Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on September 11, 2016
Apache’s West Texas Find Further Discredits Malthusianism
Apache Corp. has announced a major oil-and-gas discovery in an area of Texas that geologists previously dismissed as not likely to have recoverable hydrocarbons. That’s good news for energy consumers, including electric generators, although not particularly welcome for energy producers, where it could contribute to continuing soft prices.
The Journal reported that the area in West Texas near the Davis mountains “had been overlooked by geologists and engineers, who believed it would be a poor fit for hydraulic fracturing. It could be worth $8 billion by conservative estimates, or even 10 times more, according to the company.”
For me, the story is also about the continuing failure of followers of the 18th Century British cleric and philosopher Thomas Robert Malthus, who posited in his 1798 book “An Essay on the Principle of Population” that global population was increasing geometrically and food production only arithmetically. The result, according to Malthus? The world was doomed to famine, collapse, and the end of civilization as we know it.
Thomas MalthusHe was wrong in spades. Malthus failed because he failed to understand the disruptive role of technology.
But that has not deterred others, to this day, from continuing to spout the false Malthusian dystopianism. In 1968, Stanford butterfly biologist Paul Ehrlich and his wife Anne published the best-selling “The Population Bomb,” arguing the same discredited case as Malthus. He still makes his population bomb argument. (An aside: I spent two weeks with Paul and Anne in 2004 in a small group visiting New Zealand’s South Island and subantarctic islands. Lovely people.)
One of Ehrlich’s key allies then and now was physicist John Holdren, President Obama’s science advisor and perhaps the worst choice for a major advisory position in the administration. Holdren was a partner in Ehrlich’s legendary bet with the late University of Maryland economist Julian Simon. As NPR described it two years ago, Ehrlich argued that minerals would become more scarce and expensive as they were used up. Simon argued that technology and brain power would replace the diminishing mineral supply many times over. They made a wager in 1980 on the prices for copper, chromium, nickel, tin and tungsten over a decade.
Ehrlich, with Holdren backing the bet, said prices would soar. Simon said they would fold. In 1990, Simon won, with the prices for the five metals declining by about 50%.
The same sort of false scarcity analysis happened in the energy economy, dating to the 1950s and acclaimed oil and gas geologist M. King Hubbert. In a 1956 paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Petroleum Institute, he predicted that U.S. oil production would peak around 1965-1970, and decline thereafter. Hubbert’s incorrect prediction guided U.S. energy policy for the next 50 years (and is still prominent in Holdren’s rhetoric on energy supply).
Hubbert was the inspiration of a group of 1970s and 1980s energy policy gurus, who then formed the basis of the “peak oil” enthusiasts of subsequent years. Among them was my good friend and fusion energy expert Bob Hirsch and his former colleague and first U.S. energy secretary the late Jim Schlesinger. As recently as 2007, both were on speaking tours touting the decline of oil and gas production. That was just before the fracking and shale gas and oil revolution hit the U.S.
Again, like Malthus, the peak oil catastrophists failed to reckon with the game-changing role of technology. In this case it was directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing, which turned the 1970s “oil crisis” that shaped Schlesinger’s and Hirsch’s views, into irrelevance in the 21stCentury.
Apache’s fossil find is further evidence that Malthusian analysis is inherently flawed. It is also good news for consumers around the world. The Journal reported, “The company has begun drilling in the area and says the early wells, which produce more natural gas than oil, are capable of providing at least a 30% profit margin at today’s prices, including all costs associated with drilling.
“Some are so prolific that they can break even at a price of 10 cents per million British thermal units, according to the company.”
96 Comments on "Apache’s West Texas Find Further Discredits Malthusianism"
Cloggie on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 12:18 pm
shortonoil is underming his own case by posting this link:
https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/icbkDFACM4iA/v2/-1x-1.png
Header says: “Explorers slash spending after price collapse”.
“Cloggie is not seeing any immediate problem with depletion because he is hiding under his bed.”
Uh no, I am here on this forum to attack the rubbish you are peddling.
Your own graph reveals the truth as to why no new reserves are found… because explorers slash spending because prices are too low because there is a supply “glut” which pushes prices down, which hurts American shale producers more than the “conventionals” in the Gulf. What’s so difficult to understand?
Collapsing oil prices can’t be used to prove that peak oil is immanent, no matter how much you would want that to be true, just because you embraced a faulty theory in the past and kept broadcasting that message, probably for money and now you are trapped.
mike on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 1:08 pm
What appears to not be widely understood is that presently less than 3% of recoverable gas in the Barnett scale has been extracted, and that is with PRESENT tech.
If the flooded inventories start to be worked down, and prices rise, dormant wells can have their valves turned back on within days. Seven of the 11 wells in the Barnett where we have interests are in this state.
Apneaman on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 1:36 pm
Marmi, sure, so much money they can’t pay all their bills.
Saudia Arabia: Can’t Pay Its Bills, Yet Funds War on Yemen
“Almost unreported outside the Kingdom, the country’s big construction magnates – including that of the Binladen group – have not been paid by the Saudi government for major construction projects and a portion of the army of Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan and other workers have received no wages, some of them for up to seven months.”
“The result? A country with 16 per cent of the world’s proven oil reserves, whose Aramco oil company makes more than $1bn a day and now records a budget deficit of $100bn, cannot pay its bills.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/12/saudia-arabia-cant-pay-its-bills-yet-funds-war-on-yemen/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNtjksCUMIA
rockman on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 2:46 pm
Shorty – “The industry is no longer replacing the reserves that it is extracting.” You seem to be implying that this is a rather recent development. It’s actually been true for decades. In 1975 I was part of the offshore division at Mobil Oil tasked with replacing produced reserves. And we failed which is why we now have ExxonMobil. And XOM did that acquisition because it was unable to replace its produced reserves by drilling.
“The oil industry is not making any money because oil is $44/ barrel”. ????. The oiooiol industry will grtoss around $1.5 TRILLION this year at that price. Granted there are many companies in serrtious financial trouble as well as others that have already failed. And other companies that are spending the bulk of their net income servicing debt. And not nearly as many viable drilling prospects at $44/bbl.
Regardless of those facts consumers are still transferring a significant portion of their wealth to the world’s oil producers. In fact a fair bit more then they were just about 10 years ago and a hell of a lot more 20 years ago. In inflation adjusted $’s:
1996 – $1.0 trillion per year
2006 – $1.3 trillion per year
2016 – $1.5 trillion per year
Of course that’s gross revenue and not profit. But the statement was “not making money” and wasn’t “not making a profit”.
yoshua on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 2:57 pm
Roccosaurus – 🙂
JGav on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 3:40 pm
What’s all this Malthus stuff? Gets very repetitious. Easy target. There have been updates on this subject (Club of Rome 1970s – Limits to Growth, for example). Are any of them 100% right on every subject they consider?
Of course not, are you? But the basic message should be clear by now it seems to me. Infinite development (mineral and energy extraction, soil and forest exploitation etc) is not a credible long-term strategy on a finite planet, at least not for anybody outside the predator class presently leading the way to disaster. And yet those on the outside looking in are the mainstay of the status quo – after all the propaganda, the idea of system-change scares the hell out of ’em. Frankly, it doesn’t inspire much joy in me either.
That’ll have to come from somewhere else – individuals, families and communities that understand what the stakes are. That’s bound to happen more and more but it’s likely to be a fairly time-consuming process. Exactly how much time do we have before the monumental F-?!:ups we have wrought become irreversible? Nobody knows, though some pretend to. On the other hand, loads more people now understand that time is already beginning to pinch than was the case just 10 years ago.
Interesting times, eh?
