Obama Admn keeping Oil drilling ban ($6 a gallon gas here we come) - Told You So

[GigantorX]

None of this really matters.

All the new production/extraction that will be coming on line now and in the future will only be replacing declining production. The whole Peak Oil thing is true in regards to production, we will do all we can to maintain a plateau of production and then it will be a long, slow decline from there.

Worth mentioning that the new wells/production will be more expense per barrel when compared to the easier wells from long ago.

Higher prices are here to stay and it will only get more expensive in the future.

Only a decline in use of oil/gasoline and diversification away from it will help.

This is real talk, folks.

It's all Obama's fault.

[kcballer]

None of this really matters.

All the new production/extraction that will be coming on line now and in the future will only be replacing declining production. The whole Peak Oil thing is true in regards to production, we will do all we can to maintain a plateau of production and then it will be a long, slow decline from there.

Worth mentioning that the new wells/production will be more expense per barrel when compared to the easier wells from long ago.

Higher prices are here to stay and it will only get more expensive in the future.

Only a decline in use of oil/gasoline and diversification away from it will help.

This is real talk, folks.

Agreed.  One need only look at the tar sands economic viability to see this in action.  The US has been using less oil for a few years now, the price is going up because China and India are picking up the slack.  China's consumer car market is growing at insane rates.  Oil is the fuel of the east, time to find something new for the west.

[Soul Crusher]

Energy industry accuses Obama of misleading public about extent of untapped oil resources
foxnews.com ^ | 3/21/12 | Jim Angle
Posted on March 21, 2012 10:30:59 PM EDT by ColdOne

In almost every energy speech, President Obama makes this statement: "We've got 2 percent of the world oil reserves. We use 20 percent."

But there's more to those numbers than meet the eye.

"It's accurate but extremely misleading," says Dan Kish of Institute for Energy Research, which is supported by the industry. "What he is talking about is oil we already have found."

Misleading, he argues, because the president is pointing to "proven" reserves, which is some 21 billion barrels, but the U.S. is sitting on vast reserves of untapped energy that are far greater.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[kcballer]

Energy industry accuses Obama of misleading public about extent of untapped oil resources
foxnews.com ^ | 3/21/12 | Jim Angle
Posted on March 21, 2012 10:30:59 PM EDT by ColdOne

In almost every energy speech, President Obama makes this statement: "We've got 2 percent of the world oil reserves. We use 20 percent."

But there's more to those numbers than meet the eye.

"It's accurate but extremely misleading," says Dan Kish of Institute for Energy Research, which is supported by the industry. "What he is talking about is oil we already have found."

Misleading, he argues, because the president is pointing to "proven" reserves, which is some 21 billion barrels, but the U.S. is sitting on vast reserves of untapped energy that are far greater.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

And cost far more to extract.  So until oil rises higher, those "untapped" reserves will stay "untapped" because they aren't economically viable.  If they were, they would have been tapped long ago.

[Soul Crusher]

Video: Obama says we’re producing too much oil and gas

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/22/video-obama-says-were-producing-too-much-oil-and-gas


posted at 2:55 pm on

March 22, 2012 by Tina Korbe




President Barack Obama is in my home state of Oklahoma today, touting his tired talking points about energy in little Cushing, “the town that fossil fuel built.” For the record, most Oklahomans aren’t happy he’s here. The state administration will give him no official welcome and protesters have already gathered near the location of the president’s speech, which — predictably — was closed to the public.

First, listen to this portion of the president’s energy address (h/t Greg Hengler).



As usual, he uses “we” to refer to both the government and private energy companies and takes credit for an expansion of drilling and production that he didn’t do anything to facilitate. Oil and gas production, he brags, is at an eight-year high. Actually, on federal land, fossil fuel production is at a nine-year low.
Then, he actually has the audacity to suggest that we’re producing too much oil and gas. The problem, he says, is that we don’t have enough pipeline to transport all of that. Gee, you’d think the president had done all he could to fast-track the Keystone pipeline. What’s that, you say? He’s doing what he can now to fast-track the portion of the pipeline that runs through Oklahoma and Texas? Don’t buy that he’s the reason TransCanada is moving ahead.

