Fear Mongering

[riser]

This is a stretch. Our weather predictions already suck.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/03/obama_warns_gop_budget_would_make_weather_prediction_less_accurate.html

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/obamas-nsa-close-to-knowing-all-about-us/

Ah yes.. An associate of mine a decade ago was one of the original authors of Carniv0re. It was claimed to have been 'turned off' back then, and it was, but an updated version came about with a new name. Therefore, it was not the same.

A simple flip of the switch would create too much data to parse through. But specific targets would be easy to search.

 

[riser]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/mar/30/nv-energy-windmill-program-generates-rebates-littl/

At the very bottom it states that the wind reading model is very inaccurate. We can't even predict wind speeds in most areas, yet that is a major factor that contributes to the concept of man-made climate change? C'mon.

 

[wanamingo]

I agree with the issues of privacy the government should stay out of personal business. Obama definitely dropped the ball on that issue. Maybe he will address it more in round 2.

As for the link about wind farming, it was a good read. Wind turbines of any size are expensive and I know that you have to pay a ridiculous amount of money just to apply and get setup. I wish this were a hell of a lot cheaper, or at least simpler to get the proper documents.

That last article is a stretch ...... Since there wasn't a lot of info.

 

[riser]

It was a local news article. I'm sure they had a series on it that was more for a local group than a MSM in depth article.

The sheer amount of copper required in a turbine makes it very expensive. Then having the wind requirement.

I believe the government wants more insight into personal business so they can better direct policies and push out their form of control. They're mandating all new vehicles come with backup cameras by 2015 or something? Really? Stuff like that is completely unnecessary and doesn't benefit the consumer.

I wish there was more focus on the true requirements of government, not of individuals grasp for more power.

 

[wanamingo]

The same thing thats happening at schools, churches, construction sites. People will try to steal the copper damaging the turbines or electrocuting themselves.

 

[riser]

It has to produce electricity first.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I notice its Nevada, and see more tinkering thru governmental approach, costing the taxpayers money, all for the lil guy.
Please retire Harry

 

[dogman_1234]

Go to the West coast, specifically the Pacific Northwest. I heard they have tons of that crap all over the place, oh, and Portland is a big solar addict as well.

 

[l0ckd0wn]

We can't even predict wind speeds in most areas, yet that is a major factor that contributes to the concept of man-made climate change? C'mon.

I love how you cherry pick like you have a clue.

With schools, churches, and construction sites already being robbed of their copper, what do you think is going to happen once wind farms containing tons of copper start springing up all over the place?

Zombie Apocalypse? Wrong fictitious conspiracy theory?

Go to the West coast, specifically the Pacific Northwest. I heard they have tons of that crap all over the place, oh, and Portland is a big solar addict as well.

And the problem with that is? [strike] I suppose you are going to put down New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona for their solar farms too? Not sure on what grounds, [/strike]but it must be bad, IT DOESN'T USE OIL! (Oh, sorry Dogman, realized you weren't holding a pitchfork and torch ready to burn down our windfarms for copper, got you confused with them rebels)



Down here in SoCal on the way to Indio there is a huge valley that is uber windy, the Coachella valley; tons of wind turbines, contributing to San Onofre nuclear power. One of the windiest places on earth, but scientist can't prove there is wind, because they can't see it, skeptics say...

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I hate that wind farm coming in on the 10
It didnt used to look like that, but more power to em heheh

 

[dogman_1234]

And the problem with that is? [strike] I suppose you are going to put down New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona for their solar farms too? Not sure on what grounds, [/strike]but it must be bad, IT DOESN'T USE OIL! (Oh, sorry Dogman, realized you weren't holding a pitchfork and torch ready to burn down our windfarms for copper, got you confused with them rebels)

Thanks for jumping to conclusion. I am not a far-right winged individual. No one on the forum is far left or right. In fact, I see the balance of OMG, JDJ, riser, mingo and I as a balance in this part of the forum.

I mentioned the wind farms and solar projects in Portland, OR because I hear a lot about it. Oregon, Washington, and Idaho have been great states for leading innovation in 'alternative/green energy' aka non chemical generation if I may be politically incorrect.

I am liberal and conservative at heart. I am a moderate independent if you may! Go over the the pacific northwest and talk to the people over there. They will tell you the pros and cons of the system.

Pros: Cheap energy, clean, leaders of the future.
Cons: Higher taxes, expensive as hell, eyesore, easily breakable.

Don't jump to conclusion. I possibly should watch my semantics on this forum. To many people making ASS's out of U M E!

 

[l0ckd0wn]

Don't jump to conclusion. I possibly should watch my semantics on this forum. To many people making ASS's out of U M E!

I guess you missed my bad, brash humor there.

I totally disagree on your opinion of the forum members political slant and in fact so does political philosophy as well, but like has been established, everyone can have an opinion no matter the lack of facts involved.




If we want to talk about "what is" with the political beliefs of the forum, I'd like to hear/see the results of some of the members:
http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php


I scored nearly dead center, pushing slightly right, which is exactly what I thought I was.

There is also some conceived notions about the US political climate as if the current climate is normal, and not already skewed hugely to the right. The conversation has been dragged so far from center that the political "right" appears to be center while anything actually "centrist" is considered extreme left. It's the exact climate Fox and conservative news outlets (we'll sum this up as the MSM like most of our conservadrones do) want; the apperance that anything rational is actually far left while anything far right appears to be normal. For instance, ID: Intelligent Design. Material that should be taught in schools, or more b^!!$#!t from a group of people that is afraid of science?

Writing is on the wall... In Tennesse, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Utah, Kansas, Texas...

 

[l0ckd0wn]

hey l0ckd

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=copper+thieves

Hey, OMG... I never argued this point, great tunnel vision!

In fact, it isn't surprising as we strip the crust of our planet of it's natural resources that they are only going to go up in cost! Wait... something about supply and demand, can't place it... Eco... Ecology? No that's to green... Econo... Econolodge? No that's not it... ECONOMICS! YES! Truth through education.

But I don't think oil falls under "natural resource" though because the President has EXCLUSIVE control over oil prices and only wants to fleece the American people, put them out of a job and give money to our innocent oil companies forcing the cost of living to go up for all Americans.

 

[l0ckd0wn]

Well the media sure gave Bush "the oil man" that ultimate power didn't they?

And that has to do with me how?

I never believed that Bush was a huge factor in oil prices; I did think his invasion of the 2nd largest oil producing country in the Middle East next to Saudi Arabia may have had something to do with it.

OPEC is a cartel that fixes prices. That's fixing the price on a publicly traded commodity; taking price control of the means of production. They create demand through deliberate scarcity. Speculators continue their dirty deeds and inflate fear; prices rise. We bring more oil to the table, they continue to cut production, oil prices maintain the same levels in price due to the inability for the US to offset global production in a way that would reduce import expense.

This is the simplest I can put this.

 

[l0ckd0wn]

So, supply + speculation + demand, has nothing to do with the price?

As far as Bush goes, hell John Kerry went on every network demanding that Bush personally talk to King Abdullah to drill baby drill to increase the supply.

Of course, you and I know this is absurd right? To increase supply? Or was it just great political theater?

OK, since you are actually coming at this relatively sanely, I'll retort:

You know all this, but you have to be told again otherwise you just ignore it:

Bush and Fam have huge ties to the oil industry. Bush Sr also had many strong ties with the Saudi Arabian leaders. The Carlyle Group also has huge investments over there which the Bush family BANKs off of, with both W. & Sr. being spokesmen for the company (Sr was selling arms contracts to his son during W's presidency; conflict of interest?). So the Bush family has some clout, and it's well known. Now that the facts are in the open, wtf does it matter?

Google Search for 'Carlyle Group saudi arabia' - First 4 press releases are acquisitions within Saudi Arabia.

If you control the means of production AND sale of a commoditity, you can charge whatever you like for it, that's what having a monopoly (OPEC) is all about! Collusion to dilute the free market - This is exactly why industries setup cartels.

As a comparison to another, stranglehold market; Cocaine. After the fall of Pablo Estebar their was a huge power vacuum amongst the cocaine producers in Colombia to take hold of the entire market. Rather than continue warring against one another, they found it more profitable to consolidate their effots and act as a single cartel, cashing in on being able to fix the price of their commodity without having to compete with one another. Now their only competitors are some small potatoes producers in a few other South American countries and Bolivia (being #2 in production AFAIK).

