Originally posted by: David Miller
Lewis's asinine question has been answered multiple times - he is just too ignorant to accept real facts versus the lying DemocRat and media lies. He is a moron with no credibility.
That's all you have, Davey Dog? You can't actually answer my question, can you?
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
That's all you have, Davey Dog? You can't actually answer my question, can you?
Read again, Lewis - your question has been answered multiple times - find a 2nd or 3rd grader to explain it to you.
Originally posted by: David Miller
Read again, Lewis - your question has been answered multiple times - find a 2nd or 3rd grader to explain it to you.
Perhaps, but not by you! You lack the ability.
Impotence...so terrible for you, I know...
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Perhaps, but not by you! You lack the ability.
Impotence...so terrible for you, I know...
Lame and off topic.
Not all all, Davey Dog! "Use it or lose it" has special relevance for you: no one of the same sex or the opposite sex has let you use it, and now, you've lost it.
*droop*
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Not all all, Davey Dog! "Use it or lose it" has special relevance for you: no one of the same sex or the opposite sex has let you use it, and now, you've lost it.
*droop*
Another asinine reply from Lewis.
Originally posted by: MisterPicture
I just read that the Biden administration will try to require oil companies to either drill and/or pump on their idle oil leases on federal lands or be subject to fines. Hence, "use it or lose it."
Since oil companies are choosing to use their record profits for stock buybacks and increased dividends instead of drilling and pumping - according to the Wall Street Journal - this seems like a reasonable policy, but I'm no expert.
So is there any downside to this policy? I'd love to hear some responses here.
And Boilerman, we know you're going to click on any topic that has the word "oil" in it, so yeah, you should chime in.
This policy is for new leases only. Do you think that this policy will increase production or not?. Economics 101 tell us that an increase in the cost of doing business decreases business. All you guys must have flunked that class. At least that's what they teach at
Purdue's Krannert school of management
Originally posted by: Boilerman
This policy is for new leases only. Do you think that this policy will increase production or not?
It will increase production because non-producing leases will be penalized.
It will not increase costs on active leases, because active leases will not be penalized.
It will reduce energy costs because incentivizing more production will increase the overall supply.
It all seems pretty obvious, doesn't it?
One more time.
25% are tied up in court. Thousands more are being held up by red tape. Others are not being used due to being unprofitable to drill. Adding an additional cost does not incentive people to drill. They will let it expire, so the penalties will be ineffective.
Most leases already have a sunset clause anyway, so it is political posturing by the democrats.
Originally posted by: tom
One more time.
25% are tied up in court. Thousands more are being held up by red tape. Others are not being used due to being unprofitable to drill. Adding an additional cost does not incentive people to drill. They will let it expire, so the penalties will be ineffective.
Most leases already have a sunset clause anyway, so it is political posturing by the democrats.
"Others are not being used due to being unprofitable to drill."
Yes, it is more profitable for the oil companies to produce LESS oil while charging MORE for it because of scarcity. Obvious, right?
That enriches the oil companies and costs Americans lots of money. Maybe businesses that depend on government leases should be held to account.
