archer wrote: Right now we have higher supplies and lower demand and still the price goes up. Gee...maybe something else is causing the price to rise...maybe speculators or world events. Do you think approving Keystone will fix that?
Oh no, not the evil speculators again! Only a foolish man would be buying up oil contracts when supply is plentiful and demand is down, he would be selling then...unless he thinks oil supplies are going to decline because we have an anti-fossil fuel administration who is threatening domestic oil suppliers with tax hikes.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, like the Right parrots the phony numbers about how many "hundreds of thousands of [permanent] jobs will be created"... (It won't.) And how it will "bring down the price-at-the-pump" (It won't.)
Suckers....
Yep, how could a 7 billion dollar construction project create any jobs?
:faint:
LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, like the Right parrots the phony numbers about how many "hundreds of thousands of [permanent] jobs will be created"... (It won't.) And how it will "bring down the price-at-the-pump" (It won't.)
Suckers....
Yep, how could a 7 billion dollar construction project create any jobs?
:faint:
:thumbsup: In LJ's world, only goverment infrastructure projects create jobs, (temporary!)
Privately created jobs don't exist.
And the point about midwest oil supplies? If the Canadian oil goes to China, the Midwest doesn't get it either. At least if it is in a pipeline heading to Texas, we can buy it before it reaches the tankers.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
I have posted this quote from TransCanada in Calgary on another thread but since LJ and other liberals keep posting lies about where this oil would go- I thought posting it again might be helpful to the "hard of learning".
Terry Cunha, a spokesman for TransCanada in Calgary, Alberta, said it’s his understanding that most of the oil will be for domestic use in the United States.
“As we’ve highlighted, why not get (this oil) from Canada, versus importing it from other countries that don’t share the same beliefs as we do in Canada and North America?” he said.
A spokesman for the largest U.S. petroleum refiner, Valero Energy Corp. of San Antonio, Texas, said that while some of the Canadian oil may be refined into products for export, it would be a small part of its overall use
.
And any of the oil that gets "refined into products for export" would subtract from the total number of barrels of oil that we import.... would it not? If we export oil- it just offsets from the number of barrels imported.
Gee- some day these liberals are actually gonna grow a brain cell.
It appears TransCanada is speaking out of both sides of their mouths, as they specifically tell potential investors the pipeline is for export only, in order to maximize potential profits to those investors. Think it through: right now the oil stops at the midwest refineries, where potential sales prices are limited by a limited market. Pipe it to coastal refineries and selling price potential is increased by being part of the global market. It simply doesn't add up...no real benefit for America...plenty of risk, but no (minimal) reward. Sure TransCan is going to say whatever will get the pipeline through because they stand to make a LOT more money than they currently do, or will if they must make different arrangements.
All this "if liberals could grow a brain cell," and "liberals are dumb," stuff is counter productive. I disagree with many conservatives here, but don't call you stupid for having your opinions. Do insults strengthen or weaken your argument? How do you think they're perceived by the many folks who read these debates, but may not post?
So far in the XL pipeline debate,, we have two sources of info to help us formulate our opinions: TransCanada, who stands to profit enormously; and the independent third party study who will not gain or lose anything regardless of the outcome. I know who I trust more in this case. If you trust the party with the financial interest, then no amount of logic or facts will convince you otherwise.
It seems like there are 2 choices regarding the Canada pipeline:
1. Expand refinery capacity in Montana, WY or ND and pipe it in from our friendly Canada neighbors.
or
2. Pipe the oil all the way to the gulf where the refinery capacity exist today.
Or we could ignore the US energy needs and hope the tooth fairy fills the underground tanks at the Conoco stations so they are available when we pull in to "fill up".
Or we could buy Obama's Chevy Volts! Seems like few have shelled out the $40K lately. How many of you are driving Volt, Leafs, or Chinese Codas?
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
There are a lot more choices than just those two... But you won't be aware of them unless they're mentioned by one of the right-wing sources you get your ideas from.
Oh no, not the evil speculators again! Only a foolish man would be buying up oil contracts when supply is plentiful and demand is down, he would be selling then...unless he thinks oil supplies are going to decline because we have an anti-fossil fuel administration who is threatening domestic oil suppliers with tax hikes.