The same thing is beginning to happen in Mexico with the caretels as they are producing industrial quantities of high quality methamphetamine. They haven't consolidated power as there is still huge efforts to have singular control, but as the cartels are further splintered by law enforcement, there is a similar historical parallel that is happening in Mexico to the way the Cocaine industry consolidated in Columbia.

Read more: Meth in Mexico: A Turning Point in the Drug War? | Stratfor

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I guess you missed my bad, brash humor there.

I totally disagree on your opinion of the forum members political slant and in fact so does political philosophy as well, but like has been established, everyone can have an opinion no matter the lack of facts involved.




If we want to talk about "what is" with the political beliefs of the forum, I'd like to hear/see the results of some of the members:
http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php


I scored nearly dead center, pushing slightly right, which is exactly what I thought I was.

There is also some conceived notions about the US political climate as if the current climate is normal, and not already skewed hugely to the right. The conversation has been dragged so far from center that the political "right" appears to be center while anything actually "centrist" is considered extreme left. It's the exact climate Fox and conservative news outlets (we'll sum this up as the MSM like most of our conservadrones do) want; the apperance that anything rational is actually far left while anything far right appears to be normal. For instance, ID: Intelligent Design. Material that should be taught in schools, or more b^!!$#!t from a group of people that is afraid of science?

Writing is on the wall... In Tennesse, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Utah, Kansas, Texas...

I would simply point out, being either too far left or too far right puts those who faithfully indulge in such thought as far from the center as one can get, and thus also makes it harder to see

 

[l0ckd0wn]

I would simply point out, being either too far left or too far right puts those who faithfully indulge in such thought as far from the center as one can get, and thus also makes it harder to see

:lol:

Coming from you that's like skin care advice from a leper. Please, spare me.

Also, I'm assuming you are just brushing off that test because it's liberal or something. Maybe you should read something for once and actually acknowledge it's an academic website, setup by a professor. But I guess that would be giving in to the evils of Science.

Weak JDJ, weak.

 

[dogman_1234]

I sense negative energy on this thread. Meditate my fellow humans, meditate.

 

[riser]

If we don't agree with Lockdowned, we're all idiots. That' the jist of what he's implying.

 

[riser]

The Carlyle Group is mainly a group of investors. They're probably one of the most powerful investing groups in the world. They have a huge hand in healthcare and military defense systems.

The Carlyle Group is mainly a group of people who make their money by making their money work for them while improving the industries they invest in. My previous employer was owned by the Carlyle Group and we had some significant and impressive changes in the company through their indirect leadership. They are a very, very financially savvy group.

 

[wanamingo]

Ok, i checked out the Carlyle Group and I don't see any Bush on the team roster. What are their ties exactly? Are they hidden partners or something? I'm not being sarcastic. I am honestly asking how the Bush family is tied to The Carlyle Group.

Also, when you hold public office you must divest yourself of all private holdings. Dick Cheney divested himself of all Haliburton holding, at a net loss I might add, before even running for office. I know I know, this destroys the lib's myth that he was still secretly controlling Haliburton all throughout the war, but it is what it is.

The idea that oil production and the price per barrel + market speculation + demand does not affect the gas price is just ludicrous. And you call me a conspiracy nut?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group#Political_figures

Im definitely not the most versed on Oil politics but Ill give it a go.

1) How much did the large Oil Companies make in profit last year? Or whatever metric you want to use.

2) What determines the price of gasoline?

3) How can it be made cheaper?

Sources people.

 

[riser]

Wanamingo: If we look at profits, we deal strictly in the realm of percentage. Percent of profit to the amount of income. This is what confuses people because they want to view the dollar amount.
Most companies want to average 5-7% to maintain. 8-9% or more is growth. 15% is scary because the growth is too fast and will often result in a collapse. Sub 5% tends to mean the company is failing, or is very close to having financial issues.

Essentially, you want to make 5% profit on everything you sell. Here is the info:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/exxon-shell-profits-bp-oil-companies-high-expectation/story?id=13472740

2010 Revenue and Profits, Fortune's list of America's Largest Petroleum Refining Companies

2. Exxon Mobil, $284.7 billion; $19.3 billion
3. Chevron, $163.5 billion; $10.5 billion
6. ConocoPhillips, $139.5 billion; $4.9 billion
26. Valero Energy $70.0 billion; $-2.0 billion
41. Marathon Oil, $49.4 billion; $1.5 billion


2011 data is still be released, 2010 is the most current I readily found.

Exxon Mobile, the number 2 company operated at around 6.x% profit. That's where they need to be to maintain.

The dollar amount of very large, but realize they're also spending an astronomical amount of money as well. Dollar amounts can make a point of excessive money, but they 6% over cost. They are operating within a sound business model.

 

[riser]

Setting Gasoline prices:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/267072-busting-the-myth-about-oil-company-profits

The last 3-4 paragraphs give a synopsis. Gas prices go up, oil company profits go up. Fairly simple since they're going to maintain that 5% profit. Profits in dollar amounts go up, but the percentage remains the same.

The breakdown also shows where the costs come from. Mainly, over 60% of it is from just buying the oil. Produce more oil, price goes down. Suppy and demand on that.

 

[riser]

Thanks mingo. Advisory board from 1998-2003.

I have to ask. Did they do anything illegal though? If so, i'm all for prosecution. Many of the US attorneys under Bush were appointed by Clinton. Surely at least one of them would have brought charges?


1. How is that relevant to the price of gasoline? The average profit of Exxon is ~$0.02 on a gallon of gas or 2%. As a comparison the profit margin on bottled water is anywhere from 50% to 200%. Milk is 19% avg.

2. supply + demand + market speculation on future supply & demand

3. I actually think market speculation needs to go away. The price could drop $0.47 overnight if taxes were eliminated.

The link I cited mentioned Apple and their insane profits. No one yelled at them for the huge profit in percentage. It was actually a badge of success to them to have made a stupid amount of money. Yet oil companies, because everyone wants the stuff, get the blame. Not everyone wants an iPhone so the concern isn't there, at least that's my thought.

 

[l0ckd0wn]

Thanks mingo. Advisory board from 1998-2003.

I have to ask. Did they do anything illegal though? If so, i'm all for prosecution. Many of the US attorneys under Bush were appointed by Clinton. Surely at least one of them would have brought charges?


1. How is that relevant to the price of gasoline? The average profit of Exxon is ~$0.02 on a gallon of gas or 2%. As a comparison the profit margin on bottled water is anywhere from 50% to 200%. Milk is 19% avg.

2. supply + demand + market speculation on future supply & demand

3. I actually think market speculation needs to go away. The price could drop $0.47 overnight if taxes were eliminated.

Yes there were conflicts of interest within the contracts between the Carlyle Group and the Federal Government while Bush Jr. was in office; his father was one of the key figures earning the contracts for the Carlyle Group with Sr.'s international political contacts.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/iron-triangle-the-carlyle-group-2/ - Documentary on the subject.

http://www.carlylegroup.net/thebigguys.htm

http://baltimorechronicle.com/linkthing/starwars_cluster.html

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3309.htm

Between those 3 links and the documentary there are days of old news stories that document the relationships.

This is one of the major reasons I'm so vocally opposed to military contracting; because it's not fair and just a "who you know in the biz" business model, not merit based.

One of the biggest issues that was present was "Star Wars" link from the Baltimore Chronicle talking about the missile defense system that the Carlyle Group designed, which didn't work, were being pushed through on military contracts even though it provided no operational level that could provide missile defense. This happened while GWB was in office.

@Riser, again, speculators. Great Op/Ed btw, it absolutely, 100% supports what I said about speculation within the industry, because if you notice every step of the way, the author is referencing the global fluctuations in the market relative to the output; Supply & Demand. This is the EXACT reason creating a Cartel around a commodity works wonders for dispersing profit to a group of colluded companies at a fixed margin rather than companies trying to undercut one another to make 1 more dollar in this quarter, but may falter in future quarters. Again, if you control the means of production, and the pricing, you control the whole of the market.