|
strypes
Meriden, CT
|
Edna wrote: <quoted text>
Just how stupid are you, I mean exactly, on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the "most Stupid of All"? Let us know. More name calling from another liberal. It is really uncanny. They cannot debate with facts so they ALWAYS resort to name calling.
|
|
GOoPed on
Hicksville, NY
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
Ooh- good one! I know you are but what an I....
What are you 20 years old and under the control of left wing college professors still?
As ususal, when facts dismiss liberal arguments they resort to name calling. Coming from someone who has yet to present ANY facts, I find that amusing. Conservatives are teh ones who cry 'commie' and 'terrorist lover' every chance you get btw. And what are you, some old bat who craps in his Depends and yearns for the good old days of Ike? Drop dead already and let us fix the mess you con jobs created.
|
|
GOoPed on
Hicksville, NY
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
More name calling from another liberal. It is really uncanny. They cannot debate with facts so they ALWAYS resort to name calling. Pinko commie
|
|
strypes
Meriden, CT
|
GOoPed on wrote: <quoted text>
Pinko commie I am not old, just informed. Unlike you. The fact is that speculators react to market factors such as supply and demand. If the US has no plans to drill or build new nuclear plant or refineries then there will be no new supply on the market and demand will remain higher than supply. That is what dictates price. I do not resort to name calling like you because the knowledge and facts are on my side. Good luck in life blaming others and calling names when you get frustrated.
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
derbydoll wrote: The real question to ask is why Democrats are against lower fuel prices. We are talking at cross-purposes. Your goal is to bring down fuel prices. My goal is to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels.
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
Judged:
1
Candidate B wrote: <quoted text>
They're against anything that benefits Americans who actually choose to go to work in their own cars. They want you to take the bus...the cute little blue one that stops right in front of your house in Roxbury. Then again, you COULD live closer to where you work, and walk...(as they do through the halls of Congress) you KNOW you COULD - it's a choice that you need to make about your place and role in the Universe!
But I digress. The ultimate goal is for everyone to live and work in megacities, because that's the Utopian Democrat Dream (for YOU). "They" of course, will continue to reside in the Napa Valley, or Highanusport, on their grande estates, or perhaps even the countryside around D.C. or Chappaqua NY? Spoken like someone who lives in a 3000 sq ft home half an hour from the nearest grocery store.
|
|
GOoPed on
Hicksville, NY
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
I am not old, just informed. Unlike you.
The fact is that speculators react to market factors such as supply and demand. If the US has no plans to drill or build new nuclear plant or refineries then there will be no new supply on the market and demand will remain higher than supply. That is what dictates price.
I do not resort to name calling like you because the knowledge and facts are on my side.
Good luck in life blaming others and calling names when you get frustrated. Yeah I'm ill informed. I guess Enron was really not manipulating the energy market in California either. Oh and calling someone ill informed is name calling you hypocrite.
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
I am not old, just informed. Unlike you.
The fact is that speculators react to market factors such as supply and demand. If the US has no plans to drill or build new nuclear plant or refineries then there will be no new supply on the market and demand will remain higher than supply. That is what dictates price.
I do not resort to name calling like you because the knowledge and facts are on my side.
Good luck in life blaming others and calling names when you get frustrated. But the strange thing is that the supply does not appear to be responding to changes in price. Even with prices going up, Bush had to twice beg his Saudi pals to open the spigots and pump more oil. They finally promised to pump and additional 500,000 barrels, but I don't know that we've seen any of it yet.
|
|
|
|
StopHatinOthers
Norwalk, CT
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
Ooh- good one! I know you are but what an I....
What are you 20 years old and under the control of left wing college professors still?
As ususal, when facts dismiss liberal arguments they resort to name calling. Bahahaha...because we all know college professors set the course of events these days. That old chestnut. Damn campus hippies!
|
|
Frank
Boston, MA
|
strypes wrote: I guess there are really people out there that are completely uninformed and oblivious to the real world.
Oil speculators simply "speculate" on oil futures. Market factor such as supply and demand, volatility in the oil producing regions etc... effect the future availability and price of the commodity. Speculators make money weather the price goes up or down if the predict correctly.
The only real solution is for the do nothing congress to approve drilling, and get alternative sources such as nuclear and wind approved with as little red tape as possible.
Guess what would happen then.....?
The speculators would immidiately call the price of sweet crude at considerably lower prices and we would all see immidiate change at the pump.
None of this can happen unless Washington allows drilling asap.
The premise of your letter is rediculous. Look at the facts of supply and demand, not for some faceless person to blame. This is nothing but oil industry, RNC drivel from begining to end. Most analysts agree that the real price of crude should be about $80 to $90 per gallon which, due to the supply and demand issues you mentioned, is still high but no where near as high as it is now because of wild speculation. You are either woefully misinformed or you're a shill for the oil companies. We can't drill our way to energy independence and low costs. An alternative must be explored and in order for that to happen we must make it profitable for business to invest in alternatives. Yes it will involve government spending but that's okay. We'll simply repeal Bush's ruinous tax cuts, end his ruinous war and then we should be able to pay for it and maybe we'll even have enough money left over for a new round of tax cuts that will go to those who really need it instead of those who make more than $250,000 per year.
|
|
D-oh
Bethel, CT
|
Why should we give the Oil Company’s more land when they have not even tapped ½ of what we already gave them? Since the oil industry is subsidized by tax payers we should nationalize the oil industry and regulate prices. Don’t like the idea? Then stop giving them billions of dollars every year. No other industry makes the profits that the oil industry does but they are still virtually tax free. Does this make sense? strypes wrote: I guess there are really people out there that are completely uninformed and oblivious to the real world.
