How much can smart people learn from just one graph?

Here's the graph.  How much can we learn from it?

Note that the numbers plotted above have always been freely, publicly available to anyone.  Smart people instantly see what it means.  But people who want to see the U.S. (as we've known it) destroyed--i.e. most Democrats--either refuse to grasp the lessons, or are too dumb to understand it.  Take your pick.

Oh wait, there's a third option: They don't believe the numbers are real.  Like Dems refusing to believe bribem and Obozo allowed 16 million foreigners into the U.S. (11 million for bribem, 5 million net for Obozo).  "We refuse to believe numbers we don't like," eh?  Yes, always.

SO...what can smart people learn from this one graph alone?

1. Whatever this "oil" stuff is, does the steady increase in demand suggest humans find it VERY useful?

2. Since it's so useful, then with world demand increasing at a near-constant rate, unless world-wide production increases at the same rate, what do ya think that will do to the price of oil?

3. If world supply and demand are perfectly matched, and a few nations produce far more oil than they use, and grow rich by exporting billions of barrels per year to the rest of the world, how long before one of those nations tries to control, say, 30% of the world market for oil, demanding "fees" of a million dollars per tanker to use "their" waterway?

4. If the woke, moronic leftist politicians who rule most countries refuse to slap the shit out of the nation that demands those "fees" to carry oil to the world, what will happen to the world price of oil?

5. If oil is indeed necessary to the world economy, what will a huge price hike do to the world economy?

6. The U.S. has roughly five percent of the world's people but is the world's largest economy.  We also use more oil per person than other nations.  Do you think those two things are related? 

7. If an opponent/rival/enemy of the U.S. wanted to destroy the U.S. economy, would they try to get American voters to hate oil and natural gas?

8. If a very few U.S. politicians (two, to be exact) supported increasing domestic oil and gas production ("Drill, baby, drill), how do you think members of the Democrat party would react?  Would they support increasing U.S. oil production, or would they sneer "Dat not possible!  We CANNOT drill ouah way to energy independence!"?

9. Because using oil and natural gas produces carbon dioxide, could you predict that leftist scientists would begin claiming CO2 was gonna wipe out all life on Erf by making duh Erf too hot to support life (i.e. global warming)?

10. Would it be easily predictable that "international organizations" (the U.N.), totally controlled by rivals of the U.S, would totally support the theory of Global Warming? 

I could do this all day.  All of this was (and is) entirely predictable.  The twist is that China  consumes far more oil than it produces, so has to import a few million barrels per day.  So you'd think the Chinese communist party would support efforts to keep Iran from raising the price of oil, eh?  But they don't.  Instead they support the Islamic Republic of Iran, selling 'em drones and all manner of weapons. 

You'd think that would be counterproductive, eh?  But the CCP hates the U.S. way more than they care about paying a a bit more for oil, so if China can force Trump to withdraw from the Straits, they win a HUGE PR victory.

That's the game plan.  And with the help of Trump-hating Dem shitheads, and the Trump-hating Mainstream Media, they're on the verge of winning.

Here's a prediction: No matter how many concessions the mullahs make, the U.S. Media and the Democrats will spin it as a win for Iran.

Absolutely guaranteed.  Anti-Trump outlets like Reuters and top Dem congresswhores have already bleated that Trump's "deal" gives the mullahs and IRGC everything they want, while getting nothing in return.  After all, that's what the mullahs are claiming--and we know they nevah lie, right?

Guess we'll see.  Except you won't, because the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media will lie as they always do.

Another prediction: IF an agreement is actually signed, the mullahs and IRGC will claim its terms are totally different from what was actually agreed to.  They can get away with that because they'll post their version of the "agreement" and claim the U.S. agreed.  And the Mainstream Media won't say a critical word.  So Americans will be left to believe...whatever the Media bleats, eh?