E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's John Bailey
With the price of Brent crude oil spiking -- up 22% since the first of the year, and up 17% since the unrest in the Middle East first began -- the conventional wisdom is that the violence in Libya has contributed to the rise in gas prices.
But Libya supplies less than 2% of the world’s oil. And even though the country's oil supply has seen disruptions, Bloomberg reports that Saudi oil officials have said, “Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations ... are willing and able to replace any lost Libyan oil as soon as companies ask for it.” Some producers in the Persian Gulf have even said the market may be over supplied.
That has led some to believe that market speculation is to blame for the high gas prices. Back in 2006, a Senate Homeland Security report on the role of speculation in rising oil and gas prices reported that “there is substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices.” As to how much it affected oil prices then, the report said, “analysts have estimated that speculative purchases of oil futures have added as much as $20–$25 per barrel to the current price of crude oil.”
Yet get this: The House spending bill -- which cuts $61 billion in federal spending and which failed to clear the Senate on Wednesday -- reduces the federal government's ability to regulate oil commodities.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act included a provision for rules regulating these types of trades via the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal regulator of the commodities futures markets. These rules would attempt to decrease volatility and prevent unhealthy amounts of leverage.
But last week, CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler told the Senate Agriculture Committee that “the CFTC's current funding is far less than what is required to properly fulfill our significantly expanded mission.” However, per CNN Money: “The most recent comprehensive spending bill produced by House Republicans would chop the CFTC's funding by $56.8 million -- almost a third of the agency's entire budget -- over the next seven months.”
Leave a Comment:
Yet another example of why the house CR, which does NOTHING to solve our long term debt problem, but has been found to hurt the economy, is nothing more then an irresponsible, political hit list.
There is a reason the GOP ran up the debt, and put this country in such a bad place when they controlled things.
They are pulled this way and that by ideological fools.
Now, they put at risk the economic recovery and future of this nation pandering to thier ignorant base.
Say, any risk in the Dem's "plan?"
Any risk in the fact that Pelosi screwed the pooch and failed to pass a budget?
Naaaa, all the R's fault.
You are correct that the democrats should have passed a budget.
And so now your argument is that since the Democrats did not, the GOP will punish the country by passing symbolic, politically motivated cuts to the CR that do nothing to bring down our debt, but have been found by two independent, non-partisan economic analysis to hurt the economy.
Great argument genius.
So if House spends less money, that hurts the economy. And if the House spends more money, that does nothing to solve the long term debt problem.
So, what do you want the House to do? Ask China for some free money?
And the House is passing CR's just until the Senate can stop talking about "Cowboy Poetry" long enough and pass their version of the budget. We're waiting Harry.
JoAnna.
The House and the Senate and the White House should not be looking at the 12% of the budget that is most needed to sustain our economic recovery, especially when it does nothing to solve the long term debt problem.
They need to drop this ideological non-sense. I know it will irritate the ignorant base, but the welfare of the country is far more important.
Rather then going after the one part of the budget that will hurt he economy the most, and do the very least to address the debt problem, they should be working on a long term solution.
Please, try and look past your nose.
Joanna got's a 'cowboy poetry' Jones. Neat.
What else you gots, sugar plumb? An "I hates Obama" Jones??
And so how would your rate the performance of Obama on this topic Repulicant?
Just what are the dems doing to address the debt problem?
What part of the budget should we be looking out? How much, and when should the cuts take place?
And since my 12 key doesn't go out far enough - too many digits, just what is your projection for this years deficit?
What the House has done is gotten the deficit reduction ball rolling with a set of timid cuts that are less than 2% of the entire 2011 budget. Those $60 billion in cuts are token at best. They did this so that they could get the 2011 budget in place because Pelosi neglected that little part of her job last year. They're also trying to show that at least someone in Washington understands the damage that the mega-deficits are causing to the long term solvency of the country. The Senate, in control of the Democrats, have balked at any budgets, both theirs, and the one from the House. They have no plan. Looking for some kind of leadership from Obama, Biden stopped by Congress the other day to mediate the issue, stayed for a bit, and caught the red-eye to Europe, and hasn't been seen since. Obama on the issue, like he is on so many others issues, has been silent.
Obama did crawl out from behind his desk long enough a few weeks ago to submit a 2012 budget to Congress. He balanced his spending with a line item of $1.65 trillion in borrowing. He made this bold stand after declaring that the deficit is a major issue that must be dealt with. Obama obviously ignored his Debt Commission report on how to reduce the deficit during his budget creation process.
The House Republicans, realizing that someone should lead on deficit reduction, have said they will include entitlement reform as part of their 2012 budget. We'll see what they plan when they submit their 2012 budget in about 6 weeks. And we'll also see how the Democtrats react to it. My guess is they'll demonize it.
So maybe you should look past your nose, and maybe challenge the Democrats to address the debt problem. At least the GOP is making a meager attempt at doing so.
Spanky.
Obama and the Democrats are being more responsible then the GOP on this issue. Everyone realizes we need to deal with our debt, and this is one of the reasons we had the debt commision.
The reason I say they are being more responsible on this issue, is they are taking steps toward reducing our debt, realizing it is a long term problem, and that we are still recovering from a recession.
The GOP is being irresponsible because they are pandering to an ignorant base, worried they will get primaried. They are not taking the economy into consideration, which is why they went after the one part of the budget that will hurt the economy. They did so because it is the most visible. Their ignorant base usually doesn't see past their collective nose.
That said, the democrats are not being completely responsible, for many are pushing for cuts that they souldn't be, because they are worried about thier election prospects.
However, neither side deserves anywhere near an A, because they are both using these symbolic cuts to the CR avoid addressing the real problems, entitlements, defense, and revenue.
JoAnne.
You and many others skip right past the fact that cutting from discresionary spending has been found to threaten the economic recovery.
You ignore this fact, and then say the house is leading on cutting the deficit. They are leading us off an economic cliff.
If the house really wanted to lead, they would not have proposed symbolic, politically motivated cuts to the one part of the budget that we need for economic growth. They would be addressing the parts that can actually bring down our debt and deficits.
So by creating an additional $223 billion in one month was the dem's way of responsibily dealing with the issue?
That's what you really believe?
How about this: tell us what steps the dems are taking to actually reduce the debt? Last I saw they kind of ignore the debt commission.
Deserve and A? Please explain what grade the dems deserve and why. Do cuts need to be made now? If so how much, and to what?
And are there any consequences for delay? What is the cost of debt service today? You cool with $5 billion?
Dude we are already over the cliff. We are insolvent. You get that, right? Do you ever foresee us 1. paying back the debt, or 2. being able to have any discretionary spending in 2017 when trillions go to debt service?
It was all the big bad republicans that did this to our country, wasn't it?
Until you realize that it is government as a whole that is doing this you will be percieved as the close minded individual that you are. This system pits us against each other, which makes certain that we never solve any of these problems created by our out of control government.
Wake up people. Before it's too late and our country is too far gone.
Spanky.
You make no sense.
The $223 billion in one month is a reflection of the beginning of the year.
In addition, you do not seem to know what makes up our deficits. Most of our debt and deficits since 2009 is from lost federal revenue due to the recession, increased manditory outlays due to the recession, and leftover spending from the GOP (2001 and 2003 tax cuts, Iraq war, Medicare D).
This adminstrations policies that have added to our debt have been limited primarily to stimulus policies, and these total about a third of the $3.5 trillion.
============
The debt reduction process will be a long term process involving entitlement reform, defense reductions, and ways to increase revenue.
It will not be dented by symbolic cuts.
Taking symbolic steps that hurt the economy are not steps to reduce the debt. They are steps that pander to an ignorant base.
================
No one deserves any grade, for noone has done anything. The house cuts are symbolic, and irresponsible.
There are consequences for not addressing the long term debt problem, just as there are consequences for making symbolic cuts that will hurt the economy.
I am not cool with $5 billion. We shouldn't be cutting anything from the part of the budget that is crutial to economic recovery.
Who gets to make the call as to what is "critical to the economic recovery?" You?
$223 billion is a fact. It is money [more money] owed, that will have to be paid back. Regardless of the cause there is no excuse to continue to spend more than they take in.
Brother, inflation, and likely hyper-inflation is coming. We are insolvent and that's just a fact. We do not have time to fiddle while the house burns. Cuts must be made now. No more voting present, no more dithering.
Where is Obama's leadership on any of this? He's the boss, applesauce.
Found? Found by who? The same people that didn't predict the crash in 2007? What do they know?
So what you're saying is nothing can be cut? You're saying chronic trillion dollar deficits are the answer? At some point, and I think that point has long passed, the government has to stop it's out of control spending. That's the real cliff.
Spanky.
It is not I that said the cuts to the CR will hurt the economy, it is two independent, non-partisan analysis.
"Under the House passed spending bill, the drag on GDP growth from federal fiscal policy would increase by 1.5pp to 2pp in Q2 and Q3 compared with current law."
"The House Republicans’ proposal would reduce 2011 real GDP growth by 0.5% and 2012 growth by 0.2%. This would mean some 400,000 fewer jobs created by the end of 2011 and 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of 2012."
http"//media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/moodys022811.pdf
Spanky.
I never said the $223 billion was not a fact.
The point is, much of this spending was cooked before Obama took office.
You seem to have bought hook, line and sinker the cutting mantra to the point nothing else matters.
You chose to ignore the economic analysis that says blindly cutting is unwise.
You ignore the debt commision which stated we needed to keep the fact we are still recovering in consideration when dealing with our debt.
JoAnne.
Cynicism is not an argument.
Your position, which is the position of all right wing ideologs who cannot defend their position, is to attempt to discredit the sound economic sources simply because they do not agree with what you were fed.
Would you like to address the fact that you have NO economic analysis to back up the point of view provided to you?
================
I am saying that little should be cut from discresionary spending, if any at all, for it does nothing to help our debt problem. It is symbolic meant to placate people like you, who have bought into this ideological mantra.
I am saying we need to address this with wisdom. We do need to address our debt problem, but as I have said a few times on this thread, it will have to be a long term process that addresses entitlements, defense spending, and increasing revenue.
LoL All I know is that getting my own money out of the stock market has proven to be the best sleep aid I could have purchased, and it didn't cost a thing.
But I do have a question. How can republicans simultaneously take credit for positive jobs numbers and blame President Obama for oil prices? And now, I'll hang up and listen.
Anna.
Answer: Magic.
Republicants, you've tried your very best explaining but how do cure ignorants with holes in their brain. they've got teabagger lines without no statistics or facts hence can't reason beyond that. we know and they know we know.....
Republicants:
Black magic, you mean. Texas Tea. ;-)
republicants:
You are a one man/woman wrecking crew. Great posts I loved it. Hope to see you around more often. Nice job. Kudos
The money to take care of the budget deficit is available, it's been piling up amongst the corporations and top 2% of individuals for decades now, the problem is getting the greedy bastards to participate in the deficit reduction efforts, I say it's time to persuade them to give back to the country who has given them the opportunity to acquire such staggering wealth, by what ever means necessary, it just the right thing to do.
The author here is obviously addressing the bill that passed before the unrest in Libya. Yea, note that this bill was passed in the house "Before". Typical, the liberal author can't find any fault with wanting to do something so they create an after the fact problem using an unrelated after the fact problem.
What about the speculation of commodities that is what drives up the prices. I heard today that Obama signed a bill to stop this practice, but there is nobody to monitor these practices. I`m not great with economics either so please be nice.
We all know that this is all Obama's fault.
He has allowed oil prices to spike earlier that ever before in our history. And, just today, He allowed the Dow to slip way down below the 12000 mark.
This is not economic leadership. This is socialism at it's worst.
Now, this budget fiasco. What has to happen before the Democrats finally get on board?? Total economic collapse??
BarbH - Commodities are traded on a global level, rather hard to believe that obama can control it.
Speculation is driven by just that speculation (a form of gambling if you will). Will Russia have a good wheat crop? Will Americas corn and soybean crops be devastated by hail or corn borers? Will India have enough rain? will Australia have more flooding? Will a war break out disrupting the flow of oil? Etc...
Is it fair? All depends on viewpoint. Is it profitable? Sometimes, but not often. Think of the recent housing speculation, some are still losing $$$ from it. the corn and oil speculation of 2008 made money for those who sold out before prices crashed later.
after the fact speculation is another matter. As one already knows something has happenned. IE Russian wheat harvest failure in 2010. With its expected exports stopped what effect will the drop in world wide supply have on demand prices for less product?
