Replies

Your post says you pay 1/8 or receive 1/8 and I asked if the gov't should do the same. Your post about the gov't implies that the gov't, taxpayer, shouldn't receive jack squat.

Is that correct? The gov't should be different from others, like yourself in the oil buss.?

Samartaleck, you're pretty good at cherry picking but not good at listening. Here's what he said:

I typically pay or receive a 1/8 royalty to the mineral owner.

Sometimes, I get or give a sweeter deal if the land is marginal or unproven. For example, I have some land in Pecos/Reeves county that has never been that great.

Deep, deep, gas and expensive wells.

Well I gave some leases I would not otherwise have given because I got guarantees that the leasee would go explore for gas and drill certain depths and formations.

Same thing here, except the government is the landowner. The land in question is cruddy land, expensive to develop, build pipelines, etc.

It's really basic economics --- no one would take the usual deal, so the government sweetened the pot.

I can't believe the number of people who fall for the liberal talking points, even here. <--- This would be you

"I can't believe the number of people who fall for the liberal talking points, even here. <--- This would be you"

Asking questions so as to better understand the issues is not the same as accepting either side. Not easy for some to comprehend without jumping to pre-mature conclusions as you have aptly illustrated.

Further, there are assertions, such as crappy land without any documentation or references to back up such assertions.

Just as I wouldn't take a liberal's view on faith, I don't take the word of someone on FR either.

Go back and look at the NEWS story. While Reuters may not have presented an unbiased report, they do quote from a report from Aministration officials. You saying the WH has a liberal view?