speed down the road I am driving on or trying to cross, that's bad for MY health.

By all means, do whatever you want that affects YOUR health. Nasty emissions, however, affect MY health, and you aren't giving ME a choice in the matter. Feel free to hook up a hose to your exhaust pipe and inhale that stuff all day---just keep it to yourself and don't share it with those of us who don't want it. Your rights end where my nose begins.

[mad_fan]

It will be interesting to watch...
Are the standards based on average of vehicles manufactured??? Or sold???
You can't pull a horse trailer with a Prius...and you probably aren't going to get 35 mpg from a 3500 or F-350...
What if they build to the new standards (assuming some average is the 'standard') but people don't put their money where Obama's mouth is???

[drgnbkr]

It will be interesting to watch...
Are the standards based on average of vehicles manufactured??? Or sold???
You can't pull a horse trailer with a Prius...and you probably aren't going to get 35 mpg from a 3500 or F-350...
What if they build to the new standards (assuming some average is the 'standard') but people don't put their money where Obama's mouth is???

We already put our taxes/money where his mouth is...And it's only the beginning..He'll have us all driving barrackmobiles if he hangs around long enough.

[slorch]

I filled up this morning, and my mpg for the last tank was 36.985. I'm cool with it.

How long before we complain again that we are at the mercy of foreign oil? It is painfully obvious that it is simply political rhetoric, because when the rubber meets the road, people really don't want to do the things necessary to do so. It seems a National Energy policy will never come to fruition.

speculators are driving the market up more than true demand right now.

Pisses me off...:mad::Censor:

[mad_fan]

Will sitting in my future car be like flying coach??? Surely there will be rules exempting height challenged people...

[Firebird]

speculators are driving the market up more than true demand right now.

Pisses me off...:mad::Censor:

Speculators are the market.....:rolleyes:

[mad_fan]

We already put our taxes/money where his mouth is...And it's only the beginning..He'll have us all driving barrackmobiles if he hangs around long enough.

No...I'll buy a Toyota pickup...;)

[pied]

speculators are driving the market up more than true demand right now.

Pisses me off...:mad::Censor:

You don't like capitalism?

[mad_fan]

speculators are driving the market up more than true demand right now.

Pisses me off...:mad::Censor:

I prefer 'investors'...;)
The reduction in exploration in the past year doesn't help matters...

[mad_fan]

You don't like capitalism?

Only if it's like a militia...well regulated...;)

[dragonpants]

I filled up this morning, and my mpg for the last tank was 36.985. I'm cool with it.

How long before we complain again that we are at the mercy of foreign oil? It is painfully obvious that it is simply political rhetoric, because when the rubber meets the road, people really don't want to do the things necessary to do so. It seems a National Energy policy will never come to fruition.

All you guys complaining about dependence on foreign oil,there is a solution. let us drill our for own oil, how about that?
I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break. You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.
What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.
Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.
When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.
I understand I am overstating some points(for effect) however how much government interference do you want in your life, my answer NONE.

Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV? Hell Southlake is loaded with SUV's as well as Highland Park and I have not about any iron lung transplants going on. Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

[slorch]

Speculators are the market.....:rolleyes:

true, but the tail is wagging the dog.

[dragonpants]

It will be interesting to watch...
Are the standards based on average of vehicles manufactured??? Or sold???
You can't pull a horse trailer with a Prius...and you probably aren't going to get 35 mpg from a 3500 or F-350...
What if they build to the new standards (assuming some average is the 'standard') but people don't put their money where Obama's mouth is???

Easy solution for Obama, tax gas $2(more) a gallon so the average person has no choice.

[Firebird]

All you guys complaining about dependence on foreign oil,there is a solution. let us drill our for own oil, how about that?
I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break. You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.
What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.
Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.
When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.
I understand I am overstating some points(for effect) however how much government interference do you want in your life, my answer NONE.

Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV? Hell Southlake is loaded with SUV's as well as Highland Park and I have not about any iron lung transplants going on. Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

FAIL

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/07/the_myth_that_keeps_giving.html

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/40994.html

[dragonpants]

FAIL

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/07/the_myth_that_keeps_giving.html

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/40994.html

Ok, I f'ed up but they can if they would like, no one is doing it now, but Cuba has no problem with it and it will happen.

I am still not understanding how from a Constitutional stand point our government can prevent companies from drilling in the Gulf. Can someone explain that to me, again constitutionally?

Why not drill in Alaska?

[JagFan]

All you guys complaining about dependence on foreign oil,there is a solution. let us drill our for own oil, how about that?
I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break. You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.
What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.
Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.
When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.
I understand I am overstating some points(for effect) however how much government interference do you want in your life, my answer NONE.

Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV? Hell Southlake is loaded with SUV's as well as Highland Park and I have not about any iron lung transplants going on. Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

That would be Jaguars not Panthers. Thank you very much:D I don't know which one he supports. His kids are younger and in private school.

[mad_fan]

FAIL

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/07/the_myth_that_keeps_giving.html

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/40994.html

"While Cuba has partnered with Chinese companies to drill in the Florida Straits, no Chinese company has been involved in Cuba's oil exploration that close to the United States."

No cause for concern here...:rolleyes:

[yallerjacket2]

All you guys complaining about dependence on foreign oil,there is a solution. let us drill our for own oil, how about that?
I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break. You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.
What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.
Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.
When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.
I understand I am overstating some points(for effect) however how much government interference do you want in your life, my answer NONE.

Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV? Hell Southlake is loaded with SUV's as well as Highland Park and I have not about any iron lung transplants going on. Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

Vikings.

[Firebird]

"While Cuba has partnered with Chinese companies to drill in the Florida Straits, no Chinese company has been involved in Cuba's oil exploration that close to the United States."

No cause for concern here...:rolleyes:

Since oil is a globally traded commodity....no, not really...:)

What, is China going to put it on a boat and take it all back to Beijing for themselves? (If and when they ever actually drill there).

[dragonpants]

That would be Jaguars not Panthers. Thank you very much:D I don't know which one he supports. His kids are younger and in private school.

Both are black cats, I was a Panther in high school, sorry for the mistake.

[JagFan]

Both are black cats, I was a Panther in high school, sorry for the mistake.

That's ok just don't let it happen again;)

[mad_fan]

Since oil is a globally traded commodity....no, not really...:)

What, is China going to put it on a boat and take it all back to Beijing for themselves? (If and when they ever actually drill there).

I thought we weren't drilling there for environmental reasons...
I guess if they have an accident the oil will know that we didn't drill it...and not head for Florida...

[dragonpants]

Since oil is a globally traded commodity....no, not really...:)

What, is China going to put it on a boat and take it all back to Beijing for themselves? (If and when they ever actually drill there).

Hopefully they will sell it to us, should be cheaper than getting it from the Middle East. Why would they not put it on ship and take it through the Panama Canal?
How do you think oil gets to us from the middle east? They put it in these big ships, I am confident China will do the same thing.:D

[Firebird]

I thought we weren't drilling there for environmental reasons...
I guess if they have an accident the oil will know that we didn't drill it...and not head for Florida...

Actually, we aren't drilling there (as in, where China has exploration rights) because it belongs to Cuba and they get to decide who does. Try to keep up.

[dragonpants]

Actually, we aren't drilling there (as in, where China has exploration rights) because it belongs to Cuba and they get to decide who does. Try to keep up.

You guys really try to change the subject when you cannot respond in a manner aligned with what you think your beliefs are supposed to be. We also have oil rigs in the gulf, just a wee bit further from Cuba, we are not talking about the Cuban owned area. :rolleyes:

[CyFallsMom]

I read about this latest "pulling out of the hat" crap and then climbed into my SUV, cranked up Fox News (Greta, then Brian and the Judge) and blocked out the world until my 20 miles one way commute was completed. We all have SUV's and we will continue to drive them until they are no longer made. My sister has a Winnebago for her drag racing car and she uses it all the time. Plus, I can't imagine the gas the dragster eats up in one race. My other sister drives an Excursion. Global warming is a myth and it's king, Al Gore, apparently uses just as much energy and fuel as the next guy! I am so tired of all the hypcrites!!!

[mad_fan]

Actually, we aren't drilling there (as in, where China has exploration rights) because it belongs to Cuba and they get to decide who does. Try to keep up.

When you were splitting that hair...you missed the point...
Drilling off the coast of Florida...
Or are you suggesting that oil spilled off the coast of Cuba can't find Florida???

[15Adragon]

Drill now. Drill everywhere. Drill often.

Mine and burn coal now. We can do this cleanly folks.

Eat our corn.

Build nuclear power plants. Build trailer parks around all nuclear plants to house the protestors. Create reservations for them to live on.

Export Al Gore.

;)

[Maroondog]

Anyone know what the POTUS limo gets? I'll bet that monster doesn't meet mileage and emission requirements.

I'm pretty sure when the auto makers eventually cannot meet the specs, the issue will either be on the back burner or we will see more tax dollars thrown at another "problem."

[Firebird]

When you were splitting that hair...you missed the point...
Drilling off the coast of Florida...
Or are you suggesting that oil spilled off the coast of Cuba can't find Florida???

They're drilling off the coast of Cuba.......;)

[mad_fan]

UNCLE.......;)

Okay...;)

[Firebird]

Okay...;)

I suggest letting Castro know they can't drill there for our environmental reasons.

[mad_fan]

I suggest letting Castro know they can't drill there for our environmental reasons.

Or we could tell Obama that the environment issue is off the table...and that US producers could probably operate in the area at least as safely as the Cuba/China team...

[Firebird]

Hopefully they will sell it to us, should be cheaper than getting it from the Middle East. Why would they not put it on ship and take it through the Panama Canal?
How do you think oil gets to us from the middle east? They put it in these big ships, I am confident China will do the same thing.:D

It doesn't matter who they sell it to...they will sell it to someone.

[Firebird]

Or we could tell Obama that the environment issue is off the table...and that US producers could probably operate in the area at least as safely as the Cuba/China team...

We'll have to convince them to pay more than the Saudis and Africans do for our own jack-up rigs first....

[15Adragon]

It doesn't matter who they sell it to...they will sell it to someone.

Sounds like a hopeful government business model... :rolleyes:

[Firebird]

Sounds like a hopeful government business model... :rolleyes:

Actually, it sounds like a globally traded commodity market....:rolleyes:

[15Adragon]

Actually, it sounds like a globally traded commodity market....:rolleyes:

Lone Star Showdown Champs... lol ... what is that?

[Firebird]

We tied...but we get to keep the trophy. Which is good enough for an * in my book.

(http://www.kbtx.com/sports/headlines/45367657.html)Lone Star Showdown Champs... lol ... what is that?

[mad_fan]

We'll have to convince them to pay more than the Saudis and Africans do for our own jack-up rigs first....

???

[Firebird]

???

Oil rigs have been leaving the Gulf of Mexico for better contracts overseas. The number of rigs in the Gulf is in a tailspin, down by 30 under contract from last year. Down in absolute numbers as well.

[pied]

All you guys complaining about dependence on foreign oil,there is a solution. let us drill our for own oil, how about that?
I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break. You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.


What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.

Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.
When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.
I understand I am overstating some points(for effect) however how much government interference do you want in your life, my answer NONE.

Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV? Hell Southlake is loaded with SUV's as well as Highland Park and I have not about any iron lung transplants going on. Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?


problems with your points. You assume that people only think one way. Also your rant is based on the premise that there are only yes/no type answers, when in reality there may be many.



let us drill our for own oil, how about that? I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break.

I agree. We should rill in the interim, but also be researching new technologies. I am also in favor of building Nuclear plants, whatever it takes. I don't rally caer about the spotted owl, but do think that we can drill, while being responsible to the environment.






You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.

I think Firebird pointed out your factual error, trying to make a point.






What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.

I think the safety of many of the smaller cars is much better than you give them credit for. With my side airbags, anti lock brakes, etc. I am pretty safe. Now if you t-bone me at 50 mph, I will likely be in the same situation I would be in if I were driving a Crown Victoria. I would still be way better off than those riding on a motorcycle.






Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.

Nice. Given that the standard is an average, there is plenty of room to have the larger cars in addition to more fuel efficient ones.






When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.

I imagine a lot of those will be the diesels, even the diesel hybrids. Even the evil Wal-Mart sees the possibilty and savings.

Between 2005 and 2008, Wal-Mart achieved a 25-percent increase in efficiency with its private fleet. It hopes to double that by 2015. While that sounds pretty nifty, that’s only from its 2005 baseline.
.....

While Wal-Mart is only running these tests in the United States, if successful, they hope to extend what they’ve learned to their UK fleet - Wal-Mart’s only foreign private fleet. They also hope to influence other fleet operators with what they learn.

I think businesses will want to take notice. Last year, with all of their efficiency efforts, they drove 90 million less miles. They also saved 10 million gallons of fuel, and over $50 million! In this economic climate, it seems going green is one of the best things a business can do.

Sultemeier also said that Wal-Mart’s ties to the EPA will help expand these efforts beyond just Wal-Mart. I hope so too.

http://gas2.org/2009/02/06/wal-mart-tests-diesel-hybrid-trucks-alternative-fuels-2/







Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV?

Want to do a test? I'll sit behind my mother in law's Prius running in a garage, and you sit in your garage with your SUV running. Who will last longer?







Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Nope, bad assumption. I am on a half acre. No house closer than 50 yards. The one that is closest, does not have either. When my mother in law builds her house, there will be a Prius next door. I am not planning on moving.

Not certain why you think relying on countries that don't like us very much to drive our cars is Constitutional, or really a good thing though.







Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

Another bad assumption and bad info(thanks Jagfan). I am a Viking(Lamar). In addition my kids will likely go to private school, and Mrs. pied wants that to continue through 12th grade. Also to your bad assumptions, I do not in the LISD boundaries.

[mad_fan]

Oil rigs have been leaving the Gulf of Mexico for better contracts overseas. The number of rigs in the Gulf is in a tailspin, down by 30 under contract from last year. Down in absolute numbers as well.

And that has to do with companies not charging themselves enough...
As for the 'tailspin' I guess I missed that...
Sounds like business taking advantage of oppurtunity...

[SLC93]

i thought we weren't drilling there for environmental reasons...
I guess if they have an accident the oil will know that we didn't drill it...and not head for florida...

:d

[GoOwls]

Every single thing I highlighted is something that, if you choose to do, will be bad for YOUR health and no one elses'. However, if you choose to smoke cigarettes in the booth next to me or speed down the road I am driving on or trying to cross, that's bad for MY health.

By all means, do whatever you want that affects YOUR health. Nasty emissions, however, affect MY health, and you aren't giving ME a choice in the matter. Feel free to hook up a hose to your exhaust pipe and inhale that stuff all day---just keep it to yourself and don't share it with those of us who don't want it. Your rights end where my nose begins.

Well, by all means I'm sure you actively support the stopage of the environmental genocide being taken out on the land and the air in the backwards a** places like China and the old Soviet Union that emit wastes and contaminants into the air that your little Priuses can never overcome.....I mean, you don't buy stuff made over there, right.....nothing imported to America....you buy only American made stuff, right.....

......and of course you don't by them from here either, do you, as they still emit gobs of polutants into the air, even made in America....

.....and, you don't eat beef either, right........you know, the methane emmissions and all.....if you support the beef industry by buying and eating beef, you can't possibly be a serious environmentalist.....just a pick-and-choose hypocrite.

[SLC93]

Hopefully they will sell it to us, should be cheaper than getting it from the Middle East. Why would they not put it on ship and take it through the Panama Canal?
How do you think oil gets to us from the middle east? They put it in these big ships, I am confident China will do the same thing.:D

Yeah but why buy it from anyone when we could be providing to ourselves? Even at a perceived discount you're still going to incur a markup. There's a middle man and profit margin has to exist. If we would get serious about alternative research and implementation and couple that with tapping into all of our own resources we could put ourselves in an amazing position in a short amount on time while reaping an untold amount of savings. Fairly simple stuff.

[SLC93]

They're drilling off the coast of Cuba.......;)

:D Nice!

[drgnbkr]

Yeah but why buy it from anyone when we could be providing to ourselves? Even at a perceived discount you're still going to incur a markup. There's a middle man and profit margin has to exist. If we would get serious about alternative research and implementation and couple that with tapping into all of our own resources we could put ourselves in an amazing position in a short amount on time while reaping an untold amount of savings. Fairly simple stuff.

That is a sound strategy! Too simple for a politician to understand.:rolleyes::p

[Firebird]

And that has to do with companies not charging themselves enough...
As for the 'tailspin' I guess I missed that...
Sounds like business taking advantage of oppurtunity...

When BP or PEMEX or Petrobras wants to drill offshore...they call someone like Diamond Offshore and pay them. Not themselves.

[JagFan]

problems with your points. You assume that people only think one way. Also your rant is based on the premise that there are only yes/no type answers, when in reality there may be many.



let us drill our for own oil, how about that? I agree we need to find other sources but that is going to take time, so in the meantime let us drill our own damn oil. I know gotta save the spotted owl. Give me a friggin break.

I agree. We should rill in the interim, but also be researching new technologies. I am also in favor of building Nuclear plants, whatever it takes. I don't rally caer about the spotted owl, but do think that we can drill, while being responsible to the environment.






You do realize that China is drilling about 30 miles from where we want to in the Gulf of Mexico.

I think Firebird pointed out your factual error, trying to make a point.






What about the safety of all these little damn cars going down the road and there are going to be accidents, does that not effect your health? Of course the less healthy the country is the better for Universal Health Care, right? These little cars and their complete lack of safety will become an issue and then the government can take over the auto insurance industry.

I think the safety of many of the smaller cars is much better than you give them credit for. With my side airbags, anti lock brakes, etc. I am pretty safe. Now if you t-bone me at 50 mph, I will likely be in the same situation I would be in if I were driving a Crown Victoria. I would still be way better off than those riding on a motorcycle.






Tell me how people with large families are going to transport their children/family around in their little 35 mpg cars. Of course the government can do away with large families through abortion.

Nice. Given that the standard is an average, there is plenty of room to have the larger cars in addition to more fuel efficient ones.






When will we have the 35mpg full size pick up, that contractors need to build houses etc.

I imagine a lot of those will be the diesels, even the diesel hybrids. Even the evil Wal-Mart sees the possibilty and savings.



http://gas2.org/2009/02/06/wal-mart-tests-diesel-hybrid-trucks-alternative-fuels-2/







Tell me how much your health is suffering because of my gas guzzling SUV?

Want to do a test? I'll sit behind my mother in law's Prius running in a garage, and you sit in your garage with your SUV running. Who will last longer?







Living in FM I guarantee there is an full size suv or pick up within a stones throw. When are you planning on moving, I bet you have not made a negative comment to your neighbor about how your health is suffering from them exercising their constitutional rights to drive whatever the F they want.

Nope, bad assumption. I am on a half acre. No house closer than 50 yards. The one that is closest, does not have either. When my mother in law builds her house, there will be a Prius next door. I am not planning on moving.

Not certain why you think relying on countries that don't like us very much to drive our cars is Constitutional, or really a good thing though.







Oh one question, Marauders or Panthers?

Another bad assumption and bad info(thanks Jagfan). I am a Viking(Lamar). In addition my kids will likely go to private school, and Mrs. pied wants that to continue through 12th grade. Also to your bad assumptions, I do not in the LISD boundaries.

You are welcome. But there are an awful lot of SUV pickups in FM. The other day while I was waiting in line to pick up my child there were 5 SUV/pickups for every car. And of the cars they were mainly BMW's or jaguars. Very few GM/Ford/Chryslers cars being driven in FM.

[15Adragon]

That is a sound strategy! Too simple for a politician to understand.:rolleyes::p

Not trying to change the subject, but will put this out there anyway as a remedy for this and a lot of other issues.

- Constutional amendment for term limits in Congress
- No retirement packages for members of Congress, just max credit toward SS calculation for years served
- Mandatory retirement age for SC and federal judges (78? 80? 85? who knows the age, but something)

[JagFan]

You are welcome. But there are an awful lot of SUV pickups in FM. The other day while I was waiting in line to pick up my child there were 5 SUV/pickups for every car. And of the cars they were mainly BMW's or jaguars. Very few GM/Ford/Chryslers cars being driven in FM.

And one of the most popular car for the youngsters is the mazda 3. I think FM youth alone are keeping them in business.

[GoOwls]

The government already regulates most of these things. Surgeon General Warnings, the USDA, the FDA....



Originally Posted by GoOwls
cigarettes are bad for health......

alcohol is bad for health......

recreational drugs are bad for health....

misuse of prescription drugs are bad for health....

eating red meat, eggs, refined sugar, sodium, pork, monosodium glutimate, etc., is bad for health.....

not going to your doctor for regular checkups is bad for health....

not taking drugs your doctor has prescribed for you and as prescribed is bad for health.....

not taking a bath is bad for health....

driving over the speed limit is bad for health....

having unprotected sex is bad for health.....

etc.

I assume that you are willing for the federal government to get inside your pocket and regulate all these and other things that people think are bad for health.....right?

So much for freedoms and The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


Yes, and there are many people who are down-right angry about that level of involvement.

What if the govt:

bans the use of cigarettes and make it to where you can only get alcohol in limited amounts at certain places, make the abuseof recreational drugs a hanging offense, make prescriptions so hard to get that people who need them can't get them in time, put American on a lettucer and tomato diet and outlaw all meat eating, put GPS unitson all autos and if you speed the unit notes it and automatically sends you a ticket in the mail.....etc., etc.

I'm talking about how far are you willing to go.

I do believe ethat you and Firebird were two of the ones who got on my case about giving up my rights for security in relation to the terrorist thing....now you are willing to let that same govt. tell you whether you can eat beef or drive the car you want.......please boys.....be consistant.

[Firebird]

Yeah but why buy it from anyone when we could be providing to ourselves? Even at a perceived discount you're still going to incur a markup. There's a middle man and profit margin has to exist. If we would get serious about alternative research and implementation and couple that with tapping into all of our own resources we could put ourselves in an amazing position in a short amount on time while reaping an untold amount of savings. Fairly simple stuff.

Because we aren't going to sell it to ourselves for anything less than the world price...

[Firebird]

Originally Posted by GoOwls
cigarettes are bad for health......

alcohol is bad for health......

recreational drugs are bad for health....

misuse of prescription drugs are bad for health....

eating red meat, eggs, refined sugar, sodium, pork, monosodium glutimate, etc., is bad for health.....

not going to your doctor for regular checkups is bad for health....

not taking drugs your doctor has prescribed for you and as prescribed is bad for health.....

not taking a bath is bad for health....

driving over the speed limit is bad for health....

having unprotected sex is bad for health.....

etc.

I assume that you are willing for the federal government to get inside your pocket and regulate all these and other things that people think are bad for health.....right?

So much for freedoms and The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


Yes, and there are many people who are down-right angry about that level of involvement.

What if the govt:

bans the use of cigarettes and make it to where you can only get alcohol in limited amounts at certain places, make the abuseof recreational drugs a hanging offense, make prescriptions so hard to get that people who need them can't get them in time, put American on a lettucer and tomato diet and outlaw all meat eating, put GPS unitson all autos and if you speed the unit notes it and automatically sends you a ticket in the mail.....etc., etc.

I'm talking about how far are you willing to go.

I do believe ethat you and Firebird were two of the ones who got on my case about giving up my rights for security in relation to the terrorist thing....now you are willing to let that same govt. tell you whether you can eat beef or drive the car you want.......please boys.....be consistant.


I don't believe I ever said anything about beef. By all means, do what you want to yourself. I don't care how much you drink/smoke/eat, except when my tax dollars are funding someone's liver surgery or bypass.....

[SLC93]

That is a sound strategy! Too simple for a politician to understand.:rolleyes::p

:D I don't pretend to be fluent in the numerous intracies this issue is bound by. What I know is simple business. We have supply/inventory of our own. A great deal of it is extremely viable. It falls under enviromental restrictions that we control. Rather than force all of the green practices and hybrids on a market that is not prepped for it yet because we are reacting to a horrid economic enviroment why not commit ourselves to an agrressive plan that alleviates both issues, short and long term. Do you have any idea how cheap fuel would be were it manufactured, produced and distributed solely in this country? Think that wouldn't kick start and sustain economic recovery and growth? Provisions and legislation would have to be enacted to allow this drilling only as it coincides with serious R&D with hard deadlines for show o progress.We do have to get green and we do have to have legitimate, long lasting alternatives. We're so woefully behind in this area because we allowed it to be. We were fat, lazy and comfortable. Nobody wants to smack heads with big oil or the automotive lobby. We let them have their way for decades, Realities have changed, concessions need to be made, reform enacted and progress made. A with everything we overcomplicate the debate because all sides want to be heard when the stark truth is that sometimes what is best is for folks to shut up and act. Simplicity is a beautiful thing.

[Firebird]

:D I don't pretend to be fluent in the numerous intracies this issue is bound by. What I know is simple business. We have supply/inventory of our own. A great deal of it is extremely viable. It falls under enviromental restrictions that we control. Rather than force all of the green practices and hybrids on a market that is not prepped for it yet because we are reacting to a horrid economic enviroment why not commit ourselves to an agrressive plan that alleviates both issues, short and long term. Do you have any idea how cheap fuel would be were it manufactured, produced and distributed solely in this country? Think that wouldn't kick start and sustain economic recovery and growth? Provisions and legislation would have to be enacted to allow this drilling only as it coincides with serious R&D with hard deadlines for show o progress.We do have to get green and we do have to have legitimate, long lasting alternatives. We're so woefully behind in this area because we allowed it to be. We were fat, lazy and comfortable. Nobody wants to smack heads with big oil or the automotive lobby. We let them have their way for decades, Realities have changed, concessions need to be made, reform enacted and progress made. A with everything we overcomplicate the debate because all sides want to be heard when the stark truth is that sometimes what is best is for folks to shut up and act. Simplicity is a beautiful thing.

It would not be a dollar cheaper than the world price.

[pied]

I do believe ethat you and Firebird were two of the ones who got on my case about giving up my rights for security in relation to the terrorist thing....now you are willing to let that same govt. tell you whether you can eat beef or drive the car you want.......please boys.....be consistant.

Driving the cars you want is helping the terrorists, right?

[drgnbkr]

:D I don't pretend to be fluent in the numerous intracies this issue is bound by. What I know is simple business. We have supply/inventory of our own. A great deal of it is extremely viable. It falls under enviromental restrictions that we control. Rather than force all of the green practices and hybrids on a market that is not prepped for it yet because we are reacting to a horrid economic enviroment why not commit ourselves to an agrressive plan that alleviates both issues, short and long term. Do you have any idea how cheap fuel would be were it manufactured, produced and distributed solely in this country? Think that wouldn't kick start and sustain economic recovery and growth? Provisions and legislation would have to be enacted to allow this drilling only as it coincides with serious R&D with hard deadlines for show o progress.We do have to get green and we do have to have legitimate, long lasting alternatives. We're so woefully behind in this area because we allowed it to be. We were fat, lazy and comfortable. Nobody wants to smack heads with big oil or the automotive lobby. We let them have their way for decades, Realities have changed, concessions need to be made, reform enacted and progress made. A with everything we overcomplicate the debate because all sides want to be heard when the stark truth is that sometimes what is best is for folks to shut up and act. Simplicity is a beautiful thing.

Agree. You and I won't agree though on something I heard on the news the other day..a commentator said that every time obama has had a choice to make, he has made the wrong one. From stimulus to interrogation, to energy policy, he has missed the boat. In this case you are exactly right..we need to look after our own and develop energy. Nuclear is the clear choice for domestic energy. We develop the cleanest, safest, nuclear plants in the world but won't do it. We produce the worlds cleanest rig technology, but won't go get our own oil. To require the struggling auto industry to make cars people don't want is the opposite thing to be doing.

[drgnbkr]

Driving the cars you want is helping the terrorists, right?

Only if we are delivering them to their target!:p

[SLC93]

Because we aren't going to sell it to ourselves for anything less than the world price...

You already own it and the price to Americans will be far less, if for no other reason than logistics. The cost to companies producing is Lousianna, for random example, is how much less than if they were deep drilling in the Indian Ocean? You cannot state there wouldn't be a dramatic savings. Furthermore, if the oil industry is not willing to concede a hometown discount, they'll simply not be allowed to drill. What were theorizing here would be an intervention by the government via a rewrite of enviromental acts/restrictions that would allow us to tap some of these resources in conjuction with a serious alternative commitent and funding bill. I'm fairly certain I'd include a clause or two to cover this. Otherwise you've just flatly illustrated the greed that is big oil, all due respect. You'll still sell some of the inventory on that Global market at a global price, undoubtedly, as a way to finance the operation and further fund research.

[SLC93]

It would not be a dollar cheaper than the world price.

Right.:rolleyes:

[pied]

Agree. You and I won't agree though on something I heard on the news the other day..a commentator said that every time obama has had a choice to make, he has made the wrong one. From stimulus to interrogation, to energy policy, he has missed the boat. In this case you are exactly right..we need to look after our own and develop energy. Nuclear is the clear choice for domestic energy. We develop the cleanest, safest, nuclear plants in the world but won't do it. We produce the worlds cleanest rig technology, but won't go get our own oil. To require the struggling auto industry to make cars people don't want is the opposite thing to be doing.


What cars do people want? It seems the car companies doing the least bad right now, are at the forefront of the fuel efficiency research(Honda/Toyota).

What cars do people want?

[SLC93]

Agree. You and I won't agree though on something I heard on the news the other day..a commentator said that every time obama has had a choice to make, he has made the wrong one. From stimulus to interrogation, to energy policy, he has missed the boat. In this case you are exactly right..we need to look after our own and develop energy. Nuclear is the clear choice for domestic energy. We develop the cleanest, safest, nuclear plants in the world but won't do it. We produce the worlds cleanest rig technology, but won't go get our own oil. To require the struggling auto industry to make cars people don't want is the opposite thing to be doing.

We may not agree, exactly, but I will say we do not disagree as much as you may think. By biggest beef with the current climate isn't that some folks doubt Obama or his plan. They are certainly entitled to and may, in fact, be spot on. I just get worn out with every issue cirruntly out there having some form of " That Damn Obama" tied to it. Things are bad but they didn't get there in the last 100 days or so. This has been a slow build that took place over the course of years due to neglect, indecision and poor policy. He's not responsible for everything that goes bump in the night. Thats all I'm really saying. It is his job to fix it and he will be judged for it by all, myself included.

[stevefoxsc]

What cars do people want? It seems the car companies doing the least bad right now, are at the forefront of the fuel efficiency research(Honda/Toyota).

What cars do people want?

Japanese make great cars because of the ingenuity and creativity and ideas they have. They're a very people society, and when they make something their are no limits. They also look to make beneficial products for instance the charge car, the solar car, car that runs on water, live in home robotics, and such.

Look at our automakers like the stride gum commercials. You don't want to make a car that will last 100 years because thats not going to make you money.

[15Adragon]

We may not agree, exactly, but I will say we do not disagree as much as you may think. By biggest beef with the current climate isn't that some folks doubt Obama or his plan. They are certainly entitled to and may, in fact, be spot on. I just get worn out with every issue cirruntly out there having some form of " That Damn Obama" tied to it. Things are bad but they didn't get there in the last 100 days or so. This has been a slow build that took place over the course of years due to neglect, indecision and poor policy. He's not responsible for everything that goes bump in the night. Thats all I'm really saying. It is his job to fix it and he will be judged for it by all, myself included.

true. But I admit to having some fun with this cuz they have blamed EVERYTHING on Bush for the past few years. They have been the party of opposition to everything. Now they have all of the gov under their control .. turn about is fair play. Obama went to Europe and bashed Bush after he became pres. He is full of it on this and I for one will hold him to it. He is the leader, now lead... I hope he figures it out so we don't have a Carter administration in the making. I also like the way he is waffling on a lot of issues and it pisses the far left off. Actually that is a good sign.

[Firebird]

You already own it and the price to Americans will be far less, if for no other reason than logistics. The cost to companies producing is Lousianna, for random example, is how much less than if they were deep drilling in the Indian Ocean? You cannot state there wouldn't be a dramatic savings. Furthermore, if the oil industry is not willing to concede a hometown discount, they'll simply not be allowed to drill. What were theorizing here would be an intervention by the government via a rewrite of enviromental acts/restrictions that would allow us to tap some of these resources in conjuction with a serious alternative commitent and funding bill. I'm fairly certain I'd include a clause or two to cover this. Otherwise you've just flatly illustrated the greed that is big oil, all due respect. You'll still sell some of the inventory on that Global market at a global price, undoubtedly, as a way to finance the operation and further fund research.

OK, let's go over this plan.

1. If you believe that the U.S., by simply drilling in shallow water/ANWR/ and all other conventionally recoverable reserves not currently tapped could supply enough oil for itself and some left over for the world market, then you are smoking a crack pipe. Not even the most wildly optimistic drill here/drill now pundits will make that claim. If you want to start talking about oil recovery in oil shale,etc, then OK-- but that oil is not technically recoverable at the current world price, much less your imagined hometown discount rate. The U.S. is not going to become a net oil exporter by drilling offshore and ANWR and in national parks. That's a pipe dream that no one--I repeat, not even the most optimistic pundits-- would ever take seriously.

2. The U.S. is the single biggest oil consumer and does not have enough conventionally recoverable reserves to feed our own appetite. Period. There's no debate on this. The best we can do is increase the share of what we provide to ourselves, but we will, for the foreseeable future, always import more than we can give ourselves.

