The Thriller
Well-Known Member
why would more drilling change the price of gas?
Obama = Nero
- Thread starter PearlWatson
- Start date
why would more drilling change the price of gas?
The general thought is that this will create a glut in supply even though it has not been a shortage that caused the current up-tick in price.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
So if we agree that the price increase in gas has nothing to do with supply and demand, then why are we even talking about drilling more? Perhaps we should look at who's controlling the prices and what we can do about that instead of beating around the bush.
Essentially, this would be like the NFL's owners and players trying to end the lock out by hiring more hot dog workers. In hopes that more hot dog sales people will somehow end the lockout.
It would make us less dependent on foreign supplies. That's a great reason to drill our own oil... as long as Exxon doesn't turn around and sell it to China that is.
A
Agoxlea
Guest
Exxon, or any other oil company, selling oil to China is bad why?
Because then we'd still have to import to meet the demand our own supplies could have handled?
It's like a baker's family needing to go to another baker to get their daily bread.
So, you're opposed to inefficiency in private enterprise? If Exxon can make more money selling to china than selling here, why should they sell here?
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Sounds to me like some of you conservatives are in support of nationalizing our own oil. Interesting.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Ok.... So what's stopping them from selling to China?
And dependency on foreign supplies isn't what determines the price of gas.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
A question was asked and I answered it. Knowing the answer to the question is not an indication of where I stand on the issue.
I think Exxon should be able to sell their oil to whomever is willing to pay what they're asking. Doesn't mean there aren't drawbacks to my line of thinking, nor that I'm ignorant as to what those drawbacks are.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Tuesday morning, a peculiar announcement trickled out of the White House press office: President Barack Obama would be holding a moment of silence for the victims of the Boston bombings. At the White House. By himself. No press or other intruders allowed.
Except the White House photographer.
That Obama assumed Americans would want an iconic photo of him privately mourning the victims of the bombings was emblematic of a kind of hubris that has enveloped the president and his White House as the president commences his second term.
Hubris in a leader is an obnoxious thing,
Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/obamas-hubris-problem-90650.html#ixzz2Rc48cCYd
Tuesday morning, a peculiar announcement trickled out of the White House press office: President Barack Obama would be holding a moment of silence for the victims of the Boston bombings. At the White House. By himself. No press or other intruders allowed.
Except the White House photographer.
That Obama assumed Americans would want an iconic photo of him privately mourning the victims of the bombings was emblematic of a kind of hubris that has enveloped the president and his White House as the president commences his second term.
Hubris in a leader is an obnoxious thing,
Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/obamas-hubris-problem-90650.html#ixzz2Rc48cCYd
You think.. you know.. maybe he just allowed freedom of the press, but didn't think it appropriate to have the chaos that is the press?
MoreFeasts
Member
I just can't see why this bothers Pearl.
Don't be fatuous David. Clearly, this was all about Obama being Obama, while trying to destroy the world. The more I think about it, I'm certain that this was all his idea. I doubt very highly that the White House has some sort of, I dunno, Communications Director (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Communications_Director ) who does this kind of thing. Nope, I'm positive that Satan told Obama to do this (during last nights sacrifice of fetuses) first thing in the morning. The USA is screwed!!1
That's because you're new here.
Because it relates to the left and that is all that is needed. I dem senator could save a drowning child and PearlWatson will bitch.
Same with Thriller attacking the right. They could save a pregnant woman from burning alive and Thriller will go off about how they did it wrong.
candrew
Well-Known Member
Because they would only be doing it to save the unborn fetus.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
You don't find hubris to be the appropriate word?
Hubris (pron.: /ˈhjuːbrɪs/), also hybris, from ancient Greek ὕβρις, means extreme pride or arrogance.
I guess it could just be a Marie Antoinette moment: too busy living it up on taxpayer dime to bother answering questions that don't fit his anti-gun/anti-job agenda.