If the president had an ounce of humility at all, he might recognize that he has something to learn from Oklahomans, who know the energy industry the way Obama knows critical race theory. We kinda just imbibe it from the people around us who know it better than we do. Even those of us whose families weren’t actually in oil grew up knowing drilling engineers, geologists and landmen. We drive by pumpjacks on our way to visit grandparents, spy the lights of a far-off rig on midnight drives and occasionally will see a car fuel up at — get this! — a natural gas pump that the government didn’t pay us to install.

We might not articulate it to ourselves — I didn’t, really, until the BP oil spill, which I mourned along with the rest of the nation — but we respect the oil industry for its commitment to safely extricating oil and gas from formations far below the surface of the earth. The nation never pays attention to oil and gas companies until they do something wrong or an accident occurs, but, in Oklahoma, we can’t help but pay attention. We value what the industry has brought to our state — including, I’m not ashamed to admit, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

That’s why we wish that, just once, Obama would admit he doesn’t know everything about oil and gas companies and listen a little more to those who do:

Approval of the entire Keystone XL pipeline should happen now — not after the election. Yes, we are pleased TransCanada decided to build a critical section of the project from Cushing to the Gulf Coast. We note that this section doesn’t require State Department approval. However, America’s greatest benefit will come when we can transport oil from our best energy partner, Canada, and oil-rich North Dakota and Montana.

Private-sector innovation led to the combination of horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing resulting in the most significant resource revolution in the nation’s history. The safe and responsible application of these technologies has added new proven gas and oil reserves once inconceivable, and it has made U.S. energy independence a distinct possibility in just the next 10 years. We have now safely and successfully fracture treated 1.2 million wells in the U.S. since 1948 and more than 45,000 wells in 2011 — a safety record that would be the envy of any industry in the country. …

Our industry invests billions of dollars to ensure our operations are conducted in an environmentally responsible manner. However, with more than a dozen federal agencies in your administration proposing, planning or implementing new regulations — for little or no environmental benefit — there is considerable risk that increased costs and bureaucratic delays will cripple America’s energy production and halt the renaissance under way in our nation’s steel, plastics, chemical and agricultural industries.
Mr. President, your words suggest you want the economic benefits American natural gas and oil can deliver. We hope your actions follow suit — to date they have not.

Oil and gas CEOs have the greatest incentives of all to discover and promote some new and better energy source than fossil fuels — before some government-subsidized start-up does. Why does Obama act like they’re the enemy?

[Soul Crusher]

Obama's Keystone XL Visit A Potemkin Village Photo-Op
IBD Editorials ^ | March 21, 2012



Politics: The president stages a photo-op in Oklahoma to take credit for the portion of the Keystone XL pipeline that doesn't need his approval and for oil production on private and state lands beyond his jurisdiction.

If one of his aides some morning remarked on a particularly lovely sunrise, it wouldn't surprise us if President Obama responded with a "thank you," so gifted is he in taking credit for successes that he has nothing to do with and that occur despite, not because, of his policies.

So it will be Thursday, when Obama is scheduled to appear in Cushing, Okla., known as the pipeline capital of the world, to take credit for the southern half of the Keystone XL pipeline, a project announced weeks ago by TransCanada, the Keystone builder.

It's the section that doesn't need presidential or State Department approval since it does not cross an international boundary.

The part that does require State Department approval and a presidential blessing, and which holds as much as 24 billion barrels of oil, runs from the rich oil sands of Alberta, past the booming oil fields of the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota and down to Cushing. It is the portion Obama killed in January.

He killed it, Obama says, because those rascally Republicans tried to make a political issue out of gas prices and were trying to "rush" approval of a project without giving him time to study it further.

This, despite the fact that the project had already been studied for three years. Environmental concerns that had already been addressed by TransCanada's rerouting of the pipeline around sensitive aquifers needed to be addressed, Obama claims.


(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...

[Shockwave]

And cost far more to extract.  So until oil rises higher, those "untapped" reserves will stay "untapped" because they aren't economically viable.  If they were, they would have been tapped long ago.

See, this makes sense. I have no problem with this or what Gigantor says, because that makes sense.
When you were trying to say that Canada would never sell that oil and that we would get 1st dibs in the end, made no sense, as China is already recieving it and we aren't.

But this makes perfect sense.

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/22/us-usa-campaign-obama-pipeline-idUSBRE82L0UU20120322



LMFAO!!!!!  Who does obama think he is fooling! ! !    "Pipeline to nowhere" 

[Soul Crusher]

[ Invalid YouTube link ]


BUSTED! ! ! !

[Soul Crusher]

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

[Soul Crusher]

Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Gasoline
Townhall.com ^ | March 23, 2012 | Rich Galen
Posted on March 24, 2012 10:33:26 AM EDT by Kaslin

 Gasoline prices have climbed above $4 per gallon for regular at too many places across the nation. We know this because President Barack Obama has embarked on a four-day blitz to demonstrate his concern for high gasoline prices.

According to the U.S Energy Information Administration the average price for a gallon of regular gasoline in the country is $3.87 which is up about 30 cents from a year ago.

The highest prices are on the West Coast at $4.23. The lowest, next door in the Rocky Mountain region at $3.62.

Unemployment numbers are largely theoretical. At 8.3 percent (or 14.9 percent if you'd rather use the underemployed rate) we care more about whether it's going up or down. Either everyone in our family who wants job has one, or they don't.

Gasoline prices are different. Everyone with a car or truck has to fill his her or his tank on a regular basis. They know pretty much to the nearest dollar how much it should cost. When it costs more dollars, they notice. It is not theoretical, it is actual cash off the debit card.

Rising gasoline prices are a regressive tax on poorer Americans. They affect most those who can afford higher prices least.

My car has a 20 gallon tank. I generally fill it when I have about a quarter of a tank left. That means I need about 15 gallons about every two weeks. 30 gallons a month.

At $3.50 per gallon it will cost $105 per month for me to drive a normal pattern not counting trips to visit family and friends out of town.

At $4.00 per gallon I will spend $120 per month - 15 dollars more.

For me that is one fewer tall no-whip Starbucks mochas per week. Four morning mochas instead of five per week and I'm just about even.

But, for people on a fixed income or working at a close-to-minimum-wage job who are stretching the check to reach the end of the month is a struggle in the best of times. That $15 dollars is a big FIFTEEN dollars. It might well mean, not one fewer Starbucks a week, but one fewer meal for the family per week.

If I were advising the Republican National Committee - which I am not - I would be looking for a struggling family in every state, maybe in every Congressional district to tell the story of what $4 gasoline means to them. How they have to buy gas to get to work. They are trapped by higher prices.

I guarantee you if there were a Republican President the DNC would be doing just that.

This Administration has made some very bad bets that have made lowering prices more difficult.

Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu is a PhD and Nobel Prize winner in physics. He has been focused like a laser on ridding the nation, and the world, from the yoke of fossil fuels for cars and trucks by moving America's fleet to battery-powered vehicles.

There are 250 million cars and light trucks on America's highways. Even if we could get a million Americans to purchase a battery-powered car, that would amount to 1/250th of the fleet or four tenths of one percent.

Not exactly a game changer.

Not only that, but you have to have additional electricity production to have something in the socket when those million battery-operated cars are plugged in. In order to do that, without increasing the use of natural gas or coal, the Administration promoted more nuclear powered generation plants.

Nothing wrong with that on its face, but the Tsunami in Japan last year made it far more difficult to move out smartly on that front - at least for now.

Solar power and wind farms are pleasant thoughts as alternative sources, but (a) you have to build them somewhere where people aren't; (b) you have get the electricity from where they are to where it is needed; and, (c) the wind doesn't always blow, nor does the sun always shine.

So, battery-powered cars may have been a bad bet. After planning to sell 10,000 Chevy Volts in 2011, General Motors admitted it sold only about 6,200. As 2012 opened, Chevrolet had to bite bullet and shut down the Volt assembly line for at least five weeks until inventories are sold off.

I'm not cheering for the demise of battery-operate cars, but they are not a solution to $4 gasoline any time in the foreseeable future.

President Obama is correct when he says there is "no silver bullet" to quickly bring down gasoline prices. Fair or not, the guy behind that big desk in the Oval Office gets the blame.

This time, it's Barack Obama.

[Soul Crusher]

Obama Kills Atlantic Offshore Drilling For Five Years
Breitbart ^ | 3/30/12 | John Sexton




Yesterday the Obama administration announced a delaying tactic which will put off the possibility of new offshore oil drilling on the Atlantic coast for at least five years:

The announcement by the Interior Department sets into motion what will be at least a five year environmental survey to determine whether and where oil production might occur.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell notes that a planned lease sale, which the administration cancelled last year, will now be put off until at least 2018. As you might expect, Republicans were not impressed with the decision:

"The president's actions have closed an entire new area to drilling on his watch and cheats Virginians out of thousands of jobs," said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee. The announcement "continues the president's election-year political ploy of giving speeches and talking about drilling after having spent the first three years in office blocking, delaying and driving up the cost of producing energy in America," he said.

Finally, given that this is the Obama administration, you won't be surprised to learn that oil and gas exploration is not the only aim of the survey:


(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

China rejects Obama's Iran oil import sanctions (REJECTED!)
google ^ | 3/31/2012 | AP
Posted on March 31, 2012 6:57:23 AM EDT by tobyhill

China rejected President Barack Obama's decision to move forward with plans for sanctions on countries buying oil from Iran, saying Saturday that Washington had no right to unilaterally punish other nations.

South Korean officials said they will continue working with the U.S. to reduce oil imports from Iran, as other U.S. allies who depend on Iranian oil worked to find alternative energy supplies.

Obama announced Friday that he is plowing ahead with the potential sanctions, which could affect U.S. allies in Asia and Europe, as part of a deepening campaign to starve Iran of money for its disputed nuclear program. The U.S. and allies believe that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb; Iran denies that.

China is one of the biggest importers of Iranian oil, and its Foreign Ministry reiterated its opposition to the U.S. moves.

"The Chinese side always opposes one country unilaterally imposing sanctions against another according to domestic law. Furthermore it does not accept the unilateral imposition of those sanctions on a third country," the ministry said in a brief statement Saturday.

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

         
Email   Print   2Comments   Share
March 31, 2012
There Obama Goes Again
By Larry Kudlow
As Ronald Reagan famously said, “There you go again.”

Of course, Reagan was blaming Jimmy Carter for launching false attacks during a debate. And that line was so effective, it not only helped Reagan win the debate, but a presidential election that would change American history.


 
But “there you go again” can apply equally to President Obama. Once again this week, the president was out on the campaign trail bashing and oil and gas companies. And he continued to spread major falsehoods about this industry, which I guess is the polite way to put it.

Obama is obsessed with oil and gas. He is a prisoner of the left-wing environmental groups. And really, he’s extending his leftist class-warfare attack from rich people to successful oil and gas producers.

What seems to have Obama especially steamed is the fact that the conventional-energy companies are profitable. Especially the five largest. So he wants to tax them. He then wants to redistribute their income to his favorite green-energy firms. Sound familiar? I don’t know which is more important to the president -- the fact that he hates fossil fuel or the fact that he hates success. Or that he wants an energy-entitlement state.

But here’s what I do know, factually.

Oil companies have an effective corporate tax rate well above 40 percent. And they operate within one of the highest-taxed industries in America. According to the Tax Foundation, for more than 25 years, oil and gas companies have sent more tax dollars to Washington and state capitals than they earned in profits. That’s a fact.

Single-handedly, oil and gas companies finance over 10 percent of non-defense discretionary spending within the U.S. budget. According to The Wall Street Journal, ExxonMobil, the world’s largest energy firm, paid out $59 billion in total U.S. taxes over the five years prior to 2010 while earning only $40.5 billion in domestic profits.

And Obama wants to raise taxes on conventional-energy firms by somewhere between $40 billion and $80 billion? Whatever happened to the supply-side principle that if you tax something more, you get less of it?

But with gasoline prices headed towards $5 a gallon, and with oil prices over $100 a barrel, virtually the whole country outside of the White House wants more oil, more retail gas for the pump and more energy supplies everywhere in order to bring prices down. Raising taxes won’t do it.

Make no mistake about it: Fossil fuel is going to drive the American economy for decades to come. Green energy is not.

Obama’s other line of attack is that oil companies shouldn’t get any subsidies. They made too much money for that. Well, I’m against oil subsidies. There’s about $90 billion worth in the federal budget. Better to end them, slash corporate tax rates across the board and let the free market decide energy policy and production.

But on the subject of subsidies, so-called renewable-energy subsidies (think Solyndra) are 49-times greater than fossil-fuel subsidies, according to studies by the Congressional Research Service. And the Congressional Budget Office says renewable green energy received 68 percent of energy-related tax preferences in fiscal year 2011, while fossil fuels got only 15 percent. Additionally, oil, natural gas and coal received 64 cents per megawatt hour in subsidies, while wind power alone received $56.29 per megawatt hour. That’s nearly 100-times what fossil fuels got.

By the way, the so-called subsidies that Obama is talking about are really depreciation write-offs for investment. Oil companies get a 6 percent deduction from income. Most manufacturing industries get 9 percent. And every company in the economy is eligible for faster investment write-offs.

Frankly, the most pro-growth corporate-tax policy would be 100 percent cash-expensing for new investment, a slashed corporate tax rate, and no more subsidies, preferences and carve-outs. That would be an unbelievable job-creator.

But President Obama is too busy spewing falsehoods to support his ideological agenda than to take account of the facts. And while he’s at it, one of the greatest, pro-growth revolutions ever is taking place right under his nose. It’s the oil and gas shale miracle, which if left unfettered will turn America and Canada into an energy-independent New Middle East inside of 10 years.

In fact, the collapse of natural-gas prices brought on by this revolution could become one of the biggest tax cuts for the economy in history, making all our industries vastly more competitive, revolutionizing transportation and providing more consumer real income at home.

Obama should quit the demagoguery, stop bashing oil and gas, stop taxing success and let our ingenious, creative, free-enterprise private economy spur America to a new generation of prosperity. 

Lawrence Kudlow is host of CNBC's The Kudlow Report and co-host of The Call. He is also a former Reagan economic advisor and a syndicated columnist. Visit his blog, Kudlow's Money Politics.
Copyright 2012, Creators Syndicate Inc.

   

[Shockwave]

China rejects Obama's Iran oil import sanctions (REJECTED!)
google ^ | 3/31/2012 | AP
Posted on March 31, 2012 6:57:23 AM EDT by tobyhill

China rejected President Barack Obama's decision to move forward with plans for sanctions on countries buying oil from Iran, saying Saturday that Washington had no right to unilaterally punish other nations.

South Korean officials said they will continue working with the U.S. to reduce oil imports from Iran, as other U.S. allies who depend on Iranian oil worked to find alternative energy supplies.

Obama announced Friday that he is plowing ahead with the potential sanctions, which could affect U.S. allies in Asia and Europe, as part of a deepening campaign to starve Iran of money for its disputed nuclear program. The U.S. and allies believe that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb; Iran denies that.

