- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:20 am to ragincajun03
This shows how stupid and out of touch he is.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:45 am to ragincajun03
quote:
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News on Thursday that the administration "is considering waiving the Jones Act for a limited period of time to ensure vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports."
F trying to spin higher prices as good for most anyone in the US, BUT getting rid of the Jones Act would be a huge benefit of all of us, one of the most absurdly restrictive laws there is, to largely our detriment.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:47 am to ragincajun03
I'm a Trump guy, but he's pissed me off with this stuff. I voted for an economy fix and America first, not globalists wars and higher oil prices leading to more inflation. He can frick off with this.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:48 am to NolaLovingClemsonFan
quote:
BUT getting rid of the Jones Act would be a huge benefit of all of us, one of the most absurdly restrictive laws there is, to largely our detriment.
Agreed.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:54 am to BottomlandBrew
quote:
I ain't making shite if gas prices are high.
Assuming you mean “gasoline” and not natural gas, you do benefit when prices are high. Depending on your circumstances, those benefits - mainly increased revenue into the national treasury - could be greater than or less than your increase in costs - primarily home HVAC, automobile fuel costs, and energy related inflation (this is ameliorated by energy related wage increases). Trump’s point is valid, that the USA benefits due to being a net exporter of energy. Your point is also valid, that the benefits and costs are unevenly distributed among Americans.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:56 am to ragincajun03
The “we” Trump is referring to are the oil companies and his rich buddies and not the average citizen like you and I.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 7:58 am to hubertcumberdale
quote:
Remember this board when Biden tapped into the reserves?
Invalid point! Biden tapped into the reserves to get an economic stimulus to help him win an election. Trump is using the SPR for what it was meant for - to relieve oil shocks caused by supply disruptions.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:05 am to Penrod
Get some.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:08 am to Penrod
quote:
Invalid point! Biden tapped into the reserves to get an economic stimulus to help him win an election. Trump is using the SPR for what it was meant for - to relieve oil shocks caused by supply disruptions.
Any word why trump 1.0 reduced the SPR 10% from inauguration through mid November/beginning of December 2019
feel free to frame your response around almost every last month in that period was record production.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:14 am to msudawg1200
quote:
I'm a Trump guy, but he's pissed me off with this stuff. I voted for an economy fix and America first, not globalists wars and higher oil prices leading to more inflation. He can frick off with this.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:24 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Any word why trump 1.0 reduced the SPR 10% from inauguration through mid November/beginning of December 2019
Were any of those releases initiated by the Trump 1.0 Administration? I'm asking because I honestly don't remember.
I do believe back then there was some sort of law or Congressional mandate for periodic releases from the SPR, because I remember around 2023 or 2024 discussions for that mandate to be repealed.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:35 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Any word why trump 1.0 reduced the SPR 10% from inauguration through mid November/beginning of December 2019
Just a guess, but Trump is first and foremost a businessman. If prices are high, he is going to want to sell (exception being a supply shock) and when prices are low he is going to want to buy. Remember in his first term when oil prices actually went negative, he practically begged congress to let him fill the SPR. We would have made a bunch of money had we done that.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:36 am to ragincajun03
quote:
I do believe back then there was some sort of law or Congressional mandate for periodic releases from the SPR, because I remember around 2023 or 2024 discussions for that mandate to be repealed.
Congress has and continues to pass spending bills "without new taxes" by raiding the SPR and doing forced selling.
They basically say the method for paying for paying for programs or tax rebates is to sell oil and take the profits.
Eventually they buy oil back and up the average purchase price of an SPR barrel. Keep going back to the well and selling the cash cow piece by piece.
Will say that one thing is planned to be different this time. The bbls will be on loan more than sold. Whoever takes out this time will have to repay the bbls within 18 months at 120% payback. This is the correct way to distribute but the price may be too high for some companies to risk it.
This post was edited on 3/13/26 at 8:38 am
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:39 am to ragincajun03
quote:
Were any of those releases initiated by the Trump 1.0 Administration? I'm asking because I honestly don't remember.
I couldn't honestly tell you, I'm just looking at the eia weekly reserve numbers. I can say they were virtually unchanged the 18 months prior to him entering office, so unless it was a parting gift that went into effect month 3 of his 1st term, I have some doubts.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:41 am to Penrod
quote:
Remember in his first term when oil prices actually went negative, he practically begged congress to let him fill the SPR. We would have made a bunch of money had we done that.
yes we would have made money in a low oil price envoirment but prices were depressed for years after the 2014 thanksgiving OPEC meeting, basically until the Ukraine/Russia war started.
Oil going negative was due to traders not wanting to take delivery of the futures contract they were trading that were coming to expiration
quote:
The negative price specifically affected the May 2020 WTI futures contract as it approached expiration. Traders holding the contract were forced to pay to get rid of it to avoid taking physical delivery, as they had nowhere to store the oil.
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:44 am to hubertcumberdale
democrats are such pussies they cry when it's up they cry why it's down
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:45 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
I couldn't honestly tell you, I'm just looking at the eia weekly reserve numbers.
Understand. I've seen those numbers too. Actually referenced them in another thread a day or two ago.
And which is why when Trump said things on the campaign trail like "I filled the SPR up more than any other President in history", it was typical BS like every single other politician, that Trumpists seem to hate, do.
The overall numbers decreased by tens of millions of barrels from the time his first term began to the time it ended. Reagan and GW Bush actually "oversaw" the largest buildups of the SPR since its inception, and it reached its highest level under the Obama Administration.
This post was edited on 3/13/26 at 8:53 am
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:46 am to tigersmanager
quote:
democrats are such pussies they cry when it's up they cry why it's down
when theres no global oil flow blockage, the world, specifically america who is currently producing more oil than any nation in world history, has more oil than we know what to do with, aka low prices like we have seen since 2014 driven by the US Shale Revolution. The only reason you see price spikes is largely geopolitical
Posted on 3/13/26 at 8:48 am to fightin tigers
quote:
Eventually they buy oil back and up the average purchase price of an SPR barrel. Keep going back to the well and selling the cash cow piece by piece.
Will say that one thing is planned to be different this time. The bbls will be on loan more than sold. Whoever takes out this time will have to repay the bbls within 18 months at 120% payback. This is the correct way to distribute but the price may be too high for some companies to risk it.
Interesting.
I know you've mentioned this stuff before. I'm just not familiar with how all of it works, other than there's times where the Feds "take in kind" some oil in lieu of royalty payments.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News