or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › New Republican coordinated plan to blame Democrats for high oil prices
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Republican coordinated plan to blame Democrats for high oil prices - Page 7

post #241 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

The premise of this article is flawed. Oil futures can be bid up without physical transfer of said oil. Where is all this futures oil? In the ground. So someone can always buy that stored oil at a higher price than the last person. With the oil in the ground being the bank.

No, futures lock in a price for oil delivered at a set time. What that price will be at the time is STILL determined by supply and demand. You buy orange juice futures at $100 and there's a frost and the price ends up $200 you just made a mint. If there was a bumper crop and it's $50 on the market you just lost your shirt.

Like say Brian Hunter who lost $6B in the natural gas futures game. He bet that natural gas would be really expensive in 2006. It wasn't. Amaranth supposedly had 60%-70% of the natural gas futures market...so if anyone could manipulate the market using futures to their advantage it was them.

They couldn't and they went boom.

Quote:
In fact the premise is downright ludicrous, you buy land, you sell land. Does one put that land in a bank for safe deposit? Absolutely not.

You do, in fact, take possession of the land.

Quote:
The land doesn't move, and neither does the oil, but if you bet on higher oil prices, and sell that oil in the ground to someone else (at a higher price), and they in turn sell it to someone else (at a higher price), and they in turn sell it to someone else (at a higher price). ..., ad infinitum, guess what happens when that oil actually does come out of the ground? It gets physically transfered at ~2X of it's original market value.

Unless there's no one that wants your oil at the price you bought it at. When you bet on higher oil prices in the future, you're trying to lock in lower prices for yourself not higher ones.

You don't transfer oil at 2X the ORIGINAL market value. You're transferring oil at some multiple of the CURRENT market value. Which may be above or below the price it was trading at when you make your futures bet.

This is how Amaranth went bust. The price it purchased NG at was far above the market price at delivery. Then you get margin calls and finally bankruptcy.

Especially for oil. Rarely does a futures trader actually ever take delivery of oil. It's mostly settled as cash. So where does it go? To the actual consumers that have the option of buying your oil or on the market.

Quote:
I'll take what the WSJ. or Fortune Magazine. or whatever financial periodical you care to mention with a grain of salt.

Of course.
post #242 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

No, futures lock in a price for oil delivered at a set time. What that price will be at the time is STILL determined by supply and demand. You buy orange juice futures at $100 and there's a frost and the price ends up $200 you just made a mint. If there was a bumper crop and it's $50 on the market you just lost your shirt.

Like say Brian Hunter who lost $6B in the natural gas futures game. He bet that natural gas would be really expensive in 2006. It wasn't. Amaranth supposedly had 60%-70% of the natural gas futures market...so if anyone could manipulate the market using futures to their advantage it was them.

They couldn't and they went boom.



You do, in fact, take possession of the land.



Unless there's no one that wants your oil at the price you bought it at. When you bet on higher oil prices in the future, you're trying to lock in lower prices for yourself not higher ones.

You don't transfer oil at 2X the ORIGINAL market value. You're transferring oil at some multiple of the CURRENT market value. Which may be above or below the price it was trading at when you make your futures bet.

This is how Amaranth went bust. The price it purchased NG at was far above the market price at delivery. Then you get margin calls and finally bankruptcy.

Especially for oil. Rarely does a futures trader actually ever take delivery of oil. It's mostly settled as cash. So where does it go? To the actual consumers that have the option of buying your oil or on the market.



Of course.

Your last statement would seem to support the speculation argument.

Show me the land in a bank and I might buy this bogus silver's futures argument. \

Futures trade long they also trade short. Supply and Demand? In two words? My ass!

Financial causes of oil price increases since 2003

1) Financial speculation
2) Effect of US dollar value on oil prices
3) Other causes (My guess? Potential for instability in the Middle East (RE: Iran and the Strait of Hormuz).)

And I don't buy what this Bush hack states either;

Quote:
On June 21, 2008, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said that insufficient oil production, not financial speculation, was driving soaring crude prices. He said that oil production has not kept pace with growing demand, especially from developing countries like China and India. "In the absence of any additional crude supply, for every 1% of crude demand, we will expect a 20% increase in price in order to balance the market," Bodman said.

The numbers from the DOE's own EIA website don't support his own statement;

Vertical supply curve (Perfectly Inelastic Supply)

[CENTER][/CENTER]

If I'm to believe his statement then we've already reached Peak oil, which is possible, but world oil consumption has increased at a rate of ~1.6%/year over the past 25 years (1983-2007), and in fact has tapered off slightly over the past three years (2005-7), relative to the two prior years (2003-4).

