Let Oil Companies Drill More

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arch...ll-more/246263/
Quote:
The government is preventing the oil industry from creating more jobs. Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, said that his company would expand its workforce if the U.S. would allow it better access to federal lands. He addressed jobs, the economy, and challenges facing the energy industry in an interview with CNBC's Maria Bartiromo at the Washington Ideas forum on Thursday.
Quote:
What could his industry do to create more, Bartiromo wondered. "[By] allowing our industry to do the things we've done for decades in this country. That means access," Tillerson replied. He asserted that his company would be eager to expand its energy production, but it is constrained by government policy. Its refusal to allow it to acquire oil and natural gas from federal lands significantly limits its potential to produce, he said. He explained that the attitude of the U.S. not to allow energy companies access to federal lands is actually an aberration in the global market. In other countries, governments want their natural resources developed, he said. But in the U.S., he characterized the government as asking: "What do we do to make it as difficult for you as we can?"
Quote:
Tax and regulatory uncertainty is also a problem that holds back growth in his sector, and ultimately hiring, according to Tillerson. He explained that when the rules aren't clear and concrete, making the sort of long-term investment that is necessary in his industry becomes difficult from a financial risk standpoint.
Very good article by an "evil" oil company CEO.
 
Messages
4,574
Location
Merritt Island FL, USA
I see Exxon/Mobil has a lot of problems with financial risk. Their profits are really hurting right now. The long term, I think you could basically say they make record profits every year for the last x number of years. I think that is a pretty good platform for long term investment. We have to be very careful what we do to our lands. This is a beautiful country, I think we need to be cautious about drilling all over the US. I agree with energy investment, all kinds, alternative should be our #1 priority with necessary investment for the short term in fossil fuels. I love my country and I don't want oil Co's to have free reign on our sacred land. There can be a balance...at least I hope so, or that is the end of US.
 
Messages
11,856
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: chubbs1
I see Exxon/Mobil has a lot of problems with financial risk. Their profits are really hurting right now. The long term, I think you could basically say they make record profits every year for the last x number of years. I think that is a pretty good platform for long term investment. We have to be very careful what we do to our lands. This is a beautiful country, I think we need to be cautious about drilling all over the US. I agree with energy investment, all kinds, alternative should be our #1 priority with necessary investment for the short term in fossil fuels. I love my country and I don't want oil Co's to have free reign on our sacred land. There can be a balance...at least I hope so, or that is the end of US.
Can't comment on XOM's financials, but I agree on the rest. Well said.
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
Quote:
I agree with energy investment, all kinds, alternative should be our #1 priority
Specifically, what kinds of "alternative" investments should be made and in what quantity? Who should be making these decisions? What is the track record of the people you want in charge of these decisions?
Quote:
our sacred land
What does this mean? A barren frozen wasteland in the middle of nowhere?
 
Messages
499
Location
VA
How about they invest in something renewable. Be the first big name in a different source of clean, plentiful, and inexpensive power. Who cares if they don't make as much money. Greedy.
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
Originally Posted By: BigBuck
How about they invest in something renewable. Be the first big name in a different source of clean, plentiful, and inexpensive power. Who cares if they don't make as much money. Greedy.
So I take it that you are dumping every free dime of your money into "something renewable"? If not, then you are greedy by your own standard.
 
Messages
43,676
Location
'Stralia
So they are whining because they can't drill on property that isn't theirs to begin with ? Surely Tempest, with your bent for property rights, you see through the oil companies. Would you let them drill in your back yard gratis, or are you demonstrating your hypocrisy also ?
 
Messages
11,856
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: Torino
The only environmental issue of importance is that of--Ignorance, filth and poverty.
What have you had in the way of biology classes?
 
Messages
8,576
Location
Ohio
Originally Posted By: Shannow
So they are whining because they can't drill on property that isn't theirs to begin with ? Surely Tempest, with your bent for property rights, you see through the oil companies. Would you let them drill in your back yard gratis, or are you demonstrating your hypocrisy also ?
+1. Not only that, you can own private property with oil and gas fields and other natural resources and it gets extracted without any compensation. You don't even own the resources of your own land. The line that if you deregulates and reduce tax even more, then jobs will be add is mostly bogus. Demand causes job growth.
 
