• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Buckwheat's Jobs Plan - Kill 400,000

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Obama's New Job Plan: Kill 400,000 Jobs Immediately
Townhall.com | November 12, 2011 | John Ransom


The decision by the Obama administration to delay any action on the XL Keystone pipeline until after the election is a fitting development for an administration that has pursued a bankrupt energy policy, a bankrupt jobs policy and is quite literally bankrupting the country with politics thinly veiled as policy.

And the beauty for Obama in this latest axe he's taken to jobs in the USA is that he doesn't even have to consider Congress while he's swinging it. He can kill close to a half-a-million jobs all on his own.

“The State Department said Thursday it would take up to 18 months to review alternative routes for the Keystone expansion,” reports MarketWatch, “so it avoids carrying heavy Canadian crude past Nebraska's environmentally sensitive Sand Hills region and a major regional aquifer.”



The pipeline could ultimately supply about a million barrels of Canadian oil to the US per day and 400,000 US jobs, most of them almost immediately. But instead, the president, who has been railing against Congress for not passing another expensive jobs bill just killed 400,000 American jobs, while making sure the price of gas stays high for citizens.

And despite everything the Obama administration has done to slow down domestic development of oil and gas resources, the oil and gas sector is one of the fastest growing jobs markets in a very anemic job market. While other sectors are shedding jobs, oil and gas is hot.

“The six fastest-growing jobs for 2010-11,” according to Economic Modeling Specialists Inc’s (EMSI) latest quarterly employment data, “are related to oil and gas extraction. This includes service unit operators, derrick operators, rotary drill operators, and roustabouts. Each is expected to grow anywhere from 9% to 11% through this year, in an otherwise mostly stagnant economy.”

Imagine what would happen if we could get Obama to cooperate with creating jobs just a little bit.

The State Department had already issued an approval for the XL Keystone project back in August and it was just waiting on Obama’s desk for action.

Obama could have approved the pipeline easily on economic grounds- the project will create 20,000 construction jobs, plus another 350,000 ancillary jobs- but he’s being bullied by his friends on the left to stop the project in its tracks. The green meanies want him to put their anti-growth, anti-development, anti-job, misanthropic agenda above the welfare and prosperity of US citizens…again.

And he’s complied with them now temporarily, likely with the message that if they get him reelected, he’ll kill the project permanently.

Environmental whackos have been getting arrested by appointment at the White House for the last two months hoping to put pressure on Obama to scuttle the most significant development in energy for our country in the last 50 years.



If successful, the Keystone pipeline will not only significantly reduce US imports of oil from place like the Middle East and Latin America, but it will also help open up huge new oil resources in the United States by providing the confidence to develop oil reserves in the Rocky Mountain region.

While it’s estimated that Canada may have as much as 2 trillion barrels of oil in reserves, “the U.S. Geological Survey estimates the [US] has 4.3 trillion barrels of in-place oil shale resources centered in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, said Helen Hankins, Colorado director for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management” according to the Associated Press.

4.3 trillion barrels is 16 times the reserves of Saudi Arabia or enough oil to supply the US for 600 years.

But the newest delay has noting to do with aquifers in Nebraska; rather it has to do with activists on the left who want no fossil energy development under any circumstances. Obama thinks that if he alienates these activists, that he can forget about reelection. He’s already alienated the right and center. The only place he has to go is to the left.

The left doesn’t care about jobs. They only care about their agenda.

"The road to viability for the oil shale industry is reliant on a predictable regulatory structure and an environment in which companies can invest in research and development and create jobs," said Congressman Scott Tipton (R-CO), who has accused Obama of delaying the commercial extraction of shale oil by adding regulatory obstacles.

"The proper implementation of our environmental and safety regulations already on the books is a far better strategy than adding additional layers of bureaucracy to the process," said Tipton who held hearings on the subject in Colorado in the summer.



Earlier this summer the high priest of climate change, Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore blasted Obama for being timid on environmental matters, perhaps because he sensed a sell-out coming.

It will be a tough sell to the American people struggling under massive unemployment that the 400,000 jobs that could have been created by Keystone aren’t more important than the worries of environmentalists who think that a grouse has more value than a baby.

After all, the oil shipped through Keystone will replace oil that is being purchased from countries that don’t like us very much. And the project will add good paying, US jobs.

And this latest delay will undercut Obama’s demand that Congress pass his jobs bill “immediately,” a demand that started before the bill had even been written.

