CNBC Editor blames Obama's Stimulus for recent stock woes

Well said sishir. Good post.

 

That's exactly my point...I think we got our wires crossed. Someone else was saying these other companies need to make changes, but does not realize how difficult financially and business wise it is to make a change like that. That is not how these "smaller" companies became successfull.

 

As a native Houstonian I feel bad that a change in energy sources will have negative impacts on Houston but that is a cost of progress. Any city that is so dependent upon one industry is going to be inherently fragile. Whether it happens now or later the dependence on fossil fuels will end at some point and if we don't want Houston to go the way of Detroit the key is to diversify.

 

Oh, I understand completely.

Those companies and Houston have a choice... diversify or die. The energy sector will not look the same in 20 years whether you prop up the status quo or not. Better to get on with the changes.

And really, if you can't spare a dime for R&D and are betting everything on the current business model, that kind of proves my point, no?

 

Ahhh. I think my point was that that should be expected.

Yes, it will suck in the short term, but adaptation is bound to occur. If not - well, tough cookies.

 

Maybe the stimulus plan can pay for the R&D at these companies that only know the oil and gas business and completely pay for new departments. Helps create jobs, saves the Houston economy. Let's consider it preventative bailout money.

 

I agree, I'm all about wind energy. I think it's great and would like to get into the industry but it doesn't replace the oil and gas industry that is being attacked by the Obama policies now. The fall in oil and gas prices has already costs thousands of jobs and has decimated exploration. These new policies would be like taxing Detroit now or removing incentives for developing new technologies for more efficient cars. You can't kick an industry that's down in a recession. Energy companies are reporting record losses NOW.

 

That's not what happened though. - the multiplication doesn't come from a lot of loans, the multiplication comes when you create various derivative financial instruments.....including "synthetic" ones with no underlying collateral, based on them. Then you add in leverage and that is where the multiplication comes in.

WE could have had sh-tload of loans default - companies like CFC and IndyMac would have gone bankrupt - but that wouldn't have collapsed AIG, BSC, LEH, BAC, C, MER overnight like it did othewise.

 

Who isn't?

There's nothing sacrosanct about the energy sector, particularly now when you have a system that creates changes in the world's climate and rewards countries that tend to blackmail us with energy prices.

Alternative energy does not replace the current energy infrastructure now, but it will eventually. It must.

 

Then the better start learning

 

If the oil and gas companies feel that a few billion in profits isn't enough for them and that a gas tax or whatever will require them to lay off workers or stop exploring (all idle threats by the way) let them do it. They have the money and I doubt they are going to do anything that's not in their best interest.

And I'm not talking about windfarms either. In fact, I think wind energy is a false solution. I'm talking about new fuels and building car batteries. I'm talking nuclear power. The energy companies aren't spending the money into research - that's a shame. And don't tell me its because they don't know anything but oil and gas. You are telling me exxon can't hire scientists and work with universities to build the next generation technology? Bull crap.

You want to keep the lights on? Do it. Windfall tax on oil and gas isn't going to turn your lights off. But maybe you should think about turning your lights off more often.

Texas is the biggest carbon polluter in the country, more than Cali and Pennsyvania (number 2 & 3) combined. If Texas was a country, it's rank number 7 on the international list of carbon polluters.

Think about that.

 

True this is where we get into the other posters dog poo bologna analogy. Bad loans that are supported by bad loans and the poo gets thinner. Good thing about that is it makes it a lot easier to spread with your Zeppelins.

 

Some people are over estimating how easy it will be for the companies to change. Just because it is energy does not make it the same industry.

People are also overestimating how quickly the need for oil and gas will die out.

 

The government mandated fairness, not stupidity. There is a big difference.

 

You have no idea what you are talking about!!!!! There are more companies that are out there beside Exxon, Chevron, Shell.

 

Texas would also be the 8th largest economy in the world. So what. Exxon and the other big companies are not what this is going to hurt. They have plenty of over seas intrest. It will hurt the independent oil companies like XTO and Chesapeak and Devon and Anadarko and a thousand others that produce solely in the united states and help keep our dependency on foreign oil down. These companies don't have "RnD" they are production companies that get oil and gas out of the ground and sell it. They don't do anything else and if they can't afford to drill and explore then we become more dependent on foreign oil. I work at one of these companies and we have cut drilling BIG TIME and are only drilling in known producing areas using known methods. The only reason we maintain what drilling we do is that the leases are dependent on a certain amount of drilling.

When production starts to decline you will pay. You will wish we had $4 gas back. That will be great for the economy don't you think?

 

Thank you!! Exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

Major addressed this also in post #50. It's bunk. The "mandated" loans were not some magical starting point for deregulated banking r****dation.

 

Sometimes fairness is stupidity.