• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Energy Discussion

Flash said:
How is this a good idea at all? Since when did the US government get directly involved on such a large scale in foreign business ownership, or business ownership period? Isn't this socialism, a bogeyman of the right, or is it some sort of imperialism? Why not both?*

The irony is that this is exactly what a lot of folks claimed our invasion of Iraq was really about, that we wanted to take over the oil fields.

*®Old El Paso.
Click to expand...
This is a very Trumpian action. He sees the federal government as a corporation (different than a business) and he wants to add to corporate holdings. I don’t see how it can work, unless any “profit” goes directly to paying the national debt.
 
Griz882 said:
This is a very Trumpian action. He sees the federal government as a corporation (different than a business) and he wants to add to corporate holdings. I don’t see how it can work, unless any “profit” goes directly to paying the national debt.
Click to expand...

Profits, if there ever are any, would flow to the oligarchy. Trump's goal is self-enrichment. Seen through that lens, all his actions come into focus.
 
Last edited:
sevenhelmet said:
Profits, if there ever are any, would flow to the oligarchy. Trump's goal is self-enrichment. Seen through that lens, all his actions come into focus.
Click to expand...
“Oligarchy” is kind of a slippery term as it has more or less lost its intended meaning. I think “profiteers” is more apt since most of those (of all political appetites) who are super rich don’t give a crap about what party is in control as long as their bottom line improves.
 
Griz882 said:
“Oligarchy” is kind of a slippery term as it has more or less lost its intended meaning. I think “profiteers” is more apt since most of those (of all political appetites) who are super rich don’t give a crap about what party is in control as long as their bottom line improves.
Click to expand...

It's a plundering of the country by the ultra-wealthy either way, so I'm not sure why the distinction matters to you. But sure, whatever helps you sleep at night.
 
Griz882 said:
This is a very Trumpian action. He sees the federal government as a corporation (different than a business) and he wants to add to corporate holdings. I don’t see how it can work, unless any “profit” goes directly to paying the national debt.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how this cannot be viewed as extra constitutional. Unclear to me whether Congress or the judiciary would be the correct branch to remedy this overreach, or who would have standing in a lawsuit.
 
Brett327 said:
I don’t see how this cannot be viewed as extra constitutional. Unclear to me whether Congress or the judiciary would be the correct branch to remedy this overreach, or who would have standing in a lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Broadly, I concur. I would think Congress, but I also think they’d have to craft some new bill to settle it.
 
Throughout history, nations have maneuvered to have access to natural resources and strategic location - oil above all - I don’t see this as any different. (For example, Winston Churchill led the UK to buy a controlling stake in the Anglo-Persian Oil Company- aka, BP, in 1914) In the case of Venezuela, you need a guarantee of security and funding to make the long term investment. As in the title of Daniel Yergin’s Pullitzer Prize winning book, for a century oil is “The Prize”


And a fascinating history “what if ?” of US plans to seize Saudi oil fields in 1973.

U.S. mulled seizing oil in 1973, memo says​

The United States gave serious consideration to sending airborne troops to seize oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi during the 1973 Arab oil embargo

www.nbcnews.com

U.S. mulled seizing oil in 1973, memo says

The United States gave serious consideration to sending airborne troops to seize oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, according to a top-secret British intelligence memorandum released Wednesday night.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

As for electrification, this was recently in the news:

 
Roger_Waveoff said:
How about just any step? Whole lot of the last few years could frankly be summed up as, "Entire Legislative Branch, literally just do your f***ing job."
Click to expand...
There has certainly been an increase of executive powers (championed by both parties) as well as ideological sorting between right and left which has led our Presidential system acting more like a Parliamentary system.

Combined with gerrymandering, I don’t see this changing until the system of electing Congressmen is (if ever) changed from single member districts to an at large, proportional system. This is further skewed by the current interpretation of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment that says representatives are apportioned by counting the "whole number of persons (not citizens) in each state" - thus the more people that illegally cross into a state increase its political power.

Note: if you are curious to which states are the most gerrymandered, go to wikipedia for the raw vote count and build an Excel spreadsheet to compute the disparity between vote proportion against actual elected representatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top