Hugo's Citgo a No-Go

[Jocko]

It's certainly done in self-interest, but 7-11 is dumping Venezuela-owned Citgo gas after a 20-year relationship. (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/09/27/D8KDA6A02.html) About 40% of 7-11 stores sell Citgo today - soon, they'll sell their own brand which, oddly enough, will not be sourced from Venezuelan governement-owned producers.

7-Eleven had been considering creating its own brand of fuel since at least early last year. Company officials said at the time they had spoken with independent fuel distributors.

Hmmm... about a year and a half, then. When did Hugo Chavez start believing his own Che act?

[DaChew]

When did Hugo Chavez start believing his own Che act?


Last year.

[Crossbow]

Well, the USA stopped buying all Iranian oil in 1979 yet the embargo has not hurt the marketing of Iranian oil.

I would expect similar results if the USA posted a Venezuela oil embargo as well.

[IXP]

Somehow, I don't think the solution to high-priced oil is to stop buying from everyone who pisses us off.

IXP

[BPSCG]

The best price for gasoline between my home and my office is a Citgo station. They regularly beat the BP/Amoco station just down the street by a penny. I usually gas up there. Or did until I found out Citgo is Venezuelan-owned. Now I pay a penny more per gallon - about eleven or twelve cents per tank - at the BP/Amoco.

I know, economically it doesn't make sense. If Citgo has more gas than it can sell, it'll sell its excess to BP/Amoco at the prevailing market price, so it all washes.

Nevertheless...

[Jocko]

Well, the USA stopped buying all Iranian oil in 1979 yet the embargo has not hurt the marketing of Iranian oil.

I would expect similar results if the USA posted a Venezuela oil embargo as well.

Who said embargo? Apart from Hugo, that is? 7-11 just said it Citgo had become a PR liability, that's all. God bless the free market!

[BPSCG]

And now the Citgo sign that looms over Fenway Park (http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/9909105/detail.html) is threatened.

[Jocko]

Somehow, I don't think the solution to high-priced oil is to stop buying from everyone who pisses us off.

IXP

Tell that to the people who decide to not sell to everyone who pisses them off, (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113580,00.html) like Chavez's own threats.

[Sally]

The best price for gasoline between my home and my office is a Citgo station. They regularly beat the BP/Amoco station just down the street by a penny. I usually gas up there. Or did until I found out Citgo is Venezuelan-owned. Now I pay a penny more per gallon - about eleven or twelve cents per tank - at the BP/Amoco.

I know, economically it doesn't make sense. If Citgo has more gas than it can sell, it'll sell its excess to BP/Amoco at the prevailing market price, so it all washes.

Nevertheless...

I actually go out of my way to buy my gas at Citgo.

Chavez may have stepped a bit over the line with his UN speech but his promise to provide heating oil to low income americans is better than anything coming out of Exxon, Moblie and the likes..

Plus I prefer my oil to be free of middle east ties, I much rather support venezuelan oil...

EDIT:

Did some reading and there are other choices BP, Sunco, Hess all seem to be Middle east oil free.

[SteveGrenard]

Won't boycotting CITGO put thousands of Americans who work for CITGO out of work?

[Jocko]

Won't boycotting CITGO put thousands of Americans who work for CITGO out of work?

Probably, if anyone was organizing one, which they're not. 7-11 saw the relationship as a net liability and didn't renew their contract - it's not a "boycott" any more than your switching long distance companies.

[shemp]

Won't boycotting CITGO put thousands of Americans who work for CITGO out of work?

Yes, but according to the Capitalist Model, they will go to work for other companies whose business increases. Good Ed man, don't you understand Capitalism!??

[Jocko]

Yes, but according to the Capitalist Model, they will go to work for other companies whose business increases. Good Ed man, don't you understand Capitalism!??

That's precisely what will happen, unless you think a boycott would also make a corresponding percentage of energy needs evaporate along with the jobs, in which case I'd love to hear that theory.

[gnome]

That's precisely what will happen, unless you think a boycott would also make a corresponding percentage of energy needs evaporate along with the jobs, in which case I'd love to hear that theory.

I think the point is that the transition may not be so friendly to the displaced individuals as the free market ideal might offer. Which is not to say we should avoid all transitions, but that we should recognize that such changes have consequences worth addressing, even if in the long run they work themselves out. Human beings can't wait a few years for the market to sort itself out.

[Crossbow]

Who said embargo? Apart from Hugo, that is? 7-11 just said it Citgo had become a PR liability, that's all. God bless the free market!

Sorry about that!

Your referral to Che had indicated to me that you desired an embargo of Venezulan oil products. My misunderstanding!

[Mephisto]

Let's all buy middle-eastern oil! It's the patriotic thing to do. :)

[Sally]

Let's all buy middle-eastern oil! It's the patriotic thing to do. :)

Plus it will be easier to justify a permanent occupation in Iraq.

Yeah Patriotism!








I really need to convert my car to run on freedom fries oil...

[IXP]

I really think we should stop buying oil with trans-fats.

Whoops, wrong thread.

IXP

[Ziggurat]

Somehow, I don't think the solution to high-priced oil is to stop buying from everyone who pisses us off.

Suppose every Citgo station in the US closes. Does that mean Venezuela won't be selling oil to the US? Not necessarily. Venezuela exports crude. That crude gets refined into oil here in the US. But that crude could just as easily be sold to other companies to do the refining and distribution - boycotting Citgo stations would cut Venezuela out of the distribution market, but it wouldn't cut them out of the oil market.

Plus, as stated, this isn't an actual boycott.

[steverino]

My boat has a little diesel engine and the diesel at the Shell station on the river is tinted pink. What if each nation's oil was tinted a specific color. That way I can oil from Indonesia, but not Nigeria or Venezuela, and hot left-wing wacky chicks like Sally can buy strictly Venezuelan product.

[Darth Rotor]

Plus I prefer my oil to be free of middle east ties, I much rather support venezuelan oil...

Me too. So what if he's a jerk? The French sometimes irritate me, but I still drink a bit of French wine now and again, or some cheese.

