Post by: Balog on June 20, 2008, 06:33:00 PM
http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/06/18/offshore-drilling-bush-business-cx_bw_0618oil.html
Partial article, follow link for full.
Washington, D.C. -
Suppose for a moment that Congress listens to President Bush's remarks Wednesday and removes the decades-old ban on offshore drilling for oil and natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf. Who wins, aside from the oil industry?
Uncle Sam, of course.
Why? Because the U.S. government collects royalty payments and upfront cash from oil companies that lease federal lands for oil and gas exploration and production.
The U.S. Interior Department's royalty rate for deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico is 18.75%--up from 12.5% two years ago. This move helped the government take in $7 billion in offshore royalties, rents and bonuses from oil companies drilling in U.S. waters last year.
Post by: old school on June 20, 2008, 06:37:25 PM
Post by: De Selby on June 20, 2008, 09:31:59 PM
Is this a socialist country where you get to use other people's land for free if you're connected to the government?
Or is this a country where you have to pay a fair market value for what you get?
Post by: The Annoyed Man on June 20, 2008, 10:12:06 PM
Post by: agricola on June 21, 2008, 12:00:49 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on June 21, 2008, 04:38:54 AM
As an aside, is it true (Fox seems to be reporting this) that offshore drilling is taking place but its just not US firms that are doing it?
Of course it's true. China has rigs 100 miles off our coast, and so does Mexico. China is putting more out there as we speak.
They've got their straws in our milkshake, and we're not allowed to even bring a straw near the glass.
Post by: agricola on June 21, 2008, 04:42:02 AM
As an aside, is it true (Fox seems to be reporting this) that offshore drilling is taking place but its just not US firms that are doing it?
Of course it's true. China has rigs 100 miles off our coast, and so does Mexico. China is putting more out there as we speak.
They've got their straws in our milkshake, and we're not allowed to even bring a straw near the glass.
Well then, one would expect the Repubs to point out the imbecility of this.
Post by: MicroBalrog on June 21, 2008, 05:02:36 AM
Quote
Wait a second here: The federal government owns or controls these territories, and it shouldn't get a substantial cut of the money why?
So why should FedGov own the territory in the first place?
Be Wise - Privatize!
Post by: De Selby on June 21, 2008, 11:00:56 AM
Quote
Wait a second here: The federal government owns or controls these territories, and it shouldn't get a substantial cut of the money why?
So why should FedGov own the territory in the first place?
Be Wise - Privatize!
Because the public in general sacrifices its blood and treasure to extend federal sovereignty-that isn't privately paid for, and the land certainly was not captured by private interests.
Post by: MicroBalrog on June 21, 2008, 11:33:57 AM
Quote
Wait a second here: The federal government owns or controls these territories, and it shouldn't get a substantial cut of the money why?
So why should FedGov own the territory in the first place?
Be Wise - Privatize!
Because the public in general sacrifices its blood and treasure to extend federal sovereignty-that isn't privately paid for, and the land certainly was not captured by private interests.
Ever hear of how the West was tamed?
Post by: De Selby on June 21, 2008, 11:46:22 AM
Quote
Wait a second here: The federal government owns or controls these territories, and it shouldn't get a substantial cut of the money why?
So why should FedGov own the territory in the first place?
Be Wise - Privatize!
Because the public in general sacrifices its blood and treasure to extend federal sovereignty-that isn't privately paid for, and the land certainly was not captured by private interests.
Ever hear of how the West was tamed?
Yes-it was tamed by people who were able to migrate here because of the costly and hugely unpopular war with Mexico. The promise of land grants from the federal government, along with the massive public subsidies for developing land and sea lanes to the west, helped to encourage them to move.
Huge pieces of the west, btw, are still state owned.
Post by: seeker_two on June 21, 2008, 01:38:20 PM
....was there a Kennedy involved?....
Post by: RocketMan on June 21, 2008, 06:20:35 PM
Oh, that's right, the Fed doesn't pay attention to the Constitution. Never mind...
Post by: stevelyn on June 21, 2008, 06:23:32 PM
Wait a second here: The federal government owns or controls these territories, and it shouldn't get a substantial cut of the money why?
Is this a socialist country where you get to use other people's land for free if you're connected to the government?
Or is this a country where you have to pay a fair market value for what you get?
Is this a socialist country where you get to use other people's land for free if you're connected to the government?
Or is this a country where you have to pay a fair market value for what you get?
For us it's the statehood compact that clearly states a 90/10 split with the feds.
Post by: taurusowner on June 21, 2008, 09:14:27 PM
Quote
Increasing the supply (as if ANWR would do that) won't do squat.
Increasing supply won't do anything to price?? Do you know anything at all?
Post by: Finch on June 21, 2008, 10:19:43 PM
Quote
Increasing the supply (as if ANWR would do that) won't do squat.
Increasing supply won't do anything to price?? Do you know anything at all?I think he is saying that it is not necessarily the price of oil that is sky rocketing, it is that our dollar is tanking.
Post by: Manedwolf on June 21, 2008, 10:24:49 PM
Quote
Increasing the supply (as if ANWR would do that) won't do squat.
Increasing supply won't do anything to price?? Do you know anything at all?I think he is saying that it is not necessarily the price of oil that is sky rocketing, it is that our dollar is tanking.
Well, there's a slight problem with that in that it's not true. It went down a bit since Feb, but is wobbling in the same position, and is expected to rise as soon as the Fed stops cutting rates and raises them again.
Other than that!
Post by: wmenorr67 on June 21, 2008, 10:53:52 PM
Post by: MicroBalrog on June 21, 2008, 10:58:58 PM
Yes-it was tamed by people who were able to migrate here because of the costly and hugely unpopular war with Mexico. The promise of land grants from the federal government, along with the massive public subsidies for developing land and sea lanes to the west, helped to encourage them to move.
Huge pieces of the west, btw, are still state owned.
Yes. THe key part is "huge land grants". You can develop pretty much the most unforgiving bits of soil by giving it for symbolic prices to whoever will develop it.
And yes, huge parts of the west are still state-owned, but IIRC there have been legal challenges to it.
Post by: MechAg94 on June 23, 2008, 06:02:01 AM
Plus it doesn't matter how much oil there is. If you cannot refine it the price of gas and diesel will stay inflated.
Yes, but you can't have one without the other. Get supplies of crude moving. If refining is restricted, that can be fixed also. I agree that the value of the dollar has an effect on our gas prices, but it isn't the only factor.
Post by: MechAg94 on June 23, 2008, 06:03:35 AM
Post by: Waitone on June 24, 2008, 05:19:12 AM