Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (37710)	8/6/2008 9:37:39 PM
From: InvesTing	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

So you would rather we not have 1.5 mil barrels a day because oil is depleting. Now that's bright. So when do you think we won't be using more than 1.5 million barrels a day in this country? Why would you rather 1) pay Arabs for that million and a half brls/day instead of producing it? 2) pay more for oil because 1.5 mil barrels are not on the market--some say that a 1% increase or decrease causes a 10% price change now. If that is true that would mean in today's market of 80 some million a day about 15% lower oil prices. Can you tell me one single problem exploiting our ability to produce oil would cause the alternative fuels/methodology that the pie in the sky crowd want to increase? The liberals are more fixated on not drilling and not building nuclear plants--proven sources of energy than developing new ones. If you hear them talk, it's all ramble yamble, "fund this" "research that". The same rambling 'idys' brought us all of these corn based ethanol plants. It makes much more sense to let oil companies drill --that brings money into the government and reduce the red tape on nuclear power plant construction and refinery construction--that costs nothing, while making some research funds available and having a non partisan group pick out a plan to go forward after reviewing the research. You must remember that if all of these alternatives were so damned easy and efficient, they would already be being produced marketed and making fossil fuel obsolete. IF the government has to tax you to make these things go (subsidize) on a continuing basis(like ethanol) other than as a start up, something is wrong with oil over 100/brl. Why not build and use a nuclear reactor for the energy requried for tar sand extraction?