All Activity

Who is this; Randy Weir guy and why should I put more credence in what he says - than you? I see nothing in this guy's credentials to indicate he has any actual knowledge about the oil and gas industry, any special knowledge that would give him more insight than you have - as a matter of fact the only thing I see is a bachelor's of science in accounting and economics, probably from the University of Buea, in Cameroon. - and an opinion. You really should check out his Facebook page... and his 79 Facebook followers and his non working World Press website. *He's a friggin' accountant!!! ... No strike that he's a wannabe' minister with a BS in accounting... I don't even see any footnotes about his sources of information or documentation on referenced material... Just another guy putting out his opinion on social media with nothing but him saying so to back up his claims. If that's all it takes to impress people and for them to choose to take his word, over publications with dozens of people speaking to industry experts and documented information sources, that's kinda' sad don't you think? NBC: Gas prices are up, but red America may be paying more A rural lifestyle means Republicans often use far more gasoline than Democrats.

There may be protesters on both sides of the issue, but I didn't post about "protesters"... I posted about intentional vandalism, destruction of property and threats of violence which right now only seems to be coming from one side of the issue. If you find instances of pro-life protesters destroying property, threatening to engage in violence and vandalizing stuff feel free to post it. Oh, you mean this one? CNN: Tear gas used to disperse protesters outside Arizona Capitol building, officials say OK, I'll post how when demonstrators attempted to break out the windows of the Arizona Capitol building to interrupt the ongoing legislative session the police had to use tear gas to drive them back - that's when they entered a nearby green space and immediately began vandalizing public property. Yeah, that was part of the Twitter video I posted previously... CNN: Tear gas used to disperse protesters outside Arizona Capitol building, officials say Late Friday, law enforcement in Arizona used tear gas to disperse a crowd of abortion rights supporters protesting outside the State Capitol in Phoenix. “Troopers deployed tear gas after a crowd of protesters repeatedly pounded on the glass doors of the State Senate Building,” Arizona Department of Public Safety spokesperson Bart Graves told CNN. The crowd then moved across the street to the Wesley Bolin Plaza, where police used the tear gas after a monument was vandalized, Graves said. In New York’s Greenwich Village, thousands of people marched and chanted in the streets. One of the chants directed the f-word at Justice Brett Kavanaugh. There were some anti-abortion activists at the march, but they were keeping a low profile and there were no confrontations seen by the CNN crew walking with the protesters. Demonstrators in Los Angeles clogged the 110 freeway as it passed through downtown, blocking traffic. While abortion will remain legal in California, the protesters said they were showing their concern and support for women in other states. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/us/supreme-court-roe-v-wade-protests/index.html Luckily the police were able to stop those folks in Arizona from breaking into the Capitol building, or we might have had another "insurrection" on our hands...

I've had an actual job to provide health care , food housing and education for my family. Never have I relied on welfare for support. Jobs are plentiful and if anyone truly wants to work, they should be able to find some sort of suitable position to provide a steady income. You just need to get yourself Also don't have to agree with the opinions of some pro-life folks. Not all would agree with them. I'm very familiar with several people who experienced "unwanted" pregnancies. They had the child, kept and raised it to be a good, responsible, adult and a blessing to the parents. Some cases, the couple married while others didn't. Regardless of the circumstances, if you were to ask them now, I don't know of any that would say they wish they had terminated the pregnancy. If a woman doesn't want a child, she needs to exercise the "control" of her body to prevent it. No...it's not always the guy's responsibility...it takes two. I only know of one instance where a child was born to a woman without being physical with a male. But that was an isolated incident that happened over 2000 years ago.

interesting you missed the protesters being on both sides in these protests I notice you didnt mention the pro lifers being tear gassed by the police at a state capitol

You mean like the people who want to deny them health care , food housing and education , You know the pro lifers who support ending welfare As Ive always said you folks aren't pro life you are pro birth there are 400,000 children looking for foster homes this wont help any babies to live it will make sure women die though, and that babies are starved and abused to death

You seem to have forgotten trumps deal with the saudis to reduce oil production heres a few thing you may have missed Randy Weir's answer to How can Joe Biden possibly blame the US inflation on the GOP when it was obvious things were not like this during GOP admins? - Quora

NY Post: Abortion protests in Portland turn violent, businesses vandalized KATU-Portland local: Group damages properties, including non-profit, in Portland's Hollywood District

Like I said, Yeah I can just believe what you're saying without any supporting documentation or reference to back it up... Or I can believe statements from actual industry and business experts with the supporting documentation and reference to back it up... I'd have to keep my brain in a jar and only take it to exercise it once in a blue moon for that to be a tough decision.

just showing your typical use of false hoods like other threads when you show yourself wrong you twist and try to deny oil companies are in decline , come on , decline is indicated by falling profits not record profits you jumped the shark on this and you know it which is what makes it so dishonest

thats the best ya got as an example of a lie. so using that as an example you lied about the the police response in the texas school shooting , and on biden causing gas prices to rise , shall i go on

Did California Governor just point out Biden was lying when he made his remarks about SCOTUS overturning Row v Wade? Why yes, yes I think he did...

