Canada can export to a different country, maybe China. Let’s try that strategy out! Trade surplus for the US!
US is the world’s largest consumer of oil. We have an oil addiction.
January Inflation
- Thread starter SilentBirdHunter
- Start date
US is the world’s largest consumer of oil. We have an oil addiction.
Nick87
Well-known member
You should check out the meme thread sometime. Little change of pace for ya.
Sytes
Well-known member
You're disputing the #'s shared between Canada and the U.S., per capita, I see. You're saying the numbers do not calculate correctly. Reasonable assessment to identify would be per capita between Canada and the U.S.
You used "Statistica"... So I'll play with your lead.
Oil consumption in Canada 2004-2023
Published by Statista Research Department, Jul 15, 2024Oil consumption in Canada reached roughly 2.4 million barrels per day in 2023, an increase of 1.7 percent when compared to the previous year.
Oil consumption in the U.S. 1998-2023
Published by Statista Research Department, Oct 14, 2024In 2023, the United States consumed nearly 19 million barrels of oil daily. In comparison to the previous year, figures increased by around 0.6 percent.
United States "nearly" 19M x 365 days = 6.9B / 340 million people = 20 barrels per person.
Canada: "roughly" 2.4M x 365 days = 876M / 40 million people = 21.9 barrels per person.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I do, I just don’t post. MostlyYou should check out the meme thread sometime. Little change of pace for ya.
if they are clever and/or funny. Mostly I think they are made by people with too much time on their hands. lol yes, I see the irony.Sigh. Who cares? Wasted brain space trying to prove an irrelevant point.
The US is the worlds largest user of oil.
The US has a trade deficit with Canada because of the oil the U.S. imports. Oil the U.S. wants. If the oil is eliminated from the export/import calculations, the U.S. has a trade surplus. The US’s hunger for oil is causing the trade deficit issue.
Sytes
Well-known member
You're the one that brought it up, apparently you cared until you determined it, "Irrelevant" when it does not fit the common understanding of matching apples with apples. Per capita. Got it.
Sounds better to say America is addicted to oil. Fits an agenda.
Sigh.
Sounds better to say America is addicted to oil. Fits an agenda.
Sigh.
Sytes
Well-known member
When a hunt talk member excludes Canada's MAIN export to the U.S., the calculations of U.S. / Canadian surplus and deficit will change.
Reality, Canada nor America excludes oil as an export.
You completely miss the point.
The trade deficit is “evil” and we need to “negotiate” to have a trade surplus ignoring the fact the United States needs to import products - especially oil based on the complexity of the U.S.’s oil market. We’re creating our own deficits and then get mad about it.
You want a trade surplus with Canada? Stop buying oil. Oh wait - the U.S, needs oil. Let’s forget that the US exports more products to Canada than it imports beside the oil we want. Let’s complain about the small dairy market.
Treating Canada the way Trump has is an embarrassment to the country.
Sytes
Well-known member
Hah! You completely skipped my comments... surprisingly we mostly agree about this admin's activity related to Canada, I'll save you the hassle reading back, x pages...
Next subject you are clearly not aware:
Canada / U.S. exports to each other: Primarily, U.S. exports sweet crude whereas Canada exports sour crude. U.S. accepts the sour crude as we have refineries that use the cheaper sour crude and refinaries already in place to reduce the sulfer content.
Canada values U.S. export of sweet crude as they need it. Sweet holds value for gas, diesel, and aviation fuel that their primary sour is unable to accomplish w/o extreme refining that U.S. already has functioning, etc.
Not only that, though the jobs their export of sour crude to U.S. is significant.
@Sytes and @brymoore - I love the back-and-forth resolution of this data. If tempted to give up or mad, please don't. I'm learning from both of you!
Meme's are fun and can be very informative with few words; 'the less the words, the more the meaning' is my hardest lesson right now.
@Sytes, I appreciate your perspective on Canada, bringing your concerns to the front, and doing it in a way that's not screaming, but stressing valid points. For example:
I agree and will continue to regard both countries, especially America, as precious, worth defending, worth the time to resolve conflicts, and worth demonstrating the patience to reasonably inform/discuss, like you all are, despite relative anonymity on this forum.
Meme's are fun and can be very informative with few words; 'the less the words, the more the meaning' is my hardest lesson right now.
@Sytes, I appreciate your perspective on Canada, bringing your concerns to the front, and doing it in a way that's not screaming, but stressing valid points. For example:
I agree and will continue to regard both countries, especially America, as precious, worth defending, worth the time to resolve conflicts, and worth demonstrating the patience to reasonably inform/discuss, like you all are, despite relative anonymity on this forum.
I've been wrong a few times on this thread with constructive and sometimes blunt criticism. It's always good to accept correction when it's due. When my wife insists she's right and nothing gained from proving she's not, I'm content to say, 'ok'.
