Obama - a three term President?

[Coito ergo sum]

Norway has state-owned strategic oil (Statoil), hydropower, aluminum plants, banks, and telecoms. Fully 1/3 of the country's companies are gov't owned/controlled.

Which makes 2/3 of it privately owned -- and about the same amount their GDP is government production as the US.

Their tax code is very, very much more progressive than ours and they are one of the most heavily taxed economies in the world. Benefits like retirement, medical care, and disability care are all fully paid for out of a public trust. Since WWII Norwegians have expanded and increased these gov't benefits.

Try running on that platform in the US and tell me what happens.

Here is where the differences come into play -- Norway is in a "state of plenty" -- which means that they have so much flippin' oil and other natural resources, that they can sell and pay for pretty much anything any of their mere 4.5 million people need. To do the same thing in the US, you'd have to be willing to dramatically increase our natural resource production, especially oil, to a level never before seen. Norway produces about 550,000 barrels per day per 1,000 people. The US produces about 25,000 barrels per day per 1,000 people.

Do the math -- if you want the US to be like Norway in regards to money available to support a safety net, then let's increase our oil production by 10 or 20 times, and such. Add that to the coffers, and you can pay for a lot of government cheese.

[Gerald McGrew]

Ok, tell you what CES, put forth a candidate who runs on a platform of...

The US federal gov't taking over one third of US (formerly) private companies

Increasing tax revenues to 40-45% of GDP (the US is usually around 25%), including increasing taxes on the wealthy to create a truly progressive tax code

Expanding the welfare state so that each citizen's retirement, health care, education, and all disabilities are fully taken care of

And increasing domestic oil production



If you truly think that last item will be enough to prevent the candidate from being labelled a "socialist/communist" and accused of engaging in "class warfare" because of the others, then you really haven't been paying much attention the last 4 years.

[Coito ergo sum]

Ok, tell you what CES, put forth a candidate who runs on a platform of...

The US federal gov't taking over one third of US (formerly) private companies

I wouldn't run on that -- but, my point was that Norway has gotten stronger economically as it has privatized -- not the reverse.

Increasing tax revenues to 40-45% of GDP (the US is usually around 25%), including increasing taxes on the wealthy to create a truly progressive tax code

Expanding the welfare state so that each citizen's retirement, health care, education, and all disabilities are fully taken care of

And increasing domestic oil production



If you truly think that last item will be enough to prevent the candidate from being labelled a "socialist/communist" and accused of engaging in "class warfare" because of the others, then you really haven't been paying much attention the last 4 years.

We wouldn't need to do the tax rate increases and expanded welfare state if we increased domestic oil production by 10-20 times. Think of the additional tax revenue that would be generated from the oil drilling fees and the taxes up the chain of production and distribution.

[Gerald McGrew]

Riiiiiiiiiiight.....let's be Norway with the oil part, but none of the others.

FFS.

[Jason]

While you two are arguing about domestic oil, I have a question. Does Obama consider Canadian oil to be 'domestic'? Because there's a huge push for us to build a pipeline to increase our volume of export to the US.

[Coito ergo sum]

While you two are arguing about domestic oil, I have a question. Does Obama consider Canadian oil to be 'domestic'? Because there's a huge push for us to build a pipeline to increase our volume of export to the US.

No. But, we like to pipe our Alaskan oil across your country. Thanks.

[Gerald McGrew]

While you two are arguing about domestic oil, I have a question. Does Obama consider Canadian oil to be 'domestic'?

No.

Because there's a huge push for us to build a pipeline to increase our volume of export to the US.

That's supported, but was turned into a political football by Congressional Republicans. Basically, the company proposed a route for the pipeline but during the review and permitting process some state Governors raised concerns about the route going over sensitive areas (e.g. the aquifer that supplies large chunks of the midwest with water). So the company went back to the drawing board and was working on a new route when the Republicans, hoping to score political points against Obama and thus help prevent his re-election, made making a decision on the pipeline by X date a condition of budget negotiations. Of course Obama and the State Dept. pointed out that they couldn't make a decision yet as the company was still developing a new route and hadn't even applied for a new permit. Didn't matter.

So Obama and the Dept. of State only had the old route and permit application to go on, and of course they denied it. They pointed out that they would review the new permit application once the company proposed a new route. And as before, part of the process is allowing the states time to comment. That seems to be where the process is at now.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 81848.html

[JimC]

While you two are arguing about domestic oil, I have a question. Does Obama consider Canadian oil to be 'domestic'? Because there's a huge push for us to build a pipeline to increase our volume of export to the US.

No. But, we like to pipe our Alaskan oil across your country. Thanks.

Charge 'em a bloody fortune, Canucks!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Hey, they already get what leaks out. That should be enough.