Biden's remarks on Supreme Court abortion decision... "They didn’t limit it. They simply took it away. That’s never been done to a right so important to so many Americans" Not so Joe, abortion rights weren't taken away they were returned to the states from where the federal government took them. How is abortion a "right"? It certainly isn't a constitutional right but what is a constitutional right is the right to Life - as in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. "They have made the United States an outlier among developed nations in the world. But this decision must not be the final word." Again not so Joe, There are several European nations where abortion is heavily regulated, Ireland and Germany, for example, ban most abortions after 12 weeks. Abortion is only permitted in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger in Poland. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/06/24/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-supreme-court-decision-to-overturn-roe-v-wade/ Many European nations have much more liberal abortion policies, but to claim the SCOTUS ruling puts America in some kind of outlier or exclusive category from other developed nations isn't quite accurate and is for all intent and purposes is false. Annnd here we go, House Representative Cori Bush (D-MO) expresses her outrage publicly calling Supreme Court Justices: "far-right", "racist" and "sexist", because SCOTUS overturned Row v Wade based on non- adherence to Constitutional dictum - not what people want... It isn't the job of the Supreme Court to figure out what 80% of the people want or to make law based on popular notion - that's the legislator's job - all the Supreme Court is supposed to do is, if challenged, see if existing legislation is in keeping with principles spelled out in the United States Constitution or runs contrary to it. Alito expressed it pretty clearly in my opinion, there are no rights or precedent to abortion inherent in the Constitution and by the federal government taking the right to determine and enact national policy for something that is supposed to be reserved to the states, federal abortion legislation is unconstitutional.

You did say that, and still it only applies to site with "no salvageable value", so your blanket statement about it costing oil companies nothing to drill is misleading at best and patently false in reality. I'm guessing you either didn't read or chose to ignore the snippet I posted from Forbes. Actually what you said was 18% and you're right companies don't pay the federal government royalties until wells start producing, and wells producing aren't considered sites with no salvageable value are they - so oil companies don't get reimbursed for those sites. Something else you apparently ignored, didn't read or didn't understand... The past decade oil companies took a sizable hit to their bottom line with the worst year being 2020. In 2021 the lockdowns became less restrictive, people began to get out and go more, demand for gasoline increased significantly, and oil companies began to make profits... So yeah, oil companies profits doubled but that only started last year... And so far you've misunderstood or misrepresented the two previous points.... Oil companies have to pay to drill new wells, they only get 100% reimbursement for wells with no salvageable value. A resting well that can be tapped later has salvageable value, as do dormant wells that can be made active when and if the price of oil increases to offset the costs of running them... claiming oil companies get reimbursed 100% for drilling wells is a total misrepresentation of the facts - either that or a straight out lie, but then they're both pretty much the same aren't they, as a lie is the opposite of the truth and so is a misrepresentation of facts. Oil companies have made a lot of money for a lot of years - but when the costs are subtracted from that revenue it decreases the amount of profit companies make... when expenses, costs taxes and royalties wind up being more than the revenue there is no profit and the oil companies lose money. Why and how do you think the attempted deflection of introducing Roe v Wade into a discussion about gasoline prices and oil companies makes any kind of sense??? Wassa' matter, can't support any of your anti-oil company opinions so you got to try to toss out a completely unrelated subject to try to draw attention away from the fact that so far all you've presented is unsupported rhetoric without a single reference to validate those statements... So far about the only thing you've got right is the price of gas to the cost of a barrel of oil...

