Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 01-11-2016, 04:50 PM   #41
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

of course they are, but that's the job of the opposition isn't it, especially on the budget, to point out the problems with the budget.

The NDP are the government, they're putting out a budget and its going to be grim, my concern is with the fundamentals of the budget.

Whether they like it or not the government is going to have to make serious cuts to how they do business, the previous government should have done it, the NDP are going to have to eat a big poop sandwich when it comes to dealing with their support base in the unions.

Its time that the government starts to look at how they're spending money.

And no a continual jacking up of taxes isn't the answer.
__________________
Good Night America . . . Wherever you are
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 04:53 PM   #42
IliketoPuck
#1 Goaltender
 
IliketoPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post

And no a continual jacking up of taxes isn't the answer.
Given past precedent, it appears to be the NDP's answer.
__________________
Pylon on the Edmonton Oilers:

"I am actually more excited for the Oilers game tomorrow than the Flames game. I am praying for multiple jersey tosses. The Oilers are my new favourite team for all the wrong reasons. I hate them so much I love them."
IliketoPuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 04:55 PM   #43
Table 5
Franchise Player
 
Table 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NYYC
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
so does it make sense for me to buy oil by the barrel and store them in self storage units?
Someone had a similar question and decided to find out what it would be like.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...some-crude-oil
Table 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 05:54 PM   #44
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

The Alberta budget is going to be paiiiiinful. Any oil sands project in post payout for royalty purposes pay 25%-40% of net profits (compared to 1%-9% of gross revenue pre payout). 25% of nothing is nothing.
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 07:23 PM   #45
CampbellsTransgressions
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12 View Post
http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...into-this-mess

Excessive cuts do not help in the long term.

We've spent years making up for Ralph Klein's infrastructure deficit and still experience high costs due to infrastructure shortages, particularly in healthcare. The worst part is that the cuts were done to eliminate 8 billion dollars in debt, an amount that only takes the province two years to accumulate in a downturn as the oil royalties diminish.
CampbellsTransgressions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 07:44 PM   #46
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
of course they are, but that's the job of the opposition isn't it, especially on the budget, to point out the problems with the budget.

The NDP are the government, they're putting out a budget and its going to be grim, my concern is with the fundamentals of the budget.

Whether they like it or not the government is going to have to make serious cuts to how they do business, the previous government should have done it, the NDP are going to have to eat a big poop sandwich when it comes to dealing with their support base in the unions.

Its time that the government starts to look at how they're spending money.

And no a continual jacking up of taxes isn't the answer.
Yeah I get that. It just feels like some of them are cheering for failure, and that's distasteful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CampbellsTransgressions View Post
http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/col...into-this-mess

Excessive cuts do not help in the long term.

We've spent years making up for Ralph Klein's infrastructure deficit and still experience high costs due to infrastructure shortages, particularly in healthcare. The worst part is that the cuts were done to eliminate 8 billion dollars in debt, an amount that only takes the province two years to accumulate in a downturn as the oil royalties diminish.
Yeah Ralph was a magician. I mean sure, taxes were higher back then and everyone is against that today, but he balanced the budget and that's all anyone remembers.
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 07:59 PM   #47
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

403 Debt Free
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 08:01 PM   #48
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude View Post
403 Debt Free
780 debt free? Hell no
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2016, 08:10 PM   #49
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Yeah Ralph was a magician. I mean sure, taxes were higher back then and everyone is against that today, but he balanced the budget and that's all anyone remembers.
On the back of $10, $20 oil also, Ralph was the people's champion.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to darklord700 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-11-2016, 08:35 PM   #50
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700 View Post
On the back of $10, $20 oil also, Ralph was the people's champion.
Right, and taxes were higher. Lets not miss that critical fact.
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 06:41 AM   #51
GaiJin
Crash and Bang Winger
 
GaiJin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Right, and taxes were higher. Lets not miss that critical fact.
Which taxes? All taxes were not higher, if you want to talk about critical facts.
GaiJin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 07:14 AM   #52
calf
Franchise Player
 
calf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undercoverbrother View Post
So at what point will we see further movement at the pump?


The price has been "stuck" at $0.82(ish) for some time.
Depends on if the dollar keeps declining or not.
calf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 08:04 AM   #53
darklord700
First Line Centre
 
darklord700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Right, and taxes were higher. Lets not miss that critical fact.
And gas was the main driver back then too so $10 didn't hurt that much either. The point is attitude is everything.

When Joe Ceci in his budget speech said those already high forecast deficits will be revised if situation called for it, he and his party have an attitude problem.

Not respecting the budget limit you set, why set a budget in the first place?

Last edited by darklord700; 01-12-2016 at 09:28 AM.
darklord700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 09:28 AM   #54
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaiJin View Post
Which taxes? All taxes were not higher, if you want to talk about critical facts.
Well business taxes, income taxes were both higher for starters. Which taxes were lower?
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 09:31 AM   #55
Ironhorse
Franchise Player
 
Ironhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Interesting article that evaluates Saudi Arabia's market share, which apparently hasn't really eroded all that much at all since 1994, and explores the idea that OPEC's decision has hugely backfired on them:

Quote:
I suspect if Saudi Arabia were able to travel back in time to OPECís November 2014 meeting, the oil markets would look very different today. Because at that meeting the group made a decision that has thus far proven to be very costly to OPEC members.
Quote:
Was this a miscalculation on the Saudisí part, or is there a deeper strategy at play? I firmly believe they failed to anticipate how sharply oil prices would drop. I think they believed that oil prices could fall somewhat below $75/bbl for a short period of time, and that would be enough to bankrupt a lot of the shale oil companies and allow OPEC to recapture market share. Instead, the shale oil producers slashed costs, and while some producers have gone bankrupt ó and other bankruptcies are undoubtedly on the way ó shale oil production has proven to be much more resilient than the Saudis and OPEC expected.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/...iscalculation/
Ironhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ironhorse For This Useful Post:
Old 01-12-2016, 09:45 AM   #56
Resolute 14
One of many who is too boring; thinks that there should be rules regarding grammar in custom user titles, and also makes moderators wonder if there is a charachter limit here. I mean come on- you would think that would be a limitation in the software
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

^I recall reading an article from a few months ago that noted when the Saudis began this power play, shale oil was considered viable at around $80/bbl, so cutting the price to below $75 is in line with that thought process. Problem for the Saudis though is that the Americans managed to find so many ways to improve the process that it quickly became viable at $50. And possibly even lower now. So not only has the plan backfired on the Saudis, all they have done is make shale oil's position even stronger when prices recover.
__________________

Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 09:50 AM   #57
polak
In the Sin Bin
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Exp:
Default

Well and potentially killed off/set back the Alberta Oil Sands....
polak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2016, 10:45 AM   #58
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

The real victim of this price war is not the US shale industry. Those plays are just too variable and quick payout to ever be truly killed off (this trait does put a pretty firm ceiling on the price of oil for the forseeable future). They were just the short term victims (again, because of their variable nature).

The real victims are the mega projects that once running don't stop and take decades to pay out. That would be the Alberta oil sands and deep offshore plays. If I'm a capital dollar looking for a home, Saudi's actions have driven my risk premium on these long term mega projects way up. Which means my discount rate on their future cash flows has gone way up. Which means their net present value has gone way down.
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
Old 01-12-2016, 11:00 AM   #59
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironhorse View Post
Interesting article that evaluates Saudi Arabia's market share, which apparently hasn't really eroded all that much at all since 1994, and explores the idea that OPEC's decision has hugely backfired on them:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/...iscalculation/
Not the greatest article in my opinion. Technology unlocked a ****tonne of oil in the US and production was climbing rapidly.



What was to stop it from continuing up and eroding Saudi market share. The author's premise is based on an assumption that US production levels were flatlined and that the Saudis were trying to push them lower.

The Saudis aren't trying to push them lower. They are trying to stop them from climbing even higher.

The $1T "mistake" the author references was really just an inevitable loss of value caused by a technological shift in drilling. They just chose to take that loss early on the chin in an effort to bankrupt as many of the highly levered shale guys as possible. But those guys will pop up again once prices hit ~$80. It's a game of whack a mole that will keep a pretty firm ceiling on prices until demand grows significantly.

Technology is such a disrupter to markets. It's facinating to watch.
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
Old 01-12-2016, 12:18 PM   #60
flamesfever
First Line Centre
 
flamesfever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Exp:
Default

I think there may be many other factors at play which are influencing the Saudi's decision to lower the price of oil:

1. The ongoing friction between the Sunnis and #####es

2. The attempt to put a damper on Putin's aggressiveness

3. To make oil more economic in view of the accelerating move to solar, wind etc. energy.

4, To jumpstart the world economy
flamesfever is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:24 PM.

Calgary Flames
2016-17




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016