English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Just wondering because Bush is always saying the oil in Iraq belongs to the Iraqis. How come our oil does not belong to each of us?

I sure would like to get my 0.00000001 percent of the profits from it.

2006-06-16 06:21:48 · 10 answers · asked by BeachBum 7 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

10 answers

Great question and just another illustration of Bush's hypocrisy, such as how we are bringing "freedom" to the Iraqis while reducing freedom in America (i.e. wiretaps, patriot act, incarcerating terminally ill cancer patients)

FYI - Alaskans receive money every year for "their" share of the Alaskan oil reserves

2006-06-16 06:31:28 · answer #1 · answered by Top 99% 3 · 3 2

First of all, some American oil DOES belong to Americans.
For example, most of the profits from the sale of oil in Alaska are redistributed among the citizens of Alaska, the share is approximately 1000$ a year. This is called the "Alaska Permanent Fund"[1].
All other Oil in America USED to belong directly to people, then American government sold it to private companies and used proceeds for public services. So technically you, or you ancestors, have already got their share.

So what is meant by "Iraq oil should belong to Iraqis" is that they should be able to do with it as they see please, including selling it to private companies or to other countries for just compensation. What should be avoided is that someone taking away Iraqi oil unjustly.

2006-06-16 08:06:28 · answer #2 · answered by hq3 6 · 0 0

Interesting point. Probably has to do with property rights. Most oil in the U.S. is owned by one branch or another of the Federal Government, since it mainly has been found on Federal lands.

However, if someone owns both the land and has mineral and oil rights (these aren't always sold simultaneously - there's a huge row in Colorado right now about it), they can drill for as much oil as they want and sell it at whatever price they want. You see this driving across southern Illinois, for example.

I would guess that the property ownership structure in Iraq is less well-organized, or the property is owned by the government. But that's basically the difference.

2006-06-16 06:47:59 · answer #3 · answered by Veritatum17 6 · 0 0

I think the land is leased from the owners here in America not based on its oil content, but on any price agreed on.

Places like Iraq i think have nationalized oil. Something i think could work well here given all employees payed equally and no billion dollar ceo's. Plus nationalized oil can eliminate all profit margins.

Dont jump to conclusions on my view of nationalized oil. I think this is the only thing we should do this with for the simple fact its key to developed society & economy.

2006-06-16 08:32:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

PRESIDENT Bush (show some respect!!) says what he means. Iraqi oil belongs to them just as American oil belongs to Americans, the ones who own the oil fields and companies. It really isn't that confusing, now, is it?

I hope this helps you.

2006-06-16 07:06:14 · answer #5 · answered by No one 7 · 0 0

Oil agencies are pondering determination fuels. the position do you imagine ethanol comes from? in some unspecified time sooner or later, it sounds like algae will be subtle also besides as different sorts of remember to be grew to develop into into fuels. in truth, the oil agencies are suing because they're being fined thousands and thousands of greenbacks for no longer including a substance that has no longer been invented yet. No i do not trust nationalizing it in any respect. Wells on inner most sources are using diverse folk at very intense wages in N.Dakota and Texas. the authorities does no longer some thing yet restrain the total procedure and makes it more desirable intense priced. we will be getting a lot more desirable oil now if Obama would have licensed the Keystone pipeline and allowed more desirable drilling in the Gulf. the own sector is a lot more desirable suitable, a lot more desirable useful. i'm no longer effective, yet wind generators and image voltaic panels would nicely be nationalized. the authorities pays farmers to placed the generators on their sources. no longer effective who owns the land in the wasteland the position the picture voltaic panels are getting in.

2016-10-31 00:09:33 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Oil belongs to whomever owns the land. In the US, it is mostly privately owned or, if the government owns the land, it is sold to a private entity to extract the oil, and the money is "used for the public good". In Iraq, the government itself owns and extracts and processes the oil. They can choose to use the profits to provide money or government services to the population.

2006-06-16 06:33:49 · answer #7 · answered by Brent 2 · 0 0

Oil belongs to the oil companies who have paid for developing and distributing it. So long as these contracts are respected no war. If not we will enforce this property right and continue to ensure delivery of as much oil as is needed. The various governments simply administer the title to this oil and take their share in royalties and taxes, including the US.

2006-06-16 06:52:25 · answer #8 · answered by frankie59 4 · 0 0

Because things are always backwards when it comes to Republicans.

2006-06-16 16:41:33 · answer #9 · answered by Answers R Me 3 · 0 0

cause we dont have the oil...we get it from them

2006-06-16 06:26:28 · answer #10 · answered by Maria 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers