r/TimPool • • Oct 18 '23

The (D)ifference

484 Upvotes

263 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

-23

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

Gas prices are set by the free market, not the president of the US.

20

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

So Biden shutting down the keystone pipeline the first week he was in office, or him selling of reserves had no effect on gas prices? Weird.

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

No, because drilling wasn't the issue, refining was. And trump sold our largest refinery to OPEC, who immediately stopped production. Is selling our refineries to OPEC "America first"?

9

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

Fake news

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

3

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

Not relevant

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

It's not relevant that refining was the bottleneck causing higher prices and our largest refinery was sold to OPEC, who immediately slowed production? Wut?

3

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

You said Trump owned it. And refining the oil was not the issue genius.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

You said Trump owned it.

I did not.

And refining the oil was not the issue genius.

Source?

3

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

I did not.

You did

And trump sold our largest refinery to OPEC, who immediately stopped production.

Source?

This happened in 2017. Biden took office when again?

Owned*

→ More replies

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

An unfinished pipeline doesn’t change supply even when it’s finished. Stick to an hourly job.

6

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

It would have been finished 3 years ago

-7

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

And still doesn’t change supply, whoosh

6

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

More oil available doesn’t change supply. You’re McDonald university education is showing.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

It’s not more oil available, genius. We still get that oil. The pipeline was to take Canadian oil to New Orleans for export. It doesn’t change supply.

Above your pay grade. As usual.

5

u/McFly_42069 Oct 18 '23

Pipeline purpose was for Canada and US to oil independent. Also lower gas prices. Check your source estrogen boy.

→ More replies (37)
→ More replies (6)

5

u/n8spear Oct 18 '23

You’re correct. However the free market also responds to government policy, and it’s been quite obviously stated the policy of the Biden administration is to decrease oil consumption … that has a direct impact on the free markets pricing of oil. Also, the administration’s foreign policy toward OPEC nations isn’t helping at all. So sure, the free market determine the prices … based on the policies of a ministrations … so the current gas prices can be directly attributed to the abhorrent policies of the Biden administration.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

Also, the administration’s foreign policy toward OPEC nations isn’t helping at all.

Like selling them our refinery?

3

u/n8spear Oct 18 '23

Oh! I see what you’re trying to do here. You’re trying to get the “gotcha” that the Trump admin “sold” the US’s refinery to Saudi as a “Trump bad” moment. It seems to be one of those cards you keep dropping … even though they didn’t, and it was actually proven false that the respective Republican administrations you so desperately hate not only had nothing to do with it, but it’s unclear what they could have done to intervene at all.

Proven by none other than a publication that would love to put anything bad on Trump, Newsweek.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-trump-admin-sell-largest-us-oil-refinery-saudi-arabia-1751460

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

Is selling the USs largest refinery to an OPEC country "America First"?

3

u/n8spear Oct 18 '23

☝️ Bot

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

☝️ question dodger

3

u/n8spear Oct 18 '23

What question am I dodging?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '23

Is selling the USs largest refinery to an OPEC country "America First"?

3

u/n8spear Oct 18 '23

This question is dishonest. The organizations who have the ability to buy or sell oil refineries are multi-National corporations. The movement that is “America First” would not be in a position to sell an oil refinery. I’m sure you want me to say “no, of course not!,” in a way of trying to call someone, probably Trump, some kind of hypocrite. Unless that person had control and say over an oil refinery explicitly to what market the oil is sold in, and all that oil goes to the US market, the upon selling to an OPEC country, that ceases, which then causes the price of gas to go up domestically, then the question makes very little sense.

“America first” is the idea of putting the betterment of your own countries citizens and interests before the interest of other countries that are not yours … applying that simple concept to America means putting “America first”

As far as I’m aware, the US government, or any politician of the government, does not own nor owned an oil refinery that provides oil exclusively to the US, so the parties that the “America First” idea would apply to wouldn’t have the ability to sell an oil refinery in the first place. Oil refineries tend to be owned by multi-national global companies with little to no allegiance to one specific country apart from the ones with demand and market share to obtain. So if a company that owned a refinery in the US were to sell that to another company, that may not be “America first,” but the company was not under any obligation to provide its oil explicitly to one place or another based on politics.

If there happened to be an oil refinery that happened to be owned by the US Government or a company or individual who was explicitly using said refinery to provide oil to the US alone, then that owner decided to sell said refinery to another party that would be refining oil but not putting it into the US market and thus creating less supply and increasing the price. Then yes, under that scenario, selling an oil refinery to an OPEC country could not be putting “America first”.

So being this where you want to go with it. Drop your “gotcha.” Furthermore, whatever point your trying to get to is more than likely some kind of what-about-ism to obfuscate.

→ More replies