Sissyfuss on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 7:45 pm
Rock, if they don’t make a profit they don’t survive. Or get nationalized.
rockman on Mon, 12th Sep 2016 10:35 pm
Sissy – First, the great majority of US oil companies are making a profit. And yes some are failing. But we’ve yet to see a body count close to approaching that of the 1980’s bust. And those reserves of the busted companies are currenty being acquired at bargain basement prices which will only add to the buyers’ profitability. IOW Company X may have spent $70/bbl to dervelop its shale production but Company Y just paid $20/bbl for those reserves. As I’ve said many times this ain’t our first rodeo. LOL.
I think so folks loose tract of the fact that regardless of how much the current shale production cost to dervelop all of it still delivering positive cash flow. Any well that wasn’t would have been plugged. IOW all of that $1.5 TRILLON in gross revenue is happening with positive cash flow. So yes: some oil companies may have lost their asses But the majority are still producing a positive cash flow/profit margin on the 30+ BILLION BBLS OF OIL being produced annually.
IOW most of us aren’t disappearing anytime soon. LOL.
Second, exactly how would being “nationalized” work? I’ve asked that question of everyone that has broughht that idea in the past. Perhaps you might be the first to offer a description that makes sense. Good luck, buddy. LOL.
Cloggie on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 4:18 am
“Second, exactly how would being “nationalized” work? I’ve asked that question of everyone that has broughht that idea in the past. Perhaps you might be the first to offer a description that makes sense. Good luck, buddy. LOL.”
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25299798
‘GM will no longer be known as Government Motors in US’
Davy on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 6:44 am
Clog, the auto industry the world over is subsidized and supported. This is a global car culture and an oil culture. Both are foundational and hence part of the government in multiple abstract ways.
oracle on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 6:56 am
“Ehrlich argued that minerals would become more scarce and expensive as they were used up.”
That’s how supply and demand works when you don’t have some other major forces at play, namely a weak economy and a production war causing an oversupply, along with probably some other things that slip my mind at the moment.
rockman on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 7:17 am
Thanks Cloggie…your link helps emphasize the silliness the idea of a take over of the US oil/NG industry by the govt via “nationalization”. From Cloggie’s link:
“The US government has sold its remaining shares in General Motors, leaving it with a loss of around $10 BILLION on the bailout of the car maker.”
shortonoil on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 10:58 am
The extraction portion of the industry has seen its revenue fall by $1.7 trillion/ year over the last two years, and they were definitely not producing a 55% profit margin on their gross sales prior to the price collapse. They have been able to reduce their costs by a small amount by deferring new reserve exploration, and development. That will be nothing more than a can kicking exercise as their reserves, and the ERoEI of existing fields decline.
To compensate they have been able to tap the private markets for equity funding, and the HY Bond market. As bankruptcies in the industry increase (there where 15 last year that completed) that market will soon be drying up. The risk has gotten very great, as both holders of equities, and bonds are receiving very low reimbursements from the asset liquidation process. In 2015 it was 29% as compared to 49% in prior years.
The industry will soon need additional funding to keep producing, and since oil is the single most important commodity used in modern society it will revert to governments to provide that funding. We calculate that it will require $39 trillion over the next decade. How that funding will be provided will be a political decision that will have to be determined by each individual nation. Some will obviously choose to nationalize, and some may us a transfer payment method. But regardless, society will have to start paying the total cost for the oil that it consumes.
This will not be a difficult political decision as the banking industry has already set the stage for making profits private, and loses public. The oil industry has only to follow their example, although like in banking, it is not likely to work out well for the present private investors.
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
Davy on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 11:28 am
“U.S. Stocks, Bonds Sell Off as Market Turmoil Resumes; Oil Drops”
http://tinyurl.com/hlr9qx7
“Crude fell 2.9 percent to $44.97 a barrel in New York. World stockpiles will continue to accumulate through 2017, a fourth consecutive year of oversupply, due to declining demand in India and China, according to the IEA. OPEC also revised up its projections for rival supplies in 2017, predicting an increase in output from outside the group before major producers meet in Algiers for talks later this month. U.S. data due Wednesday are forecast to show the country’s oil inventories rose by 4 million barrels last week, which would be the biggest increase since April. “Inventories remain high, they’re well above five-year trend levels,” said David Lennox, a resources analyst at Fat Prophets in Sydney. “The market is just waiting to see what happens at the OPEC meeting. If there is a concrete deal and it’s actioned, we’d expect to see prices rally.”
rockman on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 12:42 pm
“The industry will soon need additional funding to keep producing”. The industry doesn’t require any f*cking additional funding to keep producing existing wells. Essentially that dynamic is self funding as long as positive cash flow is produced.