Yesterday, poll results showed Trump has the lowest approval rating at this point than any of the previous terms dating back to 'W':
It is also worth noting that the current term involves the most extreme level of change he was voted to enact. I think he knows it and even anticipates his irascible approach would piss off his trusted circle, administration, voters, allies, press, etc. along the way. Many of his voters were included in that poll reflects their disappointment. He knows it and acts indifferent. He has thick skin, and the tips outlined in his 'Art of the Deal' from the 80s are playing out in real time. Ironically, the guy who wrote the book for him (Schwartz) later claimed it was mostly fiction and should have been retitled 'The Sociopath'. Trump defended it as "truthful hyperbole". Here's an interesting article about the book and how his tips are manifested in the current term: The Business Insider.
On the matters of inflation, trade balance, immigration, war, and tariffs, it is worth noting that his positions are not original political agendas of the right. These ideas were drawn from the Democrat playbook, with agenda front-runners for these changes being Obama, Schumer, and Pelosi. Should that make these issues bipartisan or more 'American'? I realize the framing of this question suggests a certain answer, but I really don't know.
Yesterday, poll results showed Trump has the lowest approval rating at this point than any of the previous terms dating back to 'W':
It is also worth noting that the current term involves the most extreme level of change he was voted to enact. I think he knows it and even anticipates his irascible approach would piss off his trusted circle, administration, voters, allies, press, etc. along the way. Many of his voters were included in that poll reflects their disappointment. He knows it and acts indifferent. He has thick skin, and the tips outlined in his 'Art of the Deal' from the 80s are playing out in real time. Ironically, the guy who wrote the book for him (Schwartz) later claimed it was mostly fiction and should have been retitled 'The Sociopath'. Trump defended it as "truthful hyperbole". Here's an interesting article about the book and how his tips are manifested in the current term: The Business Insider.
On the matters of inflation, trade balance, immigration, war, and tariffs, it is worth noting that his positions are not original political agendas of the right. These ideas were drawn from the Democrat playbook, with agenda front-runners for these changes being Obama, Schumer, and Pelosi. Should that make these issues bipartisan or more 'American'? I realize the framing of this question suggests a certain answer, but I really don't know.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
War? Seriously.
Oddly, protectionism seems most popular on the far right and far left. The right screams about Socialism and the left screams about inequality. I kind of wish they could form their own party. Most of us quite enjoy neoliberalism.
406dn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 3,021
It stands to reason that a country with great geographical distances, with a sparse population, and a colder climate, would use more oil, than a more densely populated, warmer country.
I suspect that Montana's oil usage per capita is higher than Canada's per capita consumption.
The next concern for me is if the administration tries to impose the 1% “user fee” on foreign official holders of Treasury securities. It’s a bullet point in the Mar Lago Accord and was mentioned again this week.
I’m not sure if they have thought past go on this idea. Essentially a treasury default by the U.S. Interest rates will go crazy.
I’m not sure if they have thought past go on this idea. Essentially a treasury default by the U.S. Interest rates will go crazy.
Thank you for putting yourself out there with more detail. I appreciate and understand where you are coming from a little better now. While I don’t agree with a lot of it, I certainly now understand a little more.
For now, Trump keeps pushing peace without war. He seems to have his own ideas about how to do that.
We are not yet privy to the nuances of the ideas he's using with Putin, but on the surface, it appears that a contextual array of 1) monetary investments in Ukraine, 2) the tariff war, and 3) sanctions are being used to leverage an economic advantage that will erode Russia's interest in pursuing the war.
With respect to your objection, it's too early to decide if this will not result in US troop involvement since Putin keeps defaulting on cease-fire agreements.
Edit: I had to look up your $20 word
, neoliberalism; I like it too:
Last edited:
@brymoore 's statistics confirm your suspicion is likely incorrect. Do you have any stats beyond what may be a reasonable hunch?
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Yes, demanding Ukraine give up territory to Russia, but sure, peace. He is also bombing Yemen. Clearly you see what you want to see.
Politicians are definitely addicted to oil.
Colorado's Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert is asking DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) and the federal government to pull funding for a passenger rail project along the Front Range.
"This project is fiscally irresponsible, impractical, and benefits special interests rather than the hardworking people of Colorado," Boebert said in the letter. The congresswoman suggested expanding roadways instead, calling it a "cost-effective and adaptable" approach.
Colorado's Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert is asking DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) and the federal government to pull funding for a passenger rail project along the Front Range.
"This project is fiscally irresponsible, impractical, and benefits special interests rather than the hardworking people of Colorado," Boebert said in the letter. The congresswoman suggested expanding roadways instead, calling it a "cost-effective and adaptable" approach.
