Jump to content

The Trump Economy


GG

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

They are limited by the contents of their wallet. I don't think their wells will run dry soon but selling their oil at a loss is not a strategy that they can sustain. 

Remember, if Russia didn't have nuclear weapons they would just be another country with an economy the size of Texas. With Trump as president, we're their daddy, while when Obama was in charge they were Michael to our Fredo. 

  Russia does in fact have nuclear weapons as does India so it makes the situation a game of emotions.  The 3 powers have always had a pragmatic aspect in terms of trade of goods that can found outside their own borders.  Beyond that general relations are generally cold.  In the past several years there have been minor border skirmishes between India and China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, RochesterRob said:

  Didn't Trump announce his intention to buy oil for the national reserve last week.

Yes, he did. He'll fill our strategic reserves at these lower prices and that takes millions of barrels of oil off the open market. Hopefully that will hasten the endgame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump administration rolls back Obama-era fuel efficiency standards
 

The Trump administration on Tuesday rolled back an Obama-era law that pushes automakers to produce more fuel efficient vehicles, severely limiting a rule designed to decrease pollution from transportation in the face of climate change.
 

The new rule cuts the year-over-year improvements expected from the auto industry, slashing standards that require automakers to produce fleets that average nearly 55 mpg by 2025. Instead, the Trump rule would bring that number down to about 40 mpg by 2026, bringing mileage below what automakers have said is possible for them to achieve.
 

The Trump administration has argued that cutting Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards will allow automakers to produce cheaper cars, something they say will save 3,300 lives as lower prices spur consumers to upgrade to new vehicles with better safety features that guzzle less gas than older models.
 

</snip>

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Trump administration rolls back Obama-era fuel efficiency standards
 

The Trump administration on Tuesday rolled back an Obama-era law that pushes automakers to produce more fuel efficient vehicles, severely limiting a rule designed to decrease pollution from transportation in the face of climate change.
 

The new rule cuts the year-over-year improvements expected from the auto industry, slashing standards that require automakers to produce fleets that average nearly 55 mpg by 2025. Instead, the Trump rule would bring that number down to about 40 mpg by 2026, bringing mileage below what automakers have said is possible for them to achieve.
 

The Trump administration has argued that cutting Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards will allow automakers to produce cheaper cars, something they say will save 3,300 lives as lower prices spur consumers to upgrade to new vehicles with better safety features that guzzle less gas than older models.
 

</snip>

Now if they'd only get rid of ethanol. Once 10% ethanol was required to be mixed with gasoline my gas mileage dropped 10%. Next they can work on the faux electric driven cars that are in many cases fueled by coal. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump Calls for New $2 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

 

WASHINGTON—President Trump on Tuesday said a significant investment in infrastructure should be part of a fourth congressional

coronavirus relief package, citing an opportunity in low interest rates.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-calls-for-new-2-trillion-infrastructure-bill-11585668373

 

The next President will have one heck of a national debt.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ALF said:

Trump Calls for New $2 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

 

WASHINGTON—President Trump on Tuesday said a significant investment in infrastructure should be part of a fourth congressional

coronavirus relief package, citing an opportunity in low interest rates.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-calls-for-new-2-trillion-infrastructure-bill-11585668373

 

The next President will have one heck of a national debt.

 

This was expected before the lock down too -- interesting he's still going forward with it. Could be a real quick way to get a bunch of jobs ready for when it's lifted. 

(though, it seems infrastructure bills never deliver there)

Edited by Deranged Rhino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This was expected before the lock down too -- interesting he's still going forward with it. Could be a real quick way to get a bunch of jobs ready for when it's lifted. 

(though, it seems infrastructure bills never deliver there)

We have a developer in charge not someone who believes in Unicorns.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2020 at 7:19 PM, Foxx said:

won't be long before we won't be able to store it. so much so that, will we see negative prices on a barrel?

 

The oil glut is filling up the world’s supertankers fast

The world’s oil tankers are being filled with crude at a record pace as the options to store a glut on land rapidly diminish, one of the industry’s largest owners said.

