If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AP)   Bush says increasing supply is the solution to high gas prices, mentions nothing of decreasing demand. Omission Accomplished   (hosted.ap.org) divider line 200
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

559 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 May 2008 at 5:01 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



200 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-05-05 06:18:21 PM  
DaSwankOne: Cost to produce a barrel of oil - $40
Price on oil on commodity market $120

120 / 40 = 3


I was talking about something more along the lines of a source.

Shaggy_C: I know in your perfect world Jed Clampett goes out back, strikes oil, builds a refinery, and then starts a gasoline company that blows away Shell due to his awesome business savvy, but that's sadly not the case

That's quite possibly one of the most laughably inaccurate strawmen I've ever seen on Fark, and I've seen some pretty big ones.


Shaggy_C: It's about as easy to pull off as starting your own airline. It's the kind of barriers to entry that prevent a newcomer from seeing a profit for DECADES

Because as we all know, all new competitors must start from scratch.

Besides, who said we were talking about new oil competitors putting the big oil companies out of business? I was thinking more along the lines of the morass of government/corporate control and subsidization that has squashed all innovation but the officially ordained renewable-fuel-of-the-month.
 
2008-05-05 06:19:13 PM  
Shaggy_C: brainiac-dumdum: AWWWW, did I hurt your feelings?

No, you're just making yourself look like an idiot. I find it kind of amusing. Perhaps I used too many big words in my post; or perhaps you really don't understand finance, economics, or accounting. If you were smart you'd shut up and learn something.


You shouldn't let strangers on the internet get you so bent out of shape.

Prozac now has a cheaper generic version, maybe you could try that.
 
2008-05-05 06:20:09 PM  
Didn't Brazil just find one of the biggest fields evar? Maybe they can become our best pals.
 
2008-05-05 06:20:36 PM  
canyoneer: All2morrowsparTs: "What do Geologists know about commodity prices and the oil markets?"

What do economists know about oil? Nothing. Petroleum isn't like pork bellies or junk mail. There's only so much. Economists evidently can't understand this basic concept.



Very interesting link but the futures markets are about the short term we are talking 1 to 5 years.

I think you are asserting we are at peak oil, which most people don't believe nor do the speculators. The speculators are trying to make a buck. There is not a supply shortage right now that is driving the latest increase in Oil.

If you haven't noticed, when the Dow goes up or the dollar for that matter, Oil takes a hit. It's not like some one found an extra days worth of oil.

Also if it was a supply problem, the Brazillian Oil find would have caused the Oil market to sink fopr a considerable time.

And yes the oil futures markets works just like all the other commodities markets. Hence why they call it a commodity.
 
2008-05-05 06:21:19 PM  
Churchill2004: Besides, who said we were talking about new oil competitors putting the big oil companies out of business? I was thinking more along the lines of the morass of government/corporate control and subsidization that has squashed all innovation but the officially ordained renewable-fuel-of-the-month.

Subsidization? Wouldn't any US company get the same subsidy whether or not they were a 'big boy'? The whole idea is that even in the 'flat world' (Thanks, Reagan!) we live in that we give our domestic manufacturers a competitive advantage so that they don't sell all of their oil to China. Hate on subsidies all you want, but it's in our strategic interest.
 
2008-05-05 06:24:17 PM  
Galen_Rasputin: There is one short term solution, conservation. If everyone would slow down and drive 45 on the highway and 25 in the city that would reduce consumption by increasing your miles per gallon and drive the price of gasoline down. No politician is serious about conservation though, if they were they would be advocateing the re-institution of a 55 mph speed limit or even a 45 mph speed limit. I think they should go further then that and require a speed governer on all new cars that limited them to those speeds.

But I drive a 2001 Saturn. According to my observations, I get close to 40 mpg at 80 mph. At 65, it goes down to 35 mpg. Why do you hate me?
 
