Hello:

Oil is a strategic commodity. Our armed forces cannot do war without it. Before we let private industry sell it all, we WILL seize the oil companies.

Given that we WILL do that, the question becomes when. I think right about now would be good. You?

excon

ebaines

I think we need to wait for the Cesar Chavez/Fidel Castro Unity Party to come into power first - then we can natoinalize eveything all at once!

Seriously - the US is not going to be nationalizing anything that has as much political and economic clout as the oil companies. Before that comes rationing (as in WW II) and price controls (as in 1973 - and boy was that disaster!).

michealb

I think it would be a better idea is to get the congress to actually let us use the oil America has instead of stopping us from using it every chance they get. America has about 2 trillion barrels of oil in reserve that currently isn't being used.(Oil Shale Reserves - A Daily Reckoning White Paper Report) Environmentalist don't want cheap oil though because then people won't use less.

inthebox

Surprising Ex, I thought you were a libertarian?

If the government "seizes" control of the oil companies, what other industry do you think they will want to "seize" next? How about gold or corn or coal ......

progunr

Similar to my question earlier today, which no one has responded to.

How much does the price per barrel or gallon have to be, before we stop worrying about the spotted field mouse, and start using OUR OWN OIL??

Can you just see these other nations, laughing at us, and saying something along these lines:

Can you believe those stupid Americans!! We've gotten the price up to $135 a barrel, and they STILL HAVE DONE NOTHING TO START USING THEIR OWN OIL!!!

So, whats it gonna take, $8 a gallon, $15...........$20?

michealb

How is the government going to seize a global company anyways? They all ready control about 80% of the oil reserves in the US anyways. Unless of course you saying we should start invading OPEC countries for oil?

tomder55

I share the sentiments of those who are begging (including those evil oil companies ) for us to open up our reserve areas for exploration . They wanted to do that when the price was low over 10 years ago and they were rejected . Now that the price is high they argue that it would take too long;at least a decade, to get the areas on line. Duhhhh , was it short term thinking 10 years ago to decline it ? and where will the price be in another decade if we don't ?
At very least if we have to pay high prices it should at least be going to domestic sources instead of the Russians;the Sheiks and the thug Hugo Chavez. It is absolutely rediculous that off shore the Chinese are drilling away on behalf of the Cubans. It is absolutely rediculous that we cannot explore in an area of Arctic Alaska the size of many big city airports when on the other side of the Arctic Ocean ,in the Barents Sea you could walk across the Russian rigs.
Lukoil’s shipping strategy for the Barents Sea

Not only that ;But Russia is frantically claimimg the Arctic territory ;planting the Russian flag under the North Pole , and fitting a nuclear ice breaker for drilling purposes.

Brazil has just found an off shore major deposit and will no doubt rush to exploit it.
michaelb is correct that there is a massive reserve in South Dakota just waiting for us to tap into. Meanwhile we've turned the Alberta Canada town of Fort McMurray into a boon town.

Nah ;we don't need to nationalize . We need to unleash the great forces of capitalism again.

excon

Hello again,

This has nothing to do with capitalism... I like capital. It has nothing to do with exploration or the idea that we shouldn't explore.... We should. It has nothing to do with profits... I like profits. It has nothing to do with the ecology... I'm a green guy.

It has to do with the fact that oil is finite, and going to run out. It's pretty important to us. Did I say it WILL run out? Oil, is NOT like any other product in the marketplace. At some point, it will be in our national interest to guard the remaining supply where ever it is, as long as it OUR supply. THAT is going to happen as well it should.

Consider that I'm using words like "pretty important to us", in the context of today. Even though gas will cost $4 a gallon this summer, we're still gonna drive. With all the cars on the road, you can't imagine a future without gasoline.

I can. I can imagine, within 5 years, oil at $1,000 a barrel and gasoline, where you can find it, at $25 a gallon. THEN, you'll be singing a different tune. All I'm saying, is lets not keep our heads in the sand. Lets do it now when it can do some good.

excon

BABRAM

The pricing will just keep escalating unless we decide to drill our own resources. Although we might get a little relief from OPEC just on merit bases alone, if our country doesn't vote another Republican back into the White House. That's the short term solution. But for the long term, at the same time, we have to keep up the challenge of discovering or processing for all alternative fuels. In fact, we have enough coal and H2O if the strict environmentalist could just compromise (I'd permit them supervision levels), then everybody would be more content. We have some of the brightest minds any University has ever produced, ready to serve, and there are very few circumstances when habitats can't be preserved while at the same time helping relieve the rising oil costs.

tomder55

Good point about the coal Bobby . Liquification of coal is 1940s technology . WE have an abundant supply.

Excon ;yes I see a future beyond our use of oil but we have to bridge that gap. Also as you recall I offered the theory a few posts back that oil is in fact a renewable resource.
http://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current...st-211991.html

Our energy problems will not be solved without keeping an open mind about all alternatives. Nationalizing is not taking a leadership position . I uderstand the temptation for nationalization but that would take us in exactly the wrong direction.

Look ; most of the price can be explained by speculators driving up the cost and the dollar value. Even if we just announced that we were going to aggressively exploit our own resources and add them to the world supply it would have an immediate impact on investor behavior. If President Bush would do more than just pay lip service to a strong monetary policy it would also have an impact. If Congress would restrain their spending just a little it would have an impact. Right now the difference between a balanced budget and deficit is the big agri-business welfare policy.
There are plenty ways to guarantee the energy supply at a reasonable cost without taking draconian measures we know do not work.