US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[Oxous]

Since gas prices are getting higher, the calls to ban U.S. oil exports are beginning to return. Last time it was the House, this time it's the Senate.

Democrat Senators Are Trying To Limit U.S. LNG Exports For All The Wrong Reasons​

Spoiler: Full Article

(article)

• A group of Democrat Senators has just sent a letter pleading for the Biden Administration to limit U.S. LNG exports while the Department of Energy conducts a review of the exports and their impact on domestic prices.
• The appeal comes at a time when Europe is being crippled by sky-high energy prices, with U.S. LNG potentially providing a lifeline to help keep the lights on in the region.
• Many of the Senators which have signed off on this letter have campaigned against pipelines within their states, forcing them to import natural gas from abroad.

Just as U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) serves as the main cog in helping keep the lights on and homes heated in Europe in this windless winter, a group of Democratic senators sends a letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm urging her and the Biden administration to take action to limit U.S. LNG exports.

In their letter, these 10 senators "...urge the Department to conduct a review of LNG exports and their impact on domestic prices and the public interest, and develop a plan to ensure natural gas remains affordable for American households. Until such a plan is completed, the Department should consider halting permit approvals of U.S. LNG export facilities."

There are several problems with this approach. The first is that, as stated above, Europe is in desperate need of U.S. LNG this winter and likely beyond as its wind industry fails to deliver on its promises. Second is the fact that, despite record levels of LNG exports in recent months, U.S. natural gas production continues to enjoy a steady surplus over demand for it. The U.S. price, currently standing at about $4.80 per Mmbtu at the Henry Hub, is not connected to prices for international natural gas, which in Europe is currently selling for upwards of 6 to 7 times the U.S. price.

The U.S. proven resource of natural gas is equal to hundreds of years of current consumption. Shouldn’t we as a nation should celebrate our ability to pitch in a small sliver of what we produce to help avoid a looming humanitarian catastrophe across the European continent? That crisis was brought on by the wrong-headed energy policies adopted by governments who share the general energy outlook of Granholm, Biden, and this group of senators.

Here is a list of the senators who signed this letter: Jack Reed (D-RI), Angus King (D-ME), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Gary Peters (D-MI), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

Now, take a look at that list and notice the states they represent: Two of them are from Sec. Granholm’s home state of Michigan, obviously recruited by the others to elevate the priority of this letter with the Secretary, a former governor of that state. Then you have Tina Smith of Minnesota, who opposes anything the U.S. oil and gas industry does as a matter of course.

Where are the 7 other senators from? Maine, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. All New England states. This leads us to the second logical problem with this approach, where the senators get the question of the impacts of importing/exporting LNG to their constituents exactly backward.

Where high natural gas prices for utility consumers are concerned, what do all New England states have in common in recent years? They’ve all found themselves cut off from the massive natural gas supply provided by the Marcellus and Utica Shale formations of the Pennsylvania/West Virginia/Ohio and Michigan region. Why? Because their fellow Democrats in New York State, led by disgraced ex-Governor Andrew Cuomo, have refused to allow pipelines to be built across that state, which forms a land blockade from the Marcellus/Utica shale basins to New England.

Thus, we see the spectacle every winter of LNG being imported into Boston Harbor by tanker after tanker coming not from U.S. exporters, but from thousands of miles across the ocean from other exporting nations, including from 4,000 miles distant in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

If lowering natural gas costs for their constituents were really the goal of these senators, their best, most effective approach would be advocating for the building of a few hundred miles of new pipelines across New York from Pennsylvania, rather than invoking bans that ensure the continuation of the illogical, carbon-intensive practice of bringing natural gas into Boston Harbor from 4,000 miles away in Russia.

At the end of the day, this letter to Sec. Granholm only demonstrates that these 10 senators either have no understanding of the true potential benefits involved in the import/export equation for LNG, or that they intentionally misrepresent these benefits for the U.S. and the world for purely political reasons. Neither option is especially flattering.

 

[X Prime]

He's also Canadian. I don't walk into Canadian topics and profess myself an expert or an interested party; Peterson shouldn't waddle into American politics and profess himself an expert or an interested party.

This is wrongheaded; remember that all areas of the world innately belong to America and therefore any American's opinion on their politics is automatically valid.

 

[he who has thus come/gone]

This is wrongheaded; remember that all areas of the world innately belong to America and therefore any American's opinion on their politics is automatically valid.

Canada can keep most of its territory. No need for Quebec or other trash parts of the country.

If anything, this is an acceptable compromise on which parts of Canada belong to America:

Spoiler: fight

 

[deso2y]

Peterson is a classic example of someone who is highly educated and intelligent, who believes that their educational intelligence transfers from the fields they understand to every other field. When you're talking about psychology and fields related to that (psych history, social anthropology, behavioural ethics, collective stories and such) he's pretty much on point. He's at his best when he's asking questions on his podcast, even though he can get a bit transcendental. He's at his worst when he's the one answering questions; once he starts talking about politics, he gets a bit out there. The farther he is from his knowledge domain, the more insane he sounds when he's being queried. I certainly wouldn't ask him how to resolve pathfinding in arbitrarily large, multi-dimensional arrays, for instance, but I'd be inclined to trust his answers about the influence and growth of social structures.

So it took me like a FULL YEAR thinking about it because it's bloody complicated: A* - and that's the bloody thing about A* - it represents man's search of meaning, in fact it's right there in the name: a star, and what is a star? it is a faraway body creating an inconceivable amount of energy that we attribute characteristics to, it's like-it's like trying to tame fire! it also shows how humans can be tyrannical, because who the hell are you to pick the right heuristic function and impose it upon the algorithm? and in contrast, there is Dijkstra, who was a very interesting person in his own ways, he came up with his algorithm while walking with his fiancé, so it's a manifestation of him not accepting his maturity and sacrificing his relation with a woman who loves him, so who the hell wants to be that? you don't want to be the king of the lost boys! but it gets very tricky, because there is a sacrificial element in path finding: you need to sacrifice the pure potentiality of exploration for the actuality of a path, and that makes it analogous to maturation, the very thing that Dijkstra refused to do! so you have to choose your damn limitation here, no bloody postmodern rationalisation will change that, if you didn't you might end up in the graph gulag, so to speak, like Tarjan ended up multiple times and that is not a happy day.

 

[The Ugly One]

We should ban LNG exports because Europeans are retards for shutting down their base generating capacity and deserve a heatless winter.

 

[BibiLivesMatter]

So where can we get a government sanctioned crack pipe now gaymers?

 

[Kuritan Deplorable]

So where can we get a government sanctioned crack pipe now gaymers?

Right under Hunters Desk.

Can't quote the LNG Article - But there really isn't much reason to keep the excess LNG around. Prices are reasonably low for domestic LNG, the main inhibitor to using more of it right now is plants that can burn it for electricity. Coal conversions to LNG are fairly common but getting approval to build new generators is a nightmare in the modern green hellscape.

What I find really interesting about that article is that it outright says that wind is failing to deliver on its promises. Even from a website literally named after oil, its surprising to see such a hard break in the renewables narrative.

 

[Vyse Inglebard]

Black people, who have one of the lowest vaccination rates in America.

In that case, those community groups are going to get a big fat from me. They can only jab my cold, lifeless Minecraft avatar.

WTF? White House now says they never wanted lockdowns and most of them happened under Drumph.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/white-house-now-says-it-never-really-wanted-lockdowns

When asked in an August ABC interview whether he would support lockdowns if experts recommended doing so in order to stop the spread of the virus, Biden said: “I would shut it down. I would listen to the scientists.”

The Brandon administration's lies are getting more desperate. Sad!

 

[Only A Retard Sometimes]

If they ban oil and gas exports it will DECIMATE the industry in the united states leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the closure of facilities that would take billions to reopen and the price of gas to skyrocket to all time highs.

 

[Vyse Inglebard]

If they ban oil and gas exports it will DECIMATE the industry in the united states leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the closure of facilities that would take billions to reopen and the price of gas to skyrocket to all time highs.

Losing hundreds of thousands of jobs = more people now depend on gubmint money = more votes.
Gas skyrocketing to all time highs = what's the point of cars? Gotta Uber rideshare your way to school/work/wherever now!

"You will own nothing, and you will be happy."

 

[MirrorNoir]

They don't hire normies. I'd guess they recruit former military like Crenshaw or folks that wanted to be like that, the Blue Falcon crew.

What's Blue Falcon Crew?

 

[CarlosDanger]

 

[More AWS-8Q Than You]

What's Blue Falcon Crew?

Blue Falcon is a military short hand for Buddy Fucker.

 

[spinal gas chamber]

If they ban oil and gas exports it will DECIMATE the industry in the united states leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the closure of facilities that would take billions to reopen and the price of gas to skyrocket to all time highs.

And there will be secondary effects - for example, 76% of Mexico’s LNG comes from the US: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48836
Take out their economically viable power generation capability by cutting fuel 76% and what will happen next?

 

[Kuritan Deplorable]

If they ban oil and gas exports it will DECIMATE the industry in the united states leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the closure of facilities that would take billions to reopen and the price of gas to skyrocket to all time highs.

Losing Jobs? Hold on, let me get the bean counters in.

Ah, yes, you mean 300,000 new jobs added. Just had to break out my Biden maths there.

And there will be secondary effects - for example, 76% of Mexico’s LNG comes from the US: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48836
Take out their economically viable power generation capability by cutting fuel 76% and what will happen next?

Oh man, I didn't even think of Mexico. Or Canada, for that matter. I don't even think Mexico would have to do anything, the Cartels would move first to fuck with the border hard. They'd make so much money from the mass refugees crossing into the USA if Mexicos power grid were to get fucked with that hard.

 

[The Nothingness]

If they ban oil and gas exports it will DECIMATE the industry in the united states leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the closure of facilities that would take billions to reopen and the price of gas to skyrocket to all time highs.

The Burgerland version of the Freedom Convey can't happen any sooner in Minecraft.

 

[The Ugly One]

Just ban exports to Europe. In fact, we should just a general trade embargo on Europe. They want to eat dicks for breakfast, let 'em.

 

[Vaclav]

Right under Hunters Desk.

Can't quote the LNG Article - But there really isn't much reason to keep the excess LNG around. Prices are reasonably low for domestic LNG, the main inhibitor to using more of it right now is plants that can burn it for electricity. Coal conversions to LNG are fairly common but getting approval to build new generators is a nightmare in the modern green hellscape.

What I find really interesting about that article is that it outright says that wind is failing to deliver on its promises. Even from a website literally named after oil, its surprising to see such a hard break in the renewables narrative.

Wind is a scam. A wind turbine would need to run for 100 years to offset the carbon cost of its own manufacture, and none of them will last that long. As an added bonus they kill huge numbers of migrating birds and bats.

 

[Kramer on the phone]

Peterson's a decent guy with some good ideas on personal responsibility and self-empowerment, but he doesn't know shit about politics, and it bleeds through when it comes to issues where you need to go for the throat. To use a common example - CRT is a fucking non-starter policy wise on both sides of the political aisle; left, right, center, they all hate it, and the only ones who are outright supportive of it are the hard lefties and race grifters. Similarly, the thing about calling out the 2020 fraud for what it is is that pretty much everyone already knows, even if they won't admit it. At this point, even a massive chunk of the Dem hardline believes Trump got robbed (they're much more split on whether or not this was a good thing, of course), to say nothing of the people outside that hardline base that never saw Biden as legitimate.

So why is it Peterson thinks avoiding it is the better option? He's trying to logic it out, but he's using the wrong frame of mind for it. In his mind, as I understand it, there's a thousand more direct issues you can hammer that are vastly more effective, so locking these seems like a waste. The reason he's wrong is that every one of these is another chink in the armor, and the Biden Administration, starved as it is, cannot afford to let any go unresponded to - and in those responses it will always overreach.

its much simpler than that. Jordan's Canadian and never lived anywhere less than 99% white. He legitamtely has never had to think about racial issues or the good and bad that comes from them. Its the same reason in that one interview with Jim Jeffries all someone had to do is say "well what about the civil rights act that limited freedom was that good" for him to go "yep my views are completely dogshit". Its the same reason he can't work up the blood flow needed to say "CRT is dogshit" its just repackaged CRA. But Jordan is too Canadian, raised in too white a society to understand why its bad or why you can't argue with niggers

Its the same reason Jordan looked like he got kicked in the balls when that one black guy called him an evil white man during a debate; he genuinely doesn't understand that niggers don't think the way whites do and honestly whites are an extreme minority in the way they think. Jordan because of his upbringing and lifestyle will never understand. Which is why he won't ever have a good point when it comes to race issues. its insane that people can't see this

 

[Breadbassket]

Wind is a scam. A wind turbine would need to run for 100 years to offset the carbon cost of its own manufacture, and none of them will last that long. As an added bonus they kill huge numbers of migrating birds and bats.

Wind turbines as they are now are simply to inefficient and I am not sure how much more they can improve the tech to be honest. I've heard a lot of other green "renewable" energy processes do not perform well when compared to traditional energy producing methods.