RUSSIANS TAKING TRUMPS ADVICE..... BOMBING MIDDLE EAST OIL FIELDS...... :)
Again Mr Trump was right..
and Ruskies taking his advice... ?
at any rate... ME oil fields.. being bombed...
Guess that might bring up the PRICE on OIL ??
Views: 7146
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by TennToddy on
-
That's TennToddy Mr. Joseph :)
Sorry I missed your input the past few years. Been recuperating from lung removal surgery. :)
Damned lucky to be here: Hurts like Hail I have to say :(
(1) Lets put Eminent Domain to rest and possibly Mr. Adams too. :) I hear very brief opinions, drum beating in the distance, concerning proper function, definition and use of Eminent Domain. Very Brief Opinions.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/eminent+domain
Is about as good a definition as your going to get Mr. Joseph. The COURTS decide Just Compensation taking into consideration certain devaluation points and certain valuation points; current use and future use to decrease or increase the value of the seized property accordingly. Just as you requested. The link describes all this Mr. Joseph. All ya got to do is read it. If ya want the government to change the valuation methods and definitions then ya gotta get your state representatives, congressmen and Senators involved. Of course lobbyist will get their meat hooks in it. It is the American way. Not my rules Mr. Joseph. If Ya want change ya gotta pay. No guarantees either Mr. Joseph. If ya lose ya outta pile a cash. The law and definition is there; not perfect but better than any other attempt to be fair.
1993 Casino Reinvestment Development Authority VS Vera Coking, 22 years ago, the one Mr. Adams is all tore up over:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425212/donald-trump-eminent-domain-wonderful
Ms. Coking has right to turn down millions of dollars,which surpassed Just Compensation by 8 times the value of her home, probably more than that considering inflation, according to Mr. Trump! Is that not the epitome of Just Compensation Mr. Joseph? In refusal it appears she made the wrong decision concerning the welfare of her family! Instead of a windfall of some 8 million dollars the property sold at auction for $530,000 minus auction fees, back taxes, etc.... Thousands were deprived the chance to make an honest living in an area struggling to survive. Ms. Coking had the right but it was not the next right thing to do for her family nor the community. One of the most prolific 'revitalizers' of run down communities was defeated. Ms. Coking keeps her property and every body else loses. I hear the entire city is near bankruptcy or close to it? The city never recovered and neither did the gambling industry so hopefully supported. Mrs. Coking's 'decades' long refusal to help the community may have killed the city? It is not for me to say. You make that call Mr. Joseph.
If Mr. Adams was denied employment maybe his opinion would be different? Mr. Trump had a valid reason requesting the CRDA initiate Eminent Domain proceedings against the Coking property. That is what the courts are for Mr. Joseph. To decide public issues. If Mr. Trump would have stated in writing Ms. Coking's property would be used for nothing other than a Limo parking lot the CRDA would have won the Eminent Domain case. Ya gotta put a limit on the use of the condemned property. An overlooked legal error or was Mr. Trump sold out? I guess we'll never know Over the years Mr. Trump states the land was to be used increasing the size of the hotel! Apparently, of which I have not seen, the petition does not state what the land will be specifically used for. But there were two government departments fighting each other. You make the call Mr. Joseph :)
Please Note; New York City routinely evokes Eminent Domain to revitalize various areas of the city. Atlantic City has a Casino Reinvestment Development Authority, CRDA, to handle this function. I am sure many if not all cities have turned to Eminent Domain at one time or other. Mr. Trump is not the only developer to request a ruling.
To date I have heard of no private land owner in the Marcellus / Utica area being subjected to Eminent Domain. As a matter of fact I haven't heard of any recent Eminent Domain cases filed against any oil/gas holding individual anywhere! Just does not seem to be a need for it Mr. Joseph?
So Mr. Adams drum beating and screaming of intolerable and inexcusable behavior on Mr. Trumps part seems to be, shall we say, way off base. Motivated by what? Mr. Trump might think it somewhat slanderous / not funny. :( Eminent Domain is a regular and routine function, provided by the Unites States Government, exercised virtually by every state and major city in the union. If a developer is big enough he / she can request the proper authority get a ruling on Eminent Domain. Anybody can if they have the resolve.
If ya wanna run with the big dogs Mr. Joseph ya gotta get off the porch! Mr. Trump is a Big Big Dog; many are jealous that he has never been on the porch and is now RUNNING for the Presidency of these United States of America. I am sure Mr. Adams' biased opinion is the results of never having opportunity to operate in the environment Mr. Trump, for one, does. Real Estate is highly speculative especially the level Mr Trump PLAYS. I wonder if Mr. Adams could last for decades playing Mr. Trumps brand. I am not going to spend the time researching Mr. Trump's business. It may have gone bankrupt; I will bet money it was restructured, renamed and is operating still today?
It is very easy to scream and spread biased opinion without speaking the entire story. Mighty unfair, you would not like it and neither would I.
(2) Change the elected officials? Covered in Previous post.
You cry no Joy on 3, 4
(5) Change law so our oil/gas lease will be canceled and rewritten to greater benefit us personally?
Government can pass law concerning the protection of citizens, the environment, import, export, taxes etc.. Chuckling, but that I know of; it cannot dictate how a company negotiates a lease/contract. That would be a swing past Socialism heading towards Dictatorship if I am not mistaken. Both of which you vehemently oppose :)
(6) Change law to better enforce current oil/gas industry laws?
Maybe give the enforcement laws some teeth ?:)
(7) Change the laws of supply and demand?
The most flexible and most power tool we have and you cry No Joy Mr. Joseph? We will let you think some more on that one :)
(8) Change how laws are set forth for our nation to operate?
Ya killing me again Mr. Joseph. Before the Declaration of Independence was signed there were lobbyist and special interest groups. That's what makes politics so much fun? :) “You would be more successful riding a black tornado across the western sky.” than attempt to get rid of lobbyist. Chuckling I think I pea did my pants :) Even if you could find new representatives of such a brand, and I do not believe you can, the new found honest representative would be engaged the day elected. CASH talks bull crap walks. They would be engulfed by the the system. Why would a representative making lets just say a hundred grand a year pass up millions in lets say gifts? So lobbyist are here to stay JMHO (.)
LOL ,I thought I was done; again you add to your reply. LOL, All is well :)
At stake is a Multi-Trillion dollar,industry, not counting all the indirect run off, to put it mildly Mr. Joseph. Please keep that in mind. It is always wise to be cautious crossing the street. Many Big Big things not fully understood run wild and free :) I do not know what vibes you are picking up. You are a grown man you decide.
Known for many years, since before my time , energy companies employ any means by which to gain an edge. They are very very very good at it. 'Strapulate' that out just one step. It's not hard to see information files of various types are maintained; concerning let say investments, areas of special and not so special interests and concerns, deaths, births, marriages, life changing events and events that could cause a change. I have personally use social media to maintain such files. I also use Public Records and any hearsay in the geographic area of interest. It is surprising what ya can learn at a Waffle House, Denny's, a supermarket, a quik stop, even a bar stool. If ya can find out the doughnut and coffee haunt of the local police force then ya really got fresh intel. Ya can be creative Mr. Joseph information is everywhere :)
Of your first concern, I have personal experience in an energy company's refusal to do business with land owners because of various reasons. In fact should the perception dictate it better to sell the lease than to maintain it; most larger companies will off it to an unsuspecting smaller one or a smaller subsidiary. Survival of the fittest Mr. Joseph. :) A sharp smaller company's refusal to buy will leave a land owner looking through the window so described. Even if ya have a Lease Mr. Joseph the energy companies do not have ta develop ya land. I am not threatening anyone Mr. Joseph. Ya can take it however ya want.
Your second concern is plain human nature Mr. Joseph. Kinda like Mr. Adams feels about Mr. Trump? Again no threat intended.
Your third Concern. Maybe I should have included many interests as well as the the United States Government are watching the play. I do not know if that clarification will help you or not? I guess Yellow Flags are better than Red :)
I take my privacy seriously Mr. Joseph.
