PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Seen as Biggest Oil Producer After Overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia



ELVIS
07-07-2014, 03:10 PM
Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/u-s-seen-as-biggest-oil-producer-after-overtaking-saudi.html)

U.S. production of crude oil, along with liquids separated from natural gas, surpassed all other countries this year with daily output exceeding 11 million barrels in the first quarter, the bank said in a report today. The country became the world’s largest natural gas producer in 2010. The International Energy Agency said in June that the U.S. was the biggest producer of oil and natural gas liquids.

“The U.S. increase in supply is a very meaningful chunk of oil,” Francisco Blanch, the bank’s head of commodities research, said by phone from New York. “The shale boom is playing a key role in the U.S. recovery. If the U.S. didn’t have this energy supply, prices at the pump would be completely unaffordable.”

Oil extraction is soaring at shale formations in Texas and North Dakota as companies split rocks using high-pressure liquid, a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The surge in supply combined with restrictions on exporting crude is curbing the price of West Texas Intermediate, America’s oil benchmark. The U.S., the world’s largest oil consumer, still imported an average of 7.5 million barrels a day of crude in April, according to the Department of Energy’s statistical arm.

http://www.bloomberg.com/image/iJaIVJ6C67Rg.jpg
An oil drilling rig stands on the Bakken formation in Watford City, North Dakota.

Surpassing Saudi

U.S. oil output will surge to 13.1 million barrels a day in 2019 and plateau thereafter, according to the IEA, a Paris-based adviser to 29 nations. The country will lose its top-producer ranking at the start of the 2030s, the agency said in its World Energy Outlook in November.

“It’s very likely the U.S. stays as No. 1 producer for the rest of the year” as output is set to increase in the second half, Blanch said. Production growth outside the U.S. has been lower than the bank anticipated, keeping global oil prices high, he said.

Partly as a result of the shale boom, WTI futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange remain at a discount of about $7 a barrel to their European counterpart, the Brent contract on ICE Futures Europe’s London-based exchange. WTI was at $103.74 a barrel as of 4:13 p.m. London time.

Islamist Insurgency

“The shale production story is bigger than Iraqi production, but it hasn’t made the impact on prices you would expect,” said Blanch. “Typically such a large energy supply growth should bring prices lower, but in fact we’re not seeing that because the whole geopolitical situation outside the U.S. is dreadful.”

Territorial gains in northern Iraq by a group calling itself the Islamic State has spurred concerns that oil flows could be disrupted in the second-largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries after Saudi Arabia. Exports from Libya have been reduced by protests, while Nigeria’s production is crimped by oil theft and sabotage.

Libya will resume exports as soon as possible from two oil ports in the country’s east after taking back control from rebels who blocked crude shipments for the past year, Mohamed Elharari, spokesman for the state-run National Oil Corp., said by phone yesterday from Tripoli.

The U.S. will consolidate its position as the world’s biggest producer in the coming months if returning Libyan supply limits the need for Saudi barrels, said Julian Lee, an oil strategist who writes for Bloomberg News First Word. The observations he makes are his own.

Record Investment

“There’s a very strong linkage between oil production growth, economic growth and wage growth across a range of U.S. states,” Blanch said. Annual investment in oil and gas in the country is at a record $200 billion, reaching 20 percent of the country’s total private fixed-structure spending for the first time, he said.

A U.S. Commerce Department decision to allow the overseas shipment of processed ultra-light oil called condensate has fanned speculation the nation may ease its four-decade ban on most crude exports. Pioneer Natural Resources Co. and Enterprise Products Partners LP will be allowed to export condensate, provided it is first subject to preliminary distillation, the companies said June 25.

The decision was “a positive first step” to dispersing the build-up of crude supply in North America, Bank of America said in a report on June 27. The U.S. could potentially have daily exports of 1 million barrels of crude, including 300,000 of condensate, by the end of the year, according to a June 25 report from Citigroup Inc.


:elvis:

FORD
07-07-2014, 03:27 PM
At what cost though?

Is it worth destroying every drop of drinkable water in this country to extract this toxic goo from the ground, only to make two Stalin funded treasonous bastards richer, and create earthquakes in parts of the country that have never had earthquakes before.

And what benefit is any of this bullshit to the average American? Last time I checked, fucking gasoline was STILL $4 goddamn dollars per gallon.

