Economy Oil drove the lasyt recovery

ElKarlo

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
46,217
Reaction score
20,457
With Biden sinking the Keptsone pipeline and with the suspension of permits for Fed land gas and oil development, what does Biden expect to come? I know that oil prices are lower than there were a decade ago, but that has a massive impact on the US, just economically, not just the political implications.

The last recovery from the GFC was basically Texas and fracking


In fact, Obama actively worked to restrict the industry that led the economy as a percentage of GDP growth. Oil and gas development accounted for nearly half of GDP growth, and the fracking boom alone accounted for 9.3 million jobs, nearly half of the jobs created during his entire presidency. States such as Texas contributed nearly 70% of all jobs created during the Obama administration. Wage growth for workers in the natural gas industry also skyrocketed, with workers in states such as North Dakota seeing their weekly wages increase up to 40% in the post-shale boom. Without oil and gas development, there would have been almost no economic or job growth during the Obama administration.

Without fracking and the related industries, you would have had an even slowly Euro like recovery and perhaps a double dip recession.

Meanwhile with the Keystone pipeline alone you are losing thousands of jobs, at a time when they are moist needed. You can't just spend out of a recovery, there also needs to be an economic engine that starts up and creates jobs and earnings. With oil and gas muzzled, do you see a long term recovery, or more of like the last time where jobs only crept back?

I worry about this 'In the last year of Obama's presidency, growth shrunk to 1.6%, and the concern was the possibility of another recession. That's some boom.'

All of which will lead to more social unrest and instability.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...was_no_economic_boom_under_obama_144425.html#!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/barack-obama-didnt-power-the-recovery-oil-and-gas-did
https://www.nbc11news.com/2021/01/2...y-suspension-for-federal-oil-and-gas-permits/
 
TS claims 9.3 millions created from energy production his article claims only 4.3 million jobs that includes indirect jobs created. The 9.3 is the total jobs created. I can’t tell if TS was being intentionally dishonest or just made a honest mistake. Taking credit for indirect job creation is misleading at best. There are just too many factors that go in determining indirect job creation. Which really is the cruxes of the debate.


Phantom Jobs: Fracking Job Creation Numbers Don’t Add Up

According to BLS data, from 2016-2018 approximately 636,000 jobs were directly related to oil and natural gas extraction nationally - 200,000 more than the pre-fracking boom (2001-2006) average. In Pennsylvania, a fracking epicenter, there were about 26,000 jobs in these industries, 18,000 more than the pre-boom average.7

Conclusions
The employment benefits of frackinghave been overhyped to manipulate the public and policymakers. With deceptive models, stunningly broad definitions and creative spin, frackers have created illusions, not jobs. Policymakers should know that fracking jobs numbers do not stand up to scrutiny; rosy projections are no counterweight to environmental, climate and public health concerns. Industry-hyped projections should not inform or influence policy decisions.


https://foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/fracking_jobs_memo_final.pdf
 
Last edited:
Lol ... WPEM dude... Calm down you know these guys...

You take a few shots and decide to beat the shit out of a retard?

Turn and kneel man you just dragon punched him in the throat

Grown man with anger issues vs a boy in a dress

Let the others show up and build the stone wall on the first page before you zerker in
 
TS claims 9.3 millions created from energy production his article claims only 4.3 million jobs that includes indirect jobs created. The 9.3 is the total jobs created. I can’t tell if TS was being intentionally dishonest or just made a honest mistake. Taking credit for indirect job creation is misleading at best. There are just too many factors that go in determining indirect job creation. Which really is the cruxes of the debate.


Phantom Jobs: Fracking Job Creation Numbers Don’t Add Up

According to BLS data, from 2016-2018 approximately 636,000 jobs were directly related to oil and natural gas extraction nationally - 200,000 more than the pre-fracking boom (2001-2006) average. In Pennsylvania, a fracking epicenter, there were about 26,000 jobs in these industries, 18,000 more than the pre-boom average.7

Conclusions
The employment benefits of frackinghave been overhyped to manipulate the public and policymakers. With deceptive models, stunningly broad definitions and creative spin, frackers have created illusions, not jobs. Policymakers should know that fracking jobs numbers do not stand up to scrutiny; rosy projections are no counterweight to environmental, climate and public health concerns. Industry-hyped projections should not inform or influence policy decisions.


https://foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/fracking_jobs_memo_final.pdf
You cited Pennsylvanian related materials only.
try a little harder for the rest of the nation please and we can have a civil discussion
 
Lol ... WPEM dude... Calm down you know these guys...

You take a few shots and decide to beat the shit out of a retard?

Turn and kneel man you just dragon punched him in the throat

Grown man with anger issues vs a boy in a dress

Let the others show up and build the stone wall on the first page before you zerker in
Looks like we have a retard here. Glad you depend on others to do the lifting for you
 
Biden is doing what he said he was going to do. He told us this months ago

The goal is the wiping out of the middle class.
Agreed. There needs to be an engine to start otherwise we go to low single digit growth. That translated into no real wage growth at all and a much lower home ownership level
 
TS claims 9.3 millions created from energy production his article claims only 4.3 million jobs that includes indirect jobs created. The 9.3 is the total jobs created. I can’t tell if TS was being intentionally dishonest or just made a honest mistake. Taking credit for indirect job creation is misleading at best. There are just too many factors that go in determining indirect job creation. Which really is the cruxes of the debate.


Phantom Jobs: Fracking Job Creation Numbers Don’t Add Up

According to BLS data, from 2016-2018 approximately 636,000 jobs were directly related to oil and natural gas extraction nationally - 200,000 more than the pre-fracking boom (2001-2006) average. In Pennsylvania, a fracking epicenter, there were about 26,000 jobs in these industries, 18,000 more than the pre-boom average.7

Conclusions
The employment benefits of frackinghave been overhyped to manipulate the public and policymakers. With deceptive models, stunningly broad definitions and creative spin, frackers have created illusions, not jobs. Policymakers should know that fracking jobs numbers do not stand up to scrutiny; rosy projections are no counterweight to environmental, climate and public health concerns. Industry-hyped projections should not inform or influence policy decisions.


https://foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/fracking_jobs_memo_final.pdf
How is that misleading? That is literally the point when, for example, any city wants a big corporation to set up shop, because of the indirect effects of job creation.
 
Oh and don’t forget North Dakota with the cheap natural gas, keeping the cost of energy down.
 
You cited Pennsylvanian related materials only.
try a little harder for the rest of the nation please and we can have a civil discussion

You lied in your OP and you smugly refuse to address it. Now I have no choice but to believe it was intentional. This is now the second time in the last few days that I have exposed you as a liar.

My first link even quotes BLS data, and specifically says nationally. One link is only about Pennsylvania, the other two are not. You don’t understand my sources, didn’t read them or are lying again. The point still stands the industry as a whole exaggerates job creation. I agree there is nothing more to continue with as its hard to have a civil discussion with a proven liar.
 
Last edited:
You lied in your OP and you smugly refuse to address it. Now I have no choice but to believe it was intentional. This is now the second time in the last few days that I have exposed you as a liar.

My first link even quotes BLS data, and specifically says nationally. One link is only about Pennsylvania, the other two are not. You don’t understand my sources, didn’t read them or are lying again. The point still stands the industry as a whole exaggerates job creation. I agree there is nothing more to continue with as its hard to have a civil discussion with a proven liar.
I read them and your source for nation wide was nov 2013 which is old as well as not contributing to the rest of the recovery. It also states that shake oil exploration did shield many counties from the impact of the Great Recession even if they did not get them out of it. You’re acting like I’m being dishonest, which I’m not. You throw liar out like racist. Maybe tone down the bitchy snap chat attitude and discuss things like a person. Basically we’re debating numbers and that is open to discussion. Even at the low end you’re talking a significant amount of jobs as well as places like New Mexico where many areas find their public schools via gas and oil revenue. Those jobs would have to find other sources of income which you being the snap chatter you are refuse to even consider
 

Two coal power plants shut down in the town I live in. Both located on the shores of Lake Superior and were very clean (as far as coal goes) and won awards for how well they were run in the past. I know that natural gas is better in the long run, but 260 people were put out of work and our bill was raised by 30% because of it.

I can't speak for the rest of the country, but it definitely felt like a sacrifice that cost people good jobs with pensions, and hit peoples wallets a lot harder every month when the light bill came.
 
TS claims 9.3 millions created from energy production his article claims only 4.3 million jobs that includes indirect jobs created. The 9.3 is the total jobs created. I can’t tell if TS was being intentionally dishonest or just made a honest mistake. Taking credit for indirect job creation is misleading at best. There are just too many factors that go in determining indirect job creation. Which really is the cruxes of the debate.


Phantom Jobs: Fracking Job Creation Numbers Don’t Add Up

According to BLS data, from 2016-2018 approximately 636,000 jobs were directly related to oil and natural gas extraction nationally - 200,000 more than the pre-fracking boom (2001-2006) average. In Pennsylvania, a fracking epicenter, there were about 26,000 jobs in these industries, 18,000 more than the pre-boom average.7

Conclusions
The employment benefits of frackinghave been overhyped to manipulate the public and policymakers. With deceptive models, stunningly broad definitions and creative spin, frackers have created illusions, not jobs. Policymakers should know that fracking jobs numbers do not stand up to scrutiny; rosy projections are no counterweight to environmental, climate and public health concerns. Industry-hyped projections should not inform or influence policy decisions.


https://foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/fracking_jobs_memo_final.pdf

The employment benefits of frackinghave been overhyped to manipulate the public and policymakers. With deceptive models, stunningly broad definitions and creative spin, frackers have created illusions, not jobs. Policymakers should know that fracking jobs numbers do not stand up to scrutiny; rosy projections are no counterweight to
environmental, climate and public health concerns
. Industry-hyped projections should not inform or influence policy decisions.
Meanwhile your altearntives like Solar and Wind farms would require a large swaps of land acres thus also impacting the environmental impact of those areas by cutting trees and among other things.

In Germany.
Source
The country, the biggest electricity market in the European Union, is abandoning nuclear power by 2022 due to safety concerns compounded by the Fukushima disaster and phasing out coal plants over the next 19 years to combat climate change.
Imagine the rolling blackouts in America on a grand scale. If some decide to push and ban the nuclear power plants. You would need a lot of solar and wind farms just to power large cities in America.
 
Oh and don’t forget North Dakota with the cheap natural gas, keeping the cost of energy down.
North Dakota also has a state fund that’s existence is almost all in thanks to oil and gas. Which has led to massive infrastructure and other projects there
 
Meanwhile your altearntives like Solar and Wind farms would require a large swaps of land acres thus also impacting the environmental impact of those areas by cutting trees and among other things.

In Germany.
Source

Imagine the rolling blackouts in America on a grand scale. If some decide to push and ban the nuclear power plants. You would need a lot of solar and wind farms just to power large cities in America.

Yep... There is a lot of forest around where I live and this company is proposing a 2000 acre solar farm. A lot of outdoors people are pissed about it because it's going to fuck up the wildlife and a lot of trails that people go on. The site they are proposing to build this on all needs to be clear cut.
 
With Biden sinking the Keptsone pipeline and with the suspension of permits for Fed land gas and oil development, what does Biden expect to come? I know that oil prices are lower than there were a decade ago, but that has a massive impact on the US, just economically, not just the political implications.

The last recovery from the GFC was basically Texas and fracking


In fact, Obama actively worked to restrict the industry that led the economy as a percentage of GDP growth. Oil and gas development accounted for nearly half of GDP growth, and the fracking boom alone accounted for 9.3 million jobs, nearly half of the jobs created during his entire presidency. States such as Texas contributed nearly 70% of all jobs created during the Obama administration. Wage growth for workers in the natural gas industry also skyrocketed, with workers in states such as North Dakota seeing their weekly wages increase up to 40% in the post-shale boom. Without oil and gas development, there would have been almost no economic or job growth during the Obama administration.

Without fracking and the related industries, you would have had an even slowly Euro like recovery and perhaps a double dip recession.

Meanwhile with the Keystone pipeline alone you are losing thousands of jobs, at a time when they are moist needed. You can't just spend out of a recovery, there also needs to be an economic engine that starts up and creates jobs and earnings. With oil and gas muzzled, do you see a long term recovery, or more of like the last time where jobs only crept back?

I worry about this 'In the last year of Obama's presidency, growth shrunk to 1.6%, and the concern was the possibility of another recession. That's some boom.'

All of which will lead to more social unrest and instability.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...was_no_economic_boom_under_obama_144425.html#!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/barack-obama-didnt-power-the-recovery-oil-and-gas-did
https://www.nbc11news.com/2021/01/2...y-suspension-for-federal-oil-and-gas-permits/

Bureau of labour statistics says otherwise.

https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-sector.htm

41,000 jobs created in mining 2009 to 2019

Services added over 23 million.

Many did more than 41,000
 
Meanwhile your altearntives like Solar and Wind farms would require a large swaps of land acres thus also impacting the environmental impact of those areas by cutting trees and among other things.

In Germany.
Source

Imagine the rolling blackouts in America on a grand scale. If some decide to push and ban the nuclear power plants. You would need a lot of solar and wind farms just to power large cities in America.
Green energy is nice and all but even with mass investments it still isn’t at the level of being bake to fully replace traditional energy generation. Night and cloudy days and all that

land it dos suck that jobs are lost. There is a bit of nostalgia in inefficiency as it does create jobs. Miners get the coal. RRs bring it to the power plant as people there have to maintain throes turbines. Definitely makes a lot of good jobs.
Also alt energy is still very low margin, meaning we get lopsided investments and that could lead to low paying jobs. It’s an unfortunate reality of the present
 
Back
Top