I am retired. I do not view you as an adversary nor an assignment.
Since you feel threatened I will refrain unless I see a condition such as Mr. Adams created. Cannot stand by and watch our Loose Cannons get shot on unjustly now can I! :)
(@)
Crape Myrtles Spread Scent Of Sweet Truth For All :) |
Take Care Mr. Joseph
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on
-
TennToddy,
5) and a bit of 8) Revisited :
You've written :
'Government can pass law concerning the protection of citizens, the environment, import, export, taxes etc.. Chuckling, but that I know of; it cannot dictate how a company negotiates a lease/contract. That would be a swing past Socialism heading towards Dictatorship if I am not mistaken. Both of which you vehemently oppose :)'
Is not then 'Forced Pooling' / 'Forced Unitization' a 'swing past Socialism heading toward Dictatorship' also ?
If not, why not ?
If you believe that it is, perhaps you attribute its implementation to the power of the lobby ?
A shame then, if so, that a lobby can force such upon us; wouldn't you agree ?
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on
-
Vibes I find offensive / threatening :
To use your very own analogy, that if we don't look both ways / exercise great caution crossing the street (especially in the next election) we (citizens / people of similar status / station to mine) may end up finding they have only traded / empowered one set of 'elitists' for another.
You seem to be saying (by your comments that cite the special interests / lobbies are all powerful and always will be) that we need to grow up, realize it and just learn to live with it.
Even farm animals from time to time refuse their normal duties / balk / decide to utter complaint.
Hope you didn't 'pea' your pants again ! ! :) ! !
Maybe it's time to change 'em ! ! :) ! !
-
Permalink Reply by Gregory J Adams on
-
You wasted a lot of verbage to come up with a excuse for Trump to purchase the CRDA to ILLEGALLY, read that part again, ILLEGALLY attempt to use Eminent Domain to steal someone property for him. If you want the definition, try the constitution instead of picking and choosing a web based generic dictionary.
I am motivated by the fact that I dont like thieves. Not hard to figure at all. And dont presume you know me or what circles I can play in. I may not be at Trump level, but I can play.
Nothing I have said is biased, it is what HE has said from HIS mouth. You have not once come up with anything to refute that Trump is a pompous windbag (thought he was in mil because he went to a HS, got a award from the Corps) believes the govt should steal land for private citizens (statement post Kelo v New London)
THAT is the problem I have with it, him and anyone who wants to STEAL form someone else for their own personal gain. That was illegal until the SCOTUS made law saying it was OK. After which a lot of states preempted that by passing law saying it was still for public use ONLY.It doesnt matter if he offered her Billions for her place, SHE DIDNT WANT TO SELL. It was HER land and HER choice. You may make a different one, but you, like Trump HAVE NO SAY in it because you dont own it. If I told you I wanted to give you 1000.00 for your wifes wedding ring which happens to be over the value of the metal and stone, and you said no, and I get a cop to put a gun to your head, does that make it OK?
Trump is on record, from his own mouth stating that he thinks it is a good idea for the govt to steal from private citizens, then give that which was stolen to private citizens. You wont look it up, because you are a sheep who only listens to words.
I am not going to spend the time researching Mr. Trump's business. It may have gone bankrupt; I will bet money it was restructured, renamed and is operating still today?
Really? then I guess you are not going to research that he says he never went bankrupt even though he rode his company down 4 times. Its a lot easier to say you like the guy on top while not actually knowing anything about him.
I was never hurt by Trump, but my family has been affected a few times by "Bobs LCC" that didnt pay their bills and became "Bob and son LCC" who didnt pay their bills and became "B&S LCC" who didnt pay their bills..... Same as the company Trump runs. He has screwed a lot of people.
FYI, both the casinos he built in AC, went bankrupt or are going bankrupt putting lots of people out of work and hosing investors for millions which will affect a lot of pensions and 401K's
http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/09/news/companies/trump-bankruptcy/ind...
But he never went bankrupt....... over and over and over
-
Permalink Reply by TennToddy on
-
True colors fly even when there is no threat, as you wish Mr. Joseph. Let the games begin :)
Separating us from farm animals Mr. Joseph is the ability to comprehend complex concepts and follow complex requirements / laws and realize the welfare of the whole is greater than the welfare of one / few; the goal / ability of the whole is greater than the balk / complaining / incapable of reasoning and understanding of one or a few.
Since you find my thoughts / expressions disturbing you will do ya own research from now on. Ya can put it in ya own thoughts / disturb ya self so's to speak. Ya can seek ya confirmation of realization else where also. :)
How ever in a short offensive / threatening word to answer you questions, NO.
'Forced Unitization' A termed concept, in part, allowing the energy companies to manage a physical commodity, at great depth below the surface, which naturally spans the boundaries of logical / legal ownership on the surface. IE... Multiple Ownership / Multiple Leases. Not with holding accounting and a multitude of LAWS governing the entire project from start to finish. The concept IMPOSSIBLE to manage / follow law FAIRLY on an individual basis has influenced the energy industry in conjunction with prevailing governments, of geographic locations, to develop a method of management called 'UNITIZATION'. A concept developed, in part, to protect one land owner's oil/gas from being depleted by his neighbor. Prior to the concept of 'Unitization' was the concept / law of CAPTURE. “The legal rule stating that there is no liability for producing oil and gas that was originally in place under the land of another, so long as the producing well does not trespass”. Means I can suck the oil / gas out from under ya land as long as my oil rig does not trespass your legal boundaries Mr. Joseph.
I will stop there Mr. Joseph. As you might well know the topic could be developed for years and is in fact still being developed. I am sure somewhere some one balked / complained with out understanding nor improving the system, claimed this was 'FORCED UNITIZATION'! Maybe it was just uttered?
It could have just as well been termed 'FORCED PROTECTION'. Mr. Joseph.
When ya can produce a better way to manage, in it's entirety, a physical commodity / pool, at great depth spanning multiple legal boundaries on the surface, complying with all laws; and which can be applied fairly to all Lessees and Lessors and get it accepted by the energy companies and get it passed by the government I will listen to your drivel further. As for now I liken you to OPEC itself. All agree on specification, laws, etc... until greed compels you to find a better way to increase YOUR share. Allow you to make a nickle, on the cubic foot or barrel, more than your neighbor. Of course then ya must find justified support for balking / complaining; BAH! BAAH! BAAAH! Ya wonder why the energy companies act like they do.
Tell ya what Mr. Joseph go to the energy company, likely to develop ya land or if they already have, tell them ya REFUSE to be treated like a farm animal and be forced into a unitized contract. See what happens! Remember the window of regret we spoke of? Don't let it slam shut on ya nose? :)
The flower of Cactus will Protect itself to Maintain the simple concept of Life :)
Have a nice Day Mr. Joseph
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on
-
Drivel you say.........I say an instance of the pot calling the kettle black.
A little more drivel for 'ya' 'ta' ponder (if you so choose) :
Forced Pooling / Forced Unitization, if it leaves doors open to cheat landowners / lessors of fair market value for their acreage pro-rated share of a modern long horizontal bore natural gas / oil well (and IMHO those doors are open) to me is unjust / landowner / mineral owner / lessor abusive.
If it does not, it is not.
The devils lie in the details and devils also lie.
JMHOs
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on
-
For info - unleased in the Utica P. P. Rich Condensate and Oil Window.
No Wells were ever developed on our land.
Sensing our land is practically surrounded by lands HBP / leased under pre-Utica leasehold agreements.
If neighboring landowners / mineral owners / lessors were to opt to increase their Max. Unit size I feel our land would be at risk to be force pooled / force unitized into some leasehold agreement that is sub-spec. / sub-standard to today's modern long horizontal bore Marcellus / Utica leasehold agreements.
If that were not the circumstance and only modern Marcellus / Utica style / type leasehold agreements were offered which included a meaningful 'delay rental' / 'signing bonus', etc., we would likely agree.
