Gasoline Gasoline!

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
Bush 1 was not president in 1988.

Why did the Bush's both oversee decreased oil production? I thought they were big oil "drill baby drill" guys.

Can you explain this?
OK, minor technicality. Reagan was Prez, Bush 1 was VP and elected Prez in 1988.

Bush's were big oil buddy-buddy with the Saudis and assorted ME sheiks, who were number 1 sources of cheap oil production at the time.

Both Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 had us addicted to Middle East cheap oil. We all know how that got us involved in Iraq 1 and Irag 2 wars, along with all sorts of crap in between. When their oil reserves started showing signs of peaking and topping out (mid-2000's), we needed to go back to our own domestic sources (or others) to keep the free flow moving on the global market, at somewhat higher prices than the glory days of cheap oil. Environmental hoops to jump in the USA made exploration, drilling, pumping/pipelining more expensive here, so oil needed to be at a specific price point to make it viable. Once it got there, and stayed there, USA oil sources became worthy again.

Biden and his GND puppet masters want to take us backwards, and the global oil market knows it.
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,540
23,122
113
Ya, Obama brought USA oil production back to......

Bush 1 years in 1988. Woohooo!
<snip>
I stopped reading at the lie....what did the other 400 fkn words of mouth vomit say?

my money is on: NOTHING WORTH READING

holy fk, this guy is clowny

"IT COMES DOWN TO ONE THING...MY IDIOTIC BIASES ABOVE ALL OTHER FACTS"
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
I stopped reading at the lie....what did the other 400 fkn words of mouth vomit say?

my money is on: NOTHING WORTH READING

holy fk, this guy is clowny

"IT COMES DOWN TO ONE THING...MY IDIOTIC BIASES ABOVE ALL OTHER FACTS"
You should've kept reading. I actually partially agreed with you.........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile we had 70 million more people since 1988 driving autos and using even more plastics.

It only took 6 years into his term (and almost 26 years later from Bush 1) to do it. And with the majority Repubs in House/Senate pushing him along. Clinton and Bush 2 were too busy sucking Saudi gushers to get production in the USA back up. Cheap oil was cheap oil.

And yes, oil and gas price increases are multivariate indeed.

But Biden's policies, agenda and attitude towards USA oil production are not helping bring prices down anytime soon. And that's how they like it, and don't really care if they come back down. They love this sh*t. Take it and like it.

It's the only way they can finally get any halfway support for the not-ready-for primetime Green New Deal policies.

If he was smart and really wanted to help subdue high inflation and a real recession, he'd take all recent imposed new regs, restrictions and anti-oil attitude and stuff them down AOC's throat. But no. Not now, not ever.

It would help the poor and struggling lower-middle class tremendously. It's going to get worse before we have even a glimmer of relief. But no, we need to stick to this forced "transition" to nowhere, no matter how much it hurts the economy and the struggling in the near and long term.

November is going to be brutal for the Green Flash Dems.
 

hammies

Duke status
Apr 8, 2006
15,588
14,231
113
I think Biden is right to do everything he can to wean the US off of fossil fuels and onto other, more ecologically friendly energy sources. It should be a major long-term goal of our nation, as the faster we can get off of them the stronger and more competitive we will be going into the second half of this century.
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
I think Biden is right to do everything he can to wean the US off of fossil fuels and onto other, more ecologically friendly energy sources. It should be a major long-term goal of our nation, as the faster we can get off of them the stronger and more competitive we will be going into the second half of this century.
I agree we need to reduce dependency on fossil fuels. But it needs to be done in way the doesn't destroy the economy in the process. We're still decades away from having non-fossil fuel energy replaced by solar, wind and/or whatever as a reliable 24/7/365 source for a vast majority of the USA. Until we are even close, we'll still need it for decades to come, if we want to have a vibrant and growing economy.

But Biden, and moreso the GND'ers, think it can basically happen overnight if they just wish it so.

We're seeing the realities of that magical wishful thinking come to fruition.
 

hammies

Duke status
Apr 8, 2006
15,588
14,231
113
@Surfdog. Mostly in agreement. Would like to see more effort and $$ put into developing non fossil-fuel energy sources. Nuclear is available abundantly now or in the very short term and I wish they would get on it with development of the very necessary safety and long term storage solutions (transmutation?) this technology needs.
 

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,179
16,270
113
It still amazes me how multinational oil companies can be be taking massive record profits and stupid people blame Biden.