Yes, and now after having helped the American worker to gain
reasonable work hours and wages, they are now killing the American
worker's jobs by driving companies out of business. Good thing we
have unions to steal, I mean tax, our hard earned money.
It really depends how you define reasonable wages. In the cost of
building a new car, approx 30% is for raw materials and 70% is labor
costs and health insurnace alone adds about 1500 dollars to the price of
each new car from GM. The bubble is bursting and time to pay the piper
and get runaway costs under control.
Raw materials and fuel is hardly all labor
Most of the costs are sales, marketing, profiteering
The prices can theoretically come down quite a lot
The price of oil is one of the cost most obvious to the ordinary
The use of alternative energy is obviously favored by the high costs of
For last thirty 30 years we have been getting warnings that the prices
of oil would be going up steeply but most people have ignored it
Finally now the price of oil is noticable for most people
There have been alternatives available for a long time but they are
still a long way off at replacing oil altogether but it seems that the
higher costs now will speed things up
The old companies rely on inertia and slow changes
The old companies management have missed out on doing these neccessary
changes and there is also a question of the authorities to help create
the infrastructure for the new energies
The authorities should put a lot of taxes on oil and stimulate use of
If they did that the changes will go even quicker and the need to
invade more countries to get more oil would be less
On 24 Dec 2005 06:42:28 -0800, email@example.com wrote:
I do believe that the Iraq invasion was to establish a military
presence in an unstable region that seems bent upon the acquisition of
nuclear arms more than it was to access oil.
Oil from Canada would have been much cheaper and much more plentiful
than anything in Iraq and they haven't come North to free Canadians
from our elected Dictatorship.
As for alternative energies? If they were truly viable don't you
think Microsoft would buy them and get yet another Monopoly?
joe schmoe said "Oil from Canada would have been much cheaper and much
than anything in Iraq..."
Joe, I'm not sure where you are getting your information or what you've
been smoking, but at last check, the U.S. had 2.1% of proven Oil
Reserves, Iraq had 10.9% and Canada had a measley 0.4%. Only Saudi
Arabia, with 25.5% had more Oil Reserves than Iraq. Canada's oil supply
could not even come close to meeting thehuge U.S. demand. It would be a
waste of time for the U.S. to tap into Canada's supply. Iraq is "much
more plentiful"! ;-)
Your figures are just a bit off, in fact you seem to be about 20 years
out of date. >:)
Canada's Alberta oil sands alone equal Saudi Arabia's reserves at only a
10% recovery, which is too low for todays improving technology.
SA is maturing as an oil source, Canada is just getting going.
The difference is SA had very low production costs. With increasing
prices much more oil is economically recoverable.
An example of this is the $140 million Nexen of Canada, with several
other partners, just spent to drill the world's deepest commercial oil
well. It's in the Gulf of Mexico, I assume in the USA part of the Gulf.
As for supplying the USA with imported energy, SA is third,
Canada is first and that guy Bush and Pat hate is second.
Canada currently supplies about 30%.
So for a number of years very significant quantities of oil, natural gas
and electricity have been flowing south to the USA.
Spam Hater said "Your figures are just a bit off, in fact you seem to
be about 20 years
out of date. >:) "
You may want to check out this link Spam Hater:
Fortunately I bookmarked this site when I came across it a couple of
years ago. The information is admittedly 5 years old (not 20!) but you
will note therein that "Saudi Arabia contains an estimated 260 billion
barrels of oil, or about one-fourth of proved global reserves (Radler,
2000). " while Canada had an estimated 4 billion barrels of oil or 0.4%
of world reserves.
Spam Hater also said : " Canada's Alberta oil sands alone equal Saudi
Arabia's reserves at only a 10% recovery,".
In this regard, you may wish to check this link Spam Hater:
This report was posted in October of 2005 but please note that it has 2
very significant qualifications:
1. " BP p.l.c., BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2005, except
2. " Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic
and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are
recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions."
The 1st qualification appears to imply that the figures shwoing for the
U.S. are incomplete. The 2nd qualification merely defines "Proved
You will note that this report very clearly shows that Saudi Arabia has
substantially more reserves than Canada, no matter whose figures you
The BP Statistical Review shows Canada with reserves of 16.8 Billion
barrels VS. 262.7 Billion barrels for Saudia Arabia.
The Oil & Gas Journal shows Canada with reserves of 178.8 Billion
barrels VS. 261.9 Billion barrels for Saudia Arabia. As explained in
Footnote 3. : " Oil & Gas Journal's oil reserve estimate for Canada
includes 4.3 billion barrels of conventional crude oil and condensate
reserves and 174.5 billion barrels of oil sands reserves."
The World Oil Organization shows Canada with reserves of 4.7 Billion
barrels Vs. 262.1 Billion barrels for Saudi Arabia.
This information would appear to be at odds with your information Spam
Hater and particularly your claim that "Canada's Alberta oil sands
alone equal Saudi Arabia's reserves at only a 10% recovery." Would you
be so kind as to provide us with links that might shed some light on
the accuracy of your figures. Thanks S.H.
hate to disagree but
"Alberta sits atop the biggest petroleum deposit outside the Arabian
peninsula - as many as 300 billion recoverable barrels and another
trillion-plus barrels that could one day be within reach using new
retrieval methods. (By contrast, the entire Middle East holds an
estimated 685 billion barrels that are recoverable.) "
Seeing as you won't believe that here's a few other links to read:
The US needs ot be in Iraq to limit the proliferation of Nuclear
technology from Pakistan. Oil is a minor added benefit/excuse.
If oil was the reason why not invade Venezuela? Easier, cheaper and
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.