• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump to ban Saudi Oil imports

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
And it's a Republican president-elect who's talking about banning imports.
I mean, which is it? Do Republicans approve of market interference or not?

If he is I think that would be innecessary and unwise.

But I doubt if trump will ban saudi oil
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
14,490
Reaction score
3,778
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
'What is 'Protectionism'
Protectionism refers to government actions and policies that restrict or restrain international trade, often done with the intent of protecting local businesses and jobs from foreign competition. Typical methods of protectionism are tariffs and quotas on imports and subsidies or tax cuts granted to local businesses. The primary objective of protectionism is to make local businesses or industries more competitive by increasing the price or restricting the quantity of imports entering the country.'


Read more: Protectionism Definition | Investopedia Protectionism Definition | Investopedia

No, what Trump is proposing is the EXACT definition of protectionism.

I agree. Trump is not suggesting any restriction or restraint of trade. He is only suggesting an increase in the price of imports. I hope he gets it through.


As for Smoot-Hawley?

[qute]'Unemployment was at 8% in 1930 when the Smoot–Hawley tariff was passed, but the new law failed to lower it. The rate jumped to 16% in 1931, and 25% in 1932–33.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot–Hawley_Tariff_Act#Coincident_economic_events

That is true but to say that there is cause and effect is an opinion, not a fact. Unemployment jumped because of a deep recession, not tariffs in my opinion. Do have something that suggests my position is wrong. All I see is talking points. Some of our trading "partners" indeed practice protectionism as the definition states. Almost all of them practice what Trump suggests.
 

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
46,021
Reaction score
27,382
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
If he is I think that would be innecessary and unwise.

But I doubt if trump will ban saudi oil

It'd be just a gesture. Saudi accounts for less than 10% (I think) of US imports, which would make it a fairly safe move.
But I doubt it, too. I don't know why he'd bring it up, except to piss off high ranking Republicans with ties to the Kingdom.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,209
Reaction score
18,971
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So if Trump really tells the Sauds to stick it, will it mean much to the US economy?

Trump: We Are Banning Saudi Oil From America – InvestmentWatch

Considering the recent announcement of a huge oil deposit in Texas, probably not:



https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-estimates-20-billion-barrels-oil-texas-wolfcamp-shale-formation

What does it mean?

More good paying jobs!

Maybe if the Sauds really are supporting ISIS, this could be a ploy to get Saudi Arabia to get rid of the group...
 

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,888
Reaction score
456
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's about time we began boycotting a country which kills people for leaving islam
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It's about time we began boycotting a country which kills people for leaving islam

Ok fine

Thats islam

What should our immigration policy be for muslims since they are so violent?

Surely we dont need people like that in America
 

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,888
Reaction score
456
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ok fine

Thats islam

What should our immigration policy be for muslims since they are so violent?

Surely we dont need people like that in America

well, do we just let them die in syria? where else do they have to go?
 

Gaztopian

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
481
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'm a protectionist but not an isolationist.

Many trumpsters like me want better trade deals, smarter trade that is good for America not a total cutoff of trade with the rest of the world.

So if trump solemnly promised to cut off saudi oil imports - and Im not sure he did - but if he did I release him from that promise because in my opinion it would be a mistake.

But this isn't about you; this is about Trump and his commitment to his campaign platform. For a candidate that ran an insurgent populist campaign that promised to stand up to "global financial interests", Trump is increasingly and suspiciously entangled in the system he maligned and promised to dismantle.

In light of such entanglement, his ardent supporters will have to pardon the rest of us, as we remain unsold on his brand.
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
But this isn't about you;

this is about Trump and his commitment to his campaign platform.

For a candidate that ran an insurgent populist campaign that promised to stand up to "global financial interests", Trump is increasingly and suspiciously entangled in the system he maligned and promised to dismantle.

In light of such entanglement, his ardent supporters will have to pardon the rest of us, as we remain unsold on his brand.

Trump promises to make better trade deals for America.

Something that liberal democrats and establishment republicans failed to do

And since you are in the minority now feel free to remain as unsold as you please
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
well, do we just let them die in syria? where else do they have to go?

People are dying in mass all ver the world.

We do what we can for them - but in Syria

After that its their country and if they die they die.
 

jmotivator

Computer Gaming Nerd
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
31,225
Reaction score
16,581
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I get the distinct impression as I read responses to this news here and elsewhere that deep down the left is attacking this decision only because it takes one of their longest running critiques of Republicans off the table.

What will they do when they can no longer claim that the GOP oil barons are in the pocket of the Saudis?!
 

matchlight

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
9,869
Reaction score
3,495
Location
Los Angeles area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
the odds of coal ever being a major source of fuel are done in the US.

It already is a major source of fuel in the United States. Coal produces roughly one-third of this country's electricity.
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It already is a major source of fuel in the United States. Coal produces roughly one-third of this country's electricity.

It could be half or three quarters as well as a majotr export commodity
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
58,482
Reaction score
27,446
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It could be half or three quarters as well as a majotr export commodity

It could be but I'm not sure why we'd want coal to be a higher share of our energy. It's a dirty source of energy from end to end, and no amount of coal industry propaganda will ever change that. Do we need more of this (the result after a coal ash retention pond a few miles from me burst):

25sludge2_600.JPG

And I'm not aware of any barriers to exporting coal other than economic (price, transportation costs, etc.).
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It could be but I'm not sure why we'd want coal to be a higher share of our energy. It's a dirty source of energy from end to end, and no amount of coal industry propaganda will ever change that. Do we need more of this (the result after a coal ash retention pond a few miles from me burst):

View attachment 67210516

And I'm not aware of any barriers to exporting coal other than economic (price, transportation costs, etc.).

Dams have failed as long as men (and beavers) have been building them

Of couse the coal industry must be held to reasonable standards just like everyone else.

I give the environmentslists credit for demanding clean coal technology and now coal burning is very clean.

We need to tale advantage of this abundent natural resource
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
58,482
Reaction score
27,446
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Dams have failed as long as men (and beavers) have been building them

Of couse the coal industry must be held to reasonable standards just like everyone else.

I give the environmentslists credit for demanding clean coal technology and now coal burning is very clean.

We need to tale advantage of this abundent natural resource

But the point is this retention pond was believed to be a "reasonable standard" until it failed. That's the waste that used to go out as air pollution and deposited over millions of square miles, so it's an improvement, but it's still not 'clean' by any stretch. Neither is mining for coal 'clean' - they lop off mountain tops and forever ruin the landscape.

Bottom line is I'm not opposed to burning coal, but it's a necessary evil, and the less of it we burn going forward the better IMO. When it comes down to it, I'd much prefer nuclear to coal, even with the knowledge that we'll almost surely have a nuclear 'disaster' like Japan at some point in this country.
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
But the point is this retention pond was believed to be a "reasonable standard" until it failed. That's the waste that used to go out as air pollution and deposited over millions of square miles, so it's an improvement, but it's still not 'clean' by any stretch. Neither is mining for coal 'clean' - they lop off mountain tops and forever ruin the landscape.

Bottom line is I'm not opposed to burning coal, but it's a necessary evil, and the less of it we burn going forward the better IMO. When it comes down to it, I'd much prefer nuclear to coal, even with the knowledge that we'll almost surely have a nuclear 'disaster' like Japan at some point in this country.

Yes, humans do make mistakes

Which epa employee inspected the dam and signed off on it as safe?

If he screwed up he should be fired

But if this was an unavoidable act of Nature then too bad.
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
58,482
Reaction score
27,446
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, humans do make mistakes

Which epa employee inspected the dam and signed off on it as safe?

If he screwed up he should be fired

But if this was an unavoidable act of Nature then too bad.