Money is made, money is lost and the end user either pays more or pays less based on what really happened with the supply and demand. Hated gas prices in 2008 but loved them in 2009.
wbush - wealth redistribution has never worked for any length of time. the poor will still be there, the middle will still be there and the wealthy will still be there. The only difference will be that some of the faces will change.
Another sign that Oil Companies, Supporting Industries and traders profits will GO-UP 2000% and they will not pay any income tax thanks to the GOP, while gas prices hit $6.00 a gal at the pumps..
Funny thing, Volume of Oil imports and World supplies increased, no storages just profits going up for the Rich Elites while the middleclass pays and get poorer.
Republicans are staying GREAT--Elites are making record income and will give to the GOP Party war fund many 100s of Million more to attack the Dems and Obama.
Also Teabag Smokers, Looks like you and your kind will have to get your lies from places other than Fox UnNews since it’s owned by News Corp which also owns 100s of other outlets for News and a Saudi King is the 2nd largest owner of it all.
Maybe you will not have to get your half lies and total untruths from other places since the truth would bring an end to the Right-Wing-Nutcases of the Republican Party and its Teabagger members.
My I suggest you learn a thing or two by research before your types post untrue Comments.
PS, You nutcases now know how the GOP gets their Party money in supports of Elites World-Wide. Also Beck, Palin and others get Millions from the Saudis and their American partner the Koch Brothers.
Let’s get are funds in order and balance inflows to outflows.
Don’t listen to the bull of Fox New s, Right-Wing-Nut-Cases of the GOP and there hand-picked writers of Untruths. Listen to what these nuts are saying, like—Government should be keep-out of private business but they should stop the unions---what they are saying let Corporations control the people and do not give the people the means to stand-up.
First, all Working Americans, (Public and Private), should have good medical and pension coverage---NOT just the Rich.
Of all first world countries, America is the only country that does not have Free and Not-for-Profit Health coverage and Pensions for its people. The Right liars say Government cannot run a Insurance group---LOOK at USAA Insurance Company, A Non-profit Government Insurance group that cost 45% less with better coverage than any other Insurance company in America for Auto and Home insurance.
Instead of wanting to take away good Pension and Health coverage from follow working Americans let’s fight for all Americans to have that coverage.
Let’s take away or tax at 60% the Elites CEO type $100’s million pension, and their $50 million a year income and Wall Street Money Manger $ Billion a year income that is tax at 15%. Plus stop being the police force of the world that in real life just supporting the Elite’s World-Wide-Holdings. Stop the give-a-ways of our tax money to all foreign countries for any reason and get us out of the 2 wars at once. Cut Military spreading cost by 40% including closing over ½ of are bases World-Wide. All World-Wide Support and Military commitment should be employed via the UN with America commitments of just its fair share.
Plus, take away all tax loop-holes for the Elite and no more special tax rate reduction for net-income greater than $500,000. Increase the Federal tax rate to 45% for all income greater than $750,000.
In addition, STOP giving tax bennies to corporation to move America jobs oversea and offer only tax credit to companies for net jobs increased in America. Add import tax and restrictions that matches the other countries enforce on American Goods, Company & land ownership, plus an additional 20% for American Company goods made oversea that are imported back to America.
Wake-up-American—Our country GDP/GNP had increased, but the Federal tax income collected has decrease---Because the increase dollar sale profits in America are going to the Elite while they reduce income and bennies to the middleclass. Since these Elite are paying at a lower Federal tax rate. So the Federal Government gives less to the States which causes the Cities and States to increase all service Fees and Taxes to the American people. AND they with the help of the GOP will reduce the Education levels given to Children of the Middle/Lower classes.
Let’s take back America for all Americans and the hxll with Fox UnNews, Right-Wing-Nuts with their Elites Masters and the Teabaggers.
After all who gave more for America, The Middle/Lower classes with their Blood and hard work to build America and fight to keep it free?
Unless you think the likes of Paris Hilton or the Elitist Koch Brothers, (starters of the Tea-Party), or the Wal-Mart owners or Ex-President Elitist Bush who showed up for military duty only 30% of the time when he wasn’t partying and was paid by our tax dollars to learn how to fly on jets that could not be engaged in a war zone during a war time that 50,000 Americans died?
Do not get me wrong, both parties, Dems and GOP are not for the people but their paid from Elitist Masters and the Tea-Party group are just brain washed/dead, Liars or nuts in most cases.
Let’s replace all of Washington with common intelligence people who are not Lawyers or Elites. I think the make-up should be Accountants, Engineers, Doctors, Teachers//Educators and Ex-Professional Military heroes—NO LAWYERS.
GET ARE INFLOWS AND OUTFLOWS IN ORDER AND LEARN FROM OUR FOUNDING FATHERS!
Hey you Republican learn what our Founding Fathers words mean in the constitutional for common defense: " a society in which the government is limited to protecting the nation from invasion and barred from invading or attacking foreign nations!"
Thanks the GOP for Iraq and over $2 trillion given to their Elite friends and helping with the taking of Wealth from the Middleclass and allowing to flow Elites to get Richer than Rich and Supporting movement of jobs to go oversea.
Stop the GOP war Machine and supporting the Elites World-Wide Holdings with American’s Blood!
1) Cut are total Military budget and black-hole cost by 45%.
2) Cut are oversea Military Bases by 60% and bring our sons home!
3) No foreign nation building with our tax money.
4) No foreign wars unless enacted by the United Nation and America to provide soldiers and material no greater than any other first world country.
5) American companies that make profit from war activates, tax their profits at a rate of 60%.
6) Cut our foreign aid cost to other countries by 80% and let the UN do its job. If American Jews want to support Jew land, let them do it with their money not our country’s tax money.
Go back to the Vision of our Founding Fathers — toward liberty and the restoration of a republic to our nation — toward a society in which the government is limited to protecting the nation from invasion and barred from invading or attacking foreign nations — a world in which the United States is once again the model society for freedom, prosperity, peace, and harmony
STOP Using Military action to enrich the Elite and support their world-wide holdings with the lower class tax money and blood of their sons.
