I wasn't suggesting that Mr. Cotten "write his Congressman." I was suggesting he MEET with Mr. Barton in person, if possible. A person of Mr. Cotten's expert qualifications, from Barton's home state, and with a well reasoned proposal within the jurisdiction of Barton's subcommittee, would merit more attention from Barton than a random crank.
I like it (your tariff on OPEC oil imported domestically).
Other North American and South American Countries should do the same thing and forge a Trade Agreement among themselves. Call it the OPAC agreement (Oil Producing American Countries).
JMHOs.
OPEC needs a "dose of their own medicine". Tampering with other countries economies and industry with drastic price changes with oil has to be stopped. The US is going to have to start looking out more for the people of the United States FIRST! If the US did not protect the Saudi's they would be in deep trouble.
Let's Make America Great Again!
Right.
Sounds (reads) like we're on the same bus.
Let's stop protecting S. A.
I think that too would be some good medicine.
NWO ?
KIA.
Just my humble opinions.
Sounds (reads) like we're on the same bus.
Let's stop protecting S. A.
I think that too would be some good medicine.
NWO ?
KIA.
Just my humble opinions.
Permalink Reply by Joseph E. Powell yesterdayDelete
Hard to believe our government moves to increase taxes on our natural resource developers and owners while subsidizing M.E. / S.A. / O.P.E.C interests during our 'war efforts'.
It defies all intuition / logic.
To me it represents more of our 'leadership's absolutely backwards / counter-intuitive actions / tactics.
To penalize us and subsidize the remainder of the world.
Just exactly opposite of common sense.
JMHOs
How about an Americas Trade Embargo against OPEC production to go along with the Tariff ?
Let him have both barrels and see what happens next.
Whatever happens we'll prevail.
JMHOs
How about stop sending money to countries that are not on our side all around the world?
In my opinion we need to greatly reduce the numbers of immigrants coming into the US from the middle east, Asia and especially Africa! Use the money on our own people first along with our country.
No matter what happens there will never be a lasting peace in the Mid-East! At least until the return of Jesus Christ!
Russia wants Syria! Let them have it and take it and it's people and "stick it".
Stop sending money and aid to non-allied Countries all around the world - we certainly agree.
Regarding reducing the number of immigrants coming into the US : Reduce their numbers from anywhere and everywhere around the world - not just the M.E., Asia and Africa. And allowing only a yearly quota of immigrants seeking and successfully obtaining Citizenship (over some reasonable period of time) would put us in agreement on that one.
Peace in the M.E. ? ? A fool's errand. I don't think even J.C. has a chance at success there. Never going to happen in a million years no matter what - as there is a never ending cycle of entrapment / poverty / oppression / greedy control / holier than thou-ism ruling that roost - a totally different culture that even the oppressed want to maintain.
On letting Russia have Syria and it's population : You betcha - and also any other such place. But prepare for a confrontation with them (Russia) at some future point in time. It will happen someday as it will also happen with China as I think they both want the whole enchalata and won't give up going after it - EVER.
All JMHOs
Joseph, You got this right and we both could probably add some more things. We are not the only ones who feel this way, but about 90% are afraid to put in print what they think.
Until the U.S. stops letting other countries take our money and aid, then side with our enemies this will continue and increase!
But, this tariff will just be paid by the American people. Essentially it's just another tax on Americans. Yeah, it will come through the Saudi wallets, but the money into the Saudi wallets will be from American consumers. Tariffs just tax the consumers. If my understanding of a tariff lacks some fundamental point, the please correct me.
I think a better way to do this would be to limit imports of oil. You'd have to limit imports from all sources or the Saudis would just sell it to someone else and that someone else would sell it to us.
Dear Kyle,
I understand your concerns but there is a fly in limiting imports. Refinery capacity is skewed to refine heavier oils, rather than the lighter oils and condensate produced domestically. Heavier oils would be the oils for example that we import from Venezuela and Canada.
We have no excess refining capacity for US crude, hence the storage situation which includes unfracked wells, storage batteries at capacity and oil being stored in pipelines.
This is a situation on how do you want your dollar spent? Having taxes raised to overcome the shortfall because of tax dollars not collected because of the crash in oil, are having drivers pay about a dollar more per gallon?
Best wishes,
Buddy CottenReading ya' loud and clear Buddy.
Need to build more of the right kind of refineries here at home the way I see it.
That's the only way to see it.
