Trump pulled out of Paris Climate Accord to benefit Russia and Saudi Arabia

Given that the US is the third largest oil producing country in the world isn’t just as much our interest as Saudia Arabia and Russia to have high oil prices?

That link had a screen capture of Steyer’s Twitter comment. How is that lying?

In any case, did you come up with this accusation of treason on Trump’s part by yourself, or did you read it somewhere on the internet?

:rolleyes:

The point stands, the writer you linked as a reply uses big time lies to convince you that he is the beesness when he should not be used for citations.

I came up with it myself. Did not depend on what Steyer’s said. And it was related to betraying the human race, not America, but it can qualify when one notices that a lot of the jobs Trump “saved” are now being tossed under the bus.

What it is clear is that one can bet that you will remain angry with anyone pointing at how much your sources lie to you and you will not demand better from those sources.

Personally, I think the reason he did it is embedded right into his speech : he said the deal was “yugely unfair to the US” (err, no it’s really not) and that he would try and secure a “better deal”. And that’s it right there :

  • his whole “I’m the king of the deal” PR shtick
  • he wants to say “I’m the one that made it happen”
  • most importantly, he wants this “new deal” (that is to say, world leaders telling him personally to stop being an arse - little bit of an ego boost there) to happen under him, because he wants his cut. I mean, he knows climate change happens (a fucking sinkhole opened right in front of his stupid golf fer chrissakes), and he knows the US needs to be involved. But the man gotta have his cheese before that can happen. He’s, essentially, trying to take the whole world hostage without even a goddamn moon laser to show for it.
    Fuck him. We can wait the bum out a couple years.

It’s not one of “my” sources. I read about Steyer’s comment in several places in the last few days. This morning, I googled Steyer and treason, and that’s the first link I found.

I don’t even know what PJ Media is. Unless you think they doctored the screen capture, they accurately reported what Steyer said.

More than once I have pointed that the sources of today are social media and blogs. So yes, your sources.

As I said also before: get better friends. (besides looking at better sources of info, you only showed that you looked at a nut pick.

Oil is sliding after the US withdraws from the Paris Climate Accord

I strongly disagree. On social media, are there fact-checkers or editorial boards? Do the writers go to journalism school to earn degrees? Are there Pulitzer prizes for Facebook? Any standards at all?

No, and therefore social media is not a cite for anything.

Hence my point that you need better acquaintances or sources. And no, I’m not excluding the right wing media sources you are using.

Your posts in this thread are silly.

PJ media is not MY source, it’s the first one I found on Google.

But here’s the original:

https://twitter.com/TomSteyer?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

You have to scroll down to May 28th. Are you now denying that he said it?

:rolleyes:

I already said that I see your example as just a nut pick, IOW not what all people against Trump think.

It’s not a “nut pick”. Here’s Steyer’s stupid tweet

Your own statement was even sillier:

Hint: It’s not possible to be “treasonous” to the entire human race. Words have meaning, you know.

Carry on as you like. That was my last word on the subject.

It is painfully obvious that you are not even wrong, you do not know what a nutpick is.

Yes you can, if you think you can make a profit by undermining it.

And the second definition in a dictionary tell us that it is “involving or guilty of the betrayal of someone or something.”

Et alors?

The oil pricing has been under pressure for months - the over productin of the OPEC cheates combined with the falling demand as the renewables and energy effiiency measures investment have been biting into the forecast petrol demand for two years running.

It is a trend now years old and the demand impact is not from your clumsy clown president, it is from the innovation in the productive effieincy and the amazing fall in the production price in the renewables.

Ironically, right there in the cite it has a chart showing what you are saying concerning the price…with a helpful line at $50/barrel. :stuck_out_tongue: Yes, this isn’t a new trend and it has nothing to do with the US pulling out of the accords.

The OP tried hard to imply that the reason for pulling out of the Paris agreement was to raise the oil prices. As in: “Both Russia and Saudi Arabia’s economy are based on oil. They’re struggling to keep the price of oil high enough to maintain their economies. The only way to keep oil at high prices is to either decrease the amount of oil or increase the demand for oil. The Paris Climate Accord cut back on the demand for oil. Donald Trump has pulled out the Accord, and has had significant personal relations with Russia and Saudi Arabia.”

Apparently the oil market doesn’t think Trump’s abandonment of Paris agreement will raise oil prices. Foiled again.

oh well the OP, he has no economic literacy at all. I was simply ignoring him.

however, the daily market reactions in the markets, whether it is the stocks or the commodities, it is not the intelligent way to evaluate the real impact of a policy. It is the multi-month trends.

Not that I think that the OP’s idea of TRump acting to help the Saud or the Russia has any sense, I am sure Trump has acted from a childish resentment and a complete economic illiteracy of his own, that is 100 percent domestic and self-regarding.

but the economic analysis that a less efficient trend in the American market consumption of the hydrocarbons should indeed lead to the higher pricing against what would have otherwise been the trend (note the trend otherwise, it could be the trend should be down 10% but due to higher demand, is only down 5% for example). Maybe some traders think there will be more of the fracking based production against the trend… maybe that can outweight the demand side impacts.

It will be interesting to watch the balance of the results from the gratitious stupidity your president has engaged in.

Do not appear to insult other posters in this fashion. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.

[/moderating]

That’s not the prevailing theory. The theory is that Shale will pump even more now which will depress oil prices any more.

Trust me…my shale stocks are flirting with year lows.

I’m honestly not sure what you are trying to say here. US production is certainly a major component of why the prices are still low and continue to fluctuate, as the glut the Saudi’s tried to spin down is back. It’s one of the reasons the Saudi’s asked US producers to scale back as well. Problem is, after the last few years where OPEC kept production up to keep the prices low (which had the unintentional consequence of putting US shale oil producers at a disadvantage…I’m sure it was unintentional anyway), US shale producers figured out ways to produce oil at lower costs. IIRC they are now at just a touch over $45/barrel to break even, which means they can make at least a bit of profit with the current prices.

I don’t invest in commodities nor oil stocks, so no idea what this has done to stock prices for shale producers, but most are able to make a profit even at the current price point…which means they are still producing, though many have scaled back somewhat. However, that means we aren’t drawing down on the glut, which means…the price has fluctuated between $40-60, and this has been the case for the last year and a half. Which indicates that it has little or nothing to do with Trump pulling out of the accords and more to do with plain old market forces…that supply and demand stuff they are always on about.