India-US relations: News and Discussions III

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8109
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Mort Walker » 14 Dec 2016 12:22

There are some 550 billionaires in the US. Most will be forgotten in a generation or two. There have been just 20 secretaries of state since WWII and whatever opinion one may have of them, fact is Marshall, Rusk, Kissinger, Shultz, Albright have become part of history. This is what Tillerson will be remembered for as well.


Maybe, but the average American or Indian doesn't care. Dull, duller, Dulles.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8109
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Mort Walker » 14 Dec 2016 12:25

Austin wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:Hamm has indicated that fracking is still profitable around $20/barrel.


Franking is a good opportunity for US as it helps reduce dependencies on imported Energy , It was never a profitable business though , The only reason fracking survived was because of cheap credit available in US but as business from charts I saw Fracking was always in Red

You can read here why fracking is turning red even when the prices where high and why Oil Companies are going bankrupt

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... krupt.html

Oil Sector Debt

https://dailyreckoning.com/oil-sector-debt/


Fracking has been popular in the US for both oil and gas. They have been making a profit. Only the small players are facing a problem now. The big guys like Exxon-Mobile and Continental Resources have been doing well even though profits are significantly down. They know it's a cyclical business.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Viv S » 14 Dec 2016 12:36

Austin wrote:Franking is a good opportunity for US as it helps reduce dependencies on imported Energy , It was never a profitable business though , The only reason fracking survived was because of cheap credit available in US but as business from charts I saw Fracking was always in Red

You can read here why fracking is turning red even when the prices where high and why Oil Companies are going bankrupt

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... krupt.html

Oil Sector Debt

https://dailyreckoning.com/oil-sector-debt/

That's an opinion and an irrelevant at that. The topic it addresses is bankruptcy not profitability. Companies that are overextended can collapse. That doesn't change the extraction cost of shale oil/gas. A bankrupt company's assets will simply be auctioned off to the highest bidder who can continue operations if the market price remains above his break-even cost (which includes cost-of-capital). And that break-even point has been continually falling (down to $20/bl in some regions).

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Viv S » 14 Dec 2016 12:40

Mort Walker wrote:Maybe, but the average American or Indian doesn't care. Dull, duller, Dulles.

As long as Tillerson cares, his motivation would be beyond base personal monetary gain. Time will tell.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Austin » 14 Dec 2016 12:46

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:Franking is a good opportunity for US as it helps reduce dependencies on imported Energy , It was never a profitable business though , The only reason fracking survived was because of cheap credit available in US but as business from charts I saw Fracking was always in Red

You can read here why fracking is turning red even when the prices where high and why Oil Companies are going bankrupt

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... krupt.html

Oil Sector Debt

https://dailyreckoning.com/oil-sector-debt/

That's an opinion and an irrelevant at that. The topic it addresses is bankruptcy not profitability. Companies that are overextended can collapse. That doesn't change the extraction cost of shale oil/gas. A bankrupt company's assets will simply be auctioned off to the highest bidder who can continue operations if the market price remains above his break-even cost (which includes cost-of-capital). And that break-even point has been continually falling (down to $20/bl in some regions).


Without Profitibility there is No Business , They cannot run companies at loss eternally and shale was a loss making bussines since its inception ...... infact its an unsustainable ponzi scheme :lol: , Not to mention the Environmental Effect is huge that its banned in EU.

Break Even Point does not mean any thing , Break Even for Saudi Oil is at $2-3 USD and Russian Oil is it $4-5 USD

There are other aspects like processing transportation refining manpower , investement & R&D in new project , over and above generating profits , providing divident YOY to share holders etc ,If break even was all it means then we would be selling oil at $10 today.

The fact is even at $50 major projects in oil exploration has come to stand still ...... All Major oil companies agree that for new exploration you need atleast $80 barrel Oil else eventually even at low oil price $50 , Oil will again spike to $100 pretty soon.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Viv S » 14 Dec 2016 13:02

Austin wrote:Without Profitibility there is No Business , They cannot run companies at loss eternally and shale was a loss making bussines since its inception ...... infact its an unsustainable ponzi scheme :lol: , Not to mention the Environmental Effect is huge that its banned in EU.

