woodguru

What is energy independence supposed to be? We've heard about it for decades, it has been the excuse for drill baby drill, it has been used to extract subsidies and special tax breaks for the oil industry, millions of acres of federal land have been given to oil companies even though they have millions of acres they haven't had a chance to drill and develop.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my idea of the concept of oil independence would be that our oil industry produces enough oil and fuel that we are not held captive by needing to import more than we produce for our own domestic consumption.

We have produced more than we use for a long time, even back when our consumption was at it's peak, we exported oil to other countries. It has always annoyed me to hear the right wing call to drill more, get more land, more subsidies for exploring new reserves.

We are exporting huge amounts of oil and fuel, pipelines are not about getting oil to refineries, it's about getting it to ports for export. It's about government subsidies for building pipelines. If these pipelines were needed as much as the rhetoric would imply wealthy oil companies can build them on their own dime, they don't need federal funds to do it.

If people on the right would take the time and initiative to learn about the facts without all the rhetoric about jobs and energy independence we would be part of much more intelligent arguments, not to mention saving billions of dollars that's going to an oil industry that doesn't need it.

So next time you hear an argument about the keystone pipeline being about 11,000 jobs, understand that that is BS, once it's constructed it's about a few hundred jobs at best. If it's not constructed at all it has no impact, if oil companies had to pay for it themselves they would do a cost effectiveness analysis and they wouldn't spend another dime on it. The right is all about less government spending, but there isn't a government giveaway to major corporations they don't support.

I'm all for oil, and I'm all for oil companies paying for their own expenses and their fair share of taxes on the tens of billions they make in profits. Subsidies are for new and emerging technologies, not the established ones that make more money than most industries.

factnotfiction

Excellent points, plus the fact is that Keystone is in full operation, however the keystone xl has never been operational, so no jobs are being lost, and no toxic, corrosive oil tar sands are being shipped.

And to your point about so called 'energy independence', if that was true, then this country would not be importing oil, while exporting refined petroleum products. The taxpayers of this country should be reaping the benefits of any domestic petroleum products.

And the big oil dollars are striving to end the 'oil glut' so that prices will increase to $60-70 a barrel, and Saui Arabia will once again reap billions of dollars from the rest of the world.

And with rising oil prices, look for Venezuela economy to rebound

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

It's one of a number of scams favored by the GOP; energy independence, voter fraud, tax relief for the wealthy pay for themselves, freedom of choice ( except when one of the choices is something they don't like ).............

PeterS

Nice argument Woodrow. PR was just crying crocodile tears over how many millions of jobs it would cost. I suggested she take up smoking so as to employ farmers and later on people in the medical field thereby doing her part to add to jobs. Tobacco was one of the greatest jobs producers of all time.

Now the point is that not all jobs are equal and we have to think about what the job gives to society vs what it substracts. Oil is certainly at the tipping point where it subtracts more than it contributes...

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Tobacco is still one of the largest job producers of all time. Smoking cessation projects, counselors, Medical procedures, vaping and associated products, Government warning labels, and public service announcements, etc., etc. This is a huge business.