2008-05-05 06:24:30 PM  
All2morrowsparTs: And yes the oil futures markets works just like all the other commodities markets. Hence why they call it a commodity.

I heard someone mention the other day that at one point (possibly during the OPEC embargo) that the US actually disbanded and illegalized the Oil futures funds. Anyone know anything about that?
 
2008-05-05 06:24:41 PM  
All of this debate about oil prices omits the fact that, regardless of how much oil is still around to be discovered, petroleum and its use in combustible engines is a dying and outdated technology.
 
2008-05-05 06:27:26 PM  
Shaggy_C: All2morrowsparTs: And yes the oil futures markets works just like all the other commodities markets. Hence why they call it a commodity.

I heard someone mention the other day that at one point (possibly during the OPEC embargo) that the US actually disbanded and illegalized the Oil futures funds. Anyone know anything about that?


Dunno. But the commodities function as an insurance against instability. I'm not saying that the status quo is adequate, but something would have to take over that function.
 
2008-05-05 06:28:28 PM  
Shaggy_C: What do you think 'overextension of credit' means?

The Federal Reserve put out too much credit, letting loose rampant malinvestment and its predictable boom/bust consequences.


Shaggy_C: It wasn't the Federal Reserve that created the housing bubble - it was speculators driving up price, creating value where there was none previously

That is exactly what the Federal Reserve does, and they provided the credit that made that speculation possible.

Shaggy_C: Banks found themselves with more cash on hand (in the form of papers) and then could lend out more money

Again, because the Federal Reserve essentially gave them that money.


Shaggy_C: It was a game of musical chairs that is inherently part of a fractional reserve banking system

A banking system run by... who?

Shaggy_C: No one was making sure the credit ratings people were doing their job correctly

They were correctly reading false signals. Low interest rates mean "buy, buy, buy!". And since now interest rates are arbitrarily set by the Fed instead of actually being the market signal they're still treated as, people bought when they shouldn't have.


Shaggy_C: Oil hedge funds' are just another ploy for big banking interests to get ownership of a commodity that they can rebrand as a AAA risk bond and use to pump out more credit. All they need is $10 to create $100.

Who do you think "big banking interests" are, if not the Fed? What you're describing is exactly how the Fed controls the money supply.

We basically agree on the causes here, I think. It's just that you don't seem to see how all those bad bank policies you're talking about go back to the Fed- which is, after all, the central bank.
 
2008-05-05 06:28:49 PM  
Eric_PDX: DRILL ALASKA

Drilling in Alaska will reduce the price of oil by an estimated 50 cents per barrel.

Yippie skippie.
 
2008-05-05 06:30:07 PM  
At $120 per barrel, the oil companies are paying $2.86 per gallon for raw crude. On the average, state and local taxes are $.65 per gallon. Refining and transportation are fairly costly. In other words, given the cost structure, gas would average $3.50 a gallon even if the oil companies made no profit at all.

Relative to the massive cost of goods, it's virtually immaterial to the consumer whether the oil companies make ten cents a gallon or twenty. That's only ten cents out of four bucks. A drop in the bucket. I'm not suggesting that the oil companies should make more profit per gallon, or less, just observing that their profits, massive though they are in the aggregate, are virtually insignificant in their impact on pump prices. Even if they give it to us without making any profit, it would still cost us some $3.50 a gallon. The only way to get REAL relief on the retail prices, to get them below $3.50 a gallon, is to lower the cost.

Is that going to happen? Probably not. If anything, prices will continue to increase, because world demand for petroleum will continue to increase. The United States did manage to reduce consumption slightly in the period 2004-2007, from 20.73 million barrels per day to 20.70, but at the same time, the rest of the world increased from 61.60 to 65 (2007 estimated). In other words, if the United States had reduced demand by 15% in three years, total world consumption would still have increased! This trend is likely to continue. Even sharp reductions in American consumption will still result in world consumption increases, and therefore probably higher prices as well. I just don't see that changing.

