Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mojorabbit

(16,020 posts)
273. I was just reading about this on forbes
Sun Nov 16, 2014, 11:56 AM
Nov 2014

"This presumably accounts for some of the spin-off jobs. In the case of Keystone XL, it seems as though the intention is to export significant amounts of this petroleum abroad after it’s processed into gasoline, diesel and other products at existing Gulf Coast refineries, so it’s not clear how many additional jobs might be created. The notion of spin-off jobs is so vague and imprecise that it is impossible to predict beforehand or even estimate after the fact." http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2013/05/10/pipe-dreams-how-many-jobs-will-be-created-by-keystone-xl/2/


If existing infrastructure is used at the other end, there may be no need for significant new jobs in the refineries. mojo

absolutely not. spanone Nov 2014 #1
nope. nashville_brook Nov 2014 #2
NO. truebluegreen Nov 2014 #3
Keystone is not a major factor for me, really. MineralMan Nov 2014 #4
I read that thread, and there were good comments in there... TreasonousBastard Nov 2014 #12
Yes. I'm not sure all of the opposition is fact-based. MineralMan Nov 2014 #16
Can you point out what part of the opposition you're not certain is fact-based? sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #66
:crickets: BeanMusical Nov 2014 #98
Bullshit! I was away from my computer. MineralMan Nov 2014 #112
You seem angry. BeanMusical Nov 2014 #142
I've been pretty clear on all of that. MineralMan Nov 2014 #110
Yes the people use the oil, just not in your country. arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #153
Yes, as clear as tar sands: BeanMusical Nov 2014 #171
I agree! To me the result is the same either way, using antiquated energy sources. That said, RKP5637 Nov 2014 #253
MM didn't say he wanted the oil transported ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #199
The US Government has no say in who takes over land in this country for the purpose of making sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #214
Maybe there has been a disconnect here ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #218
The point that is coming across to me is that oil will be transported across the US so rhett o rick Nov 2014 #226
I, mostly agree, ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #237
Good point. I agree. nm rhett o rick Nov 2014 #238
No one who understands this issue, this particular oil, can be agnostic about the pipeline. sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #245
Potential to lower fuel costs AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #252
The flow of goods and services moved across the globe long before, what is going to be, the sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #257
LOL AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #289
By "agnostic", I simply mean ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #267
So in essence what you are saying is that because we have already allowed some really bad sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #271
In a word ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #272
'Little' is better than nothing. But it will do more than a little to protect this environment. We sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #287
Canada has no right to transport shit over our nation. If they want to ship it China so bad then use TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #269
True, Canada has no "right" ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #270
I obviously don't give a fuck about their plan as I oppose it. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #282
Okay ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #283
In the real world water is required for life. You threaten the water you threaten life. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #285
I agree ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #286
Hoping for magic future fixes does not address the actual threat no matter how well intentioned. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #296
Then let Canada make a pipeline across their country. nt Mojorabbit Nov 2014 #259
They can ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #268
I was just reading about this on forbes Mojorabbit Nov 2014 #273
is your heat on? DeadEyeDyck Nov 2014 #216
Oil makes gasoline AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #250
Get a horse, the world survived without cars that go 'vroom-vroom on the highway for sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #256
I don't want a horse AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #288
Admittedly it takes a little skill to handle a horse. Anyone can handle a combustion engine. So I sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #291
LOL AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #292
You can't hug a combustion engine! sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #293
Well you can AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #294
Speak to my good mates in Quebec, the ones who arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #154
Without the pipeline, less of it will move. jeff47 Nov 2014 #19
The current low prices for crude won't last, and it will again MineralMan Nov 2014 #24
I'm not basing that on the current price. jeff47 Nov 2014 #29
Finally someone with knowledge. The problem isn't arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #157
I wholeheartedly agree Art_from_Ark Nov 2014 #158
He was light years ahead and people mocked arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #160
Create jobs for Koch and Calgary, thanks. The arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #156
Don't you mean Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #189
You are correct. A few CEO's benefit and that's arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #232
This is true, they will find a way to move the oil. NYC_SKP Nov 2014 #140
one big difference unless it's my imagination between rail and pipeline Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #194
Correct. AND...invisibility of it is preferred by the owners and transporters. NYC_SKP Nov 2014 #196
That's where I'm at. aikoaiko Nov 2014 #190
Thank you very much for that other thread ctaylors6 Nov 2014 #275
Will they say they are voting for the Keystone Pipeline because the people want and need it? L0oniX Nov 2014 #5
People want it... brooklynite Nov 2014 #73
Because they are misinformed. alarimer Nov 2014 #83
Perhaps so, but it puts a crimp in politician's ability to say no... brooklynite Nov 2014 #86
And yet many, many things with majority support from the people are simply ignored for years on end Bluenorthwest Nov 2014 #118
Not if the politician has a spine. nt arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #159
LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #202
Every American I know who supports KXL mistakenly thinks it will move American oil. SunSeeker Nov 2014 #205
Who paid for that poll? American Petroleum Institute? Octafish Nov 2014 #210
Which people, the Chinese? If you think it's arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #162
As far as I'm concerned this pipeline is an illegal immigrant. B Calm Nov 2014 #6
Will obama grant it ammensty Travis_0004 Nov 2014 #36
No I am not, at this point in time I am not OK with the Democratic party on the whole Autumn Nov 2014 #7
No. NV Whino Nov 2014 #8
Kindly explain WTF is so bad about yet another pipeline TreasonousBastard Nov 2014 #9
+1. It is also described as the end of all life on planet earth. I don't get it. FSogol Nov 2014 #14
Besides the dirty crap going over aquifer in Nebraska and Oklahoma.. kentuck Nov 2014 #15
So, Kocks are bad- so we must oppose- ignore the 100's of other pipelines being built snooper2 Nov 2014 #22
Some would say??? rpannier Nov 2014 #94
Very well said. joshdawg Nov 2014 #184
but, "intellectually weak" bobduca Nov 2014 #222
Because there are no pipes over it now... bobclark86 Nov 2014 #225
Yes I did rpannier Nov 2014 #233
Trains kill people more often. bobclark86 Nov 2014 #258
Yes, but we need to upgrade our rail lines cally Nov 2014 #280
I fully agree, but it's unlikely. bobclark86 Nov 2014 #297
Good post. Thank you. woo me with science Nov 2014 #265
OK, so the thing is to beat up on the Koch brothers... TreasonousBastard Nov 2014 #30
unlike the other pipelines, WE do not get the oil, We do not get the jobs larkrake Nov 2014 #21
You're overlooking what we do get LondonReign2 Nov 2014 #26
So Jefferson County Texas is not Louisiana AnalystInParadise Nov 2014 #254
There is a huge fresh water aquifer that it crosses right over. We do not have the technology to jwirr Nov 2014 #33
+1! Excellent post. Enthusiast Nov 2014 #52
Well said! MatthewStLouis Nov 2014 #56
It crosses over a small part of the High Plains Aquifer... TreasonousBastard Nov 2014 #133
This is dirty oil this time and there are many of us who do not want the farmers etc to continue jwirr Nov 2014 #169
Thank you for this information.... LovingA2andMI Nov 2014 #70
Your map is irrelevant to the topic rpannier Nov 2014 #97
That there are almost 200,000 miles... TreasonousBastard Nov 2014 #134
A Fairly decent argument on your part that failed at the end rpannier Nov 2014 #136
I can't believe you are thinking this is ok and I arthritisR_US Nov 2014 #150
I object! I live 20 minutes from Port Arthur, Texas where the Koch refinery will refine this extra Dustlawyer Nov 2014 #178
Its an artificial issue with no economic justification IronLionZion Nov 2014 #276
Nope 2naSalit Nov 2014 #10
That is a rapidly growing sentiment Jackpine Radical Nov 2014 #80
Indeed. 2naSalit Nov 2014 #91
No, and Hell NO! whathehell Nov 2014 #11
Well beyond not okay. n.t 99Forever Nov 2014 #13
Some believe that continually excusing Party betrayals of core constituencies Maedhros Nov 2014 #17
No way. It'll be bad for the environment. Louisiana1976 Nov 2014 #18
I'm very lucky to have JustAnotherGen Nov 2014 #20
No... FarPoint Nov 2014 #23
No. I am in MN and I doubt any of my reps are going to vote for it. jwirr Nov 2014 #25
Three did ISUGRADIA Nov 2014 #119
Nolan is my rep. The other two I do not have anything to do with. I am surprised at Nolan - he is jwirr Nov 2014 #121
I read that Senator Amy Klobuchar is going to vote for it. She needs to hear from you. Maineman Nov 2014 #172
Okay. I will do that right now. jwirr Nov 2014 #173
Done. jwirr Nov 2014 #176
That's not why I voted for them. So, no. Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2014 #27
+1,000 malaise Nov 2014 #28
GOTV! whatchamacallit Nov 2014 #31
No, I am not. I will NOT forget. They vote for it, it's on their record, closeupready Nov 2014 #32
I see the Third Way pivot from denying it will happen to defending the pipeline is in progress. woo me with science Nov 2014 #34
Yep. It has begun in earnest. Union Scribe Nov 2014 #44
Exactly. That is their MO. Jamastiene Nov 2014 #89
Yep-- same play we've seen about 100 times now./nt Marr Nov 2014 #105
I shouldn't be surprised, but I am. BrotherIvan Nov 2014 #144
Naw, man RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #35
+1 wavesofeuphoria Nov 2014 #108
No. No. No. madashelltoo Nov 2014 #37
To those who say it will reduce gas prices, Mr.Bill Nov 2014 #38
I don't think there is anything congress can vote on. They have to have permits approved to refine t Sunlei Nov 2014 #39
They stink! vlyons Nov 2014 #40
No. The pipeline is a terrible infrastructure investment and money better spent on renewables on point Nov 2014 #41
What money? The pipeline isn't supposed to be built with taxpayer money. n/t hughee99 Nov 2014 #113
The money society has, public and private. The incentives are all wrong if this seems good on point Nov 2014 #116
NO !!! WillyT Nov 2014 #42
no La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2014 #43
kentuck, I'm bookmarking this thread so that DU will remember when it passes Liberal_Stalwart71 Nov 2014 #45
Agreed Iliyah Nov 2014 #81
Shit, I was writing & calling fucking McTurtle and the far worse Dumbing at least weekly for months TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #88
No, No, and No. Oh and did I say NO! nt Fla Dem Nov 2014 #46
Hell fucking no! ybbor Nov 2014 #47
No,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no. TNNurse Nov 2014 #48
Hell no CanonRay Nov 2014 #49
The pipeline does nothing for us, as a nation. And it could result in an environmental disaster. Enthusiast Nov 2014 #50
No.... irisblue Nov 2014 #51
No. And this very discussion is indicative of what is wrong with the party. hamsterjill Nov 2014 #53
No. I don't want my reps voting for the Koch brothers' dark money payday. MatthewStLouis Nov 2014 #54
No, but the betrayal is heaped on many such betrayals Tsiyu Nov 2014 #55
Yes and No. You have two questions. ffr Nov 2014 #57
No Jack Rabbit Nov 2014 #58
Just a rhetorical question: who remembers the 2013 Mayflower, Arkansas oil spill? MatthewStLouis Nov 2014 #59
No. Definitely not. H2O Man Nov 2014 #60
NO, NO, NO, NO!!! trueblue2007 Nov 2014 #61
We may want to ask ourselves is it better to continue to transport the oil by rail and road Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #62
Let the Canadians figure it out. Maybe they could ship it by rail to their coastline. B Calm Nov 2014 #96
Oh, yea that would fix the problem. In the meantime is it better to ship by rail or Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #107
Rail the toxic goo through Canada would be my choice. B Calm Nov 2014 #130
They can send it to Vancouver, and from there to China. grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #146
Perhaps it would be better to just shut down oil production worldwide,guess we could revert to horse Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #165
Renewables are already cheaper than oil. It's a fact. grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #230
I'm all for renewables for those who wants to do without the luxuries Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #231
Driving is cheaper with electric cars and renewable energy by a factor of 10! grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #239
I forgot, how do you charge electric cars? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #241
If safety is your concern, then you should want to leave the tar sand in the ground grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #242
No democrank Nov 2014 #63
Yes. If the people want it. It's our country Boom Sound 416 Nov 2014 #64
No. 1monster Nov 2014 #65
No roody Nov 2014 #67
Absolutely NO! sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #68
Hypothetically, yes. In reality, no. pampango Nov 2014 #69
Hell no rosesaylavee Nov 2014 #71
As long as it is NOT PASSED pnwmom Nov 2014 #72
No! mckara Nov 2014 #74
whats in it for us?...payback for alaska oil pipeline in canada. shallwechat Nov 2014 #75
Not only no, Hell NO! onecaliberal Nov 2014 #76
FUCK NO! williesgirl Nov 2014 #77
Absolutely not MissDeeds Nov 2014 #78
Nope and no to Tester also LiberalArkie Nov 2014 #79
NO! ISW Nov 2014 #82
Ditto on the nopes Omaha Steve Nov 2014 #84
The problem is that this isn't a winning issue for Dems. Drunken Irishman Nov 2014 #85
The problem is the Dems haven't figured out HOW to make it a winning issue. Martin Eden Nov 2014 #92
The problem is the potential environmental disaster, and the fact that the only upside to the Marr Nov 2014 #106
+1 RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #111
a-freakin-men!!! U4ikLefty Nov 2014 #260
Link to people who vote dem being for it, please. grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #147
Considering only 30% or so oppose it, it's a good bet a lot of Dem voters support it. Drunken Irishman Nov 2014 #148
So, it loses us votes, especially among those that sat out the last election. grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #151
It's the definition of a lose-lose political issue. Drunken Irishman Nov 2014 #217
NO. LWolf Nov 2014 #87
They're fucking cowards gwheezie Nov 2014 #90
Nope. BeanMusical Nov 2014 #93
no, but when it breaks onethatcares Nov 2014 #95
First of all this isn't crude florida08 Nov 2014 #99
No, old guy Nov 2014 #100
NO MFM008 Nov 2014 #101
I do not support the Keystone XL Pipeline. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2014 #102
No. That's one of the dumbest ideas ever. PDJane Nov 2014 #103
No. /nt Marr Nov 2014 #104
Nope. Ny abelenkpe Nov 2014 #109
HELL NO DonCoquixote Nov 2014 #114
Do red states deserve what they voted for? IronLionZion Nov 2014 #115
So, it's already there they just want a shorter one LeftInTX Nov 2014 #249
Oh yeah its there, they claim its not big enough IronLionZion Nov 2014 #255
No. nt awoke_in_2003 Nov 2014 #117
No. n/t GoCubsGo Nov 2014 #120
Not at all! tenderfoot Nov 2014 #122
No, absolutely not! Who do they think will benefit? Certainly not any of us! scarletwoman Nov 2014 #123
Fuck no. truebrit71 Nov 2014 #124
Its definitely not a deal breaker bhikkhu Nov 2014 #125
NO. n/t Triana Nov 2014 #126
No. I am not OK with that. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #127
Hell No! Kath1 Nov 2014 #128
Not Okay with that. i have been assured, though, that policy and issues do not matter as djean111 Nov 2014 #129
In no way,shape,or form. 99Forever Nov 2014 #131
No. n/t ms liberty Nov 2014 #132
Yes customerserviceguy Nov 2014 #135
NO! n/t tokenlib Nov 2014 #137
I'm ok with this pipeline sweetapogee Nov 2014 #138
Does it run through your water source? RiverLover Nov 2014 #164
we have a private well sweetapogee Nov 2014 #243
Are you also ok with global warming and corporate control of politicians? Maineman Nov 2014 #175
thanks! sweetapogee Nov 2014 #244
You like higher gasoline prices, and only more jobs to stop terrorists... cascadiance Nov 2014 #198
Only one way that it matters Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Nov 2014 #139
