As far as I know anyone can speculate in the oil markets. Private individuals like John Adams, or groups like HEDGE FUNDS can speculate on oil. Just a reminder: Madam Hillary Clinton nee Rodham, speculated with $1000 dollars on cattle futures, and came out with $10,000. What may not be known is speculating on futures is a zero sum gain. That means for every position holder that makes money, there is a position holder that loses money.

The tank producers of WWII bid on the opportunity to create tanks. They were not nationalized as implied above. The producers had a profit motive.

The U.S. government has a lot of oil stored in the strategic reserve. This is the oil that will be used by the military to protect the U.S. when every other oil source goes dry. Regular citizens will have to figure other ways of getting to work, because this oil isn’t for them.

Since the dollar is weak, the U.S. will be a destination for a vacationing world. U.S. products are more affordable overseas. Unfortunately it is a burden here.

Please tell me she was on crack. In these uncertain times, I need some assurances.

We have the potential to significantly decrease consumer cost under esentially a competitive licensing plan. You cant really count Chavez as a operations standard bearer though.. he is essentially using the state oil revenue MONOPOLY as a giant bribe to underwrite/reward his lackeys there and abroad.

If we refuse to regulate speculation, then the alternative is to increase competition. Move from a straight legacy royalty scheme for public land to a controlled site licensing system, and if the major players dont want to involve themselves domestically in a plan that builds a profit into the license, then we benefit from a resurgence of small AMERICAN companies who want to profit from those public site licenses, instead of a globalist conglomerate that has grown contempful.

When we utilized auto manufacturers in WWII to build tanks and typewriter manufacturers to assemble Carbines they didnt take it to court, or threaten legal action, they said they wanted to do their part for the nation. Make no mistake, THAT WAS nationalizing industry, and it won us WWII.

When you embrace the Neocon globalization of industry that we have been taught to love as so `conservative` guess what?.. that isnt `american` industry anymore, even though it may have the same name, it doesnt have the same interest and its welfare no longer rises and falls with that of its parent nation state.
Anytime we hear talk of promoting `business` and `trade` listen very closely, because US NATIONAL interests are likely about to get shoved in the backseat or the trunk, while globalist interests move to the front seat.
Globalism and NATIONALISM are not compatible as the former requires a donor state oblivious of its own potential dismantlement(globalism) and the latter requires a vigilance to its own individual economic interest.

We can for minimal cost add what would essentially be an available 10% federal cushion to our current refining capacity, use it process stock rotated out of the emerg. reserve, and pay for a at least a significant part of continuing sytem operations/maintenance in that manner- when you need it to expand refining operations, you have that option.

I said that lack of new fields was NOT the cause of the current price escalation, but at no point advocated FOR restraining public OR private exploration or recovery.

You also would have a hard time finding someone who would agree with you any more strongly that federalized land ownership, which in some western states amounts to the preponderance of the land, is inexcusable unless its realistically needed for a military base or is a part of a park system. That didnt occur recently though, and I think that although its a valid point, you are moving far afield into a separate though legitimate topic.

Oil companies pay a royalty.. sometimes. but they are generally legacy royalties that given modern recovery expenses and sales price are the eqivalent of you buying a brand new Chevrolet for 500 bucks.

I do not preclude a private firm from accessing deposits found on their own land and profitting by their work. No one short of a real wartime emergency has the right to prevent private investment in privately owned mineral rights, as long as your not destroying your neighbors water table or dumping spoil on THEIR land, as that amounts to a situation not dissimilar to eminent domain. If you dont have rights to use your OWN land, then you are effectively being deprived of your property.

The problem is, the oil companies can pull or reopen wells on private lands, but their real value per cost to access (`fracing` colorado shale is costly and difficult) is going to be the large proved, known deposits, and they want the known oil fields at continuing bargain basement prices on PUBLIC lands that they do not have to acquire, but can exploit by paying (or not) a token fee to the Feds.

Should far-fetched polar bear devastation claims stop Alaskan oil field production?.. a resounding no. However, given the current consumer cost it is unwise to allow the past deals with private firms on Pulic land to continue, AS BEFORE.

Ideally, I would like to see a federal refinery system, accompanying the storage system we already maintain for refined emergency stores. It does not have to rival the size of even one domestic refiner. A hundred Billion for a two million barrel a day maximum capacity is all it would take, and this is how it would work;

My suggestion would be to kill two birds with one stone, and utilize the Federal sytem at all times to supply fuel to the emergency stockpile, thus maintaining its staffing and physical plant, but at a reduced capacity EXCEPT-

If we face speculation interference as is curently the place, or if prices breach a cutoff, lets say for argument of $70 a barrel, we dont call any oil exec`s in front of a photo-op congressional hearing, we dont send the president to hold hands with the Saudi `king` and beg his intercession, we dont waste time trying futily to regulate / plead for mercy from foreign commodity markets set up to juice us-

We do only two things-

1) All oil recovery royalty agreements are open to suspension at our discretion, if the producer cannot maintain the per barrel ceiling, and its production will revert to /be utilized to supply the emergency federal refinery sytem. If the private company cannot make a legit profit off of 70 dollar barrels, they cannot meet the obligation of the contract and it will become non-exclusive.

The free market is now introduced as we have the greatest of all elements in play- COMPETITION and INCENTIVE,..
.. which do not exist under current, poorly executed exclusive royalty licenses that simply charge based upon the companies REPORTED production.

2) At the arrival/approach of the price ceiling, the federal refining system will be utilized beyond its previous stockpile-only capacity and will supply the difference to thwart speculatory pressures on the price. You gain a second advantage here, because the speculation is largely discouraged as we now have the means to largely ensure a fixed price point within a deniable margin, ovecoming spikes or volatility, which is difficult for speculators to make any sizeable profit off of.

We spent more in Iraq over the past six months than it would take to implement this system to pre-production phase. Problem solved. Now lets get back to screaming nonsense thats fun, and makes us feel good, and actually acomplish nothing.

You shall know them by their fruits.