Oil speculators simply "speculate" on oil futures. Market factor such as supply and demand, volatility in the oil producing regions etc... effect the future availability and price of the commodity. Speculators make money weather the price goes up or down if the predict correctly.
The only real solution is for the do nothing congress to approve drilling, and get alternative sources such as nuclear and wind approved with as little red tape as possible.
Guess what would happen then.....?
The speculators would immidiately call the price of sweet crude at considerably lower prices and we would all see immidiate change at the pump.
None of this can happen unless Washington allows drilling asap.
The premise of your letter is rediculous. Look at the facts of supply and demand, not for some faceless person to blame.
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
GOoPed on wrote: <quoted text>
It is. They wanted to control the supply so they could gouge us. Why would they invade a country and then give the world cheap oil when they could invade a country, make us pay for it and then charge us 3x more for the oil on top of it?
Only some people are too dumb to realize all this and think republicans are good for us because they will cut our taxes by $50 a year (which will pay for one tank of gas). Which neo-con con artist was it who told us that the invasion and occupation of Iraq would "pay for itself" from oil revenues? Wolfowitz, I believe. Also Cheney.
|
|
Bloviator
United States
|
Judged:
1
Frank wrote: <quoted text>
This is nothing but oil industry, RNC drivel from begining to end. Most analysts agree that the real price of crude should be about $80 to $90 per gallon which, due to the supply and demand issues you mentioned, is still high but no where near as high as it is now because of wild speculation. You are either woefully misinformed or you're a shill for the oil companies. We can't drill our way to energy independence and low costs. An alternative must be explored and in order for that to happen we must make it profitable for business to invest in alternatives. Yes it will involve government spending but that's okay. We'll simply repeal Bush's ruinous tax cuts, end his ruinous war and then we should be able to pay for it and maybe we'll even have enough money left over for a new round of tax cuts that will go to those who really need it instead of those who make more than $250,000 per year. Based on strypes composition and spelling I highly doubt they are a shill but more of the misinformed TV News junkie with partisan political blinders and leanings to the Republican spin machine's hype.
|
|
strypes
Meriden, CT
|
social democrat wrote: <quoted text>We are talking at cross-purposes. Your goal is to bring down fuel prices. My goal is to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels. Scary people out there- buying into this global warming myth. When someone can explain why the earth has been warming and cooling for thousands of years before the industrial rev. I will start to listen to these global warming snake oil salesmen. There is no such thing as global warming. But people like you want the US to fail, and our economy to tank, rather than access the billions of gallons of oil that are waiting to be tapped.
|
|
friend of a friend
Wallingford, CT
|
All the talking heads I have heard from on this issue say that drilling would not result in ANY short-term relief. We don't have the drill structures... we don't have the refineries... we don't even know WHERE to drill... and we have the competition from China and India... so the idea that DRILL NOW in order to fix the problem is wrong.
|
|
strypes
Meriden, CT
|
friend of a friend wrote: All the talking heads I have heard from on this issue say that drilling would not result in ANY short-term relief. We don't have the drill structures... we don't have the refineries... we don't even know WHERE to drill... and we have the competition from China and India... so the idea that DRILL NOW in order to fix the problem is wrong. Legislation to allow drilling would immidiately lower prices. However, Nancy Pelosi will not allow ANY legislation that includes drilling to even get to a vote. That is because it has bi-partisan support and it would pass. It would also leave her looking like the fake that she is.
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
Scary people out there- buying into this global warming myth.
When someone can explain why the earth has been warming and cooling for thousands of years before the industrial rev. I will start to listen to these global warming snake oil salesmen.
There is no such thing as global warming. But people like you want the US to fail, and our economy to tank, rather than access the billions of gallons of oil that are waiting to be tapped. Forget about climate change. How about getting off our fossil fuel addiction simply because it is a finite, non-renewable dead end?
|
|
social democrat
New Canaan, CT
|
strypes wrote: <quoted text>
Legislation to allow drilling would immidiately lower prices. Will it? After two requests to increase supplies, the Saudis told Bush they would start pumping out another 500,000 barrels, but I didn't notice any big change in price, did you? I'm not convinced that oil still obeys the old laws of supply, demand, and price.
|
|
derbydoll
Danbury, CT
|
GOoPed on wrote: <quoted text>
I don't know, why are Republicans?
After all it's tripled in price under a republican president. Shut up and produce some oil!
|
|
Frank
Boston, MA
|
social democrat wrote: <quoted text>Forget about climate change. How about getting off our fossil fuel addiction simply because it is a finite, non-renewable dead end? Exactly!
|
Leo
Most Popular
Judge it!