Break Even Point does not mean any thing , Break Even for Saudi Oil is at $2-3 USD and Russian Oil is it $4-5 USD

The marginal cost of production is $3/bl for Saudi Arabia and $18/bl for Russia. And yes from a purely business perspective, they're both very very profitable with oil at $50. Much more so than most shale projects. That doesn't make the shale projects will low extraction costs unprofitable.

There are other aspects like processing transportation refining manpower , investement & R&D in new project , over and above generating profits , providing divident YOY to share holders etc ,If break even was all it means then we would be selling oil at $10 today.

Demand for oil is finite. If the producers ever actually got into a dog-eat-dog no-holds-barred competition for market share, oil price would crash to $10. And in the end only the very low cost producers like Saudi Arabia & UAE will survive at all, and even their national budgets would be decimated and they'd end up ripping through their forex & crude reserves.

And that is why the OPEC cartel exists.

The fact is even at $50 major projects in oil exploration has come to stand still ...... All Major oil companies agree that for new exploration you need atleast $80 barrel Oil else eventually even at low oil price $50 , Oil will again spike to $100 pretty soon.

Exploration of new reserves. Extraction from existing shale reserves. Different things with different break-even points.

nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 1097
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby nandakumar » 14 Dec 2016 14:32

EOG Resources, another major oil producer in the US, using fracking technology reported that in the first nine months of 2016, their variable cost of extraction worked out to $12.5 per barrel. At least existing producers with invested dollars in field development have no reason to stop production at current prices of crude oil.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Austin » 14 Dec 2016 16:10

Viv S wrote:The marginal cost of production is $3/bl for Saudi Arabia and $18/bl for Russia. And yes from a purely business perspective, they're both very very profitable with oil at $50. Much more so than most shale projects. That doesn't make the shale projects will low extraction costs unprofitable.


Mr Sechin said that Rosneft’s cost of production had fallen to less than $3 a barrel due to the drop in value of the rouble, down from around $5 a barrel last year. https://www.ft.com/content/5ee82ce2-553 ... 3585f2cfcd

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/03/minist ... ction.html

According to the Deputy Minister of Energy of Russia Kirill Molodtsov, "the average production cost of a barrel of Russian oil is about $2. The cost of producing hard-to-recover and offshore reserves is above $20.


About 60 per cent of the oil production that is economically viable at a crude price of $60 a barrel is in US shale, and only about 20 per cent is in deep water, said Wood Mackenzie, the consultancy. https://www.ft.com/content/0a7a817a-486 ... e9211e86ab

Iran and Saudi Arabia can produce oil for something in the $10 per barrel range, according to energy consultancy Rystad Energy. Even in Iraq, production costs are less than $11 per barrel. http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2016/02/ ... rt-prices/

Exploration of new reserves. Extraction from existing shale reserves. Different things with different break-even points.


The good ones at Bakken are already being explored , the others hard to explore ones will be more costlier .......Shale need Oil Cost to be more than $100 to remain profitable , The average exploration cost of for 60 % shale is around $60

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Lalmohan » 14 Dec 2016 16:31

the cabinet appointments and posturing so far indicate a bigger willingness to work with Russia and to seek a more adversarial relationship with china. inevitably a lot of emphasis will be on oil

the attention to india will be only so far as we are an irritant to china

I do not think we have any industrial/economic benefits to look forward to - we may return to a far less strategic relationship than the one we have just had (which was questionable at many levels)

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9743
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Yagnasri » 14 Dec 2016 16:38

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/robert- ... y_partner/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

I think that the globalist cabal is not going to allow DT inauguration so easily. Now with Obomber trying to jump in with CIA investigation on the email hacking and almost every MSM and other gangs supporting it we can not rule out suits before courts etc. Even electors jumping here and there drama is going on. This election result will be first discredited and then reversed. Part of the GOP may end up supporting it. Only thing that may present such happening is the GOP majority in both the houses of US Congress. But there is no guarantee that they then election DT. It may be Paul Ryan or someone like that.

I do not like DT much but my hatred towards HC and the present left gangs is more. Most of the people in US also feel the same way. But if DT stopped by these gangs and try to make some one else as President there may be open revolt from large section of the GOP and other forces. We may see the second civil war then.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21817
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby chetak » 14 Dec 2016 17:02

Yagnasri wrote:http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/robert-reich-dark-cloud-of-illegitimacy-hangs-over-donald-trumps-pending-presidency_partner/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

I think that the globalist cabal is not going to allow DT inauguration so easily. Now with Obomber trying to jump in with CIA investigation on the email hacking and almost every MSM and other gangs supporting it we can not rule out suits before courts etc. Even electors jumping here and there drama is going on. This election result will be first discredited and then reversed. Part of the GOP may end up supporting it. Only thing that may present such happening is the GOP majority in both the houses of US Congress. But there is no guarantee that they then election DT. It may be Paul Ryan or someone like that.

I do not like DT much but my hatred towards HC and the present left gangs is more. Most of the people in US also feel the same way. But if DT stopped by these gangs and try to make some one else as President there may be open revolt from large section of the GOP and other forces. We may see the second civil war then.


Hillary did concede the elections.

There was no voter fraud on Trump's side.

Trump won against ALL opposition, both within and without his party. Somewhat like Modi did and a right wing tsunami is sweeping across many countries and Trump may just have tapped into that wave.

Trump cannot be impeached NOW, before he takes over.

There is only one way to do what is being suggested and that cannot be done in a democracy.

Trump will be president.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9743
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Yagnasri » 14 Dec 2016 17:19

We know after December 19th for sure. I think that is the day of electors vote. Right? We can have suits, CIA drama, etc. in between. But as Putin said the US not a banana republic and it has strong institutions. But the same was damaged over last two decades with people lying to support the bosses. "Weapons of mass destroction" to "No reasonable prosecutor will prosecute the case" statements shown that how far they have fallen. Now the test is how far they have fallen.

While I agree that DT may become the President, I have a feeling there will be serious attempt to stop him. It may be open or it may be secretive.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby NRao » 14 Dec 2016 17:38

Mort ji,

As far as I can see, from reading, PM has planned to include this climate change into his projections. So, no matter what Trump, et al do, PM is on his way (to add 495 coal fired electricity units and make more that - I forget exactly number - some 10X times using solar). Done deal, published info (posted earlier).

So, I just do not see your first arg about India abandoning the climate deal. ???????

On Trump abandoning, not for a few years - I would say at least 1. More likely 2. Could be more. Resistance has already started in the Energy dept, most States will resist, Oklahoma has stopped fracking, etc. Low consuming products (of electricity) have flooded the market. Not to mention networked items. I think we can use Tesla as our canary. And I very much doubt Trump can deliver on his clean coal promise (he will cheat like he did in the case of Carrier).

I just do not see any of this having an impact on India. Which was the original arg.

And on the West trying to stunt Indian development, I can see some deep rooted tangential reasons. I agree with the args of the developing nations, but I see such nations paying heavily for it down the road. Very, very heavily. India included.

I think where Trump will help is on the trade front. His policies will increase product prices (but will provide jobs). IMHO, outside of the US , India is THE only nation that can sustain itself and is geared to do so even today. Mean India will do great with exports, but will do ver well without them - population and distribution of types of industries are in india's favor.

As long as India takes care of corruption, India IMHO will do well. I have no fear. And Trump be rammed.

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby sooraj » 14 Dec 2016 18:49

Reports: Donald Trump Taps Rick Perry To Head Agency He Once Forgot :lol:

It's a good thing former Texas Gov. Rick Perry once forgot he wanted to eliminate the Department of Energy, because President-elect Donald Trump is nominating him to lead the agency. That's according to reports by multiple news outlets.


Trump has repeatedly expressed skepticism about wind power's cost and effectiveness. But under Perry, Texas heavily promoted wind. Massive wind farms dot the Texas landscape, and wind energy now produces more than 10 percent of the energy the state consumes.


India To Award 1 GW Wind Energy Capacity Next Month
Last edited by sooraj on 14 Dec 2016 18:52, edited 1 time in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Viv S » 14 Dec 2016 18:50

Austin wrote:Mr Sechin said that Rosneft’s cost of production had fallen to less than $3 a barrel due to the drop in value of the rouble, down from around $5 a barrel last year. https://www.ft.com/content/5ee82ce2-553 ... 3585f2cfcd

This may be the direct cost of extraction. My figures including ancillary costs, particularly transportation (bulk of Saudi oil is in Ghawar field less than 100 km from Dammam). Also, the figures were from 2014, so the fall in ruble would have reduced the dollar figure.

In both cases, the balance over the prevailing market price is profit (minus taxes). That they're far more profitable than shale, doesn't mean shale is always a loss making venture.

The good ones at Bakken are already being explored , the others hard to explore ones will be more costlier .......Shale need Oil Cost to be more than $100 to remain profitable ,

Where did you read 'more than $100'? There is no single figure for profitability. Every project has its own break-even cost which can vary anywhere between $25 and $100 per barrel. The industry average was about $60/bl but subsequent technical advanced have reportedly brought it down to $50/bl. So while many projects have gone bust, there are still plenty of profitable shale operations still ongoing.

The average exploration cost of for 60 % shale is around $60

60% of profitable oil at $60/bl comes from shale according to Wood Mackenzie. Nothing to do with exploration.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby panduranghari » 14 Dec 2016 19:18

NRao wrote:Coal is cheap.

Clean coal is not.


This is a step above sophistry! Clean Coal? What next?

Coal is not clean. It pollutes. It has and it always will.

And please tell me why the constant sermon FOR India to do the right thing? When will the USA do the right thing?

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby panduranghari » 14 Dec 2016 19:28

schinnas wrote:Human cause of climate change is accepted by vast majority of scientists. Lay persons in Delhi, Beijing and Bangalore will attest to it.


In finance there are 3 types of capital;
Tier 1- marked to market
Tier 2- marked to models
Tier 3- marked to fantasy

Your argument cannot be used without data backing it. The data should be reproducible over a reasonable time span with a robust enough model to back it. Otherwise its a mark to fantasy stuff.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby panduranghari » 14 Dec 2016 19:32

KLNMurthy wrote:Couldn't help observing.

.


Nice post KLNM ji.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1505
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby schinnas » 14 Dec 2016 20:24

panduranghari wrote:
schinnas wrote:Human cause of climate change is accepted by vast majority of scientists. Lay persons in Delhi, Beijing and Bangalore will attest to it.


In finance there are 3 types of capital;
Tier 1- marked to market
Tier 2- marked to models
Tier 3- marked to fantasy

Your argument cannot be used without data backing it. The data should be reproducible over a reasonable time span with a robust enough model to back it. Otherwise its a mark to fantasy stuff.


If you google, there is preponderance of evidence in the form of scientific studies, peer reviewed publications, etc. Since you insist on your fantasy theory that human activity does not contribute to climate change which is contrary to widely accepted scientific / academic understanding, it is you who should provide data to prove that climate change is not caused by humans.

Note: edited to remove an unnecessary statement.
Last edited by schinnas on 14 Dec 2016 23:59, edited 1 time in total.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby TSJones » 14 Dec 2016 20:25

And please tell me why the constant sermon FOR India to do the right thing? When will the USA do the right thing?


India has ratified the kyoto accord in 2002.

live up to your own ratification or do your own weaseling and back out of it. its your choice.

the US will do what it thinks is best.

and while the US has not ratified, it has met the Kyoto commitments.

LokeshC
BRFite
Posts: 696
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 04:36

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby LokeshC » 14 Dec 2016 21:09

OT: Climate change in Delhi and BLR is due to extremely high density of population and NOT because of industrial green house gas emissions.

If you are in a tiny enclosed Bakistan having bad wind, you will produce a highly local climate change, much the same way.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21817
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby chetak » 14 Dec 2016 21:20

TSJones wrote:
And please tell me why the constant sermon FOR India to do the right thing? When will the USA do the right thing?


India has ratified the kyoto accord in 2002.

live up to your own ratification or do your own weaseling and back out of it. its your choice.

the US will do what it thinks is best.

and while the US has not ratified, it has met the Kyoto commitments.


Hasn't the US weaseled out of other agreements in the past?? :)

sauce, gander and all that.

Surprisingly, India will also do what it judges as best for itself.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21817
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby chetak » 14 Dec 2016 21:43

hypocrite.

her board must have chewed her out for taking a vocal political position

from twitter

Ha ha ha...U -Turn specialist....campaigned for Hillary and even unethically sought Pepsi employees to vote for her...



PepsiCo chairman & CEO Indra Nooyi has joined US President-elect Donald Trump's advisory council.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby panduranghari » 14 Dec 2016 21:59

schinnas wrote:
If you google, there is preponderance of evidence in the form of scientific studies, peer reviewed publications, etc. Since you insist on your fantasy theory that human activity does not contribute to climate change which is contrary to widely accepted scientific / academic understanding, it is you who should provide data to prove that climate change is not caused by humans. I hope you do believe in helio centric model and in evolution.


I am saying there is not enough evidence to say there is climate change induced by human actions. Because the orthodoxy says it is.

The claim started by saying the Antarctic ice is melting rapidly due to a hole in the ozone layer which was caused by human action. And then models were made claiming that how bad it is going to get.

But http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016 ... shrinking/

Antarctic sea ice had barely changed from where it was 100 years ago, scientists have discovered, after poring over the logbooks of great polar explorers such as Robert Falcon Scott and Ernest Shackleton.

Experts were concerned that ice at the South Pole had declined significantly since the 1950s, which they feared was driven by man-made climate change.

But new analysis suggests that conditions are now virtually identical to when the Terra Nova and Endurance sailed to the continent in the early 1900s, indicating that declines are part of a natural cycle and not the result of global warming.
< snip>


"We know that sea ice in the Antarctic has increased slightly over the past 30 years, since satellite observations began. Scientists have been grappling to understand this trend in the context of global warming, but these new findings suggest it may not be anything new.

"If ice levels were as low a century ago as estimated in this research, then a similar increase may have occurred between then and the middle of the century, when previous studies suggest ice levels were far higher.


The basis of the models is lost. So now they are marked to fantasy.

Please spare me to condescension of asking if I believe heliocentric model. I did not expect a low blow from someone like you who posts some very excellent posts.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby A_Gupta » 14 Dec 2016 22:07

To understand how science works, and specifically that about Antarctic ice:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... ntarctica/

yvijay
BRFite
Posts: 331
Joined: 13 Jun 2007 06:47

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby yvijay » 14 Dec 2016 22:21

nandakumar wrote:EOG Resources, another major oil producer in the US, using fracking technology reported that in the first nine months of 2016, their variable cost of extraction worked out to $12.5 per barrel. At least existing producers with invested dollars in field development have no reason to stop production at current prices of crude oil.

Absolutely. These shale companies have become much more efficient at horizontal drilling and fracking, that they are profitable even at 25 $. The only thing is not all reserves they hold are profitable at that price point, but they are significant enough to survive. And their sweet spot is 50$ - 60$, since it would discourage marginal players from drilling and increasing the supply.


Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8109
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Mort Walker » 14 Dec 2016 22:58

Nrao-ji,

I will respond in context to this thread for the sake of not derailing it any further.

NRao wrote:Mort ji,

As far as I can see, from reading, PM has planned to include this climate change into his projections. So, no matter what Trump, et al do, PM is on his way (to add 495 coal fired electricity units and make more that - I forget exactly number - some 10X times using solar). Done deal, published info (posted earlier).

So, I just do not see your first arg about India abandoning the climate deal. ???????


The PM has announced his plans, but as an EE you know that large scale solar power is not viable. On a smaller scale it is. Certainly you've seen this heartwarming story in IEEE Spectrum: Lights for the Enlightened. Anyway, my point is should the US trash the UN Climate Framework, then India has an automatic out. Or at least a way of weaseling out of it without being criticized and perhaps with Trumpanzee's cheerleading too.

NRao wrote:On Trump abandoning, not for a few years - I would say at least 1. More likely 2. Could be more. Resistance has already started in the Energy dept, most States will resist, Oklahoma has stopped fracking, etc. Low consuming products (of electricity) have flooded the market. Not to mention networked items. I think we can use Tesla as our canary. And I very much doubt Trump can deliver on his clean coal promise (he will cheat like he did in the case of Carrier).

I just do not see any of this having an impact on India. Which was the original arg.


Fracking has not ended in Oklahoma and Texas, but has slowed down due to the deliberate injection of waste water in to geologic fault lines. This has caused earthquakes in Oklahoma up to Magnitude 5.4. The smaller players in fracking are leaving it now since the price of oil has declined, but the big players are still actively operating. In fact there has been a massive new shale find in west Texas and is now going to be exploited. See Apache Energy's Huge New Oil Find.

NRao wrote:And on the West trying to stunt Indian development, I can see some deep rooted tangential reasons. I agree with the args of the developing nations, but I see such nations paying heavily for it down the road. Very, very heavily. India included.

I think where Trump will help is on the trade front. His policies will increase product prices (but will provide jobs). IMHO, outside of the US , India is THE only nation that can sustain itself and is geared to do so even today. Mean India will do great with exports, but will do ver well without them - population and distribution of types of industries are in india's favor.

As long as India takes care of corruption, India IMHO will do well. I have no fear. And Trump be rammed.


Trumpanzee is an oddball and we don't know where he'll go, but right now I remain optimistic. Meeting with Kanye West was strange. I do sense that Trumpanzee wants showmanship Hollywood style with celebrity trappings. If he comes to Mumbai in the future, India can give it to him with world class showmanship celebrity style with "Coffee with Karan" types. We do know the phone call readout with Sharif was a fake and so far the Trump team hasn't met any Pakis, but we'll watch carefully. He did meet with Indian businessmen, which for better or worse is still a good thing.

I do agree that if corruption is contained, India will do well regardless of what happens in the rest of the world, and if it has strategic space to operate in its own backyard.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1505
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby schinnas » 15 Dec 2016 00:43

panduranghari wrote:
schinnas wrote:
If you google, there is preponderance of evidence in the form of scientific studies, peer reviewed publications, etc. Since you insist on your fantasy theory that human activity does not contribute to climate change which is contrary to widely accepted scientific / academic understanding, it is you who should provide data to prove that climate change is not caused by humans. I hope you do believe in helio centric model and in evolution.


I am saying there is not enough evidence to say there is climate change induced by human actions. Because the orthodoxy says it is.

The claim started by saying the Antarctic ice is melting rapidly due to a hole in the ozone layer which was caused by human action. And then models were made claiming that how bad it is going to get.

But http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016 ... shrinking/

Antarctic sea ice had barely changed from where it was 100 years ago, scientists have discovered, after poring over the logbooks of great polar explorers such as Robert Falcon Scott and Ernest Shackleton.

Experts were concerned that ice at the South Pole had declined significantly since the 1950s, which they feared was driven by man-made climate change.

But new analysis suggests that conditions are now virtually identical to when the Terra Nova and Endurance sailed to the continent in the early 1900s, indicating that declines are part of a natural cycle and not the result of global warming.
< snip>


"We know that sea ice in the Antarctic has increased slightly over the past 30 years, since satellite observations began. Scientists have been grappling to understand this trend in the context of global warming, but these new findings suggest it may not be anything new.

"If ice levels were as low a century ago as estimated in this research, then a similar increase may have occurred between then and the middle of the century, when previous studies suggest ice levels were far higher.


The basis of the models is lost. So now they are marked to fantasy.

Please spare me to condescension of asking if I believe heliocentric model. I did not expect a low blow from someone like you who posts some very excellent posts.


Edited my post to remove that statement on heliocentric model.

That said, Antarctic ice caps melting is just a symptom. Global rise in temperatures over the years is another big symptom which has been recorded. Outside of splitting hair on specifics of climate change models, I guess we can agree that there is a huge overlap between causative of pollution and that of supposedly human induced climate change.

India will be impacted more than other countries both due to pollution and due to climate change given our reliance on Himalayan glaciers for 3 of our major rivers and long coastline (we will lose landmass for every 1 Meter rise in sea level).

We cannot afford to be relaxed about climate change or pollution, imho.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3524
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Rudradev » 15 Dec 2016 00:54

chetak wrote:
Trump won against ALL opposition, both within and without his party. Somewhat like Modi did and a right wing tsunami is sweeping across many countries and Trump may just have tapped into that wave.


I think we have to be extraordinarily careful about this kind of generalization.

There is really no comparison between Trump's election and what Modi managed to achieve.

Over the 2010-2016 period the Tea Party movement had already created, through pursuit of deliberate strategies, the kind of electoral climate that paved the way for someone like DT to come into power. For six-plus years they had been relentlessly running messaging campaigns that tapped into white blue-collar resentment against the cultural siege posed by nonwhite immigration and political correctness, anger against the economic doldrums resulting from QE2 and the bank bailout, frustration of fighting two unwinnable wars etc.

It is certainly to DT's credit that he recognized the shifting mood of a significant section of the US electorate, and tailored his own campaign accordingly. However, the ground for him had been very well prepared beforehand. The more conventional GOP candidates didn't see it... except perhaps Ted Cruz to some extent... and they missed the bus. But DT was not the author of his own electoral strategy; he simply piggybacked on that of the Tea Party and its organs.

Even after all this, Clinton won a greater margin of the popular vote than Jimmy Carter or Woodrow Wilson had in the years when they actually won the election. So it was no tsunami or sweep by any stretch.

Modi by contrast did not ride anyone's coat-tails to power. There was no institutional effort within the BJP to prep the ground for someone like him, let alone a consistent strategy followed for 6 plus years. Upto 2013 the BJP's message was D4-uvacha and Congress-accommodation all the way... and it remained so until Modi changed the narrative single-handedly.

And the 282-40 defeat he handed the INC? Now THAT was a genuine sweep. We only belittle his triumph by comparing it to Trump's squeaking through with an electoral college victory in the US election. The magnitude of Modi's victory isn't as obvious as it should be, because the Indian electoral scoreboard isn't as clean-cut as that of the US with its two-party system... many third parties, regional parties etc. add to the total LS count, muddying the picture.

The fact that Modi won a single party majority for the first time in 30 years is far more significant than the achievement of any US President since, possibly, Reagan in 1984.

I also reject the idea of a "right-wing" tsunami. What exactly does "right wing" mean? I cannot see the first sign of similarity between the philosophies of Modi and Trump (other than a common rejection of Marx-derived ideologies). Trump ran on a populist platform clearly appealing to majoritarian revanchist tendencies. Modi ran on sabka saath, sabka vikaas and good governance (and that is exactly what he is delivering).

There is absolutely no commonality of substance between what Trump means by "America First", and what Modi means by "India First". Their visions are as completely, profoundly different as Western Hellenistic/Hebraic civilization is from Dharmic civilization.

Honestly, when we start defining everyone who doesn't buy into a Marx-derived worldview as "right wing", we end up giving undue importance to the Marx-derived worldview itself. We effectively reduce the whole playing field of political mind-share to a binary framework where 50% of it... the so-called "left wing"... belongs to the Marxists!! In fact, the Marxists (socialists, communists, social democrats, "progressives" etc.) neither own nor deserve 50% of the worldwide political mind-share. They are just one of many competing ideologies and perspectives out there.

When we define Marx-derived as "left wing", and then squeeze all the other possible perspectives that are NOT-Marx-derived into the lump category of "right wing", we are doing a huge favour to the Marxists by aggrandizing their useless and outmoded dogma beyond all proportion to its present-day relevance. It is entirely to their advantage when people continue to use "left wing/right wing" terminology as a political descriptor.

I strongly suggest we retire this terminology for our purposes, and let the Trump people use it to delude themselves if they want. I have always felt that using the term "right-wing" was a recipe for a self-goal. The dissimilarities between Modi and Trump make it abundantly clear why that is the case.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby A_Gupta » 15 Dec 2016 03:24

The Russian concept of Reflexive Control
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semp ... l-ttg.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby NRao » 15 Dec 2016 03:28


A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby A_Gupta » 15 Dec 2016 03:32

Rudradev +10^6

Also, I wrote this below before Trump made nominations for his cabinet. We now know more and I've put that in { }.

This is Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's statement:

Why do we need the state? There are five main components:

.. The first is public goods such as defence, police and judiciary.

.. The second is externalities which hurt others, such as pollution. For this, we need a regulatory system.

.. The third is market power, where monopolies need controls.

.. The fourth is information gaps, where you need someone to ensure that medicines are genuine and so on.

.. Last, we need a well-designed welfare and subsidy mechanism to ensure that the bottom of society is protected from deprivation. This especially includes education and health care.


These are five places where we need government.


We do not know where Trump stands, because he has made statements on both sides of most issues; and he has no record of public office. {Trump's nominations now reveal much better where Trump stands.}

We do know where the Republicans stand:

1. On defence, police, judiciary - yes, they mostly agree. However, note that they are in favor of privatizing prisons, even though the American experience so far has been that private prisons are very abusive. After Trump's victory that has put Republicans in control, the stock price of private prison companies rose more than 40%. (Defence companies rose by 6% or so.)

2. On the regulatory system to control externalities that hurt others, the Republicans are utterly opposed, whether it is with the environment or with the financial system. {Trump's nominees are on the record against the regulatory agencies they have been named to head.}

3. On market power, the Republicans have no desire to control monopolies. Their hero, Reagan, dismantled much of the New Deal anti-trust controls. {We don't know still Trump's views on regulating market power in general; but he has brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs alumni who are likely not to want to limit the power of financial firms.}

4. On information gaps, this is a mixed bag; but I would rate the Republicans as mostly against the government doing anything to fix information gaps.

5. On the safety net, we know that the Republicans are against any such. {Trump's nominees are on the record for mostly diminishing or even demolishing the safety net.}

I repeat, on many of these, we don't know where Trump stands; he has made contradictory statements during the campaign, and he has no record of public office. {But now we have his nominees.}

In any case, policy-wise, PM Narendra Modi is very explicit and clear; the situation with Trump is ambiguous, and there is utterly no basis for comparison of the two men. It is not apples vs oranges; it is apples vs. BS.

Rammpal
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 23 Sep 2016 12:21

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Rammpal » 15 Dec 2016 06:06

panduranghari wrote:
NRao wrote:Coal is cheap.

Clean coal is not.


This is a step above sophistry! Clean Coal? What next?

Coal is not clean. It pollutes. It has and it always will.

And please tell me why the constant sermon FOR India to do the right thing? When will the USA do the right thing?


Clean coal = de-sulfured coal + impurities removed, i.e.: higher energy density + flue gas treatment, to trap gas borne sulfur compound.

Rammpal
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 23 Sep 2016 12:21

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Rammpal » 15 Dec 2016 06:12

schinnas wrote:
India will be impacted more than other countries both due to pollution and due to climate change given our reliance on Himalayan glaciers for 3 of our major rivers and long coastline (we will lose landmass for every 1 Meter rise in sea level).

We cannot afford to be relaxed about climate change or pollution, imho.


Why should such an impact, if any at all, affect India worse than others ?
First, it won't happen overnight.
Secondly, I presume India Is already doing something about it.

In short, this is no more than boogeymen scare.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby NRao » 15 Dec 2016 06:22

Rammpal wrote:
panduranghari wrote:
This is a step above sophistry! Clean Coal? What next?

Coal is not clean. It pollutes. It has and it always will.

And please tell me why the constant sermon FOR India to do the right thing? When will the USA do the right thing?


Clean coal = de-sulfured coal + impurities removed, i.e.: higher energy density + flue gas treatment, to trap gas borne sulfur compound.


Very, very true. But that is from yester years.

Latest is capture and compression of Co2, for storage under ground, in addition to your post. The question is what if (when?) It escapes.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9743
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Yagnasri » 15 Dec 2016 08:02

NM, unlike DT, was a highly successful political leader for almost 12 years before he became PM. So there is a large difference there. Also, NM had the biggest organisational support in his 2014 win. We are not taking that into consideration. The organisational support and the number and extent of foot soldiers NM got were quite massive in 2014. I do not know how much organisation DT had in the elections. NM also very clear in the policy articulation and principles and DT almost never did that.

Rammpal
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 23 Sep 2016 12:21

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Rammpal » 15 Dec 2016 09:02

DT was Never a monk, neither is he even remotely connected to that realm !!
Modiji is a WYSIWYG bramhachari as well, unlike, err........ :D

Relevance?
Moral bearing, perhaps.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby Austin » 15 Dec 2016 09:28

Viv S wrote:This may be the direct cost of extraction. My figures including ancillary costs, particularly transportation (bulk of Saudi oil is in Ghawar field less than 100 km from Dammam). Also, the figures were from 2014, so the fall in ruble would have reduced the dollar figure.


The standard production cost figure for every one , look at my quote above for energy minister it varied from $3 to $18 depending from where it is getting production , For Saudi , Iran and Iraq its $ 9-11
In both cases, the balance over the prevailing market price is profit (minus taxes). That they're far more profitable than shale, doesn't mean shale is always a loss making venture.


Shale has always been loss making venture , that is why shale companies are going bankrupt
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/16/investi ... ankruptcy/

There have already been at least 29 U.S. oil and gas bankruptcies this year alone, according to Haynes and Boone. That brings the toll since the start of last year to at least 64.

The default rate among exploration and production junk bonds has soared to a record 27% over the past 12 months, according to a recent Fitch Ratings report. Fitch thinks the default rate could hit 35% by the end of 2016.


Most Shale companies will only survive if the Oil price is around $80-100 and cheap credit is available , Critically the ecological and environmental damage for shale is an unknown entity reason it is banned in EU countries.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Postby NRao » 15 Dec 2016 10:10

John R. Bolton as deputy SoS is not good news for India. His first action in the UN was to team up with China to ensure India (or for that matter any other nation) did not get into the SC.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests