Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Point Break

Ukraine

Recommended Posts

A lot of people should be rightfully eating crow in the morning:

 

How Obama crippled a Russian Bank With A Stroke of a Pen

 

He may not take shirtless horseback rides across the steppes, or have a black belt in judo, but on Thursday, President Obama sent a message to Russian president Vladimir Putin about strength. Specifically, economic strength.

The message was this: Whenever I decide to, I can pick up a pen, and kill a significant financial institution in your country.

Obama’s victim was the St. Petersburg-based Bank Rossiya.

In response to Russia’s takeover of the Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, Obama yesterday authorized the Treasury Department to add 20 members of Putin’s inner circle, as well as Bank Rossiya, to the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s list of “specially designated nationals.”

The designation makes the individuals named ineligible to do business with U.S. financial institutions, which is likely a major personal inconvenience. But for Bank Rossiya, the designation is something like the kiss of death.


Bank Rossiya is not the largest bank in Russia by a long shot, but its significance lies in its clientele rather than its size. In announcing the sanctions, the Treasury Department noted that Bank Rossiya “is the personal bank for senior officials of the Russian Federation” including members of the Ozero Dacha Cooperative, an exclusive community where members of Putin’s inner circle live. In addition, it provides financial services to the single largest segment of the Russian economy – the oil, gas, and energy sector.

Essentially, this is a credit union for oligarchs, with a side business in financing the Russian energy industry. Its customers include many more high-profile Russians than just those named in the Treasury statement. As of Thursday it is, for all intents and purposes, out of business.

More at the link: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-crippled-russian-bank-stroke-100000133.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia just expanded its borders for the first time since WW II. Putin's popularity is at an all time high.

 

Just maybe he's playing a different game than Obama thinks he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A lot of people should be rightfully eating crow in the morning:

 

How Obama crippled a Russian Bank With A Stroke of a Pen

 

He may not take shirtless horseback rides across the steppes, or have a black belt in judo, but on Thursday, President Obama sent a message to Russian president Vladimir Putin about strength. Specifically, economic strength.

The message was this: Whenever I decide to, I can pick up a pen, and kill a significant financial institution in your country.

Obama’s victim was the St. Petersburg-based Bank Rossiya.

In response to Russia’s takeover of the Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, Obama yesterday authorized the Treasury Department to add 20 members of Putin’s inner circle, as well as Bank Rossiya, to the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s list of “specially designated nationals.”

The designation makes the individuals named ineligible to do business with U.S. financial institutions, which is likely a major personal inconvenience. But for Bank Rossiya, the designation is something like the kiss of death.

 

Bank Rossiya is not the largest bank in Russia by a long shot, but its significance lies in its clientele rather than its size. In announcing the sanctions, the Treasury Department noted that Bank Rossiya “is the personal bank for senior officials of the Russian Federation” including members of the Ozero Dacha Cooperative, an exclusive community where members of Putin’s inner circle live. In addition, it provides financial services to the single largest segment of the Russian economy – the oil, gas, and energy sector.

Essentially, this is a credit union for oligarchs, with a side business in financing the Russian energy industry. Its customers include many more high-profile Russians than just those named in the Treasury statement. As of Thursday it is, for all intents and purposes, out of business.

More at the link: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-crippled-russian-bank-stroke-100000133.html

 

There is a shitload of money shuffling about right now.

 

Do you think Russia will withdraw from the Crimea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A lot of people should be rightfully eating crow in the morning:

 

How Obama crippled a Russian Bank With A Stroke of a Pen

 

He may not take shirtless horseback rides across the steppes, or have a black belt in judo, but on Thursday, President Obama sent a message to Russian president Vladimir Putin about strength. Specifically, economic strength.

The message was this: Whenever I decide to, I can pick up a pen, and kill a significant financial institution in your country.

Obama’s victim was the St. Petersburg-based Bank Rossiya.

In response to Russia’s takeover of the Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, Obama yesterday authorized the Treasury Department to add 20 members of Putin’s inner circle, as well as Bank Rossiya, to the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s list of “specially designated nationals.”

The designation makes the individuals named ineligible to do business with U.S. financial institutions, which is likely a major personal inconvenience. But for Bank Rossiya, the designation is something like the kiss of death.

 

Bank Rossiya is not the largest bank in Russia by a long shot, but its significance lies in its clientele rather than its size. In announcing the sanctions, the Treasury Department noted that Bank Rossiya “is the personal bank for senior officials of the Russian Federation” including members of the Ozero Dacha Cooperative, an exclusive community where members of Putin’s inner circle live. In addition, it provides financial services to the single largest segment of the Russian economy – the oil, gas, and energy sector.

Essentially, this is a credit union for oligarchs, with a side business in financing the Russian energy industry. Its customers include many more high-profile Russians than just those named in the Treasury statement. As of Thursday it is, for all intents and purposes, out of business.

More at the link: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-crippled-russian-bank-stroke-100000133.html

 

There is a shitload of money shuffling about right now.

 

Do you think Russia will withdraw from the Crimea?

 

No, but a bunch of pissed off oligarchs may have the larger say so from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the money going?

 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/22/world/europe/russia-starts-to-feel-effect-of-sanctions.html

 

MOSCOW American and European sanctions rattled Russia's economy on Friday, with Moscow's stock indexes opening sharply lower, rating agencies threatening to reduce the countrys creditworthiness, and hints of trepidation coming from Russia's tycoons as they concluded an annual conference here.

 

I hate it when that happens. Is this how the big boys play the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the money going?

 

Dunno, do you?

 

I suspect that the stuff sold in Europe will remain in Euros (which might account for the FOREX drop in the Ruble).

 

If you want Rubles, you just buy something in Europe, export it to Russia and Sell it in Rubles. Since there is no direct cash exchange that might also account for the FOREX drop in the Ruble.

 

Sanctions haven't worked well in the past against whole nations. I expect the US and Europe to just fuck around like this until it's off the front page, some new 'crisis' occurs or winter sets in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Russian central bank is propping up the ruble then the money is heading for the border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Russian central bank is propping up the ruble then the money is heading for the border.

 

Some of it will, but if it becomes a flood expect Putin to stop it with force. Britain did a number on our economy for a few decades after 1776, but it wasn't the end of the US.

 

Those buds of Putin are now among the most popular people in Russia. They probably aren't very close to panic. How long will Germany follow a policy that makes it difficult for them to sell cars and such in Russia when nearly everybody in the Crimea is raising toasts to the health of Vladimir Putin? How long will we beat that same dead horse?

 

We may have our tantrum, but lets see if we keep sending the neocon Kagan's to pass out cookies to rebels in places Russians consider to be within their sphere of influence before we start sucking each others dicks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU has 10 times as much trade with a Russia as we do and 10 times the leverage. Merkel is willing to ratchet up but wants to see if Putin will back down first. Merkel is not nobody.

 

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/russia-s-trade-energy-might-frustrates-eu-move-for-sanctions.html

 

I don't see Putin giving back the Crimea. And it's a reasonable question what the end game is here. So far it hasn't spilled over into Iran negotiations, ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A lot of people should be rightfully eating crow in the morning:

 

How Obama crippled a Russian Bank With A Stroke of a Pen

 

He may not take shirtless horseback rides across the steppes, or have a black belt in judo, but on Thursday, President Obama sent a message to Russian president Vladimir Putin about strength. Specifically, economic strength.

The message was this: Whenever I decide to, I can pick up a pen, and kill a significant financial institution in your country.

Obama’s victim was the St. Petersburg-based Bank Rossiya.

In response to Russia’s takeover of the Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, Obama yesterday authorized the Treasury Department to add 20 members of Putin’s inner circle, as well as Bank Rossiya, to the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s list of “specially designated nationals.”

The designation makes the individuals named ineligible to do business with U.S. financial institutions, which is likely a major personal inconvenience. But for Bank Rossiya, the designation is something like the kiss of death.

 

Bank Rossiya is not the largest bank in Russia by a long shot, but its significance lies in its clientele rather than its size. In announcing the sanctions, the Treasury Department noted that Bank Rossiya “is the personal bank for senior officials of the Russian Federation” including members of the Ozero Dacha Cooperative, an exclusive community where members of Putin’s inner circle live. In addition, it provides financial services to the single largest segment of the Russian economy – the oil, gas, and energy sector.

Essentially, this is a credit union for oligarchs, with a side business in financing the Russian energy industry. Its customers include many more high-profile Russians than just those named in the Treasury statement. As of Thursday it is, for all intents and purposes, out of business.

More at the link: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-crippled-russian-bank-stroke-100000133.html

It was really boring when the cold war ended. So boring when one global policeman is unchallenged, the only thing good about Iraq, Iran, Libia and North Korea was challenge. But Russia ups the ante a tad hey. They are not third world and have the capacity to strike back. Like when the school yard bully met his match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Listenup Mister. The neocons will tell you when the people of a country are dreaming of democracy. They'll tell those people too. When the US economy needs an influx of borrowed dollars, we will be the ones to say who needs a war for the dreams of democracy they didn't know they had, thank you very much.

 

You know, I was reflecting on something when I read what President McCain said the other day. Here's what President McCain said:

 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=289994303

<

blockquote>

>> John McCain, in Kiev on Friday, pledged to help send an array of armaments, ranging from combat infantry rifles to anti-tank weapons, to Ukraine as quickly as possible. Ukraine's military is largely poorly trained, but McCain pointed to the looming Russian troops as enough reason to help the country defend itself.

"Would you like them to throw rocks?" said McCain, a hawkish Republican from Arizona. "If that's what they're literally begging for, why should we judge whether we give it to them or not?"<

>/span>

 

At first, that about made me want to tear my teeth out, but...and I want to remember this...I always want to remember this...I realized...like I was shot with a diamond...a diamond bullet right through the forehead...And I thought, my God...the genius of that! The genius! The will to do that! The perfect, genuine, crystalline, pure...will to do that! Just give weapons to everyone who asks for them...because...because...who are we to judge?!

And who are we? Who? Who?

 

I always want to remember...It's judgement....judgement ! That defeats us!

Insanity, that's what it is. Told you institutionalization is near. But sell more weapons. McCain isn't gong to donate them. War is good for business. Get more campaign funds. Last time I looked, weapons were categorized as stuff, making it legitimate under the Sell More Stuff label. Not saying this is wrong or corrupt, situation normal.

 

I thought you liked NATO operating outside the bounds of mutual defense.

 

Blah Blah Blah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU has 10 times as much trade with a Russia as we do and 10 times the leverage. Merkel is willing to ratchet up but wants to see if Putin will back down first. Merkel is not nobody.http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/russia-s-trade-energy-might-frustrates-eu-move-for-sanctions.html

I don't see Putin giving back the Crimea. And it's a reasonable question what the end game is here. So far it hasn't spilled over into Iran negotiations, ....

I'm waiting to see if lap dog Merkel is going to shoot herself in the foot. BTW- Where's she going to get the gas for her pissing contest dipshit??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The EU has 10 times as much trade with a Russia as we do and 10 times the leverage. Merkel is willing to ratchet up but wants to see if Putin will back down first. Merkel is not nobody.http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/russia-s-trade-energy-might-frustrates-eu-move-for-sanctions.html

I don't see Putin giving back the Crimea. And it's a reasonable question what the end game is here. So far it hasn't spilled over into Iran negotiations, ....

I'm waiting to see if lap dog Merkel is going to shoot herself in the foot. BTW- Where's she going to get the gas for her pissing contest dipshit??

Dude, just because you think everyone else is wrong doesn't make you right. It just makes you an asshole. 1st Class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Russian central bank is propping up the ruble then the money is heading for the border.

 

Or a lot of short term contracts in Rubles need covering.

 

FOREX can be covered by lots of methods. Banking (as Tiki will tell you) isn't really necessary, just convenient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The EU has 10 times as much trade with a Russia as we do and 10 times the leverage. Merkel is willing to ratchet up but wants to see if Putin will back down first. Merkel is not nobody.http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/russia-s-trade-energy-might-frustrates-eu-move-for-sanctions.html

I don't see Putin giving back the Crimea. And it's a reasonable question what the end game is here. So far it hasn't spilled over into Iran negotiations, ....

 

I'm waiting to see if lap dog Merkel is going to shoot herself in the foot. BTW- Where's she going to get the gas for her pissing contest dipshit??

Dude, just because you think everyone else is wrong doesn't make you right. It just makes you an asshole. 1st Class.

Sorry, but you are always wrong jackass.. ;) Educate yourself if you want respect otherwise piss the fuck off jerk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The EU has 10 times as much trade with a Russia as we do and 10 times the leverage. Merkel is willing to ratchet up but wants to see if Putin will back down first. Merkel is not nobody.http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/russia-s-trade-energy-might-frustrates-eu-move-for-sanctions.html

I don't see Putin giving back the Crimea. And it's a reasonable question what the end game is here. So far it hasn't spilled over into Iran negotiations, ....

I'm waiting to see if lap dog Merkel is going to shoot herself in the foot. BTW- Where's she going to get the gas for her pissing contest dipshit??

Dude, just because you think everyone else is wrong doesn't make you right. It just makes you an asshole. 1st Class.