Historically, governments had misused standing armies, including the GOP with Bush at the head, in two ways, both of which ultimately subjected the citizenry to tyranny. One was to engage in faraway wars, which inevitably entailed enormous expenditures, enabling the government to place ever-increasing tax burdens on the people. Such wars also inevitably entailed “patriotic” calls for blind allegiance to the government so long as the war was being waged. Consider,
For example, the immortal words of James Madison, who is commonly referred to as “the father of the Constitution”:
“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.... [There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and ... degeneracy of manners and of morals.... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. “
Consider again the words of Madison:
A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.
The idea is that governments like the GOP Leaders with support of media like Fox News use their means to produce the enemies, then scare the people with cries that the barbarians are at the gates, and then claim that war is necessary to put down the barbarians. With all this, needless to say, comes increased governmental power over the people and more taxes or bigger deficits’ .
Sound familiar?
U.S. foreign policy
Are the ideas and principles of the Founding Fathers relevant today? They couldn’t be more relevant. Many decades ago, President Dwight Eisenhower warned us about the growing power of the military-industrial complex in American life. Unfortunately, the American people failed to heed his warning. The result has been an ever-growing military cancer that is bringing death, ruin, shame, and economic disaster to our nation and allowing the GOP Elites to get more powerful and Richer— just as our Founding Fathers said it would.
In determining the future direction of our nation, the choice is clear: Do we continue down the road of empire, standing armies, foreign wars and occupations, and sanctions and embargoes, along with the taxes, regulations, and loss of liberty that inevitably come with them? Do we continue this foreign policy, enforced by the GOP, which engenders ever-increasing anger and hatred among the people of the world, which then engenders violent “blowback” against Americans, which is in turn used to justify more of the same policies?
Or do we change direction and move our nation in the direction of the vision of our Founding Fathers — toward liberty and the restoration of a republic to our nation — toward a society in which the government is limited to protecting the nation from invasion and barred from invading or attacking foreign nations — a world in which the United States is once again the model society for freedom, prosperity, peace, and harmony — a nation in which the Statue of Liberty once again becomes a shining beacon for those striving to escape the tyranny and oppression of their own governments?
Additional Founding Fathers & Founding principles references to support the above statements;
1) Here is how Henry St. George Tucker put it in Blackstone’s 1768 Commentaries on the Laws of England:
2) Virginian Patrick Henry pointed out the difficulty associated with violent resistance to tyranny when a standing army is enforcing the orders of the government:
3) When the Commonwealth of Virginia ratified the Constitution in 1788, its concern over standing armies mirrored that of Patrick Henry:
4) North Carolina, which stated in its Declaration of Rights in 1776,
5) The Pennsylvania Convention repeated that principle:
Wrenching memories of the Old World lingered in the 13 original English colonies along the eastern seaboard of North America, giving rise to deep opposition to the maintenance of a standing army in time of peace. All too often the standing armies of Europe were regarded as, at best, a rationale for imposing high taxes, and, at worst, a means to control the civilian population and extort its wealth to the Elite.
Once more, Sound familiar?
Hey Teabaggers and other Republicans stop being such liars and keep running America in to the Pits of Hell.
1) The USA has the 2nd lowest total corporate real tax rate in all 1st World countries!!! And only 2nd lowest by less than 1%, but the USA has better & greater roads, rail, sea and 200+% lower gas and electric cost than number 1 lowest corporate tax country…!!!!!
2) In 1st world countries America is the only country that has health insurance and Hospitals as a profit, for the Elite pigs.
Facts: America health care in number 40th in the World, meaning most other 1ST worlds countries have better healthcare, plus America Healthcare cost are nearly 3 time as costly as the nearest other 1st world country, PLUS meds in America cost nearly 4 times more for the same units when purchase at stores.
3) American wages are lower than 75% of all 1st world countries once you take-out the CEO type, plus Americans work longer hours with less time-off and with lower pensions and poorer health insurance for 90% of all Americans.
But America has the Greatest number and riches Elites in the Worlds, the top 1/3 of 1% of Americans. The top 1% income being 1200 times more than the average American—see the problem---Now 65% of all income goes to the top 1%, who are tax at a real tax rate that is a lot lower than if that income when to the middleclass and one will see why the middleclass is in harm’s way and are tax dollars are falling and we getting more into the red, even with the GDP/GNP going-up!
4) Republican voting fools have you ever learn about supply and demand. YOU CAN REDUCE CORPORATE TAXES TO ZERO BUT IF NO ONE HADs THE CASH TO BUY THEIR PRODUCTS THEY WILL NEVER EMPLOY MORE WORKERS.
Lower salaries, pensions and low paying health insurance for Americans means less employment---get-it-fools!!---less money for most to buy more products!
5) The GOP and its teabaggers are liars and have been giving out lies by the 1000s in support of their Rich Elite Masters, but most Teabaggers are to brain wash/dead to know it..
6) 70% of America debt is due to the GOP, including to date!!!!!!
7) Republicans are for more corporate profits by moving jobs oversea to 3rd Worlds, reducing Americans salaries, reducing workers pensions and healthcare insurance and reducing SS, Medicare and other support needs.
In addition, Spending more than the total cost of the next 20 largest countries added together on Military to support the Elites holdings worldwide---including the combine cost of China, Russia, England, France, German, Spain, Japan, Korea, Brazil, India totaled together.
Now if you take out Trust Funds for the Federal Budget, such as SS and Medicare, you would see that out of all income to the Feds such as income tax, fees, import tax, gas tax and 100s of others that over 50% of these funds and most debt spending go to Military related items to support the Elites World-Wide Holdings, PLUS the Blood of our Children—not the kid’s blood of the Elite.
9/11 happen with a GOP President, and GOP Control of Washington---Note: that they also increased military cost before 9/11 but most of this increase when to their GOP friends and the Government was told in advance of the attack, yet zero was done!
You people who voted for these pigs can live in hell on earth---most will!
How did America get so bad off and into the Red---Wars, Military Cost, Give-A-Way Money to other Countries, Moving Jobs Oversea and Reduce Taxing on most America's income which now go to the Elite.
I written in depth about all the listed items that got us so deep into the Red, except for moving jobs oversea. So let's look at How, Why and who caused or Helped American jobs to be taken-way.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY supports moving American Jobs oversea in support of Elites!
THE GOP stated GROUP CALLED THE: ‘US’ Chamber Of Commerce Hosts Seminars With Chinese Gov Officials To Teach American Firms How To Outsource and are funding Republican elections.
Among the many lies told by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently, chief Chamber lobbyist Bruce Jostens said that his organization’s foreign affiliates, called AmChams, are only “comprised of American companies doing business abroad in those countries.” In fact, the Chinese AmCham is comprised of Chinese firms like Northern Light Venture Capital; the AmCham in Russia is comprised of Russian state-run companies like VTB Bank; and, the AmCham of Abu Dhabi is comprised of UAE state-run oil companies.
The ties between the AmChams and the U.S. Chamber are deep. In addition to sharing staff members, the Chinese AmCham has worked closely with the U.S. Chamber and the Chinese government to sponsor a series of seminars in America to teach American businesses how to outsource jobs to China (called the China Grassroots Program). Below is an invite to an event sponsored by the right-wing billionaire Sheldon Adelson, inviting local businesses in Florida to come to Jacksonville and learn about outsourcing from Chinese government officials like Li Haiyan, the Counselor for Economic Affairs for the People’s Republic of China, U.S. Chamber lobbyist Joseph Fawkner, and BChinaB, a firm that specializes in helping American firms outsource their manufacturing jobs to China. Click the screenshot below for the invitation:
Similar events like the one above continued into 2009 and beyond.
The Chamber’s CEO, Tom Donohue, frequently defends outsourcing: for example, in 2004, he said “there are legitimate values in outsourcing — not only jobs, but work.” Recently, the Chamber came out against a Senate bill that would have discouraged outsourcing. As Campaign Money Watch report found that more than 1.4 million jobs were outsourced since 1994 in the nine states in which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending significant money.
Separately from their relationship with the AmCham affiliates, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce receives direct foreign donations to the same 501(c)(6) political accounts the Chamber is using to run an unprecedented $75 million attack ad campaign against progressives. In an exclusive investigation, Think-Progress documented over 80 foreign firms donating at least $885,000 to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6) account. As Think-Progress’ Brad Johnson noted, many of these foreign supporters of the Chamber financing its 501(c)(6) are also some of the world’s largest outsourcing companies.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/19/chamber-chinese-seminar/
Still wondering why this is such a ‘secret’ amongst the MSM and GOP!
Secrets are for those who have something to hide! And with each passing day it's becoming more & more apparent what it is the COC and GOP are hiding...
It's ironic that the Chinese Communist Party elites are in cahoots with the American corporatist elites. And the Tea Partiers are unwittingly contributing to this unholy alliance while they parade around with posters depicting President Obama as Chairman Mao. American corporations love the virtual slave labor they can get in China. The only way American workers can compete is for them to become slaves, too.
Then the US will be a "workers' paradise" just like China, except it will be a Republican workers paradise with no Unions.
republicant - being rather reckless and ill informed in your posts 1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 1.9, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17
The premise of the cuts to the FY 2011 CR is to start addressing our debt and to go on record for doing so. Simply ignoring cuts, symbolic or otherwise is reckless and only kicks the proverbial can down the road. Each kick only aggravates and deepens the problem.
Yes, too deep of cuts can create a great loss of jobs and affect the GDP. but $61 billion is not deep enough.
As reported by AP economics writer Martin Crutsinger on March 14, 2011 on Obamas proposed $3.73 TRILLION 2012 budget the following can be verified...
Senior administration officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity in advance of the formal release of the budget, said that Obama would achieve two-thirds of his projected $1.1 trillion in deficit savings through spending cuts including a five-year freeze on many domestic programs.
The Obama budget recommendation, which is certain to be changed by Congress, would spend $3.73 trillion in the 2012 budget year, which begins Oct. 1, a reduction of 2.4 percent from what Obama projects will be spent in the current budget year.
The biggest tax hike would come from a proposal to trim the deductions the wealthiest Americans can claim for charitable contributions, mortgage interest and state and local tax payments. The administration proposed this tax hike last year but it was a nonstarter in Congress.
http://cedartownstd.com/view/full_story/11387354/article-Obama-unveils--3-73-trillion-dollar-budget-for-2012?instance=home_news_1st_left
Rather reckless and foolish of you to state...
The reason I say they are being more responsible on this issue, is they are taking steps toward reducing our debt, realizing it is a long term problem, and that we are still recovering from a recession.
They need to drop this ideological non-sense. I know it will irritate the ignorant base, but the welfare of the country is far more important.
Republicant, this is priceless from you...
You ignore this fact, and then say the house is leading on cutting the deficit. They are leading us off an economic cliff.
Oh how I love the slow scrooling and having the block quotes getting crewed up, gotta be a better way.
Sure hope this one comes out formatted right
republicant - being rather reckless and ill informed in your posts 1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 1.9, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17
The premise of the cuts to the FY 2011 CR is to start addressing our debt and to go on record for doing so. Simply ignoring cuts, symbolic or otherwise is reckless and only kicks the proverbial can down the road. Each kick only aggravates and deepens the problem.
Yes, too deep of cuts can create a great loss of jobs and affect the GDP. but $61 billion is not deep enough.
As reported by AP economics writer Martin Crutsinger on March 14, 2011 on Obamas proposed $3.73 TRILLION 2012 budget the following can be verified...
http://cedartownstd.com/view/full_story/11387354/article-Obama-unveils--3-73-trillion-dollar-budget-for-2012?instance=home_news_1st_left
Rather reckless and foolish of you to state...
And with the next breathe you say this...
Bet you win a lot of friends and influence a lot of people by saying the above and the following...
Republicant, this is priceless from you...
Under intense grilling by congress last week bernanke testified (as reported on Bloomberg tv) that the republicans $61 billion in cuts would not have an adverse effect on the economy. He estimated a loss of 200000 jobs and a decline in GDP measured in tenths. But what would he know, obama has kept him on as head of the FED and reids reelection was in doubt. Think about it our 2010 economy was just over $14 trillion, a $61 billion dollar cut in any funding used in helping to generate that economy is only 0.4 % (4 tenths of a percent). That is like saying someone earning $30000/year will have a cut of $120. Bet that would be a disaster for them right?