Why don't we just get over the addiction to fucking 19th century technology, and FUCK whose profit margins it hurts?

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 03:45 PM
That profit margin is what increases wages...

Something the Libtards like you want to do, but with no money...

DONNIEP
07-07-2014, 03:50 PM
That profit margin is what increases wages...

Something the Libtards like you want to do, but with no money...

Money is Devilly, Elvis...and profit margins are straight out of Hell!

DONNIEP
07-07-2014, 03:52 PM
Anyway, if we can produce more oil than we import, does that mean we can nuke the next country that has their fucking backwards ass peasants running around screaming "Death to America"?? Oh wait, we'd have to nuke half of our own country...probably not a good idea.

Angel
07-07-2014, 04:34 PM
Most of your imports come from Canada. Your increase in production has our oil producers a little worried....good. We need to keep more here and upgrade our refineries. We ship crude to you and then buy refined from you. Ridiculous...

Von Halen
07-07-2014, 05:13 PM
Why don't we just get over the addiction to fucking 19th century technology, and FUCK whose profit margins it hurts?

What 19th century technology?

What's your better idea?

I can't wait to hear this one.

I sat in a hotel bar one night while traveling for work, and talked at length to a very wealthy battery guy, that is supplying batteries to Tesla, as well as other automobile companies. I was surprised how much his thoughts were similar to mine. But hey, he's making money hand over fist, so why would he argue with the fake "green" propaganda?

Von Halen
07-07-2014, 05:19 PM
Most of your imports come from Canada. Your increase in production has our oil producers a little worried....good. We need to keep more here and upgrade our refineries. We ship crude to you and then buy refined from you. Ridiculous...

What your faggy cuntry needs to do, is stay on our good side. Our bitches to the North need our protection. We stole Lord Stanley's Cup from you already. If we want your oil, we'll take that too. Guess what you guys can do about it?
N O T H I N G!

Is that a vacuum cleaner salesman knocking on your door?

FORD
07-07-2014, 05:33 PM
What 19th century technology?

What's your better idea?

I can't wait to hear this one.

I sat in a hotel bar one night while traveling for work, and talked at length to a very wealthy battery guy, that is supplying batteries to Tesla, as well as other automobile companies. I was surprised how much his thoughts were similar to mine. But hey, he's making money hand over fist, so why would he argue with the fake "green" propaganda?

Of course he's making money. Batteries cost money, nobody is going to dispute that. But overall it's still a far more sustainable idea than a combustion engine designed in the 1800s, burning a fuel which is in short supply, and no longer readily available without either needless wars or even more needless damage to the planet.

Ultimately, if you had a Tesla (or any other electric powered vehicle) plugged into a home charging station that was powered by solar panels, a windmill, or both, you could be driving your car for "free". Sure you would have to buy new batteries eventually, and probably even change/upgrade the charging station, but compared to the maintenance costs saved on the car itself, not to mention the lack of fuel costs, it would be a huge gain in the long run. And that's just personal gain. Not even counting that environmental stuff that you probably don't give a fuck about.

VAiN
07-07-2014, 05:45 PM
Is that a vacuum cleaner salesman knocking on your door?

:appl: That one gave me the lulz.

VAiN
07-07-2014, 05:46 PM
I don't give a shit where we get it, or how we get it.. I'm fucking tired of paying over $4 a gallon at the pump.

Von Halen
07-07-2014, 06:06 PM
Of course he's making money. Batteries cost money, nobody is going to dispute that. But overall it's still a far more sustainable idea than a combustion engine designed in the 1800s, burning a fuel which is in short supply, and no longer readily available without either needless wars or even more needless damage to the planet.

Ultimately, if you had a Tesla (or any other electric powered vehicle) plugged into a home charging station that was powered by solar panels, a windmill, or both, you could be driving your car for "free". Sure you would have to buy new batteries eventually, and probably even change/upgrade the charging station, but compared to the maintenance costs saved on the car itself, not to mention the lack of fuel costs, it would be a huge gain in the long run. And that's just personal gain. Not even counting that environmental stuff that you probably don't give a fuck about.

Fuel is not in short supply. That's politics at work.

How much damage will these batteries cause to the planet? How will they be disposed of? Do you really believe what's inside these batteries, is "green"? Do you really believe we need to go to war for oil? Between us and our bitches to the North, we are sitting on more oil than we could ever use, or get from the towel heads.

