Interesting Trip In More Ways Than One
Last Summer, it was a bad year for travel. The flights were crowded and the season was fraught with extreme thunder storms almost every week. The delays were aggravating and overall it was a miserable year for travel.
Traveling about every week, 2008 has been the exact opposite of 2007. The flights are often full but not always. Families are not flying in the numbers that they did last year and I am sure that has to do with fares and struggles with gas and oil prices.
It always amazes me when I travel, just how huge and diverse of a country we live in. I have favorite destinations and some I would rather never travel back to.
Detroit is depressing to visit; auto workers and related businesses are suffering, homes are up for sale all over the state and in general, it is difficult to feel good about being in Detroit.
Conversely, Raleigh/Durham is a nice trip; the economy is holding up and the growth throughout North Carolina is tremendous. The economic downturn has not impacted North Carolina as much as other destinations to which I travel.
I have not been to California for 23 years, but, between 1976 to 1988 I traveled there at least 10 times. I really have not had a reason to go back, but, as fate would have it I have business there now in San Mateo. This week I took the 6 hour, early morning flight on Jet Blue to San Francisco. It was worth the trip to Boston to catch the flight because Jet Blue jets have the most leg room and a television with 40+ channels in every seat. There is no reason to be cramped and bored on a 6 hour flight.
A smooth flight it was and it was full but time passed quickly. I was not looking forward to this trip as I had no desire to go to California, with all of the stories of natural disasters and economic problems there but....duty called.
Watching television news about an hour out of San Francisco I learned of the earthquake in Southern California. Landing, it was a cool 65 degrees.....perfect!
I spent 3 full days in the Bay area and decided to get a feeling for the politics, viewpoints and overall demeanor of the people and the area. Each day I ate out for lunch and dinner and I found myself eaves dropping on conversations in restaurants. Here is what I learned.
1) Out of the ten or so conversations I heard, 80% of the people were supporting Barack Obama for president. The reasons ranged from: "he will make it easier for minorities" to "his wife reminds me of Jackie O" to "he is Kennedyesque" to "anyone who is not a Republican".
2) Most of these people were angry about the gas shortage and wanted Congress to do something about it. In fact, of the Obama supporters, most made some comment about how he was wrong about drilling and utilizing our own resources.
3) Several of these people talked about eating out less, spending less on household items and being more frugal. Most wondered how long this economic downturn would last.
4) I walked by one liquor store and I overheard the store owner saying: "Obama is the guy I am going to vote for because he will help me save money with a break on taxes." Not sure where that 'fact' came from.
I was not surprised by the support for Obama or the demeanor and attitude of the people I listened to. After all, San Francisco and Berkeley specifically are very liberal areas of the country.
I was not there long enough to come to fast and firm conclusions but I got the gist of how the population feels. I did hear several people, many the Obama supporters express disdain for Gavin Newsome's (mayor of San FRancisco) support for legalizing prostitution.
I had the opportunity to drive down Route 1 last evening, along the shore and that was quite enjoyable. I took pictures of the sunset and walked out on the pier in Pacifica.....all al ot of fun and it was very beautiful. On my travels I seldom see much beyond what happens in my day location but yesterday I had several hours free and my work was done!
I did pick up one piece of first hand information that was quite interesting and supported one of my long held beliefs.
My business associate in San Mateo employed his sister in law. She was employed by the United States Geological Survey for many years and recently retired. I asked her about oil and natural gas reserves. Her confirmation was chilling as she agreed that the land the Oil and gas companies have leases on are the "better these than nothing" leases. She confirmed what I was sure of anyway.....the land where the oil and gas is plentiful (and she confirmed that it was plentiful) is the land where Congress will not allow drilling an development. At the end of my visit she said something like: "Let's hope McCain will get in and allow us to drill". After all, there is plenty of oil out there....we just are not allow to get to it. In any event, this was first hand information and not tainted by the press.....I believe it wholeheartedly.
The flight home was perhaps the smoothest flight of my entire life. I enjoyed watching the Earth go by as we flew over the Sierra Nevada's, then northern Nevada, Salt Lake City, northern Colorado, Kansas, Iowa and then the Great Lakes.
Our country is not only beautiful, but it is vast and flying at 37,000 feet made me think......how can any one presidential candidate represent all of these diverse groups of people? How can governance come from Washington D.C. be effective and efficient and meet the needs of all of the people when major population centers seem to decide the course of the country? The short answer is that we can not be governed unless our representatives work for the people, not political parties.