“The question, then, is, will Congress do something?" the president said at a press conference when he announced his jobs bull, but before he presented it to Congress.

"If Congress does something, then I can't run against a do-nothing Congress. If Congress does nothing, then it's not a matter of me running against them. I think the American people will run them out of town, because they are frustrated."



Frustrated? Yeah.

Obama still doesn’t understand the half of it.

It will be US Against Him until he’s out of office.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Just how many times does Obama get to put job CREATION on the back burner to further his agenda? He has promised jobs jobs jobs and everytime he seems to find a reason to back burner any attempts to create a few. This time he is using the preservation of the Nebraska aquifer but with his history we all know it is the upcoming ELECTION and his greenie support he is trying to perserve.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Tam said:
Just how many times does Obama get to put job CREATION on the back burner to further his agenda? He has promised jobs jobs jobs and everytime he seems to find a reason to back burner any attempts to create a few. This time he is using the preservation of the Nebraska aquifer but with his history we all know it is the upcoming ELECTION and his greenie support he is trying to perserve.


He knows government cannot create jobs, what part of this is so hard to understand after 3 years?

If he knows this, and is spending all this money still fabricating the facade of government creating jobs.....what is he truly doing?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
hypocritexposer said:
Tam said:
Just how many times does Obama get to put job CREATION on the back burner to further his agenda? He has promised jobs jobs jobs and everytime he seems to find a reason to back burner any attempts to create a few. This time he is using the preservation of the Nebraska aquifer but with his history we all know it is the upcoming ELECTION and his greenie support he is trying to perserve.


He knows government cannot create jobs, what part of this is so hard to understand after 3 years?

If he knows this, and is spending all this money still fabricating the facade of government creating jobs.....what is he truly doing?

Sorry but the government can help create jobs, all Obama has to do is sign the permits and GET OUT OF THE WAY. But he would rather stand in the way if it means he will apease his base. All the slimey speeches he wants to make will not put people back to work GETTING OUT OF THE WAY WILL. :x
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Tam said:
hypocritexposer said:
Tam said:
Just how many times does Obama get to put job CREATION on the back burner to further his agenda? He has promised jobs jobs jobs and everytime he seems to find a reason to back burner any attempts to create a few. This time he is using the preservation of the Nebraska aquifer but with his history we all know it is the upcoming ELECTION and his greenie support he is trying to perserve.


He knows government cannot create jobs, what part of this is so hard to understand after 3 years?

If he knows this, and is spending all this money still fabricating the facade of government creating jobs.....what is he truly doing?

Sorry but the government can help create jobs, all Obama has to do is sign the permits and GET OUT OF THE WAY. But he would rather stand in the way if it means he will apease his base. All the slimey speeches he wants to make will not put people back to work GETTING OUT OF THE WAY WILL. :x


signing permits is an obstruction to creating jobs....always has been, but it's great for increasing campaign donations.....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
How about building new refineries at the point of origin in Canada and then shipping the refined products to the point of use. Bottom line for this pipeline is to get the crude to the Gulf coast to be able to ship to China. I think that I read somewhere that some of the oil companies in Canada are owned by the Chinese. Correct me If I am wrong on this.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
hurleyjd said:
How about building new refineries at the point of origin in Canada and then shipping the refined products to the point of use. Bottom line for this pipeline is to get the crude to the Gulf coast to be able to ship to China. I think that I read somewhere that some of the oil companies in Canada are owned by the Chinese. Correct me If I am wrong on this.


There is quite a bit of Chinese ownership in the oilsands projects, but not as much as American.

Where did you read/hear that the oil would go to the Gulf and then to China?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
hurleyjd said:
How about building new refineries at the point of origin in Canada and then shipping the refined products to the point of use. Bottom line for this pipeline is to get the crude to the Gulf coast to be able to ship to China. I think that I read somewhere that some of the oil companies in Canada are owned by the Chinese. Correct me If I am wrong on this.


There is quite a bit of Chinese ownership in the oilsands projects, but not as much as American.

Where did you read/hear that the oil would go to the Gulf and then to China?

Did not read it anywhere. Just speculation on my part. One: refinery operating at near capacity. Two: balance of payments to China. Need to sell more of something to them. They need oil.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
hurleyjd said:
hypocritexposer said:
hurleyjd said:
How about building new refineries at the point of origin in Canada and then shipping the refined products to the point of use. Bottom line for this pipeline is to get the crude to the Gulf coast to be able to ship to China. I think that I read somewhere that some of the oil companies in Canada are owned by the Chinese. Correct me If I am wrong on this.


There is quite a bit of Chinese ownership in the oilsands projects, but not as much as American.

Where did you read/hear that the oil would go to the Gulf and then to China?

Did not read it anywhere. Just speculation on my part. One: refinery operating at near capacity. Two: balance of payments to China. Need to sell more of something to them. They need oil.


How would private companies selling oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

And How much oil does the US export?

exports to China are minor. Exports to Panama are double what they are to China

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_expc_a_EP00_EEX_mbbl_a.htm



How about the refining capacity?


2010 Operable Utilization Rate (%) 86.4

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_unc_dcu_nus_a.htm
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
How would private companies selling oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

Same as selling corn rice cotton and any thing else. I may not understand the balance of payments as well as you. I thought it was a trade imbalance where China bought less of our products and we bought more of theirs.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
hurleyjd said:
How would private companies selling oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

Same as selling corn rice cotton and any thing else. I may not understand the balance of payments as well as you. I thought it was a trade imbalance where China bought less of our products and we bought more of theirs.


I should have written that differently "How would private companies re-selling this oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

The US does not export any amount of oil to China at present and you claim there is minimal refinery capacity, so how would that amount be increased to a degree to really contribute to the "balance of payments", when the US would be purchasing the majority of that oil from a Foreign Country?

You already mentioned the Chinese ownership of this "oil", correct?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
hypocritexposer said:
hurleyjd said:
How would private companies selling oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

Same as selling corn rice cotton and any thing else. I may not understand the balance of payments as well as you. I thought it was a trade imbalance where China bought less of our products and we bought more of theirs.


I should have written that differently "How would private companies re-selling this oil to China lower the "balance of payments"?

The US does not export any amount of oil to China at present and you claim there is minimal refinery capacity, so how would that amount be increased to a degree to really contribute to the "balance of payments", when the US would be purchasing the majority of that oil from a Foreign Country?

You already mentioned the Chinese ownership of this "oil", correct?

even if China owned all the shares of the oil sands exporting oil to them would still benefit Canada..

first the chinese would have to invest and spend money in Canada..

they would have to employ Canadian workers and pay Canadian taxes..

add in the cost of doing business and Canada would show a gain...

China would also show a gain but it seldom would be as much as the exporting country..

in economics even not extracting the oil would have a cost on Canada..

as would additional production add to Canada's bottom line..

each barrel is proportionally owned by China, so they only get a portion of the final profit. or gain,.. which is also taxed. The rest is economic gain for Canada..

so if you go further and subtract China's initial investment, they may actually be at a loss economically.

with out real numbers it is all speculation.. but It would be nearly impossible for Canada to be at an economic loss in this financial deal with China..

remember.. even if China had ownership of all the oil sands operation, Canada would still benefit more economically on that one transaction.

when you add in selling the product to China,.. Canada would gain even more!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hypo here is an excerpt from an article about re-routing the pipeline through Alaska, should we read any thing into it about China and the oil.


Delaying the decision on the pipeline went over badly in Canada, where it was seen as a signal that the country must diversify its oil exports away from the United States and toward Asia.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he made it clear in a weekend meeting with President Barack Obama that the nation will step up its efforts to sell oil to Asia since the decision was delayed, and would keep pushing the U.S. to approve the project.

"This highlights why Canada must increase its efforts to ensure it can supply its energy outside the U.S. and into Asia in particular," Harper said.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
hurleyjd said:
Hypo here is an excerpt from an article about re-routing the pipeline through Alaska, should we read any thing into it about China and the oil.


Delaying the decision on the pipeline went over badly in Canada, where it was seen as a signal that the country must diversify its oil exports away from the United States and toward Asia.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he made it clear in a weekend meeting with President Barack Obama that the nation will step up its efforts to sell oil to Asia since the decision was delayed, and would keep pushing the U.S. to approve the project.

"This highlights why Canada must increase its efforts to ensure it can supply its energy outside the U.S. and into Asia in particular," Harper said.



No need to read anything into it. If the US does not want the oil, then it will still be produced and sold to someone. It might even replace some of the US exports to Japan.

What's Alaska got to do with it?
 

Latest posts

Top