Reminds me of the term "Authoritative Bloviating." I think that was JMD's creation. A good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If the Russian central bank is propping up the ruble then the money is heading for the border.

Or a lot of short term contracts in Rubles need covering.

 

FOREX can be covered by lots of methods. Banking (as Tiki will tell you) isn't really necessary, just convenient.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyp9fh-u4w8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks as if big O may turn this into a net positive:

 

 

Ukraine crisis gives new impetus to EU-U.S. trade talks, U.S. says

Reuters) - Russia's annexation of Crimea underlines the need for the United States and the European Union to substantially deepen their economic ties, Washington's top trade official said on Saturday, opening the door to U.S. exports of natural gas to Europe.

Days before U.S. President Barack Obama and EU officials hold a summit in Brussels, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said the rationale "could never be stronger" for a U.S.-EU free-trade pact, despite growing public hostility to it.

"Right now as we look around the world, there is a powerful reason for Europe and the United States to come together to demonstrate that they can take their relationship to a new level," Froman told reporters.

"Recent developments just underscore the importance of the transatlantic relationship. "From both a strategic and economic perspective, the rationale for the T-TIP could never be stronger," he said, referring to the proposed accord's official name, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/22/uk-ukraine-crisis-usa-trade-idUKBREA2L0AA20140322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It looks as if big O may turn this into a net positive:

 

 

Ukraine crisis gives new impetus to EU-U.S. trade talks, U.S. says

Reuters) - Russia's annexation of Crimea underlines the need for the United States and the European Union to substantially deepen their economic ties, Washington's top trade official said on Saturday, opening the door to U.S. exports of natural gas to Europe.

 

Days before U.S. President Barack Obama and EU officials hold a summit in Brussels, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said the rationale "could never be stronger" for a U.S.-EU free-trade pact, despite growing public hostility to it.

 

"Right now as we look around the world, there is a powerful reason for Europe and the United States to come together to demonstrate that they can take their relationship to a new level," Froman told reporters.

 

"Recent developments just underscore the importance of the transatlantic relationship. "From both a strategic and economic perspective, the rationale for the T-TIP could never be stronger," he said, referring to the proposed accord's official name, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

 

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/22/uk-ukraine-crisis-usa-trade-idUKBREA2L0AA20140322

Damn, that's what I said that Obummer should be doing. I'm going to need help finding something wrong with this so that I can disapprove of it without having to flip flop, which is bad sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revolution's over. The guns you recently needed will never be needed again. Time to hand 'em in.

 

Despite the NRA's and other, associated Aryan Nations groups desire to create them here, very few people who have actually had to obey heavily armed mobs found the experience pleasant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's one way to handle the media. Cheaper than buying them and getting them to entertain instead of report.

 

We are most fortunate to live in a country where that doesn't happen.

 

I just regret we can't do that with K street Lobbyists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It looks as if big O may turn this into a net positive:

 

 

Ukraine crisis gives new impetus to EU-U.S. trade talks, U.S. says

Reuters) - Russia's annexation of Crimea underlines the need for the United States and the European Union to substantially deepen their economic ties, Washington's top trade official said on Saturday, opening the door to U.S. exports of natural gas to Europe.

 

Days before U.S. President Barack Obama and EU officials hold a summit in Brussels, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said the rationale "could never be stronger" for a U.S.-EU free-trade pact, despite growing public hostility to it.

 

"Right now as we look around the world, there is a powerful reason for Europe and the United States to come together to demonstrate that they can take their relationship to a new level," Froman told reporters.

 

"Recent developments just underscore the importance of the transatlantic relationship. "From both a strategic and economic perspective, the rationale for the T-TIP could never be stronger," he said, referring to the proposed accord's official name, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

 

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/22/uk-ukraine-crisis-usa-trade-idUKBREA2L0AA20140322

 

You might want to check the balance of payments data before you decide that better economic ties with Europe are a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would us selling LNG to Europe increase or decrease our balance of payments?

 

I think you mean Trade Deficit. A balance of payments is a metric of all imports and exports which can be either positive or negative.

 

This is primarily because we produce little but buy a lot on credit. LNG, in and of itself would be an export so it would be on the positive side. Producing goods the world wants is one way to get exports on the positive side. Selling off assets is another way to deal with the trade deficit. However, if our seemingly insatiable demand for eurocars and oriental electronic doodads continues it may not be enough.

 

So, we can sell them LNG if we could actually find someplace that would actually permit us to produce it and then we could load it on very expensive tankers (not built here) which are now in surplus because of pipelines.

 

Of course, Europe now beginning to do some fracking of their own so it's quite possible that they won't want ours shipped in or want Russias via the pipeline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An LNG carrier costs about as much as an airliner, $250M. The proposed liquefaction terminal in LA is about $7B.

 

Europe has a diverse set of gas sources including Norway, LNG and pipelines from North Africa, ... Russia is one of those but it is a declining percentage.

 

Germany is huge on solar (currently 3% of electricity) and they're at latitude 50. But while Europe is energy dependent they are energy diverse. Russia has less leverage than they think.

 

With all that in mind about Europe, what's Russia got for a future? Is Putin being at all smart about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An LNG carrier costs about as much as an airliner, $250M. The proposed liquefaction terminal in LA is about $7B.

 

Europe has a diverse set of gas sources including Norway, LNG and pipelines from North Africa, ... Russia is one of those but it is a declining percentage.

 

Germany is huge on solar and they're at latitude 50. But while Europe is energy dependent they are energy diverse. Russia has less leverage than they think.

 

With all that in mind about Europe, what's Russia got for a future? Is Putin being at all smart about this?

 

Germany is huge on solar when the government is subsidizing it. Not so much when the artificial support goes away.

 

Yes, Europe does have a lot of gas resources,

image-for-fracking.jpg?w=640&h=536

 

It's getting the political will to exploit them that is the problem. Right now the Whale Killers seem to be the only ones piercing the bosom of mother earth for gas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

 

Show me the cancelled checks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Revolution's over. The guns you recently needed will never be needed again. Time to hand 'em in.

 

Despite the NRA's and other, associated Aryan Nations groups desire to create them here, very few people who have actually had to obey heavily armed mobs found the experience pleasant.

 

How is the NRA associated with the Aryan Nation?

 

Asking people who recently needed their guns to protect themselves to give them up is downright funny to me. Of course they're not going to comply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Revolution's over. The guns you recently needed will never be needed again. Time to hand 'em in.

 

Despite the NRA's and other, associated Aryan Nations groups desire to create them here, very few people who have actually had to obey heavily armed mobs found the experience pleasant.

 

How is the NRA associated with the Aryan Nation?

 

Asking people who recently needed their guns to protect themselves to give them up is downright funny to me. Of course they're not going to comply.

 

Will all of them refuse to comply, Tom?

 

I'm sure you honestly would like to pretend Ted Nugent isn't a member in good standing on the NRA's board of directors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

Show me the cancelled checks.

I showed them to you for the nuclear and petroleum industries, why do you keep doing this to yourself.

 

They're subsidized. Deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

Show me the cancelled checks.

I showed them to you for the nuclear and petroleum industries, why do you keep doing this to yourself.

 

They're subsidized. Deal with it.

There are still no Americans in Baghdad. Never were.

 

anchorman.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

Show me the cancelled checks.

I showed them to you for the nuclear and petroleum industries, why do you keep doing this to yourself.

 

They're subsidized. Deal with it.

 

Show them to me for solar and all the other alternative fuels.

 

Tough, one reason we are in so much fucking debt is spending money on subsidizing anything.

 

But, still a cancelled check is proof of a subsidy, just calling shit you don't like a subsidy doesn't make it so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

Show me the cancelled checks.

I showed them to you for the nuclear and petroleum industries, why do you keep doing this to yourself.

 

They're subsidized. Deal with it.

 

Show them to me for solar and all the other alternative fuels.

 

Tough, one reason we are in so much fucking debt is spending money on subsidizing anything.

 

But, still a cancelled check is proof of a subsidy, just calling shit you don't like a subsidy doesn't make it so.

 

Solar and alternative fuels are subsidized too. Just like oil, gas and nuclear. (Also wind, hydro, a some others.) The obvious difference though is that some are established industries that need subsidies like a crack whore needs more crack, and others are nascent industries that couldn't possibly compete against highly subsidized established industries without their own subsidies.

 

Our debt is due to spending more money than our government can take in from revenue. Subsidies can be net-revenue generators, or net-revenue losers. If we want to get rid of debt we need to remove subsidies on the technologies that offer little long-term benefit for increased revenue and keep or increase subsidies on the technologies that offer long-term benefit for increased revenue.

 

If we remove all subsidies, our economy will suffer because we've already proven ourselves to be a collection of a short-term profit-takers who are resistant to investment in domestic commercial and manufacturing infrastructure.

 

Gotta say though, I'm impressed by your abilities of denial to convince yourself that public money spent to create private gains aren't in fact "subsidies" unless someone shows you a "cancelled check." Pretty neat trick! If you could teach that to the folks in D.C. you could make millions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Does the capitalistical USofA subsidize oil+gas+nuclear? Is the Pope gay?

Show me the cancelled checks.

I showed them to you for the nuclear and petroleum industries, why do you keep doing this to yourself.

 

They're subsidized. Deal with it.

 

Show them to me for solar and all the other alternative fuels.

 

Tough, one reason we are in so much fucking debt is spending money on subsidizing anything.

 

But, still a cancelled check is proof of a subsidy, just calling shit you don't like a subsidy doesn't make it so.

Yep, and another reason for the debt is raging war. Weapons are expensive. It costs a lot of public money to protect the interests of Cheneys' crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Revolution's over. The guns you recently needed will never be needed again. Time to hand 'em in.

 

Despite the NRA's and other, associated Aryan Nations groups desire to create them here, very few people who have actually had to obey heavily armed mobs found the experience pleasant.

 

How is the NRA associated with the Aryan Nation?

 

Asking people who recently needed their guns to protect themselves to give them up is downright funny to me. Of course they're not going to comply.

 

Will all of them refuse to comply, Tom?

 

I'm sure you honestly would like to pretend Ted Nugent isn't a member in good standing on the NRA's board of directors.

 

Why does it matter if every last one complies? I'd guess most won't. I sure wouldn't.

 

You're sure of lots of interesting and untrue things about me. What have I said to lead you to believe that I care who is on the NRA's board? And is your argument here that Nugent = NRA = associated Aryan Nations groups? I'd like to know which other groups are "associated" with the Aryan Nation and the nature of the associations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nugent is a useful idiot, just like Palin, but mark k. Is a moron with no common sense. Why waste the text trying to instill common sense onto a complete fucking moron? Just saying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revolution's over. The guns you recently needed will never be needed again. Time to hand 'em in.

Despite the NRA's and other, associated Aryan Nations groups desire to create them here, very few people who have actually had to obey heavily armed mobs found the experience pleasant.

 

 

How is the NRA associated with the Aryan Nation?

 

Asking people who recently needed their guns to protect themselves to give them up is downright funny to me. Of course they're not going to comply.

 

 

Will all of them refuse to comply, Tom?

 

I'm sure you honestly would like to pretend Ted Nugent isn't a member in good standing on the NRA's board of directors.

 

 

Why does it matter if every last one complies? I'd guess most won't. I sure wouldn't.

 

You're sure of lots of interesting and untrue things about me. What have I said to lead you to believe that I care who is on the NRA's board? And is your argument here that Nugent = NRA = associated Aryan Nations groups? I'd like to know which other groups are "associated" with the Aryan Nation and the nature of the associations.

 

 

You said "they" wouldn't comply earlier, as if they all wouldn't comply. The story is the assault rifles were nearly all stolen from the government armory in Liyv during the height of the troubles, so it may be a case of who is and isn't the armed forces of the new Ukraine as much as anything else.

 

Well, you can honestly pretend Ted isn't a race-baiting POS if you wish, it makes no difference to me, but I really think honestly pretending that Ted, despite being on the board of directors, has nothing to do with the policy of the organization is slightly more plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

 

He brought up gun-grabbing. Do you have an opinion on the situation in the Ukraine or are you just seeking to offend people so you can participate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I do have an opinion on the Ukraine situation. Ukrainians surrendering their weapons has nothing to do with racism, NRA, Ted Nugent or the Aryans Nations group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I do have an opinion on the Ukraine situation. Ukrainians surrendering their weapons has nothing to do with racism, NRA, Ted Nugent or the Aryans Nations group.

 

Scolding me isn't an opinion about the Ukraine. You are a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fucking quantum leap there Mark! Way to go!!

 

Perhaps you can splain to me what racism, NRA, Ted & ANG have to do with the Ukraine situation?

 

I think YOU'RE the one trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they'll see the Big Board!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fucking quantum leap there Mark! Way to go!!

 

Perhaps you can splain to me what racism, NRA, Ted & ANG have to do with the Ukraine situation?

 

I think YOU'RE the one trolling.

 

Yeah, in the Crimea river...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

 

He brought up gun-grabbing. Do you have an opinion on the situation in the Ukraine or are you just seeking to offend people so you can participate?