(By the way, gas costs more than eight bucks a gallon in all the major European countries, and is approaching ten bucks in some of them.)
 
2008-05-05 06:30:35 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: Apparently it won't work because of something called tax incidence theory which says that the oil companies would simply increase the price of gas and pass the cost of the "wind-fall tax" onto the consumer.

If something like this were to work, there would need to be some law passed which does the following:

1. Limits the price that gas can be sold at a certain percentage of profit for the oil company and approved by a utility board
2. Prevents refineries from cutting production to "increase" profits
3. Requires all oil industry execs, any privately held businesses or investment clubs, and their stock/commodity brokers to submit their finances to forensic accountants to ensure that they aren't manipulating the price of oil or gas on the public market.

Basically, it wouldn't work.
 
2008-05-05 06:30:49 PM  
DaSwankOne: Look if you want to remain blissfully ignorant that is cool. The original article ran in the business section of the Houston Chronicle and was a link on Fark. I don't have time to vet news sources.

I have good enough sources to be satisfied with how hard refineries work to keep rates up without any shadow conspiracies. I'm married to an engineer who is working 13 hour days to keep rate at a maximum and complete special projects. I'm friends with engineers who put themselves in harms way so that production is maintained. I know first hand that they work damn hard to keep units going as long and strong as possible.

Typically, when I read stories about how oil companies are cutting rate, or how prices are high, they fail to account for real events that have a direct relationship that are a more common cause, turn-arounds, units breaking, rate cuts to perform repairs delayed during high demand periods, conversions for specialty fuels causing an increase in cost. I don't proclaim expertise on these subjects, but I do know enough about the practical realities that have more substantial impacts on prices that are never covered in the news.
 
2008-05-05 06:32:01 PM  
Churchill2004: Or better yet, simply undo the government interventions that are adding to, if not in large part creating, the inelastic demand and high entry barriers.

Wait, when did the government start forcing everyone to drive cars and setting the price of crude rigs?

That said, I'm not sure turning them into utilities is the right play--utilities are notoriously incompetent at managing price risks.
 
2008-05-05 06:33:39 PM  
FortKnox: Oil companies are making record profits. Isn't that price gouging? Increase price, record profits? Doesn't that insinuate that prices shouldn't have gone up??

/yeah, I don't understand the oil industry.


The price of oil is driven up by commodities traders. If oil companies decide that they are going to sell gas at a price that gets them a X% profit margin, and the price of oil/gas increases, "X%" is a bigger number. X% of $3.60 vs. X% of $0.70 -- big difference, same profit margin.

Even if they decided to work for free, the price of gas would drop 10, 20 cents.
 
2008-05-05 06:34:26 PM  
tomasso: (By the way, gas costs more than eight bucks a gallon in all the major European countries, and is approaching ten bucks in some of them.)

Smaller countries, denser cities, better public transporation.
 
2008-05-05 06:35:31 PM  
Churchill2004: We basically agree on the causes here, I think. It's just that you don't seem to see how all those bad bank policies you're talking about go back to the Fed- which is, after all, the central bank.

I'm looking at it like this:
Guy buys house for $100k. He mortgages it with a bank.
The bank now owns the $100k house. It has broken even (100k cash out, 100k in assets in.) In a year, the house is worth $150k. Suddenly, the bank has $50k more money laying around in the form of hard asset. It wants to get cash for it. The mortgage is sold off to another group of people (who expect the price to rise to $200k) for $150k. The bank now has that $50k in cash, and can now lend an additional half million dollars to other people. They've created value where there was none before. The fed sets the cash on hand requirements, but that didn't change at all - it was still the same 10% it always was. I don't really see what you're getting at with blaming the fed; the only thing you could imply is that more people were trying to get loans due to low interest rates thereby giving the bank more incentive to act in such a manner...

Where is the fed involved?
 
2008-05-05 06:35:50 PM  
godofusa.com: Didn't Brazil just find one of the biggest fields evar? Maybe they can become our best pals 51st state.

Fixed
 
2008-05-05 06:37:02 PM  
Smaller countries, denser cities, better public transporation.

In other words, less demand.
 
2008-05-05 06:37:05 PM  
tomasso: (By the way, gas costs more than eight bucks a gallon in all the major European countries, and is approaching ten bucks in some of them.)

Taxes - and if gas prices double in the next year, the government can cut those taxes and lessen the blow to their populations. Us? We're screwed in that scenario.
 
2008-05-05 06:37:46 PM  
Poopspasm: godofusa.com: Didn't Brazil just find one of the biggest fields evar? Maybe they can become our best pals 51st state.

Fixed


But they're brown!
 
2008-05-05 06:38:15 PM  
Shaggy_C: the only thing you could imply is that more people were trying to get loans due to low interest rates thereby giving the bank more incentive to act in such a manner

That's exactly what I'm talking about. That's the definition of malinvestment, and it's the basis of the boom/bust cycle.
 
2008-05-05 06:38:15 PM  
chapman: DaSwankOne: Look if you want to remain blissfully ignorant that is cool. The original article ran in the business section of the Houston Chronicle and was a link on Fark. I don't have time to vet news sources.

I have good enough sources to be satisfied with how hard refineries work to keep rates up without any shadow conspiracies. I'm married to an engineer who is working 13 hour days to keep rate at a maximum and complete special projects. I'm friends with engineers who put themselves in harms way so that production is maintained. I know first hand that they work damn hard to keep units going as long and strong as possible.

Typically, when I read stories about how oil companies are cutting rate, or how prices are high, they fail to account for real events that have a direct relationship that are a more common cause, turn-arounds, units breaking, rate cuts to perform repairs delayed during high demand periods, conversions for specialty fuels causing an increase in cost. I don't proclaim expertise on these subjects, but I do know enough about the practical realities that have more substantial impacts on prices that are never covered in the news.


Perhaps they should hire more engineers?

No one is blaming down the line employees for anything shady. I gots me some friends in that industry and they are good people. But that doesn't cloud my judgment about the history of large companies in a functioning oligopoly.
 
2008-05-05 06:40:27 PM  
The only real solution to the gas price crises is conservation. Only when the demand for gas falls will price of gas will go down.

Conservation requires sacrifice, and the current political thinking is that sacrifice is anathema to the American way.

Nothing could be further from the truth; sacrifice for the greater good is the American way.

Our grandparents made immense sacrifices during WWII; they sacrificed not only lives, but also food and fuel for the war effort.

The sacrifice of these comforts to was seen as the patriotic thing to do.

Once again our nation is at war and the only sacrifices being made are by the families of the men and women dying in the desert to satiate our fuelish needs.
 
2008-05-05 06:41:36 PM  
Churchill2004: That's exactly what I'm talking about. That's the definition of malinvestment, and it's the basis of the boom/bust cycle.

But cannot a cogent argument be made that such malinvestment is more likely to occur due to poor oversight of the risk assessors? Low interest rates are fine, but when you have banks and investment houses using faulty numbers to begin with, you're going to have much worse problems.
 
2008-05-05 06:41:36 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: sacrifice for the greater good is the American way

Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.
 
2008-05-05 06:44:31 PM  
Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: sacrifice for the greater good is the American way

Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.


That too.

I just meant that we are going to have to sacrifice our car culture if we're going to wean ourselves off of the terrorist-supporting, environment-destroying oil addiction.
 
2008-05-05 06:46:32 PM  
Churchill2004: Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.

Tsk, tsk...there we go again, the Ron Paul supporter and his anti-American platitudes :P
 
2008-05-05 06:47:25 PM  
Shaggy_C: But cannot a cogent argument be made that such malinvestment is more likely to occur due to poor oversight of the risk assessors?

Oversight by whom? Risk assessment is subjective. What do you do, find the best one and hire them as government overseers?

Interest rates are the fundamental market signal on whether or not to spend or save. The only problem is, they're not a market signal anymore. They're a signal from a board of governors stabbing blindly in the dark. Thus the false signal to spend rather than save.

If you want a much clearer explanation than I can provide, read the chapter on inflation and the business cycle in Murray Rothbard's For a New Liberty. It's a theory unique to the Austrian School, that prompted Ludwig von Mises to be one of the few economists to predict the Great Depression.
 
2008-05-05 06:48:23 PM  
"The only real solution to the gas price crises is conservation. Only when the demand for gas falls will price of gas will go down."

American conservation is not going to affect the solution. Even if the USA had reduced petroleum consumption by 15% in the past three years (and a decrease that large would have been a quixotic goal), total world consumption would have increased. Thus, even if one accepts your contention that a reduction in demand would drive prices down, the point is that there is not going to be such a reduction. Some very large countries are industrializing rapidly, and a reduction in American consumption is not likely to be enough to offset that.
 
2008-05-05 06:49:05 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: That too

Those are contradictory goals.

brainiac-dumdum: I just meant that we are going to have to sacrifice our car culture if we're going to wean ourselves off of the terrorist-supporting, environment-destroying oil addiction

That's fine. That's hardly a "sacrifice for the common good", though. It's a self-interested effort to save money on the part of the individual consumers.
 
2008-05-05 06:50:29 PM  
I'm always amazed by the lack of cognitive dissonance in people who talk about how we need to get off oil on the one hand, and then turn around and demand we punish oil companies for supposedly driving prices up.
 
2008-05-05 06:51:43 PM  
Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: That too

Those are contradictory goals.

brainiac-dumdum: I just meant that we are going to have to sacrifice our car culture if we're going to wean ourselves off of the terrorist-supporting, environment-destroying oil addiction

That's fine. That's hardly a "sacrifice for the common good", though. It's a self-interested effort to save money on the part of the individual consumers.


I would say that it serves all American's interests because it would stop US dollars from going into the coffers of terrorist supporting Middle Eastern theocracies.

It would also help our environment immensity.
 
2008-05-05 06:54:55 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: I would say that it serves all American's interests because it would stop US dollars from going into the coffers of terrorist supporting Middle Eastern theocracies.

It would also help our environment immensity



I was just jumping you for the disturbing "Fatherland above all!" rhetoric. I don't particularly disagree that a long-term move away from oil is both inevitable and beneficial.
 
2008-05-05 06:55:01 PM  
bartink: Perhaps they should hire more engineers?

No one is blaming down the line employees for anything shady. I gots me some friends in that industry and they are good people. But that doesn't cloud my judgment about the history of large companies in a functioning oligopoly.


such manipulation exists and if it can be proven would make for an interesting discussion. Right now people are happy to infer market manipulation out of any increase in price. I'm simply trying to demonstrate that there are tons of legitimate causes for prices to increase (regardless of the number of engineers)

However, I would also mention that prices are being directly increased by people who are speculating who have nothing to do with the oligopoly and created a messy externality. The decline of the dollar also hasn't done us much good as far as I could tell.
 
2008-05-05 06:55:07 PM  
Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: sacrifice for the greater good is the American way

Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.


Don't confuse selfishness with freedom and individual liberty.
 
2008-05-05 06:56:53 PM  
Churchill2004: Oversight by whom? Risk assessment is subjective. What do you do, find the best one and hire them as government overseers?

Interest rates are the fundamental market signal on whether or not to spend or save. The only problem is, they're not a market signal anymore. They're a signal from a board of governors stabbing blindly in the dark. Thus the false signal to spend rather than save.


You have to admit that there is something fishy going on when you have CDOs and SIVs being created and rated AAA for subprime mortgages on a large scale. Basel II essentially said that the banking industry could be trusted to effectively manage risk itself, without any kind of objective outside oversight. It was the free market at its very worst - big banks deciding how to value their own risk portfolios. Think Enron except on a much larger scale.

As far as the fed goes, the idea is to maintain an equilibrium interest rate such that a small amount of inflation is allowed in order to minimize unemployment. You're right that they held the rate low for too long, but by mid-2007 it was back over 5%, where it was through much of the mid-90s. I'm sorry to say, but the fed had very little to do with the current situation. The fault for this lays almost entirely at the feet of neoliberal economic policy over the last 25 years which have reduced the ability for the government to effectively police financial markets.
 
2008-05-05 07:00:45 PM  
chapman: Anwar would have been pumping oil for 3 years if it was approved the first time around in 1995.

Dude, Anwar is dead...

www.loc.gov

/The term you're looking for is ANWR: Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.
 
2008-05-05 07:01:29 PM  
Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: I would say that it serves all American's interests because it would stop US dollars from going into the coffers of terrorist supporting Middle Eastern theocracies.

It would also help our environment immensity


I was just jumping you for the disturbing "Fatherland above all!" rhetoric. I don't particularly disagree that a long-term move away from oil is both inevitable and beneficial.


I pulled it from an op-ed article about the gas tax holiday I just wrote for a column I do for my school newspaper (it's a community college, don't be impressed.

They like that high-flying rhetoric.
 
2008-05-05 07:05:51 PM  
Sleeping Monkey: Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: sacrifice for the greater good is the American way

Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.

Don't confuse selfishness with freedom and individual liberty.


Freedom to pursue your self-interest, however you define it, in whatever manner you see fit is the very definition of individual liberty.

Shaggy_C: You have to admit that there is something fishy going on when you have CDOs and SIVs being created and rated AAA for subprime mortgages on a large scale. Basel II essentially said that the banking industry could be trusted to effectively manage risk itself, without any kind of objective outside oversight.

If you kind find fraud, go for it. Oversight will never be an answer for bad decision making, though. Allowing the people who made the bad decisions to feel the consequences (something Washington/the Fed hasn't allowed) will.

Shaggy_C: It was the free market at its very worst - big banks deciding how to value their own risk portfolios

A market where all the major players know they have a guaranteed bail-out if they need it is not "free".

Shaggy_C: Think Enron except on a much larger scale

Again, there's an important distinction between fraud and stupidity.

Shaggy_C: As far as the fed goes, the idea is to maintain an equilibrium interest rate such that a small amount of inflation is allowed in order to minimize unemployment

That's the idea. Not that they're that good at it.

Shaggy_C: You're right that they held the rate low for too long, but by mid-2007 it was back over 5%, where it was through much of the mid-90s. I'm sorry to say, but the fed had very little to do with the current situation

Three years is a fairly typical delay between mass malinvestment and a recession. If anything, it's a shorter delay than usual.

Shaggy_C: The fault for this lays almost entirely at the feet of neoliberal economic policy over the last 25 years which have reduced the ability for the government to effectively police financial markets

What exactly do you think regulators could have done here? The government was encouraging this stuff because they thought it was good.
 
2008-05-05 07:07:44 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: I pulled it from an op-ed article about the gas tax holiday I just wrote for a column I do for my school newspaper (it's a community college, don't be impressed.

They like that high-flying rhetoric


Ah. Such vaguely jingoistic talk just triggers the "Fascism!" fuse in the back of my head. I though the same thing when Fred Thompson used the same phrase as his campaign slogan.
 
2008-05-05 07:08:14 PM  
This guy is such a moron. Why doesn't he just shut his hole and practice his putting in the backyard of the White House and be done with it? Doesn't he know that he's an embarrassment to America, and the laughing stock of the world yet?
 
2008-05-05 07:09:28 PM  
Churchill2004: Sleeping Monkey: Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: sacrifice for the greater good is the American way

Silly me, I though it had something to do with freedom and individual liberty.

Don't confuse selfishness with freedom and individual liberty.


