Op-Ed Columnist

Natural Born Drillers



By Paul Krugman

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/opinion/krugman-natural-born-drillers.html?_r=1

 

Now folks this is the perfect example of the blinded brainwashed parrot that cannot see his own glaring contradictions even after he writes them down.

Because any reasonable and rational thinking individual would easily see that President Obama did in fact influence oil prices yesterday and actually has been influencing oil prices for weeks now. By simply weighing his options in public which is the only reason the price of oil isn't $150 to $200 per barrel right now.

This has absolutely been the most brilliant political game of cat and mouse with Wall Street I've ever seen in my life and once again reaffirms President Obama is the most intelligent, hardest working, and effective president I've seen in my life time.

 

LOL @ Stumbler using the last bastion of Obama hope, "it could be worse."

 

Economic growth under Democratic and Republican presidents

Republicans claim that military spending for the Second World War, rather than New Deal programs, ended the Great Depression. This is because they would rather that tax money be spent destroying lives than improving them. Well, OK. Let's compare the growth in the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) during Franklin Roosevelt's first term with per capita GDP growth during the terms of Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.

Many Republicans have never accepted the basic reforms of the New Deal, and would like to restore the economic status quo of the 1920s. President Coolidge left office in 1929 before the stock market crash of that year began the Great Depression. Republicans like to claim that the New Deal artificially prolonged the Great Depression. They cannot blame the Stock Market Crash on the Democrats because when it happened the Republicans dominated the country.

Anyway, from 1921 to 1928 the per capita GDP grew from $5,758 to $7,439. It grew $1,681 for a rate of 29.2%.

From 1933 to 1936 the per capita gross domestic product grew from $4,804 to $6,423. It grew $1,619, for a rate of 33.7%.

My statistics have been compiled by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. They are adjusted for 1996 dollars. Check my arithmetic if you want to. Correct it if you need to.

http://www.singularity.com/charts/page99.html

These statistics cover the years of 1920 to 2002. From 1921 to 2000 the United States had Republicans for forty years, and Democratic presidents for forty years. If you do the kind of calculations I have here, you will find that there was more than twice the economic growth under Democratic presidents as under Republican presidents.

 

Jesus. The old "war for oil" thing. So if we did such a fine job kicking a little mid east ass, and all them oil wells are just pumping away, why the fuck is the price of gas going up...........again??

Oh yeah, cause them greedy corporate fat cat fuckers are making a profit, which is of course EVIL.

At some point you are going to admit that you are not correct in your head on some points.

 

WWII did end the Great Depression, and here is why.. After the end of WWII, the United States was the only industrialized country left in the world that did not sustain damage to it's infrastructure.

Europe was destroyed, Russia was not only destroyed, 1 out of 4 Russians died in WWII. China was in shambles and decades away from being industrialized.

The USA was the only country to come out of WWII pretty much unscathed. We had the factories and the work force to produce the goods the world needed and wanted.

The USA was making and exporting just about everything at that time. We were the world's largest oil producer and exporter at the time as well as making and exporting every thing from automobiles to agricultural products.

This is what ended the Great Depression.

 

What you say is true. It is also true that there was more economic growth per year during Franklin Roosevelt's first term of office than during the 1920s, when the Republican Party dominated the country.

An unfortunate outcome of the post World War II prosperity is the wide spread delusion that military spending itself is good for the economy.

The reason there is usually more economic growth under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents is that trickle up economic works and trickle down economics does not. Tax cuts for the rich do not lead to jobs for the unemployed because the rich either put the money in the bank, or they spend it on personal luxuries.

 

From your own quote,,those 2 organizations are NOT conservative organizations,,but, you'll continue to blame it solely on the conservative organizations..........

 

Great article the other day by Krauthammer (of the Washington Post) debunking all the looney left spin with respect to the Obama administration's mindless energy policies. Here you go (from the Portland Press Herald):

Charles Krauthammer: Obama's stance on oil drilling leaves us vulnerable, dependent




WASHINGTON - Yes, of course, presidents have no direct control over gas prices. But the American people know something about this president and his disdain for oil. The "fuel of the past," he contemptuously calls it. To the American worker who doesn't commute by government motorcade and is getting fleeced every week at the pump, oil seems very much a fuel of the present -- and of the foreseeable future.





President Obama incessantly claims energy open-mindedness, insisting that his policy is "all of the above." Except, of course, for drilling:

• off the Mid-Atlantic coast (as Virginia, for example, wants),

• off the Florida Gulf Coast,

• in the broader Gulf of Mexico (where drilling in 2012 is expected to drop
30 percent below pre-moratorium forecasts),

• in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,

• on federal lands in the Rockies (where leases are down 70 percent since Obama took office).

But the event that drove home the extent of Obama's antipathy to nearby, abundant, available oil was his veto of the Keystone pipeline. It gave the game away because the case for Keystone is so obvious and overwhelming. Vetoing it gratuitously prolongs our dependence on outside powers, kills thousands of shovel-ready jobs, forfeits a major strategic resource to China, damages relations with our closest ally and sends billions of oil dollars to Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin and already obscenely wealthy sheiks.

Obama boasts that on his watch production is up and imports down. True, but truly deceptive. These increases have occurred in spite of his restrictive policies. They are the result of Clinton- and Bush-era permitting. This has been accompanied by a gold rush of natural gas production resulting from new fracking technology that has nothing at all to do with Obama.