 

 

Gun grabbing has been a feature of every revolution since before it was attempted at Lexington and Concord. It was a feature in the Ukraine, so I mentioned it. Didn't mean to set off your NRA Derangement Syndrome again. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Another fucking quantum leap there Mark! Way to go!!

 

Perhaps you can splain to me what racism, NRA, Ted & ANG have to do with the Ukraine situation?

 

I think YOU'RE the one trolling.

 

Yeah, in the Crimea river...

 

 

So you can't explain the relevance of racism, NRA, Ted and ANG in the Ukraine.

 

You are the troll here Mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

 

He brought up gun-grabbing. Do you have an opinion on the situation in the Ukraine or are you just seeking to offend people so you can participate?

 

 

Gun grabbing has been a feature of every revolution since before it was attempted at Lexington and Concord. It was a feature in the Ukraine, so I mentioned it. Didn't mean to set off your NRA Derangement Syndrome again. :lol:

 

How was it a feature in the riots in Kiev that overturned the government? Were they rioting for gun rights? Did they shoot a lot of police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

 

He brought up gun-grabbing. Do you have an opinion on the situation in the Ukraine or are you just seeking to offend people so you can participate?

 

 

Gun grabbing has been a feature of every revolution since before it was attempted at Lexington and Concord. It was a feature in the Ukraine, so I mentioned it. Didn't mean to set off your NRA Derangement Syndrome again. :lol:

 

How was it a feature in the riots in Kiev that overturned the government? Were they rioting for gun rights? Did they shoot a lot of police?

 

I'm not sure how those questions relate to the article I posted. Here it is again:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/world/europe/ukraine-sets-deadline-for-militias-to-surrender-illegal-guns.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=2

 

Then again, I'm not sure how the article is related to the NRA, nor how the NRA is associated with the Aryan Nation, nor why any of that has to do with the Ukraine. But it is amusing. OK, I admit, I'm not sorry I set off Mark's NRADS again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

So a thread about Ukraine becomes am NRA Ted Nugent's a racist bash.

 

Perfectly logical Mark. If you're into staw men & deflection.

 

He brought up gun-grabbing. Do you have an opinion on the situation in the Ukraine or are you just seeking to offend people so you can participate?

 

 

Gun grabbing has been a feature of every revolution since before it was attempted at Lexington and Concord. It was a feature in the Ukraine, so I mentioned it. Didn't mean to set off your NRA Derangement Syndrome again. :lol:

 

How was it a feature in the riots in Kiev that overturned the government? Were they rioting for gun rights? Did they shoot a lot of police?

 

I'm not sure how those questions relate to the article I posted. Here it is again:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/world/europe/ukraine-sets-deadline-for-militias-to-surrender-illegal-guns.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=2

 

Then again, I'm not sure how the article is related to the NRA, nor how the NRA is associated with the Aryan Nation, nor why any of that has to do with the Ukraine. But it is amusing. OK, I admit, I'm not sorry I set off Mark's NRADS again. :P

 

I bolded the statement you must have honestly forgotten.

 

Nugent trys to sow paranoia in order to incite hatred between Americans in order to sell guns, and I am talking about violent revolutions and your obsession with guns. You have stated the assault rifles "saved" them.

 

OK then, in what way did the assault rifles the rebs had affect the events in the middle of Kiev which led to the change in government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

 

Another fucking quantum leap there Mark! Way to go!!

 

Perhaps you can splain to me what racism, NRA, Ted & ANG have to do with the Ukraine situation?

 

I think YOU'RE the one trolling.

 

Yeah, in the Crimea river...

 

 

So you can't explain the relevance of racism, NRA, Ted and ANG in the Ukraine.

 

You are the troll here Mark.

 

He's always a troll. So what - at least he's not Spatial Gator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Nugent trys to sow paranoia in order to incite hatred between Americans in order to sell guns, and I am talking about violent revolutions and your obsession with guns. You have stated the assault rifles "saved" them.

 

OK then, in what way did the assault rifles the rebs had affect the events in the middle of Kiev which led to the change in government?

 

 

Yes, yes, the NRA is all about racism selling guns and no one can mention guns without your NRADS popping up again. We know.

 

Matter of fact, though I'm not a member of the NRA, I will be helping out at the Charlotte Harbor Friends of the NRA banquet this Thursday night. I'll keep an eye out for Klan outfits.

 

By the rebs, do you mean "the militias that helped overthrow the former government" referenced in the article I linked? I'd say they affected events by helping overthrow the government and by providing for the personal protection of those who held them. Coincidentally, those are the same reasons they won't want to give them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...

Nugent trys to sow paranoia in order to incite hatred between Americans in order to sell guns, and I am talking about violent revolutions and your obsession with guns. You have stated the assault rifles "saved" them.

 

OK then, in what way did the assault rifles the rebs had affect the events in the middle of Kiev which led to the change in government?

 

 

Yes, yes, the NRA is all about racism selling guns and no one can mention guns without your NRADS popping up again. We know.

 

Matter of fact, though I'm not a member of the NRA, I will be helping out at the Charlotte Harbor Friends of the NRA banquet this Thursday night. I'll keep an eye out for Klan outfits.

 

By the rebs, do you mean "the militias that helped overthrow the former government" referenced in the article I linked? I'd say they affected events by helping overthrow the government and by providing for the personal protection of those who held them. Coincidentally, those are the same reasons they won't want to give them up.

 

The article you linked is about what is happening now, long after the events that overthrew the government. I'm sure you have honestly forgotten that you asserted the guns "saved" them just a few posts ago, just as you have honestly forgotten the continued and presence of the openly racist Ted Nugent on the board of directors of the NRA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

...

Nugent trys to sow paranoia in order to incite hatred between Americans in order to sell guns, and I am talking about violent revolutions and your obsession with guns. You have stated the assault rifles "saved" them.

 

OK then, in what way did the assault rifles the rebs had affect the events in the middle of Kiev which led to the change in government?

 

 

Yes, yes, the NRA is all about racism selling guns and no one can mention guns without your NRADS popping up again. We know.

 

Matter of fact, though I'm not a member of the NRA, I will be helping out at the Charlotte Harbor Friends of the NRA banquet this Thursday night. I'll keep an eye out for Klan outfits.

 

By the rebs, do you mean "the militias that helped overthrow the former government" referenced in the article I linked? I'd say they affected events by helping overthrow the government and by providing for the personal protection of those who held them. Coincidentally, those are the same reasons they won't want to give them up.

 

The article you linked is about what is happening now, long after the events that overthrew the government. I'm sure you have honestly forgotten that you asserted the guns "saved" them just a few posts ago, just as you have honestly forgotten the continued and presence of the openly racist Ted Nugent on the board of directors of the NRA.

 

 

... The story is the assault rifles were nearly all stolen from the government armory in Liyv during the height of the troubles...

 

When rebel militias steal your guns at the height of the troubles, it can affect things.

 

Your opinion about Ted Nugent is of no consequence to me. It's just your latest excuse to complain about anything related to the NRA. If you want to change the NRA board, you should join.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

...

Nugent trys to sow paranoia in order to incite hatred between Americans in order to sell guns, and I am talking about violent revolutions and your obsession with guns. You have stated the assault rifles "saved" them.

 

OK then, in what way did the assault rifles the rebs had affect the events in the middle of Kiev which led to the change in government?

 

 

Yes, yes, the NRA is all about racism selling guns and no one can mention guns without your NRADS popping up again. We know.

 

Matter of fact, though I'm not a member of the NRA, I will be helping out at the Charlotte Harbor Friends of the NRA banquet this Thursday night. I'll keep an eye out for Klan outfits.

 

By the rebs, do you mean "the militias that helped overthrow the former government" referenced in the article I linked? I'd say they affected events by helping overthrow the government and by providing for the personal protection of those who held them. Coincidentally, those are the same reasons they won't want to give them up.

 

The article you linked is about what is happening now, long after the events that overthrew the government. I'm sure you have honestly forgotten that you asserted the guns "saved" them just a few posts ago, just as you have honestly forgotten the continued and presence of the openly racist Ted Nugent on the board of directors of the NRA.

 

 

>>... The story is the assault rifles were nearly all stolen from the government armory in Liyv during the height of the troubles...

 

When rebel militias steal your guns at the height of the troubles, it can affect things.

 

Your opinion about Ted Nugent is of no consequence to me. It's just your latest excuse to complain about anything related to the NRA. If you want to change the NRA board, you should join.

 

 

 

 

I'm sure you have honestly once again forgotten you assertion that the rifles "saved" them.

 

I believe both giving money to and then bleating criticism sends a very mixed message to racists. The NRA does not permit the members to pick the candidates for office, merely vote for one of the people their selection committee presents to them as suitable, so joining them to change them would be somewhat idiotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the rebs, do you mean "the militias that helped overthrow the former government" referenced in the article I linked? I'd say they affected events by helping overthrow the government and by providing for the personal protection of those who held them. Coincidentally, those are the same reasons they won't want to give them up.

Also you may recall all the fuss about snipers a few weeks ago (who turned out to be the "goodies").

It's pretty clear that the peeps being backed by the US in this instance (again) are a highly undesirable lunatic fringe. The desire of the Ukranians to see them less heavilly armed is pretty understandable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Would us selling LNG to Europe increase or decrease our balance of payments?

 

I think you mean Trade Deficit. A balance of payments is a metric of all imports and exports which can be either positive or negative.

 

This is primarily because we produce little but buy a lot on credit. LNG, in and of itself would be an export so it would be on the positive side. Producing goods the world wants is one way to get exports on the positive side. Selling off assets is another way to deal with the trade deficit. However, if our seemingly insatiable demand for eurocars and oriental electronic doodads continues it may not be enough.

 

So, we can sell them LNG if we could actually find someplace that would actually permit us to produce it and then we could load it on very expensive tankers (not built here) which are now in surplus because of pipelines.

 

Of course, Europe now beginning to do some fracking of their own so it's quite possible that they won't want ours shipped in or want Russias via the pipeline.

 

 

You either listen to too much RWNM, or you're an idiot.

 

The US is a very strong global exporter. 2nd if you're looking at exports for a single country, or 3rd if you lump all the EU together. Note - these are exports, not real property.

 

We just happen to import more than we export.

 

As the worlds 2nd largest exporter, driving down global tariffs is a net positive. We already have the lowest tariffs on our side, so if we can get them to lower their tariffs, it's a win/win for the US.

 

 

Export data: (edited for ease of reading)

 

 

China $ 2,210,000,000,000 2013 est. —
European Union $ 2,173,000,000,000 2011 est.
2 United States $ 1,575,000,000,000 2013 est.
3 Germany $ 1,493,000,000,000 2013 est.
4 Japan $ 697,000,000,000 2013 est.
5 France $ 570,100,000,000 2013 est.
6 South Korea $ 557,300,000,000 2013 est.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm sure you have honestly once again forgotten you assertion that the rifles "saved" them.

 

I believe both giving money to and then bleating criticism sends a very mixed message to racists.

 

 

I have honestly forgotten that assertion. Why don't you keep me honest by quoting the post in which I used the word "saved" that you keep quoting? I can't seem to find it.

 

At least I have graduated to "sending a mixed message" to racists. I don't see it that way. Glad you've dropped the line that I'm going to be associating with the Aryan Nation on Thursday night. It was pretty offensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

 

 

I'm sure you have honestly once again forgotten you assertion that the rifles "saved" them.

 

I believe both giving money to and then bleating criticism sends a very mixed message to racists.

 

 

I have honestly forgotten that assertion. Why don't you keep me honest by quoting the post in which I used the word "saved" that you keep quoting? I can't seem to find it.

 

At least I have graduated to "sending a mixed message" to racists. I don't see it that way. Glad you've dropped the line that I'm going to be associating with the Aryan Nation on Thursday night. It was pretty offensive.

 

You guys are making the assumption that those like Mark and Sol are being intellectually honest. Good luck with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Would us selling LNG to Europe increase or decrease our balance of payments?

 

I think you mean Trade Deficit. A balance of payments is a metric of all imports and exports which can be either positive or negative.

 

This is primarily because we produce little but buy a lot on credit. LNG, in and of itself would be an export so it would be on the positive side. Producing goods the world wants is one way to get exports on the positive side. Selling off assets is another way to deal with the trade deficit. However, if our seemingly insatiable demand for eurocars and oriental electronic doodads continues it may not be enough.

 

So, we can sell them LNG if we could actually find someplace that would actually permit us to produce it and then we could load it on very expensive tankers (not built here) which are now in surplus because of pipelines.

 

Of course, Europe now beginning to do some fracking of their own so it's quite possible that they won't want ours shipped in or want Russias via the pipeline.

 

 

You either listen to too much RWNM, or you're an idiot.

 

The US is a very strong global exporter. 2nd if you're looking at exports for a single country, or 3rd if you lump all the EU together. Note - these are exports, not real property.

 

We just happen to import more than we export.

 

As the worlds 2nd largest exporter, driving down global tariffs is a net positive. We already have the lowest tariffs on our side, so if we can get them to lower their tariffs, it's a win/win for the US.

 

 

Export data: (edited for ease of reading)

 

 

China $ 2,210,000,000,000 2013 est. —
European Union $ 2,173,000,000,000 2011 est.
2 United States $ 1,575,000,000,000 2013 est.
3 Germany $ 1,493,000,000,000 2013 est.
4 Japan $ 697,000,000,000 2013 est.
5 France $ 570,100,000,000 2013 est.
6 South Korea $ 557,300,000,000 2013 est.

 

Just happen to to the tune of about 400 billion a year or more.

 

A trade deficit is a trade deficit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your argument was that the US didn't make anything, therefore a free trade agreement is a bad deal.

 

Guess what, you're wrong about the data, and therefore about the conclusion.

 

Now, if you use the trade deficit to advocate raising tariffs into the US, at least your conclusion would match your data, even though it would be incorrect.

 

 

 

So - you can use the "sky is falling" argument and work to destroy wealth through higher tariffs, or the "expanding opportunity" argument to argue for lowering foreign country tariffs.

 

Personally, i'd like to avoid a trade war with our biggest market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we can sell them LNG if we could actually find someplace that would actually permit us to produce it and then we could load it on very expensive tankers (not built here) which are now in surplus because of pipelines.

That "someplace that would actually permit us to produce it" is right here in the US:

http://theadvocate.com/news/business/7529415-123/cheniere-updates-progress-at-sabine

 

Where did you get the idea that it wasn't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I'm sure you have honestly once again forgotten you assertion that the rifles "saved" them.

 

I believe both giving money to and then bleating criticism sends a very mixed message to racists.

 

 

I have honestly forgotten that assertion. Why don't you keep me honest by quoting the post in which I used the word "saved" that you keep quoting? I can't seem to find it.

 

At least I have graduated to "sending a mixed message" to racists. I don't see it that way. Glad you've dropped the line that I'm going to be associating with the Aryan Nation on Thursday night. It was pretty offensive.

 

My bad, you said they needed their guns to protect themselves and thought the guns had indeed done that so asking them to give them back was silly. That of course in no way implies that the guns played a critical role in your honest estimation, I'm sure. This explains why you will not answer any questions about how the guns actually did that.

 

I see nothing wrong with associating with white supremacists per se. Some of my best friends are white supremacists, but I would never let my daughters date one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

You either listen to too much RWNM, or you're an idiot.

 

The US is a very strong global exporter. 2nd if you're looking at exports for a single country, or 3rd if you lump all the EU together. Note - these are exports, not real property.

 

We just happen to import more than we export.

 

As the worlds 2nd largest exporter, driving down global tariffs is a net positive. We already have the lowest tariffs on our side, so if we can get them to lower their tariffs, it's a win/win for the US.

 

 

Export data: (edited for ease of reading)

 

 

China $ 2,210,000,000,000 2013 est. —
European Union $ 2,173,000,000,000 2011 est.
2 United States $ 1,575,000,000,000 2013 est.
3 Germany $ 1,493,000,000,000 2013 est.
4 Japan $ 697,000,000,000 2013 est.
5 France $ 570,100,000,000 2013 est.
6 South Korea $ 557,300,000,000 2013 est.

Just happen to to the tune of about 400 billion a year or more.

 

A trade deficit is a trade deficit.

Not true http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/WorldStats/UNCTAD-import-rates-manufactured-goods.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's 2008 data. Do you have anything for 2014?

 

EU cars imported into the United States are charged a 2 percent duty, while the EU sets a 10 percent duty on U.S. cars. Including even higher duties for trucks and commercial vans, the burden for automakers amounts to about $1 billion every year.

 

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA151A120140206?irpc=932

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's 2008 data. Do you have anything for 2014?

 

EU cars imported into the United States are charged a 2 percent duty, while the EU sets a 10 percent duty on U.S. cars. Including even higher duties for trucks and commercial vans, the burden for automakers amounts to about $1 billion every year.

 

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA151A120140206?irpc=932

It says "Most Recent" and it is not 2008. I'm sure you could find other data. Every country could cherry pick examples. Your statement was a broad one and US tariffs are higher than Japan and twice that of the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really does say 2008.

 

148 United States (2008) 3.03

159 EU (2008) 1.51

 

Also tariffs vary both by product and export origin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So, we can sell them LNG if we could actually find someplace that would actually permit us to produce it and then we could load it on very expensive tankers (not built here) which are now in surplus because of pipelines.

That "someplace that would actually permit us to produce it" is right here in the US:

http://theadvocate.com/news/business/7529415-123/cheniere-updates-progress-at-sabine

 

Where did you get the idea that it wasn't?

 

I think that's far enough from where Olsonist lives to make it OK.

 

The question is still logistics and the fact that NG is actually relatively abundant in Europe

 

your argument was that the US didn't make anything, therefore a free trade agreement is a bad deal.

 

Guess what, you're wrong about the data, and therefore about the conclusion.

 

Now, if you use the trade deficit to advocate raising tariffs into the US, at least your conclusion would match your data, even though it would be incorrect.

 

 

 

So - you can use the "sky is falling" argument and work to destroy wealth through higher tariffs, or the "expanding opportunity" argument to argue for lowering foreign country tariffs.

 

Personally, i'd like to avoid a trade war with our biggest market.

 

OK, the US doesn't make anything is hyperbole.

 

Where did I say anything about a free trade agreement being a bad deal? That's all yours.

 

I'm not using the trade deficit to advocate tariffs, You won't find a post anywhere where I have drawn that conclusion, that's all yours.

 

In fact, neither the post I was responding to or my response mentioned either of those.

 

WTF are you talking about?

 

But, incidentally, even though Europe has it's problems economically the Euro is still rising against the US dollar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really does say 2008.

 

148 United States (2008) 3.03

159 EU (2008) 1.51

 

Also tariffs vary both by product and export origin.

Yep, I see it now. The tab for "Most Recent" fooled me. Of course they vary with product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And export origin. I'd need to see a lot more detail before I'd trust such a reductionist statistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And export origin. I'd need to see a lot more detail before I'd trust such a reductionist statistic.

Not trying to wind you up but your original comment was more reductionist with no statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assumed it's the world price although they cut the Ukrainians a deal if the U's cut ties with the EU. When the Russians want to dick around they usually do it by restricting supply.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jan/02/russia.ukraine

 

BTW, I don't remember the Great W mobilizing any Western response to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assumed it's the world price although they cut the Ukrainians a deal if the U's cut ties with the EU. When the Russians want to dick around they usually do it by restricting supply.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jan/02/russia.ukraine

 

BTW, I don't remember the Great W mobilizing any Western response to that.

 

OK, so we would have to liquefy and ship the gas over there and still sell it at "market price". I suppose it would be sold to the liquefier's at "market price", so somebody would have to pick up the tab for all that refrigeration and shipping.

 

Who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is already pretty common worldwide. And Europe has hella LNG import terminals. We have a liquifaction terminal under construction in Cheniere Sabine Pass, LA. 2016. That might be why Landrieu made The List.

 

And this doesn't have to completely replace the Russkis who have been declining as a percentage of EU gas since the last time Putin pulled a dick move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is already pretty common worldwide. And Europe has hella LNG import terminals. We have a liquifaction terminal under construction in Cheniere Sabine Pass, LA. 2016. That might be why Landrieu made The List.

 

And this doesn't have to completely replace the Russkis who have been declining as a percentage of EU gas since the last time Putin pulled a dick move.

 

Gonna need subsidies if it's not economically viable all on it's own, and if it was, it probably would have happened by now.

Removing the rather large Russian contributions from the worlds supply should spike the price though, and that will help...

 

Freedom is never free. We will all surely relish our new Freedom Pricing for NG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This turned into a gun thread? Stunning.

Any thread can be turned into a gun thread. Come to think of it, all threads are gun threads, unless they are red herrings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This turned into a gun thread? Stunning.

 

I know. And I'm quite proud of myself for biting my tongue and sitting this one out..... its silliness at its best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my. The Moscow Nyets.

 

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5022228/

 

linky no workey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I'm sure you have honestly once again forgotten you assertion that the rifles "saved" them.

 

I believe both giving money to and then bleating criticism sends a very mixed message to racists.

 

 

I have honestly forgotten that assertion. Why don't you keep me honest by quoting the post in which I used the word "saved" that you keep quoting? I can't seem to find it.

 

At least I have graduated to "sending a mixed message" to racists. I don't see it that way. Glad you've dropped the line that I'm going to be associating with the Aryan Nation on Thursday night. It was pretty offensive.

 

My bad, you said they needed their guns to protect themselves and thought the guns had indeed done that so asking them to give them back was silly. That of course in no way implies that the guns played a critical role in your honest estimation, I'm sure. This explains why you will not answer any questions about how the guns actually did that.

 

I see nothing wrong with associating with white supremacists per se. Some of my best friends are white supremacists, but I would never let my daughters date one.

 

 

I said that they took those guns to protect themselves. Just a wild guess that it was not because they were collectors, hobbyists, or common thieves. I still think that's why they took them. At the height of the troubles, taking those guns (and getting them out of government hands) was done because they needed the guns to protect themselves.

 

I said, "When rebel militias steal your guns at the height of the troubles, it can affect things."

 

Basic English lesson: "can" does not mean the same thing as "did." The article I linked said the guns in question arrived too late to matter, but having your guns taken by rebels can be disheartening to a government facing unrest. Did it have such an effect? I don't know. In any case, no one knew what might happen next at the height of the troubles so that leads me to believe that they took the guns to protect themselves.

 

Your "saved" interpretation of what I said was just a strawman, much like your interpretation of whatever it is Nugent may have said to lead you to believe that the NRA and associated groups are all just Aryan Nation white supremacists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

OK, so we would have to liquefy and ship the gas over there and still sell it at "market price". I suppose it would be sold to the liquefier's at "market price", so somebody would have to pick up the tab for all that refrigeration and shipping.

 

Who?

 

 

Unlike oil, "market price" for gas has considerably more global variation since you can't just pour it into a tanker. The spread between market prices picks up the tab. A bit of an outdated graph:

 

Natural_Gas_Price_Comparison.png

 

Mark K, on 25 Mar 2014 - 00:42, said:

Gonna need subsidies if it's not economically viable all on it's own, and if it was, it probably would have happened by now.

Removing the rather large Russian contributions from the worlds supply should spike the price though, and that will help...

 

Freedom is never free. We will all surely relish our new Freedom Pricing for NG.

Natural gas wasn't this cheap in the US for a sustained period until now.

 

Takes a while to build an export terminal. And a lot of capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

OK, so we would have to liquefy and ship the gas over there and still sell it at "market price". I suppose it would be sold to the liquefier's at "market price", so somebody would have to pick up the tab for all that refrigeration and shipping.

 

Who?

 

Unlike oil, "market price" for gas has considerably more global variation since you can't just pour it into a tanker. The spread between market prices picks up the tab. A bit of an outdated graph:

 

Natural_Gas_Price_Comparison.png

 

>Mark K, on 25 Mar 2014 - 00:42, said:

Gonna need subsidies if it's not economically viable all on it's own, and if it was, it probably would have happened by now.

Removing the rather large Russian contributions from the worlds supply should spike the price though, and that will help...

 

Freedom is never free. We will all surely relish our new Freedom Pricing for NG.

Natural gas wasn't this cheap in the US for a sustained period until now.

 

Takes a while to build an export terminal. And a lot of capital.

 

 

And there needs to be some logistical purpose to the liquification and transport. I don't see separate markets for LNG vs CNG vs NG. If you go to the expense of processing and transport, it still gets sold at the same price as the pipeline. It is the product not the process that has value.

 

Exporting NG is a good way to get hard currency for some countries and fuels may well be some countries most significant export. Trinidad and Tobago come to mind as a country that may be hit as fracking makes more NG locally available in the US and Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

OK, so we would have to liquefy and ship the gas over there and still sell it at "market price". I suppose it would be sold to the liquefier's at "market price", so somebody would have to pick up the tab for all that refrigeration and shipping.

 

Who?

 

Unlike oil, "market price" for gas has considerably more global variation since you can't just pour it into a tanker. The spread between market prices picks up the tab. A bit of an outdated graph:

 

Natural_Gas_Price_Comparison.png

 

>Mark K, on 25 Mar 2014 - 00:42, said:

Gonna need subsidies if it's not economically viable all on it's own, and if it was, it probably would have happened by now.

Removing the rather large Russian contributions from the worlds supply should spike the price though, and that will help...

 

Freedom is never free. We will all surely relish our new Freedom Pricing for NG.

Natural gas wasn't this cheap in the US for a sustained period until now.

 

Takes a while to build an export terminal. And a lot of capital.

 

 

Need to know both what the Russians are selling it for and could sell it for before locking horns with them in NG, I thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark K, on 25 Mar 2014 - 13:57, said:

Need to know both what the Russians are selling it for and could sell it for before locking horns with them in NG, I thinks.

I think your italics lend a degree of secrecy that just isn't there. The price of natural gas in Europe is well known.

 

As to what they "could" sell it for without taking a loss (I presume your point), it doesn't really matter. Dropping the price is enough to remove Russia's power.

 

We don't really need to know anything, as it's the private sector that is building LNG export terminals. If the price of gas in Europe collapses Japan needs all the gas they can get since they shut down their nukes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites