Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Help with an Oil Argument (Vanity)
my own twisted world | me

Posted on 10/12/2004 1:08:01 PM PDT by MikefromOhio

Ok here it goes....

My co-workers here seem to be pushing a bit to the left concerning the oil prices. They know I am a conservative and continually say the President should step in and that he is only getting rich (wow I have never heard that one before!!).

I came back with it is market driven and teh price of oil is driven by the buyers wanting to secure their supply and therefore bid a higher amount. They looked like deer in the headlights until one guy came back with well Exxon made X number of billions in profits last year. I came back with they also paid more to get the oil in the first place, but am I correct? He couldnt say if it was net profit or gross profit.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bigoil; driven; driving; markets; oil; stupidhippy; theman; tiredargument; usualsuspects
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
Please help...I need numbers to bash these people over the head with....
1 posted on 10/12/2004 1:08:03 PM PDT by MikefromOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Tell them all they have can ride their bikes to work!!!


2 posted on 10/12/2004 1:10:49 PM PDT by Prolifeconservative (If there is another terrorist attack, the womb is a very unsafe place to hide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

It is speculation buying driving up the cost. The increased needs of China are also a factor. IF the war was about oil prices would be down.


3 posted on 10/12/2004 1:11:03 PM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (Dan Rather, "I lied, but I lied about the truth".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

It's both, but irrelevant. No one controls OPEC. But of course that isn't what Woodward or John Kerry seem to think. If you recall Kerry jumped on the Woodward statement that Bush had a secret deal with the Saudis to keep oil prices low and whined that no one should be able to do that. Now Kerry has flip flopped and is demanding that Bush do exactly what he warned him not to do eight months ago.

Oh, well no one expects Kerry to be consistent, just negative.


4 posted on 10/12/2004 1:12:01 PM PDT by Eva (W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

The oil markets are commodity based and subject to many factors including supply and demand, futures contracts, global economics, politics, refining, etc...

Yes, they make huge profits but then again, they pay corporate taxes, they pay bonuses that get taxed, they provide employment which generates taxes, they provide dividends that create taxes, they add wealth to share holders.

And, the fact that we are short on supply is that the leftists won't allow the creation of new refineries or of new drilling in Alaska.


5 posted on 10/12/2004 1:12:19 PM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

politicians have been scrutinizing the oil industry since the 1973 oil shortage and have found nothing. had there been even a scintilla of evidence of wrongdoing, the fur would fly so high that every politician would be creaming in his jeans.

people are being manipulated into beleiving that big oil is BAD because it exists. had it not exist, these same foplks would get mighty cold walking to and from work, and on them cold winter nights.

ask them who global crossing's biggest politico favorites were, or enron. or who the big, bad insurance industry has in their hip pocklets. Or who is in bed with the trial lawyers. Or who was most tainted in big investing scandals?


6 posted on 10/12/2004 1:13:02 PM PDT by camle (keep your mind open and somebody will fill it with something for you))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
They know I am a conservative and continually say the President should step in

How? Like Bill Klinton did by releasing the Strategic Oil Reserves in a last ditch effort to get Al Bore elected?

Yeah, THAT worked wonders. The price of oil really fell after that.

7 posted on 10/12/2004 1:13:30 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Oil companies are making out like bandits. Thats why many brokerage firms are recommeding the sector!


The Canada sands at 13$ per barrel and Alaska need to be developed.

Oil companies have assumed the 15$ per barrel for new projects but this is obviously too low.


8 posted on 10/12/2004 1:13:33 PM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
Relevant paragraphs from an article printed in the (UK) Guardian 18 months ago. So, the $7 Billion isn't exactly news.

Crucial to the surge in profits was the rising global price of oil, which averaged record highs across the three-month period, buoyed by fears of a supply gap due to the war in Iraq.

The net income figure of $7.05bn included special items and compared with last year's figure of $2.09bn. The company has rewarded shareholders with an 8% rise in dividend.

Fadel Gheit, oil analyst with New York brokerage Fahnstock & Co, said groundbreaking profits had been driven by the Iraq war and strikes in Venezuela and Nigeria. "They [Exxon] had a very strong wind in their sail and they happened to have a very big sail. But if you look at the detail, the US refining and marketing figures fell from the fourth quarter and the US chemicals results were also very disappointing," he said.

9 posted on 10/12/2004 1:13:39 PM PDT by HiJinx (Bush/Cheney '04 - Fit For Command - Piper's Pick!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

The enviro-weenies have prevented the construction of new refineries in the USA for the last 20 years so no matter how much crude there is we can only refine a certain amount.

Being that Canada is our biggest importer, why didn’t we invade them instead of Iraq?


10 posted on 10/12/2004 1:13:52 PM PDT by tractorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Allright. Purchase a single-handed sledgehammer. WWeld the numbers "04" on the face of it, preferrably with 1/4" elevation. When approached by idiot co-workers, brain them with it. You will win every argument handily.


11 posted on 10/12/2004 1:14:07 PM PDT by Shryke (Never retreat. Never explain. Get it done and let them howl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Learn about oil market futures here:

http://www.futuresknowledge.com/Market_Analysis/energies_intro.asp


12 posted on 10/12/2004 1:14:44 PM PDT by annyokie (Here's your sign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

If this was all about oil we would have invaded Argentina.

It's closer, we know the language better, and the food is not as smelly.


13 posted on 10/12/2004 1:15:45 PM PDT by BlueNgold (Feed the Tree .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

World demand is up.

The greens in the US havn't allowed a refinery to be rebuilt in the US in 15 years.

Light Sweet Crude is the most easily converted to gasoline --- Nigeria is a big supplier of that, and there is unrest with the rebels there.

George Soros is speculating (just a guess) -- however, many publications have reported that $7-$10 per barrel is spec money --- and we know Soros likes to spec --- and get Bush out of office....


14 posted on 10/12/2004 1:15:58 PM PDT by Munch (BC in '04 (BUSH-CHENEY..... and BOSTON COLLEGE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

The oil industry consists of three major componenets:

Upstream, which is finding, drilling, and producing oil and natural gas.

Midstream, which is refining and transporting it, and

Downstream which is selling it to the retail consumer.


Exxon is making a killing because of their upstream business (they own a lot of oil reserves) not because of the downstream (the gas that they are selling at the pump).


15 posted on 10/12/2004 1:17:08 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

I don't know about numbers - but -

Politics - that should tell you why things are the way they are - each side uses it - and it is considered fair game by some -

Recent prices - last week they said the price rose because of concerns and then went on to list some - this week they say the price is rising because of the same reasons already given last week - and they make it sound as if more supply is in danger of being cut off than what is truth -

Until someone in the know separates truth from fiction - it's hard to tell what is really going on - in other words - politics is in play -

just a thought -


16 posted on 10/12/2004 1:18:48 PM PDT by Pastnowfuturealpha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Dont bother doing it. It's non-scientific. If you want to be heard, send a support letter to Sinclair. Here is the address: comments@sbgi.net
Many of us have done so.


17 posted on 10/12/2004 1:20:57 PM PDT by RedRepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fooman
Oil companies are making out like bandits. Thats why many brokerage firms are recommeding the sector!

Yes, because the oil that is being extracted out of the ground and sold right now was found or purchased five years ago when oil prices were low. The dilemma that the oil companies have now is what to do with all this excess cash. If they reinvest it now, they'd better be darned sure that oil prices are going to stay this high as it costs $12-14 bucks per barrel of proven reserves in the ground to buy North American reserves right now. It then costs a lot of money to produce, transport, etc. Traditionally, what happens when oil prices move up is everyone thinks that the rise is going to go on forever. The oil guys make a lot of money and reinvest it in projects with very high hurdle rates. Then it turns out that the industry still is in fact cyclical, and they get wiped out on the next downturn. Of course this time it is different, they all say :)

18 posted on 10/12/2004 1:21:32 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq; LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget

Read this excellent analysis, with graph and details.


Oil Prices (My First Vanity)

Posted on 10/10/2004 10:55:28 PM PDT by LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1241324/posts


19 posted on 10/12/2004 1:26:32 PM PDT by QQQQQ (Defeat Kerry. Support the SwiftVets. Keep the ads on the air. http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
Tell them, George Bush is still filling the Strategic Oil Reserves that Clinton tried to use to win the election for Al Gore, Bush will NOT play politics with our national security by using the strategic reserves, those are for if we encounter a huge disruption in supply...
20 posted on 10/12/2004 1:27:08 PM PDT by FesterUSMC ("If you don't have the hammer, you are going to be the anvil, and I would rather have the hammer!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson