The GOP’s latest job-creation lie: Stunning hypocrisy in the Keystone Pipeline crusad

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Jan 10, 2015.

  1. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    With gas prices so low it is not even a sure thing that Canada wants the pipeline built at this time.

     
  2. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    The article you posted is heavily-slanted to produce a certain conclusion.

    For instance, the allegation that the Keystone pipeline project will only produce about 35 jobs is ridiculous if you actually think about it for a moment. (The 35 job figure comes from Obama's State Department which is opposed to the project, so we shouldn't expect fair assessment since there is political motivation behind it.)

    The 35 job figure ONLY takes into account the jobs created to service and manage the pipeline, not the jobs that will be created on both ends of the pipeline to handle the materials flowing through the pipeline. The pipeline is being built not for aesthetic reasons, but as a means of TRANSMISSION. The pipeline will require additional employees to work in the refineries to create the finished oil-based products from the oil that comes from Canada. Furthermore, there will be additional personnel and resources needed to transport the finished oil products to the various markets throughout the United States and the world. So even more jobs will be created to manage the transport, sales, and management of those resources. That's going to be many times more than 35 jobs.
     
  3. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    You didn't really expect anything else out of CTB, did you?
     
  4. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,213
    Likes Received:
    611
    Baptist Believer beat me to it. Good post.

    I was wondering about all the jobs that Obama created with alternative energy companies that he funded with his Stimulus program, you know, like Solyndra, Abound Energy, Fisker Automotive, and Beacon Power. Oh wait, they all went bankrupt and all employees lost their jobs and taxpayers picked up the bill for about $1 billion.
     
  5. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    A couple of the finer points that our resident "OBUMMERITES" seem to be unable to fully grasp; but then this is also true of them for simple basic reality. :BangHead:
     
  6. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    10,464
    Likes Received:
    136
    Regarding your thread title. The GOP is promising 40,000 jobs. Obama promised one million shovel ready jobs with the Bailout money. One has been proven a lie, and we'll have to see if this one by the GOP is a lie, won't we? How 'bout you stop whining until the facts prove you right? Shalom!
     
  7. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    Surely you do not mean 40,000 jobs on the Keystone pipeline? That is a very serious overestimation.

    Note below the State Dept. estimates only 3,900 full time construction workers during the building and only 50 full time jobs once the construction is ended .... 50. Where did the 40,000 come from?


    And you do realize this is for a Canadian company with Canadian oil to be shipped to foreign countries, but the American taxpayer will be stuck with the bill for any oil spills from the pipeline.

    http://ecowatch.com/2013/04/02/american-taxpayers-foot-bill-tar-sands-cleanup/
     
    #7 Crabtownboy, Jan 11, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2015
  8. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    That's half true. The oil flow begins in Canada as a Canadian operation. The pipeline flows to multiple US cities where American companies will refine the oil and distribute it to the US. By the way, much of the Keystone Pipeline has already been built and is in operation. The portion under debate is Phase 4 of the pipeline (from Alberta to Nebraska) to connect Canadian oil to the system.

    From a business standpoint, this is beneficial for both the US and Canada.

    Oil is a commodity in a worldwide market. Excess oil can be shipped overseas, but the most likely scenario is that we will keep the oil here and reduce imports from places like the Middle East and Venezuela. (You realize that Canada already supplies much of our "foreign oil" imports, right?)

    Pipelines are an incredibly safe means of transportation for fluids - much more efficient and reliable than trains or trucking. Moreover, the same hang-wringing accompanied the debates over the Trans-Alaska Pipeline back in the 1970s - I remember the arguments - that was constructed over a much more difficult and remote terrain, and few leaks have occurred. Most of those that have occurred have been the result of sabotage. Of course the alternative to the Trans-Alaska pipeline is shipping, so the pipeline reduced the need for more ships like the Exxon Valdez.

    Don't you realize that there are already huge pipelines stretching all over the US (see this map for more details), including pipelines that go through roughly the same areas as the proposed Keystone XL pipeline? This would simply be another one. The difference here is that environmentalists don't want Canada to extract oil from the oil sands.
     
    #8 Baptist Believer, Jan 11, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2015
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    When did job creation become a function of government?
     
  10. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    Really? I do think they are safer than other means, but they have their problems for with the American tax payer is billed, not the company.

    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/10/20/3581706/pipeline-spill-oil-louisiana-bayou/

    http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/19/pipeline-spills-crude-oil-ohio/

    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/18/3605276/enbridge-oil-spill-canada/

    http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2014/08/01/tesoros-north-dakota-oil-pipeline-spill-cleanup-photos/

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1699902/alberta-pipeline-spills-60000-litres-of-crude-into-muskeg/



    At the moment oil sands are too expensive to extract oil and make a profit.

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-12-03/why-canadas-oil-sands-look-like-a-shaky-investment

    http://business.financialpost.com/2014/08/22/fp-energy-aug-22-cost-cutting-fever/?__lsa=9653-1fc7

    http://tarsandssolutions.org/in-the...projects-in-peril-as-collapse-in-oil-investme

    Do not know about you but I would not touch any investment in shale oil companies at this point in time.
     
  11. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    No one has said they are completely free of problems, but compared to every other form of transport. By this way of thinking, we should outlaw passenger airlines because of a few notable failures.

    Moreover, you keep talking about taxpayer money. I looked at every alarmist article you posted, and not one mentioned the taxpayers footing the bill for cleanup. That's always handled by private firms and insurance companies for those firms.

    I see you ignored everything I wrote about pipelines and are now trying to make a claim of economic viability. That is the concern of the firms building it.
     
  12. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    The American tax payer has already been tabbed for bilions to pay for cleanup of oil spills.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/07/27/us-oil-spill-bp-tax-idUSTRE66Q1FW20100727

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/boehner-government-i-e-taxpayers-should-help-pay-for-oil-spill

    http://www.politicususa.com/2013/04...on-arkansas-oil-spill-taxpayers-cleaning.html

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-blocks-oil-spill-liability-bill/

    The GOP protects oil companies at tax payer expense.

    Red herring. Don't believe taxpayers are billed for airline crashes


    That is why I said I would not invest in a company that continues to build the pipeline. Of course they may get help for their losses from the GOP controlled congress. We have seen how the GOP protects companies at tax payer expense.

     
    #12 Crabtownboy, Jan 11, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2015
  13. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,113
    Likes Received:
    219
    You are right Crabby - it was solely the GOP who passed the Bailout for Detroit.
     
  14. Rolfe

    Rolfe
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    5,295
    Likes Received:
    391
    :thumbs: Absolutely.
     
  15. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,213
    Likes Received:
    611
    I'm looking to buy oil company's stock right now. Lot of bargains out there.
     
  16. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    Note, I said shale oil companies ... not all oil companies. Yes there are bargains and they can be found with diligent research.
     
  17. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    Well, at least if the Rs do it, it saves the company; not like the many bail-outs of this admin. that have gone bankrupt!
    Use some common sense Crabby!!!!!!!:sleep:
     
  18. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    I noticed you changed the question in the middle of our discussion. You are now talking about oil spills, not the safety and dangers of oil spill pipelines.

    I guess if you are demonstrably wrong in one area you move to the next to pretend that was the issue all along.

    This is not about tax payers paying for cleanup. This is about reduced tax revenues from BP because of the enormous costs of cleanup. When companies have significant liabilities to pay (including fines to the US government = taxpayers), they don't earn nearly as much profit. Therefore, the government does not get to collect as much tax.

    This is irrelevant to our discussion. The article covers the debate about who should pay, not evidence of anything related to the question at hand.

    This rant against Republicans makes a lot of claims that don't seem to be supported in other places. For instance, there is no mention here that tax payers were footing the bill:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Mayflower_oil_spill

    In fact, there is quite a bit about what Exxon-Mobil and local emergency responders did to mitigate and resolve the spill. However there are lawsuits pending for alleged losses regarding the spill. Apparently those have not been resolved yet, so it is too early to make a call.

    This was a difference of opinion as to how high the the liability limit should be set, not whether or not the limit should be raised. Almost everyone, Democrats and Republicans alike, believed the $75 million limit was obsolete.

    Public employees are involved in immediate response and investigations.

    Moreover, you have not demonstrated - even with all of your irrelevant links - that taxpayers are billed for general oil spills.

    Why don't you just admit that you were mistaken and we can move on?
     
  19. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,213
    Likes Received:
    611
    Name one oil company that:

    1. Deals mainly with oil extraction from shale.

    2. Is publicly traded.

    I doubt that it's possible.
     
  20. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,620
    Likes Received:
    158
    It is the American tax payer that will be billed for any spills from the Keystone pipeline.





    On companies:

    I would not buy EOG

    [​IMG]

    Nor MRO

    [​IMG]

    Just two examples. It will not be their shale business that keeps them in business in the near future.
     

Share This Page

Loading...