5 ms·

The US oil industry is making massive amount of money directly from the people of the US on the inflated prices, since their domestic supply and refineries are

The US oil industry is making massive amount of money directly from the people of the US on the inflated prices, since their domestic supply and refineries are unaffected. It also perfectly matches the actions a foreign country trying to harm the US would take. There's so many terrible options to choose from!

goda90 6mo ago
> since their [...] refineries are unaffected Unfortunately not the case. There are an odd number of refinery issues happening across the US lately.
KptMarchewa 6mo ago
There are much easier ways of increasing the oil prices that don't have as much drawbacks as trump's war. Of course, for _some_ reason most people and countries prefer _lowering_ oil prices.
- nisegami 6mo ago
  Higher oil prices makes renewables even more competitive, so this is another situation where the extreme left and extreme right may agree.
  - kccoder 6mo ago
    Renewables being a good thing is not an "extreme left" viewpoint, it's just reality. That being said, I'm going to guess that extreme left supports renewables near 100%.
    - hvb2 6mo ago
      Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding renewables? Also, at his rallies, drill baby drill wasn't exactly met with booing
      - mcphage 6mo ago
        > Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding renewables? Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding reality, for that matter?
  - throw0101a 6mo ago
    > Higher oil prices makes renewables even more competitive, so this is another situation where the extreme left and extreme right may agree. Another way would be to introduce carbon pricing, which folks like Greenspan, Volker, Bernanke, Yellen, etc endorsed: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economists%27_Statement_on_Carbon_Dividends https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economists%27_Statement_on_Car... You add a surcharge on carbon emissions, they raise the prices of carbon-intensive activities, which get passed onto end consumers. Companies which reduce their carbon footprint would be able to sell products/services for less money and where many people would choose because it's cheaper. The key: the money collected is returned to consumers (why it's labelled "dividend") on an average basis. So if you use less carbon than average your refund will be more than your surcharge outlay and you'll come out ahead. If you use more than average, then it's more money out of pocket. Sadly when Canada tried this under the Trudeau Liberals the Conservatives—which tend to be (federally) concentrated in the O&G-dominant western provinces—attacked it as a "tax" (regardless that the money was refunded), even though it's probably the most market efficient mechanism—which Conservatives even testified to: "Scott Moe says Saskatchewan considered carbon tax alternatives, but found them too costly": * https://nationalpost.com/news/scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-considered-carbon-tax-alternatives-but-found-them-too-costly https://nationalpost.com/news/scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-co... The gradual increasing of the price would put continued, increasing pressure to reduce emissions, but would not (net) cost people more out of pocket. The other market efficient solution would probably a cap-and-trade, which is how Canada and the US (under Bush 41) dealt with acid rain.
seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
The west coast doesn’t actually have pipelines to receive oil from the mountain/Midwest regions, and Alaska has been declining for a while now. So California mostly gets oil from Brazil (not affected) and Iraq (affected).
jaybrendansmith 6mo ago
None of the Trump administrations actions look objectively different than what a foreign adversary would do to destroy the United States of America. It's staring us all in the face every day. My children will pay for this their entire fucking lives.
- lotsofpulp 6mo ago
  I bet foreign adversaries are simply throwing in the towel since the American people can do far worse than whatever they could come up with.
  - itronitron 6mo ago
    "shock and awe"
lopsotronic 6mo ago
The resultant economic income elasticity / demand destruction from sudden "shocks" in energy costs will dull those gains for oil comopanies. And that shock has a longer signal. Witness the commodity runup from the last time we blew up west Asia - the resultant liquidity squeeze would melt down the financialized economic system. A collapse only slapshod avoided by exchanging government risk for private risk on an unprecedented scale. Did the Iraq 2003 adventure actually net more money for oil companies in a 10-20 year horizon? Debateable.

goda90 6mo ago

> since their [...] refineries are unaffected Unfortunately not the case. There are an odd number of refinery issues happening across the US lately.

KptMarchewa 6mo ago

There are much easier ways of increasing the oil prices that don't have as much drawbacks as trump's war. Of course, for _some_ reason most people and countries prefer _lowering_ oil prices.

nisegami 6mo ago
Higher oil prices makes renewables even more competitive, so this is another situation where the extreme left and extreme right may agree.
- kccoder 6mo ago
  Renewables being a good thing is not an "extreme left" viewpoint, it's just reality. That being said, I'm going to guess that extreme left supports renewables near 100%.
  - hvb2 6mo ago
    Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding renewables? Also, at his rallies, drill baby drill wasn't exactly met with booing
    - mcphage 6mo ago
      > Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding renewables? Have you looked at the current administration's policies regarding reality, for that matter?
- throw0101a 6mo ago
  > Higher oil prices makes renewables even more competitive, so this is another situation where the extreme left and extreme right may agree. Another way would be to introduce carbon pricing, which folks like Greenspan, Volker, Bernanke, Yellen, etc endorsed: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economists%27_Statement_on_Carbon_Dividends https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economists%27_Statement_on_Car... You add a surcharge on carbon emissions, they raise the prices of carbon-intensive activities, which get passed onto end consumers. Companies which reduce their carbon footprint would be able to sell products/services for less money and where many people would choose because it's cheaper. The key: the money collected is returned to consumers (why it's labelled "dividend") on an average basis. So if you use less carbon than average your refund will be more than your surcharge outlay and you'll come out ahead. If you use more than average, then it's more money out of pocket. Sadly when Canada tried this under the Trudeau Liberals the Conservatives—which tend to be (federally) concentrated in the O&G-dominant western provinces—attacked it as a "tax" (regardless that the money was refunded), even though it's probably the most market efficient mechanism—which Conservatives even testified to: "Scott Moe says Saskatchewan considered carbon tax alternatives, but found them too costly": * https://nationalpost.com/news/scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-considered-carbon-tax-alternatives-but-found-them-too-costly https://nationalpost.com/news/scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-co... The gradual increasing of the price would put continued, increasing pressure to reduce emissions, but would not (net) cost people more out of pocket. The other market efficient solution would probably a cap-and-trade, which is how Canada and the US (under Bush 41) dealt with acid rain.

seanmcdirmid 6mo ago

The west coast doesn’t actually have pipelines to receive oil from the mountain/Midwest regions, and Alaska has been declining for a while now. So California mostly gets oil from Brazil (not affected) and Iraq (affected).

jaybrendansmith 6mo ago

None of the Trump administrations actions look objectively different than what a foreign adversary would do to destroy the United States of America. It's staring us all in the face every day. My children will pay for this their entire fucking lives.

lotsofpulp 6mo ago
I bet foreign adversaries are simply throwing in the towel since the American people can do far worse than whatever they could come up with.
- itronitron 6mo ago
  "shock and awe"

lopsotronic 6mo ago

The resultant economic income elasticity / demand destruction from sudden "shocks" in energy costs will dull those gains for oil comopanies. And that shock has a longer signal. Witness the commodity runup from the last time we blew up west Asia - the resultant liquidity squeeze would melt down the financialized economic system. A collapse only slapshod avoided by exchanging government risk for private risk on an unprecedented scale. Did the Iraq 2003 adventure actually net more money for oil companies in a 10-20 year horizon? Debateable.