Article

2005-10-20 Great White North

Canada threatens to divert U.S. oil imports to Chicoms

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2005-10-20 16:14|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Um... Oil is a fungible commodity. if Canadian oil goes to China, then the oil that had originally been earmarked for China is available for sale. If they would withhold all oil sales, that would screw up prices, but it would cost them all the revenue during that time.

Posted by Mark E. 2005-10-20 16:41|| 2005-10-20 16:41|| Front Page Top

#2 What Mark said. Let the Chinee take the downside price risk and let the US enjoy the benefit of chinee capital. Even better the oil is very easy to ~~take~~ defend in case of some emergency.

Posted by Shipman 2005-10-20 17:17|| 2005-10-20 17:17|| Front Page Top

#3 Hong Kong billionaire, Li Ka Shing, head of Hutchinson Whampoa...

aka Doctor No.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-20 18:11|| 2005-10-20 18:11|| Front Page Top

#4 Martin and other Canadian government leaders have been careful not to directly link the softwood conflict to any oil punishment

Prudent of them, since a) we're one of their largest trading partners overall and b) such retaliation violates several international agreements unless it's done in a not-entirely-obvious-or-at-least-somewhat-plausibly-deniable way IIRC.

Posted by still anon 2005-10-20 18:47|| 2005-10-20 18:47|| Front Page Top

#5 if Canadian oil goes to China, then the oil that had originally been earmarked for China is available for sale

That works in a market in equilibrium. When demand outpaces supply, it works less well.

Posted by lotp 2005-10-20 18:49|| 2005-10-20 18:49|| Front Page Top

#6 helllooo ANWR!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-10-20 19:23|| 2005-10-20 19:23|| Front Page Top

#7 That works in a free market. It appears that Canada (and other countries, like Venezuela) want to set up a situation where oil trade is governed by government-to-government contracts with different prices for different countries.

This is the perfect stimulus to produce what all of these countries have been complaining about to begin with: war for oil.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2005-10-20 19:28|| 2005-10-20 19:28|| Front Page Top

#8 Touche! LOL! I gotta mention that to my Liberal friends.

Posted by Rafael 2005-10-20 19:38|| 2005-10-20 19:38|| Front Page Top

#9 Where would Qanada be if we closed the border to commercial traffic and brought all of those manufaturing jobs back that support, just one among many, the auto industry? And we stopped buying Qanadian qrap? Gosh, think they'd like that as our tat for their tit? Stupid protectionism cuts both ways - but in this case it would gut Qanada far worse than the US. as other have pointed out.

So much for any BS PR about Martin.

Posted by .com 2005-10-20 19:44|| 2005-10-20 19:44|| Front Page Top

#10 lotp: That works in a market in equilibrium. When demand outpaces supply, it works less well.

Demand always matches supply. At some price. If the Canadians want to subsidize Chinese oil consumption by selling below market price just to stick it to Uncle Sam, that's their prerogative. Think of it as an aid program. I just can't see that it will hurt the US more than it will hurt Canada. For Canada to compensate for lower sales of lumber by settling for lower total sales (because of some preferred price at which oil is being sold to the Chinese) of oil is just so idiotic, I can't believe this guy is doing this on economic grounds alone. I understand that Canada's population is 10% Chinese, but the cumulative negative economic impact from such stupid deals will alienate the other 90% of Canada's population that isn't Chinese.

Posted by Elmenter Snineque1852 2005-10-20 20:29|| 2005-10-20 20:29|| Front Page Top

#11 The Cannucks have got a valid beef on the softwood lumber issue. We went outside of a WTO process we both agreed to adhere to. Pity is we should just be taking the cheaper lumber and putting it into lower home prices (among other things) rather than corporate welfare for Weyerhaeuser.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2005-10-20 21:05|| 2005-10-20 21:05|| Front Page Top

#12 US softwood lumber is a campaign contributor. Not a large contributor or even a particarly large industry, but enough to get Congress and the Administration in line to "protect" them at the expense of US consumers and (smaller matter) overall relations w/Canada. The same way our relations with PRC are distorted to protect companies who want access to the Chinese market.

Just sayin' - it would be as bad or worse with the Dems in control - will either party (or a new one) ever be willing to put US national interest first again?

Posted by Angomonter Gloluter5517 2005-10-20 22:36|| 2005-10-20 22:36|| Front Page Top

23:58 Frank G
23:57 Frank G
23:38 mojo
23:13 trailing wife
23:11 trailing wife
23:07 Anginemp Hupolurong7319
23:07 trailing wife
23:07 trailing wife
22:53 Angie Schultz
22:51 trailing wife
22:47 Doomsday Gift
22:36 Angomonter Gloluter5517
22:30 trailing wife
22:29 Doomsday Gift
22:25 trailing wife
22:24 Doomsday Gift
22:14 trailing wife
22:11 trailing wife
22:07 DanNY
22:07 Edward Yee
22:04 Edward Yee
21:57 Edward Yee
21:55 OregonGuy
21:55 trailing wife