Interesting article about OIL

dee1949

.......

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Oil-Should-Be-Around-10-a-cnbc-3612643166.html;_ylt=Aj2Ot5hyjeA5hcYc3ehs3ky7YWsA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1YW9mM3VjBHBvcwM1BHNlYwN0b3BTdG9yaWVzBHNsawNjcnVkZW9pbHNob3U-?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode=

punk-roc

I am be off base on this, but while its probably true that we have more oil now then we did in the 1980s.. there are millions more people in India/China, as well as other developing nations clammering for more oil..

Could it be we actually have less available oil and thus the price is higher? The article didnt seem to address demand concerns and just mentioned increased supply?

Just a thought

Jason

dee1949

....there is a hell of a lot more demand today but all cars, furnaces and appliances are about 3 or 4x more efficient.

sucks2beme

Speculation drives up prices. They're betting it goes up, and it goes up.
Supply and demand have an effect, but as we've seen in the past with
other stuff like silver, price may not reflect that. And god help us if
suddenly takes a huge drop. Sound silly? Not when huge sums of money are
tied up into it. If it tanked in price overnight, we'd find out in a hurry who all
the big players were by watching who did a swan dive out the window.
The Hunt brothers were playing this game 30 years ago and lost their
fortunes overnight. Between that and the expanding worldwide demand,
it's looks not to be dropping anytime soon.

scottyboy76

they used to put speculators to death, not kidding.

tonyb

So speculators are bad guys now...is that the drift ?

obieone

Ibtl:p

sucks2beme

tonyb wrote: »

So speculators are bad guys now...is that the drift ?

They are what they are. Welcome to the free market.
Normally, that's not a bad thing. But sometimes they get out
of control, and then they hit bottom with a big crash.
Gold is the next big thing to crash. In the next 12-18 months,
something bad is going to happen to those prices.

decal

Gold is the next big thing to crash. In the next 12-18 months,
something bad is going to happen to those prices.

Are you speculating this?

munk

I'm going with developing nations like China building roads and cars and increasing the demand for oil. Machines may be more efficient, but not enough so as to cancel out so many third world nations entering the tech age and enjoying an emergent middle class.

The US is more dependent upon foreign oil now than when we had gas lines in the 1970'
s.

tonyb

...and why did we have gas lines in the 70's ?

munk

Long answer or short? OPEC

bsoko2

Control!

munk

Uh huh. But the problem with it being only an OPEC matter is US Domestic production has fallen off drastically and we've fields left undeveloped.

sucks2beme

decal wrote: »

Are you speculating this?

No, I'm the one controlling the market!:eek:

The nature of things seems to be not, hot and bust.
Nothing special, just looking at patterns.

tonyb

munk wrote: »

Uh huh. But the problem with it being only an OPEC matter is US Domestic production has fallen off drastically and we've fields left undeveloped.

You mean we have our own oil?

Control...once you have it,you can manipulate it anyway you see fit. If you can agree to that,then take a look around. Seems our government has learned lots from OPEC.

tonyb

sucks2beme wrote: »

No, I'm the one controlling the market!:eek:

The nature of things seems to be not, hot and bust.
Nothing special, just looking at patterns.

Patterns...thats a speculators tool of the trade.

munk

Control- through environmental regs and outright bans on drilling from both the states and federal government. But these governments make money through taxation of these assets and it does not make sense they'd forgo the wealth. There is a greater wealth in a person being elected who gives the population what they want to hear- no oil drilling.

We haven't built a new refinery in years because there's no incentive- too many regs, and the big oil groups raise prices. (I think we're starting to get into the 'long answer')

tonyb

Taxes collected on the sale of oil doesn't compare to having the power to let them drill or not. Taxes collected go into the general fund. Power, on the other hand can benefit you individually,monetarily, and so many other ways.

munk

I could be wrong, but thought there were local taxes attached to gas in many states. But your point is a good one. Looks like science is the first casualty of politics.

oh- and general funds are often used as slush funds for pet projects and kickbacks

tonyb

munk wrote: »

I could be wrong, but thought there were local taxes attached to gas in many states. But your point is a good one. Looks like science is the first casualty of politics.

oh- and general funds are often used as slush funds for pet projects and kickbacks

Yeah,true, but too many more have to be involved and it becomes public knowledge sooner or later. Science is a casuality of politics,agreed,look at Nasa's new mission. I can't wait to see how much of that 20 billion BP forked over will not get to the hands of the people. Power is what forced 20 billion from one company to Uncle sam, no tax involved,and 20 billion is not chump change. I estimate 10% to be "lost or wasted". Thats 2 billion going into someone's pockets,again,not chump change. 3 years from now,you'll see the story, money is running out in BP slush fund or something along those lines,maybe sooner. Welcome to redistribution of wealth, you take a dollar from the rich,give 10 cents to the poor and the other rich people get the rest.

munk

Did you see the latest estimates of the waste of money in non-military spending in Iraq?

Yeah, I have a saying,"the working man cannot win his own revolution." But I also know you can't tax the rich and put the money in the pockets of the poor. You can only tax a corporation and raise the price of the toaster they make so the poor can't afford one.

As for NASA, that's one black hole of money disapearing I'm willing to finance. Space exploration is man's only future. My real concern about the effort will be at the end, when they pick people to go. That wouldn't be me, and it's unlikely it will be my sons. It more likely Congress and the President's family will have dibs, especially if time is running short here, and I can think of a number of reasons why that might be. Chances are, we'll be sending Lawyers to space, and highly placed ones at that. Oh,there will be astronauts and military types, scientists etc; but the Lawyers will be the main seed. The future of the species in the hands of those adapted to comfortable living while lying and plying their trade. That disturbs me.

I'm doubtful first contact with another species is best represented by Lawyers and the lawyer's we've placed into high office.

Yeah, that scares me. I think the first 200 names out of the Boston phone book, or any phone book, might be a better choice.

I don't think we had any right to ask BP to place 20 billion in an account for the gulf mess. Oh, I think BP are detestable, but once we do this, 'because it was such an enormous catastrophy' (my quotes) how much less the reason when we do it again? Will it be OK if they ask you and me for 50 bucks? I wonder what's my share of the 'free health care'?

The constitution has taken a real pounding in the last 30 years. It appears to mean whatever lawyers say it does.

tonyb

Constitution has been getting a beating since the early 1900's. When you think about, our whole government was created with 18 pages, yet today we have laws like the new healthcare reform,with 4700 pages. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out something ain't right.

munk

That was pretty well said. I think it was Stossel that had a pile of government regulations in front of his desk. He'd asked the accounting office how many laws there were and they'd had no idea.

dee1949

....REMEMBER

...There are a lot of Third World countries that "NEED" to sell oil at any price in order to pay debt's. Artificial shortages can be used to bolster price. BUT...who can hold out the longest once reserves are FULL.