3. That simple fact completely destroys your plan. States like Saudi can afford to sell oil at home for a loss and sell the rest on the market for profit because they have far more of the stuff than they could ever dream of using. The U.S., with a population of 300 million and counting and less oil in conventionally recoverable reserves than the Kingdom, does not have the ability to do that. We are inextricably linked to the world market. We don't even have enough of the stuff that we can significantly affect the world price. The only way we can affect the price of oil is on the demand side. You will note what falling demand for gasoline because of the recession did to global oil prices here.

4. The U.S. does have siginficant reserves in things like oil shale that might someday be viable. It is very expensive right now to get at it. So expensive, in fact, that at current world prices companies would lose money on the prospect. Research to drive the cost down costs money. Exxon, Chevron, et. al. are not going to have the money for that research if you are going to insist on them selling gasoline to the world's largest energy market (that would be us) at less than the world price.

5. We are also a free market economy (for now) and we don't have nationalized oil companies. Oil is fungible. Thus, any drop of oil that comes out of the ground, from anywhere, as a result of a domestic producer's actions will be sold at the highest price they can get for it. Which would be the world price.

[pied]

true. But I admit to having some fun with this cuz they have blamed EVERYTHING on Bush for the past few years. They have been the party of opposition to everything. Now they have all of the gov under their control .. turn about is fair play. Obama went to Europe and bashed Bush after he became pres. He is full of it on this and I for one will hold him to it. He is the leader, now lead... I hope he figures it out so we don't have a Carter administration in the making. I also like the way he is waffling on a lot of issues and it pisses the far left off. Actually that is a good sign.


If you stop living in a us/them world, perhaps things might get better, or at least seem that way. You want him to lead, but disagree with him to have fun, weird.

[15Adragon]

If you stop living in a us/them world, perhaps things might get better, or at least seem that way. You want him to lead, but disagree with him to have fun, weird.

Yep, in a strange way I admit to enjoying watch him face the heat of trying to live up to all of the ridiculous stuff he was saying in order to get elected. The promises were crazy. Anyone with a little sense knows this stuff is not that easy or we would have already done it. But not for the Obamamessiah he just votes present and the rest is magic. I say BULL and I think he is starting to see this. And yes it is also painful to watch cuz it is costly to our country as well.

[drgnbkr]

If you stop living in a us/them world, perhaps things might get better, or at least seem that way. You want him to lead, but disagree with him to have fun, weird.

We would all love to see him lead..just so far, not much of it. Bashing, blaming and belittling is not leading, it is whining on his part.

[pied]

We would all love to see him lead..just so far, not much of it. Bashing, blaming and belittling is not leading, it is whining on his part.

Exactly, adding more troops to Afghanistan and trying to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil from countries that don't like us very much is whining quite a bit.

[stevefoxsc]

Yep, in a strange way I admit to enjoying watch him face the heat of trying to live up to all of the ridiculous stuff he was saying in order to get elected. The promises were crazy. Anyone with a little sense knows this stuff is not that easy or we would have already done it. But not for the Obamamessiah he just votes present and the rest is magic. I say BULL and I think he is starting to see this. And yes it is also painful to watch cuz it is costly to our country as well.

change has been made, just not the changes that certain people want to see in the sense of financial lucrative.

[pied]

Yep, in a strange way I admit to enjoying watch him face the heat of trying to live up to all of the ridiculous stuff he was saying in order to get elected. The promises were crazy. Anyone with a little sense knows this stuff is not that easy or we would have already done it. But not for the Obamamessiah he just votes present and the rest is magic. I say BULL and I think he is starting to see this. And yes it is also painful to watch cuz it is costly to our country as well.

And yet the vast majority of people approve of his progress so far.

The ones that are complaining, first complained that the Big Three were building cars no one wanted and should be moer like the Japanese companies. Then when faced with a challenge to be more like them, complain that it would force them to build cars that no one wants.

Color me confused.

[15Adragon]

change has been made, just not the changes that certain people want to see in the sense of financial lucrative.

What change? Did we close Gitmo? Is the war in Iraq over? Did we end the problems with illegal immigration? Do we all have health insurance?

No, look at Calif, and other states with out of control social spending and liberal ideals being implemented... they are BROKE. We need to head the other direction and wean ourselves from government dependence instead of the going in the other direction. He is leading us to more decay and dependency.

[JagFan]

And yet the vast majority of people approve of his progress so far.
The ones that are complaining, first complained that the Big Three were building cars no one wanted and should be moer like the Japanese companies. Then when faced with a challenge to be more like them, complain that it would force them to build cars that no one wants.

Color me confused.

They haven't been hit with all the hidden tax increases yet. Wait until 2010 when a lot of them will be in place. So glad that 95% are not going to see any tax increase;)

Health insurance, the letting Bush tax cuts retire, gas taxes, sodas, ect.

[15Adragon]

And yet the vast majority of people approve of his progress so far.

The ones that are complaining, first complained that the Big Three were building cars no one wanted and should be moer like the Japanese companies. Then when faced with a challenge to be more like them, complain that it would force them to build cars that no one wants.

Color me confused.

Sheep my friend sheep, feeding on the carefully packaged message all the while marching to their ultimate demise.

[dragonpants]

Yeah but why buy it from anyone when we could be providing to ourselves? Even at a perceived discount you're still going to incur a markup. There's a middle man and profit margin has to exist. If we would get serious about alternative research and implementation and couple that with tapping into all of our own resources we could put ourselves in an amazing position in a short amount on time while reaping an untold amount of savings. Fairly simple stuff.

I agree with you, The oil companies are NOT ALLOWED to produce enough off shore to provide it for us. That is my point and we are on the same page. Remember when Bush had the offshore ban repealed and we had not produced a drop of oil and the cost of gas went down 30% +?

This crap about the government telling companies how to operate is ridiculous. If you want the US to become competitive you cannot tie their hands. You cannot expect US industries to be able to compete when they have all the regulations prohibiting them from doing so and then the libs want us to complain about the trade deficit. I am not even going to start about organized labor and their effect on competitiveness both in quality and pricing.

What the hell did we build the Alaskan Pipeline for when we have so much oil up there that would rid us of dependence on foreign oil.

No one really believes that you get sick from auto emissions? Just a good argument. If you are that concerned move to friggin Montana or something, for the sake of the health of your children, why would you subject them to such atrocities? Your actions and your words are completely different.

I at least have respect for the people, as misguided as they are that are so concerned about these environmental concerns that they live out in the woods with no electricity and home school their children. Their actions are consistent with their thoughts.

This is not directed at you SLC93, I am trying to not have to do respond to several different posts and I am trying to conserve on the world's bandwith as I am sure it is causing some sort of cancer or health related problem.

[drgnbkr]

Exactly, adding more troops to Afghanistan and trying to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil from countries that don't like us very much is whining quite a bit.

Wut???

[Firebird]

I agree with you, The oil companies are NOT ALLOWED to produce enough off shore to provide it for us. That is my point and we are on the same page. Remember when Bush had the offshore ban repealed and we had not produced a drop of oil and the cost of gas went down 30% +?

This crap about the government telling companies how to operate is ridiculous. If you want the US to become competitive you cannot tie their hands. You cannot expect US industries to be able to compete when they have all the regulations prohibiting them from doing so and then the libs want us to complain about the trade deficit. I am not even going to start about organized labor and their effect on competitiveness both in quality and pricing.

What the hell did we build the Alaskan Pipeline for when we have so much oil up there that would rid us of dependence on foreign oil.

No one really believes that you get sick from auto emissions? Just a good argument. If you are that concerned move to friggin Montana or something, for the sake of the health of your children, why would you subject them to such atrocities? Your actions and your words are completely different.

I at least have respect for the people, as misguided as they are that are so concerned about these environmental concerns that they live out in the woods with no electricity and home school their children. Their actions are consistent with their thoughts.

This is not directed at you SLC93, I am trying to not have to do respond to several different posts and I am trying to conserve on the world's bandwith as I am sure it is causing some sort of cancer or health related problem.

Do they seriously believe this nonsense out on planet Republican? If we opened up ANWR and the other federal lands in Alaska that are currently off limits, we'd add land that contains perhaps 20 billion barrels. We use about 7 billion a year. That's churning out every drop we could get, not even taking into account what's economically recoverable. Do the math.

[dragonpants]

Do they seriously believe this nonsense out on planet Republican? If we opened up ANWR and the other federal lands in Alaska that are currently off limits, we'd add land that contains perhaps 20 billion barrels. We use about 7 billion a year. That's churning out every drop we could get, not even taking into account what's economically recoverable. Do the math.

#1 I do not know where you are getting your information from. In conjunction with off shore drilling we could rid ourselves of foreign oil dependency allowing us time to come up with alternatives.
There is all this data floating out there, who knows what is true and what is not.

[Firebird]

#1 I do not know where you are getting your information from. In conjunction with off shore drilling we could rid ourselves of foreign oil dependency allowing us time to come up with alternatives.
There is all this data floating out there, who knows what is true and what is not.

No, that's nonsense. First of all, let's throw open the whole shebang to production. Go......

You've got years before the new oil even starts flowing, much less gets to capacity. Increase that factor by several when it comes to the offshore fields. Building jack-up rigs takes time. And all that time we continue to import foreign oil.

Off-shore oil is estimated at about 70 billion barrels, at 80/barrel. More then anyone is paying as we speak.

It's a pipe dream. Full-on, crack pipe dream.

Go for it. Drill whereever you want, I am all in favor of it. But don't labor under some sort of insane delusion that it's going to significantly drive your cost of driving down, or wean us off foreign oil. Probaly line Exxon's pockets, though.

[dragonpants]

No, that's nonsense. First of all, let's throw open the whole shebang to production. Go......

You've got years before the new oil even starts flowing, much less gets to capacity. Increase that factor by several when it comes to the offshore fields. Building jack-up rigs takes time. And all that time we continue to import foreign oil.

Off-shore oil is estimated at about 70 billion barrels, at 80/barrel. More then anyone is paying as we speak.

It's a pipe dream. Full-on, crack pipe dream.

Go for it. Drill whereever you want, I am all in favor of it. But don't labor under some sort of insane delusion that it's going to significantly drive your cost of driving down, or wean us off foreign oil. Probaly line Exxon's pockets, though.

I am cool with the current gas prices. I am talking about exactly that weaning off foreign dependency. I have no problem with Exxon lining their pockets, what is wrong with a company making billions of dollars and employing tax payers and paying taxes on their profits?

Ok rocket scientist since everyone's solution is wrong what is your answer. If there are not enough hybrids or alternative energy powered cars, blame the car companies for not manufacturing them.

The only reason people bought hybrids was because of the high price of gas. Now that prices are at a managable level they are just sitting. What does mean? America is not as consumed with the environment as everyone thinks. On your way to work look to see how many people are car pooling, few if any. Look at the hybrids, how many people are riding in them per vehicle. People want their cars, just the way it is. You are not going to change that without huge gas price increases and who does that hurt, middle America that the libs are so trying to protect.
Does Obama think that national healthcare and the huge amount it is going to cost is going to be paid for by only the wealthy, nope middle America screwed again. So how does this all work. Obama had a great message but again just an empty politician and they are both democrats and republicans.
Everyone wants to complain but there are not solutions. The devil is in the details folks. Great idea but no way to execute, just ideas.

What if I told you that I could create a national health system guaranteeing everyone high quality health coverage without raising taxes and I can lower the deficit at the same time without raising taxes and no decrease in governmental services? Interested? I have the solution if that is what you really want.

[The King]

It will be interesting to watch...
Are the standards based on average of vehicles manufactured??? Or sold???
You can't pull a horse trailer with a Prius...and you probably aren't going to get 35 mpg from a 3500 or F-350...
What if they build to the new standards (assuming some average is the 'standard') but people don't put their money where Obama's mouth is???

didn't obmamesiah tell you he wants communism for the better collective good of all of us, the government will tell you what kind of car to drive and how much to pay for it.

Welcome to the Peoples Republic of the United States Comrad:rolleyes:

[pied]

didn't obmamesiah tell you he wants communism for the better collective good of all of us, the government will tell you what kind of car to drive and how much to pay for it.

Welcome to the Peoples Republic of the United States Comrad:rolleyes:

Just to be clear, all this does is push the standards Bush signed into law, to go into effect in 2016 as opposed to 2020, correct?

As Sam mentioned, I firmly believe this country needs to have a comprehensive energy strategy, and I appreciate the members of Congress for understanding that as well. Two years ago I was pleased to stand with members -- many of whom are here -- to sign a bill that was the first major energy security legislation in more than a decade. At the time I recognized that we needed to go even further. And so in my State of the Union I proposed an aggressive plan to reduce oil consumption of gasoline by 20 percent over 10 years.

Today we make a major step with the Energy Independence and Security Act. We make a major step toward reducing our dependence on oil, confronting global climate change, expanding the production of renewable fuels and giving future generations of our country a nation that is stronger, cleaner and more secure. (Applause.)

.......
One of the most serious long-term challenges facing our country is dependence on oil -- especially oil from foreign lands. It's a serious challenge. And members of Congress up here understand the challenge and so do I. Because this dependence harms us economically through high and volatile prices at the gas pump; dependence creates pollution and contributes to greenhouse gas admissions [sic]. It threatens our national security by making us vulnerable to hostile regimes in unstable regions of the world. It makes us vulnerable to terrorists who might attack oil infrastructure.


http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/12/20071219-6.html

[Firebird]

I am cool with the current gas prices. I am talking about exactly that weaning off foreign dependency. I have no problem with Exxon lining their pockets, what is wrong with a company making billions of dollars and employing tax payers and paying taxes on their profits?

Ok rocket scientist since everyone's solution is wrong what is your answer. If there are not enough hybrids or alternative energy powered cars, blame the car companies for not manufacturing them.

The only reason people bought hybrids was because of the high price of gas. Now that prices are at a managable level they are just sitting. What does mean? America is not as consumed with the environment as everyone thinks. On your way to work look to see how many people are car pooling, few if any. Look at the hybrids, how many people are riding in them per vehicle. People want their cars, just the way it is. You are not going to change that without huge gas price increases and who does that hurt, middle America that the libs are so trying to protect.
Does Obama think that national healthcare and the huge amount it is going to cost is going to be paid for by only the wealthy, nope middle America screwed again. So how does this all work. Obama had a great message but again just an empty politician and they are both democrats and republicans.
Everyone wants to complain but there are not solutions. The devil is in the details folks. Great idea but no way to execute, just ideas.

What if I told you that I could create a national health system guaranteeing everyone high quality health coverage without raising taxes and I can lower the deficit at the same time without raising taxes and no decrease in governmental services? Interested? I have the solution if that is what you really want.

Why do I care where the goop comes from, if the price doesn't change? What difference does it make to anyone?

We'd STILL be dependent on foreign producers when it came to setting prices.

The solution to America's dependance on oil (and that is what it is, a dependance on oil and not foreign oil) is simple-- use less. Simple in concept but not in practice, I should say.

[dragonpants]

Why do I care where the goop comes from, if the price doesn't change? What difference does it make to anyone?

We'd STILL be dependent on foreign producers when it came to setting prices.

Do not care where the goop comes from?
Interesting, well I would rather it come from US companies, with US workers who pay taxes to the US and increases our GNP, employs people so they do not have to collect unemployment and can provide a better standard of living for their families, you know patriotic crap like that. I am one of those guys that would rather fill the coffers of US companies and workers than those over seas.

The more we produce here the less we are dependent upon countries that are not all that stable.

We could of course go and invade and take over one of the these oil producing countries and then we could control both supply and demand since we are the largest consumer on the planet. I know that sounds extreme but if it is all gloom and doom like ya'll want to paint it to be and of course you have no solutions.

[Firebird]

Do not care where the goop comes from?
Interesting, well I would rather it come from US companies, with US workers who pay taxes to the US and increases our GNP, employs people so they do not have to collect unemployment and can provide a better standard of living for their families, you know patriotic crap like that. I am one of those guys that would rather fill the coffers of US companies and workers than those over seas.

The more we produce here the less we are dependent upon countries that are not all that stable.

We could of course go and invade and take over one of the these oil producing countries and then we could control both supply and demand since we are the largest consumer on the planet. I know that sounds extreme but if it is all gloom and doom like ya'll want to paint it to be and of course you have to no solutions.

There are lots of American companies and workers, making lots of dollars, on foreign oil......:) Don't worry, your money is getting to 'em.

[15Adragon]

Don't worry, Obamamessiah will walk for days in the desert until he locates the exact spot as told to him by community organizers working on a federal grant. He will place his staff into the sand and there be oil coming out of the sand. We will enjoy a period of unprecedented prosperity and there will be peace in the land. :rolleyes:

[pied]

Don't worry, Obamamessiah will walk for days in the desert until he locates the exact spot as told to him by community organizers working on a federal grant. He will place his staff into the sand and there be oil coming out of the sand. We will enjoy a period of unprecedented prosperity and there will be peace in the land. :rolleyes:

and you would still find something to complain about.

[15Adragon]

and you would still find something to complain about.

Yes, Romo needs to win a PO game. ;):p

[pied]

Yes, Romo needs to win a PO game. ;):p

Very true.

[mad_fan]

Oil rigs have been leaving the Gulf of Mexico for better contracts overseas. The number of rigs in the Gulf is in a tailspin, down by 30 under contract from last year. Down in absolute numbers as well.

Tailspin might be a bit extreme...
http://www.energycurrent.com/index.php?id=2&storyid=16704
And I would imagine...and will seek a source...that most or all the platforms in the gulf at not owned by US majors...
So with only 62% of the rigs in the Gulf under contract...it seems logical to move...

[stevefoxsc]

What change? Did we close Gitmo? Is the war in Iraq over? Did we end the problems with illegal immigration? Do we all have health insurance?

No, look at Calif, and other states with out of control social spending and liberal ideals being implemented... they are BROKE. We need to head the other direction and wean ourselves from government dependence instead of the going in the other direction. He is leading us to more decay and dependency.


~Repealed restrictions on federal funding of stem cell research.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52721M20090309

Important issue considering its a hot field that make huge advances in the medical field i think its great to see progress is being made with it...


~Decriminalized marijuana.
http://gawker.com/5162010/obama-pretty-much-legalizes-marijuana

Now we can stop wasting extra funding on the war on drugs


~Lifted ban on federal funding for planned parenthood facilities.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/newsroom/local-press-releases/president-obama-lifts-global-gag-rule
-blocking-us-funds-international-reproductive-health-care-23835.htm

~Approved continued funding for NASA's moon/mars habitat program, 'Project Constellation.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16676-obama-backs-moon-return-in-nasa-budget.html



~climbed in bed with America's largest nuclear power company.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/obama-hearts-nuke-giant-e_b_84824.html

~Appointed nobel prize winning physicist Steven Chu as energy secretary.
http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=steven-chu-nobel-prize-winning-phys-2008-12-
11

~Appointed Harvard professor John Holdren as environmental advisor.
http://www.harvardscience.harvard.edu/culture-society/articles/john-p-holdren-named-president-elect-
obama-s-science-advisor

~Confirmed the construction of highspeed rail between major cities.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/obama.rail/index.html

positive progression that has long term benefits for future generations.

[mad_fan]

http://www.rigzone.com/data/results.asp?sortField=0&sortDir=1&P=1&Rig_Name=&RWD_Max=-1&RWD_Min=-1&Region_ID=2&Rig_Type_ID=-1&Manager_ID=-1&Rig_Status_ID=-1&Operator_ID=-1

Here are your 239 rigs in the Gulf...including ported and under construction...
ONE is operated by Conoco...
ZERO by Exxon and Chevron...
I guess these independent drillers just go where the demand is...

[15Adragon]

~Repealed restrictions on federal funding of stem cell research.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52721M20090309

Important issue considering its a hot field that make huge advances in the medical field i think its great to see progress is being made with it...

There has been more quantifiable progress using adult stem cells. Something that is not reported.

~Decriminalized marijuana.
http://gawker.com/5162010/obama-pretty-much-legalizes-marijuana

Now we can stop wasting extra funding on the war on drugs

I guess you think this is smart so we are miles apart on this one.

~Lifted ban on federal funding for planned parenthood facilities.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/newsroom/local-press-releases/president-obama-lifts-global-gag-rule
-blocking-us-funds-international-reproductive-health-care-23835.htm

We have no business spending our money on this.

~Approved continued funding for NASA's moon/mars habitat program, 'Project Constellation.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16676-obama-backs-moon-return-in-nasa-budget.html


~climbed in bed with America's largest nuclear power company.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/obama-hearts-nuke-giant-e_b_84824.html

I like nuclear.

~Appointed nobel prize winning physicist Steven Chu as energy secretary.
http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=steven-chu-nobel-prize-winning-phys-2008-12-
11

This guy is a joke!!! How does Steven Chu pass himself off as a scientist. He is a hack.

~Appointed Harvard professor John Holdren as environmental advisor.
http://www.harvardscience.harvard.edu/culture-society/articles/john-p-holdren-named-president-elect-
obama-s-science-advisor

~Confirmed the construction of highspeed rail between major cities.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/obama.rail/index.html

positive progression that has long term benefits for future generations.

???


response in bold

[slorch]

Nukular

[stevefoxsc]

response in bold



There has been more quantifiable progress using adult stem cells. Something that is not reported.

you're missing the point if we had restrictions on stem cell how could we use any form of to make any progressive research. You can't say this road is safer than this road if you can't travel down either road especially when you need a toll to reach both roads which are esentually the same.
~Decriminalized marijuana.
http://gawker.com/5162010/obama-pret...izes-marijuana

Now

I guess you think this is smart so we are miles apart on this one.

billions of dollars are spent criminalizing people who smoke pot... Thats tax payer dollars being wasted on guys who smoked a joint...

~Lifted ban on federal funding for planned parenthood facilities.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/new...lobal-gag-rule
-blocking-us-funds-international-reproductive-health-care-23835.htm

We have no business spending our money on this.



