Kay Bailey - On Target!

UNTflyer · July 2, 2008

---The whole point is nothern Alaska an expensive place to drill, very hostile climate, and it would do little to help out the problem.. The claim we have have more reserves that the Middle East may be true some BUT we are talking oil the is extremely expensive is very difficult to produce and would not drop the cost of gasoline one cent... Anwar might drop it a few cents but only cents, The price of gasoline is all about the WORLD's demand for oil and has very little with us and what we can do.

So it's expensive... There aren't exactly cheap places to drill. We already have a pipeline up there, we just need to run a short 30-mile pipe to the Prudoh Bay field. And claiming that 1,000,000 barrels a day will drop prices by just a few cents is ridiculous. You are just repeating the lies of environmentalists and politicians. Out one side of their mouth, the Democrats are saying if OPEC would increase production by 1mil barrels a day, the price would drop 30-40, then out the other they claim that drilling the same amount in America won't matter? Clearly, they have no grasp of the situation.

Also, much of the high price is driven by speculation, and it is based on the belief that America will not change it's drilling policy. You're telling me if we do a 180 that the speculation bubble won't burst? I am amazed by the extent to which people will go to protect a tundra wasteland and continue sending money to Middle East and South America regimes hostile to the United States.

Edited July 2, 2008 by UNTflyer

adman · July 2, 2008

The demand for oil worldwide will continue to increase regardless of what we do in America.

On the contrary. We use over 25% of the worlds oil. One country out of 189 using a quarter of all oil produced.

UNTflyer · July 2, 2008

On the contrary. We use over 25% of the worlds oil. One country out of 189 using a quarter of all oil produced.

Which is quite reasonable considering we produce 1/5 of the planet's Gross World Product.

GreenMachine · July 2, 2008

Would you drill here?
I most certainly would
or here?
sure would
or here?
yes and wouldn't lose a minute of sleep over it.
These are all pictures from different areas of Texas, and Texas, like ANWAR, is a big place. Can you imagine how history would have been altered if we had never drilled here?
Can you imagine how history will be altered if we don't drill in ANWAR?

Mean Green 93-98 · July 2, 2008

On the contrary. We use over 25% of the worlds oil. One country out of 189 using a quarter of all oil produced.

Obviously, if we were to end all use of petroleum, it would make a huge impact on the oil market. My comment was in the context of what had just been said: "The best and fastest way to bring down the price of fuel is [for America] to stop being fuel hogs." Even if we were to cut our oil consumption by 20% (unrealistic), the emerging markets would compensate enough to keep prices high.

emmitt01 · July 2, 2008

And, even if the site was in the middle of the most beautiful wildlife area... WHO CARES??? We are talking about 2,000 out 19.2 million square acres. The caribou can go elsewhere, just like they did when we built every other drilling site and pipeline in Alaska.

And that goes for you Indians too. You can move around, I hear Oklahoma is nice.

Throwing out straw man responses to the whole "we could use less fuel, but damnit we don't feel like it" argument is fun.

Edited July 2, 2008 by emmitt01

UNTflyer · July 2, 2008

"we could ~~use~~ ~~less~~ produce more fuel, but damnit we don't feel like it"

There you go... the mantra of Congress.

You know, food prices are going way up now. If Americans could just learn to eat less and find alternative foods, then we can reduce our dependence on wheat, dairy, and corn farmers.

Censored by Laurie · July 2, 2008

If Americans could just learn to eat less

A similar idea has already been mentioned in this thread

adman · July 2, 2008

Which is quite reasonable considering we produce 1/5 of the planet's Gross World Product.

We're 300 Million of what, 9 Billion, people on this earth and we use 25%. Seems excessive to me.

Quoner · July 2, 2008

I missed most of this today, but the main takeaways seem to be that we deserve oil and public transportation is for poor people.

UNTflyer · July 2, 2008

We're 300 Million of what, 9 Billion, people on this earth and we use 25%. Seems excessive to me.

It doesn't to me. Oil consumption goes hand in hand with production. It is not excessive considering that we produce so much more then the rest of the world.

Censored by Laurie · July 2, 2008

I missed most of this today, but the main takeaways seem to be that we deserve oil and public transportation is for poor people.

As always...well put. I've got an hour before I have to head out and tell passersby that my car ran out of gas and if they could spare a few dollars I could get back home.

Jokes on them...I'm really just scoring rocks

GreenMachine · July 2, 2008

I missed most of this today, but the main takeaways seem to be that we deserve oil and public transportation is for poor people.

read again

Quoner · July 2, 2008

read again

I also learned that you have trouble using quote tags on your second post.

It's hard to take the same 5-6 people arguing the same points seriously. Plus fuel and social media are big parts of my job so this just makes this thread feel like work.

forevereagle · July 2, 2008

We're 300 Million of what, 9 Billion, people on this earth and we use 25%. Seems excessive to me.

Actually, the world population is about 6 billion, but who's counting?

Mean Green 93-98 · July 2, 2008

We're 300 Million of what, 9 Billion, people on this earth and we use 25%. Seems excessive to me.

Don't worry - if we become less technologically advanced and less prosperous, we will be right in line with third world oil usage.

GreenMachine · July 2, 2008

It's hard to take the same 5-6 people arguing the same points seriously.

Couldn't agree with you more.

yyz28 · July 2, 2008

Couldn't agree with you more.

Beat me to it... ...easier to make blanket conclusion statements instead of discussing the actual points.

Edited July 2, 2008 by yyz28

Quoner · July 2, 2008

Beat me to it... ...easier to make blanket conclusion statements instead of discussing the actual points.

Especially if they are sarcastic points but everyone takes them so seriously that their panties bunch up and chaff their cracks because deep down we all know that winning the war of words on the secret member NT message board will fix AMERICA and keep it safe and healthy for all AMERICANS!

I mean, you realize you are one of the 5 or 6 people we just agreed about, right? It doesn't make us love you less, but I just want to make sure we are all on the same page.

Edited July 2, 2008 by Quoner

Green P1 · July 2, 2008

Especially if they are sarcastic points but everyone takes them so seriously that their panties bunch up and chaff their cracks because deep down we all know that winning the war of words on the secret member NT message board will fix AMERICA and keep it safe and healthy for all AMERICANS!
I mean, you realize you are one of the 5 or 6 people we just agreed about, right? It doesn't make us love you less, but I just want to make sure we are all on the same page.

Couldn't agree with you more.

Kinda low balling it with the 5 or 6 aren't you?

Edited July 3, 2008 by Green P1

FirefightnRick · July 3, 2008

I've been to the region. ANWR is a HUGE place, and there are some nice areas. However the coastal plain is as advertised. ANWR is a very diverse area, but the zone they are wanting to drill in is not a spot anyone wants to visit, and there is little to no wildlife to inturrupt there. ...and Alaskan wildlife has proven they can adapt to what we're doing. You've seen the pictures of thousands of carribu grazing right next to the pipeline, right?
...and that's where your argument falls flat on its face. CAFE standards have mandated fleet averages in the 30+MPG range of the automakers, so the 6MPG Hummer is going to be the exception, not the rule. You also just assume that Exxon-Mobil, Shell Oil and the other major energy producers in this country just want to run all the oil they can through their pipelines and then when it runs out, they are going to just say "oh well, that was fun while it lasted, I guess we're just going to shrivel up and die now..." Do you actually think that they don't know where the limits on the supply are? Do you really think they won't be getting themselves in a place to keep going after the oil thing is over? You actually belive that people are going to say "screw alternitive energy?". No matter the price of oil, would you drive an electric car because of the environmental benefits if you could get one for about the same price as an internal combustion model? I bet you would. I bet there is a huge market out there for that, without the governemt making one up and without those of you who would want such a vehicle mandating them on those of us who don't.
My point is this. Alternitives to oil burning transportation have been in the works for a couple of decades and are now getting close to being ready for primetime. Do you really think people and companies who have put the effort into such endeavors are just going to say "f-it" if oil prices go back down? If you do, then you haven't been educated on the inventive nature of this country very well. If there is a market for something, and there is for electric and other types of transportation, the FREE MARKET, not the Government, will make it happen.
Your side of the argument loses credibiltiy when you blame america and lecture us on our "over-consuming way of life". It is an amazing fact of history - we adapt very well.
Well, the left has stopped us from using nuclear power in this country. Obviouslly, wind, solar and hydroelectric energy is and will continue to be used in this country. I don't get the point of the question. Are you asking if we keep it all here or put it on the global market? Obviously we put it on the global market. It is the only smart thing to do.
...yet for some reason I'm not. Spend my morning in my car listening to my radio, on my schedule - or go wait for the smelly train so I can sit across the isle from the homeless guy who jumpped the turnstyle and will become violent when the conductor tries to throw him off the train for not having a ticket. He'll flail around, bump into me, I'll spill my coffee on my paper, and will have waited on the platform 15 mintues for this luxury.
Ugh. There is a train line that runs into Plano. It would run to McKinney if Allen would pull it's head out of it's ass... Line is being built to Carrolton. ...and what exactly does the lack of a government run and publically funded transportation system have to do with a sense of entitlement?
I find it ironic that people who support real entitlement programs like government run healthcare call people living their lives as they see fit as having a "sense of entitlement".

Excellent post yz.

Rick

yyz28 · July 3, 2008

Especially if they are sarcastic points but everyone takes them so seriously that their panties bunch up and chaff their cracks because deep down we all know that winning the war of words on the secret member NT message board will fix AMERICA and keep it safe and healthy for all AMERICANS!

There is nothing wrong with debate and discussion. Sometimes we learn something from each other. Sometimes one side makes a point the other hasn't seen yet and those who are thinking instead of just regurgitating talking points learn new things in these debates. Nobody here thinks what is said on this site will change the world.

You can think of me what I want - Have thick skin, and I promise not to get my panties in a wad - but the issues we're talking about here ARE serious and the dicussion was being handled maturely by all, I think.

I mean, you realize you are one of the 5 or 6 people we just agreed about, right? It doesn't make us love you less, but I just want to make sure we are all on the same page.

I realize I am. There are 5 or 6 on the other side as well. This is a sports board and there aren't many of us here wo care about politics (or at least enough to dicsuss it), so you're going to see a small minority of our membership posting in these threads, and it will be a handful on each side of the issue who are passionate about politics.

To put it another way - if you don't like the content of a thread and could give a sh!t less about it, don't read it. Higt the back button and move on with your life.

Quoner · July 3, 2008

There is nothing wrong with debate and discussion. Sometimes we learn something from each other. Sometimes one side makes a point the other hasn't seen yet and those who are thinking instead of just regurgitating talking points learn new things in these debates. Nobody here thinks what is said on this site will change the world.
You can think of me what I want - Have thick skin, and I promise not to get my panties in a wad - but the issues we're talking about here ARE serious and the dicussion was being handled maturely by all, I think.
I realize I am. There are 5 or 6 on the other side as well. This is a sports board and there aren't many of us here wo care about politics (or at least enough to dicsuss it), so you're going to see a small minority of our membership posting in these threads, and it will be a handful on each side of the issue who are passionate about politics.
To put it another way - if you don't like the content of a thread and could give a sh!t less about it, don't read it. Higt the back button and move on with your life.

I actually care a lot about politics and world issues, but my problem is that for every good point, there are 10 political party talking points thrown up in slightly paraphrased form. It's hard to read that and not want to take a shot at it. I snapped at you because I misinterpreted a post - my apologies.

These threads are win-win for me - I either get easy target content to keep me occupied why the football board continues in its offseason abyss or I learn something and think about it on my own.

Censored by Laurie · July 3, 2008

football board continues in its offseason abyss

What abyss?

yyz28 · July 3, 2008

I snapped at you because I misinterpreted a post - my apologies.

Fair enough. Hope I didn't offend.

I'm with you on the talking points, of both parties. While I may agree with and say something that sounds like a talking point, you can rest assured I don't know what the talking points are for either party. I just call it like I see and believe it. If it happens to match a talking point, that's ok, but it isn't my intention to parrot any party, as they both make me want to puke.