NYMEX has gone from ~$70 a year ago to ~$140+ today, so according to Bodman's numbers where's the ~5+% increase in demand over the past year coming from? My answer? Mostly thin air! \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #243 of 297
Look I don't buy that this is simple supply and demand. Yes we are going to run out of dead dinosaurs some day. Probably in about 100 to 150 years. And yes we'll feel the pinch way before that. And yes we need to be looking at alternatives. However what we are seeing today as far as prices go is someone ( or many someones ) getting rich at our expense. They're hoping you blame it on China or we're running out of oil already. Just not the case. The way the pricing has rose so fast says it's manipulation. Anyone who says otherwise is blind or selling something.

Pure and simple.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #244 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Look I don't buy that this is simple supply and demand. Yes we are going to run out of dead dinosaurs some day. Probably in about 100 to 150 years. And yes we'll feel the pinch way before that. And yes we need to be looking at alternatives. However what we are seeing today as far as prices go is someone ( or many someones ) getting rich at our expense. They're hoping you blame it on China or we're running out of oil already. Just not the case. The way the pricing has rose so fast says it's manipulation. Anyone who says otherwise is blind or selling something.

Pure and simple.

It's really not funny when you think about it. The stock market has lost 20+% in the last several months, so it's an official bear market. So over the past several month's where have institutional and individual investors been putting their money to make ~100% gain in a year's time?

Hmm, that's a tough one, we know they aren't making any money in either the stock market or housing. Jiminy Cricket you got me, I just can't think of where all the money is being made.

Oil? Black Gold?

Nah, that couldn't possibly be as simple as it seems, it's all due to the Magic Supply Demand Wizard.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #245 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

the Magic Supply Demand Wizard.

Cute. The rolling eyes is right but, I suspect, not for the reason you think.
post #246 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Cute. The rolling eyes is right but, I suspect, not for the reason you think.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Why don't you give me loooooooooooooong list of reading materials, about supply and demand "theory," but remember economics is only a social "science" when it should be called more appropriately social voodoo.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #247 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

remember economics is only a social "science" when it should be called more appropriately social voodoo.

You can call it (and dismiss it) however you want to. Your willful ignorance doesn't affect my life (it's actually kind of amusing). Unless you actually have some control over government policy. Then it would scare the hell out of me. But no more so than what I already see going on. You (probably) couldn't do worse.
post #248 of 297
It's not simple supply and demand. It's called GREED.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #249 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Your last statement would seem to support the speculation argument.

Not really unless all oil is tied up in the futures market which we know isn't the case because there exists a spot market. Typically we're talking spot price when we talk about the price of oil.

Quote:
Show me the land in a bank and I might buy this bogus silver's futures argument. \

If I buy up all the land in an area I take possession of it and I can corner the real estate market in that area. I put the titles for those properties in the bank.

Quote:
Futures trade long they also trade short. Supply and Demand? In two words? My ass!

Yes they do also trade short. I'm not sure what the point is here. Either way you're speculating on the future price of the commodity if you aren't actually taking delivery.

Quote:
Financial causes of oil price increases since 2003

1) Financial speculation
2) Effect of US dollar value on oil prices
3) Other causes (My guess? Potential for instability in the Middle East (RE: Iran and the Strait of Hormuz).)

Wikipedia is not an authoritative source.

In any case the 1st cause it lists is demand, followed by supply and finally financial causes.

But lets look at the statements in that section. Masters testified that Chinese demand for petroleum increased by 920 million barrels. Index Speculators' demand for petroleum futures increased by 848 million barrels.

The difference? The Chinese BURNED their petroleum increase. The oil purchased by index speculators was sold back on the market. It represents a 0 barrel real increase in demand unless someone actually TOOK that oil and physically DID something with it.

Like storing somewhere to try to manipulate the market. 848M barrels of oil would be noticed by someone.

Quote:
And I don't buy what this Bush hack states either;

The numbers from the DOE's own EIA website don't support his own statement;

China's consumption of oil products increased 16.5% YOY and of crude oil 8% YOY in Q1 of 2008.

EIA's table of world oil consumption ends in 2005 unfortunately. You have to piece the 2006-2008 data from different pages rather than find it in one nice excel spreadsheet.

However, there are figures below. Did you mean to post a link to some EIA numbers? I did not find a comprensive table but didn't spend all THAT much time looking either.


Oil is not a vertical supply as the output varies. However, it is increasing more slowly than demand.

Peak oil may or may not have occured but even then it wont strictly be a vertical supply as two things happen: production drops (ie non-static), and oil that was uneconomical to recover becomes viable.

Land was the example of a vertical supply. Unless you nuke it or lose it to the ocean, you typically don't gain or lose any.

Quote:
If I'm to believe his statement then we've already reached Peak oil, which is possible, but world oil consumption has increased at a rate of ~1.6%/year over the past 25 years (1983-2007), and in fact has tapered off over the past three years (2005-7), relative to the two prior years (2003-4).

NYMEX has gone from ~$70 a year ago to ~$140+ today, so according to Bodman's numbers where's the ~5+% increase in demand over the past year coming from? My answer? Mostly thin air! \

China.

"State ceilings on prices of domestic oil products was the major reason contributing to China's surging oil consumption in the first quarter.

Below-cost fuel prices did not restrain China's demand for oil but rather boosted it, said Shu.

China's gross domestic product (GDP) rose by 10.6 percent in the first quarter, 1.1 percentage points down from a year ago but still at a high level.

...

China's net imports of crude oil was 44.95 million tonnes in the first quarter, up 14.9 percent, and net imports of oil products rose by 31.8 percent from a year ago to 5.47 million tonnes, according to General Administration of Customs.

China's imports of diesel in the first quarter surged over 600 percent to 1.66 million tonnes and the imports of gasoline, rose by nearly twice to 76,654 tonnes."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_8075648.htm

Actual EIA statements:

"The spot price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil increased from $122 per barrel on June 4 to $145 per barrel on July 3. Global supply uncertainties, combined with significant demand growth in China, the Middle East, and Latin America are expected to continue to pressure oil markets. WTI prices, which averaged $72 per barrel in 2007, are projected to average $127 per barrel in 2008 and $133 per barrel in 2009.
...
World oil consumption continues to grow despite 7 consecutive years of rising prices. Preliminary data indicate that world oil consumption during the first half of 2008 rose by roughly 520,000 bbl/d compared with year-earlier levels. Compared to year-ago levels, this increase reflects a 170,000-bbl/d gain in the first quarter, followed by an 870,000-bbl/d increase in the second quarter. A 760,000-bbl/d decline in consumption in OECD countries during the first half of 2008, mainly concentrated in the United States, was more than offset by a 1.3-million-bbl/d increase in consumption in non-OECD nations led by China and the Middle East (World Oil Consumption).
...
The pace of supply growth in non-Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is another key determinant of future market conditions. Despite higher prices and recent past projections of substantial growth in non-OPEC supplies that matched or exceeded consumption growth, actual non-OPEC production fell far short of both expectations and consumption growth.
...
OPEC crude production in the second quarter of 2008 averaged an estimated 32.3 million bbl/d, up only slightly from 32.2 million bbl/d in the first quarter. Higher production in Iraq and Angola more than offset lower production in Nigeria caused by security problems and worker strikes. Assuming that Saudi Arabia’s announcement of raising July output to 9.7 million bbl/d results in a higher sustained rate of production through at least September, OPEC crude production is projected to average 32.7 million bbl/d during the third quarter. At these production levels, available surplus production capacity during the third quarter would be only 1.2 million bbl/d, marking the third consecutive quarter that surplus capacity stood at or below 1.5 million bbl/d. All of this capacity is held by Saudi Arabia (OPEC Surplus Oil Production Capacity). Any industry operating at close to 99 percent of capacity will remain vulnerable to surprises that either boost consumption or disrupt production. Such surprises would place additional upward pressure on prices and contribute to oil price volatility. In this tight global oil market, OPEC countries have also faced delays in adding new production capacity, notably in Algeria and in Saudi Arabia, whose 500,000 bbl/d Khursaniyah project has been pushed back to the end of 2008."

http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo

Note that 2007 saw an actual drop in oil production of 400K bbl/d. Fortunately 2008 production exceeds 2006 production. Or is expected to anyway.

If you look at the steo spreadsheets 2008 production is 86.479M bbl/d with 2008 consumption 86.400M bbl/d. Interestingly enough that 2007 consumption (85.543M) is listed as higher than 2007 production (84.565M).

There's obviously some difference in computation of use vs production unless it's just a typo in the spreadsheet.
post #250 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Not really unless all oil is tied up in the futures market which we know isn't the case because there exists a spot market. Typically we're talking spot price when we talk about the price of oil.



If I buy up all the land in an area I take possession of it and I can corner the real estate market in that area. I put the titles for those properties in the bank.



Yes they do also trade short. I'm not sure what the point is here. Either way you're speculating on the future price of the commodity if you aren't actually taking delivery.



Wikipedia is not an authoritative source.

In any case the 1st cause it lists is demand, followed by supply and finally financial causes.

But lets look at the statements in that section. Masters testified that Chinese demand for petroleum increased by 920 million barrels. Index Speculators' demand for petroleum futures increased by 848 million barrels.

The difference? The Chinese BURNED their petroleum increase. The oil purchased by index speculators was sold back on the market. It represents a 0 barrel real increase in demand unless someone actually TOOK that oil and physically DID something with it.

Like storing somewhere to try to manipulate the market. 848M barrels of oil would be noticed by someone.



China's consumption of oil products increased 16.5% YOY and of crude oil 8% YOY in Q1 of 2008.

EIA's table of world oil consumption ends in 2005 unfortunately. You have to piece the 2006-2008 data from different pages rather than find it in one nice excel spreadsheet.

However, there are figures below. Did you mean to post a link to some EIA numbers? I did not find a comprensive table but didn't spend all THAT much time looking either.



Oil is not a vertical supply as the output varies. However, it is increasing more slowly than demand.

Peak oil may or may not have occured but even then it wont strictly be a vertical supply as two things happen: production drops (ie non-static), and oil that was uneconomical to recover becomes viable.

Land was the example of a vertical supply. Unless you nuke it or lose it to the ocean, you typically don't gain or lose any.



China.

"State ceilings on prices of domestic oil products was the major reason contributing to China's surging oil consumption in the first quarter.

Below-cost fuel prices did not restrain China's demand for oil but rather boosted it, said Shu.

China's gross domestic product (GDP) rose by 10.6 percent in the first quarter, 1.1 percentage points down from a year ago but still at a high level.

...

China's net imports of crude oil was 44.95 million tonnes in the first quarter, up 14.9 percent, and net imports of oil products rose by 31.8 percent from a year ago to 5.47 million tonnes, according to General Administration of Customs.

China's imports of diesel in the first quarter surged over 600 percent to 1.66 million tonnes and the imports of gasoline, rose by nearly twice to 76,654 tonnes."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_8075648.htm

Actual EIA statements:

"The spot price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil increased from $122 per barrel on June 4 to $145 per barrel on July 3. Global supply uncertainties, combined with significant demand growth in China, the Middle East, and Latin America are expected to continue to pressure oil markets. WTI prices, which averaged $72 per barrel in 2007, are projected to average $127 per barrel in 2008 and $133 per barrel in 2009.
...
World oil consumption continues to grow despite 7 consecutive years of rising prices. Preliminary data indicate that world oil consumption during the first half of 2008 rose by roughly 520,000 bbl/d compared with year-earlier levels. Compared to year-ago levels, this increase reflects a 170,000-bbl/d gain in the first quarter, followed by an 870,000-bbl/d increase in the second quarter. A 760,000-bbl/d decline in consumption in OECD countries during the first half of 2008, mainly concentrated in the United States, was more than offset by a 1.3-million-bbl/d increase in consumption in non-OECD nations led by China and the Middle East (World Oil Consumption).
...
The pace of supply growth in non-Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is another key determinant of future market conditions. Despite higher prices and recent past projections of substantial growth in non-OPEC supplies that matched or exceeded consumption growth, actual non-OPEC production fell far short of both expectations and consumption growth.
...
OPEC crude production in the second quarter of 2008 averaged an estimated 32.3 million bbl/d, up only slightly from 32.2 million bbl/d in the first quarter. Higher production in Iraq and Angola more than offset lower production in Nigeria caused by security problems and worker strikes. Assuming that Saudi Arabia’s announcement of raising July output to 9.7 million bbl/d results in a higher sustained rate of production through at least September, OPEC crude production is projected to average 32.7 million bbl/d during the third quarter. At these production levels, available surplus production capacity during the third quarter would be only 1.2 million bbl/d, marking the third consecutive quarter that surplus capacity stood at or below 1.5 million bbl/d. All of this capacity is held by Saudi Arabia (OPEC Surplus Oil Production Capacity). Any industry operating at close to 99 percent of capacity will remain vulnerable to surprises that either boost consumption or disrupt production. Such surprises would place additional upward pressure on prices and contribute to oil price volatility. In this tight global oil market, OPEC countries have also faced delays in adding new production capacity, notably in Algeria and in Saudi Arabia, whose 500,000 bbl/d Khursaniyah project has been pushed back to the end of 2008."

http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo

Note that 2007 saw an actual drop in oil production of 400K bbl/d. Fortunately 2008 production exceeds 2006 production. Or is expected to anyway.

If you look at the steo spreadsheets 2008 production is 86.479M bbl/d with 2008 consumption 86.400M bbl/d. Interestingly enough that 2007 consumption (85.543M) is listed as higher than 2007 production (84.565M).

