For the record, I am a very strong Trump supporter. I agree that Trump uses all resources at his disposal to reach his desired result on trade, commerce, regulation, etc. However the point of the article, with which I agree, is that higher energy prices are a net positive to the US economy, given that we are now a net exporter of crude oil and refined products.
Trump is viewing the oil market through the lens of 1973, and not recognizing current reality that a strong domestic energy industry is vital to the US economy at large. When people complain that gas costs $3.00 per gallon, I want to ask whether the extra 0.25 they might save on gas is worth hundreds of thousands of high paying oil and gas jobs that will go away if prices remain at this level.
The industry is still growing at the moment because capital was allocated 6 to 12 months ago based on $60 to $70 per barrel prices. Once this fiscal cycle plays out, look for dramatically reduced capital budgets, much smaller production growth and a huge number of layoffs. Many, many people reliant on the industry and their families will be hurt by this disruption. We’ve seen this movie before and it is very ugly and totally unnecessary.
I understand your point. It is valid. Why not sell USA oil on a two-tiered system? One price for domestic sale and the other price for export? I think just about every other oil producing country in the world does this.
You are taking surface information and ignoring layered information. That’s where POTUS has understanding that you lack.
Things and facts in layered information are used in a deal to offset matters on the surface.