Pensacola Discussion Forum
This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.
Home
Message [Page 1 of 2]
3 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:23 pm
knothead
After the pipeline is completed only about fifty jobs[/size] will be permanent notwithstanding sales clerk jobs in convenience stores or waitresses in diners as examples.
I listened today to the debate on the Senate floor and the exaggerations made regarding what a big jobs bill this pipeline is . . . . omg. Not good at all.
I listened today to the debate on the Senate floor and the exaggerations made regarding what a big jobs bill this pipeline is . . . . omg. Not good at all.
4 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:30 pm
Guest
Guest
It would have to be more that solyndra... and if I had to guess there would be more than 50 govt bureaucrats hired.
5 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:46 pm
Floridatexan
http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/06/technology/solyndra/
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
Just last week, Mitt Romney criticized Obama's economic acumen while standing in front of the company's now-closed headquarters in Fremont, Calif.
Solyndra represents the ideological divide between the two parties on issues beyond energy.
To Democrats it represents government support for a private enterprise that was supposed to create something that made us all better off -- clean energy and jobs.
To Republicans it represents government overstepping its role.
With the issue not showing signs of fading away in the election, here are seven things you should know about Solyndra and the Department of Energy loan program that supported it.
It was started by Bush: The DOE loan program that funded Solyndra was actually started by President Bush in 2005. It was intended to provide government support for "innovative technologies."
But the Bush administration never approved Solyndra's loan, saying the application needed more work.
Congress thought there would be more failures: Two companies have declared bankruptcy under the loan program so far, out of the 33 projects funded. Congress was expecting more.
Lawmakers set aside $10 billion to cover any losses from $26 billion in loans. Solyndra could potentially cost the government $529 million. And Beacon, a power storage company that also went bankrupt, cost the government $12 million. So even if Solyndra ends up costing the full $529 million, there's still nearly $9.5 billion available should other loans go belly up.
Two other DOE-funded companies have also had trouble -- Ener1 and Fisker -- but they received grants and are not in the loan program.
Solyndra wanted more: The company applied for another $468 million in funding shortly after its first DOE loan closed. The government did not award the second request.
Taxpayers aren't the only losers: Private investors lost almost twice what the government did -- nearly $1 billion.
While much has been made that the largest private investor was an Obama supporter, the second largest was a fund controlled by the Walton family -- of Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) fame. Walton family members are noted Republican donors.
The renewables program is closed: The renewables loan program that funded Solyndra and other wind and solar ventures is now over. There is still $170 million available for renewables under a separate program that also handles nuclear power.
The nuclear power program can still back up to $8 billion in loans. Another program focused on fuel efficiency in cars can back an additional $16.6 billion in loans.
No smoking gun with Solyndra wrongdoing: Last week, Mitt Romney said an inspector general "looked at this investment and concluded that the administration had steered money to friends and family."
That appears to be incorrect, as no evidence of undue influence peddling by the White House has been uncovered in an official, independent report.
Solyndra isn't a typical solar company: Solyndra did not make regular, flat solar panels.
It made a more advanced, cylinder-shaped device designed to capture the sun's rays on its entire surface -- hence the company's name.
It was the rapidly declining price of traditional, flat solar panels and silicon -- mostly from China -- that did the company in.
The company is now in the process of selling itself off for parts.
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
Just last week, Mitt Romney criticized Obama's economic acumen while standing in front of the company's now-closed headquarters in Fremont, Calif.
Solyndra represents the ideological divide between the two parties on issues beyond energy.
To Democrats it represents government support for a private enterprise that was supposed to create something that made us all better off -- clean energy and jobs.
To Republicans it represents government overstepping its role.
With the issue not showing signs of fading away in the election, here are seven things you should know about Solyndra and the Department of Energy loan program that supported it.
It was started by Bush: The DOE loan program that funded Solyndra was actually started by President Bush in 2005. It was intended to provide government support for "innovative technologies."