What good is having all this oil if it can't be refined and used ?
Here's where the Tariff $ + Federal Subsidy could help get the right kind of refineries built here at home.
That's called 'Domestic Commitment'.
Let's get it done.
Kyle,
Read / hear about your concern alot.
Here's some 'Tariff Logic' in a 'Trade War' that I think works to just the opposite result / a 'win-win' for our Industry / Federal Government / Consumer Population :
1st OPEC / any Non-Allied Trading Partner (S.A., Iran, etc.) would want to maintain a 'Market Share' with ourselves / our Allied Trading Partners. If they didn't want that we don't bend over backwards trying to provide it and take a beating in the process.
2nd we and our Allied Trading Partners need to pay attention to the margins and maintain profitability among ourselves - this means 'Maintenance'.
Say it works out that the Non-Allied do want to do business and we and our Allied Trading Partners are willing to accept the 'Maintenance' aspects - here's how it could work out :
OPEC / S.A. / Iran etc., et al all sell to our side at $30.00 / per barrel (to our Gas / Oil Industry and must by Tariff pay the Feds another $20.00 per barrel.
The Feds pay the 'Allied Industrial Buyers' involved in such a transaction $10.00 per Barrel and keep the other $10.00 per Barrel for themselves / maintenance processes. That means that our 'Allied Industrial Buyers' only paid $20.00 per Barrel. Our 'Allied Industrial Buyers' then turn around and sell the production purchased from the Non-Allied Trading Partner for $25.00 per Barrel to their Domestic Customers which means they make $35.00 per barrel ($10.00 per Barrel from the Feds + $25.00 per Barrel from their Domestic Customers).
If the Non-Allied Trading Partners don't like it they can make Pepsi-Cola out of their oil and drink it all up for all I would care.
It takes the Non-Allied wanting a 'Market Share' of our Allied Market and ourselves and Allies a degree of Maintenance (watching and maintaining a margin of profitability for themselves).
Maybe the whole thing works out the same as an Embargo - but, I would do that too - the only way we trade would be in such a manner.
Building Domestic Refineries means Domestic Jobs.
The week before Obama proposed the $10 bbl tax, I had a read a post on Oilpro.com along this same lines suggesting a tax on imported oil. As usual we get into our red team/blue team game weekend mentality and while both sides are proposing the same thing, applied in slightly different ways, and for different purposes, we can't actually get anything done that is helpful. It is true, the Saudis are not being helpful, but it is also true that the operators that are publicly traded on Wall Street have also been a little irresponsible, all just drilling like crazy to get as much acreage HBP'd as possible. The oversupply in the market is coming from our domestic increase in production over the last four years. This same story has happened since the dawn of the oil age, a good oil/gas play is found and the gold rush starts, there is overproduction, then price collapse. When that happened in Texas after Spindletop, the Railroad Commission and the OCC stepped in and created allowables to control production. Half the reason was to prevent reservoir depletion, but half was to stabilize price. And it created a stable price environment for many decades, until our domestic production fell too far below consumption, and we could no longer stabilize our own prices. After some political disruption and the seventies energy crisis, OPEC stepped in and the Saudis became the price stabilizer. November 2014, they abandoned that role.
We all know that oil and gas are a limited resource. There will be an end to the age of oil and gas. We have moved that date much farther down the road because of the new technologies, but it is inevitable. If we are concerned about our future generations, and not just our royalty check next month, we should embrace the ida of measured development. One thing I disagree with in this post is we do not need to try and start another gold rush. We need to develop and maintain a healthy pace of development. I think we should apply an import tax, but also create some kind of domestic OPEC of oil producing states that will ration drilling permits and manage allowables to maintain a balance in the markets. The operators would howl and cry, but the operators only care about Wall Street, not future energy security or the overall economy's health. We also need to do a far better job educating the anti-fracking crowd that natural gas is the fastest way to reduce our carbon footprint. In Boulder, Colorado, where they pass the anti-fracking law, if you buy a Leaf electric vehicle, 52% of your energy comes from burning coal, and 26% from natural gas, and the electricity produced from natural gas generates half the CO2 as the coal. But again, the Red Team and the Blue Team have a hard time talking to each other.
Think about what the Wind Power group and the "corn oil" group are having to contend with. They could not compete on equal footing with the oil and gas industry without huge government subsidies. As the price of oil gets lower their operating cost increase requiring more government subsidies. Taking corn to make a high priced fuel that is very hard on motors. It's taking food out of people Mouths all over the world along with livestock!
How are you going to fly planes? With corn, the sun, electricity and so forth? Back in the mid 70's a friend of mine asked me if I "believed in Atomic Energy Plants" I said yes, and he said would like one Atomic Plant near where you live? I said No, and he said then you don't believe in it!"
So, an oil company believes that adding a $65 tariff to oil will help save their company. Shocking. How quickly everyone forgets when americans were complaining that the prices were artificially high. Any oil industry executive that hasn't learned to prosper through the cycles of energy should hide their collective heads in shame for helping to create the issues listed in the OP's list along with the governmental officials who have once again believed that the boom will never die so tax it at every level and spend even more. The reason for the potential destruction of the oil business as we know it is the tremendous debt these companies took on while trying to capitalize on the tremendous revenue and profit that stuff that comes out of the ground can generate. Look at the fools that over paid for those Samson properties. Anyone else think that Chesapeake brought it on themselves? I believe the industry better be very careful what they ask for when they are demanding that the government get more involved in their business. You guys really need to look to yourselves for the reasons and the resolutions. It is great that the high prices allow poor management to go unpunished, but that same incompetence is the price you and we are paying now. The american public isn't going to get behind a bunch of rich people and grieve about their losses. They are going to enjoy the benefits and vote against anyone talking about artificially affecting energy costs with more taxes. Seriously, I wish you people could step back and look at what you are saying and how two faced that is when the people were being gouged at $100 a barrel.
I have minerals and have worked in and around the oil business for many years. I realize that I and many others will lose significantly in this price and glut environment, but to start pointing your index finger rather than the middle finger to the same government and public that you once ignored is beyond the pale. There are many profitable opportunities as these things are dropping and there will be even more opportunities as they recover. After seeing $5.00 gasoline, I never believed that I would hear oil companies whining because their life isn't fair.
Trade Agreements with our 'Vetted Allies', Tariffs / Federal Taxes levied on the OPEC / SA should not be implemented to hurt anyone but the opponents / competition / potential enemies / outright enemies in this 'Trade / outright War'.
Taxes on Domestic / Allied Production should be forbidden by Treaty / Trade Agreement.
Tariffs / Embargos / Taxes / Trade Agreements should be engineered to protect low prices within the sphere of ourselves and Allied Trading Partners.
It all has to be designed to work with us domestically and our 'Vetted and Allied Trading Partners'.
Such implementations should preclude harm to ourselves and Vetted and Allied Trading Partners - to build them otherwise would be foolish.
Also, I believe we (domestically here in the USA) are on the cusp of transition to more Natural Gas usage (instead of Oil / Gasoline). It also makes sense to me to assist such an expensive and fundamental transition (instead of building hurdles to stymie it).
Subsidize ourselves and not the OPEC / SA bunch.
Personally, I remain on Buddy Cotten's bus.
Just my humble opinions.
BTW, I think we should also end Foreign Tax Credits including deferral of Federal Tax Payments to the USA unless they are doing business with 'Vetted Allies' of ours under New Trade Agreements and not under Embargo.
Can't encourage them to do business with opponents / competition / potential enemies / outright enemies of ours can we ? That would be nonsense, wouldn't it ?
Have to re-write the rule book seems to me.
All only my humble opinions.
Dear Mr. Sherman,
Just to make sure that you are reading and comprehending correctly, nowhere is a tariff of $65 per bbl proposed.
Also, no oil company has purposed such a thing. Only me. As far as I know, no oil company has asked for any governmental assistance.
I think that it is a good idea, for reasons 1-9 in my rationale. You don't agree and that is just fine. High pricing is what allowed the drilling for domestic oil that today is still there, but not profitable to extract. The cost of capital is and was very low.
The reason that I placed this in the political group is so that respondents can put broad statements like "...you people could step back and look at what you are saying and how two faced..." without sanctions or reprisals.
We can also agree to disagree.
I have not pointed my finger, middle or otherwise at anybody in this post. I attempted to offer solutions to what is a very real problem.
How about this? No governmental assistance on ecofuels, wind and solar, etc? That allows the free market to decide on what has economic merit without the interference of government.
I will agree to disagree and thank you for your participation.
Just to rile some people even more, Go Trump in 2016. I am abstaining from the primary procedure but will vote anti Hillary. That is the beauty of a political board.
Warmest regards,
Buddy Cotten