Who wants to nationalize oil refinery and stop oil and gas speculation?

A difficult matter to talk about is getting people to accept that we have to peg down the price of gas, by govt. being able to mandate the price of gas. High gas prices paralyzes the economy. It is so obvious this is what the country needs. Who cares of whose brainchild it is. Just save the America from Inflation and the weak dollar.Who wants to nationalize oil refinery and stop oil and gas speculation?
Nationalizing an industry has never stopped speculation. It's called 'The black market'.Who wants to nationalize oil refinery and stop oil and gas speculation?
what are they teaching you kids?


government fiddling causes inflation (like raising the minimum wage).


are you aware that all life on earth ends if we remove the co2 from the atmosphere?


if government would stop restricting business now, gas would be two bucks a gallon in a week. perhaps less if they would also lift the oppressive taxes.
Social security is nationalized and it's broke. Since Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, doesn't want us to pump oil, then nationalizing oil is a great idea. In no time, the government will bankrupt the industry. Horses and buggies will make a comeback.
Yes, our government does such a remarkable job at running everything else, we should put them in charge of oil.
More government?





Eff that. For the people, by the people.
Ah, so socialization is the way out of an economic crunch?





Because it's worked SO WELL in the past right?





not.
Communists and nitwits... oh yeah, so do the Democrats.
if we nationalize oil





what will be next?
1. The high cost of oil is from exploration and production. Refining margins are acutally very low right now. Nationalizing refineries would not help.





2. To save America from inflation and the weak dollar, the government (federal reserve) has to raise interest rates. This is a direct correlation yet the federal reserve has been trying to bail out housing speculators by reducing the interest rate.





3. The reason people speculate in oil and gas is that it is profitable. If you only get 3% interest on your savings from the federal reserve you should put your money in oil where you can make 10%. If you made 8% interest on your savings from the federal reserve you wouldn't need to speculate on oil.
it's not that simple or i would be all for it. gas is 12 cents in venezuela, a fledgling socialist state. good for them. of course here in america things would be much different. there would be mounds of regulations with associated costs. since the government cannot actually operate the business, huge multinational corporations would be hired to operate the new business, possibly haliburton (or Exxon), with a no bid contract. at the end of the day, gas would cost the average american consummer $4 - $5 per gallon, perhaps $6. then, of course, due to corruption and various payoff, we could never be certain of the purity (remember how they sold tainted water to the troops in iraq?).





with this in mind, i'd say let's just let it be. sure, you'll have to eventually sell that split-level in the 'burbs and move into the slums outside the factory you work in, but 'them's the breaks.' that's how we started out.
You want the government to ruin I mean run the oil companies lol thats a hot one. Look here Hugo Chavez the price of gas is high because the left wont let us drill. The left and the enviromental wacko partners has stop the refining building and the building of nuclear. That would bring the high price of gas down. Gas companies make less profit then the pharmecutical companies yet I hear no one complaining there. Tell your democrat cohorts to eliminate the tax on gas state and federal. THat will lower your price of a gallon of gas.
When you figure out that the media (in bed with the government) is hiding what is really causing high prices of oil and gas - IS THE FEDERAL RESERVE DEVALUING THE DOLLAR - WHICH OIL IS TRADED IN - the reason we have high gas prices is because it takes more DOLLARS to pay for it. The federal reserve is to blame. The media knows this and they don't report on it. They play dumb.





Watch a little movie called ';Fiat Empire: Why the Federal Reserve violates the Constitution'; to learn more.





DOWN WITH THE FED
I dont think it would work. It would just be digging ourselves an even deeper hole. How about instead of spending so much time and resources to make gas cheaper, we work on creating more sustainable life styles. We can no longer have out heads in the sand thinking that things will change for the better without us doing anything. The Us people can not keep on living the way we do... there needs to be a major shift in the way we live, or else we are going to be in deep s h i t.
I don't. The word nationalization is BAD. That means the government can control it. Which is bad. And socialistic. Here's a thought, let's produce more oil so we don't have to deal with the insane prices of OPEC. The government doesn't need to set prices for oil, and you're dead wrong. You're such a pessimist. Try believing in America and democracy. And it's not obvious to you what the country needs. Because socialism doesn't work, and that's exactly what you're pitching.





Socialism is BAD. Hugo Chavez is BAD. I'm trying to say this in a way that might make sense to you. If we produce our own oil, then we


a) Don't have to resort to socialist practices (Bonus Points!)


b) Don't have to deal with OPEC


c) Keep our freedom and our money.
Oil and gasoline are commodities and are trades on a world market. The US government can't change that, and it can't enact laws that control foreign markets. There is no way the US can outlaw speculation.





If the government puts a cap on gasoline prices, Exxon and the rest will just sell it to China at the higher price.





The government could try to subsidize gas prices, but that would mean raising taxes to cover the subsidies. The tax payers end up paying for it anyway. In that case we haven't accomplished anything.





The answer is to produce more oil and gasoline domestically. Supply goes up, prices go down, profits stay in the US, and we collect taxes on the profits. Our trade deficit will be reduced, inflation will go down, and the dollar will be stronger. It really is that simple.
I do believe that's the only solution at this point.





';For decades, politicians, corporate leaders and the media have subjected the world’s people to the self-serving claim that the capitalist market is the most rational means of allocating society’s resources. What is now being revealed is the basic conflict between the needs of a modern mass society and the anarchy of the profit system.





It is impossible to ascertain any truthful estimates of remaining global supplies, because the oil producing countries and energy conglomerates have vested interests in concealing their “business secrets” from the people. Entrenched corporate and political opposition has also largely squelched large-scale development of environmentally safe and sustainable alternatives, although the technology has existed, in some cases, for decades.





Supposed solutions produced within the framework of the capitalist system have only worsened the crisis. The development of bio-fuels is a case in point. Even if one were to accept the widely disputed claims that bio-fuels are a means of reducing carbon emissions, their production has only led to a massive increase in the price of corn and other crops, wreaking havoc throughout the world. The entire project has been tied to the interests of agri-business monopolies, such as ADM and Cargill, which have an overriding concern, not in ending global warming, but boosting their bottom lines.





The rational use of remaining petroleum resources and the development of genuine alternatives require an unprecedented level of international cooperation and the marshalling of the world’s technological, material and human resources. This is not possible as long as capitalism divides the globe into competing nation states, each vying for advantage over the other.';
Keith Olbermann delivered a special report Wednesday on the ';Enron loophole'; -- a regulatory gap that is the single greatest cause of out-of-control gasoline prices -- and how McCain's leading advisors created that loophole and continue to defend it.





People who deal in oil routinely use ';futures'; -- agreements in advance on prices and delivery dates -- to deal with fluctuations in the market. However, deregulation has allowed commodity speculators to take over this system of futures and use it for their own profit, running up the price of oil in a speculative bubble.





According to Olbermann, the story of $4 a gallon gas begins during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, when former Enron CEO Ken Lay started speculating on energy futures. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) gave Enron free rein, and when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, CFTC Chairwoman Wendy Gramm moved to lock in the commission's informal position on Enron as official policy. Gramm then joined Enron's board of directors, earning more than $900,000 over the next decade.





In December 2000, during the chaos following the presidential election, Enron got a law passed containing an amendment known as the ';Enron loophole,'; deregulating not just single trades but entire markets. This made it possible for Enron to artificially create the California energy crisis -- and left Enron employees chortling over how they had ****** over ';Grandma Millie.';





The Enron loophole applied not just to electricity, but to all energy sources, which is why speculators have now been able to take over the oil market. Two weeks ago, the Senate Commerce Committee heard testimony from a former CFTC director that ';the speculators are not just placing bets in these futures markets, they're saying, 'Gosh, I can control the price of heating oil.' ... Morgan Stanley is the biggest heating oil owner in New England.';





If the Enron loophole is removed, said this director, ';you get at least a 25% drop in the cost of oil ... some people estimate 50%.';





John McCain voted to close the Enron loophole in 2002 and 2003, saying at the time that ';we're all tainted'; by Enron's money. But, notes Olbermann, ';for most of this campaign, McCain has offered explanations other than the influence of speculators, and remedies other than regulation.'; If the Enron loophole is not closed, even alternative energy sources will do little to reduce prices, because speculators will be able to immediately take those over as well.





';John McCain doesn't talk about the Enron loophole any more,'; reports Olbermann. ';What changed? Since 2006, John McCain's top economic advisor has been former Texas Senator Phil Gramm, husband of the former CFTC head who then joined Enron.';





';It was Graham who passed the Enron loophole ... with no hearings, no debate,'; Olberman emphasizes. ';It was Graham who stopped Democrats from closing the Enron loophole. ... Graham lobbied Congress about commodity trading rules in 2006.';





In addition, McCain's senior advisor, Charlie Black, was a lobbyist for the act containing the Enron loophole in 2000, and McCain's finance co-chair, Wayne Berman, has lobbied more recently against legislation to prevent price gouging.





Olbermann acknowledges that McCain is now saying, ';We must reforms the laws and regulations governing the oil futures market.'; However, McCain has not yet specifically mentioned the Enron loophole, and he still has Gramm and Berman and Black running his campaign and writing his economic policies