OTOH if “producing” is once more being misused to mean creating and drilling NEW wells then that’s a very different conversation. But the Rockman considers that position to not be completely true either.
The industry has much fewer prospects that pass economic evaluation at the current oil/NG prices as when they were much higher. Hence the collapse of the rig count. Consider Rockman’s company: even with $250 million cash on hand it hasn’t drilled a single well in the last two years. IOW we don’t lack a f*cking penny to drill…we lack economic prospects to drill. And in general so does the entire oil patch.
I can’t estimate how much FCF (free cash flow) the $1.5 TRILLION/year in gross revenue the industry is pulling in is netting but it would certainly be in the many tens in not hundreds of $BILLIONS. $BILLIONS that could be used to drill new wells…if there were enough economic prospects to spend it all on.
IOW the primary problem facing the oil patch today isn’t revenue but not enough economically viable new wells to replace the depleting reserve base. Hell, ExxonMobil has been sitting on a lot more FCF then Rockman and had to use a lot of it to buy back their own stock since it also lacks drilling projects.
And that has been the f*cking reoccurring problem we’ve faced since before the Rockman began 4 decades ago. LOL.
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 2:05 pm
Annual Financials for Exxon Mobil Corp.
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/XOM/financials
Sissyfuss on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 2:14 pm
Rocko,I’m deducing that the nationalization process would not follow the chaotic Chavezian plan but would be akin to the Chinese hybrid known as communapitalism. A strong central govt that orders those in the oil business to operate according to their dictums. OPEC on steroids.Also, people there are 3 S’s in losses; you LOSE the meaning with only 2. Just sayin.
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 2:47 pm
Annual Financials for Chevron Corp.
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/CVX/financials
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 2:57 pm
Annual Financials for Royal Dutch Shell PLC ADR Cl A
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/RDS.A/financials
Davy on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 3:01 pm
Siss, in a collapse situation a central government will have to take control of many areas that are free market now. Free markets don’t work properly in all situations most notably a collapse situation. Energy is foundational and vital so I imagine government will get more involved in energy as we sink into a collapse situation.
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 3:03 pm
Annual Financials for BP PLC ADR
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP/financials
BP made a $4.24 billion loss last year.
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 3:17 pm
Annual Financials for ENI S.p.A.
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ENI/financials
ENI went $7.68 billion into the red last year.
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 3:38 pm
Mexico’s oil giant tumbled 51 spots on the Global 500 as production continued to decline, global crude prices tumbled, and the company’s 2015 revenues dropped 38% to $73.5 billion. Pemex also recorded its biggest ever loss of $45 billion last year.
http://beta.fortune.com/global500/pemex-98
yoshua on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 3:57 pm
Petrobras Annual Income Statement (NYSE:PBR)
http://amigobulls.com/stocks/PBR/income-statement/annual
Petrobras lost $7 billion in 2014 and $10 billion in 2015.
MikeX11.2 on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 5:54 pm
No one is going to nationalize Exxon going bankrupt.
Wind and Solar are cheaper by the day, now cheaper then any new carbon solution.
Toyota now saying EV’s are cheaper then ICE cars TODAY.
Exxon is a 40 dollar stock company selling for 80+.
It’s grossly overvalued, and digging a deeper hole with an expensive dividend payout.
The world is moving to clean energy.