"The American people aren't stupid," said Obama (Feb. 23), mocking "Drill, baby, drill." The "only solution," he averred in yet another major energy speech last week, is that "we start using less, that lowers the demand, prices come down." Yet five paragraphs later he claimed that regardless of "how much oil we produce at home ... that's not going to set the price of gas worldwide."

So: Decreasing U.S. demand will lower oil prices, but increasing U.S. supply will not? This is ridiculous. Either both do or neither does. Does Obama read his own speeches? [Clarise: he reads them. We know he can read. The question is, does he comprehend them?]

Obama says of drilling: "That's not a plan." Of course it's a plan. We import nearly half of our oil, thereby exporting enormous amounts of U.S. wealth. Almost 60 percent of our trade deficit is shipped overseas to buy crude.
Drill here and you stanch the hemorrhage. You keep those dollars within the U.S. economy, repatriating not just wealth but jobs, and denying them to foreign unfriendlies. Drilling is the single most important thing we can do to spur growth at home while strengthening our hand abroad.

Instead, Obama offers what he fancies to be the fuels of the future. You would think that he'd be a tad more modest today about his powers of divination after the Solyndra bankruptcy, the collapse of government-subsidized Ener1 (past makers of the batteries of the future) and GM's suspension of production -- for lack of demand -- of another federally dictated confection, the flammable Chevy Volt.

Deterred? Hardly. Our undaunted seer of the energy future has come up with his own miracle fuel: algae. Yes, green slime, upon which Steven Chu's Energy Department will be sprinkling yet another $14 million of taxpayer money.

This is the very same Dr. Chu who famously said in 2008 that he wanted U.S. gas prices to rise to European levels of $8-$10 a gallon -- and who Tuesday, eight months before Election Day, publicly recanted before Congress, Galileo-style.

Who do they think they're fooling? An oil crisis looms, prices are spiking -- and our president is extolling algae. After Solyndra, Keystone and promises of seaweed in their gas tanks, Americans sense a president so ideologically antipathetic to fossil fuels -- which we possess in staggering abundance -- that he is utterly unserious about the real world of oil in which the rest of us live.

High gasoline prices are a major political problem for Obama. They are not just a pain at the pump, however. They are a constant reminder of three years of a rigid, fatuous, fantasy-driven energy policy that has rendered us scandalously dependent and excessively vulnerable.

Charles Krauthammer is a columnist for The Washington Post. He can be contacted at:

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

 

t minus 234

 

When the rich put their money in the bank, the bank lends it out to small business owners who hire people who . . . wait for it . . . pay taxes!

Personal luxuries are made by business owners who employ people who, wait for it . . . pay taxes!

Because the wealthiest 10% spend so much, the last thing you want to do is take their $ away.

The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes account for nearly a quarter of all spending, according to data compiled by research firm Moody's Economy.com from a 2006 federal survey.
``That does suggest those folks are important for the spending outlook, and the overall economic outlook,'' said Scott Hoyt, Moody's director of consumer economics.


​

http://www.ajc.com/ajccars/content/business/stories/2008/08/05/wealthy.html?cxntlid=inform_artr


What you continually fail to grasp is that when you 'tax' the rich you lower their bank accounts which leaves the bank less $ to lend. And you they spend less on luxury goods so those employers close - causing employees to not have income to pay taxes.


When the wealthy decide they need to stretch their money buy a new Cadillac every 4 years instead of every two years, CAdillac/GM and their employees are hurt.

 

You are way far off on this one...

First your article was done in 2008 and anyone who bothers to read it will read about million dollar homes and private jets..


Next who in there right mind keeps money in a bank with less than one half of one percent interest that is paid...

Rich have their wealth in

Real Estate
Art
Bonds
Stocks
Gold & Silver
excess money is in hedge funds running up committee prices with speculation in the markets

 

Just Breaks my fucking heart...

 

What heart???

 

No. Not only is it spot on, it points out what is very obviously happening at the beginning of recession.

We're talking about the top 10%, not the top half of 1%, why by the way, do keep $ in the bank. Further, you make a great point in that when the wealthy you are referring to dumps their Real Estate, Art, Bonds, Stock, Gold & Silver, & Hedge fund cash it further devalues each one of those which effects all of the rest of us.

Thanks for remaking my point.

 

once again,

When the wealthy decide they need to stretch their money buy a new Cadillac every 4 years instead of every two years, Cadillac/GM and their employees are hurt.​

 

I gotta stop staying away from this place, it's like the inmates are running the asylum anymore.....
seriously, ace, Obama can "tax" exports? I know you flunked out of school at about the fourth grade level, but by that point, even I knew CONGRESS imposes taxes.
so, I guess what you're saying is that the high gas prices, the exporting of gas from the US which is helping to keep prices high, is all on the Republicans in the House, who will never, ever "impose" a tax on something as honest as shipping gas overseas (to keep prices high here)?

 

I am not sure why I even bother to reply to idiots....

trying to explain to ace-nature boy and RR is like...

they are so fucking stupid they don't even know they are stupid

 

lol. It's funny when you devolve to 1st grade blabberings.

Your surrender is accepted.

 

right -- I give up trying to talk to an idiot...