Obama and BP masking severity of oil spill?

George Bush and Dick Cheney I see its their fault not Obama's.

Now I understand.

 

Did I read that, right? 500, 000 dollars is all it would have cost the big oil companies to prevent one of the most catastrophic disasters of all time? I'm sure the fatcat oil bosses could easily spend that much on a party with champagne and prostitutes in one night.

 

I see, so it has to be just one or the other? The thing is, I am completely unbiased. I don't care which group the culprits come from. I think it isn't the fault of one party or another, but the whole system which is corrupt and rotten to the core.

 

Here Joe - maybe this article pointing out where Obama is at fault will enable your blood pressure to come back down.

The blame lies with the power big business has over ALL politicians...right across the board.

 

Anyone who takes money from oil companies is to be blamed. People scratching other people's backs. The GOP isn't some sort of divine being incapable of corruption or making mistakes, same goes with the democrats.

 

If only it was as simple as Joe seems to believe...the "good guys" versus the "bad guys". Like a Hollywood movie.

 

Unfortunately, in these times, anyone can be a villain. Refusing to face that fact creates a bubble of surrealism and oblivion. Joe will categorically defend anyone on the right of the political spectrum, no matter what the facts are. And attack anyone on the left, no matter what the facts are.

 

Which party ran on a freedom ticket? Which ran on the ideals of free market and capitalism?

Who ran on the idea of more regulation, protection against "Big Oil" and other corporate interest.

BP gave more money to Obama than any other politician and there was an obvious Quid Pro Quo.

You two are comical. When its that damn Bush's fault its that damn Bush to be blamed. When its Obama's fault well then any reasonable person should see that we are all just a guilty aren't we.

What a couple of clowns.

 

Just calling a spade a spade...

 

Decided by Bush and Cheney?

I thought the US Department of Interior Minerals Management Service reported to Obama and Biden.

Yep sure enough.

Sorry it is Obama and Biden who decided not to protect the oil wells.

They were to distracted what with lying to America about health care coverage and forcing more rules and regulations in 2000+ page bills that no one read and no Republicans voted on but All Democrats did against the will of the majority of the people.

 

If Obama is to blame for this mess.... he can go fuck himself. I still hate Bush to this day for what he did to us in 2007. When he took office, diesel prices went up a little. By 2008... it hit 4.50 a gallon and drove my business (and my American Dream) right out of my life. All while his oil buddies reported record profits.

No. He will always be a bastard in my eyes. He sat by while my dreams were crushed. Fuck him.

 

Let's try not to upset Joe. He is under the impression that only liberals participated in deregulation or took money from oil companies.

Conservatives have never been in bed with oil companies.


The fact that Cheney's former company, Halliburton, routinely made equipment and chemicals used in oil drilling for BP's use probably slipped from everybody's mind.

Or how about this?
"According to the Center for Responsive Politics, BP ranked fourth amongst oil and gas company contributors in the 2000 elections, with donations totaling $1.1 million. Two thirds of that amount went to the GOP.

Cheney was grateful and never forgot the favor: in early 2001 the Vice President set up an Energy Task Force seeking to design a national energy policy. In a slap in the face to democracy, the Task Force was never open to official public comment and kept all its deliberations secret from the public. At the time, the White House claimed that turning over its records from the Task Force would impede its ability to get candid advice.

For years, Bush and Cheney successfully stonewalled attempts to shed light on the inner workings of the Energy Task Force. Indeed, the administration won a Supreme Court ruling stipulating that the White House would not have to reveal the records of industry executives who had met with administration officials. Finally, however, after four long years the Washington Post obtained a list showing that oil company officials, including BP, had met with Cheney aides at the White House."


I'm sure that was only single occurrence, it's not like anyone from the Bush/Cheney administration actually benefited from the Energy Task Force.

Um... Nevermind that....
"The culture of permissiveness in the White House fostered an incestuous relationship between Cheney officials and BP. Take for example, the case of native Alaskan Andrew Lundquist, a man who worked for both his state’s senators on Capitol Hill. The Executive Director of Cheney’s Energy Task Force, Lundquist later oversaw efforts to spearhead energy policy at the White House.

However, Lundquist later left the government and opened a consulting business. Nine months later, he became a lobbyist for companies that served to benefit from the very same energy policy that he had helped to craft. Lundquist’s clients, which paid him more than $300,000 in 2003, included BP."

Joe's memory is very fickle at best. He seems to forget all those years under Bush when they were deciding national policies behind closed doors.
But the liberals are the ones usurping the country.

Truth is, both sides are in bed with the oil companies. Believing anything else is utter naivety.

Liberals are sheeples, conservatives have Alzheimer's....



source: Nikolas Kozloff on mongabay.com

 

The oil companies were smart in 2000 and put their money in the president who would protect America from oil rig spills. Unfortunately due to the oil crisis and restrictions on drilling in America the oil companies had to pay record prices for oil and since regulations for the past few decades caused a refinery shortage gas prices went up accordingly. To bad the profits went to OPEC instead of Shell, Exon, Mobil, or Texaco. But it gave the liberals a way to pull the rug over stupid peoples eyes and convince them that big oil made big profit.

 

BTW just wondering how is the economy and employment doing these days in America? Who is responsible?

World Peace. How is that going these days? Has there been an increase in world political stability? Maybe we need to look for a president with Nobel Peace Prize credentials next time.

Barrack Obama awarded the Deepwater Horizon a safety award last year. And then virtually stopped their once a month safety inspections.

I get the impression Obama wanted a catastrophe.

 

So when a conservative is in bed with oil companies it's fine, but when a liberal is in bed with an oil company it's bad, nice double standard.

On a side note, I have a little counter-argument for your bullshit on oil profits. It would appear that Exxon earned a record-breaking profit last year, $40.6 Billion to be exact. It's a record, no company in the history of mankind has earned this much money in a single year. The total amount of sales was $404 billion, that exceeds the gross domestic product of over 120 countries combined. By the way, OPEC is an assembly of oil producing countries, they don't earn a profit. That would be like saying that the UN earns a profit.

 

Yep you are right there in lock step with the other sheeple.

So their total sales went up yeah well no shit they were paying four times their normal amount for a barrel of oil also. So they charged more even twice to three times more. So it stands to reason yes in deed Einstein their total SALES went through the roof. Not total profit.

The anti-oil crowd pulled one over on you cooking the books tho make youthink that Exxon, Mobil, Texaco and all the rest were bilking the world and laughing all the way to the bank. All so they could neetly tie it into a Bush Cheney conspiracy.

What a bunch of sheeple all organized nicely into their little flocks ready to go vote against Bush and for a "change".

Where is your change?

Still got gitmo, Afghanistan, and MUCH MUCH worse unemployment. ........ Duh! ....... that's the change!!! Changed us from a massive, productive, healthy, economy that weathers storms to a fragile shitpile weak ass economy and massive unemployment. No shit there it was right there under our noses all along.

 

Um... Okay. The fact that oil costs more is already accounted into the number. Net sales = Total Revenues - Cost of Goods Sold. The cost of goods sold would be the cost of purchasing the oil or to make it available for consumption. So as you can see, Einstein, the net sales went up; which means that they are selling more of it. Furthermore, the article specifically said that the total profit was record-breaking, so yeah, it was about total profit anyway.

Exxon's balance sheet and income statement are available to whoever possess shares from the company. Exxon is indeed trading publicly so they surely have millions of shares out there. On the balance sheet you can figure out the total net income (profit), and last year's net income was record breaking. That information is widely made available to Exxon shareholders, therefore making impossible to be cooked, whatever the fuck you meant by that.

A few links to my sources
Articles from the Washington post, Consumer Energy Report, New-York Times, and Huffington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/30/AR2009013003744.html
http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2009/02/01/exxon-sets-record-profit-despite-recession/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/worldbusiness/01iht-exxon.4.9679416.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/30/exxon-mobil-reports-recor_n_162468.html

What a nice bunch of sheeple all organized nicely into little flocks ready to eat whatever comes out of Rush Limbaugh's rectum.

Bush did it. He did everything. Ever.

 

So gasoline goes from ~ 2 dollar a gallon to ~ 4 dollar a gallon.

A barrel of oil goes from ~ 30 a barrel to ~ 120 a barrel.

Do they teach math in Canada or just sit you all down in front of a TV and have you watch liberal TV shows and read the Huffington post?

That is price of product twice the original cost and the price for raw materials goes up four times.

And of course we can trust :

http://www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.consumerenergyreport.com
http://www.nytimes.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com

to illustrate to us clearly how this increases your net profit. Were they educated in Canada also?

 

Are they fucking serious? Mudpie cap? Tiger Woods and a team of Boy Scouts taking turns with golf balls and knotted rope?

 

I can't help but feel that you're leaving a crucial piece of information behind. Exxon themselves posted those fucking numbers! The news articles only confirm it. It's frustrating how thick you are.

So let's take it from the top again shall we?
To determine net sales, which is the part you're so expertly disputing, one must take total revenues - cost of goods sold.

Let's give you a simplified example for that dense brain of yours.

Joe operates a lemonade stand.
He sells 20 cups throughout the day at $0.50 per cup.
This will determine your total revenue: 20 x .50 = $10
But we must deduct the cost of making the lemonade in order to get the net sales amount.
Let's say that it costs $0.10 per cup to make the lemonade.
This will determine your operating cost: 20 x .10 = $2
Next we subtract the operating cost from the total revenue.
(20 x .50) - (20 x .10) = 8
You have effectively made $8 for a whole day. This is your net sales or net income.

What happens if the cost of making lemonade goes up? You have to increase the price per cup to match the rise in cost.
Let's say that the cost increases by $0.15 per cup. It is logical to increase the price per cup by that much as well.

The new formulas:
20 x .65 = $13 (total revenue)
20 x .25 = $5 (total cost)
(20 x .65) - (20 x .25) = 8

Observe how the profit didn't decrease even though the cost increased.

This is the same thing going on with the oil companies. As the cost of oil goes up, so do the prices. This maintains the profit margin. The only way that oil companies could be losing money is if the cost of oil went up but the prices didn't. And we know that it's not the case because the prices routinely go up. This is simple arithmetic.

Let's recap this for your thick skull.
The cost of oil goes up, but it's fine because so do the prices. The oil companies maintain a certain percentage of profit, known as the markup, constant due to the fact that they increase the price according to the cost.
An increase in sales (net sales = total revenue - cost of goods sold) is an indicator of more people buying oil or gasoline, not because the cost of oil goes up.

Here is my suggestion. Before you trash my education, make sure you have at least a basic understanding of high school arithmetic. And let's not forget that Exxon themselves posted the record-breaking profit!

Were you born this dense or do you practice everyday?