𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝟗𝟕$ 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐦𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐜𝐤 𝐰𝐚𝐬 $𝟖𝟓𝟎𝟎 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝟏𝐨 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 𝐚 𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞. 𝐌𝐲 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝟏𝟐𝐤 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝟐𝟐 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 𝐚 𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐤. 𝐈 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐲 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐈 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭.... 🙂 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐆𝐎𝐎𝐃 𝐋𝐔𝐂𝐊.:) 𝐇𝐄𝐑𝐄========)> https://www.worksclick.com

Economics drive production: "I never received a call from the administration about adding more rigs," says $PXD CEO Scott Sheffield to @SullyCNBC . "I don't think we have an obligation to grow production...we added too much oil several different times over the last 10 years and we had a price collapse." “Whether it’s $150 oil, $200 oil, or $100 oil, we’re not going to change our growth plans,’’ Pioneer Chief Executive Officer Scott Sheffield said during a Bloomberg Television interview. “If the president wants us to grow, I just don’t think the industry can grow anyway.’’ But the message from shale country is loud and clear: the independents won’t repeat the mistakes of the past by flooding the world with cheap oil. Record cash flows will go right back to investors through dividends and buybacks, CEOs are saying. That means U.S. drillers are leaving a lot of crude in the ground. If they chose the other path — pouring windfall profits into new drilling — they easily could inflate domestic production by 2 million barrels a day, according to IHS Markit. Current forecasts are for the U.S. to add less than half that to global supplies this year. And on public lands and waters (and let’s not forget that nearly 90% of onshore oil production in the U.S. takes place on non-federal land): The industry holds more than 9,000 unused, approved permits to drill onshore.

@notmev - Your argument for not producing North American oil and gas due to pure economics is the driving force doesn’t hold water for me. Proven cheap easily accessible coal reserves in America alone are in excess of 500 years. Canada has proven moderately expensive to extract oil in their oil sands and these lands are desolate that no one inhabitants or wants to inhabit. The oil in these oil sands exceed all known oil still available in Saudi Arabia. The one necessary requirement to extract these oil sand is to pump it from Canada to Houston refineries capable of refine such dirty shale derived oil. Houston refineries designed to refine dirty oil from Venezuela for decades are the best for refining this shale oil. The Keystone XL pipeline was to pipe this dirty shale oil to Houston for refining but was stopped cold by Biden in his first act as President. The latest war on fracking natural gas and oil is the most laughable. New fracking technology makes this approach the most profitable and easiest to extract but Biden’s administration wants all natural gas energy in their Blue Cities to be removed as an energy source, I kid thee not! As for Nuclear when the million year safe Yucca mountain in Nevada depository for spent nuclear waste was halted permanently for use again by Democrats and of all things Lost Wages Los Vegas Casinos, nuclear energy was permanently knee capped. Something stinks and it’s not Denmark but coming from our politicians elected in our Blue Cities. Nothing is sustainable in America if we don’t do what China has done and start relying again only on our own abundant and accessible (for easily a millennium) coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear.

Why do people like you put all blame, all the time, on one side? "Nuclear when the million year safe Yucca mountain in Nevada depository for spent nuclear waste was halted permanently for use again by Democrats" In March of 2016, a republican lead senate and house failed to fund the Yucca Mountain repository. Can you even see that? I was on my way to start learning about your other points, when I read that statement, and I start to wonder why bother.

"New fracking technology makes this approach the most profitable and easiest to extract" Which technology is that specifically and at what price point is it profitable? Oil or gas?

You guys are both right. The oil industry benefits the most from a long-term plan. Higher, stable prices over time are better for profits. Getting everyone to extract as much as possible in the short term just to keep prices down, is really bad for business in the long term. Of course the climate change/green energy industry is using increased cost of production and the large price swings to push their technology. It's good for their business. What nobody seems to be caring about, is all the poor and lower middle class working people who are most impacted. Instead of subsidizing fuel efficient compact cars, government is subsidizing bloated electric luxury sedans. My 1984 VW diesel got better fuel economy than anything except possibly a Prius today (in the USA). It's rediculous, and of course it's intentional.

It's always better for politicians to keep the people misdirected, and fighting the "other side". If they weren't effective at it, people might notice that none of them are for the people, and they're all for whatever the corporate lobbyists tell them to be for. If it was really about conservation and the environment, and not just profits, then they would actually implement policies that are effective, instead of just hurting poor people.

Why do people like you put all blame, all the time, on one side? "Nuclear when the million year safe Yucca mountain in Nevada depository for spent nuclear waste was halted permanently for use again by Democrats" In March of 2016, a republican lead senate and house failed to fund the Yucca Mountain repository. Can you even see that? I was on my way to start learning about your other points, when I read that statement, and I start to wonder why bother.

My comment to you was a mistake.