http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eZ8-cN662I

the history of the ENRON loophole.....this needs to be closed.

I believe Bill Clinton signed this legislation into law.

Sac, I tried to watch it but I do not believe ANYTHING Olbermann says! He hates the right so much he would lie intentionally if it would harm them! Is there a source I can read (I only ask because I don't know what ENRON loophole is). I will go do a Google search and see what I find. But, on the surface, if there is a loophole associated with ENRON, I am in supporting of closing it and nailing it shut!

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/congress-seeks.html

"It’s the "Enron loophole," which exempts energy speculators who make trades electronically from US regulation. Some argue that the unregulated energy speculation, codified in 2000, can account for $20 to $25 in the jump in oil prices."

I didn’t really understand what regulations they avoided.

http://www.oilwatchdog.org/articles/?storyId=18735

"The lack of regulation is due to what's actually called the "Enron Loophole." Enron Chairman Ken Lay and his market-manipulating buddies persuaded Congress and federal regulators in 2000 that electronic trading markets would be more "efficient" if they didn't suffer the weight of regulation. An attempt by a hedge fund in 2005 to corner the market in natural gas finally forced federal commodity regulators to quit denying the truth: speculation, not market conditions, was driving prices. Unregulated markets are not efficient, they're an invitation to gaming by big money and Big Oil."

Still don’t understand the loophole 100% but see enough to believe that something might well be rotten in Denmark. Although I don’t like government regulation (as you all know) I know that ENRON and the criminals in charge were evil. Now, I am not sure as to whether I am reading left spin or not but all I could find was Olbermann and Huffington and other unbiased sources… I know that this ‘loophole’ was not the only input that drove up the cost of electricity in CA but that their (CA) policies and politics did that. Problem is, I can’t find an unbiased source (either left or right but no ‘news’).

I also found that President Clinton did sign it. Why?

quote:

I also found that President Clinton did sign it. Why?

He's a politician.

quote:

Originally posted by Hooligan1790:

quote:

I also found that President Clinton did sign it. Why?

He's a politician.

And, he signed GATT, NAFTA, extended Most Favored Nation trading with China. This is why I can't figure out why people were calling him a "Communist". His Administration was owned by the corporations, as well.

it was signed on the day he was sworn in, it was presented to him by Phil Gramms wife just before she jumped ship from the public sector to a job in ENRON. wasn't there a GOP congress when it was signed? seems dis like to blame the conress rather then the president for high gas prices (see his "blame liberals" thread) so following his lead i guess that lets clinton off the hook

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SacraficialMetal,

http://www.pubrecord.org/index.php?view=article&id=147%...om_content&Itemid=16

the phil gram/john mcain dance....don't miss the dips.......

Sac, I blame the higher prices on the speculators… on the oil companies… on the government for their excessive taxation… etc… President Bush has been in power for quite a long time. This issue has been rearing its ugly head for a long time. He didn’t take any action to stop it! So he also is to blame. Congress refuses to let us drill our own oil or build more nuke plants… so they are also to blame.


I place sole blame on the Congress as a point of sarcasm. For you see, the liberal left always blames the president and only the president for all the world’s woes. This is wrong, childish and all around stupid thinking (it’s actually ‘feeling’ based, but I’ll let that point go). The president needs Congress to really screw the nation over. We are totally screwed over, so what’s done is done! So, if President Bush is partially to blame for the high price of oil, then Congress and the speculators are his accomplices. All I did was use liberal tactics against them (and they didn’t like it!). In this case there is plenty of blame to go around. This is not just a ‘big business’ problem. I don’t know of anyone with clean hands.


Acceptable and logical answer?

I blame the United States people for high gas prices ... under the "fool me once ..." paradigm, they should have known better than to be in this situation.

quote:

Originally posted by disagreed:
Sac, I blame the higher prices on the speculators… on the oil companies… on the government for their excessive taxation… etc… President Bush has been in power for quite a long time. This issue has been rearing its ugly head for a long time. He didn’t take any action to stop it! So he also is to blame. Congress refuses to let us drill our own oil or build more nuke plants… so they are also to blame.


I place sole blame on the Congress as a point of sarcasm. For you see, the liberal left always blames the president and only the president for all the world’s woes. This is wrong, childish and all around stupid thinking (it’s actually ‘feeling’ based, but I’ll let that point go). The president needs Congress to really screw the nation over. We are totally screwed over, so what’s done is done! So, if President Bush is partially to blame for the high price of oil, then Congress and the speculators are his accomplices. All I did was use liberal tactics against them (and they didn’t like it!). In this case there is plenty of blame to go around. This is not just a ‘big business’ problem. I don’t know of anyone with clean hands.


Acceptable and logical answer?

I guess i miss your sarcasm and your jolly joke when you wrote this:

Don’t blame the Democrats? Look at what has happened since they took over Congress. The price of gas has gone W-A-Y up! Government spending has gone up. The national debt has gone up. Even though they promised to end it, we still have a war going on. Our dependence upon foreign oil remains extremely high. Due to Democrat policies, we cannot search for our own oil sources to make us more independent. I don’t see any less poor folk. I don’t see any less hungry folks. American children still go to bed hungry.

Kumbyah my (item of choice) Kumbyah! Oh, and political correctness has pretty much eliminated the word 'Lord'.

where was that sarcasm you wrote about? did i miss a smiley face somewhere? at least my sarcasm is easy to spot.....yours pretty much follow your actual thinking. as my dad used to say.....don't piss on my leg and then tell me it's raining.....

Sac, don’t worry. The sarcasm occurred during the same time that nameless was labeling me as a liar. Most people missed the fact that I used the liberal tactic (even when I explained it to them in a PM)! Instead, they got so upset that I used their tactic that they whined and attacked me personally. But I got really big shoulders and I can take it! As a matter of fact, I find their shallowness humorous!

The quote you quoted was only one of the times I used that tactic! That whole post was sarcasm! I used it a few times in other threads, too. (Sorry that I do not have the writing ability to impart sarcasm where it exists. I’ll try better in the future. Maybe I need to go back to my caveat again!) Yes, it was all sarcasm. But, as in all sarcasm, there is a thread of truth to it. What did I type that was in error? The Democrats promised warm-fuzzy feelings and have not produced it. Why? They said we’d get out of the war. Are we? They made promises. They say President Bush is weak yet they give him EVERYTHING he asks for! Who’s weak?

Great posting, Spacey. Much respect.

From the websites's home page:

quote:

Profiteering speculators and investment banks care little about establishing a price for energy based on supply and demand fundamentals – they care about turning a PROFIT.

What do our "free market" friends, those of you who insist that government regulation is not necessary, have to say about this?

Maybe regs are necessary; it seems a slippery slope for me, tho. Reason being ... ultimately petro is just a commodity, and speculators are rampant on gaging commodities for a profit angle.

What if the national need were, say, pork bellies? Spec traders and hedge funds drove pork belly costs thru the roof ... sparerib prices were astronomical just in time for July 4th, etc. And wheat futures, soybeans, etc.

What I'm thinking is that we need to get our money "upfront", or in the oil industry vernacular, "upstream". That means oil leases based on potential gross, hefty levies on any drop of oil exported, and trade tariffs on any imported oil.

Problem is, none of that can be introduced now; it would have a regressive impact on the market, making things worse ... would need to be implemented over a couple of decades, I think.

What do you think of forcing the oil companies to reopen the refineries they illegally colluded on to limit the supply of gasoline? It's a lack of supply of gasoline that's driving the prices up, not the lack of oil.

I got to admit, I've done no homework on these closed refineries, other than the ones down in Katrina world. Now I can easily believe that collusion can and does occur; but I do wonder if a single refiner can afford to do so, or if it makes practical sense.

See, I know like here in Bakersfield, Midwest is lobbying for a new refinery; and upfront engineering is happening for San Ardo, here also. There are a great many "boutique refiners" that I never knew existed until I got into the "biz".

I may do a bit of homework, see who's closed and why. Now, I could understand some Calif. refiners closed; the blending and MBTF issues could drive a single refiner off the market here, if they don't have a flexible delivery system (rail or truck, pipeline only).

quote:

Originally posted by SociallyAutistic:
I got to admit, I've done no homework on these closed refineries, other than the ones down in Katrina world. Now I can easily believe that collusion can and does occur; but I do wonder if a single refiner can afford to do so, or if it makes practical sense.

See, I know like here in Bakersfield, Midwest is lobbying for a new refinery; and upfront engineering is happening for San Ardo, here also. There are a great many "boutique refiners" that I never knew existed until I got into the "biz".

I may do a bit of homework, see who's closed and why. Now, I could understand some Calif. refiners closed; the blending and MBTF issues could drive a single refiner off the market here, if they don't have a flexible delivery system (rail or truck, pipeline only).

Here's a good place to begin your homework, Social:

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/wyden.oil.report.pdf

According to Senator Wyden's investigation, the oil companies did exactly what Enron did in California, when they closed down power plants to increase the price of electricity (after, of course, Senator Gramm pushed through that bill that made electricity a tradable commodity in the first place, but lacking the transparency usually required of tradable commodities, but that's another matter).

Sorry, dude, I typed the link wrong...

http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/wyden_oil_report.pdf

warren buffet believes supply and demand not oil speculation, is what is driving the oil price to new hights.. who knows?

either way..i believe we need a new fuel source unfortuntately to little to late has been done to make it happen...might have something to do with greed..naw.. sc