There's obviously some difference in computation of use vs production unless it's just a typo in the spreadsheet.

... proves? I have thrown out normalized numbers, not absolute numbers, and to be honest, I take the EIA data and perform my own analyses, just look at their historical predictions of future oil prices. In a word? Atrocious!

Oil products, you mean like plastics? I'm talking about total world consumption YOY, you'll find the numbers I've used taken from t46.xls on the EIA website. Come back when you have normalized all your numbers relative to crude oil production/consumption, from whence all derivative products come from (of course adding about 2.7 additional gallons of chemicals).

That 86.4 BBPD is awfully close to the 86.336 BBPD that "pops" out of my spreadsheet estimate for 2008. So 2*(86.400 - 85.385)/(86.400 + 85.385) = 1.18% which isn't much different from 2007 (0.90%) or 2006 (1.16%).

So care to explain this spike in oil prices again? Don't worry I can handle anything you are capable of throwing at me in your childlike way.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #251 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... proves?

Proves you were wrong about your assertion that there wasn't an increase in demand in 2008.

Quote:
Oil products, you mean like plastics?

No, like gasoline, fuel oil, diesel. Did you bother to click the link? No, I didn't think so.

Quote:
I'm talking about total world consumption YOY, you'll find the numbers I've used taken from t46.xls on the EIA website. Come back when you have normalized all your numbers relative to crude oil production/consumption, from whence all derivative products come from (of course adding about 2.7 additional gallons of chemicals).

Post your numbers and lets see.

Quote:
That 86.4 BBPD is awfully close to the 86.336 BBPD that "pops" out of my spreadsheet estimate for 2008. So 2*(86.400 - 85.385)/(86.400 + 85.385) = 1.18% which isn't much different from 2007 (0.90%) or 2006 (1.16%).

So care to explain this spike in oil prices again? Don't worry I can handle anything you are capable of throwing at me in your childlike way.

I don't know. I have a fear and it isn't speculators. Since 2005, world oil production has decreased slightly while demand increased 2% and prices skyrocketed even factoring out the weak dollar*.

You say it's speculators. Fine...how do oil speculators succeed when a natural gas speculator with 60% of the futures market tied up failed? How does 848M barrel tail wag a 30B barrel dog? In an elastic market, it shouldn't. Not to this degree.

What rational oil producing country would not have pumped more if they could and reaped the rewards of $70/barrel much less $140? Did Saudi Arabia say "we wont" to Bush or "we can't" to Bush?

Lets say for the moment that the 848M barrels of speculation oil represents "real" demand. How do you go from $70/barrel to $140/barrel in a year?

If demand is 100.1%+ of supply.

EIA is estimating an increase in oil production in 2008. Lets see if that ends up as reality as the increase is largely projected. I hope it does. 3 years of declining production implies not very good things.

Perhaps the final 2008 numbers will show why oil prices doubled?
post #252 of 297
Oh, the assumption that 1% demand growth = 20% price increase is the logical fallacy here.

You have to show he was right when you don't trust anything else he says. Lets even say that historically this is true.

It is unlikely to be true near, at and post peak oil when the market changes from an elastic one to one that is inelastic and then only in declines in supply.
post #253 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Proves you were wrong about your assertion that there wasn't an increase in demand in 2008.

Show me my "assertion that there wasn't an increase in demand in 2008." As usual, you read something into my posts that I never stated or claimed. It is widely known that increases in demand from countries like India and China continues at greater rates than the global market. However, that does not mean that world consumption is increasing at those same rates.

Try reading what I post, instead of reading between the lines of my posts, and seeing something that I never stated.

The numbers I'm using are from EIA's IPM Petroleum (Oil) Demand it's the last link on that page (t46.xls).

As to your link? That link will be repeated every quarter, since China will set a new record in consumption for each quarter for the foreseeable future. D'oh! It's known as a non sequitur.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #254 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Oh, the assumption that 1% demand growth = 20% price increase is the logical fallacy here.

You have to show he was right when you don't trust anything else he says. Lets even say that historically this is true.

It is unlikely to be true near, at and post peak oil when the market changes from an elastic one to one that is inelastic and then only in declines in supply.

That isn't my statement, it was the statement of the DOE's Bodman.

Stop assigning statements to me that I never stated to begin with.

It is quite clear that this statement isn't true, because if it were than world consumption would have to have increased by 5+% in the past year, that's 4+ sigma relative to historical increases in consumption over the past 24 years.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #255 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Show me my "assertion that there wasn't an increase in demand in 2008." As usual, you read something into my posts that I never stated or claimed. It is widely known that increases in demand from countries like India and China continues at greater rates than the global market. However, that does not mean that world consumption is increasing at those same rates.

