Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
I normally agree with your posts, as they are well-thought and well-presented. This one I disagree with. The argument would have been stronger only if the producers owned the basic asset - oil. In that case, their investments decisions on paying the price for that asset would be theirs to bear. It isn't though. Oil belong to the people of Alberta. Producers are simply licensed to extract and sell it. Market intervention is justifiable in this case, if the current prices make royalty returns unfeasible or unattractive for the people. Steve Laut of CNRL spoke very well about it this morning on BNN Bloomberg.
|
Thanks, Cap. My problem with it is the signal it sends to the markets. This punishes good decision making which disincentivizes capital investment in this industry even further. As if that wasn’t already a problem. That will hurt royalties and economic prosperity in the long run far more than near term price differentials.
I’ll try to dig up Laut’s interview though.