This isn’t politics, it’s engineering and economics.
makati1 on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 6:10 pm
Mike, dream on. LMAO
rockman on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 9:23 pm
Sissy – “A strong central govt that orders those in the oil business to operate according to their dictums. OPEC on steroids.”
Thanks…that’s a start. But what would those dictums dictate? Would govt workers decide what wells would be drilled? Would the govt provide the capex? Would the companies be allowed to make a profit? A maximum profit?
This is what I meant about no details provided by those tossing out “nationalization”. I give you some credit but in reality you haven’t given any sense of what a nationalized oil industry would look like, have you?
rockman on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 9:30 pm
Mike – “Exxon is a 40 dollar stock company selling for 80+. It’s grossly overvalued”. Apparently the many thousands of folks buying and selling XOM stock for about $80/share aren’t nearly as smart as you. Maybe you should get the word out to them. I’m sure they’ll be impressed by the $millions you’ve made in the market.
rockman on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 9:44 pm
Davy – “Energy is foundational and vital so I imagine government will get more involved in energy as we sink into a collapse situation.” Sorry, buddy, but to “get more involved” and “take control” don’t give any sense at all of what you’re trying to describe.
makati1 on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 9:54 pm
rockman, some here don’t think their statements through. They spout ideas that they want to believe, not what is likely to actually happen or be possible.
I don’t see the US military be very effective in a real collapse scenario. Numbers, if nothing else. ~1,000,000 active military personnel actually in the US 50. 330,000,000 actual citizens, many who are armed, that will be trying to survive. 330 to 1 is not good odds, even if many do not go awol to protect their families. Ditto for the police. Government takeover? Maybe in the last century but not this one.
How many skilled personnel would it take to run the current US “energy system” today? 5 million? 10? 20?
Davy on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 11:33 pm
Sure it does Rock, get a grip, at some point when shortages in food and fuel are widespread the government will have no choice but to get involved if they can. You oil guys just can’t stand the idea. You guys think only you can make it happen. When people are angry and desperate these things will happen. You oil guys will be directed to do what is needed and wave the fucking flag while you do it. How’s that buddy;/
Davy on Tue, 13th Sep 2016 11:40 pm
Makati1, I usually know when I have said something wise becuse you object as a dumbass would becuae that is what you are.
Apneaman on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 12:11 am
“You oil guys will be directed to do what is needed”
No oil = no military = no empire.
Those with skills needed to kick the can a little further could be conscripted for national security and all that, this has happened throughout history. Declare martial law and they can “legally” do whatever the hell they want. It could be like the soviets did with special skilled people. Scientists and even athletes had their families housed separately. You know to keep them safe;) Sounds unbelievable to those who have not lived through such things and think they are all that. There are still guys alive who were drafted into the military and forced to kill for the empire in the 60’s & 70’s. That idea seems unthinkable to today’s youngsters raised on social justice and corporate fantasies, but changes can happen in a hurry. It’s pretty normal for most humans to disbelieve even when it’s going down. Look how many deny AGW and all overshoot predicaments and aliens.
makati1 on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 12:54 am
Rebut all you like, but those previous examples were not countries where the citizens are armed to the teeth. Why do you think the government is trying to find a way to disarm the citizens? They know that any actual attempt to control large segments of the population would cause an armed revolt. They would lose their heads pretty quickly.
I don’t think many here have thought out the likely series of events in the SHTF future. This is not the 1900s. This is a world that is interconnected to such an extreme extent that it will literally shut down EVERYTHING when the financial system collapse’.
Small example: Hanjin
Davy on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 7:12 am
Makati1, Apeman and I never said it will work or how long it will work so relax. I know the thought of the US working through a collapse is a horrible idea for you. But there is more to emotions and agenda so think about it with an open mind and not like a child.
Once food and fuel are in shortage and people are desperate free markets will not function at the level we know them today. Free markets will likely work locally with barter and small transactions but nationally it will be an adapted arrangement. Centralized control of vital services will naturally be undertaken. It is almost a certainty the military will be involved because they are the only competent centralized control at a level of a severe crisis. People will be told what to do and when in varying degrees dependent on the degree and duration of the crisis. It is likely any such crisis to modern civilization will have an open ended duration with a magnifying degree. It will likely be global since we are all interconnected.
Those elements of society not cooperating and standing in the way of vital services will be dealt with. This could lead to a civil war between states. It could lead to areas of loss of control by authorities. Whole sections of cities could become no man’s lands. This effort also might work well enough in the beginning and like Apeman said allow the authorities to kick the can down the road a little more. Something like modern civilization that is in a collapse process will not be saved no matter what is done. The hope is we drop to a level of stability somewhere down there in an adapted population and consumption level. It will be a time of poverty and decay for all involved except a very few.
The energy industry will surely be controlled. The profit motive likely eliminated or reduced. In the beginning this might not be the case since politicians are in the pockets of the industry but eventually all those old connections will dissipate into the ether of discontent. It will likely greatly reduce supplies because as Rockman knows finding and producing oil is not done well with centralized control but it can be done well enough with what is already out there. There is enough oil out there to run an adapted downsized version of a decaying modern society. This will be a dead man walking into his grave but at some point he will still be walking. Modern civilization has many strengths to it and will not die easily. It may kill itself in war but likely make a maximum effort to survive short of WWIII.
Davy on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 7:37 am
Here is an interesting interview with “Dr. Doom” Marc Faber. His point is this is this globalized “new normal” reality of our modern civilization is an opened ended process of centralized implosion in slow motion. It can work for a time if the global central banks agree to cooperation at a minimum level. This cooperation will need to be at other levels also like the military sphere. I think that will be more difficult but they may pull it off. Any major war is game over. It is bad enough the economy is in destructive change so you can’t add a destructive war to the mix. His thinking is like mine 5 years or less.
“Dow 100,000? Marc Faber Warns: Central Banks “Will Monetize Everything… Introduce Socialism”
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2153748-dr-marc-faber-dow-could-go-to-100000/
“the madness in the present time may go on. In a manipulated market, it won’t end well, but you don’t know when it will not end well, and how far the manipulation can last…They could essentially monetize everything, and then you have state ownership. And through the central banking system, you introduce socialism and communism, which is state ownership of production and consumption. You would have that, yes, that they can do.”
“The developed market central banks can go on for quite some time. If Zimbabwe prints money, the pain is more obvious right away because if you are Zimbabwe, and you print money and the others don’t, and the currency collapses, and you feel the pain much sooner. If the major central banks, the Fed, the European Central Bank (ECB), the BoJ, the Bank of England, and the Chinese monetize and print money in concert and agreement with each other, they all talk to each other; then the currencies don’t collapse against each other. There may be fluctuations, but we don’t have a general collapse of a currency… I suppose the system will collapse before we become like Venezuela. In the West, if they start to print money, the end game will be brief. Within five years, I expect the system to implode.”
yoshua on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 10:55 am
International Oil Companies (The Seven Sisters)
Exxon Mobil Corporation – Net Income – 2015 – Profit 16.15 billion
Chevron Corporation – Net Income – 2015 – Profit 4.59 billion
ConocoPhillips Company – Net Income – 2015 – Loss 4.4 billion
BP PLC – Net Income – 2015 – Loss 4.24 billion
Royal Dutch Shell PLC – Net Income – 2015 – Profit 1.27 billion
Total SA – Net Income – 2015 – Profit 5.1 billion
ENI S.p.A. – Net Income – 2015 – Loss 7.68 billion
ExxonMobil is the largest of the world’s supermajors with daily production of 4 MBOED.
Chevron is engaged in every aspect of the oil production and produced 3 MBOED.
ConocoPhillips Co. is a pure-play E&P company and produced 1.5 MBOED.
BP is a vertically integrated company and produced around 3.3 MBOED.
Royal Dutch Shell is vertically integrated and produces around 3.1 MBOED.
Total SA is vertically integrated and produced 2.3 million MBOED.
ENI S.p.A. is a E&P company and produced 1.8 MBOED.
Cloggie on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 11:33 am
Interesting Davy, that in Marc Faber’s article there is zero reference to depletion of oil or anything else, although he is familiar with the subject and said in the past that “someday” peak oil will happen.
http://www.marcfabernews.com/2011/02/marc-faber-world-will-hit-one-day-peak.html#.V9l64_p96Uk
“Within five years, I expect the system to implode.”
Marc Faber is now 72 and will be 77 by that time. Mr Doom is not in a hurry.
rockman on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 3:05 pm
Davy – “…to get involved if they can. You oil guys just can’t stand the idea” I’m sorry for being redundant but you still haven’t explained a damn thing. LOL. First, the govts (state and feds) are already very “involved” in our business. Such as the feds being the single largest mineral owner the country. And no company can drill a well in Texas without approval of the state agency…and only after complying with a very long list of regs. And do you know that the same folks can force me to reduce the flow rates of all my oil wells for whatever reason motivates them.
So one more time: describe some of the changes you envision when the oil patch is “nationalized”. This is your last chance to explain yourself. LOL.
Davy on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 3:35 pm
Pretty easy Rock, you can make it as hard as you please depending on the level you address the issue at. My point is at a certain point your industry will not function as a pseudo free market/gov controlled industry. Once that happens you guys will have to work it out. You will work something out because people will be desperate. I am not pretending to know how you guys are going to work it out but I imagine you will have to bend over and take it like a man. It will only hurt a little at first but eventually you will like serving your country. You can’t stand the thought of nationalization so look at it like sex, lol how’s that friend? This won’t be nationalization per our current definition because nationalization implies an alternative. There will only be by the seat of our friggen asses in a desperate attempt to survive.
ghung on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 4:07 pm
Rock said; “…describe some of the changes you envision when the oil patch is “nationalized”…”
Uh,, your paycheck comes from the government?
Apneaman on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 4:43 pm
Davy, neither did I say it “will”. Wipe your glasses off and reread my comment and pay special attention to the words “could be” “It could be like” “Sounds unbelievable” Not exactly a declaration of certainty on my part and I provided historical examples. I’m not the one who needs to relax. Miss a dose or sumthin?
Apneaman on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 4:58 pm
Econ 101 further discredits itself once again. Flip flop flip flop
Suddenly, the banks all agree: monetary policy doesn’t work and governments need to ramp up the spending
“Deutsche Bank, Barclays, HSBC, Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America Merrill Lynch all published notes to investors that said something similar:
Central bank monetary policy isn’t working anymore and now is the time for governments to turn on their money spigots, running deficits if need be.
It is the opposite of what we are used to hearing from bank analysts. These people are, after all, bankers. They are supposed to be apostles of Milton Friedman, the fighter pilots of capitalism. In the traditional banker view, governments only get in the way, budgets are for balancing, and spending is for cutting.”
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/banks-and-economists-all-agree-on-fiscal-stimulus-2016-9
Davy on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 5:25 pm
Yea, better to not reference the apeman in comments. Too complicated.
Apneaman on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 6:29 pm
Two doses?
Davy on Wed, 14th Sep 2016 6:56 pm
I feel like I am talking to a hard headed woman:
Davy said:
“Makati1, Apeman and I never said it will work or how long it will work so relax. I know the thought of the US working through a collapse is a horrible idea for you. But there is more to emotions and agenda so think about it with an open mind and not like a child.”
Apeman said:
Davy, neither did I say it “will”. Wipe your glasses off and reread my comment and pay special attention to the words “could be” “It could be like” “Sounds unbelievable” Not exactly a declaration of certainty on my part and I provided historical examples. I’m not the one who needs to relax. Miss a dose or sumthin?
Pay special attention to:
Davy said:
Apeman and I never said it will work or how long it will work so relax.
Apeman said:
Davy, neither did I say it “will”
Who needs a dose or two?