4 ms·
>Pelosi blocked that. Why should the American people pay to fill it when they can now be paid instead to store the oil? The market's decided that the toxic ass
by joecool1029 7y ago
>Pelosi blocked that.
Why should the American people pay to fill it when they can now be paid instead to store the oil? The market's decided that the toxic asset needs to go somewhere and the speculators that bought it (not the producers) will pay.
>The workaround is to cheaply rent out the reserve as storage space
Cheaply? They took a risk in speculating and it didn't work out. The solution is to give them a choice: surrender their oil to the USG (to avoid paying storage fees) or pay the USG for the service of storing it.
No bailouts, fuck that.
- koheripbal 7y agoBailout? It's not a bailout. Prices were negative! We'd literally be _getting paid_ to take oil and put it into our reserve. It's literally the easiest financial decision on the planet. The fact that Pelosi blocked it demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of basic finance.
- Talanes 7y agoI can understand the impulse, and absent any middlemen it would make perfect sense to have the government step in to buy excess production during a crisis to fill national reserves. But we have speculators who sold us the idea that their profits brought stability to the market, so make them keep playing by their own rules.