Try reading what I post, instead of reading between the lines of my posts, and seeing something that I never stated.

The numbers I'm using are from EIA's IPM Petroleum (Oil) Demand it's the last link on that page (t46.xls).

As to your link? That link will be repeated every quarter, since China will set a new record in consumption for each quarter for the foreseeable future. D'oh! It's known as a non sequitur.

Look, can we stop arguing for the moment? Lets say for the moment I agree with everything you said in the past.

Hypothesis: Speculation can only drive markets upwards at this rate when speculators can control sufficient commodity to create a scarsity.

Is the data at hand showing that a mere 1% speculation share is able to double the price of oil?

If so then both of us are right. Speculators are the problem but they can only be doing what they are doing because the industry is operating a 99% capacity. They can leverage their 1% share to enhance scarsity and pump prices.

Why is China part of the problem? What if our reduction in oil use was not negated (and then some) by their increase. That swing is a good percentage of of the speculation market size. Had China managed to hold steady would the price of gas on the spot market been $65 a barrel instead of $70 and the speculators taken a bath?

You can trade oil "20 times" pumping the price every trade but at the end of the day a real consumer has to buy it for you to cash out. The last guy holding the oil isn't going to be happy if there are no chairs left when the music stops and he has $120 oil when the spot market is sitting at $70 or below.

From a geopolitical perspective, is it in China's interest to create this scarsity? They appear to be effectively subsidizing the price of gas which has encouraged continued double digit consumption growth.
post #256 of 297
I laughed HARD when I saw this

http://www.physorg.com/news135003243.html

I mean, how the hell are you ever going to be street-cred with a PINK tank attached to your back and a tube rammed up the harris! The bulls will die laughing...
post #257 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

I laughed HARD when I saw this

http://www.physorg.com/news135003243.html

I mean, how the hell are you ever going to be street-cred with a PINK tank attached to your back and a tube rammed up the harris! The bulls will die laughing...

LOL

I bet the same thing would happen if they strapped that gas collection device onto John McCain

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #258 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

I laughed HARD when I saw this

http://www.physorg.com/news135003243.html

I mean, how the hell are you ever going to be street-cred with a PINK tank attached to your back and a tube rammed up the harris! The bulls will die laughing...



MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! HELP ME!!!
post #259 of 297
Now, if you were an enterprising young hooligan, im sure theres fun to be had in a field of these heifers,

im thinking of some kind of catapult firing flaming rounds....BOOOM!
post #260 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

Now, if you were an enterprising young hooligan, im sure theres fun to be had in a field of these heifers,

im thinking of some kind of catapult firing flaming rounds....BOOOM!



post #261 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

LOL

I bet the same thing would happen if they strapped that gas collection device onto John McCain

Fellows

He'd float away.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #262 of 297
I watched an interesting series of videos that I think anyone with an interest in current affairs should watch. The guy can be a slight bit annoying, but its worth sticking it through to the end. There are 8 parts to this, I linked to the first. The rest are easy to find.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbakN7SLdbk

Incidently, I started watching thinking this was going to be a load of republican political nonsense - given the title of the video, but infact, while I do not know entirely whether the information given within is credible, it is certainly a fascinating watch, and gives an account of economic history in oil, back to the 60's, to why we are in this situation today.

It also raises some very revealing numbers about ANWR
post #263 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

I watched an interesting series of videos that I think anyone with an interest in current affairs should watch. The guy can be a slight bit annoying, but its worth sticking it through to the end. There are 8 parts to this, I linked to the first. The rest are easy to find.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbakN7SLdbk

Incidently, I started watching thinking this was going to be a load of republican political nonsense - given the title of the video, but infact, while I do not know entirely whether the information given within is credible, it is certainly a fascinating watch, and gives an account of economic history in oil, back to the 60's, to why we are in this situation today.

It also raises some very revealing numbers about ANWR

Pretty interesting. He has retired from the speaking tour, but I did find a manuscript of the book online.

This book was published in 1980...1980.

Uh, I just went on Amazon to see what it would cost...

The Energy Non-Crisis (Paperback)

by Lindsey Williams (Author), Clifford Wilson (Author)

3.1 out of 5 stars (10 customer reviews)

3 used & new available from $1,075.00

Or here...

Lindsey Williams DVD's *

Include:

1. Energy Non-Crisis -- "New Edited & Revised Version Now Available"
2. Torn From the Land ( about the American Family Farm Crisis )
3. Vaccinations - Do they work? Is it worth the risk?
4. Economic Hit Man - Lindsey Williams interviews an Economic Hit man in Prison ( Many of his predictions have already come to pass, are you ready for the rest of the story?)

Plus 4 Free Bonus DVD's.

5. Loose Change
6. The North American Union
7. Stem Enhance - Are Adult Stem Cells The Answer to Perfect Health?
8. Dangers of Evolution

This variety may vary due to production schedule or availability.

Plus 2 Free Books ( by Lindsey Williams )

This special offer is only $138.00 + $10.00 s&h USA only - a $300.00 + value.

...oh well...
post #264 of 297
post #265 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

So this is the way it is....

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2008/0...llar-hegemony/

The man is not the "loon" so many love to call him.

Quite the opposite.

Thank God for men like Ron Paul who have the courage to speak up even when it is "not popular" heaven forbid.....

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #266 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

The man is not the "loon" so many love to call him.

Quite the opposite.

Thank God for men like Ron Paul who have the courage to speak up even when it is "not popular" heaven forbid.....

Fellows

The trouble is - he might be 100% right, and in my opinion he is.

But the problem is so endemic, trying to tackle it might bring down the whole of western society.

The guy is right. Believe me, he is. But you have to wonder, if things didn't happen the way they have - all these evils we fight against every day, if they hadn't happened....

would western society have collapsed 50, 30, 10 years ago?

Maybe, just maybe, as sick as it is, we just bought an extra 50 years of our civilization, by screwing over everyone else in the world.

If that hadn't happened, you, I, segovius, might not have ever been born at all...

Maybe, we can buy another 20-25 years before it all collapses in a pile of rotten.....
but we have to screw everone else over in the world to an extent not seen in all of human history.

What would you chose? Life or Death?
post #267 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

The man is not the "loon" so many love to call him.

Quite the opposite.

Thank God for men like Ron Paul who have the courage to speak up even when it is "not popular" heaven forbid.....

Fellows

What can we tell from his speech?

Civilizations built on Gold has failed in the past. What he fears for us has occured in the example he provides for a gold standard empire.

Perhaps its not the form of money that matters? But hey we like simple answers. Converting to a gold standard will fix everything. Even if it didn't seem to help the Romans out much. Or the British or Spanish for that matter.
post #268 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

What can we tell from his speech?

Civilizations built on Gold has failed in the past. What he fears for us has occured in the example he provides for a gold standard empire.

Perhaps its not the form of money that matters? But hey we like simple answers. Converting to a gold standard will fix everything. Even if it didn't seem to help the Romans out much. Or the British or Spanish for that matter.

I think you are putting words in his mouth. Ron Paul believes in sound monetary policy and it could be argued that what we have now is not sound in any way. Just take a look around you. Do some reading of the news.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #269 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Look I don't buy that this is simple supply and demand. Yes we are going to run out of dead dinosaurs some day. Probably in about 100 to 150 years. And yes we'll feel the pinch way before that. And yes we need to be looking at alternatives. However what we are seeing today as far as prices go is someone ( or many someones ) getting rich at our expense. They're hoping you blame it on China or we're running out of oil already. Just not the case. The way the pricing has rose so fast says it's manipulation. Anyone who says otherwise is blind or selling something.

Pure and simple.

It feels very similar to the electrical crisis in California 8 years ago. You can almost hear those Enron guys busting at gut at fucking over little old ladies.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #270 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I think you are putting words in his mouth. Ron Paul believes in sound monetary policy and it could be argued that what we have now is not sound in any way. Just take a look around you. Do some reading of the news.

Fellows

Really? Pray tell how a gold standard saves us? It doesn't. The "discipline of the gold standard" is illusory. Especially after he just got done explaining how the Romand and Spanish empires managed to spend beyond their means despite being on a gold standard.

America isn't rich because of fiat money polices and military hegemony.

America is rich because we ARE a productive country not because of some grand conspiracy by the Illuminati (tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international commercial banks).
post #271 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Really? Pray tell how a gold standard saves us? It doesn't.

But you see, Vinea, IT DOES. IT TOTALLY DOES. BECAUSE IT DOES. BECAUSE THERE WERE NO FINANCIAL CRISES BEFORE WE WENT TO FIAT CURRENCY! BECAUSE GOLD IS VALUABLE BECAUSE IT'S VALUABLE! IT'S NOT ALL ARBITRARY ANYWAY! YOU HATE AMERICA AND THE CHILDREN AND FREEDOM AND EAGLES AND CUTE, FUZZY, AMERICAN, FREEDOMEAGLEPUPPIES.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #272 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

But you see, Vinea, IT DOES. IT TOTALLY DOES. BECAUSE IT DOES. BECAUSE THERE WERE NO FINANCIAL CRISES BEFORE WE WENT TO FIAT CURRENCY! BECAUSE GOLD IS VALUABLE BECAUSE IT'S VALUABLE! IT'S NOT ALL ARBITRARY ANYWAY! YOU HATE AMERICA AND THE CHILDREN AND FREEDOM AND EAGLES AND CUTE, FUZZY, AMERICAN, FREEDOMEAGLEPUPPIES.

I'm looking into wood futures. It's a sure bet. Once we all are energy independent, burning all that wood, horde wood now, it's got a long shelf life, you can build your own house with it, you can heat your own house with it.

We just must corner the global wood market. Then we can drive up wood prices to $150/cord.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #273 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I'm looking into wood futures. It's a sure bet. Once we all are energy independent, burning all that wood, horde wood now, it's got a long shelf life, you can build your own house with it, you can heat your own house with it.

We just must corner the global wood market. Then we can drive up wood prices to $150/cord.

Been a while since you bought a cord of wood, has it?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #274 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Been a while since you bought a cord of wood, has it?

OK so let's bump it up to $500/cord. After all it's all play money anyway, isn't it?

I'm also looking into steam futures, and coal futures, we can convert all of out transportation systems back to steam engines, burning wood or coal. We need to go back to 19th century technologies, instead of 20th century technologies, if we are ever to be able to be truly energy independent.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #275 of 297
MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

Wave of the future, wave of the future, wave...
post #276 of 297
Ah! Here we go again!

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/16/mark...ion=2008071615

Oil's 2-day decline: more than $10 a barrel


Quote:
Light sweet crude oil for August delivery settled down $4.14 to close at $134.60 a barrel on Wednesday on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Wednesday's drop followed a $6.44 plunge Tuesday that was the second largest decline ever on a dollar basis.



Next we'll be hearing about the oil glut of the summer of 2008.

Not that there's anything artificial about this pricing!


And then there's this :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/...ran/index.html

U.S. reverses course, will send envoy to talks with Iran

Quote:
The Bush administration has decided to break with previous policy by sending one of its most senior diplomats to engage Iran's top nuclear official, the White House announced Wednesday.

Looks like the republicans have started to see the writing on the wall.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #277 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Ah! Here we go again!
http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/16/mark...ion=2008071615
Oil's 2-day decline: more than $10 a barrel

Next we'll be hearing about the oil glut of the summer of 2008.
Not that there's anything artificial about this pricing!
And then there's this :
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/...ran/index.html
U.S. reverses course, will send envoy to talks with Iran
Looks like the republicans have started to see the writing on the wall.

Well, it's not like the politicians would be lying about stuff to push their big oil agenda, would they?

Oh, and for the Iran diplomat thing...look up "legacy". I'm all for it, but I do believe it is a desperate attempt. Even the Saudi's are trying to bribe Russia to break with Tehran.

The wheeling and dealing is making my head spin like a new energy source.
post #278 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Well, it's not like the politicians would be lying about stuff to push their big oil agenda, would they?

I think about that everytime Bush talks about off shore drilling but won't release the oil reserves we already have and don't have to wait 10 years for.

Quote:
Oh, and for the Iran diplomat thing...look up "legacy". I'm all for it, but I do believe it is a desperate attempt. Even the Saudi's are trying to bribe Russia to back off Tehran.

The wheeling and dealing is making my head spin like a new energy source.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #279 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

But you see, Vinea, IT DOES. IT TOTALLY DOES. BECAUSE IT DOES. BECAUSE THERE WERE NO FINANCIAL CRISES BEFORE WE WENT TO FIAT CURRENCY! BECAUSE GOLD IS VALUABLE BECAUSE IT'S VALUABLE! IT'S NOT ALL ARBITRARY ANYWAY! YOU HATE AMERICA AND THE CHILDREN AND FREEDOM AND EAGLES AND CUTE, FUZZY, AMERICAN, FREEDOMEAGLEPUPPIES.

You know, there's no shame in just coming out and admitting that you don't understand how monetary systems work and why sound (usually gold-based) monetary systems are superior to fiat, legal-tender monetary systems.

Really. It's okay. You can just admit that you don't understand it all. It's nothing to be embarrassed about.
post #280 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I think about that everytime Bush talks about off shore drilling but won't release the oil reserves we already have and don't have to wait 10 years for.

I find the fairly consistent criticism of various oil supply proposals on the grounds that they'll take too long to produce results ironic given that the government is so frequently held up as the necessary agency of long-term thinking and planning.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › New Republican coordinated plan to blame Democrats for high oil prices