No and I'm extremely disheartened that they're even considering it. Rhiannon12866 Nov 2014 #141
No N O! Against Fossil fuels continuing and the damage that that project is doing and will do. glinda Nov 2014 #143
No. It's not even oil. It's tar sand. Highly abrasive. grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #145
Here are the 31 davidpdx Nov 2014 #149
No, but it's not a major issue for me. ZombieHorde Nov 2014 #152
Nope. Iggo Nov 2014 #155
A vote for Keystone should be reason enought for removal from the Democratic Party IdiocracyTheNewNorm Nov 2014 #161
NO. & we will know they were purchased by Koch & Friends if they do. ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #163
It is none of our business, any more, how people vote once they get into office. djean111 Nov 2014 #166
Nope. fredamae Nov 2014 #167
No (nt) bigwillq Nov 2014 #168
Nordstrom's says they're better off without some customers. Similarly, the Democratic Party ... Scuba Nov 2014 #170
No. Maineman Nov 2014 #174
No! albino65 Nov 2014 #177
Hell No. n/t zentrum Nov 2014 #179
No Way LadyVV Nov 2014 #180
No...n/t obietiger Nov 2014 #181
Are you fucking kidding me? lonestarnot Nov 2014 #182
Not just no, but joshdawg Nov 2014 #183
No A Little Weird Nov 2014 #185
ABSOLUTELY NO. Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #186
No. Fearless Nov 2014 #187
Absolutely NOT... elzenmahn Nov 2014 #188
NO turbinetree Nov 2014 #191
And they wonder why Democratic turnout is so low... kentuck Nov 2014 #192
+1 Couldn't agree more! B Calm Nov 2014 #193
Yes, morons is appropriate. BeanMusical Nov 2014 #195
NO!!! When will politicians stand for the environment cally Nov 2014 #281
NO! Why should the rest of them want to lose for the same reason corporatists lost this election?! cascadiance Nov 2014 #197
Can we have their names? classykaren Nov 2014 #200
No. But I'm coming to the opinion that they don't care Cleita Nov 2014 #201
Keystone XL is why the Kochs spent many millions to buy the election Stainless Nov 2014 #203
Yes. I heard that show. It needs to be shouted far and wide. SunSeeker Nov 2014 #207
This pipeline will hurt middle class jobs, exactly why Democrats and Republicans want it whereisjustice Nov 2014 #204
No way in hell... nt G_j Nov 2014 #206
No. Greed is the opposite of Democratic. (NT) Octafish Nov 2014 #208
The world seems to have enough pipelines ecstatic Nov 2014 #209
No cantbeserious Nov 2014 #211
We need something like the NRA that scores votes.... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2014 #212
Let me add to this chorus- NO! WestCoasterDude Nov 2014 #213
No way! Faux pas Nov 2014 #215
No if it endangers the aquifer in any way. Water is the most kiranon Nov 2014 #219
No, I am not happy Andy823 Nov 2014 #220
Hell No Piedras Nov 2014 #221
Are you okay with GOP congress voting to repeal the ACA, cheapdate Nov 2014 #223
right on still_one Nov 2014 #229
More Third Way talking points conveniently omitting Third Way corporate complicity. woo me with science Nov 2014 #234
Thanks woo... kentuck Nov 2014 #236
Yes, asserting that despite the Party's imperfections and disagreements cheapdate Nov 2014 #247
Thanks, kentuck. woo me with science Nov 2014 #251
Why exactly are you posting on Democratic Underground? cheapdate Nov 2014 #246
Insults. Is that all you've got? U4ikLefty Nov 2014 #261
In case you have any actual interest in this discussion, context is important. cheapdate Nov 2014 #263
Yup. woo me with science Nov 2014 #284
The pipeline is already built. joshcryer Nov 2014 #264
third way is different from blue dog IronLionZion Nov 2014 #266
+1, wish I could rec your post. /nt Marr Nov 2014 #298
Of course not. nt valerief Nov 2014 #224
No. mindem Nov 2014 #227
Only if it goes through their backyard. still_one Nov 2014 #228
It won't pass so it doesn't matter. craigmatic Nov 2014 #235
NO!! Segami Nov 2014 #240
I am completely opposed to it. femmocrat Nov 2014 #248
For the sake of my possible future grandchildren, no. herding cats Nov 2014 #262
The AFL-CIO and big labor in general is backing the Keystone Pipeline - so I suspect that many Douglas Carpenter Nov 2014 #274
No peacebird Nov 2014 #277
No. Absolutely NOT ok with it. eom BlueCaliDem Nov 2014 #278
NO, of course not. bowens43 Nov 2014 #279
No. I'm someone who bases my position mmonk Nov 2014 #290
Only if they move to within 2 miles of it Old Nick Nov 2014 #295
Disgust for sellouts and liars woo me with science Nov 2014 #299
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are you OK with the Democ...»Reply #273