But the Bush administration never approved Solyndra's loan, saying the application needed more work.
Congress thought there would be more failures: Two companies have declared bankruptcy under the loan program so far, out of the 33 projects funded. Congress was expecting more.
Lawmakers set aside $10 billion to cover any losses from $26 billion in loans. Solyndra could potentially cost the government $529 million. And Beacon, a power storage company that also went bankrupt, cost the government $12 million. So even if Solyndra ends up costing the full $529 million, there's still nearly $9.5 billion available should other loans go belly up.
Two other DOE-funded companies have also had trouble -- Ener1 and Fisker -- but they received grants and are not in the loan program.
Solyndra wanted more: The company applied for another $468 million in funding shortly after its first DOE loan closed. The government did not award the second request.
Taxpayers aren't the only losers: Private investors lost almost twice what the government did -- nearly $1 billion.
While much has been made that the largest private investor was an Obama supporter, the second largest was a fund controlled by the Walton family -- of Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) fame. Walton family members are noted Republican donors.
The renewables program is closed: The renewables loan program that funded Solyndra and other wind and solar ventures is now over. There is still $170 million available for renewables under a separate program that also handles nuclear power.
The nuclear power program can still back up to $8 billion in loans. Another program focused on fuel efficiency in cars can back an additional $16.6 billion in loans.
No smoking gun with Solyndra wrongdoing: Last week, Mitt Romney said an inspector general "looked at this investment and concluded that the administration had steered money to friends and family."
That appears to be incorrect, as no evidence of undue influence peddling by the White House has been uncovered in an official, independent report.
Solyndra isn't a typical solar company: Solyndra did not make regular, flat solar panels.
It made a more advanced, cylinder-shaped device designed to capture the sun's rays on its entire surface -- hence the company's name.
It was the rapidly declining price of traditional, flat solar panels and silicon -- mostly from China -- that did the company in.
The company is now in the process of selling itself off for parts.
6 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:51 pm
Markle
Floridatexan wrote:http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/06/technology/solyndra/
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
[...].
How much is the government paying for the Keystone Pipeline?
It costs you nothing, provides many jobs, has not environmental impact so what is your problem? Just that Republicans are in favor of the project right?
7 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:55 pm
Guest
Guest
PkrBum wrote:It would have to be more that solyndra... and if I had to guess there would be more than 50 govt bureaucrats hired.
A prime example of the failure of government in inserting and investing tax dollars... Along with the bank bailouts that never should of happened. Let the rich invest their own money and let them sink or float. If they fail some entrepreneur will buy them up for pennies on the dollar and it didn't cost the tax payer a dime.
That's how true capitalism works.
*****CHUCKLE*****
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0
8 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 4:57 pm
Floridatexan
Markle wrote:Floridatexan wrote:http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/06/technology/solyndra/
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
[...].
How much is the government paying for the Keystone Pipeline?
It costs you nothing, provides many jobs, has not environmental impact so what is your problem? Just that Republicans are in favor of the project right?
Try reading the thread on this subject. "No(t) (sic) environmental impact..."? That, Mr. Shill, is a joke...and not a very funny one.
9 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 5:08 pm
Sal
It does make one wonder tho ....
.... is Mary Landrieu pushing this thing because she actually thinks it'll help her keep her job? ....
.... or, does she know she's going to lose her job regardless, and she's positioning herself for a new job with the energy industry lobbyist?
Either way, pretty shitty way to end her career in Congress.
.... is Mary Landrieu pushing this thing because she actually thinks it'll help her keep her job? ....
.... or, does she know she's going to lose her job regardless, and she's positioning herself for a new job with the energy industry lobbyist?
Either way, pretty shitty way to end her career in Congress.
10 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 5:53 pm
2seaoat
None of it matters. The Indians are not going to allow it over their nation as defined by treaties. I am for the pipeline because I do not want to see caustic materials delivered by rail. Until you have seen a derailment and the damage caused to the environment when tho contents of those tankers get in a stream.....with me it is all safety of transport.
Oh, by the way. They found a small leak in the first leg of the keystone pipeline going to Illinois, so pipelines are not perfect, just safer than rail. The soccer fields were closed and crews were working on it as I speak. I have googled and found no news story, but kids are telling their parents that the school said the pipeline was leaking. I will follow up with links if available. I have seen massive digging and figured they were reinforcing a road. They laid the first leg of the pipe about 5 years ago, and Illinois refineries are processing the dirty oil as we speak.
Oh, by the way. They found a small leak in the first leg of the keystone pipeline going to Illinois, so pipelines are not perfect, just safer than rail. The soccer fields were closed and crews were working on it as I speak. I have googled and found no news story, but kids are telling their parents that the school said the pipeline was leaking. I will follow up with links if available. I have seen massive digging and figured they were reinforcing a road. They laid the first leg of the pipe about 5 years ago, and Illinois refineries are processing the dirty oil as we speak.
11 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 6:17 pm
knothead
provides many jobs
Simply not true Merkel . . . . . after the project is complete there will only be around 50 permanent jobs notwithstanding some service jobs like clerks in convenience stores or waitresses in diners. . . . that's it!
Simply not true Merkel . . . . . after the project is complete there will only be around 50 permanent jobs notwithstanding some service jobs like clerks in convenience stores or waitresses in diners. . . . that's it!
12 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 6:41 pm
Markle
Floridatexan wrote:Markle wrote:Floridatexan wrote:http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/06/technology/solyndra/
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
[...].
How much is the government paying for the Keystone Pipeline?
It costs you nothing, provides many jobs, has no environmental impact so what is your problem? Just that Republicans are in favor of the project right?
Try reading the thread on this subject. "No(t) (sic) environmental impact..."? That, Mr. Shill, is a joke...and not a very funny one.
Report: Keystone pipeline would have minimal environmental impact
Friday Jan 31, 2014 12:07 PM
A long-delayed environmental report from the U.S. State Department could remove a major hurdle for a controversial oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast.
By Michael O'Brien, NBC News
A new State Department report on the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline finds that the project would have a minimal impact on the environment, an assessment likely to increase pressure on the White House to approve it. But the report sets no deadline for doing so.
Given this evaluation of environmental impact, President Barack Obama and his administration will face increased pressure to approve the project, which enjoys widespread support among Republicans, and some measure of support among Democrats and allies of the administration, like labor unions.
The proposed pipeline would carry crude derived from oil sands in Canada to refineries in the United States.
"Our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution,” Obama said in June 2013. “The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward."
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/31/22524683-report-keystone-pipeline-would-have-minimal-environmental-impact?lite
By the way, does your house NOT have a minimal impact on the environment?
13 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 8:04 pm
Floridatexan
We don't need Canada's dirty oil, however it's transported.
14 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 8:08 pm
Guest
Guest
Floridatexan wrote:
We don't need Canada's dirty oil, however it's transported.
You're right. we will just annex Mexico and take theirs.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-16/north-america-to-drown-in-oil-as-mexico-ends-monopoly.html
15 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 8:09 pm
Floridatexan
BREAKING: Senate did not get the 60 votes.
http://sanders.enews.senate.gov/mail/util.cfm?gpiv=2100121690.36782.39&gen=1
16 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 8:10 pm
ZVUGKTUBM
I just read yesterday that production of bitumen from the Athabasca Oil Sands region in Alberta will grow from 1.98 million barrels per day in 2013 to 5.2 million barrels per day in 2030.
The U.S. will be producing 10 million barrels of crude per day in 2030, and reforms by the Mexican government is revitalizing Mexican oil production which has been lagging. I haven't seen any projections on what production will be from Mexico's large and untapped shale formations, but it will be significant.
