myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Do oil companies pay their fair share?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mat-ty



Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 1088

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

have you checked your private pension , 401k, or IRA latley. Many Americans benefit greatly from oil co profits and do not even know it .

Not to mention the 9 million jobs.

Hows that solar thing going, how many billions has obama wasted on moonbat power.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2738

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mat-ty wrote:
have you checked your private pension , 401k, or IRA latley. Many Americans benefit greatly from oil co profits and do not even know it .

Not to mention the 9 million jobs.

Hows that solar thing going, how many billions has obama wasted on moonbat power.

I love it when you get pissed off about Obama. That means he's doing stuff right. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2827

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More of the right stuff...........

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/04/03/calif-border-town-loses-thousands-of-jobs-after-solar-firm-files-for-bankruptcy/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2827

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

.......and a rather different perspective from the left on the Richmond refinery

"Chevron considered selling the Richmond plant as recently as a year ago, according to Reuters. While Chevronís not happy that such information is out there in the public, it is. The reality is that no one can conduct business as usual in this economic climate, and that includes Richmond. This blogger tried to ask Richmond Mayor Gayle McLaughlin why she did not work in more of a deal-making fashion with Chevron Richmond, and what was recorded was a constant activist anger against Chevron.

With that, and the Worldís economic problems, why should Chevron remain in Richmond, California? From a very cold business perspective, it seems like a total waste of money, and Chevron could always structure a kind of sale-lease back deal so it continues to gain revenue from a scaled down Richmond refinery. If Richmond hates Chevron as much as the Mayor of Richmond seems to express, why not leave Richmond? That would solve the problem.

Hereís where the emotions run deep at Chevron.

Chevron has not just had the refinery in operation for longer than the City of Richmond has been an incorporated city, itís still the remaining employer of note. At present, Chevron Richmond employs 1,200 employees on its refining side and another 1,200 employees at its Richmond Technology Center. There are an additional 500 contractors working at the plant at any given time. Thatís a total of 2,900 workers active at any one time in Richmond.

Moreover, Chevron reports that Chevron Richmond is a giant 30 percent of the City of Richmondís revenue base. That means one-third of Richmondís municipal services are already paid for by Chevron. With that, itís not a stretch to report that perhaps greater than one-third of Richmondís economy depends on Chevron Richmond Refinery operations.

All of that is good for Richmond, which has lost 70 percent of its job base in the last three years and whoís projected job growth is already a negative 2.9 percent, but some in high-places in Richmond still think its all a big joke, so Chevron should leave Richmond. That would end all of the complaint about pollution in theory, because the plant would have been closed or downsized. Right?

Well, Chevron says not so fast. Itís reportedly concerned about many of the crime and social problems in Richmond and realizes that a departure would be the death of the City, literally and figuratively. Here, Chevronís ties to Richmond are emotional and they may very well be the reasons why Chevron remains in Richmond, even as all international market signs point to a swift exit from Richmond in some form as the right decision."
[/u]

http://blog.sfgate.com/abraham/2010/01/22/chevrons-noted-richmond-refinery-closure-seen-as-joke-in-richmond/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5468

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matty--you are so silly, as well as uninformed. California's per capita carbon generation is much lower than Massachusetts, and dramatically lower than Texas. California's per capita carbon use is 5th, see http://www.eredux.com/states/?sortBy=carbon_percap_invert&sortOrder=ASC&rows=53

what is amazing is that California's use is not much more than half of Texas', with a larger population. Of course, we don't have as many fat heads stuffed into cowboy hats, or beer bellies stuffed into pickup trucks.

Now I know that you actually enjoy drowning people with darker skins and funny accents that aren't real 'mericans, but investing in solar energy and building the technology makes sense. But only if you actually stop to think. Try it some time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5468

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe--you are the problem. Your type of management, that is, management by dictate, is the heart and soul of the problem. You can try to convince yourself that Chevron's only problems are with the Mayor--but in fact, after years of running the town, candidates who were willing to stand up to Chevron were elected to a majority of the City Council. Chevron's efforts to affect the election, and petulance with the possibility of a green party mayor, blew up in their face. Chevron has offended West County politicians far and wide.

The proximate cause of this debacle was the games that Chevron played with expansion, as well as a number of well publicized leaks that had many citizens in Richmond sheltering in place because it wasn't safe to go outside. As noted here earlier, Chevron's EIR was slapped down in court because they played games with the project description. Maybe that works in African nations you know, or in Texas, but not in California.

Now in what modern MBA's call a learning organization, management would take stock of such tactics, and ask themselves whether it is working. Even more important, the Board of Directors would ask managment "How many enemies do you think you can afford in Richmond?" Chevron does not appear to be a learning organization, and it seems that you also have been vacinated to protect your belief structure from the learning virus. How many enemies can the oil industry afford? How fast are you making them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4309

PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac, California has a lower carbon usage because of 2 things. Our weather and so many poor/illegals who don't drive. The later thanks to our looney left state and national government.

There is not a day that goes by that I don't thank God for the cheap energy that I am given. What a fool who would cook the "Goldern Goose"....let's hope they move their operation to Texas.

Back to 10-12 foot surf over here in Maui...plenty of hopeless hippies hanging on the corner looking for handouts in Da Paradise. Best place on earth to freeload. Cool I often hand them some cash after they listen to my speech on Obama!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2738

PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
I often hand them some cash after they listen to my speech on Obama!

Mr. Obama no doubt appreciates your efforts to spread the wealth as you spread the manure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3699
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mat-ty wrote:
have you checked your private pension , 401k, or IRA latley. Many Americans benefit greatly from oil co profits and do not even know it .

Not to mention the 9 million jobs.

Hows that solar thing going, how many billions has obama wasted on moonbat power.

Solar is now at the point that an investment in solar gets you your money back in 6-7 years, thats better than real estate and equal to long term stock market returns. And for the most part, integrated oil company stocks are dogs.
In regards to Richmond...I live a stones throw over the Bay from Richmond, and I for one would love to see that shithole closed down. Richmond could then become the next Marin and net billions in real estate gains. Not to mention the two or three high quality windsurf launches we could create if the refinery got wacked.
The main reason why US solar firms are going tapioca is because China heavily subsidizes the cost of polysilicon. This brings us back to our trade policies with China.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2827

PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

An investment in solar will get your money back in 6 - 7 years? So can taxpayers look forward to getting our money back in that time frame from Solyndra? How about Solar Millennium, Beacon Power, Evergreen Solar? (I could go on). We will never see our money back from those naive investments. Yet, by way of contrast, you denigrate integrated oils, which have provided a solid return to investors for decades. Strange.

If the Richmond property could net billions, I suggest you put together a consortium to buy the Richmond Refinery. They will sell it for about a quarter of the value just placed upon it by the local council. However, you had better warn prospective homeowners to keep the council sweet or they will hugely inflate the assessed value of those homes over market value to confiscate more property taxes.....and if any of the homeowners appeal those ridiculous assessments, they will be castigated as arrogant and litigious, and derided for not taking a more "nuanced" approach by settling for a slightly less ridiculous assessment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 2 of 13

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group