You see, we are pro-development and not anti-force pooling / force unitization per se, just anti-abuse of landowners / mineral owners / lessors.
You sir, jump to too many conclusions, are rude and full of drivel yourself.
JMHOs
-
Permalink Reply by TennToddy on
-
Good Morning Mr. Joseph;
I will refrain from pushing you further into mental trepidation. However, you must clarify a few points or the black pot / kettle you wield is in fact drivel.
It would really help for ya ta identify / define this babbling. Please elaborate on the massive list of doors that can be used to cheat ya out of ya pro-rata. Not only the doors but the ones, IYHO, most definitely are OPEN to hit and abuse landowners. Caveat Emptor Mr. Joseph Caveat Emptor. Or in this case let the Lessor beware. If possible could you identify exactly the doors that have swung and hit you personally? Maybe a description of being blind sided or hit face long or long faced which ever ya prefer Mr. Joseph? :)
By the way have ya heard from Mr. Adams? Seems he tanked out on the conversation?
It would also be interesting to see your perspective concerning the conclusions I have JUMPED to? Enlighten me Mr. Joseph? Please do! No need to be shy :)
Maybe ya incessant crusading has already caught the attention of the energy concerns / “landman” as ya will. If all land surrounding ya are under lease and yours is not; there is a reason? Maybe access to your land is not optimal / to far away from transportation infrastructure. Maybe it did not thump out?.
To my knowledge landowner acquiescence is not considered during 'unitization'. The unitized components, size and shape are solely the discretion of the Lessee. The formula / model is probably proprietary. I have never heard of landowners having an option to increase or decrease the size of a 'unitization' block so that should not influence your decisions.
If ya can first define “MODERN” long horizontal bore Marcellus / Utica leasehold agreements for me Mr. Joseph. For some reason I keep thinking you are going to produce an ancient lease agreement from the 15th century completely rolled up with leather straps to bind it . LOL.
If ya want meaningful Delay Rental, Signing Bonuses, Promises the sky will not fall, etc..etc..etc... have an attorney draft ya demands into ya “modern” contract. You always have the option of refusal if they even bother with a counter offer :).
Note many of these “modern” lease / contracts, with all the bells and whistles, are about to or already expired. Many were never developed / with no intention of being. Landowners, of most, in their waning years, are realizing their lands have been tied up for, standard, five years, with lessee options and rights to continue or renegotiate the lease at the same or lower price and terms. Further drawing speculation into years ill afforded. This is not landowner abuse Mr. Joseph. This is BUSINESS. You have the same opportunity to look out after ya own interests as the energy companies have to look out after theirs. An inalienable right guaranteed by our first “Loose Cannons” If either are not enchanted, cry no joy, refuse the windfall. Is this your concern? If ya don't get ya way then you may loose the opportunity? Frustration compels ya to balk / complain / utter abuse? Again, this is the window of regret slamming shut; not landowner abuse. :) It is ya right ta chose the path of Ms. Coking or ya can accept more than you and ya family will ever need for generations to come. However is crying / uttering abuse the next right thing to do?I do not know your age. I do not care to. I will bet the energy company of concern does. Probably had an actuary predict the chance of your demise. Hence an opportunity of change to gain lease at more optimal / agreeable terms than affordable today. You are dealing with a legal entity Mr. Joseph. It can out live you, me, and our families. Still be there to present the lease in a hundred years from now. Who knows the energy concern may find it necessary to request an Eminent Domain ruling on your land at some point in the distant future. :(
Ya've had plenty of time rethinking ya understanding of advantages and disadvantages and the possibility manipulating supply and demand. There are many fine techniques in many economics 101 texts. Since this my shortest reply, an opportunity exists to express ya deepest of thoughts. :)
As with most disturbing attributes rudeness is a reflection, full of disdain.Some call it getting Trumped :)
Of the first flowers blessed; many referred to in vain. Fact remains this flower was loved first and will be the right hand first a gain.Have a nice Day Mr. Joseph.
Ya Still Killing Me? LOL
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