~climbed in bed with America's largest nuclear power company.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...e_b_84824.html

I like nuclear.

remember he likes nuclear because its going to bite him in a second


This guy is a joke!!! How does Steven Chu pass himself off as a scientist. He is a hack.
this guy is one of the foremost experts and world renowned for his work with energy some of progression would not have been made if it had not been for his search. What you basically said is comparable to saying ," Einstein was a quack and did nothing important hes a joke." Btw this so called joke is the same guy pushing for your "I like nuclear" energy."

[15Adragon]

you're missing the point if we had restrictions on stem cell how could we use any form of to make any progressive research. You can't say this road is safer than this road if you can't travel down either road especially when you need a toll to reach both roads which are esentually the same.
~Decriminalized marijuana.
http://gawker.com/5162010/obama-pret...izes-marijuana

Now


billions of dollars are spent criminalizing people who smoke pot... Thats tax payer dollars being wasted on guys who smoked a joint...

~Lifted ban on federal funding for planned parenthood facilities.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/new...lobal-gag-rule
-blocking-us-funds-international-reproductive-health-care-23835.htm

We have no business spending our money on this.



~climbed in bed with America's largest nuclear power company.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...e_b_84824.html


remember he likes nuclear because its going to bite him in a second


this guy is one of the foremost experts and world renowned for his work with energy some of progression would not have been made if it had not been for his search. What you basically said is comparable to saying ," Einstein was a quack and did nothing important hes a joke." Btw this so called joke is the same guy pushing for your "I like nuclear" energy."

I think legalizing pot is bad cuz it ultimately makes it easier for kids to get and that is bad.

[15Adragon]

Nukular

strategery

[chhspantherfan]

this out of the nuclear link


.......If this was a story about Clinton rewriting legislation to benefit one of her biggest campaign contributors, who also happened to be Big Nuke, there would be blaring headlines across the web. That it revolves around nuclear leaks and helping provide cover for Exelon, a big biz corporate contributor for Obama, against the best interest of a community, is not a small issue either. You cannot buy this type of free pass from the traditional media. They have to be willing to be complicit in it, because any way you slice it this is a huge story.

The report in the New York Times is alarming. For one thing, you've got to wonder why he told a whopper in Iowa when the records are so easily revealed. Of course, to win. But when it concerns radioactive leaks and the protection of citizens, we're talking about the morality of personal politics and professional ethics. Guess Obama knows the press has been asleep where he's concerned and counted on that continuing. Oops. .........

[drgnbkr]

this out of the nuclear link


.......If this was a story about Clinton rewriting legislation to benefit one of her biggest campaign contributors, who also happened to be Big Nuke, there would be blaring headlines across the web. That it revolves around nuclear leaks and helping provide cover for Exelon, a big biz corporate contributor for Obama, against the best interest of a community, is not a small issue either. You cannot buy this type of free pass from the traditional media. They have to be willing to be complicit in it, because any way you slice it this is a huge story.

The report in the New York Times is alarming. For one thing, you've got to wonder why he told a whopper in Iowa when the records are so easily revealed. Of course, to win. But when it concerns radioactive leaks and the protection of citizens, we're talking about the morality of personal politics and professional ethics. Guess Obama knows the press has been asleep where he's concerned and counted on that continuing. Oops. .........

I guess he just misremembered.....:rolleyes:

[stevefoxsc]

I think legalizing pot is bad cuz it ultimately makes it easier for kids to get and that is bad.

if it was legalize the only thing it would do is boost the economy. And beer is worse than that weed is and kids still get a hold of it.

I can keep smoking pot and i wont die.
I can keep drinking and eventually i will die.

[BDB]

if it was legalize the only thing it would do is boost the economy. And beer is worse than that weed is and kids still get a hold of it.

I can keep smoking pot and i wont die.
I can keep drinking and eventually i will die.

besides the health effects (because cigarettes are still legal, and so is everclear... both kill more people a year then ganja), it would get (around) half the population out of the prison system (wanna talk about tax dollars, conservatives?). it'll prolly end the tobacco industry, since winston and marlboro are on the way out and they'll need something new to push... i mean, sell. plus, if it were to be legalized, there would be sanctions and restrictions just like alcohol and tobacco... so it wouldn't make it to childrens hands (theoretically).

and if weed is legal, maybe the dirty hippies will feel more a part of society and bath.... :D...i can dream.

[Firebird]

http://www.rigzone.com/data/results.asp?sortField=0&sortDir=1&P=1&Rig_Name=&RWD_Max=-1&RWD_Min=-1&Region_ID=2&Rig_Type_ID=-1&Manager_ID=-1&Rig_Status_ID=-1&Operator_ID=-1

Here are your 239 rigs in the Gulf...including ported and under construction...
ONE is operated by Conoco...
ZERO by Exxon and Chevron...
I guess these independent drillers just go where the demand is...

And that has to do with companies not charging themselves enough...

Your quote, not mine...

[tayb]

I think legalizing pot is bad cuz it ultimately makes it easier for kids to get and that is bad.

Is it really possible to make it easier to get? I think what you meant to say was make it more expensive for kids to get.

And in the end I would much rather have my children smoking weed than drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes. Weed won't do anything to harm their body.

[pied]

Is it really possible to make it easier to get? I think what you meant to say was make it more expensive for kids to get.

And in the end I would much rather have my children smoking weed than drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes. Weed won't do anything to harm their body.

I may agree with you in principle, but I think your statement is false.

[b756561]

if it was legalize the only thing it would do is boost the economy. And beer is worse than that weed is and kids still get a hold of it.

I can keep smoking pot and i wont die.
I can keep drinking and eventually i will die.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Actually, you will eventually die either way. Everyone does.....except me. I've already decided that I'm going to live forever. So far, so good. You see, it's not that I'm afraid of death, I just don't want to be there when it happens to me.
http://smiliesftw.com/x/walamabanana.gif

[mad_fan]

Your quote, not mine...

I need to go to the penalty box for 3 minutes...:D
IN CONTEXT...I think it was clear that that was a question...
I stated that I doubted that any of those platforms were owned by major US producers...
You should work for NBC or FOX...;)


We'll have to convince them to pay more than the Saudis and Africans do for our own jack-up rigs first....

Oil rigs have been leaving the Gulf of Mexico for better contracts overseas. The number of rigs in the Gulf is in a tailspin, down by 30 under contract from last year. Down in absolute numbers as well.

And that has to do with companies not charging themselves enough...(???)
As for the 'tailspin' I guess I missed that...
Sounds like business taking advantage of oppurtunity...

[Firebird]

I need to go to the penalty box for 3 minutes...:D
IN CONTEXT...I think it was clear that that was a question...
I stated that I doubted that any of those platforms were owned by major US producers...
You should work for NBC or FOX...;)

Exactly....those rigs are owned by independent drilling companies, few major producers keep their own fleets. And they are getting better long term contrats overseas. If we want to start exploiting more of the shelf, we'll need to lure them back or build new ones. Even if we start now it will be along the lines of a decade or so before we start seeing significant production from those fields....

[mad_fan]

Exactly....those rigs are owned by independent drilling companies, few major producers keep their own fleets. And they are getting better long term contrats overseas. If we want to start exploiting more of the shelf, we'll need to lure them back or build new ones. Even if we start now it will be along the lines of a decade or so before we start seeing significant production from those fields....

Exxon, Conoco, etc own offshore interests in other parts of the world...and are contracting rigs in those other locations...why???
Or is you point that the major won't pay the day rate required to keep them in the GOM??? I wonder why???

[Firebird]

Exxon, Conoco, etc own offshore interests in other parts of the world...and are contracting rigs in those other locations...why???
Or is you point that the major won't pay the day rate required to keep them in the GOM??? I wonder why???

Well, one theory is that the Gulf fields are mature and that production from a new well is not going to last as long as in other parts of the world...so there aren't as many long term contracts to be had. It's not the day rate, but the length of the contract they can get elsewhere.

[mad_fan]

Well, one theory is that the Gulf fields are mature and that production from a new well is not going to last as long as in other parts of the world...so there aren't as many long term contracts to be had. It's not the day rate, but the length of the contract they can get elsewhere.

Too bad we can't move them off the coast of Florida...

[15Adragon]

Back on topic here.

Who will design these new cars with all of the technology and innovation required to meet our increasing mandates for efficiency? The bankrupt US auto industry? No, it will be the Japanese, Chinese, Indian and Korean car companies. We will give a bunch of grants to the US car companies and they will hire all of the global warming scientists who spend more time figuring out how to get another grant than doing any meaningful research. This sounds rough but it is not a pretty picture. When you are BROKE it is hard to do a lot of long term thinking.

[pied]

Back on topic here.

Who will design these new cars with all of the technology and innovation required to meet our increasing mandates for efficiency? The bankrupt US auto industry? No, it will be the Japanese, Chinese, Indian and Korean car companies. We will give a bunch of grants to the US car companies and they will hire all of the global warming scientists who spend more time figuring out how to get another grant than doing any meaningful research. This sounds rough but it is not a pretty picture. When you are BROKE it is hard to do a lot of long term thinking.

I am erally trying to make sense of this comment, but simply can't. Why would Chrysler, and possibly GM hire a scientist that would not help the bottom line.

You do bring up some other good questions and not some others. Where does Ford fit into this picture. While the other two firms are somewhat hamstrung, they have the govt. propping them up more.

In addition, Japan and other countries subsidize their car companies moreso than we have traditionally. Do we change that? Do we want to?

[slcdragonfan]

Just a word in here.... I think we have all been critics of our domestic automakers. However, I have a 2001 GMC Yukon XL that has been nothing short of amazing. 110,000 milles and I haven't touched the brakes, just now changing the spark plugs, have a mirror that has overheated and needs to be replaced, that's pretty much it. That is quality. I would bet if they are doing it on the SUV's, they are doing it on the passenger cars as well. Contrast that with a Mercedes I considered buying (can't recall the number, but it was a two-door thing of beauty, I think 2003). That car had a known issue with the coolant getting into the tranny because of a weak wall in the radiator. Known problem, no recall, only fixed for the original owner. Also had problems with the radio, had autosensing on loudness and was known to randomly have problems. Replacement parts cost? Don't even ask...thousands....

My point should be obvious; while we can argue that the domestics have not been the most intelligently managed, and the body styles may not be the most attractive, they are building good cars, and they have been building the cars we wanted until last year (SUV's, Xovers, etc).

So, seems the big problem here is not just the worker (hey, management had to AGREE to those contracts in the first place), but also management. I don't think Government is qualified to run car companies, but there seems to have been some seriously wrong decision-making regarding futures for these companies (what we usually refer to as a quarterly focus).

Now we see that GM to get cheaper :eek: is looking to build in China and them import to here (by the way, just the opposite of BMW, Honda, and Toyota).

Hard to see how Obama is the death of them....seems that they have had some issues for a while, just not the ones we thought.

[drgnbkr]

Just a word in here.... I think we have all been critics of our domestic automakers. However, I have a 2001 GMC Yukon XL that has been nothing short of amazing. 110,000 milles and I haven't touched the brakes, just now changing the spark plugs, have a mirror that has overheated and needs to be replaced, that's pretty much it. That is quality. I would bet if they are doing it on the SUV's, they are doing it on the passenger cars as well. Contrast that with a Mercedes I considered buying (can't recall the number, but it was a two-door thing of beauty, I think 2003). That car had a known issue with the coolant getting into the tranny because of a weak wall in the radiator. Known problem, no recall, only fixed for the original owner. Also had problems with the radio, had autosensing on loudness and was known to randomly have problems. Replacement parts cost? Don't even ask...thousands....

My point should be obvious; while we can argue that the domestics have not been the most intelligently managed, and the body styles may not be the most attractive, they are building good cars, and they have been building the cars we wanted until last year (SUV's, Xovers, etc).

So, seems the big problem here is not just the worker (hey, management had to AGREE to those contracts in the first place), but also management. I don't think Government is qualified to run car companies, but there seems to have been some seriously wrong decision-making regarding futures for these companies (what we usually refer to as a quarterly focus).

Now we see that GM to get cheaper :eek: is looking to build in China and them import to here (by the way, just the opposite of BMW, Honda, and Toyota).

Hard to see how Obama is the death of them....seems that they have had some issues for a while, just not the ones we thought.

IMO the unions are the problem...by handing Chrysler over to them, it would seem to be letting the fox not only guard the hen house, they now own it. It seems like a smart move on GM's part to get as far away as they can from the leech that is the UAW, before obama can give it to the union. If obama isn't the death of them, I fail to see who is. You say in your own post that the Govt knows nothing about running a business, obama is less experienced, having run nothing before.

[15Adragon]

Just a word in here.... I think we have all been critics of our domestic automakers. However, I have a 2001 GMC Yukon XL that has been nothing short of amazing. 110,000 milles and I haven't touched the brakes, just now changing the spark plugs, have a mirror that has overheated and needs to be replaced, that's pretty much it. That is quality. I would bet if they are doing it on the SUV's, they are doing it on the passenger cars as well. Contrast that with a Mercedes I considered buying (can't recall the number, but it was a two-door thing of beauty, I think 2003). That car had a known issue with the coolant getting into the tranny because of a weak wall in the radiator. Known problem, no recall, only fixed for the original owner. Also had problems with the radio, had autosensing on loudness and was known to randomly have problems. Replacement parts cost? Don't even ask...thousands....

My point should be obvious; while we can argue that the domestics have not been the most intelligently managed, and the body styles may not be the most attractive, they are building good cars, and they have been building the cars we wanted until last year (SUV's, Xovers, etc).

So, seems the big problem here is not just the worker (hey, management had to AGREE to those contracts in the first place), but also management. I don't think Government is qualified to run car companies, but there seems to have been some seriously wrong decision-making regarding futures for these companies (what we usually refer to as a quarterly focus).

Now we see that GM to get cheaper :eek: is looking to build in China and them import to here (by the way, just the opposite of BMW, Honda, and Toyota).

Hard to see how Obama is the death of them....seems that they have had some issues for a while, just not the ones we thought.

The auto companies would clearly be better off and would be more attractive to private capital if they were allowed to go through a backruptcy that was was not strong armed by the Obama administration without concern for the rule of law. There have been numerous articles written on the Chrysler case. NOBODY will want to invest after this kind of process... Toxic at best. You have to have established rules that WILL BE followed or you have no trust and the money will stay away and all that will be left is the gov. I think that is what is meant by the title of this thread. Some have referred to this as example of a "gangsta administration" because of the way the creditors were dissed in favor of the unions which was clearly against established laws for creditors.

Yes, I agree with the aquality of the US cars. They have improved and closed tha gap significantly. I just traded a 12 year old ford expedition in for another one (Al Gore edition). It had 135K with original spak plugs and no issues other than age.

[Firebird]

The auto companies would clearly be better off and would be more attractive to private capital if they were allowed to go through a backruptcy that was was not strong armed by the Obama administration without concern for the rule of law. There have been numerous articles written on the Chrysler case. NOBODY will want to invest after this kind of process... Toxic at best. You have to have established rules that WILL BE followed or you have no trust and the money will stay away and all that will be left is the gov. I think that is what is meant by the title of this thread. Some have referred to this as example of a "gangsta administration" because of the way the creditors were dissed in favor of the unions which was clearly against established laws for creditors.

Yes, I agree with the aquality of the US cars. They have improved and closed tha gap significantly. I just traded a 12 year old ford expedition in for another one (Al Gore edition). It had 135K with original spak plugs and no issues other than age.


Except for Fiat....;)

[slcdragonfan]

IMO the unions are the problem...by handing Chrysler over to them, it would seem to be letting the fox not only guard the hen house, they now own it. It seems like a smart move on GM's part to get as far away as they can from the leech that is the UAW, before obama can give it to the union. If obama isn't the death of them, I fail to see who is. You say in your own post that the Govt knows nothing about running a business, obama is less experienced, having run nothing before.

Well, how did the Unions get those contracts agreed to? Someone has to sign on both sides...:)

I believe the UAW has gone too far with some of the work rules (getting paid while laid off? pretty sweet). But Labor AND Management are culpable.

My point is, you are claiming that Obama has killed them. I am stating that stabbing a cadaver isn't murder, while at at the same time saying they have been making pretty decent cars. Management AND Labor killed them.

[15Adragon]

Except for Fiat....;)

a sham. Fiat will put nothing up for their 20% stake until the gov gives chrysler another 5.4B and bankruptcy judges crush chryslers creditors. We'll see on this. My take is fiat is just eatin it the buffet line. The Chrysler bankruptcy will certainly get another look in the courts.

[slcdragonfan]

The auto companies would clearly be better off and would be more attractive to private capital if they were allowed to go through a backruptcy that was was not strong armed by the Obama administration without concern for the rule of law. There have been numerous articles written on the Chrysler case. NOBODY will want to invest after this kind of process... Toxic at best. You have to have established rules that WILL BE followed or you have no trust and the money will stay away and all that will be left is the gov. I think that is what is meant by the title of this thread. Some have referred to this as example of a "gangsta administration" because of the way the creditors were dissed in favor of the unions which was clearly against established laws for creditors.

Yes, I agree with the aquality of the US cars. They have improved and closed tha gap significantly. I just traded a 12 year old ford expedition in for another one (Al Gore edition). It had 135K with original spak plugs and no issues other than age.

I agree on the bankruptcy part, we should have stayed out. I can understand the concern for jobs and the domestic industry, AND we were able to save the day once before by stepping in for Chrysler, but in the end good old capitalism might have worked better. It would and will mean a very big pension liability for Americans to take care of, however, if that gets shed onto the public like the airlines and steel industry. We can't avoid being players.

[15Adragon]

I agree on the bankruptcy part, we should have stayed out. I can understand the concern for jobs and the domestic industry, AND we were able to save the day once before by stepping in for Chrysler, but in the end good old capitalism might have worked better. It would and will mean a very big pension liability for Americans to take care of, however, if that gets shed onto the public like the airlines and steel industry. We can't avoid being players.

We are stuck with that liability anyway. At least there is a cap. We would not be stuck with their medical pensions.

[mad_fan]

a sham. Fiat will put nothing up for their 20% stake until the gov gives chrysler another 5.4B and bankruptcy judges crush chryslers creditors. We'll see on this. My take is fiat is just eatin it the buffet line. The Chrysler bankruptcy will certainly get another look in the courts.

I think it's 35% that Fiat gets...and not for nothing...they are going to retool one plant to manufacture...Fiats...:)
The goverment will have to pony up a few billion more during bankruptcy...but I wouldn't worry about that hurting the new co...since it won't be their debt...and will never be repaid...
The non-TARP bondholders are toast...they dropped their opposition...despite contract law...
Despite the administrations call for a 60 or 90 day bankruptcy...it won't happen...courts are generally not a place where an administration can use it's heavy hand...except in appointments...
Don't hold your breath on this thing being sent back to the bankruptcy court in a few years...when it's done...it'll be done...

[mad_fan]

We are stuck with that liability anyway. At least there is a cap. We would not be stuck with their medical pensions.

I thought the PBGC would be stuck with it???

[15Adragon]

I thought the PBGC would be stuck with it???

Yes.

[15Adragon]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b3c8beb8-4564-11de-b6c8-00144feabdc0.html

Minor details like the law. ;)


However, the Indiana State Teachers’ Retirement Fund said on Wednesday that it had a fiduciary responsibility to its members to continue the fight. The fund stands to lose $4.6m under the current settlement proposal and has teamed up with Richard Mourdock, Indiana state treasurer, to try to recover those losses.



Whatever powers the Treasury department may have under Tarp,” the funds said, “it does not have the power to control the entire restructuring of a company to the detriment of the company’s secured creditors and for the benefit of other interest groups so that certain broader policy and political objectives may be achieved.”

[mad_fan]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b3c8beb8-4564-11de-b6c8-00144feabdc0.html

Minor details like the law. ;)

Not sure the law is relevant...
But I'm sure something will be worked out for a teachers' retirement fund by the administration...

[15Adragon]

Not sure the law is relevant...
But I'm sure something will be worked out for a teachers' retirement fund by the administration...

Bankruptcy law ... " that first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority" (pensions)

[mad_fan]

Bankruptcy law ... " that first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority" (pensions)

I'm sure we can work something out...if you aren't a hedge fund...;)

[Bobcat81]

My point should be obvious; while we can argue that the domestics have not been the most intelligently managed, and the body styles may not be the most attractive, they are building good cars, and they have been building the cars we wanted until last year (SUV's, Xovers, etc).

So, seems the big problem here is not just the worker (hey, management had to AGREE to those contracts in the first place), but also management. I don't think Government is qualified to run car companies, but there seems to have been some seriously wrong decision-making regarding futures for these companies (what we usually refer to as a quarterly focus).

Now we see that GM to get cheaper :eek: is looking to build in China and them import to here (by the way, just the opposite of BMW, Honda, and Toyota).

Hard to see how Obama is the death of them....seems that they have had some issues for a while, just not the ones we thought.

That right there would be the biggest mistake GM could ever make! With the total crap that's been coming out of China (In all catagories), their new "China" dream will sink them completely into the history books.

I wouldn't even bother looking at a GM product if it were made in China.

[drgnbkr]

Well, how did the Unions get those contracts agreed to? Someone has to sign on both sides...:)

I believe the UAW has gone too far with some of the work rules (getting paid while laid off? pretty sweet). But Labor AND Management are culpable.

My point is, you are claiming that Obama has killed them. I am stating that stabbing a cadaver isn't murder, while at at the same time saying they have been making pretty decent cars. Management AND Labor killed them.

How does the union get anything? By refusing to work until they get their way. Supported by the libs in govt. the UAW can shut down production until they get everything they want and the companies can not bust them, unlike what Reagan was able to do to the Air Traffic Controllers.

[JagFan]

Looks like some of the creditors are rethinking taking .30 on the dollar. This could get very interesting and become an even bigger mess.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b3c8beb8-4564-11de-b6c8-00144feabdc0.html

[pied]

Looks like some of the creditors are rethinking taking .30 on the dollar. This could get very interesting and become an even bigger mess.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b3c8beb8-4564-11de-b6c8-00144feabdc0.html

Is there an echo in here?

Curious as to how familiar most on here are with the BK proceedings. Here is one guys view on the hold outs:

The federal bankruptcy code can be a devilish thing, especially when trying to understand the circumstances of a precedent-setting filing like the plan announced Thursday by Chrysler.

Rather than dust off that old Studebaker filing from 1933 -- we'll assume it's a bit antiquated -- The Am Law Daily caught up with John La Liberte, chair of the litigation and creditors' rights group at Boston's Sherin and Lodgen, to explain some things to us.

John, thanks for taking the time. Why did some of Chrysler's secured lenders hold out?

Because they played the game of chicken and lost. The other 70 percent of the [secured debt holders] have agreed to a restructuring without the need for bankruptcy. So they'd get something like $2 billion in exchange for forgiving debt. But since all the lenders must approve the terms, the other [30 percent] blocked the deal to try and leverage their position.

I take it this isn't unusual?

It's not uncommon in this context or any type of negotiation where you try to be the squeaky wheel to get a little bit more grease.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202430341262

[JagFan]

Is there an echo in here?

Curious as to how familiar most on here are with the BK proceedings. Here is one guys view on the hold outs:



http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202430341262

I just so this report this morning and was under the impression that the other creditors had conceded to the plan. Now they are not.

I am not real familiar with BK law however had had to pay back money received from a vendor when they filed for BK three months after paying us. The judge ordered us to pay back the 10,000.00 because it appeared we were given favored status over the other creditors. He went back 6 months and everyone that received payments from this company had to give it back. In the end we got only 2,000.00 paid on our invoice and that was a year later.

[pied]

I just so this report this morning and was under the impression that the other creditors had conceded to the plan. Now they are not.

I am not real familiar with BK law however had had to pay back money received from a vendor when they filed for BK three months after paying us. The judge ordered us to pay back the 10,000.00 because it appeared we were given favored status over the other creditors. He went back 6 months and everyone that received payments from this company had to give it back. In the end we got only 2,000.00 paid on our invoice and that was a year later.


So you got 20% after going through BK and these guys could have settled at 30%, correct?

[15Adragon]

New name for GM:

Gettelfinger Motors

:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy

[drgnbkr]

I just so this report this morning and was under the impression that the other creditors had conceded to the plan. Now they are not.

I am not real familiar with BK law however had had to pay back money received from a vendor when they filed for BK three months after paying us. The judge ordered us to pay back the 10,000.00 because it appeared we were given favored status over the other creditors. He went back 6 months and everyone that received payments from this company had to give it back. In the end we got only 2,000.00 paid on our invoice and that was a year later.

Some of the creditors were forced to take the deal, and are now growing a set...good for them!

[JagFan]

So you got 20% after going through BK and these guys could have settled at 30%, correct?

I did not go throug BK a customer of ours did. Yes, we got 20% as did all of the other creditors. The judge did not pick and choose who got what. It was across the board.

The people upset with getting 30% is that the UAW gets more. It is grossly unfair to them. Yes, I back them going for what they can get and not bowing to the pressure of the white house. Why can't the UAW take less so the other creditors can get a little more?

[pied]

I did not go throug BK a customer of ours did. Yes, we got 20% as did all of the other creditors. The judge did not pick and choose who got what. It was across the board.

The people upset with getting 30% is that the UAW gets more. It is grossly unfair to them. Yes, I back them going for what they can get and not bowing to the pressure of the white house. Why can't the UAW take less so the other creditors can get a little more?

I understand that and probably could have phrased it differently.

I do not know why the UAW should get more. Perhaps it was decided they were a bigger stakeholder than the other investors. The people who would be necessary to continue to operate the company. Without them, you would simply sell the assets and shut the doors. I don't know how this normally works in the BK process, one of the reasons I linked to a guy that would appear to know more than I(or the majority of us on here) regarding the subject.


It will be interesting to see how the BK judge rules in this matter.

[JagFan]

I understand that and probably could have phrased it differently.

I do not know why the UAW should get more. Perhaps it was decided they were a bigger stakeholder than the other investors. The people who would be necessary to continue to operate the company. Without them, you would simply sell the assets and shut the doors. I don't know how this normally works in the BK process, one of the reasons I linked to a guy that would appear to know more than I(or the majority of us on here) regarding the subject.


It will be interesting to see how the BK judge rules in this matter.

I agree and I certainly don't know the full law on BK. I just know what a judge made us do. We received a hand delivered court order to you to pay back the money and our attorney said we must obey the order. I did it. I do know that the Obama admin. set the terms and that a BK judge will have to rule on it.

I guess we are all about to get a lesson on the BK laws. Right now the perception is that the UAW will now be part owners and get more of the payouts. They are above the other creditors that have pensions and salaries to pay as well. It is a mess and there is no end in sight to this ending.

[pied]

I agree and I certainly don't know the full law on BK. I just know what a judge made us do. We received a hand delivered court order to you to pay back the money and our attorney said we must obey the order. I did it. I do know that the Obama admin. set the terms and that a BK judge will have to rule on it.

I guess we are all about to get a lesson on the BK laws. Right now the perception is that the UAW will now be part owners and get more of the payouts. They are above the other creditors that have pensions and salaries to pay as well. It is a mess and there is no end in sight to this ending.

Perhaps, but I think more than likely people will pick their side and find fault with the other without really learning anything.

[15Adragon]

I understand that and probably could have phrased it differently.

I do not know why the UAW should get more. Perhaps it was decided they were a bigger stakeholder than the other investors. The people who would be necessary to continue to operate the company. Without them, you would simply sell the assets and shut the doors. I don't know how this normally works in the BK process, one of the reasons I linked to a guy that would appear to know more than I(or the majority of us on here) regarding the subject.


It will be interesting to see how the BK judge rules in this matter.

That is the issue. The creditors in question had priority over the UAW as first-tier secured creditors . With disregard for the rule of law the obama admin wants to force the creditors (like teachers pensions) to take less to accomplish his objectives. If the "gangsta" administration is allowed to decide winners and losers instead of the laws on the books then we are heading down a slipery slope and undoing the things that have made this country great. There is a reason why money flows into this economy and not country's with dictators in charge.

[Firebird]

That is the issue. The creditors in question had priority over the UAW as first-tier secured creditors . With disregard for the rule of law the obama admin wants to force the creditors (like teachers pensions) to take less to accomplish his objectives. If the "gangsta" administration is allowed to decide winners and losers instead of the laws on the books then we are heading down a slipery slope and undoing the things that have made this country great. There is a reason why money flows into this economy and not country's with dictators in charge.

Are they dictators in China? Just trying to keep track.

[15Adragon]

Are they dictators in China? Just trying to keep track.

Should we allow a "gangsta" administration to decide winners and losers in a bankruptcy or should we rely on existing laws?

[pied]

That is the issue. The creditors in question had priority over the UAW as first-tier secured creditors . With disregard for the rule of law the obama admin wants to force the creditors (like teachers pensions) to take less to accomplish his objectives. If the "gangsta" administration is allowed to decide winners and losers instead of the laws on the books then we are heading down a slipery slope and undoing the things that have made this country great. There is a reason why money flows into this economy and not country's with dictators in charge.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Obama did not dictate the BK terms, but was negotiating prior to the BK. Now that it's in BK, the judge makes the call, correct?

[15Adragon]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Obama did not dictate the BK terms, but was negotiating prior to the BK. Now that it's in BK, the judge makes the call, correct?

No, the administration is heavily involved in this.


Chrysler, with backing from the US Treasury, had offered its secured creditors just under 30 cents on the dollar to settle claims totalling $6.9bn.



In a court filing on Wednesday, the Indiana funds accused the government of adopting a strategy of “the ends justify the means”.


link was posted earlier...

[JagFan]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Obama did not dictate the BK terms, but was negotiating prior to the BK. Now that it's in BK, the judge makes the call, correct?

The Obama admin. was in the middle of negotiations and when some of the creditors did not fall in line he had a press conference and shamed them. (or tried to) He announced he does not stand with them and made it sound like they were the greedy ones.

I would think that the BK judge will have some say in it.

[pied]

No, the administration is heavily involved in this.





link was posted earlier...

The offer was made prior to the filing. Chrysler submitted the plan, it is up to the BK judge now. I do not think that the administration is involved at this point. Could be wrong, but the link does not support the assertion that the administration is involved in the negotiations, or writing the terms of the BK at this point.

[drgnbkr]

The offer was made prior to the filing. Chrysler submitted the plan, it is up to the BK judge now. I do not think that the administration is involved at this point. Could be wrong, but the link does not support the assertion that the administration is involved in the negotiations, or writing the terms of the BK at this point.

The administration devised the scheme whereby the union got involved in the ownership. The Administration then strong armed the other creditors, insuring that the union had preferred positioning, and announced it to the world. All links to this effect are posted in the other thread on this topic.

[pied]

The administration devised the scheme whereby the union got involved in the ownership. The Administration then strong armed the other creditors, insuring that the union had preferred positioning, and announced it to the world. All links to this effect are posted in the other thread on this topic.

What does that have to do with them mingling in the BK process?

Had the creditors agreed to the lesser amount, that they likley will get in the BK, the filing might have been avoided. Would that have been a better or worse situation?

[drgnbkr]

What does that have to do with them mingling in the BK process?

Had the creditors agreed to the lesser amount, that they likley will get in the BK, the filing might have been avoided. Would that have been a better or worse situation?

Why would a creditor want to accept an administration led effort to give the UAW front of the line status? It is strong arming at best...

[slcdragonfan]

Why would a creditor want to accept an administration led effort to give the UAW front of the line status? It is strong arming at best...

Teddy Roosevelt called it the "bully pulpit". How can they be 'shamed' if they are doing nothing wrong? The President cannot make them do something they aren't willing to do, they could stand strong and say no if the law supports them, true? So it is still a matter of choice is it not?

Unless there is a law saying he can do it, he cannot force them to take terms that they do not sign for. Am I missing something?

I guess if the issue is his involvement at all, or how he is involved, I get it. That is a debatable point.

[15Adragon]

Teddy Roosevelt called it the "bully pulpit". How can they be 'shamed' if they are doing nothing wrong? The President cannot make them do something they aren't willing to do, they could stand strong and say no if the law supports them, true? So it is still a matter of choice is it not?

Unless there is a law saying he can do it, he cannot force them to take terms that they do not sign for. Am I missing something?

I guess if the issue is his involvement at all, or how he is involved, I get it. That is a debatable point.

It was reported by the attorney who is representing the creditors that they were threatened by the negotiator ( I think the car zar but not sure w/o search) from the administration that they would use the WH press to smear their reputations if they did not accept the bankruptcy as specified by the administration. If they accepted then it would supposedly fly thru the bankruptcy process. I would think that is a little "gangsta" like for an administration. I don't think this one is over.

[drgnbkr]

It was reported by the attorney who is representing the creditors that they were threatened by the negotiator ( I think the car zar but not sure w/o search) from the administration that they would use the WH press to smear their reputations if they did not accept the bankruptcy as specified by the administration. If they accepted then it would supposedly fly thru the bankruptcy process. I would think that is a little "gangsta" like for an administration. I don't think this one is over.

That is what I have been talking about with the "strong arm" tactics being used. It is our way or the highway with these guys, and it is not good for any industry, much less the beleaguered auto business. I agree that this one has the potential to blow up.

[pied]

That is what I have been talking about with the "strong arm" tactics being used. It is our way or the highway with these guys, and it is not good for any industry, much less the beleaguered auto business. I agree that this one has the potential to blow up.

I would suggest that had the creditors taken the deal, it likely would have been better for Chrysler, if that's who your concerned about. Not the investors however.