Only see one poster on here expressing madness. But that's just me.
You have serving the people;
President Trump said Sunday he has authorized the release of oil from the U.S. strategic petroleum reserve after attacks on key production facilities in Saudi Arabia cut the kingdom’s crude production by half.
Trump said oil would be released if needed to keep the market well supplied. The president also said that he has informed the appropriate agencies to expedite the approval of oil pipelines still in the permitting process in Texas and other states.
And then you have self serving;
The AP; FACING TOUGH MIDTERMS, BIDEN RELEASING OIL FROM U.S. RESERVES
High gasoline prices are the problem that President Joe Biden keeps trying to fix — and roughly a year’s worth of extraordinary efforts have done little to significantly lower costs.
He rejected the notion that politics played a role in his latest action. But the issue has clear political implications as the president’s approval rating has moved inversely with changes in gasoline prices, which remain high despite coming down since a June peak.
@Raiders22
India is like a finger in the air trying to find the current best situation not really being concerned with long term impact. If the US were wanting to make an impact on India they could in 5 seconds, stop allowing the phony visa trade that tech firms use to make billions in profits. Cut off the visas to Indian citizens and limit the time a visa when granted is valid.
India uses the US because they know politicians want to keep good favor with corps who donate to their campaigns, like NTT and US corps who get that discounted tech labor source...its all about corporate profits and India is gaming the US no question.
No , sir. You can thank good ol' fashioned market Capitalism for the ushering in of the fracking revolution. I know, because I was an active participant in the investing of some of these companies. It was drill, baby drill, and worry about the profits later. This mindset 10 -15 years ago by oil investors helped usher in a renaissance of the American oil industry.
As an oil investor, am I supposed to feel better when Biden makes decisions that harm the overall economy. 
You need to understand that oil companies barely represent 5% of the s&p 500 weighting. Just how do you think high gas prices affect the other 95% of the index ??
@joe pockets
I am not sure what you mean? I never complained about Biden raising gas prices. Even so, I am not sure why you would laugh if folks were upset about it. I am sure they do not want to pay more for gas. That is a lot on folk's budgets, especially when so many are paycheck to paycheck.
I do not have animosity towards people that make money off of it. It is common knowledge on here that I am making an awful lot off of it. I have moved into yet another big position on it. So I am all for people making money in any situation.
That does not mean I agree with the Democrat's policies on it though. I am not sure why you would see that as funny.
@wallstreetcappers
Okay.
Pretty sure they simply have their own interests in mind. They could not care less what the USA thinks, I imagine.
My point was not what the USA should do to 'make' India keep using the USD. That is another topic altogether.
I am saying there is concern about what happens if there is a switch in the world currency is all. Sure this was just India and UAE -- but the question is popping up more and more about China and India now, etc. As the USA begins to weaken further on the world stage this has to become a concern economically.
@wallstreetcappers
"The reason why gas and oil were cheap is because we gave subsidies". The word 'WERE' should be 'IS' in that sentence.
Do you realize how much gas would cost without any subsidies. It would be tremendously higher. 
@Rush51
I think it is two completely separate things. As a consumer and citizen, you should not feel better about costs for folk's going up; but knowing it was/is going to happen and you take advantage of it should make you feel good to know you made a good financial decision.
Two separate emotions.
@Raiders22
Look the way I see it there’s no winning on oil, As far as Biden’s dealings with OPEC were in response to very high oil prices in order to relieve the price at the pump for most people. And when you look at it, oil prices and inflation is a problem world-wide. Biden can’t be at fault for that, because I’ve been assured by Canadian relative that high oil prices and inflation up there is all Justin Trudeau’s fault! To me high inflation is totally a consequence of the pandemic and the associated economic disruptions. That’s not something Biden did, or can really do a whole lot to mitigate when it comes right down to it.
@joe pockets
The issue the folks have with it is how speculative this commodity is. By far the most fickle one. When they imply, let alone actually implement, policies or sentiment about regulations, banning certain areas and the good areas, etc. These types of things affect that speculation a lot. Then you couple with that OPEC having slowdown, etc. Yes, it is a world-wide issue in that sense. But if you can do better to not rely on their fickleness, then why do the opposite. Sentiment matters almost a much as actions sometimes.
As I mentioned tangentially up above, that is the frustration seen with depleting the reserves. Now you place yourself in a more vulnerable position than you need to be.
This is the sort of thing that is very evident if you plot GDP and Oil on a graph. You will see that there is a very, very linear correlation. When you start affecting oil prices and you already have economic concerns, these concerns only get amplified by bad policy; that is true Left or Right.