It also hit me how insignificant our limited influence is on the terrain on which we live our lives and how little impact that we have on anything; the climate, politics, catatrophic events or life in general. It was an interesting trip and provoked some thoughts about the country in which we live and the importance that we place on our mundane day to day existence.
In response to.....
In response to the point that you surgically removed from this blog post about oil:
1) The oil companies profit sounds huge but if milk was sold in those quantities, the profit would sound huge as well. They will produce it if we allow them. People who think like you assert that now prices are high they will never come down, as if something irreversible happened within the last 6 months and there is no going back.
We can get the prices down and that was evident when Bush lifted the executive ban on off shore oil.....prices tumbled....why....because it sent a signal to speculators. If congress did the same, it would drop below $100 per barrell. Democrats are playing this for political reasons and see it as an opportune time to get off of oil through blackmail of the American people
2) We rebuilt the Navy in 6 months after Pearl Harbor with muscle and no technology that we have today. If we tied lease deals into timelines to drill, companies would do it....you have no faith and your argument is an excuse.
3) Regulate the speculators and put caps on their speculative practices and the price would stabilize
4) Those existing leases do not have easily extracted oil on them. As our own Paul "Franking" Hodes said....."those leases have 14 billion barrels on them" Well, ANWR and the continental shelf have ten times that. So here is the solution, trade those leases out one for one with leases where the oil is....simple!!!!!
We should develop wind, solar, geo-thermal, nuclear and clean coal but until them ease the burden on New Hampshire's and the country's working families by using oil and natural gas in the meantime; along with measured regulation of speculators.
To progressives, this is more an argument of opportunity to get off of what they see as 'dreaded oil", with no consideration of what your agenda does to your neighbor. Very destructive, shameful, hard hearted, personally destructive and selfish.
Is this more addition by subtraction voodoo mathematics?
Mikey -
Once again, the math don't add up. Let's assume you are that greedy, top-hatted oil baron, or worst yet, Texas Tycoon, and you had a chance to drill for more readily accessible offshore oil rather than more speculative possibilities on leases you already have. What would you do?
O.k., o.k., silly question. We all know you would don your Super Socialist uniform, bust out of the solar panel cell on your roof and fly off to cap all the oil wells you own to save Mother Earth from CO2 asphyxiation.
Fortunately for those who want cheaper gasoline and oil, those miserable misers at Exxon, Shell, and BP are motivated by profit, and will jump at the chance to drill for cheaper oil, and the speculators know it. Remember Mikey, they have all sorts of proven technology to make this happen, and will fall all over themselves to make it happen ASAP to reduce capital investment risk. Also remember, unlike you, they care a lot about not losing money and making more money.
Did you forget our lesson about fungible assets?
And what's wrong with companies becoming more attractive to investors? Isn't that the primary objective for such enterprises, except for Captain Commie and his superhero cohorts Super Socialist and Mega Marx?
Mikey, did you also forget alternative technologies already abound to replace/reduce oil consumption. You just have get off your high horse (or are you still stuck in your ivory tower?), go out and explore your world and implement the possibilities. Lebo, myself to a lesser degree, and many others already have. And guess what, oil price spikes no longer represent a debilitating crunch on our wallets. And you don't need your Nanny State to nurse you through the change. Or do you?
- Trying to figure out if this is déja vu Memorex or Real-politique,
C. dog e. doG
Today's Monitor
Dog,
More letters against oil in the Monitor today, including one from Mike. What these folks don't know is that we need the revenue from oil if we are ever going to invest in alternative energy.
If you read most opinion against drilling it is like throwing your hands up in the air and saying: "Oh well". Very defeatist attitude.
Their lack of willingness to do anything about producing more oil is an argument FOR self reliance, self determination and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Instead the Left looks for the easy way out.
They really miss the point that you can't change things over night. They use the faux excuse that there are no oil rigs, it will take years and the oil companies already have oil leases.
Here are the answers....we can't build oil rigs fast? Tell the oil companies that if we give them leases that we will require them to build rigs NOW or we will take the leases back.
It will take years? Tell the oil companies that they have a time limit to start getting the product out of the ground.
The leases they have can be swapped one for one with leases off of the continental shelf and then they do not hold extra leases....problem solved.
Those are the answers to their arguments. Now I wonder what they would come up with next??????
Good points that you made.........the issue is that they just don't want oil and are gleeful in this crisis as it helps them push more of their agenda.....get us off of oil and control the population.
This is not either or....
We live in interesting times, this a line stolen from an ancient Chinese curse. In days of old, boring was good, interesting, very bad! Many on the left espouse the belief that now is the time to put all the eggs into the alternative fuel basket. They compare this to the Kennedy commitment to man on the moon. It is an all or nothing approach that suggests that concentrating our efforts on developing new environmentally friendly technology and fuels will solve all our problems. Mother earth will love us once again and we will never suffer the yoke of big oil again. At least that's what they say....
It took nearly a decade to invent the technology to travel to the moon and after nearly fifty years we still have accidents and technology that fails. Step back and allow yourself a reality check. With everything going right, even the most optimistic forecasts suggest 6 to 10 years for commercial development, then infrastructure and delivery add another 5 to 10 years, dependent on the speed of litigation from environmentalists blocking construction projects and deployment for the delivery of the new technology. This cannot happen again, we need to fast track innovation, avoid costly and time wasting litigation. Remember how clean nuclear energy was met by the environmental lobby?
We need to have a strategy that is composed of research on clean coal, wind, solar, natural gas and yes...new fuels, exploration for domestic sources of energy that we can use along the way. We need quick solutions to address how to deliver new fuels to our vehicles, homes and machinery from whatever turns out to be the new next best thing.
This means that everyone will need to compromise to get this done. The alternative is $5 and $6 a gallon energy that will bankrupt the nation. My fear is that we will not compromise. Leadership does not appear to be forthcoming from either of the political parties and both only see this issue for the short term gain they can extract from the discomfort of the general public.
Is anyone else tired of people who only argue the party line and get very angry when confronted with the facts. What do we do about a country that is divided not simply on issues but cannot even agree on what is a fact...
Scott
Not Partisan....Common Sense
Scott,
Maybe I am a partisan on this issue but I only see the other side as partisan. I do not support Big Oil, big profits, greed, etc. but do want to keep a healthy economy.
Progressive thought is that this is their opportunity to get their agenda through. I do not believe that, at the end of the day, Americans will go off of oil "cold turkey" or support those who will change their economic lives forever.
However, there is no reason why we can't commit resources to developing alternative energy while producing more oil at home. Even the most conservative Democrats oppose clean coal, geo thermal, more drilling and nuclear.
They have no plan. The divide between Americans is very deep. It is more a divide about philosophy than it is the desire to obtain the same results.
Compromise is the only way that we are going to be able to solve this problem. Compromise is 50:50. In that spirit, the approach to make us independent of Middle East oil by drilling at home while at the same time, developing new energy sources is the most reasoned and logical way for us to approach it.
Without an economy, we will never be able to develop alternative sources and will become a third world nation.
In the United States today, agenda is dictated by which special interest group screams the loudest and is covered by friendly press.....the only thing that will change that is to tap into peoples wallets......that is happening now and something those on the Left are so unaware of as they are blinded by their own doctrine.
No Argument Here
Bill,
I couldn't agree more! The thing that troubles me is the lack of reasoned debate. I think I recall a time when people could discuss issues without resorting to personal attacks. I want paasionate debate and I want people to be respectfull of one anothers opinion. I enjoy reading your blog because you make logical fact base arguments for the things you believe in....as you can probably surmise we agree far more than we disagree. Thanks for being an island of sanity!
Scott
According to a U.S.
According to a U.S. Department of Energy report, opening all areas off the coast of the Atlantic, Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico to new drilling "would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.
If we haven 't solved the energy problem by 2030, we and the planet are going to be in very deep trouble, no matter whether you like it or not. These are the facts. Sorry, Charlie.
UH Huh???
Where's the source of this Michael, The New York Times? Nancy Pelosi? A Soros sponsored announcement? Just curious. I thought maybe this was a link, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
I saw a clip this morning with Madame Pelosi claiming our drilling would not make a difference for 10 years, and then it would only be a difference of a couple cents. What planet is Pelosi living on? Madame Speaker, I respectfully say you are an idiot. Perhaps her endless induction of botox injections has had a negative effect on her ability to think clearly.
Bush’s announcement that he’d lift the ban on offshore drilling caused oil to plummet by $17.00 a barrel in just a few days.. most of us are now paying 20 cents or more a gallon less at the pump. Won’t make a difference? Americans aren’t that stupid. Even Obomber is now waffling on drilling.
Look out, he’s leaning to the right!!
Judy
From the Government, Judy, the one you and I pay for.
From George Bush's Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency. (hat tip: Get Energy Smart! Now!)
Their joint site fueleconomy.gov is loaded with fuel-saving, money-saving tips. Keep your tires properly inflated, for example, and you can save up to 12 cents a gallon.
Compare that immediate savings from that single tip, with what coastal and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge drilling combined would get you two decades from now: 6 cents a gallon.
Prove that this was cause and effect. You can't.
Bush’s announcement that he’d lift the ban on offshore drilling caused oil to plummet by $17.00 a barrel in just a few days.. most of us are now paying 20 cents or more a gallon less at the pump. Won’t make a difference? Americans aren’t that stupid. Even Obomber is now waffling on drilling.
Americans demanded less and drove less. Why isn't that the reason the price dropped?
Oil is slippery when wet
Judy, Judy, Judy -
It's not nice to press Mother Nature Evans for sourcing, though he's the first to pull that trigger on Bill. I too tried linking - he duped us, he bloody well duped us! Even if true that some bureaucrat sitting in some cubicle in some Washington stink-tank said this, so what - he/she's a bureaucrat, a sub-human parasitic life form found lurking in the hallways and confines of government buildings that feed by sucking the lifeblood out of productive human beings.
As you adroitly pointed out, prices are already falling - what better fact do we need than reality? I'm sure Mikey's waiting for the updated DNC talking points on how to address this, perhaps by shielding our eyes from gas pumps, just like they have done with the recent plunge in global Tº (rememba' that Mikey, it was -.5 Cº last year).
So let's get real and break out some components of the recent oil price surge:
- Fallen $: factors are many including financing wars and mortgage fiasco.
- Increasing demand: primarily China and India
- Gob'mint barriers to increasing supply: Alaska, offshore
- Commodity traders/speculators: they look at 1 - 3 and logically conclude future prices will go up, up, up, so they do same to current price until it reaches new equilibrium. Change 1, 2, or 3, and price will float to a new equilibrium, up or down. That's how commodity markets work and are supposed to work.
So what should we do to make price and/or quantity go down, assuming you want price to go down? (Remember, there's all sorts of vested interest groupies who don't want oil prices to go down: alternative energy gurus and contractors, oil company investors: stockholders, leaseholders, etc., Mikey and The Chicken Littles, Michael Please-no-Moore, and the rest of crazy crew.)
- I've said it before - implement sensible, high yield investments to upgrade your house, and your car. You can reduce your house heat consumption by at least 20%, probably closer to 40% by the beginning of winter, and make 15% or more ROI - better than most Wall Street bets. If you wish to become baptized in saintly green, go get Lebo-ized. If done on massive scale, oil price would drop precipitously, but lazy people won't, so their natural consequence is to pay more for energy.
- Drill more. Yes, supply does matter, and given the elasticities of demand, both short and mid-term, this does matter, at least the commodity traders think so, and so do I. As they see prospects for future prices dropping as new supplies are scheduled to come on board, the reason to hold current oil for high prices later falls, and so do current prices.
- Don't be a moron and finance a house you can't afford with volatile financial instruments, and don't own stocks in banks that offer this form of financing.
- Participate in only one war at a time?
What not to do? Wait for Mikey and his cohorts to invent new technology to mystically transport you to a world where energy is free and we live in harmony with Mother Nature ... though I would love to take a hit of that magic dust they snuff to come up with this stuff.
And remember, all this from a guy who is not a big fan of oil. But boy, oh boy, I wished I had invested in the stuff about 3 years ago.
- Waiting for the Leaning Tower of Oboma to fall over on McCain,
C. dog e. dog
Yo, Dog! Good points..
Dog,
Amusing, as always. Mikey does have some interesting points..but I just don't "buy" them.
Americans demanded less and drove less. Why isn't that the reason the price dropped?
Hmmm..
Well, darn it - it musta just been a "ka-winky-dink" that is mysteriously happened at the same time of the announcement and speculators speculated better times ahead. But there I go again, basing opinions on reality, cause and effect, and other foolish things. He believes the above statement, yet his second sentence almost seems to question what he believes, no?? I see this quite often from my Liberal, well meaning, friends.
"I believe this because.. hmmmm.." ???.. then I get that deer in the headlights kinda look that says, Wow - I am questioning myself? Never spoken out loud, of course.
Even the links in your new post don't tell me much Mike.. I say kiddingly of course.. Here is the link to your car's MPG, here's the link to your car's MPG if your tires are properly inflated!!
You know what? I am ALL OVER that tires properly inflated thing, I made sure to do it b/c Obomber told me to. Yet, the change in my MPG, was... nothing!!
Perhaps my tires were fine all along. Curious.
Michael at least does admit that we all pay for the Gub'mint.. so there is a small foothold in reality there. Thank you, Michael. Glad to hear you're a paying stiff, like the rest of us. Wanna pay lots more? Keep voting for the Utopia, that is not coming.
Thanks for playing,
Judy
You'd better prepare for
You'd better prepare for your move, Judy, because if history serves as a guide, you will be looking at a much larger Democratic majority in Congress after the election along with a Democrat in the White House. Bye, bye and I hope you enjoy your new home.
Ahhh....
Ahhh.. I can only assume this is my threat of Chairman Mao's Communist party taking my well earned land and livelihood away from me. Because I've made the mistake of working hard for it.
It must be "redistributed" to those less fortunate. I'd laugh, but it's really not funny. You don't know what you're voting for Mikey. And you'll scream the loudest when you realize it.
Be careful What you Wish...
OBAMA...OBAMA...OBAMA... after that silence! Try to find three people who support this man that have any idea what he really wants to do if elected President. If you do find three people they will all tell you a different story about his platform. Not their fault it's hard to keep up with him these days.
When asked they all say "he's for change" its just difficult pinning down what, where, when and how that change will come about. If Obama is elected, it will be like the scene when Dorothy wakes up in the land of OZ. "I don't think were in Kansas Toto!
Be careful what you wish!
This comment thread is over
I've deleted the last several posts here.
They went so far over the bounds of civility that I had no choice -- and it was on both sides.
I generally allow the political discussions here fairly wide leeway in terms of our user agreements. However, please note that we have the ability to delete the accounts of those who do not abide by them.
Thanks.
Where do all the fence posts lie?
Clay -
Would you please provide us the perimeters for permissible speech? It's unclear to me where your boundaries are. I believe we were all operating well within bounds we are both comfortable and familiar with. We're used to Mikey's rants - stuff we also see on occasion in his letters to the Monitor editor - and I like to think he inspires us to reach for the stars, or at least provides a good laugh. Our retorts are usually a step or two back and up from his. And when compared to material thrown down by George Carlin, Chris Rock, Damon Wayans, Eddie Murphy, the talking heads, and partisan political minions, what we wright pales in comparison, and we stayed a considerable distance from Carlin's 7 deadly words.
What brought on this change? Did any of the participants complain? If anyone had grounds to do so, it should have been me, Bill, or Judy considering the nature of the vitriol thrown at us. But we're big boys and girls and we can take it. Perhaps for those more sensitive than us, the Monitor could implement a rule that they could request removal of material directed at them. Or the Monitor could implement a rating system along the lines the movie industry uses. Or better yet, they could choose not to participate.
And for the record, I am not a racist, in fact quite the opposite as attested by who I find attractive.
- Poised atop my keypad waiting for clearance,
C. dog e. doG
GEE Guys..................
Out of the loop for a couple of days and you practically shut my blog down. I could only read this on my Blackberry as I was traveling a long way away, but, it did go overboard.
How about commenting on some of the other points like the vastness of the country, etc.
Bill
Vast Reply
O.k., o.k -
Here's my top choices for vast spaces:
1. Great Northern Plains - both awe inspiring and eerie. Would love to one day see them repopulated with vast herds of bison - seems fitting for such a lonely place.
2. Alaska, pretty much anywhere - even in mid-summer, winter seems just a cold breath away. Lots of wildlife, including the humans. Last place, and only place that had the vitality of a frontier.
3. Badlands - are bad-ass. Very weird environment.
4. Most of Wyoming - desolate and dreary; not a cup of tea for me.
5. California? - I've heard from some that Northern Cal mountains make mo-hills out of men.
So Bill, what are your top picks for vast, wide-open spaces?
- Fondly reminiscing of places I can spread my wings,
- C. dog e. doG
There are a few problems which you fail to address:
1. The oil companies have no incentive to produce more oil. They are making the biggest profits in history. Why would they want to change that by producing more oil?
2. They is no equipment available to drill from additional oil and it will take years before equipment would be ready to do so.
3. The oil that would be produced in 15 to 20 years will be sold on the world market to the highest bidders. There is no guarantee that whatever oil is available off the US coast would be sold to the USA.
4. The oil companies already have leases on millions of acres of US properties which they have not been interested in exploring. Giving them additional leases will only make their assets more attractive to speculators and investors.
The way to resolve our energy problems lies in technology and alternatives.