You really need to pay closer attention to what you quote as the republicans are dealing with the FY 2011 CR and haven't even submitted a budget for 2012 yet.
With regards to any projected job losses it is real simple to use what many FR lib posters swear as true to prove that any job losses actually stimulate the economy.
Let's summarize shall we...
Obama proposes cuts to descretionary spending over ten years of approximately $73 billion annually. Golly that is $12 billion more than republicans
Obamas cuts would not only involve a five year freeze on expenditures but deep cuts as well.
Obama would then raise taxes and target some increases on the wealthy for how deductibles are figured for charitable contributions, mortgage interest and state and local tax payments. Bet that will make the charities happy, because it sure didn't make last years democrat controlled congress happy.
Obamma doesn't go after the military, SS or entitlements, poor you.
Personally I have no problem with military budget cuts (leave veteren benefits alone, they earned them) What's a few more contractors on unemployment
General entitlements, slash away, better to have the poor find employment, Might have a problem with medicaid, but hey obamacare is coming!
Medicare, already slashed thru obamacare by $500 billion providing fraud is eliminated to make up for the cut so this will be a nonstarter
SS - increase the contribution cap and retirement age if you want but try to cut grannies or gramps benefits or COLAS is a non starter. BTW- SS hasn't added to the deficit since its inception.
Obama already proposes tax increases. Btw - you do know that there are only two certainties in life - death and ever increasing taxes.
Sigh - not cool with $5 billion in cuts, but yet you ignore the realities of economics, cuts always hurt, but ignoring them will hurt even more as time goes on.. Have you reached age 14 yet? Balanced a bank account? Have more bills at the end of the month than cash? Even tried to understand the amount of $$$ we pay on our debt every year?
This is the only thing you said that conservatives are likely to agree with you on...
The debt reduction process will be a long term process involving entitlement reform, defense reductions, and ways to increase revenue.There are consequences for not addressing the long term debt problem.
Please do keep on posting as you have above, the FR liberals are always interested in more members of their SIASD society.
american.
Your rant was terribly hard to read, so forgive me if I missed it.
I did not see any economic analysis that refutes the analysis from the two independent, non-partisan sources.
I did not see any explaination as to why anyone would support symbolic cuts that do nothing to address our long term debt problem, expecially when those cuts would hurt the economy.
I did see the same old parroted, projection based reality that drives most blind, right-wing ideologs.
I did find it amusing you had to rely on the tell tale conservative has no argument lines like:
"Sigh - not cool with $5 billion in cuts, but yet you ignore the realities of economics, cuts always hurt, but ignoring them will hurt even more as time goes on.. Have you reached age 14 yet? Balanced a bank account? Have more bills at the end of the month than cash? Even tried to understand the amount of $$$ we pay on our debt every year?"
The real irony being YOU are ignoring the realities of economics, and ALL the economic analysis that shows you are wrong. (Oh, and the fact you have NONE that shows your parroted postitions are right.)
LOL!!! Wow.
repulicant - You do know what "discretionary" means don't you? Do you need a link or can you find it on your own?
You do realize that not all economists agree, don't you?
You do realize that you have failed to offer any form of rebuttal to the points made about obamas suggested 2012 budget or about addressing what you call the important stuff. Good to know that all you really want to do is kick the can down the street.
You do realize that you have fallen into the trap of many FR liberals of being light on facts but heavy on rhetoric having little to do with the subject at hand.. IE you hide your lack of understanding and knowledge with generalized attacks trying to project superiority but without intelligence
I found it especially telling that you couldn't answer simple questions on economics, embarrassed?
I have an insight for the liberals: drilling for more oil in the United States will drive the price of gasoline down and immeasurably help our national security.
Speculators be damned. "Federal regulators" be damned; can't run your car on their hot air.
Windmills and solar panels won't cut it.
Yeah that's the 'ticket'... Who can ever forget 'spill baby spill' less than a year ago?
The gulf still hasn't fully recovered & I doubt it ever will...
Anything goes in the name of GREED!
LOL!!!!
You have no clue.
Oil produced in this country goes on the GLOBAL MARKET, and the fact is, we simply cannot produce enough oil in this country to put a dent in the GLOBAL price of oil.
The only way what you say makes sense is if we NATIONALIZE THE OIL INDUSTRY.
Is that what you are suggesting? Wouldn't that be socialism?
Not to mention that was BP's oil, not ours. They were under no obligation to sell it to us, just as any company who gets a lease on a producing reserve of oil can put it on the global market. Increased production "domestically" doesn't result in significant increase in supply here at home. Bob should know this by now, perhaps he's a little slow.
Gas prices up 67% under Obama:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hope-and-change-gas-prices-have-gone-67-percent-obama-became-president_553930.html
Got a policy for gas prices Obama? If so, any chance you'll share it with us?
It rained today. Damn that Obama.
Here’s a quick solution for $4 or $5 dollar gas:
1) Drill like hell, and use up all OUR supplies NOW (even though we might need them for the petrochemical industry, pharmaceutical industries and fertilizer production), and
2) Put more, and larger SUV’s on our roads! (nothing says ‘ME first’ like a big ol’ Escalade or Navigator).
I can’t believe we didn’t try these ideas 30 years ago!
Amen DBO.
All you Libbies should be applauding me. I drive a huge SUV. I own and frequently operate a motor home, a boat, multiple jet-skiis and quads. In the summer months I blow through 200 plus gallons on a good weekend.
I am doing everything I can to use up all that stinky oil. You are welcome.
Psst DBO, got any idea as to the estimate amount of oil and natural gas reserves in the outer banks alone?
Sorry, Counselor-I don't have your estimate, but however large that supply is, I STILL say the best strategy is to use it up as fast as we possible can, don't you?
What a hoot.
Seeing the House bill isn't law, and the government remains firmly in control of oil commodities regulation, I guess we can concluded that regulation isn't really working that well, correct?
You show your complete ignorance of the oil situation. You can drill all you want in the USA... and it's a drop in the bucket. You've been watching too much Glen Beck.....
I'm doing my best to do just that DBO. Headed to Havasu in four hours. Minimum gas usage between now and Sunday will be 250 gallons.
Good news is Az's gas is WAY cheaper than here in Ca. Ca. has to use "clean" buring gas, which adds about $.50 per gallon. Cool huh?
How about you? Thermostat set on high?
TA - allow me to recommend the Infiniti QX56. That's a 5.6 liter v-8. Not quit as big as the 8.0 liter v-8 in my motor home, but it is one very fine ride.
If I grab an Infinity for a ride, it won't be a barge. I like the sedan too much. More fun to toss around in the twisties. Havasu, huh? Neat- look 'em over for me while you are out there, will ya? Big ones, small ones- they're all good. Wear yer life jacket, though- those pesky law enforcement goons like to spoil all the fun.
Driving less might also lower prices, but probably not if the problem is not really related to demand in this country. Simply lowering gas prices wouldn't hurt either. It's the patriotic thing to do, especially considering that oil companies are making record profits.
Why do oil companies hate America?
@ Feisty, drilling in MT and ND isn't the gulf, and it is reported to be one of the largest fields discovered so far. Now will your argument be that pipelines will distroy the environmental impact of the land it will be transported over? The Gulf is the Gulf - and the spill could have been contained sooner but wasn't. And we all know why. And it wasn't George Bush!
@Anna Molly,
Driving less won't lower prices. And in my state, to raise the taxes, the CA legislators are looking at increasing the state tax rate while also increasing a surcharge on gasoline. Now there is a great way to lower gasoline prices.....already paying $4.09 for regular.
And now for the $64M question: What is the Obama energy policy with regards to oil? I know he has already stated he would like to see gas aroung $5 gallon.........
Darned if I know, safecracker. He's too busy for Wisconsin, and I'm too busy for him.
Apparently, with his social schedule, and extended campaigning, he's too busy for much decision-making.
They don't hate us Anna Molly - they have us bent over and they're LOVING it!
For some people here these gas prices don`t seem like a big deal and regardless of your political affiliation these prices slow the economy down and if its just so Obama can be blamed I think its despicable. not all republicans are rich a lot of small business owners will be hurt, and they will lay more off. Its become a game to some people and it sucks having my tax dollars being wasted playing this foolish game.
"You get this...."
No bias there, great job Bailey. Say John, what would have gotten from the Dem's failed plan? Why no mention of it?
You know what would "regulate" the cost of gas? Opening up the outer bank of Alaska and everywhere else.
Or are we unfamiliar with the whole Supply and Demand concept?
Spanky.
Are YOU familiar with the supply and demand concept? In order to effect the supply, you have to actually be able to affect the supply.
Again. Any oil we produce goes on the global market.
Even if we were twenty years down the road and had opened up all drilling, we still couldn't put a dent in the global price of oil, much less now.
So again, are you suggesting we nationalize the oil industry?
Stop that, 'cants- Spanker asks all the quesitons around here.
Let's see - if we increase the supply, the cost will go down. Yep, I think I got it.
So if we start producing more oil that will increase the global supply and cause prices to go down. Now, see how easy that is?
Plus it's all futures. All we need to do is start to drill and the futures markets will immediately be effected.
And DBO you really are showing your lack of understanding of discourse. Come on buddy, you are better than that.
Let's see-
IF we increase the supply, the cost will go down. Yes- I think I got it.
I think I further got it that increasing DEMAND will cause the price to go UP. Do I got that, too?
SO- if you are proud of buring through 200 gallons a weekend, I would expect the whining on politcal blogs about how high the price of gas is getting would go DOWN. Do I got that, too? Hello?? Enny Buddy home???
Spanky.
Much is easy in the ideological fantasy world the right wing lives in.
If you project it, the sheep will follow.
Again, the point is, we cannot increase the supply significantly enough to effect the cost of oil.
Why is it so hard for you to get this? Does your ideology have that big a hold on you?
Wow.
Not about me DBO - I'll always be able to afford gas.
It about the poor folks. And Obama's political future, give that it is tied directly to the economy. You have seen the polls lately? Kind of related to gas, no?
And really Rep. how do you know that? Upon what is it based? So there'd be no effecton price if another 1-2 billion barrels came on line? Really, none what so ever?
Spanky.
It is based apon the well established fact that we simply do not have enough oil to increase the supply.
Even if we did, it would take decades to start producing enough.
Spanky, I know this because I do the research on my own. I then think the issue through, and form my own opinion.
Only then do I watch cable news. I appears you start with cable news, and let them to all the other steps for you.
If oil companies are interested in our economic well-being, why can't they just drop the price? They're making record profits. Why can't they sacrifice a little bit, like public workers, you know?
Why do oil companies hate America?
We are mixing up two things here. Cheap oil is over. There is an abundance of petrochemicals available for us to burn. The price point has to be high enough to justify bringing the tar sands of Canada to market. At $7.00 a gallon we would have more oil available to us than has ever existed in Saudi Arabia and the price wouldn't change much for 80 years.
spanky - republicant is so clueless about what you are saying about supply and demand
Paul - not sure of your numbers but the premise is right
Anna molly - Why should they drop prices just for us? Oil is priced in dollars and that keeps it at a lower cost for us
Why can't apple drop the price on the iphone or ipad2?
It seems to me gas prices go up during peek vacation times, and go down soon after.
american.
You have already shown you are as clueless as Spanky.
Makes sense you would support yet another point of right wing ignorance.
Batting 100. Good for you. Good ideolog.
repulicant - how does supply and demand work? more specifically how is each accomplished?
Really?? All anyone has seen yet is poorly thought out opinions and unsupported rants against those with opinions and facts counter to yours. Break your arm yet patting yourself on the back yet?
Odd that this hasn't been covered. The Tea Party "rage" certainly got top billing a while back. But now the Left has released its thug brigade in Wisconsin. The death threats have started. Compare and contrast the following with how the Tea Party behaves: http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/117732923.html
I'm certain the major news media that was so diligent in searching for Tea Party misbehavior will be doing the same to expose the Union thugs threatening the lives of politicians in Wisconsin. We can expect it to be the lead story for every news outlet.
You Liberals agree, correct? This Union violence must stop, an stop now!
Maybe President Obama may take the lead on this one. Maybe it will come under his anti-bullying initiative.
If the email is genuine, and not a prank... I noticed it contains numerous words and phrases that have been used by a number of progressives on these blogs. Strange, or is their ranting fostering this kind of behavior? weren't they the ones who yelled the loudest about this kind of behavior after the tragedy in Ariz.?
