Originally posted by FMFThe Assistant Secretary of State tells Congress what America's intentions are? You think this Assistant is our dictator or something?
You didn't point out anything. Those sources speak for themselves.
On July 31st, two days before the Iraqi invasion, John Kelly, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, testified to Congress that the "United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."
Originally posted by FMFA little gauche and ungainly of you, AThousandYoung, but a climbdown nonetheless.
On July 31st, two days before the Iraqi invasion, John Kelly, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, testified to Congress that the "United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."
Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The Assistant Secretary of State t ...[text shortened]... ongress what America's intentions are? You think this Assistant is our dictator or something?
Originally posted by slimjimYour truck looks pretty awesome btw!
What about me in my big truck delivering goods everywhere in the US. Last month I spent $50,000.00 on diesel for my trucks. I have to pass that along to the consumers which I am also a consumer. Without a good business plan it's hard survive out here.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNot entirely true.
Your high gas prices are in part the fault of these SUV owners.
The greatest component of oil prices is government taxes.
The speculation of oil on futures markets is one of the biggest drivers of oil price in recent times.
China and India as major consumers of oil, whose sheer unquenching demand for the black gold has been and will continue to put upward pressure on the oil price.
If Americans consumed less would they pay less, or would big oil still find a way to pass on the world price by cutting back production of US controlled wells and thus getting top dollar for every drop pumped?
2 edits
Originally posted by kmax87It's not entirely true that part of the problem is wasteful SUVs?
Not entirely true.
The greatest component of oil prices is government taxes.
The speculation of oil on futures markets is one of the biggest drivers of oil price in recent times.
China and India as major consumers of oil, whose sheer unquenching demand for the black gold has been and will continue to put upward pressure on the oil price.
If Americ ...[text shortened]... utting back production of US controlled wells and thus getting top dollar for every drop pumped?
Is it partially true that this is part of the problem then? What does that mean?
You know the US uses more oil than India or China, right? If you want to talk in terms of "sheer unquenching demand" then the US is the first country on the list.
If Americans consumed less they'd pay less, yes. If demand is cut in half, doubling the price isn't going to maintain oil companies' profits.
4 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWe have historically high prices as we speak. If US domestic demand slackened off, then the simple thing that oil companies would do is to adjust production downwards to follow decreasing demand. As the total supply decreases the demand for it will ensure that they can maintain the trend of current prices. There is no law that compels OIL to pump at full capacity. They have been juggling supply to just meet demand for as long as I can remember. Its not just a cynical machination either. The cost of exploration is stupifyingly expensive. Any reduction in demand allows companies to run production at more comfortable levels, which from their perspective is a much better way to do things.
If Americans consumed less they'd pay less, yes. If demand is cut in half, doubling the price isn't going to maintain oil companies' profits.
A ten year snapshot shows ~ follow the link ~ [http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9017904&contentId=7033466]
From 1996 to 2006 in thousands of barrels of oil daily
America produced
8295 / 69931 = 11% 96
6871 / 81663 = 8% 06
America consumed
18309 / 71489 = 26% 96
20589 / 83719 = 25% 06
China produced
3170 / 69931 = 4.5% 96
3684 / 81663 = 4.5% 06
China consumed
3702 / 71489 = 5.2% 96
7445 / 83719 = 8.9% 06
So in the ten year period America dropped its daily output as a percentage of world output by 3% while in the same period consuming less as a percentage of total world output, even though it consumed more in terms of absolute consumption.
China in that same period maintained a steady daily production of 4.5% of the total output even though that world output actually increased in absolute terms, but it is in the statistic of its consumption that we see an increase of almost 4% (3.7% ) of total world consumption, that has had a big impact on the world's markets. These figures are the current ones available from BP and are accurate till 2006. Considering that markets and pundits were not making as big a noise about the China effect back in 2006 as they do now, I would like to see some more up to date figures to get a more contemporary picture, but based on these trends I would think that ChinIndia has grown some more again.
The comment of their unquenching demand stands up to scrutiny when you consider that overall world production is up and that they are grabbing a bigger share of it going forward. As their economy gets even stronger we will see even more of their demand influence the price we pay. India shows a similar trend btw such that China and India had a combined consumption of 7.6% of the worlds available oil in 1996 which has grown to 12% in 2006. while this is now half of America's consumption, back in 1996 their combined consumption was only 30% of America's daily consumption.
1 edit
Originally posted by kmax87We were amazed, on a trip to Connecticut, at the attitude of people to distance. they said, "we'll take you up the road to see the casino".
We have historically high prices as we speak. If US domestic demand slackened off, then the simple thing that oil companies would do is to adjust production downwards to follow decreasing demand. As the total supply decreases the demand for it will ensure that they can maintain the trend of current prices. There is no law that compels OIL to pump at full capa umption, back in 1996 their combined consumption was only 30% of America's daily consumption.
"Uh, ok then" I said, thinking it was just a couple of miles. Thirty minutes later we are still on the highway, it turned out that it was a 70 mile round trip ! The point is, they weren't even aware of the distance travelled. This was consequence of prices being too low.
One positive result of the high cost of gas is that many over-large people will have less money to spend on food 😉
Originally posted by eamon oOr conversely there are some people that think that the only way to curb consumption is to allow the price to skyrocket. Given the demand that already exists, the sure fire way of ensuring price increases is to cut back on production. War anyone?
We were amazed, on a trip to Connecticut, at the attitude of people to distance. they said, "we'll take you up the road to see the casino".
"Uh, ok then" I said, thinking it was just a couple of miles. Thirty minutes later we are still on the highway, it turned out that it was a 70 mile round trip ! The point is, they weren't even aware of the distance t ...[text shortened]... e high cost of gas is that many over-large people will have less money to spend on food 😉