IXP's point is superb, by the way. If you stop buying from all the guys who piss you off, you be outta gas pretty soon.

Paid Political Announcement follows:

Buy Canadian gas. They don't piss us off as much as Hugo does.

*snort*

DR

[Sally]

My boat has a little diesel engine and the diesel at the Shell station on the river is tinted pink. What if each nation's oil was tinted a specific color. That way I can oil from Indonesia, but not Nigeria or Venezuela, and hot left-wing wacky chicks like Sally can buy strictly Venezuelan product.

Sorry does wanting to become independent of middle eastern oil make me a left wing wacko?

Well than I guess I am..in fact push me farther to the left I want any dependence to foreign oil stopped. Wow how wacky of me...

[Huntster]

At least until Chavez is no longer their Head of State.

Here in Alaska virtually all of our crude oil is simply funneled out of the Alaska Pipeline on it's way to Valdez, then the West Coast. There is a refinery just south of Fairbanks where most fuels are refined. There is also another such system on the Kenai Peninsula, but it's much smaller and primarily serves those peninsula communities.

So Chevron, Shell, Holiday, etc fuels are all refined at the same place, from the same crude. When we had Citgo stations here, it was the same with them.

However, even under such a system (where the crude doesn't come from Venezuela), if we stop buying the Citgo gas, Citgo loses sales. Period.

And that sounds good to me. Let him swim in the stuff, or let him sell it to somebody else and get paid in their currency.

[SteveGrenard]

However, even under such a system (where the crude doesn't come from Venezuela), if we stop buying the Citgo gas, Citgo loses sales. Period.

And that sounds good to me. Let him swim in the stuff, or let him sell it to somebody else and get paid in their currency.

I am wondering if he doesn't expect this and how it impacts or meshes with his stated plans of providing free heating oil to over 400,000 poor Americans this winter as a PR gesture. If Americans don't buy the stuff expect him to give it away.

I don't believe that our money means a great deal to him if he is a dyed in the wool communist. Plus he can get what he needs from elsewhere such as China.

[Ziggurat]

Sorry does wanting to become independent of middle eastern oil make me a left wing wacko?

Well, that depends: do you know what the word "fungible" means?

Ignorance of that wouldn't make you lefty, though, only wacko.

[Dave1001]

Plus I prefer my oil to be free of middle east ties,

Well Chavez is doing his best to alienate you from Venezuelan oil on that front too, it seems.

[Ziggurat]

I don't believe that our money means a great deal to him if he is a dyed in the wool communist. Plus he can get what he needs from elsewhere such as China.

There are no dyed in the wool communists who actually run anything - never have been, never will be. You can be pretty damned sure that Chavez cares about money - now, maybe he thinks he's getting something else that's WORTH that lost money, but he still cares about money. And you can be absolutely certain that China cares about money, AND that it costs more to ship oil from Venezuela to China than it does to ship to the US (supertankers can't make it through the panama canal, PLUS it's a good deal further away).

[shemp]

Speaking of "dyed in the wool communists", was Trotsky wearing wool when he got the ice pick? I wouldn't think so, what with him living in Mexico, but if it was a cool day he might have.

[steverino]

I much rather support venezuelan oil....

No. This makes you wacko.

[steverino]

Sorry does wanting to become independent of middle eastern oil make me a left wing wacko?

Well than I guess I am..in fact push me farther to the left I want any dependence to foreign oil stopped. Wow how wacky of me...

OK. Cool. So I hope this means you are for off-shore drilling off Florida and California, and certainly Alaska. That would cut those Arabs out of the loop.

[SteveGrenard]

OK. Cool. So I hope this means you are for off-shore drilling off Florida and California, and certainly Alaska. That would cut those Arabs out of the loop.

Somebody is drilling off the coast of Florida and it ain't the U.S.:



CHINA STARTS OIL DRILLING OFF FLORIDA
WHILE AMERICA TWIDDLES THUMBS, CHINESE TAP BILLIONS OF BARRELS

By Mike Blair

While Washington dithers over exploiting oil and gas reserves off the coast of Florida, China has seized the opportunity to gobble up these deposits, which run throughout Latin America, the Caribbean and along the U.S. Gulf coast.

The Chinese have forged a deal with Cuban leader Fidel Castro to explore and tap into massive oil reserves almost within sight of Key West, Florida. At the same time, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who controls the largest oil reserves in the Western Hemisphere, is making deals to sell his country's oil to China, oil that is currently coming to the United States.

Meanwhile, a new left-wing populist regime in Bolivia has nationalized the natural gas industry, threatening to cut off supplies to the United States.

SLANT DRILLING

There are new reports out circulating that Chinese firms are planning to slant drill off the Cuban coast near the Florida Straits, tapping into U.S. oil reserves that are estimated at 4.6 billion to 9.3 billion barrels. This compares with 4 billion to 10 billion barrels believed to be beneath the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, where drilling is held up in Congress due to the objections of environmental groups which warn of endangering caribou. Permission to drill in the refuge, which experts are certain will not present any environmental hazard, has failed by just two votes in the Senate.

As Chinese business increases its reach around the world, it is seeking oil, which it lacks domestically.

After elections in Mexico in early July, when a new regime hostile to Washington is expected to take power, the United States might be without supplies of Mexican crude oil. The United States gets about 40 percent of its imported oil from Mexico and Venezuela.

China is eager to tap into oil reserves in the Florida Straits and then make a deal with Castro to control it. The Chinese have already reopened an abandoned Russian oil refinery in Cuba. Much of the gas refined there is believed to be destined for Freeport in the Bahamas, where the Chinese, through front company Hutchison-Whampoa, has developed a massive port facility and airfield.

With the refinery reopened and expanded it will also meet the needs of Castro.

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) has introduced legislation to ease U.S. restrictions that prevent dealing with Cuba to drill in the Florida Straits. It is hoped that Florida regulations that prevent U.S. oil drilling off the state's coasts could also be eased.