Legislating using judicial or presidential fiat will never be effective long-term. If you want to create a law, lobby your legislative branch &/or elected officials who support your point of view. Go out and convince your neighbors that they should elect people who support your point of view. If you plan on using court cases or executive orders to create your utopia, you will live in a utopia that changes as quickly as the wind blows. The warnings were sent during Obama's term. Stop trying to legislate using executive orders. Then Trump came and the same sheeple who loved exec orders thought Trump was a tyrant. when judges create laws you prefer you cheer in the streets, but the judicial branch giveth, the judicial branch taketh away. Good luck with fiat government. Should be fun. *hey there chatter heads*

stammering attempt that fails I said it costs oil companies nothing to drill your post proved my claim i said the 18cents isnt paind until the leaves the ground also proven not surprising that you are proving yourself wrong considering your claim is that an industry that has doubled its profits in less than a year is in decline . you are batting 1000 today on the making yourself look like an idiot comparing roe v wade allowing abortion to being as evil as slavery why not quit well you are behind never mind you never understood remain silent and be thought a fool , you prefer to post and remove all doubt it just aint your week

actually three of the justices should be impeached as they clearly and repeated lied under oath at their confirmation hearings and another who with their wife helped with the attack on the capitol . at the very least they are criminals if not fascists but fascists also seek to take rights so it fits The supreme court allowing sharia laws to be imposed Talk about grasping you attempt to compare slavery and a womans rights the same .

Yep, something didn't go the way someone wanted, people did or said something that wasn't agreeable to some so of course they have to be described as... "fascist", or racist, or traitors or terrorists, or nazis, or white supremacists, xeophobes, homophobes, brownshirts, or whatever. Forget the reasons decisions are made, things are done or words are spoken, that doesn't matter what matters is something happened that doesn't fit the expected criteria some have demanded - so of course they have to be referred to in least flattering most offensive way possible - whether or not any of it is true. In a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling, Justice Samuel Alito offered the majority opinion that called Roe v Wade: "egregiously wrong from the start." Alito explains when Roe was brought into law there was no Constitutional or Historical precedent to do so and it removed from the states a decision regulated to the states and previously exercised by the states under the Constitution's 10th Amendment. Without any grounding in the constitutional text, history, or precedent, Roe imposed on the entire country a detailed set of rules for pregnancy divided into trimesters much like those that one might expect to find in a statute or regulation. See 410 U. S., at 163–164. Roe’s failure even to note the overwhelming consensus of state laws in effect in 1868 is striking, and what it said about the common law was simply wrong. Short and sweet - Roe -vs- Wade is unconstitutional and was from it's inception. Now of course since it's been around and accepted for 50+ years makes people believe it's a "right" - it isn't. Some will try to claim abortions fall under the Constitution's guarantee of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" and that health care, including abortions is guaranteed in the Constitution - it doesn't, and it isn't. But then look at all the years slavery was considered a part of the Constitution, and how some back then even believed slave owner rights were part of the Constitution because "slaves aren't people - they're property", or later on, somehow inferior to whites... Those people were wrong then and if anyone still believes that they're wrong now. It took a courageous Supreme Court to address the popular misconceptions and error of past generations to explain to a nation, exactly what the words - "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. means... Overturning Roe -vs- Wade puts the decision right back where it belongs, into the hands and consciousnesses of individual states - and the citizens of those states. *and now I'm guessing it's all over... except for the rioting, arson, looting, property destruction, assaults on police officers, damage to government property, by-standers being threatened and assaulted, and of course the politically expressed outrage and bloviated commentary from the news media.

Actually my post specifically states - The claim oil companies don't pay taxes is a fallacy, they do... that they don't pay the full amount of taxes according to their revenue is more accurate, and the reason they don't pay full taxes on their revenue? It's because that's how Congress set up the petroleum industry tax tables over the years. In FY 2021 the Texas Oil and Natural Gas industry paid about $15.8 billion in taxes and state royalties, those funds go to support Texas schools, teachers, roads, infrastructure and essential services every state that has oil, gas or coal production pays state taxes and royalties that goes to improve the economies of those states, not to mention the employment and retail services those industries provide to local citizens. In 2021 The top five oil companies—Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips—brought in more than $205 billion in profits... and paid about $24 billion in federal taxes alone that's not counting annual royalties paid to the federal government which amounts to 18.75% of their pre-taxed profits. Yep, the estimated $24 billion is only a fraction of the $205 billion the top 5 oil companies earned last year, but then we should remember to add in the expenses those companies incur like equipment and material purchases, maintenance costs, state and local taxes and royalties, employee salaries and of course the investment returns every company has to pay to it's investors. Still $181 billion (minus the expenses listed above) does seem like an excessive amount of profit doesn't it? But who do we have to thank for all the subsidies, credits and tax write-offs the oil companies take legal and proper advantage of... why Congress and the federal government itself of course... Which is why I commented earlier - Some of those tax tables were written into law in the 1920 and hasn't had a lot of updating in almost a half a century... others are only a few decades old and some a few years old, but it doesn't look like anyone has seriously looked at them collectively - or cared to address any existing problems in the oil and gas legislation in a very long time. Yeah, companies are sometimes given tax credits for drilling after the fact, but the point remains they still have the expense of paying for the drilling to begin with and even if the site remains dormant for a time they don't get reimbursed for producing sites just sites that have "that have no salvageable value". I don't believe a capped or resting drill site, capable of producing qualifies as having no salvageable value. Your claim oil companies don't have to pay taxes is a fallacy because they do - as is the statement oil companies deduct 100% of the costs for drilling a well, since that only applies to drill sites with "no salvageable value". But yeah, that's typical considering the source... I'm not sure I agree with every opinion expressed on the website I visited, certainly not the complete and immediate elimination of everything they've listed, but do consider many of their points solid starting points for discussion and hopeful compromise... AmericanProgress.org: It Is Time to Phase Out 9 Unnecessary Oil and Gas Tax Breaks https://www.americanprogress.org/article/it-is-time-to-phase-out-9-unnecessary-oil-and-gas-tax-breaks/ Again, oil companies deduct 100% of the costs for drilling a well, only applies to drill sites with "no salvageable value"... I'm pretty sure a temporarily capped well that can be used for later production doesn't qualify as a site with "no salvageable value". I don't know where you're getting your information, but I don't believe oil companies don't leave sites set to cheat the system that wouldn't seem at all profitable but not being an oil and gas expert I have to rely on information that comes from a petroleum engineer I know personally and went to high school with... After drilling to the desired depth pumping oil out doesn't begin immediately, all in all after drilling it sometimes takes a month to complete the casing and testing and then wells are often rested to allow more oil to accumulate making it easier and less expensive to extract. This usually takes a matter or months instead of years, I have no clue where you got your "2 years" figure, since as usual you provide no referenced sources to support your statements, but right off hand I'd have to say I question that information as being entirely accurate. When the amount of oil extracted from a pump site decreases significantly or the cost to extract the oil exceeds the profit from the output from a well, those sites are retired or made inactive. Some of them still have some oil in them, but since the cost of extracting the oil exceeds the potential profit made from doing so they are abandoned either temporarily or some times permanently in the case of companies going out of business or the owner no longer available . Often when we hear people (or the Biden administration) talk about the "hundreds of wells" oil companies have but aren't working this is the case the cost to extract oil from the site exceeds the potential profit attempting to do so. NPR: Why producing more domestic oil is so difficult right now High gas prices have everyone from truckers to politicians demanding more domestic oil production. While drilling is up, oil production in this country is still down from three years ago. But as Frank Morris of member station KCUR reports, turning that around just isn't going to be as easy as some might have you believe. FRANK MORRIS, BYLINE: Oil is expensive now, but Dick Schremmer, president of Bear Oil near tiny Peck, Kan., says there was a time early in the pandemic when he literally could not give this stuff away. DICK SCHREMMER: The oil that they took that day from us, they charged us $38 a barrel to take our oil. MORRIS: Of course, nobody knew how long the losses would go on. And domestic production plunged 20% as small companies folded or cut staff. Companies also shut down active wells, nearly 5,000 in Kansas alone. Schremmer's standing next to one of them today in a field south of Wichita. The oil thousands of feet below this ancient pumpjack is now worth more than $100 a barrel. But pumping it out will take time and lots of money. SCHREMMER: You know, this well probably cost me $12,000 to get up and running. MORRIS: Idle wells corrode. For most to come back into production, they'll need repairs. And the price of hardware and chemicals used to get oil out of the ground has shot up along with the price of crude. SCHREMMER: I just ordered a new truckload of pipe out of Houston, and that one truckload of two-inch tubing cost me $75,000. Last year, that would probably cost me $25,000 to $35,000. MORRIS: That's big money to small operators like Dick Schremmer. While big players like ExxonMobil and BP operate wells producing hundreds or thousands of barrels a day, hundreds of small companies work on the margins, running low-producing stripper wells in states like Kansas, Ohio and Texas. And Mickey Thompson, past president of the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association, says many of those companies face a serious challenge finding employees. MICKEY THOMPSON: The main reason it doesn't happen overnight is because of the thousands of workers who were let go during the downturn, which was not that long ago. Well, they're gone, most of them. ...... https://www.npr.org/2022/03/31/1090067942/why-producing-more-domestic-oil-is-so-difficult-right-now https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/03/01/1083415798/how-a-wrinkle-in-the-oil-futures-market-has-clogged-americas-oil-pump