Realistically, I don't think the climate-change movement is nearly powerful enough to stand in the way of this. North America (the U.S., Canada, and Mexico) is going to soon challenge, if not replace OPEC's grip on energy production and the power this represents. Just the fact that the hydrocarbons will come from a region of the world that is geopolitically stable is very significant.
When Saudi Arabia can no longer hide the fact that its wells are drying-up, it will make the shift I describe more apparent.
Bernie Sanders will need significantly more than a climate-change platform to gain any traction in 2016.
The U.S. will be producing 10 million barrels of crude per day in 2030, and reforms by the Mexican government is revitalizing Mexican oil production which has been lagging. I haven't seen any projections on what production will be from Mexico's large and untapped shale formations, but it will be significant.
Realistically, I don't think the climate-change movement is nearly powerful enough to stand in the way of this. North America (the U.S., Canada, and Mexico) is going to soon challenge, if not replace OPEC's grip on energy production and the power this represents. Just the fact that the hydrocarbons will come from a region of the world that is geopolitically stable is very significant.
When Saudi Arabia can no longer hide the fact that its wells are drying-up, it will make the shift I describe more apparent.
Bernie Sanders will need significantly more than a climate-change platform to gain any traction in 2016.
18 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 8:36 pm
Markle
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:I just read yesterday that production of bitumen from the Athabasca Oil Sands region in Alberta will grow from 1.98 million barrels per day in 2013 to 5.2 million barrels per day in 2030.
The U.S. will be producing 10 million barrels of crude per day in 2030, and reforms by the Mexican government is revitalizing Mexican oil production which has been lagging. I haven't seen any projections on what production will be from Mexico's large and untapped shale formations, but it will be significant.
Realistically, I don't think the climate-change movement is nearly powerful enough to stand in the way of this. North America (the U.S., Canada, and Mexico) is going to soon challenge, if not replace OPEC's grip on energy production and the power this represents. Just the fact that the hydrocarbons will come from a region of the world that is geopolitically stable is very significant.
When Saudi Arabia can no longer hide the fact that its wells are drying-up, it will make the shift I describe more apparent.
Bernie Sanders will need significantly more than a climate-change platform to gain any traction in 2016.
Socialist/Communist Bernie Sanders cannot gain any traction, whatsoever. If possible, he is worse than Ralph Nader.
19 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 10:37 pm
Guest
Guest
Floridatexan wrote:
BREAKING: Senate did not get the 60 votes.
http://sanders.enews.senate.gov/mail/util.cfm?gpiv=2100121690.36782.39&gen=1
I guess Mary can move out of her parents basement now LOL
20 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 11:42 pm
Guest
Guest
Chrissy wrote:Floridatexan wrote:
We don't need Canada's dirty oil, however it's transported.
You're right. we will just annex Mexico and take theirs.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-16/north-america-to-drown-in-oil-as-mexico-ends-monopoly.html
Best solution all day!
We get all their land & resources and send in the FBI, DEA, ATF, etc, etc, etc,... to clean out the drug lords and they all become citizens of the United States of America.
Two birds killed with one stone.
*****CHUCKLE*****
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2BfjEi1jTY
I have the name for my political party now... FVB.
21 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/18/2014, 11:53 pm
ZVUGKTUBM
The final vote tally was 59 yes/41 no. They will retry the vote in early 2015 after the new Congress and Senate is sworn in and the passed bill will be sent to the President for his signature or veto.
The big question will then be what will Obama do? This president has been overtly friendly to the petroleum industry, despite all of the rhetoric that states things differently. Oil production is booming in the U.S., in part because he has stayed out of the way. He just recently opened up the Atlantic Coast offshore between Florida and Delaware to seismic surveys so geologists can quantify the amounts of oil which may be found there. This further shoots holes in the arguments saying he is keeping leasable areas under federal jurisdiction away from energy producers. The seismic surveys will be followed by lease offerings, with drilling expected to commence as early as 2018. When Florida lawmakers expressed concern about such surveys being conducted off of Florida's coast, they were told the surveys would, in fact, be conducted in federal waters off of Florida.
I'm a thinking that Obama will use the Keystone XL pipeline as a bargaining chip for other things he wants during his last two years that are more important to him than the mood of a bunch of activists who are not needed for his re-election. My hunch is he'll approve it, and find a way to throw some candy at the children so they stop screaming at him.
The big question will then be what will Obama do? This president has been overtly friendly to the petroleum industry, despite all of the rhetoric that states things differently. Oil production is booming in the U.S., in part because he has stayed out of the way. He just recently opened up the Atlantic Coast offshore between Florida and Delaware to seismic surveys so geologists can quantify the amounts of oil which may be found there. This further shoots holes in the arguments saying he is keeping leasable areas under federal jurisdiction away from energy producers. The seismic surveys will be followed by lease offerings, with drilling expected to commence as early as 2018. When Florida lawmakers expressed concern about such surveys being conducted off of Florida's coast, they were told the surveys would, in fact, be conducted in federal waters off of Florida.
I'm a thinking that Obama will use the Keystone XL pipeline as a bargaining chip for other things he wants during his last two years that are more important to him than the mood of a bunch of activists who are not needed for his re-election. My hunch is he'll approve it, and find a way to throw some candy at the children so they stop screaming at him.
22 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/19/2014, 12:02 am
Guest
Guest
I'm not sure that pipeline is a big enough trinket to buy him any of the big plans he has.
23 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/19/2014, 12:02 am
Sal
And, what will you say when the President vetoes the toxic death sludge funnel of death?
24 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/19/2014, 10:46 am
Wordslinger
Markle wrote:Floridatexan wrote:Markle wrote:Floridatexan wrote:http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/06/technology/solyndra/
Seven things you should know about Solyndra
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- No matter how hard President Obama may try, the Solyndra debacle -- and its $529 million taxpayer-backed price tag -- just won't go away.
[...].
How much is the government paying for the Keystone Pipeline?
It costs you nothing, provides many jobs, has no environmental impact so what is your problem? Just that Republicans are in favor of the project right?
Try reading the thread on this subject. "No(t) (sic) environmental impact..."? That, Mr. Shill, is a joke...and not a very funny one.
Report: Keystone pipeline would have minimal environmental impact
Friday Jan 31, 2014 12:07 PM
A long-delayed environmental report from the U.S. State Department could remove a major hurdle for a controversial oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast.
By Michael O'Brien, NBC News
A new State Department report on the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline finds that the project would have a minimal impact on the environment, an assessment likely to increase pressure on the White House to approve it. But the report sets no deadline for doing so.
Given this evaluation of environmental impact, President Barack Obama and his administration will face increased pressure to approve the project, which enjoys widespread support among Republicans, and some measure of support among Democrats and allies of the administration, like labor unions.
The proposed pipeline would carry crude derived from oil sands in Canada to refineries in the United States.
"Our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution,” Obama said in June 2013. “The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward."
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/31/22524683-report-keystone-pipeline-would-have-minimal-environmental-impact?lite
By the way, does your house NOT have a minimal impact on the environment?
Herr Markle, just wanted you to recognize that if his house should fall or break, no big problem to his neighbors.
Seaoat is right. The pipeline is scheduled to pass over lands owned by the nation of the Lakota Sioux, who have already made a stand against it. Installation of the pipeline there would violate their treaty rights and they are prepared to fight.
Just imagine how a group of angry Indian warriors would tenderly care for the pipeline.
Screw Amerika Inc.! Corporate control of our government through campaign financing.
25 Re: Run Bernie, Run! 11/19/2014, 10:51 am
Wordslinger
Chrissy wrote:Id laugh my ass off if the left ran Bernie LOL
From what I've been told, that would take several concurrent marathons. LOL
Message [Page 1 of 2]
Go to page : 1, 2
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|
|