The irony is that Chinese drilling could be even more of an environmental hazard since China is not as concerned about or equipped to deal with any potential ecological disaster as a result of a spill, said Craig.
(Issue #22, May 29, 2006)

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/china_starts_oil_drilling.html

[webfusion]

China ---- slant drilling ----- yuk yuk

[Tony]

Somebody is drilling off the coast of Florida and it ain't the U.S.:

How reputable is that source? If true, that's a pretty startling development.

[Tony]

I know, economically it doesn't make sense.

Really? I seriously doubt you're going to miss that 12 cents.

[Tony]

Chavez may have stepped a bit over the line with his UN speech but his promise to provide heating oil to low income americans is better than anything coming out of Exxon, Moblie and the likes..


Sad, isn't it? While foreigners are offering low cost heating oil to americans (we can question his intentions), our own countrymen are ripping us off so a fat bastard can get a $400 million retirement.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1841989

[Tony]

IXP's point is superb, by the way. If you stop buying from all the guys who piss you off, you be outta gas pretty soon.

Not only that, it has the effect of uniting those guys against us.

[Dave1001]

Sad, isn't it? While foreigners are offering low cost heating oil to americans (we can question his intentions), our own countrymen are ripping us off so a fat bastard can get a $400 million retirement.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1841989

Have you seen the infant mortality statistics for Venezuela? We should not be accepting "low cost heating oil" from them -and Chavez as head of an oil rich nation should be held accountable for the health statistics of his country.

[SteveGrenard]

Have you seen the infant mortality statistics for Venezuela? We should not be accepting "low cost heating oil" from them -and Chavez as head of an oil rich nation should be held accountable for the health statistics of his country.

No, I haven't but I have now:

Using Infant Mortality to Determine Oil Suppliers

The 2002 (last) infant mortality rate for Venezuela was 19 per 1000 live births. Nearby Argentina was not far behind with 16. But by this standard then we should not be buying oil from Saudi Arabia whose 2002 infant mortality rate was a whopping 23 per 1000 live births. Who is held accountable in Saudi Arabia for their health stats?

http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator_detail.cfm?country=SA&indicatorid=25

[Mephisto]

Sad, isn't it? While foreigners are offering low cost heating oil to americans (we can question his intentions), our own countrymen are ripping us off so a fat bastard can get a $400 million retirement.

HEY! It's the American way! Do you really want to support someone that is selling cheaper oil, or giving it almost at cost to the poverty-stricken people of NY, or do you want to support an AMERICAN businessman?

With the first, you're supporting a potentially terrorist regime run by a person who didn't hesitate to make fun of our President and has no respect for our government, while the second option allows you to be reamed by a good ole' boy. Clearly the best choice is #2. ;)

[SteveGrenard]

How reputable is that source? If true, that's a pretty startling development.

I am afraid it's the sad truth my friend. Just Google yourself Cuba and oil drilling or Cuba-China and oil drilling, etc. And you'll get quite a few articles like the following:


http://washingtontimes.com/business/20060724-122242-7824r.htm


Cuba drills for oil off Florida
By Patrice Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 24, 2006

Cuba is drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida with help from China, Canada and Spain even as Congress struggles to end years of deadlock over drilling for what could be a treasure trove of offshore oil and gas.


In spite of the half-hearted noise being made about this, big American oil companies probably prefer the Chinese and Cubans to get this oil and make it dissapear inside China and Cuba. If we got it it would drive prices down.
Exxon has got a surplus of $25 billion right now but their greed, proverbially, apparently knows no bounds. They're betting the environmentalists, normally their natural enemy, would come through for them.

[Snide]

Really? I seriously doubt you're going to miss that 12 cents.Doesn't matter if the difference was only one cent.

Then again, you could argue that since BP gets more utility out of spending the extra 12 cents, then it's still an economic issue and hence does make sense economically.

But that would be a silly argument to pursue. I think we all know BP just meant "in bottom-line ($$) terms" when he said "economically."

[BPSCG]

But that would be a silly argument to pursue. I think we all know BP just meant "in bottom-line ($$) terms" when he said "economically."Nail.
Head.

[Sally]

Have you seen the infant mortality statistics for Venezuela? We should not be accepting "low cost heating oil" from them -and Chavez as head of an oil rich nation should be held accountable for the health statistics of his country.

And should we let the leaders of the American buisness community off the hook?

Record profits! Insane retirement packages! and the poor prepare to freeze this winter because they can not afford to heat their houses.

At least Hugo is offering some relief that is more than I heard from the mouths of the American counterparts...

[marksman]

In spite of the half-hearted noise being made about this, big American oil companies probably prefer the Chinese and Cubans to get this oil and make it dissapear inside China and Cuba. If we got it it would drive prices down.
So you're theory is that the oil companies would rather have China acquire oil than themselves? So they've concocted a conspiracy to allow the environmentalists to prevent them from drilling because if Congress legalzed drilling, they'd have to?

If nobody wants drilling off of Florida -- particularly the Floridians -- then Congress wouldn't even be debating it. The only reason Congress is debating Florida Gulf drilling is because the oil companies are lobbying for it. This conspiracy makes no sense.

And oil doesn't "disappear" into China and Cuba. It's all part of the global oil market that affects prices.

[SteveGrenard]

I didn't say it was a conspiracy. Everything the administration and the oil companies have done is geared to raise, not lower prices. This is SOP for them.

Of course the oil disspears, particularly into China's economy. This serves to keep prices elevated. You don't honestly believe the oil China is drilling off Cuba will supply the U.S. or Europe do you?
You honestly don't know that when the US was paying less than two dollars a gallon for gasoline England was paying more than two pounds or almost five dollars? And I am going back 20 years.

Third Quarter 2005:


Politicians and other critics are asking why the industry allowed its refining capacity to tighten.

Exxon Mobil, the world's largest oil company, said yesterday that its third-quarter net income jumped 75 percent, to $9.92 billion. Its profit in the first nine months of this year - $25.42 billion - already equals its full-year earnings for 2004. This year's sales, which topped $100 billion in the last quarter, are expected to exceed those of Wal-Mart.

Another oil giant, Royal Dutch Shell, reported a 68 percent jump in profits yesterday, to $9.03 billion. Chevron is expected to post a profit of more than $4 billion today.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1028-01.htm

[Snide]

Nail.
Head.Sometimes I "get it." :)

[marksman]

You don't honestly believe the oil China is drilling off Cuba will supply the U.S. or Europe do you?
I do believe the oil they would have bought had they not drilled in the Florida gulf will depress prices elsewhere.

I can understand if oil companies want to create an artifical shortage by reducing supply. But if an oil field is to be drilled, it is irrational for them not to want to be the ones drilling it.

You honestly don't know that when the US was paying less than two dollars a gallon for gasoline England was paying more than two pounds or almost five dollars? And I am going back 20 years.
Relevance?

[SteveGrenard]

It has a lot of relevance to the thieves at Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron. Rich or
poor Venezuelans can buy gasoline at fifteen cents a gallon.

[SteveGrenard]

Please explain the obscene 25 billion dollars in profits Exxon has made this past year? And the
400 million its CEO made?

[Grammatron]

Please explain the obscene 25 billion dollars in profits Exxon has made this past year? And the
400 million its CEO made?

Oil at $70 a barrel explains that. What they want to pay their CEO is Exxon's bussiness.

[Ziggurat]

It has a lot of relevance to the thieves at Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron. Rich or poor Venezuelans can buy gasoline at fifteen cents a gallon.

Because the Venezuelan government subsidizes gasoline. Whereas our government taxes our gasoline.

[SteveGrenard]

Oil at $70 a barrel explains that. What they want to pay their CEO is Exxon's bussiness.

Actually it is what you, me and everyone pays him and it is our business.

[SteveGrenard]

Because the Venezuelan government subsidizes gasoline. Whereas our government taxes our gasoline.

And how can Venezuela afford to do that and we can't?

[Grammatron]

Actually it is what you, me and everyone pays him and it is our business.

You can stop buying oil biproducts if you wish.

[SteveGrenard]

What its called is illegal price gouging and illegal price fixing which is what the OPEC Cartel actually is. By implementing it in the U.S. our government is
complicit in that.

And don't tell me its infant mortality. The price gouging has a ripple effect across every business and service including medical care.

[shemp]

I gassed up this morning at the Citgo in Plaistow NH. Looked like business as usual. Screw Bush.

[marksman]

It has a lot of relevance to the thieves at Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron. Rich or
poor Venezuelans can buy gasoline at fifteen cents a gallon.

But it has no relevance as to whether oil that Cuba allows China to drill in the Florida Gulf for us in China will have an effect on global oil markets, which was the specific topic we were discussing.

Almost any factoid has relevance to somebody somewhere. That doen't make every factoid relevant to every discussion.

[marksman]

Please explain the obscene 25 billion dollars in profits Exxon has made this past year? And the
400 million its CEO made?

I'm not sure if this question is directed to me or not. I assume it doesn't as the question has not obvious relevance to the issue we were disucssing: whether Chinese drilling in the Florida Gulf would have an effect on global oil markets.

[Ziggurat]

And how can Venezuela afford to do that and we can't?

Are you serious?

Because Venezuela is a net oil producer, because the government essentially owns all that oil, and because their per-capita AND gross oil consumption is significantly lower than ours. The people don't really understand that those low prices are really being paid for by themselves, in the form of reduced government services or higher taxes. But it's off balance sheet: the numbers never get added together and presented as a bill to the voter, because it's profits that are passed up, rather than profits that are taken away.

The US government, on the other hand, doesn't own the oil in the US, or the oil we need to import, there's no profit to forgo: it would have to fork out cash to provide a subsidy. And because our consumption is much higher, and because it would be even higher still if prices were dropped that low, the amount of cash would be enormous. And it would have to come from taxing people directly. Would you pay significantly higher taxes in order to get lower gas prices? That's pretty stupid.

Not to mention, since demand would be much higher at lower prices, you'd either have gas shortages or you'd have to increase capacity significantly, and the only way to increase capacity significantly would be to pay the oil companies even more money, which means subsidies would most likely exacerbate the problem you object to: high exective compensation for oil companies.

All this would be obvious if you had a clue about economics.

[BPSCG]

I gassed up this morning at the Citgo in Plaistow NH. Looked like business as usual. Screw Bush.What, has Bush been saying we shouldn't gas up at Citgo?

[Jocko]

I gassed up this morning at the Citgo in Plaistow NH. Looked like business as usual. Screw Bush.

Hugo Chavez could easily be elected to congress by NH thanks to right-thinking granite staters like yourself.

[shemp]

Hugo Chavez could easily be elected to congress by NH thanks to right-thinking granite staters like yourself.

Shirley you mean "left-thinking."

[shemp]

What, has Bush been saying we shouldn't gas up at Citgo?

Not at all! Spending money is good for the economy and is a blow against terrorism! If we stop buying Venezuelan gas, then the terrorists have won!

[Tony]

Oil at $70 a barrel explains that. What they want to pay their CEO is Exxon's bussiness.

It's our business if we're being robbed by being sold an overpriced product. And since Exxon can afford to throw away 400 mil on an already rich disgusting fat pig, I'd say the market was cheated out of, atleast, 400 million dollars. And I’ll reiterate, it's really sad that a foreign leader offers Americans low price oil while an American robber baron gets obscenely wealthy off our backs.

[Huntster]

I am wondering if he doesn't expect this and how it impacts or meshes with his stated plans of providing free heating oil to over 400,000 poor Americans this winter as a PR gesture. If Americans don't buy the stuff expect him to give it away.

I'll take it for free, just to hurt him.

I don't expect to get anything from him, but I think he's quite capable of giving freebies to the poor here in order to foster class warfare.

I don't believe that our money means a great deal to him if he is a dyed in the wool communist. Plus he can get what he needs from elsewhere such as China.

Maybe, but financial difficulties even get the attention of communists. Any way I can help get him there I will do.

I don't care who his allies might end up being. They damned sure won't include me.

[Jocko]

It's our business if we're being robbed by being sold an overpriced product. And since Exxon can afford to throw away 400 mil on an already rich disgusting fat pig, I'd say the market was cheated out of, atleast, 400 million dollars. And I’ll reiterate, it's really sad that a foreign leader offers Americans low price oil while an American robber baron gets obscenely wealthy off our backs.


I can't wait till someone tells you you're overpaid. We'll see which way your indignance blows then.

Oh, and that "getting wealthy on others' backs" is also known by its shorter name, capitalism.

[BPSCG]

It's our business if we're being robbed by being sold an overpriced product. And since Exxon can afford to throw away 400 mil on an already rich disgusting fat pig, I'd say the market was cheated out of, atleast, 400 million dollars. And I’ll reiterate, it's really sad that a foreign leader offers Americans low price oil while an American robber baron gets obscenely wealthy off our backs.How do you feel about the fact that Chavez's largesse to the American poor comes at the expense of his own more numerous Venezuelan poor? Do you really believe he gives a flying fart about "the poor"? He's playing the demagogue game, nothing more, nothing less. At least your robber baron did something to earn his $400 million, and that money comes out of the pockets of the shareholders of his company, not the U.S. treasury. Chavez, OTOH, is robbing his own country's treasury because he thinks it's cool to pretend he's Robin Hood.

Funny, even after the Soviet Union collapsed, even after China has become wealthy by embracing capitalism, even when two economic beggar-class countries, Cuba and North Korea, are today's face of communism, you can still find apologists for the most successful misery-and-death creating system ever devised by the mind of man. Lincoln was right; you can fool some of the people all of the time.

[Tony]

How do you feel about the fact that Chavez's largesse to the American poor comes at the expense of his own more numerous Venezuelan poor?

Let me clear something up. I don't praise Chavez for offering the oil, and I question his intentions. I'm just making the sad observation that a foreigner is offering to take care of Americans before they take care of their own.

Do you really believe he gives a flying fart about "the poor"? He's playing the demagogue game, nothing more, nothing less.

Although it may be more complex than that, you're essentially right.

Chavez, OTOH, is robbing his own country's treasury because he thinks it's cool to pretend he's Robin Hood.

Like Bush. Except bush is robbing our treasury because he thinks it's cool to pretend he's a warrior and to hook his cronies up with free money.

Funny, even after the Soviet Union collapsed, even after China has become wealthy by embracing capitalism, even when two economic beggar-class countries, Cuba and North Korea, are today's face of communism, you can still find apologists for the most successful misery-and-death creating system ever devised by the mind of man. Lincoln was right; you can fool some of the people all of the time.

Take a look in the mirror; you're doing exactly what you describe above when you apologize for Christian atrocities, something that has a longer and more brutal history than communism. Furthermore, since I agree with you about Chavez, it's a laughable assertion that I'm apologizing for Chavez.

[BPSCG]

Let me clear something up. I don't praise Chavez for offering the oil, and I question his intentions. I'm just making the sad observation that a foreigner is offering to take care of Americans before they take care of their own.That's not quite the spin you put on it the first time:
And I’ll reiterate, it's really sad that a foreign leader offers Americans low price oil while an American robber baron gets obscenely wealthy off our backs.Then you were blasting the American robber baron and his "obscene" wealth (you didn't call him a capitalist pig, but I'm sure that was just an oversight on your part), while observing that a foreigner was "offering to take care of Americans."

And if you think Americans don't "take care of their own," you need to spend a little time looking at the federal budget; you'll find that we "take care of our own" to the tune of close to a trillion - that's trillion, with a "t" - dollars a year

Let's get one thing straight, okay? That single robber baron has done more to improve the human condition all by himself than all your "share-the-wealth" and "redistribute-the-land" demagogues who ever existed. He creates wealth; your Hugo Chavezes simply try to take it from Peter (skimming a little off the top for himself) so he can get Paul's blubbering gratitude. And simpletons sit back and admire Chavez because they disapprove of Peter.
Take a look in the mirror; you're doing exactly what you describe above when you apologize for Christian atrocities, something that has a longer and more brutal history than communism.I'll be happy to discuss that laughable assertion with you in another thread, if you care to start it. Here it's a complete derail.
Furthermore, since I agree with you about Chavez, it's a laughable assertion that I'm apologizing for Chavez.You just find his robbing his country's treasury to score some cheap political points with the ignoranti somehow admirable.

[Huntster]

.....I don't expect to get anything from him, but I think he's quite capable of giving freebies to the poor here in order to foster class warfare.......

There appears to be plenty of rancor within the U.S. for even a transparent manipulator like Chavez to exploit.

Often I wonder if it's truly class warfare. Sometimes I think the claimed issue is simply cover for the individual, who is engaged in partisan politics, which can degrade to the point of doing or saying anything in order to damage the party or leader currently in power.

[Tony]

That's not quite the spin you put on it the first time:

I worded it different, big deal. That's not "spin".

Then you were blasting the American robber baron and his "obscene" wealth (you didn't call him a capitalist pig, but I'm sure that was just an oversight on your part), while observing that a foreigner was "offering to take care of Americans."

So what? BTW, Your bit about "capitalist pig" is poisoning the well. Also, I wouldn't consider robber barons capitalists.

And if you think Americans don't "take care of their own," you need to spend a little time looking at the federal budget; you'll find that we "take care of our own" to the tune of close to a trillion - that's trillion, with a "t" - dollars a year.

If you think that's what I said, you need to read more carefully.

Let's get one thing straight, okay? That single robber baron has done more to improve the human condition all by himself than all your "share-the-wealth" and "redistribute-the-land" demagogues who ever existed.

LOL

I see you're as paranoid as ever.

He creates wealth; your Hugo Chavezes simply try to take it from Peter (skimming a little off the top for himself) so he can get Paul's blubbering gratitude. And simpletons sit back and admire Chavez because they disapprove of Peter.

More delusional paranoia.

You just find his robbing his country's treasury to score some cheap political points with the ignoranti somehow admirable.

No, I don't. I agree with you (unless you're saying you find Chaves' actions admirable). You're taking a page out of Chavez's book by engaging in the demagoguery. Chavez is obviously your boogie-man du-jour. Your wild and bazaar assertions betray your lack of ability to discuss this rationally.

[BPSCG]

I worded it different, big deal. That's not "spin".

So what? BTW, Your bit about "capitalist pig" is poisoning the well. Also, I wouldn't consider robber barons capitalists.
If you think that's what I said, you need to read more carefully.
LOL
I see you're as paranoid as ever.
More delusional paranoia.
No, I don't. I agree with you (unless you're saying you find Chaves' actions admirable). You're taking a page out of Chavez's book by engaging in the demagoguery. Chavez is obviously your boogie-man du-jour. Your wild and bazaar assertions betray your lack of ability to discuss this rationally.Rant quotient: 100. Substance quotient: 0.

BTW, it's "bizarre." Bazaar is a place you go shopping.

[Tony]

Rant quotient: 100. Substance quotient: 0.


An apt description for post #69. You give crap, you get crap.


As an aside, notice how BP is whining despite the fact that I agree with him? That's got to be a first.

[BPSCG]

You give crap, you get crap.

As an aside, notice how BP is whining despite the fact that I agree with him? That's got to be a first.Oh, sorry. I didn't realize you intended "robber baron" to be a term of praise. My mistake. Glad to hear you've finally seen the light.

Are you saying you agree with my "crap"?

[shuize]

Oil is fungible. Selling at a lower price to anyone, lowers the price for everyone by reducing demand.

That Chavez sells to Americans at the expense of those he claims to champion, poor Venezuelans, is just icing on the cake.

[shecky]

It's a mysery to me that anyone in the US gives a spit about Chavez at all. He's a second tier small time dictator of a a third world country which poses absolutely no threat to the US, yet when he calls Bush devil, the nation goes to pieces. I can't believe Americans can be so thin skinned.

[Tony]

Oh, sorry. I didn't realize you intended "robber baron" to be a term of praise. My mistake. Glad to hear you've finally seen the light.


I see that senility continues to take it's toll.

Are you saying you agree with my "crap".

Go back and read post #68. I said you were right about Chavez and that I agree with you. That was before you got unhinged and started frothing at the mouth.

[BPSCG]

I see that senility continues to take it's toll.Senile or not, I've somehow figured out that "it's" is not the possessive form of "it." It's "its."

Got it?

[Ziggurat]

Got it?

I think he's got it's. :D

[DaChew]

Couple of quick points: The robber-baron that some seem to be so angry about. Did he receive a large portion of his salary via stock options or was he actually paid $400 million? This is a significant question because, if he was paid in stock options, then that money came from the increase in stock price that he worked toward. If the stock had dropped, he would have made nothing on those options and, I suspect, nobody here would be complaining about that. An increase in stock price does not come at the expense of the consumer or the shareholders (they make money right along with him). Options are a good way of ensuring that a CEO works towards the growth of the company because he can't exercise those options unless the stock price improves.

On the subject of China drilling off the Florida coast and Cuba: Logically, the best thing for China to do with the oil they pump out of the gulf would be to transport it to refineries in the U.S. - it's closer and the U.S. is the largest market in the world. Then use the money to buy oil closer to home, like the Persian gulf where they already get the majority of their oil anyway. Transportation is an expense and the best way to maximize profits is to limit expense.

[SteveGrenard]

Good point. Some of the 400 million was probably options or deferrments. Here is a recap of the actual pay of oil company CEOs:

http://www.nydailynews.com/business/story/448060p-377215c.html

I recall reading that a refinery in Cuba set up by the Russians is being or has reopened.

[shuize]

Senile or not, I've somehow figured out that "it's" is not the possessive form of "it." It's "its."
Its bazaar.

[Huntster]

It's a mysery to me that anyone in the US gives a spit about Chavez at all. He's a second tier small time dictator of a a third world country which poses absolutely no threat to the US, yet when he calls Bush devil, the nation goes to pieces. I can't believe Americans can be so thin skinned.

I"m surprised you'd write that after 50 years of Fidel.

Fidel didn't even have oil. Our elimination of trade with him was a one-sided disaster. They're still driving around over there in 1950's era "Chevies" that are kept together with bandaids, bubble gum, and blackmarketed parts (those who are lucky enough to afford a vehicle).

Yet Fidel was at the ccenterpoint of the near-beginning of WWIII in October of 1962, is rumored to have been involved in a U.S. presidential assasination, and has been a thorn in the American political side for my entire life (and I'm no spring chicken).

And Chavez appears to be nuttier than Fidel.

[shecky]

Yet Fidel was at the ccenterpoint of the near-beginning of WWIII in October of 1962, is rumored to have been involved in a U.S. presidential assasination, and has been a thorn in the American political side for my entire life (and I'm no spring chicken).


OK, Chavez is the next Castro...:rolleyes: If so, so what?

Is there a demonstrable threat to the US by Chavez? No.

[Jocko]

OK, Chavez is the next Castro...:rolleyes: If so, so what?

Is there a demonstrable threat to the US by Chavez? No.

Er, I supplied a link a while back where he threatens to embargo the US. 2004, I think. So I think your "no" is a tad premature.

A better question is what threat does the US pose to Venezuela? Apart from making Hugo even filthier rich?

[daredelvis]

A better question is what threat does the US pose to Venezuela? Apart from making Hugo even filthier rich?

Not a big fan of Chavez, but that is an odd question coming from one as informed as you.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/ops/venezuela.htm


"On 11 April 2002 the head of Venezuela's National Guard said the military had taken control of the country from President Hugo Chavez. In a televised address, Gen. Alberto Camacho Kairuz said the Chavez administration had "abandoned its functions" and the armed forces chief of staff, Gen. Bernabe Carrero Cubero, said that military leaders had asked the president to resign and call for new elections. The country's richest business leaders, its largest labor confederation, its top military men and its most influential media had joined forces against Chavez.

Chavez returned to power on 14 April 2002 following the collapse of the coup leadership in the face of an emotional outpouring from supporters in slums and towns across the country. President Chëvez's comeback left Washington looking rather stupid. The national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, didn't help that impression when she cautioned the restored president to "respect constitutional processes."

The Inter-American Democratic Charter is an Organization of American States' agreement to condemn and investigate the overthrow of any democratically elected OAS member government and, if necessary, suspend the offender's membership. The charter was approved by the 34 OAS member nations in Lima, Peru, on 11 September 2001. Washington's lack of commitment to democracy in the region had been made clear by the response to the Chavez coup attempt. Over the past decade, previous Administrations had reacted promptly in similar situations in Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru and Guatemala -- publicly calling for an adherence to the rule of law. This time around, the US reaction was muted, first accepting Chavez´s ouster, then embracing the coup leaders, and finally accepting the lead of the OAS to condemn the coup. In previous crises, the US rallied other countries around the hemisphere.

In the months before the coup, the US Embassy in Caracas had sought to distance itself from coup rumors. US Ambassador Donna Hrinak, took the unusual step of asking the American military attache to cease contacts with the dissidents. But Washington's signals to Chavez's opponents had been open, and at the highest levels. On 05 February 2002 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Colin Powell expressed concern "with some of the actions of Venezuelan President Chavez and his understanding of what a democratic system is all about." Similar remarks were made that same day by CIA director George Tenet. The opposition felt it had the green light from Washington to remove Chavez from power.

There were published reports that suggested that the US military provided intelligence or other assistance to the Venezuelan military as it conducted this coup. There were reports that Navy vessels carrying out exercises off Venezuela's Caribbean coast engaged in strategic communications jamming during the days of the coup. Immediately after the ouster, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer suggested that the administration was pleased that Mr. Chávez was gone. "The government suppressed what was a peaceful demonstration of the people," Mr. Fleischer said, which "led very quickly to a combustible situation in which Chávez resigned."

Within hours of the coup, Otto Reich, the assistant secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs, summoned a number of Latin-American ambassadors to his office and told them that Chavez had resigned and he urged them to support the new government. Reich reportedly phoned Venezuelan coup leader Pedro Carmona the day he took over as interim president, pleading with Carmona not to dissolve the National Assembly, which He said would be "a stupid thing to do," and would provoke an outcry. Subsequent reports suggest that this phone call was made by the US ambassador. "


Daredelvis

[Jocko]

Not a big fan of Chavez, but that is an odd question coming from one as informed as you.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/ops/venezuela.htm





Okay, I see. A paranoid megalomaniac believes the US had something to do with the coup, and we're all supposed to go along with it and believe it too?

Uh-huh. There are reports. There are published reports. Published by who, and where, and why, remians unknown so as to maintain a paranoid megalomaniac's assumptions that the big, bad boogeyman is out to get him. All rooted in the Ari Fleischer comment that didn't express adequate angst over his apparent departure.

Good thing Ari didn't call him the devil, poot old Hugo would have come completely unhinged. :rolleyes:

[Dorian Gray]

Okay, I see. A paranoid megalomaniac believes the US had something to do with the coup, and we're all supposed to go along with it and believe it too? What does Pat Robertson have to do with this?

[Dorian Gray]

If support of terrorism doesn't cause people to boycott gas stations, why should a few negative comments?

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yet Fidel was at the ccenterpoint of the near-beginning of WWIII in October of 1962, is rumored to have been involved in a U.S. presidential assasination, and has been a thorn in the American political side for my entire life (and I'm no spring chicken).
OK, Chavez is the next Castro...:rolleyes: If so, so what?

1) You wanna do that again?

2) Chavez has oil. In our backyard. Castro didn't.

Is there a demonstrable threat to the US by Chavez? No.

"Demonstrable?" Today? Maybe not.

Castro wasn't much of a threat in 1958, either.

[shecky]

1) You wanna do that again?

2) Chavez has oil. In our backyard. Castro didn't.

And that's a problem because...?


"Demonstrable?" Today? Maybe not.

Castro wasn't much of a threat in 1958, either.

Nor is he isn't a threat now. Chavez even less so, by your own admission. Yet it doesn't keep Americans from reverting to a bunch of bedwetters when his name is mentioned.

[SteveGrenard]

The U.S. currently buys 40% of its oil from Venezuela.

[BPSCG]

The U.S. currently buys 40% of its oil from Venezuela.More like 12% (http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html).

[Dave1001]

And should we let the leaders of the American buisness community off the hook?

Record profits! Insane retirement packages! and the poor prepare to freeze this winter because they can not afford to heat their houses.

At least Hugo is offering some relief that is more than I heard from the mouths of the American counterparts...

A mentally ill homeless guy offers you a sandwich while his daughter is malnourished. Do you accept it from him? That's the equivalent of Venezuela under Chavez offering low cost heating oil to poor Americans while the health statistics of his oil rich country are criminally low.

[Dave1001]

It's a mysery to me that anyone in the US gives a spit about Chavez at all. He's a second tier small time dictator of a a third world country which poses absolutely no threat to the US, yet when he calls Bush devil, the nation goes to pieces. I can't believe Americans can be so thin skinned.

It's a quid pro quo. A significant portion of the American media wants brown male "enemies". Chavez wants A List celebrity status. It's better to be infamous than unkown, in that calculation.

[SteveGrenard]

More like 12% (http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html).


Yup, stand corrected. Should have said 40% of their output. Used to be higher:


However, the United States is the largest importer of Venezuelan oil -- purchasing at least 65 percent of the Venezuelan oil exports. In fact, Venezuela overtook Saudi Arabia as the top exporter of petroleum to the U.S. in first five months of 1995. From January to May 1995, Venezuela exported 1.43 million barrels per day of petroleum to the United States, but Saudi Arabia only exported 1.34 million barrels per day to the United States during that same period.2 This rise in U.S. dependency on Venezuelan petroleum is in part due American importers' concern about price hikes in Mexico and Middle Eastern countries since 1994.3

http://www.american.edu/TED/esp/venezuela-WTO.htm

[brodski]

Somebody is drilling off the coast of Florida and it ain't the U.S.:

Steve, you do know that you just quoted the "American Free Press" which is (for all intents and purposes) an organ of the US Nazi party. This "newspaper" is little more than a collection of paranoid racist rants, and any connection their stories have to reality is entirely coincidental.
For instance they are the primary "news" source used the the loose Change video.
I would be very wary at taking anything in that article at face value.