That's missing my point by a mile. Bottom line is burning coal is a dirty business, from end to end, mining to dealing with the pollution pulled out of the scrubbers. Yes, there was a unusually string of heavy rain days before the Kingston pond failed, but the pond had leaked for years, needed constant maintenance, and the toxic waste doesn't turn into fertilizer over time, so the point is this waste would have to be dealt with long after we're all dead, and our kids are dead, with or without this failure. The lining under some of these ponds (some aren't lined at all) will eventually fail, and surprise, it will be future taxpayers in 2050 or 2080 or whenever most likely on the hook for a Superfund Round III style cleanup after nearby residents all over the country near these old toxic waste storage sites complain about heavy metals and other pollutants in their drinking water.... Etc.

Point is who was or wasn't at fault is beside the point - burning coal produces a LOT of pollution at every step and I see no reason to encourage its use, especially not when we have cleaner alternatives.
 

Mac77

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
12,049
Reaction score
2,089
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That's missing my point by a mile. Bottom line is burning coal is a dirty business, from end to end, mining to dealing with the pollution pulled out of the scrubbers. Yes, there was a unusually string of heavy rain days before the Kingston pond failed, but the pond had leaked for years, needed constant maintenance, and the toxic waste doesn't turn into fertilizer over time, so the point is this waste would have to be dealt with long after we're all dead, and our kids are dead, with or without this failure. The lining under some of these ponds (some aren't lined at all) will eventually fail, and surprise, it will be future taxpayers in 2050 or 2080 or whenever most likely on the hook for a Superfund Round III style cleanup after nearby residents all over the country near these old toxic waste storage sites complain about heavy metals and other pollutants in their drinking water.... Etc.

Point is who was or wasn't at fault is beside the point - burning coal produces a LOT of pollution at every step and I see no reason to encourage its use, especially not when we have cleaner alternatives.

There is an argument against every form of energy known to man

Even green windmills kill birds and are so ugly that rhe elites from teddy kennedy to donald trump dont want them anywhere near their property

Yes they take the tops off mountains but those are not sacred monuments to Mother Nature

The vegetation will return in an altered form and it might even produce some flat land for humans to live on someday
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
58,482
Reaction score
27,446
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There is an argument against every form of energy known to man

Even green windmills kill birds and are so ugly that rhe elites from teddy kennedy to donald trump dont want them anywhere near their property

Yes they take the tops off mountains but those are not sacred monuments to Mother Nature

The vegetation will return in an altered form and it might even produce some flat land for humans to live on someday

OK, but pointing out that wind and solar and nuclear are ALSO dirty isn't an argument for coal. If your position is that coal is as 'clean' as wind, solar, natural gas, even nuclear, you can TRY to make the case but I don't see how you can succeed.

BTW, love that about flat land. I hunt occasionally with a PR guy for the coal industry and he tries that one every now and then... It's good for a laugh when the birds aren't flying.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
21,746
Reaction score
7,702
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Dams have failed as long as men (and beavers) have been building them

Of couse the coal industry must be held to reasonable standards just like everyone else.

I give the environmentslists credit for demanding clean coal technology and now coal burning is very clean.

We need to tale advantage of this abundent natural resource

There is no such thing as clean coal and there is no reason to pretend that we haven't made the required technological progress since the 1880s to end its use. It is terrible for the environment, it is a threat to public health, and it should be killed off as quickly as possible. Besides, the children of generational miners deserve a better future than black lung.
 
Last edited:

SheWolf

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
37,412
Reaction score
13,541
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
I wouldn't be surprised if he fills our market with Russian oil after banning Saudi's oil.
 

DVSentinel

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
5,647
Reaction score
1,579
Location
The Republic of Texas.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Sweet! Get ready for $5/gallon gas.

Probably more than that, if we make it up domestically. Between EPA, OSHA, Unions and reduction of illegal aliens, it will naturally raise the price, same as it does on many "American Made" products.
 
Top Bottom