"You Liberals agree, correct? This Union violence must stop, an stop now!"
Sounds like a great fix for rising oil prices to me, Smiff. Thanks.
Repulicants
Do you really believe there is an actual "supply and demand" concept with this commodity? Since oil drives vehicles and is used in the manufacture of many products used daily, this commodity can be sold at any price the supplier demands.
I think we all know how the Tea Party "behaves," mingling in crowds with guns strapped to their thighs, etc.
Their real violence, however, is ideological, in attacking the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively. In that, they are unlawful and unpopular and they will be punished.
JoAnna, darling. Sure. That's easy. Anyone who threatens others with violence should be punished. There. Feel better now? Good. Then someone should go and arrest Sharron Angle immediately for insinuating violence in the form of "Second Amendment solutions" if she and her fellow righties don't get their way.
Or isn't threatening "Second Amendment solutions" a threat of violence? If not, then what?
A refresher on how a bill becomes a law?
But please, JoAnna, don't be too, too sure that it's liberals who did the threatening. There are plenty of conservative public workers out there -- you can probably take your pick from police, firefighters, highway workers, garbage collectors, and even teachers. Especially the ones Up North. When you trample someone's rights long enough, it tends to make them mad, regardless of their previous political affiliation.
But we do know one thing for sure, JoAnna. It's the conservatives who are most likely to be armed.
Now, as we're in agreement on threats, wouldn't you agree that the REAL violence that has been done here has been to democracy? I mean, really, JoAnna? Threatening to send goons into crowds of peaceful protesters; completely changing your previously stated position on a bill and quietly re-writing it, all the while tricking the other side into believing you were negotiating; violations of open meetings laws; suppressing objections, questions, and amendments offered by the other side; and then sneaking away like thieves in the night. There's video of that, by the way. In fact, the Capitol police weren't even informed of what was happening until the crowds started arriving in hordes. Eventually, they just pulled back and let the protesters be. And some of them are none too happy with your valiant republican senators, JoAnna.
You righties agree, correct, that the violence to democracy must stop, and STOP NOW.
Or is that just business as usual from now on, righties? We'll see how that works out for you soon enough.
Anna - you have me shaking, shaking I say. Violence to democracy?? Does that mean anna that you will stop trying to control our lives from the cradle to the grave or do you plan on slipping us a "c: note once a week to keep us subdued and in our shacks?
Fantastic article John, I think the last paragraph really hits the nail on the head, we need more funding for our regulators not less and get this......I'm traditionally anti-regulation, work in the financial industry and have voted republican in the last two elections. It's amazing to me that this subject doesn't receive more attention. You can vilify Wall St. all you want for the financial collapse but the bottom line is there wasn't and isn't enough regulation in the housing market nor on Wall St. to prevent the inevitable excesses of greed. We need a larger budget for the CFTC and SEC to create and enforce the necessary regulation. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act hardly even touch's on the true issues at hand. Deterring speculation and encouraging investment in the oil markets could also certainly help to ensure economic sustainability but I believe this issue is not as important as it is made out to be. Energy only represents 5% of global spending and oil is only a subset of that at something like 2% or 3%, we could see oil prices double and economically that would have very little effect.......psychologically it would have a HUGE effect though.
Drilling won't have any affect on the gas prices for years since there are not enough refineries to process it!
True CA girl,
But, like, ya know, (spoken in CA valley speak, lol), thanks true, but how much daily capacity does a refinery have today? Are they really working to maximum capacity? What is the time-line to build new facilities? Could the impact of drilling be beneficial to oil commodity prices? How long to build a pipeline? I am certain it can't be accomplished overnight, but could be sold to other nations temporarily with fund used to reduce the national debt.
When the infrastructure is in place, keep the oil in the USA, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and let the other oil producing countries do whatever they desire with their product.
I am having trouble with those that say drill , drill , drill , it will solve our current gas problem, well they are completely wrong.. first, how many capped wells are there in the American system (a lot), why, cause the oil companies don't want to overload the oil supply. why are prices higher than they have been in the last three years, when the supply of oil on the world market is more than at any time in the last 18 years. something ain't right here. I see (world speculators) and wall street traders running this whole thing into the ground. is the consumption of oil higher, maybe, is the future supply of oil in a little jeopardy, (sort of depends upon who you talk to, Libya is in chaos, but Saudi Arabia says it can make up the difference, so what is the problem with supply? I see the number of ships carrying it is in short supply or in the wrong part of the world to guarantee the oil /gas will get to our shores in time to refine for summer driving, sounds like a great reason to make more per gallon now doesn't it....
NOT!!!!
Seems that our President actually wants oil prices to go up. This is a vote for his Chevy "VOLT", and all those proposed, government funded, GE charging stations.
Just follow the money, and you begin to see the twisted liberal logic at work.
Oil and gas prices are inevitably going to continue to go up. Unless you intend to kill off 2 BBillion people, demand for energy will exceed the production of cheap oil. Higher oil prices will make alternative energy sources competitive and employable. Cheap oil can't last forever, accept that you are going to pay more for not modifying your behavior to the new economic reality, which you have been warned about for twenty years.
republican'ts said:
Again, the point is, we cannot increase the supply significantly enough to effect the cost of oil.
Well if that is true then why is the trouble in Libya driving oil prices up, they only produce something like 2 million barrels a day. Not to mention that most of the oil produced in Libya goes to Europe. If we produced 2 more million barrels a day then we could effect oil prices too, but wait... that might be the rules of supply and demand.
What's your answer to that Ace?
"Thinking things through" - yea right!!
Better go back and do some more research there Ace!!
i will like to see the united state stop use the opec for oil went other country is selling the oil chipper like brazil the opec dont care about us w must take care our senior people this econimic never will bounce back 1- price of oil 2 our troops in afganastain the only way mr:obama will be back on 2012 if keep his promise to bring our troops home and lower are gasoline and diesel
on every galon of gas you have $.45 cent tax per galon sold and $.58 cent on diesel, for the pass 50 years they charge us $.03 cents per galon for spill were all that money is
Great Article -- regulation proves dangerous, especially in oil industry, as "capture" may occur