 

A combination of surging production from key producers worldwide and capitulating demand in the face of the coronavirus outbreak means that land storage is being overwhelmed, said Robert Hvide Macleod, Chief Executive Officer of Frontline Management AS. The world is likely overproducing by about 20 million barrels a day, or 20% of normal consumption, he said, echoing wider industry views. ...

 

 

On 3/29/2020 at 7:50 PM, TPS said:

No. Futures prices are in a steep "contango," which means the current price is less than the future price to such an extent that it more than covers the cost of storage.  That means you can make a risk-free profit by buying oil today and storing it tankers--banks and hedge funds do this.  When the above ground storage runs out, and financial traders can't take advantage of this any longer, the Saudis will be forced to reduce pumping and meet the "real" demand for oil.  

as predicted...

 

Wyoming Asphalt Sour became the first grade to do so as it went into negative territory, with the 30th of March having the largest negative price so far, $-0.47. today's bid, $-0.08.

 

mercuria%20negative%20oil%20price.png?it

 

Edited by Foxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Foxx said:

 

as predicted...

 

Wyoming Asphalt Sour became the first grade to do so as it went into negative territory, with the 30th of March having the largest negative price so far, $-0.47. today's bid, $-0.08.

 

mercuria%20negative%20oil%20price.png?it

 

Well, I don't know about your prediction, and I did do a little googling before I wrote my post and saw that there were already some grades of oil selling at a negative price.  I was focused on the major grades listed on the futures exchange, Brent and WTI.  But kudos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2020 at 10:30 AM, Nanker said:

This is the other "war" that we're in. Both the Saudis and Putin are trying to destroy the US Shale Oil industry and with it our energy independence.

I'd like to see POTUS address this more directly than he has. Of course, the media would harangue us with stories about how he no longer cares about containing the Chinese Corona Virus and is more concerned about his "Big Oil" buddies profits - ignoring the fact that tens of thousands of oil workers will be put out of jobs.

We would pay higher prices, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

First.  Stop with the large font 

 

Second. This is in the wrong thread. 

 

Third.  Pathetic you’re happy about this.   And don’t lie and say you’re not. 

Thanks Jim

The large font is proof of your third point. Those on the Left have been rooting for failure for three years. Unfortunately this particular circumstance is going to backfire on them just like every other Willie Coyote story they’ve spun. The American Public is not going to blame Trump for the job losses so the Dems will be left looking like heartless buffoons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks Jim

The large font is proof of your third point. Those on the Left have been rooting for failure for three years. Unfortunately this particular circumstance is going to backfire on them just like every other Willie Coyote story they’ve spun. The American Public is not going to blame Trump for the job losses so the Dems will be left looking like heartless buffoons.

Actually I just cut and pasted the headline which was in large print, that it upsets you is your problem, not mine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Second. This is in the wrong thread. 

 

What thread would a lunch lady like yourself put information about the amount of Americans who applied for unemployment?

 

I've seen statistics on Trump's fantastic job numbers through the beginning of his presidency through 2019 in this thread countless times. 

Edited by Gary Busey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Actually I just cut and pasted the headline which was in large print, that it upsets you is your problem, not mine. 

depending upon your browser, when you copy and paste like that, you will notice a box that pops up at the bottom of the editor that looks like such:

 

aab.thumb.png.ee466e76444537d76725ae3e80ff9ebd.png

 

click on the underlined, 'Paste as plain text instead', and it will remove any formatting that was pasted in the copy. easy peasy.

 

 

 

Edited by Foxx
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

 

 

This is an interesting topic. Higher prices are great for the oil/gas industry (and our energy independence), but we, as consumers, end up paying more at the pump.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

This is an interesting topic. Higher prices are great for the oil/gas industry (and our energy independence), but we, as consumers, end up paying more at the pump.

Although it was nice to fill up in Irving the other day at $1.20 a gallon the oil prices that make that possible won't keep our rigs in business and we need oil prices to go up to the point that will keep our producers in business. I won't mind paying an extra $1 a gallon in order to do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...