Obama underwrites offshore drilling in Brazil, but not in the US?

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama Administration is financing oil exploration off Brazil, while still blocking offshore drilling in the US.

Sarah Palin has written a thoughtful commentary on this situation on Facebook:

Both articles are worth reading.

It doesn't make sense to me that we should spend taxpayer money to expand Brazil's oil production while prohibiting commercial expansion of US oil production.

Perhaps some of you may have insight into the thought processes behind this paradoxical state of affairs.?

This entry was posted in On the road to Socialism, Things that concern me and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Obama underwrites offshore drilling in Brazil, but not in the US?

  1. GBGames says:

    While it seems to be the case, based on how “death panels” and the like were perpetrated as “true”, I’m waiting for tomorrow to find out if Obama’s administration actually IS doing this. Grain of salt and all.

    If it is, and you are serious about inquiring into any potential insight, the best I read was that we owe a lot of money to Brazil, and when you owe money, you have less bargaining power. Perhaps this was a concession that the administration didn’t want to make, but it was the lesser of two evils?

    I don’t know, but I would sure love to find out. Unfortunately, I have a feeling Palin’s posts won’t help me with learning the truth so much as learning how angry I should feel about Obama’s plans, whether those plans are true or not.

    Such development would mean good paying jobs here in the United States (with health benefits) and the resulting royalties and taxes would provide money for federal coffers that would potentially off-set the need for higher income taxes, reduce the federal debt and deficits, or even help fund a trillion dollar health care plan if one were so inclined to support such a plan. ***

    I noticed a lack of exact references in Palin’s post this time around. The quoted text above is making some bold assertions. Do you see this as hollow as you claim Obama and Pelosi’s unreferenced statements are?

    Alaska is proof you can drill and develop, and preserve nature, with its magnificent caribou herds passing by the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), completely unaffected

    Ahem. http://sitemaker.umich.edu/section003_group001/home says that there are some bad environmental effects due to the pipeline.

    As for oil drilling at home, when will these amazing revenues be seen? What I’ve read is that it might take anywhere from 6 years to 12 years before any useful oil comes out, and even then, how is that sustainable in the long term? From what I’ve read, it’s not.

    And why is it suddenly bad that the government is avoiding getting its hands into the oil business? The government buys out a car manufacturer, and suddenly we’re all socialists even though the vast majority of the economy is still capitalistic in nature. The government sends money to Brazil on a loan, and Palin is outraged that the money isn’t being spent here to help the oil industry?

    Socialism is bad or it is good. You can’t have it both ways.

  2. Charlotte Shafer says:

    This is a credit line from the US Import-Export Bank to energy company Petrobras, to finance US exports sold to the company in its drilling endeavors. The purpose is to “shore up” American jobs.

  3. Interesting comments!

    I am sure that there is a lot I don’t know about this transaction, but my experience has lead me to believe that this deal will benefit somebody who is a big supporter of this administration.

    It seems like the big winner will be the US company that sells equipment to Petrobas.

    I wonder which of our elected official is most closely connected to this company.

    It still seems simpler to have invested the money in boosting domestic production, instead of sending it to Brazil to indirectly help a portion of the US economy.

    We’ll just have to wait until someone uncovers the full cast of characters involved in this deal. It should be interesting.

  4. Michael Kohne says:

    Our in-the-ground oil reserves are pretty small. Pumping them out won’t have much effect right now, except to leave us with no in-the-ground reserves for later. If we get everyone else to pump out their oil first (even if it costs us a lot of money) then when everyone else starts to run dry, we’ll still have some.

    Remember that oil isn’t renewable – what’s in the ground is all that there is. We shouldn’t use up any reserve on soil/sea that we control when we can get someone else to do it instead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

three × 3 =

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.