I agree with that up to a point.

Obviously, "your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose."

Many Americans don't see how their everyday behaviors and habits effect their fellow citizens, both in our nation and throughout the world.
 
2008-05-05 07:09:51 PM  
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/ (pops)



Refuge a political football
Congress has grappled for years over whether to allow oil companies access to the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain in the Alaska refuge, which geologists believe harbors about 10.4 billion barrels of crude.


Lets see, 10.5 billion barrels divided by a consumption rate of 20.7 million barrels a day =

Less than 2 years =
one small step for America, one giant leap forward for a small class of private investors. =
Insipidly stupid Bushie republicans should stfu about ANWR.
 
2008-05-05 07:11:52 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: I agree with that up to a point.

Obviously, "your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose."

Many Americans don't see how their everyday behaviors and habits effect their fellow citizens, both in our nation and throughout the world


"Affecting" is not where the proverbial tip-of-the-nose is. Just about everything we do affects someone else. It's when you actually violate someones rights that the proverbial right-to-swing-fists ends.

Besides, the whole principle applies to individuals. You can't collective either the fist-throwing or the nose getting hit.
 
2008-05-05 07:12:07 PM  
Churchill2004: What exactly do you think regulators could have done here? The government was encouraging this stuff because they thought it was good.

That's the problem - like I said, farking corporatists running the show; be it the Republicans or the DLC, they actively encouraged this. If you get someone in office who can break from that kind of system, you get a government that works for us instead of against us. I know as a libertarian you would be against Glass-Steagall in principle, but can you not see how its repeal created this kind of situation? The fact is that the fed is not going away. Rail against it all you want, but our goal should be to contain it rather than simply say 'end it' and allow it run wild in the meantime.
 
2008-05-05 07:12:11 PM  
The price of oil in US dollars has tripled in 3 years. The price in Euros during the same time has doubled. What is the Bush plan for the falling value of the dollar?
 
2008-05-05 07:15:38 PM  
Churchill2004: brainiac-dumdum: I agree with that up to a point.

Obviously, "your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose."

Many Americans don't see how their everyday behaviors and habits effect their fellow citizens, both in our nation and throughout the world

"Affecting" is not where the proverbial tip-of-the-nose is. Just about everything we do affects someone else. It's when you actually violate someones rights that the proverbial right-to-swing-fists ends.

Besides, the whole principle applies to individuals. You can't collective either the fist-throwing or the nose getting hit.


Our behavior results in harming our nation and planet everyday. I would say that our national fist hits the world's collective nose daily.
 
2008-05-05 07:16:56 PM  
All2morrowsparTs: "There is not a supply shortage right now that is driving the latest increase in Oil...Also if it was a supply problem, the Brazillian Oil find would have caused the Oil market to sink fopr a considerable time. And yes the oil futures markets works just like all the other commodities markets. Hence why they call it a commodity."

What do you imagine was found in Brazil? The North Sea, for example, originally contained maybe 80 billion barrels of oil. It was first produced in the 1960's and is now far past peak. All of the Brazilian discoveries of the last five years add up to maybe 30 billion barrels, in deep water under thousands of meters of rock and hot plastic salt, and little to none of that production will come on line until 2012 at the earliest, at an initial investment of at least $5 billion dollars. Altogether, these Brazilian finds represent the only giant find on Earth since the Kazakhstan find in 2000.

None of the Brazilian production will reach the global market for years, and all the major oil provinces and supergiant fields around the world are in decline - the North Sea, the U.S., Da-Qing, Cantarell, Burgan, Garwar, Persia, Caspian Basin - you name it. This is all open source information. You can check it for yourself.

If the oil supply reality is as you say, there would be spare production capacity, right? Why isn't anyone producing more oil to get rich off the high price of crude? Are you saying there is a worldwide conspiracy to keep production low and oil prices high?
 
Displayed 50 of 200 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report