Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘oil’


When Donald Trump became US president, he set about to undo three things former President Obama had succeeded in doing. That is because many billionaire Republican donors were opposed to Trump, most notably Charles and David Koch, who are heavily invested in the energy industry. Trump did not want enemies inside his own party, and he had plenty of them when he was first elected.

Quite naturally, the Paris Climate Agreement had to go since it is an attack on the oil industry, which primarily, though not exclusively, supports Republicans. Ending world oil dependency and thereby reversing course on global warming means terminating the industry or greatly reducing it. as well as ending or significantly reducing corporate oil profits, share prices, and dividends. In effect, the Paris Climate Agreement is an attack on the billionaires of the Republican Party. That is precisely why Trump pulled the US out of the accord, regardless of the false excuses that came out of his mouth.

Trump had to get rid of the Iranian nuclear deal since it allowed Iranian oil back on the world market during Obama’s presidency. This placed downward pressure on the profits, dividends and share prices of the fossil fuel corporations because the increased supply put downward pressure on the prices of all sorts of things we pay for, such as oil and gasoline. The best way for Trump to get oil and gasoline prices moving upward again was simply pulling the United States out of the nuclear deal with Iran. Since the USA pulled out, notice the price we pay for gasoline has risen.

By pulling the US out of the nuclear deal using lies and distortions, Trump knowingly and deliberately was redistributing income from the 99 to the 1 percent via higher oil and gasoline prices. But, the billionaires behind the Republican Party were happier with Trump because of it.

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-B) bought Burlington Northern Santa Fe for $26.5 billion back in 2010. It was his biggest acquisition ever. The railroad is the largest transporter of crude oil in the United States. If the Keystone pipeline is completed, it will compete directly with Buffett’s railroad. The pipeline will transport oil from the Canadian Tar Sands to the Gulf of Mexico. The Republican Koch brothers are heavily invested with the Tar Sands.

Koch Industries is a major player in the Canadian oil market. The Washington Post identified the company in April 2014 as the largest foreign leaseholder of acres of Canadian oil sands.

According to EcoWatch in 2018, “A leaked memorandum published by The Intercept and Documented Investigations shows that a Koch Industries’ donors network, known as the Seminar Network, has taken credit for Donald Trump approving the permits for both the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines during the first months of his presidency.” (Click here for the original story.)

Needless to say, Warren Buffett is a big supporter of the Democratic Party and the Koch’s basically control the Republican Party. Buffett’s loss is the Democratic Party’s loss while it is the Koch brothers and Republican Party’s gain.

These political games are being played pitting billionaires against the 99 percent (as well as other billionaires), and the US corporate news media wants to keep you ignorant of these facts.

Read Full Post »

Iran-Kerman-schoolgirls
The Iranian nuclear deal has done something quite wonderful. It has lowered oil prices by ending the US led embargo of Iran’s products, including oil. Iranian oil is now flooding the international markets, driving the price of oil and gasoline down. Some people in the USA are not happy with this deal, notably Republicans. One has to wonder, however, if that’s because of that oil flooding the world’s markets, or if they’re really worried the Iranians will violate the agreement, launch a suicidal nuclear assault on the United States, which would be a calamity for the Iranians since there would be a dust heap afterwards where the nation of Iran once stood, especially considering the success these same people claim for the US missile defense shield.

One has to wonder if the deal to keep Iran embargoed was intentionally to keep its oil off the world market, which drove oil and gasoline prices higher than they would otherwise have been. In other words, the effect of the Iranian embargo was to redistribute money from the 99 percent to investors and executives of Big Oil. The lack of a nuclear deal kept that embargo in place. Was this a strange coincidence? Or a master plan?

Big Oil is a big supporter of the Republican Party. Did the president strike a deal with the Iranians with an eye toward driving the price of oil and gasoline down, as well as Big Oil’s profit margins. The president’s deal may lower campaign contributions to the Republicans from the masters of this sector of the economy.

The Iranians have never been a threat to the United States, and they won’t be even if they violate any agreement to not produce nuclear weapons. The truth is that the Iranians entered the fray against ISIS at the behest of the Americans many months ago. They also offered to join with the US to eliminate Al Queda in Afghanistan after 9-11. However, President George W. Bush found it convenient to paint the Iranians as a dangerous threat to the US in order to jack up profitable military spending. That administration also most likely did not want Iranian oil flooding the world markets.

Perhaps President Obama had this in mind when he sealed the deal, and perhaps lower gasoline and oil prices is just a happy coincidence.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

After the Republicans shellacked the Democratic Party candidates in the November elections, the Corporate Democratic Establishment appears to have coordinated a series of attacks against the Republican Party, which it should have done a long time ago. So why is the Democratic Establishment doing this now?

The purpose for these attacks may not be to smear Republicans with their gruesome corruption; one can rightly suspect that it is to entice the growing number of grassroots Democrats who have abandoned the party into returning to the polls and voting for candidates of the Wall Street Democratic Party.

One can rightly suspect that the November elections showed the Democratic Establishment that its base was drifting away, and so the establishment is attempting to reestablish its credibility as a party of the people. These are a series of slick public relations stunts to fool its own base into returning to the polls and voting Democratic next time. Since the elections:

1. The Senate Intelligence Committee released its report on the Bush torture system, excoriating the ex-president and his white house advisers as the war criminals thugs they are. Most of us knew this more than ten years ago.

2. The New York Times followed that up with an editorial demanding these people be brought to justice.

The establishment is trying to show its liberal base that there exists a difference between the completely bankrupt Republican Party and itself. In the matter of war crimes, however, there is virtually no difference between the two parties. During the first year of his presidency, President Obama squashed an attempt by a Spanish judge to prosecute war crimes against members of the Bush administration. In addition, if the Democratic Establishment and the Obama administration really wanted to prosecute members of the Bush administration for war crimes, which would include such top dogs as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the White House could order its justice department to prepare extradition hearings for those accused. Earlier this month, the New York Times reported that the head of the United Nations demanded the USA do precisely this. The Obama administration refuses to follow through despite the fact that the US is a signatory to international law governing war crimes and is required to do this.

3. President Obama signed a so-called executive order granting amnesty to an estimated 5 million undocumented immigrants. The big question here, if the president can constitutionally do this, which is debatable, why then does he not issue an executive order granting amnesty to the other 6 million undocumented immigrants in the USA, or those that cross the border illegally tomorrow or next year? This action, of course, will appeal to Hispanic voters, so the establishment hopes.

4. The president negotiated a treaty with the Chinese curbing CO2 emissions. The Establishment hopes this will appeal to its waning environmental base.

5. The president opened the door to normalize relations with Cuba. The establishment hopes those of the far left, which isn’t very far left of center during this contemporary period, will return to the party.

6. MSNB created a documentary broadcast via Rachel Maddox showing that oil and not weapons of mass destruction was the reason the President George W. Bush pursued war in Iraq. Most knowledgeable people knew this more than ten years ago. This should appeal to the disillusioned anti-war faction that has seen the Obama administration continue to wage war for profits throughout the world.

Here’s what the Establishment doesn’t want the grassroots to see. The problem is that more and more of the grassroots know what’s going on.

1. The Democratic Establishment is trying to pass the greatest income redistribution treaty of all time: the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). If the treaty passes through congress President Obama has promised to sign it. Trillions of dollars of income will be redistributed from the 99 to the 1 percent via this treaty.

The secretive TPP will grant investors of the 0.01 percent special privileges to challenge labeling and health and safety local laws and regulations of the 99 percent; which will effectively eliminate your votes on local and state levels for and against such things (which most people call voter suppression, but in this case it should be called voter elimination), outsource millions of jobs, offer new monopolies for Big Pharma to raise medicine prices they charge you (which redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent), limit food safety standards (which redistributes and transforms your health into the profits of the 1 percent), and block financial regulations aimed at preventing the next financial crisis (which will make it easier for Wall Street to redistribute your income and wealth to the 1 percent). It will also kill the remainder of the US textile industry, destroy millions of jobs in Latin America, drive millions of undocumented immigrants into the United States, and depress wages in both North and South America, all to the benefit of the 1 percent, and all at the expense of the 99 percent. And we can’t forget that it will increase the already massive US trade deficit with other nations, which is supposed to be a bad thing. In other words, this scam is the largest income redistribution treaty of all time from the 99 to the 1 percent. It’s an attack on the middle class.