[SteveGrenard]

I hear 'ya but also heard it on the evening news.... plus
there are plenty of other sources for this news; this one came out on top of a google search the other day. Instead of trying to impeach unpleasant realities from an unacceptable messenger try searching China-Cuba Drilling Oil off Florida etc.

Chew on a few of these:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5321594.stm

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/nation/15611264.htm


Let me know if you find any nazis involved in them as I surmise the nazis love this story. If you read all of this you might find the extraordinary tale of how US Treasury Agents forced a hotel to throw out, yes evict, Cuban oil negotiators who were meeting with American Exxon people to discuss oil exploration. With friends like that working for U.S. taxpayers who needs enemies?


http://www.fin24.co.za/articles/companies/display_article.aspx?Nav=ns&lvl2=comp&ArticleID=1518-1783_1999141

[brodski]

I hear 'ya but also heard it on the evening news.... plus


Thank you for the better sources, after having to wade through American Free Press links over at the loose change boards, I would ask for a second source if the AFP claimed that the sky was blue. :)

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
1) You wanna do that again?

2) Chavez has oil. In our backyard. Castro didn't.

And that's a problem because...?

1) We need oil
2) Our relationships with our other close oil producers, Mexico and Canada, arent the greatest
3) We can't seem to get past our self-imposed environmental stranglehold in order to get oil domestically
4) Need I mention our relationship with the oil rich Middle East nations?

Originally Posted by Huntster
"Demonstrable?" Today? Maybe not.

Castro wasn't much of a threat in 1958, either.

Nor is he isn't a threat now.

Again, he damned sure was in 1962.

Again, you wanna do that again?

Chavez even less so, by your own admission.

Again, today, maybe.

Tomorrow?

Yet it doesn't keep Americans from reverting to a bunch of bedwetters when his name is mentioned.

No need to wet the bed.

But there's plenty of justification for getting pissed off and concerned when the damned fool comes to New York and speaks/acts the way he did.

[shemp]

I gassed up at Citgo again today. Did my part to fight the Devil.

[Darth Rotor]

I gassed up at Citgo again today. Did my part to fight the Devil.
Odds are he owns some shares in Citgo, so he probably made a profit off of you.

DR

[SteveGrenard]

Who questionned whether there was a Citgo boycott movement in the works? I hope the following isn't a suspected nazi plot but apparently there is
a boycott of Citgo "call."

Citgo criticizes calls for gasoline boycott

Last Update: 4:56 PM ET Oct 3, 2006



(This article was originally published Monday)

HOUSTON (MarketWatch) -- Citgo Petroleum Corp. on Monday criticized calls for a boycott on its gasoline that followed Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's attacks on U.S. President George W. Bush at the U.N.
In a press release, the U.S. refining arm of the Venezuelan state oil company said that the calls "run counter to the principles of a free-market economy, so cherished by all Americans" and "are being pushed in search of political and economic gain."

The boycott campaign ignores "the implications that such an action would have on American businesses and the American public," the statement said.




http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&guid=%7B670626C2-EF73-42FA-90E4-41B7F77659B1%7D&keyword=

[Darth Rotor]

Who questionned whether there was a Citgo boycott movement in the works? I hope the following isn't a suspected nazi plot but apparently there is
a boycott of Citgo "call."

Didn't Hannity or one of the AM talk radio guys advocate that after Hugo gave his rant at the UN? Heard that was the case, but didn't actually hear it on the radio.

DR

[shemp]

If an organized boycott of Citgo happens, I'll take my business there every week.

[FreeChile]

I would probably stock up on gas for 5 years. I have a big basement. Maybe I'd sell some of it at Shell or BP.

[gnome]

Speaking of which, this year, more than any other year since I started paying attention to gas prices, there is severe disparity even locally.

I can see $2.07 in one place, $2.14 in another, and $2.29 down the road. In the past, I'm used to most local gas stations being within a penny or two of each other. What accounts for it? Economically, this shouldn't happen unless there's a variable I'm not aware of.

[Huntster]

If an organized boycott of Citgo happens, I'll take my business there every week.

Good for you, I guess.

If it were up to me, you'd go without gas altogether.

[Huntster]

I would probably stock up on gas for 5 years. I have a big basement. Maybe I'd sell some of it at Shell or BP.

Big Basement Full of Gas = Big BOOM.

[shemp]

Good for you, I guess.

If it were up to me, you'd go without gas altogether.

Spoken like a true idiot, along with the other idiots who are calling for a boycott.

So everyone stops going to Citgo. Does this mean that Venezuela stops selling gasoline? No. They simply sell it wholesale to the other retailers. It still gets to the market.

Who gets hurt by a boycott? The thousands of U.S. employees of Citgo. Americans, not Venezuelans. I bet many of these people voted for Bush. Well, maybe that will console them when they lose their jobs. And some of them will find other employment quickly, but many others will not. So the unemployment rolls increase. Moral: Once again, U.S. cuts off its own nose to spite its face.

[RandFan]

I actually go out of my way to buy my gas at Citgo. Sally, you'll forgive me if I don't look you in the eyes.

Oil is fluid, well, yeah, no, that's not what I mean, I mean it doesn't matter where you buy your oil from. So long as you buy oil you increase the market for it. If America stopped buying mid-east oil it would simply increase the pressure for oil from all other sources which would drive up the price and the other producers would shift there production to us causing a shortfall in other world markets. Mid-east oil would simply be diverted to these markets and eventually the market would stabilize.

The only way you could theoretically have any effect is to stop using oil altogether (but let's face it, your consumption is statistically insignificant).

Still, if it's the thought that counts...