Live updates: Court overturns Roe v. Wade, ending constitutional protection for abortion (msn.com) So much for conservatives supporting freedom still say it should be challenged on the 4th amendment rights But obviously the right doesnt believe women should be security in their persons

Just love how you claim im wrong then show where Im right , then try to keep claiming Im wrong BYW its a dry hole until they choose to start pumping , which is why most wells sit for at least 2 years before pumping begins .this allows the company to deduct 100 of the cost of drilling the well , you own post confirms that it costs them nothing to drill a well they get every penny back by not paying taxes that royalty of 18% doesnt start until oil is pumped out or the well that was a pretty hard Fail on your part but sure thanks for proving what I said now you can stammer through trying to deny your own post to continue claiming Im wrong but we all know otherwise

So, Title 42 is ending, CBP has information that a massive surge of foreign nationals are headed for the Southern border and president Biden is telling people there's going to be a second pandemic... Coincidence?

Yeah it's also telling that the last two Democrat presidents saw "historical high gasoline prices" when the last Republican president between them was able to keep gas prices down below $3. The last two Democrat presidents also saw historically large inundations of illegal border crossings when the Republican president between them was able to reduce border incursions. The last two Democrat presidents oversaw significant slides in consumer confidence numbers while the Republican president between them showed significantly higher consumer confidence ratings. The previous Democrat president presided over the largest increase of Americans on food stamps and government assistance in decades while the current president is presiding over the largest consumer goods and food inflation price increases in 40 years and the Republican president between them had no such problems. You know it's rough when even the Trump hating, CNN network can't spin the numbers to show Biden is more popular or effective than Trump was...

I have a correction to make... NPR: Biden increases oil royalty rate and scales back lease sales on federal lands The Interior Department on Friday said it's moving forward with the first onshore sales of public oil and natural gas drilling leases under President Joe Biden, but will sharply increase royalty rates for companies as federal officials weigh efforts to fight climate change against pressure to bring down high gasoline prices. The royalty rate for new leases will increase to 18.75% from 12.5%. That's a 50% jump and marks the first increase to royalties for the federal government since they were imposed in the 1920s. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/16/1093195479/biden-federal-oil-leases-royalties Previously I posted the federal government's royalty rate for oil companies drilling on federal lands was 12.5%, and it was, until that was changed by the Biden administration and raised to 18.75% that's a 50% jump. The royalty rate for offshore oil remains at 18.75%. The important part of this information is while the federal government made hundreds of millions from oil companies leasing drilling sites of federal lands, the government is now making hundreds of millions more than it was just last year and Joe Biden and company are having accolades heaped on them for giving the American consumer a 18¢ price break at the gas pumps for temporarily suspending the federal gas tax. I'm not sure that's quite accurate or at least the best way to state the facts, but it's kinda' true... Intangible Drilling Costs ($3.5 billion “subsidy” – low estimate is $780 million) - Intangible Drilling Costs are essentially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currently, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. In what world would money spent that may or may not be recovered be capitalized as an asset? https://www.forbes.com/sites/drillinginfo/2016/02/22/debunking-myths-about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/ Oil companies still have to pay for drilling and drilling material costs, but because of federal government regulations and tax deduction allowances oil companies are sometimes able to deduct 100% of costs of "dry holes" from their federal tax debt. Does anyone know of someone who would turn down a federal tax deduction when it has been provided for them? Some want to vilify the oil and gas industry for all the subsidies they get... but those companies didn't give themselves those subsidies and tax breaks, they may have lobbied for them but ultimately it was by Congressional dictate, and presidential approval that those subsidies came to be. Blame the oil and gas industries for having and using subsidies... but don't forget to mention the government officials who wrote those subsidies into law - and allow them to remain. I've already submitted documentation that pretty clearly shows oil industry expenses have outweighed their revenue income for almost a decade... We can either believe the facts and figures put forth by industry experts and outside analysts summitted here, or the guy who claims to the contrary with nothing to support his claims. Me, I'm more inclined to go with the former - not because it matches some preconceived notion of mine, but because it's referenced by what I believe are credible sources with first hand knowledge of what they speak. Yeah I agree some may say or publish information favorable to the oil industry, for a price, but I don't believe so many would from such a diverse group of sources. Some still believe their reputation is more valuable than any pay-off money they might be offered - like NPR, Forbes, the Wall Street Journal and EWG for instance. And so far I haven't found a lot of opposing views that can be backed up with documented specifics instead of someone just saying so and questionable references that appears to rely on someone else just saying so.