Messages
1,137
Location
Florida
Last edited:
Messages
725
Location
Henderson, Nevada
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Torino
The only environmental issue of importance is that of--Ignorance, filth and poverty.
What have you had in the way of biology classes?
Puhlenty--ChE. (Rose Poly) MBA. (IU) 40+ years experience in mining, manufacturing and agriculture. John--Las Vegas
 
Messages
11,856
Location
PA
I see chemical engineering, an MBA, mining, manufacturing, and agriculture. Of those, only the last might have anything to do with biology, and it may or may not bear on this discussion depending on from what perspective it was taught (e.g. business vs. the nitty-gritty). Could you be more specific? Normally I wouldn't belabor a point like this, but I am absolutely baffled as to how one can seriously suggest that there are no real environmental issues (besides the human ones) involved in extracting natural resources.
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
Originally Posted By: Shannow
So they are whining because they can't drill on property that isn't theirs to begin with ? Surely Tempest, with your bent for property rights, you see through the oil companies. Would you let them drill in your back yard gratis, or are you demonstrating your hypocrisy also ?
You of course assume that the "evil" oil companies are extracting oil off of government controlled land for free, which is not the case. The government charges them lease fees to extract all of that "free" oil in the ground. Oil companies also pay more money in taxes than they make in profits so your entire premise is baseless.
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
+1. Not only that, you can own private property with oil and gas fields and other natural resources and it gets extracted without any compensation. You don't even own the resources of your own land. The line that if you deregulates and reduce tax even more, then jobs will be add is mostly bogus. Demand causes job growth.
If you bought the land without mineral rights, this is the case. The deed you signed will show that the mineral rights are NOT being transferred so this is part of the contract that both parties are agreeing to.
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Torino
The only environmental issue of importance is that of--Ignorance, filth and poverty.
What have you had in the way of biology classes?
What is the competency, motivation, and knowledge base of these all mighty professors that are to be teaching these classes? What makes some person with tenure and a paper on the wall more qualified in these areas than someone with 40 years in various industries that impact the environment? Your bias toward people that are supposed to be "in the know" with nothing to loose is quite telling. As for "investment" in "green" energy that people so desire:
Quote:
A new report by the Labor Department's Office of Inspector General examined a $500 million grant under the stimulus program to the Employment and Training Administration to "train and prepare individuals for careers in 'green jobs.'" So far about $162.8 million has been spent. The program was supposed to train 125,000 workers, but only 53,000 have been "trained" so far, only 8,035 have found jobs, and only 1,033 were still in the job after six months. Overall, "only 10% of participants entered employment." In the understatement of the year, the IG says the program failed to "assist those most impacted by the recession." The jobs record is even more dismal when you consider that many of the jobs classified as green aren't even new jobs, much less green, according to a report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. They include positions that have been "relabeled as green jobs by the BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics]." This means that bus drivers, Environmental Protection Agency regulators, university professors teaching ecology, and even the Washington lobbyists who secure energy loan guarantees count as green employees for the purposes of government counting. The Oversight Committee finds that even a charitable assessment of the Labor program puts the cost of each green job at $157,000.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204524604576611191286160766.html?mod=googlenews_wsj This is the massively wasteful central planning that people want in the name of "sustainability".
 

Tempest

Thread starter
Messages
10,611
Location
Las Vegas NV
This article clearly shows the scam that is green energy and how it is used to funnel taxpayer money to large corporations, picking the winners and losers. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/279802/america-s-worst-wind-energy-project-robert-bryce The entire model of the green energy industry is to soak up government money, not provide useful products. It is often the same people that despise "corporate greed", "CEO profits", and bailouts that will, in the same breath, demand billions of taxpayer dollars be funneled to such corporations in the name of "investment"....which is nothing more than a pre-bailout.
 
Messages
725
Location
Henderson, Nevada
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I see chemical engineering, an MBA, mining, manufacturing, and agriculture. Of those, only the last might have anything to do with biology, and it may or may not bear on this discussion depending on from what perspective it was taught (e.g. business vs. the nitty-gritty). Could you be more specific? Normally I wouldn't belabor a point like this, but I am absolutely baffled as to how one can seriously suggest that there are no real environmental issues (besides the human ones) involved in extracting natural resources.
Very interesting response. I certainly would like to pursue it at length. I am undergoing some serious oral/dental procedure right now and am not feeling well. The discussion may transcend the parameters of this forum. Would you mind if I PM'd you in a day or so? Regards. John--Las Vegas
 
Messages
43,676
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: Shannow
So they are whining because they can't drill on property that isn't theirs to begin with ? Surely Tempest, with your bent for property rights, you see through the oil companies. Would you let them drill in your back yard gratis, or are you demonstrating your hypocrisy also ?
You of course assume that the "evil" oil companies are extracting oil off of government controlled land for free, which is not the case. The government charges them lease fees to extract all of that "free" oil in the ground. Oil companies also pay more money in taxes than they make in profits so your entire premise is baseless.
They pay taxes, so therefore should be able to decide what they do with public property ? Wheres the baselesslessness in THAT argument LOL. Got straw ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top