@Raiders22
problem is the GOP side is allegedly against subsidies, especially social or environmental subsidies...you do realize that allowing a destructive process like fracking to increase our domestic supply IS a subsidy to frackers and OG companies, at a cost to the environment right? Allowing fracking to even exist is a direct harmful tax on the environment and the water table. There have been numerous examples of the destructive consequences of fracking from damaging the water table to large increase in earthquakes to chemical spills and issues. The subsidy for ANY fracking comes directly from the environment.
On the India topic, Ive mentioned that I have multiple friends in the tech industry who work for some of the firms I keep mentioning and what I am saying is the truth...corps get access to Indian tech workers and underpay them for a period of time while their visa is in process and I had one friend who was in the difficult visa queue and it took him over ten years to get his visa approved and most of those years he earned under market wages and for several his wife could not work.
I am in favor of the US putting an end to the visa scam, the whole pretense is a fraud that corps and tech hiring firms like Infosys rake in profits off the US worker and underpaid Indian workers.
@wallstreetcappers
Correct. There are so many things that are considered subsidies where this is involved.
I get that the fracking is a pet peeve of yours and I understand all of your misgivings on that. But isolate that out and you still have the other issues with oil.
I get your issue with India and the visa thing, I do. That is an entirely different discussion.
There are way more than just India involved with the currency concerns. I mention India only because of the connection with this conversation about oil. I just happened to see the purchase this week.
Would you want to hazard a gas price with the subsidies subtracted? I think you would be amazed at it.
Maybe one or two at a time could be addressed; but never can it be addressed wholesale.
@Raiders22
problem is the GOP side is allegedly against subsidies, especially social or environmental subsidies
I am not so sure that I agree with this out-of-hand. Some of the radical climate-change subsidies, sure, I can see that.
A lot of others, whether pecuniary in nature, or not, the Republicans put in place -- or at least, allowed. So, for sure, tacit agreeance.
Oil/gas/energy is just too dynamic to be completely political.
@Raiders22
On the currency subject, I think India just flips off the rest of the world because they feel above holding to accords or agreements. Modi would side with N Korea if he thought he would save a few bucks on oil and that is what he did with Russia. Russia wants to keep its currency strong so any deals for Russian oil are in Rubles so to me that is the reason why India made that deal. I dont trust India for anything, they have little allegiance to any country until it comes to them being attacked by Pakistan or some other angry neighbor, then they are the bestest NATO ally the world has ever seen.
I dont think OPEC cares if Russia makes side deal with India, if it were a hot topic the cartel would have never allowed it to happen from the start.
Forgot to add, I dont mind O&G exploration efforts, in the past that seemed to be deep offshore drilling projects in different oceans and water areas, that seems less intrusive to the environment barring one of the rigs breaking and having oil spill into the water. I think the exploration companies think there is lower cost to fracking versus the deep water drilling and Ive seen fewer projects than I recall seeing in the past.
In reality there are no clean and easy extraction options, all are rough on the environment and pretty much every aspect of exploration, delivery, refinery, consumption is bad on the environment.
Sure. But when the environmentalists get involved, say in ANWR, it is not as disastrous as they claim. That part is political. They know what they are doing when they allow leases only in areas that are not as viable. It sounds like they are saying they are allowing more leases but really are not, etc. They know the oil companies do not see it as profitable and will be less likely to drill, etc. That is a political ploy.
No one wants a bad environment. The oil companies have gotten way better about how clean they are and know they have to be more environmentally-sensitive.
That group just has an agenda and refuse to accept how needed the oil is to the country and the well-being the independence provides; they have an agenda that overrides that. So, no matter how 'clean' the process gets they will not accept it in any tradeoff.
So, all of that has to be balanced.
There can be a very good case made that ANWR is less intrusive or risky than one that goes bad in an ocean area. But part of that point is valid. You are right that it has to be looked at in the risk assessment when 'allowing' etc. But for sure the USA is the main country that has the 'loud' group deterring it.
@Raiders22
The remote locations have more consideration than just the hole in the ground and the impact at the direct drill site, the prep to make the drill site ready, the transport of materials to the site, the transport of people to the site, the transport of product away from the site, the pollution of the process, the pollution of the workers and the impact of the process from day one to day zero when finished is irreversible and substantial. I think that certain areas should be off limits because humans share the world with all creatures it is not just consume, discover, process, consume...we have to think more than just low cost and high consumption as to decisions and long term impacts.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
