Nationalized oil not always a good thing

[ALS]

Mexico suffers big fall in oil output
By Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: July 8 2008 03:00 Last updated: July 8 2008 03:00
Production at Mexico's Cantarell oil complex, one of the world's largest, has plummeted by a third in the past year, an indication the country could lose self-sufficiency in oil in the medium term.

Average daily production dropped to slightly more than 1m barrels a day in May compared with more than 1.6m b/d in the same month last year, according to the energy ministry.

Mexico's total oil production fell about 10 per cent in the past 12 months to

2.79m b/d in May. That was only marginally above April's output, which was the lowest in a decade.

"This is not a good sign," said George Baker, head of energia.com, a Houston-based consultancy. "But it does at least strengthen the government's position that there is an approaching crisis in oil production."

The centre-right administration of President Felipe Calderón has for months been trying to use the deteriorating figures to persuade Congress that something must be done quickly.

In April it presented legislators with a proposal for more flexibility in the service contracts that Pemex, the state oil company, signs with third parties. The contracts are narrow in scope and inflexible because Mexico's constitution prohibits private investment in oil.

There is little optimism that the proposal will survive a slow-moving, entangled legislative debate amid strong resistance from both main opposition parties.

Many opposition leaders argue the problems stem mainly from the government's rising dependence on oil income, which has starved Pemex of cash it could use for exploration.

But the government maintains the vast bulk of the country's reserves lie in deep waters and require technology and know-how to develop that Pemex does not possess.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

 

[Tempest]

Nationalized ANYTHING is usually not good. The inflexability is well demonstrated here.

 

[Duffman77]

State ownership has its merits and demerits. But it isnt a good fit for U.S. oil.

 

[H2GURU]

The huge oil field in Mexico is just plain old dryimg up and has little if anything to do with whose fingers are on the buttons. Countries, of which Russia was the 1st large one, go this route because they were getting a raw deal from one of the majors (Chevron?)and have competent people in finance that show them to take back their own oil and receive more of the profits. In the long run if the profits from oil get more evenly distibuted throughout the world we're all better off? The balance sheets of the oil cos. are way out of whack... how many billions will ever be enough?

 

[buster]

I don't trust the government to do much of anything right. Allowing them to control the energy industry would be a disaster.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
how many billions will ever be enough

In the case of government, it's how many TRILLIONS will be enough..

 

[morris]

moe in wichita ks
do you trust the government to do the right thing with that money? what has the government ever done that shows they can run a health care system?

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: morris
moe in wichita ks
do you trust the government to do the right thing with that money? what has the government ever done that shows they can run a health care system?


VA and Medicare both have far smaller parasitic overhead than the health plan insurance companies.

How's medical care in the US military these days?

 

[drivewaytech]

Originally Posted By: XS650
VA and Medicare both have far smaller parasitic overhead than the health plan insurance companies.

How's medical care in the US military these days?


Well, not exactly pristine and efficient according to the rants I often have to endure from a Veteran at work. But in all fairness... this is one person attending one facility. However, if the government runs heathcare the same as Social Security, I'll pass.

 

[morris]

moe in wichita ks
if you have ever been in the US military xs650 you wouldnt say that. as far as medicare just ask someone over 65 about medicare.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: morris
moe in wichita ks
if you have ever been in the US military xs650 you wouldnt say that. as far as medicare just ask someone over 65 about medicare.


I didn't mention quality of care, I was talking about administrative overhead in the VA, Medicare and the insurance/medical care industry. The insurance company driven health care system eats up 20% to 30% of cost of insurance in administrative costs when you count what those parasites suck out of the system and the expenses that the medical industry has to go through to deal with them.

I've been in the US military, medical cars was not that hot. But then, I didn't address quality of care in the military. You do realize that the VA and the military aren't the same thing, don't you?

I'm on medicare and get excellent care. Better than I did on a full fare Blue Cross plan. A good share of the people I know are over 65 and they are generally happy with medicare. As a cancer survivor, my follow on care is far better under my medicare advantage plan than it was under Blue Cross.