Do you know how many solar panels it would take to sufficiently keep a charge in a vehicle? Do you know how "green" it isn't to build a solar panel? Do you know how little power the windmills really produce? Do you know the maintenance issues on these windmills? Do you know they can't even keep the fucking things clean? Do you know mold is growing on those windmills at an alarming rate, and they can't properly or safely clean them, because they are so big?

We don't have enough power in our grids right now. How are we going to supply all the power for the batteries, since your other ideas make little sense? Build more power plants? Hey, great idea. We need to do that. But not because we need to recharge batteries in electric cars.

Battery powered cars are a political scam, designed to grease the pockets of the lobbyists and politicians.

The internal combustion engine is by far, the most efficient, and environmentally friendly way to power vehicles. Don't believe the scare tactics of your oh so honest government. They've done nothing more than figure out even one more way to scare people into buying into their bullshit. Key word. BUYING.

DLR Bridge
07-07-2014, 06:26 PM
I'm in the middle, literally, on this one. We have an '08 Altima Hybrid. It takes fuel and there's no plugging in, but it is the running engine that charges the battery. For local driving under 30 mph, we're cruising on battery power. So this car gets decent mileage, cuntsidering all of the kid jockeying around being done. I don't know how crazy I'd be about owning a straight up electric car. Those have no giddy up.

VAiN
07-07-2014, 06:40 PM
I don't know how crazy I'd be about owning a straight up electric car. Those have no giddy up.

A Tesla will blow the doors off of most cars.. there's no waiting for the engine to spin, it's 100% power on demand. With that said, I'll stick to my 400+HP 5.0 Mustang.. the electric cars cost 2-3 times as much and don't sound 1/100th as cool. :D

DONNIEP
07-07-2014, 07:06 PM
I don't give a shit where we get it, or how we get it.. I'm fucking tired of paying over $4 a gallon at the pump.

That's what I'm talkin about!! We should have sucked Iraq drier than a nun's pussy by now.

ZahZoo
07-07-2014, 07:13 PM
Actually that 13.1 million barrels of production from IEA by 2019 is low. Inside the oil & gas industry, which we have a ton of here in the center of the Fayetteville Shale natural gas play, they are projecting we could be at 30-35 million barrels a day by 2020 inside the industry.

Ford you can knock off the propaganda bullshit about fracking destroying or contaminating the water supply. You'll find just as much truth in that crap as you'll find on a Tea Party stumping platform. Majority of fresh water tables in the continental US run no deeper that 1000 feet below the surface most far above that. Most fracking wells run between 5000 to 8000 feet below the surface... what happens in an active well has no possibility of effecting anything thousands of feet above it. We have hundreds of natural gas wells surrounding the lake that's our primary water source. They have been testing it for 8 years since they started fracking here... no trace of any impact. Actually the water quality has improved as many chicken farms closed up because the landowners are becoming millionaires from gas royalties.

This is really great news for the US within the global economy we struggle with today. We need to up oil, gas and natural gas production to subsidize costs locally and then up exports to build reliance with customers who will play ball our way. This will shift the power and reliance on the middle east quite quickly and help us disengage there with great potential to stabilize the global economy overall... in our favor.

DONNIEP
07-07-2014, 07:20 PM
This will shift the power and reliance on the middle east quite quickly and help us disengage there with great potential to stabilize the global economy overall... in our favor.

Yeah, well so would a couple of ICBMs babayyy!!!!!

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 07:22 PM
Ultimately, if you had a Tesla (or any other electric powered vehicle) plugged into a home charging station that was powered by solar panels, a windmill, or both, you could be driving your car for "free".

No fucking way that's going to happen...

You have to burn coal or some other energy source and convert it to 220 AC power to charge one of these electric car batteries...

Solar panels and windmills (especially solar panels) do not produce the amperage necessary for that kind of current...

This is a perfect example of a liberal not knowing what he's talking about...

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 07:28 PM
I don't know how crazy I'd be about owning a straight up electric car. Those have no giddy up.




:elvis:

DLR Bridge
07-07-2014, 08:59 PM
Nice, but $27,000 for a car that could barely fit a single suitcase or a couple of bags of groceries only in the back isn't going to fly out of the dealerships. These mini electric cars are strictly body transports. Most everyone needs a bit more.

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 09:02 PM
For what ??

DLR Bridge
07-07-2014, 09:04 PM
That's what I'm talkin about!! We should have sucked Iraq drier than a nun's pussy by now.

I thought Iraq made up for less than 2% of US oil consumption. Hardly a consolation prize for all of the soldiers we wrongfully lost.

DLR Bridge
07-07-2014, 09:06 PM
For what ??

Really? Do you think this is a family vehicle? You, your wife, your 3 dogs and a box of dog treats is all your fitting that lil' box.

Nitro Express
07-07-2014, 09:07 PM
No fucking way that's going to happen...

You have to burn coal or some other energy source and convert it to 220 AC power to charge one of these electric car batteries...

Solar panels and windmills (especially solar panels) do not produce the amperage necessary for that kind of current...

This is a perfect example of a liberal not knowing what he's talking about...

What gets me is we have huge geothermal potential in this area because we are close to the Yellowstone hotspot. They could put an icelandic type plant in outside of the National Parks and you would never see it. They won't let you do that but you can plant ugly windmills all over the hillsides. When they ever become obsolete who's going to take the towers out? We are going to have broken windmills all over the place because nobody is going to want to pay the cost of taking them out.

Nitro Express
07-07-2014, 09:15 PM
Yeah, well so would a couple of ICBMs babayyy!!!!!

Always itching to turn that key. You sir are qualified to be a missile launch officer.

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 09:23 PM
Yeah, those windmills are soon to be like a dead flower garden...

There is zero return on investment...

They wouldn't exist without taxpayer subsidies...

Geothermal is a better untapped resource than wind...

Nitro Express
07-07-2014, 09:28 PM
Actually that 13.1 million barrels of production from IEA by 2019 is low. Inside the oil & gas industry, which we have a ton of here in the center of the Fayetteville Shale natural gas play, they are projecting we could be at 30-35 million barrels a day by 2020 inside the industry.

Ford you can knock off the propaganda bullshit about fracking destroying or contaminating the water supply. You'll find just as much truth in that crap as you'll find on a Tea Party stumping platform. Majority of fresh water tables in the continental US run no deeper that 1000 feet below the surface most far above that. Most fracking wells run between 5000 to 8000 feet below the surface... what happens in an active well has no possibility of effecting anything thousands of feet above it. We have hundreds of natural gas wells surrounding the lake that's our primary water source. They have been testing it for 8 years since they started fracking here... no trace of any impact. Actually the water quality has improved as many chicken farms closed up because the landowners are becoming millionaires from gas royalties.

This is really great news for the US within the global economy we struggle with today. We need to up oil, gas and natural gas production to subsidize costs locally and then up exports to build reliance with customers who will play ball our way. This will shift the power and reliance on the middle east quite quickly and help us disengage there with great potential to stabilize the global economy overall... in our favor.

Right now the Uranium mining industry and companies that make nuclear power plants like GE have invested a lot of money bribing politicians and selling propaganda to scare people away from carbon based fuels. Obama was promoting clean coal early in his presidency and now he is a GE man wanting to build nuclear power plants.

You really have to do your research on energy. The competing industries really duke it out. There is always lots of propaganda trying to demonize one form of energy or another. I mean they have people thinking a coal power plant is going to destroy life on earth and when someone tries to build a clean coal plant to see if they really do work, the project gets pummeled with lawsuits.

The US is a very rich country and we are far from broke. We were outsourced because oligarchs wanted to level the economies and then consolidate them into unions. Henry Kissinger set up the petrol-dollar so our military could have endless financing. They basically tried to take over the middle east using our military to blackmail countries like China on energy. It was about controlling most the energy assets and putting a BIS sponsored central bank in each country.

Once you control a country's money you control that country and the beauty of it, is the average schmuck has no idea what has happened. If we got control of our money again and did a few policy changes, people would be amazed at how much wealth there really is and how much of it has been untapped.

The thing is oligarchs think geopolitically. That's why our domestic policy has really sucked because our presidents work for the oligarchs. Some people call them the globalists.

The main problem is our central bank is actually anti-US. Nothing really changes until we nationalize the Federal Reserve Bank. The Fed wants the petrodollar in tact and actually that is not good for the average American or countries like Ukraine that become geopolitical targets. Why? Russia. It's an independent country. It does not have a BIS central bank. It has enough weapons and oil to be a big problem to the Bretton-Woods crowd.

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 09:32 PM
You're wrong, Nitro...

Man Made Climate Change® is REAL !!


:biggrin:

Nitro Express
07-07-2014, 09:39 PM
Most of your imports come from Canada. Your increase in production has our oil producers a little worried....good. We need to keep more here and upgrade our refineries. We ship crude to you and then buy refined from you. Ridiculous...

Canada and the US are ran by the same central bankers. The Bank of Canada and the Federal Reserve Note all fall under The Bank of International Settlements. There really are no countries. Just multinational corporations. Your politicians are bought and so our ours.

ELVIS
07-07-2014, 09:40 PM
Ron Paul wasn't...

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 12:29 AM
Yeah, those windmills are soon to be like a dead flower garden...

There is zero return on investment...

They wouldn't exist without taxpayer subsidies...

Geothermal is a better untapped resource than wind...

We are next to one of the biggest volcanic hotspots on the planet. Yeah I can get not wanting power plants in Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks but that hot spot runs way beyond the boundaries of the parks. The only exhaust would be steam. If you don't like steam clouds run it through a condenser.

Wind is a very expensive way to generate electricity and it only works if the wind is blowing. The windmills are nonstop maintenance. Plus they are ugly. Tell me it's not pollution having to look at a whole hillside of them. They kill birds.

Solar has it's niche. I know people who have cabins that are too remote to be on the grid. The thing is the batteries are expensive and inverters aren't very efficient. Everyone I know who has installed a solar system never installs a second one. Having panels on your roof can be noisy. Then you have to get up there and clean and adjust them. They are good for about 20 years. The only way to store the electricity is in batteries.

Running a turbine off of steam and using the grid that already exists makes more sense. Around here the boiler can be the magma under the ground.

DONNIEP
07-08-2014, 12:32 AM
I thought Iraq made up for less than 2% of US oil consumption. Hardly a consolation prize for all of the soldiers we wrongfully lost.

Hey, I wasn't for invading Iraq in the first place. But nobody asked me before we made that idiotic decision. But...they are sitting on over 140 billion barrels, depending on which estimate you choose to believe.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 12:33 AM
Ron Paul wasn't...

You know. I bet a good percentage of the US Congress couldn't find the Ukraine on the map and I bet many of them have no idea the Federal Reserve is a foreign owned private bank. Even if they aren't corrupt they are too out of it to understand what the problems really are.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 12:35 AM
I know one thing. If Canada nationalized it's central bank the US would invade them. It would be a sure thing. LOL! As long as your central bank is in the BIS club you are ok. The US is the BIS, IMF, and World Bank pit bull. Kaddafi would still be alive if he stayed in the club.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 12:41 AM
Hey, I wasn't for invading Iraq in the first place. But nobody asked me before we made that idiotic decision. But...they are sitting on over 140 billion barrels, depending on which estimate you choose to believe.

It's not about countries. It's about multinational corporations. Did you know Halliburton is based in Dubai? Believe me, someone is getting the oil and someone is making money. It never was about helping the US. People need to get that concept. It's not about the US. It's only about using US lives and assets to enrich foreigners and their domestic cronies. The average person sees no benefit.

The US is being fleeced while it's military is being used to pummel other countries. No spoils for us. Just more debt.

Angel
07-08-2014, 12:45 AM
I know one thing. If Canada nationalized it's central bank the US would invade them. It would be a sure thing. LOL!

??? The Bank of Canada was nationalized in 1938...

"Soon after the Bank opened, a new government introduced an amendment to the Bank of Canada Act to nationalize the institution. In 1938, the Bank became publicly owned and remains that way today."

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/about/history/

DONNIEP
07-08-2014, 12:46 AM
No spoils for us. Just more debt.

Yeah, I got that. That's why I said we should suck Iraq dry.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 01:37 AM
??? The Bank of Canada was nationalized in 1938...

"Soon after the Bank opened, a new government introduced an amendment to the Bank of Canada Act to nationalize the institution. In 1938, the Bank became publicly owned and remains that way today."

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/about/history/

Yeah but it's part of the BIS system and it's owned by the minister of finance representing the crown. It looks lie the queen owns your bank. Makes sense. She's on the money.

If your bank was actually owned by the canadian citizens as shareholders and you were independent of the BIS system you would be invaded. See the US military is the muscle for the international bankers. If you want to start your own central bank and finance it with your oil, well that's competition and that must be snuffed out. Since the queen owns your bank you are still part of the club.

Anonymous
07-08-2014, 06:33 AM
At what cost though?

Is it worth destroying every drop of drinkable water in this country to extract this toxic goo from the ground, only to make two Stalin funded treasonous bastards richer, and create earthquakes in parts of the country that have never had earthquakes before.

And what benefit is any of this bullshit to the average American? Last time I checked, fucking gasoline was STILL $4 goddamn dollars per gallon.

Why don't we just get over the addiction to fucking 19th century technology, and FUCK whose profit margins it hurts?

How? Do you have any ideas? Any ideas at all?

I'm not trying to be a jackass - I can do that effortlessly -, I'm genuinely interested in knowing.

Because the way I see it, it CAN be done, but not until the big corporations LET you do it.

In fact, I'll bet my own fucking life that the technology already exists & it has existed for quite a while now.

However, while there is oil left, it won't surface.

Meanwhile, the global warming/climate change scare will be intensified, & when the Earth has been sucked dry of its oil, the major corporations will announce a "new", clean technology & will be heralded as Saviours of the Universe.

Bookmark this post & refer to it when it happens. It'll be in your lifetime.

Cheers! :beers:

Angel
07-08-2014, 08:56 AM
Yeah but it's part of the BIS system and it's owned by the minister of finance representing the crown. It looks lie the queen owns your bank. Makes sense. She's on the money.

If your bank was actually owned by the canadian citizens as shareholders and you were independent of the BIS system you would be invaded. See the US military is the muscle for the international bankers. If you want to start your own central bank and finance it with your oil, well that's competition and that must be snuffed out. Since the queen owns your bank you are still part of the club.
"The Crown" means the Federal Government, not the queen. The bank is owned by the Federal Government. The Crown USED to mean the Monarchy, but has not since we repatriated our constition in 1982.

And the Queen is only on the $20 bill. Former Prime Minister's are on all the others. The Queen was also on the 1000 bill, which is no longer in circulation.

If you're going to pretend about being knowledgeable about another country you should do your homework first. ;)

ELVIS
07-08-2014, 10:10 AM
Like 2013 being the worst rainfall in Canada's history ??


;)

Angel
07-08-2014, 10:30 AM
Ummm...we just had our most torrential rainfall last weekend. Some saw over 200 mm in just a few hours...

ELVIS
07-08-2014, 10:55 AM
Yeah yeah yeah...

Global warming...

Angel
07-08-2014, 11:08 AM
No. Typical fucking wacky prairie weather. " Q: So, the inevitable question: Can climate change be causing these floods?

A: It’s difficult to blame any weather event — or series of weather events — on climate change, especially in a part of the world that is accustomed to extremes, said Dave Sauchyn, a professor at the University of Regina.

“[The Prairies] have a horribly variable climate: one of the most variable climates on Earth. If you think about global warming as a radio signal, the natural variability is noise. We have got a lot of noise in our climate system,” he said. http://ww2.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/02/why-exactly-are-floods-soaking-saskatchewan-and-manitoba-and-are-they-here-to-stay

Kristy
07-08-2014, 02:11 PM
That profit margin is what increases wages...

Something the Libtards like you want to do, but with no money...

Wow. "Libtard"

There's that "I'm smarter than you" 10th grade Louisiana educational system at work.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 04:03 PM
So who own's the crown property? I was dealing with a Canadian lease and Elizabeth II was the lessor. Apparently she still owns the crown property up there.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 04:14 PM
"The Crown" means the Federal Government, not the queen. The bank is owned by the Federal Government. The Crown USED to mean the Monarchy, but has not since we repatriated our constition in 1982.

And the Queen is only on the $20 bill. Former Prime Minister's are on all the others. The Queen was also on the 1000 bill, which is no longer in circulation.

If you're going to pretend about being knowledgeable about another country you should do your homework first. ;)



Apparently the monarchy still has more control over Canada than they want you to think they do. The British are very clever at hiding things inside of shell corporations.

Angel
07-08-2014, 04:17 PM
So who own's the crown property? I was dealing with a Canadian lease and Elizabeth II was the lessor. Apparently she still owns the crown property up there.
Crown land is owned by the federal government of Canada.

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 04:24 PM
Crown land is owned by the federal government of Canada.

How come the queen is listed at the lessor on the lease?

Also.


The Bank of Canada (French: Banque du Canada) is Canada's central bank.[1] The bank was founded by the Bank of Canada Act[2] on July 3, 1934, as a privately owned corporation. In 1938, the bank became a Crown corporation, belonging to the monarch in right of Canada.[3] The Minister of Finance holds the entire share capital issued by the bank. "Ultimately, the Bank is owned by the Minister of Finance on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada."[2][4]

It looks like the canadian government is nothing more than a holding company for the queen. Them royals are clever.

Angel
07-08-2014, 04:38 PM
How come the queen is listed at the lessor on the lease?

Also.



It looks like the canadian government is nothing more than a holding company for the queen. Them royals are clever.
Canada is what they call a constitutional monarchy, in which the monarch agrees to delegate her powers to the nation’s elected politicians, rather than use them herself. In Canadian law, the impressive powers of the monarch are thus formally held by Elizabeth II but lent to other people, mostly the Prime Minister of Canada, who governs on the “Queen’s behalf” and passes laws in her name using her authority. Canadian laws are often full of reference to Her Majesty requesting this, or Her Majesty wanting that; it’s all a bit of ceremony and theatre relating to this idea of delegated royal power. In reality, the Queen doesn’t care one way or another, and is not personally involved in these decisions.

Formally, Queen Elizabeth II is described as being Canada’s head of state — a symbolic figure of political authority — but the prime minister is called the head of government — the actual ruler of the country. The Crown is often used as a synonym for the entire Canadian government itself, especially in terms of property, such as Crown-owned land, or law, such as the Crown’s defence team.

http://www.thecanadaguide.com/the-monarchy

Nitro Express
07-08-2014, 04:53 PM
Yeah I get all that but from what I can tell, the queen still owns your central bank. She owns the assets. Ownership is power. Whoever owns the central bank basically controls the country. She doesn't have to get involved in the nitty gritty politics. Who would want to.

The thing about these central banks in the BIS system is they want the public to think they are nationalized banks. They give them national sounding names like Federal Reserve and Bank of Canada. The thing is, they can create bubbles and create depressions. The people of Japan had their economy ruined because they don't own The Bank of Japan. Someone at the BIS decided Japan was doing too well so the Bank of Japan lowered the interest rates and created a real estate bubble. When the bubble popped Japan never recovered.

It's all part of the Bretton-Woods financial system and as long as these banks do what they do, you really don't have a sovereign nation. You have the illusion of having one.

Right now we are in a banking war between the east and the west. That is why the US military is surrounding Russia and China. We will be building up our military presence in the Philippines, Japan, Australia. NATO is moving east. Why? China and Russia are setting up their own financial system.

It's the BIS vs the east basically. The US is the BIS enforcer. If Canada ever did have an independent bank out of the BIS system you would be flagged to be taken over.

It's all about getting a BIS bank into every country. Once you have that you basically control the world financially. Oh you have separate nations and flags and that illusion but it will just be under a few colluded banks and of course they will control the markets and corporations. World fascism. Looks like the British Royal Family are players in it.

Angel
07-08-2014, 05:37 PM
The queen is a SYNONYM for the government. The Bank of Canada is a Crown corporation owned by the government. The bank's earnings go to the federal treasury.

Isn't the BIS basically the G-7? I don't pretend to understand the global market...

Nickdfresh
07-10-2014, 10:10 AM
Yeah, those windmills are soon to be like a dead flower garden...

There is zero return on investment...

They wouldn't exist without taxpayer subsidies...

Geothermal is a better untapped resource than wind...

http://www.wycobusiness.org/green/windmills.jpg
You're retarded, seriously? "No return?" Windmills are booming here. They're ugly, kill birds, and many don't want them as much as many don't want fracking here. But there is a serious return on those windmills. You must be one of the "liberals" you were talking about...

And I agree there is a lot of anti-fracking hysteria on the left, especially here in NY. But there is also a lot of naivete on the right here as to how much fracking would actually do economically. It's not necessarily the boon it's made out to be. Even Pennsylvania is having a bit of a hangover as most of the good "wet" gas is in Ohio, not in the Northeast...

Satan
07-10-2014, 12:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfAU7nPAUhk