China is one of the biggest importers of Iranian oil, and its Foreign Ministry reiterated its opposition to the U.S. moves.

"The Chinese side always opposes one country unilaterally imposing sanctions against another according to domestic law. Furthermore it does not accept the unilateral imposition of those sanctions on a third country," the ministry said in a brief statement Saturday.

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...

I kind of agree with China here... Who the fuck are we to go around to the rest of the world telling them they shouldnt engage in commerce with Iran because were upset with them?
Jesus Christ.
I think something needs to be done with Iran, but we cant expect the rest of the world to punish Iran with us. 

[Soul Crusher]

 .  Obama is trying to create a crisis to skyrocket energy prices and then blame someone else for it.   

[andreisdaman]

.  Obama is trying to create a crisis to skyrocket energy prices and then blame someone else for it.   

and just what would be his motive for that dickhead???

[Soul Crusher]

and just what would be his motive for that dickhead???

His stated goal is t skyrocket energy prices.   

[Shockwave]

His stated goal is t skyrocket energy prices.   

I cant believe people continue to ignore that video, where he actually says that word for word.
Not to mention the videos where he talks about oil going up to tansition to other forms of energy.
Instead of letting this be a natural transition, he seeks to force it, which is only going to bankrupt people and companies as they try and push for a technology before people are ready.

[Soul Crusher]

I cant believe people continue to ignore that video, where he actually says that word for word.
Not to mention the videos where he talks about oil going up to tansition to other forms of energy.
Instead of letting this be a natural transition, he seeks to force it, which is only going to bankrupt people and companies as they try and push for a technology before people are ready.

Thugs like andre have a CT that the tape was doctored and Solyndrabama could not possibly havecsaid those words.

[Shockwave]

Thugs like andre have a CT that the tape was doctored and Solyndrabama could not possibly havecsaid those words.

LOL, kind of like the "big oil" thread Benny made, where they were brushing off the Keystone pipeline and Solynda like they were nothing, even though there are 50123487017x more examples just like them.

[24KT]

I'm not gonna raed through a 2 yr old thread, ...I just want to comment on the title.

ahem... Who told who so?

ps: If gas costs you $6.00 a gallon, grab it, and appreciate how cheap it is, 'cause it's gonna get a whole lot worse.

[Soul Crusher]

President Obama’s offshore drilling moratorium following the 2010 oil spill caused widespread job losses and a significant drop in energy production in the Gulf of Mexico. Two years later, a U.S. House committee wants to know why the administration misled the public about the drilling ban.

The House Natural Resources Committee yesterday issued its first subpoena to the Department of the Interior after Secretary Ken Salazar refused to turn over documents related to the moratorium. At issue is why Salazar’s department suggested a panel of engineering experts supported the drilling ban when in fact they did not.

Despite the Obama administration’s transparency promises, Salazar has rebuffed the committee’s requests and stymied the department’s inspector general investigation. Salazar, who previously apologized, was defiant when asked about the subpoena:

The bottom line is I’m very comfortable with everything we did including the time out and reset button that we had to put in place in the Gulf of Mexico. What the House Natural Resources and energy committee is doing is simply a distraction in the name of politics.

Natural Resources Chairman Doc Hastings (D-WA) said it was important to understand what happened and why Salazar failed to conduct any technical, scientific or economic analysis prior to imposing the drilling ban. He gave the department one week to produce the documents. The subpoena was a last resort for the committee.

The administration’s controversial moratorium — and the subsequent permitorium that followed — caused economic hardships throughout the Gulf region and in communities across America. A recent survey of employers, conducted by Greater New Orleans Inc., revealed 41 percent of businesses are not making a profit and 76 percent have lost cash revenues.

One of the region’s business owners, Leslie Bertucci of R&D Enterprises, shared her story about the moratorium’s impact:


At the time Salazar imposed the drilling ban, he justified his action with a May 27, 2010, report that recommended a six-month drilling moratorium. That recommendation was allegedly supported by seven members of the National Academy of Engineering, who had peer-reviewed the report.

But only after Salazar imposed the job-killing moratorium did Americans learn the truth: Political appointees at the White House and Department of Interior inserted the moratorium recommendation without the knowledge of the seven experts. They subsequently rebutted the implication and went a step further to note the ban “will not measurably reduce risk further and it will have a lasting impact on the nation’s economy which may be greater than that of the oil spill.”

When the department’s inspector general sought information on the incident, administration official stonewalled investigators. That ultimately led to yesterday’s subpoena. The documents sought include:

All documents created, sent, or received by Steve Black, Neal Kemkar, Mary Katherine Ishee, David Hayes and Ted Strickland between April 26, 2010 and June 30, 2010 related to the development, editing, review, issuance, response, or reaction to the May 27, 2010 Department of the Interior report that included a recommendation for a six-month drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico.

All 13 documents that the Interior Department has intervened to block the Acting Inspector General from providing to the Committee.

Rob Bluey directs the Center for Media and Public Policy, an investigative journalism operation at The Heritage Foundation. Follow him on Twitter: @RobertBluey

   

[Soul Crusher]

Experts: Obama Oil Plan May Make Prices More Volatile
Money News ^ | Tuesday, 17 Apr 2012 12:29 PM




The White House unveiled a slate of legislative proposals on Tuesday aimed at cracking down on oil market manipulation, as the administration attempts to combat high gasoline prices. The plan calls for a tenfold increase in the maximum civil and criminal penalties that can be applied for the manipulation of oil futures markets, the White House said.

The Obama administration is also calling for Congress to provide more funding to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to increase surveillance and enforcement staff for oil futures market trading. The proposal also calls on the CFTC to be given the power to raise margin requirements in oil futures markets.

The following are comments from oil analysts, politicians and traders on the Obama proposal.

AMY JAFFE, AT RICE UNIVERSITY'S BAKER INSTITUTE IN HOUSTON:

On expanding access to CFTC data: "People like me cannot analyze whether people are manipulating the market or not because they keep the data secret. Their whole rationale for keeping the data secret was that people need their commercial advantage — but people who trade know what everyone's positions are. It's the public who doesn't know.

"Given the financial climate experience we had in 2007 and 2008, wouldn't you want to know whether your bank is really long in the futures market or not?

"It's important in managing a financial crisis to know who is in the market or who isn't if suddenly there is a crisis in oil that is going to take down the banks."

On giving the CFTC power to change margin requirements: "The thing about margin requirements is that when markets are very volatile and they afraid about banks buying too much oil on leverage, it gives them a tool.


(Excerpt) Read more at moneynews.com ...









more bullshit from the imposter 

[Soul Crusher]

Skip to comments.

Obama's Crackdown On Speculators Won't Cut Prices
IBD Editorials ^ | April 17, 2012
Posted on April 17, 2012 8:07:07 PM EDT by Kaslin

Energy: President Obama's promised "crackdown" on speculators is another example of his using government to strangle markets and increase control over the private economy. Worse, it won't cut gas prices one bit.

President Obama knows that soaring gasoline prices are hurting his political chances in November. How else to explain his sudden decision to go after "speculators" — that is, investors — in the oil and gasoline markets for driving up prices?

Under his watch, gasoline prices have soared from $1.89 a gallon to nearly $3.90 a gallon — a 106% rise in just three years. No wonder he's in a political panic.

Standing with Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama said Tuesday he wants to put "more cops on the street" to nab speculators who profit from rising oil prices. Cops? For people investing legally?

After ripping Congress for not imposing new taxes on oil companies, as he wanted, Obama on Tuesday called on lawmakers to spend $52 million to give bureaucrats expansive new controls over oil trading markets.

Specifically, he wants to increase penalties for market manipulation and give regulators power to require energy traders to have more collateral. But, as even Obama admits, it "will not bring down gas prices overnight."

Actually, it won't bring prices down, period.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...