2. President Obama and the Establishment have worked overtime to see that 95 percent of all income growth since 2009 has gone to the 1 percent.

3. The battle over the omnibus spending bill in December 2014 proves an important point.

Referring to the Democratic Party meltdown in allowing a provision sneakily put in the latest budget bill (by corrupt Wall Street Republican Congressman Kevin Yoder of Kansas) that allows Wall Street investment banks to gamble with taxpayer money and expect to be bailed out if their gamble fails, Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone magazine wrote on December 13;

“If the Democrats actually stood for anything other than sounding as progressive as possible without offending their financial backers, then they would do what Republicans always do in these situations: force a shutdown to save their legislation. How many times did Republicans hold the budget hostage to rescue the Bush tax cuts? But the Democrats won’t do that here, because they’re not a real (political) party. They’re a marketing phenomenon, a big chunk of oligarchical”…”single furiously-money-collecting/favor-churning oligarchical Beltway party…cleverly sold to voters as the more reasonable and less nakedly corrupt wing of a two-headed political establishment.”

4. The budget battle of December 2014 proved a particularly gruesome point; both political parties have been totally corrupted by big money unleashed by the Reagan tax cuts, as well as other tax cuts, and the politicians of the US government are absolutely corrupt, with few exceptions, such as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown, Jeff Merkley, Alan Grayson, and perhaps David Vitter. That’s why the political and economic game is totally rigged against the 99 percent.

5. The White House coordinated the crackdowns on Occupy Wall Street.

The Democrats, exactly like the Republicans, are all about redistributing income and wealth from the 99 to the 1 percent.

That’s why the Democratic base is leaving the Democratic Party because the Party Establishment left the base behind two decades ago, and continues to favor the rich and powerful over working families, just like the Republican Party. In this respect there is no difference between the twin parties of corruption. And no slick public relations campaign is going to keep the grassroots in line.

More and more grassroots Democrats are leaving the rotted ship called the Democratic Party because the Establishment can no longer direct their attention away from economic issues by appealing to social issues, which is what the latest wave of Democratic Establishment actions are intended to do. These actions may be the last gasp of a sinking skip.

Read Full Post »

Who Gets What From the Keystone Pipeline?

Read Full Post »

Why Solar Power Is Not Feasible

Read Full Post »

Ten Reasons for Raising Taxes on the rich;

1. Not only would the rich still be wealthy beyond most people’s wildest dreams, higher taxes mean they’d have less money to purchase politicians, such as Wall Street Senators Ron Wyden, Orrin Hatch and Mitch McConnell. In other words, there would be greater democracy for all of us, rather than plutocracy for the few, which is the current case in the United States.

2. That’s because the rich would have less money to buy legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent. That means the demand for goods and services would increase, job and income growth would accelerate, and the US economy would become strong again. However, decreasing taxes on the rich would accelerate the downward slide of the US economy for the reasons stated above and below, and which are supported by historical documentation.

3. They’d have less money to corrupt government with.

4. They’d have less money to leverage the financial markets to their advantage, and to the disadvantage of everybody else.

5. Eliminating the cap on social security taxes, which would raise taxes on the rich, would allow that program to continue indefinitely, but the rich would still be rich.

6. The rich would have less money to corner sectors of the futures markets, such as oil, wheat and natural gas, and which have resulted in increased prices for the rest of us.

7. The rich would pay higher federal taxes on their incomes, which would help to bring down the deficit, which from a conservative point-of-view (which really means “stupid point-of-view) would see a decline in the interest rates the rest of us pay for loans.

8. Higher taxes on the rich on the state and local levels would also see social safety nets strengthened and school finances increased. Conversely, lowering taxes on the rich have seen our social safety nets weakened and our school finances shredded.

9. Raising taxes on the rich would decrease the pressure the rich put on politicians to continue the endless wars the United States currently wages. Ending those wars, and ending the buying of 150,000 US mercenaries, would decrease the federal deficit.

10. The rich would have less money to mislead us with false studies and advertisements into believing such things as trickle down economics, free corporate trade is good, privatization saves the government money (it doesn’t), etc…. In other words, the brain washing of the rest of us would decrease.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: