Bush Sticker = Truth?
Thread started by
User1 at 12.29.08 - 5:13 pm
I saw this sticker on a car the other day and said to myself, "self, that maybe one thing that he may actually restore by the time he leaves office!" LOL
reply
Loser1,
I wouldn't trust a gay man who claimed he knew the truth about bush.
spiraldemon12.29.08 - 5:16 pm
reply
how is it that gas prices were so distorted right before the election?
Roadblock12.29.08 - 5:18 pm
reply
speculators...they did the same thing with gas they did with houses.
They should be forced to pay us back the bastards
la duderina12.29.08 - 5:20 pm
reply
It cost about 15 bucks to fill a tank when he took office
I still think we are nearing peak oil or have already passed it. We need to get off that shit quick!!
la duderina12.29.08 - 5:22 pm
reply
Peak oil is something my stepdad made me aware of back when I was 6.
Why it's new and fascinating/horrifying news to everyone else now is something that dumbfounds me to drooling.
Luckily, trains will always have a future and I've always fancied the idea of being the shotgun-wielder on a Stagecoach!!!
bentstrider12.29.08 - 5:28 pm
reply
They need to tax the shit out of gas while it is so cheap. Who needs gas to be $1.50. OH BOY you just saved $3 to fill up your tank.
50c gas tax hike until it hits $2.50-$3.00 again would help pay back the billions upon billions of dollars worth of deficit that Mr. Bush has acquired for the country, and people wouldn't even really notice.
jonnyboy12.29.08 - 5:30 pm
reply
gas will probably be even lower soon...
even it was the truth, what is the point of the sticker? As if the price of a gallon of gas makes everything better? If we don't have car companies to provide cars for gas, of course gas will be cheap!
it was not a policy or something Bush did on purpose to lower gas prices...
He put the world into a recession/depression... there is no demand for gas, because no has money to buy it... and that's the only reason why gas is cheap now...
adrian12.29.08 - 5:44 pm
reply
speculators aren't the evil people some make them out to be. There's speculators in just about any commodity that has any value to anyone. In alot of respects they are just as likely to stabilize prices as they are to inflate them. The market is driven far more by a semi open market that is dictated by supply/demand.
User112.29.08 - 9:39 pm
reply
Peak oil's a myth.
They just discovered HUGE new oil supplies offshore near Brazil and Cuba and who knows how much other oil is still undiscovered. And that's just in terms of easily recoverable crude, if you start talking oil shale, etc., there's all kinds of additional oil out there, so there's not going to be a shortage any time soon.
But like they say, the stone age didn't end because we ran out of rocks, so it's just a question of getting better technology online to provide sustainable fuels and transportation (bikes/biodiesel/algae gasoline/plug-in hybrids/etc., etc.).
It is a little disturbing to see SUV/light truck sales going up significantly though. 15mpg is not ok no matter how cheap gas is.
JB12.29.08 - 10:02 pm
reply
I think Roadblock is on to something . . .
What do you think the odds are that the new administration investigates the market manipulations that drove gas over $4.00 a gallon and handed them the White House?
NixonTwin12.29.08 - 11:29 pm
reply
hmmmmm peak oil's a myth huh? Can you cite a reference to this argument?
Peak oil is not about running out of oil, but the peaking and then the decline of the production of sweet crude. Sure we have large reserves of oil shale in North America, but shit's expensive to process. The reserves off our coast are not accessible with current technology and it's going to be expensive to extract in the future.
Some researchers think we already past peak oil, others say it's 20 years off. I had a hard time finding anyone that says we nothing to worry about and peak oil is a myth.
User112.29.08 - 11:32 pm
reply
There you go...
http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=peak+oil+myth
JB12.29.08 - 11:50 pm
reply
I'll be waiting...........
:-)
User112.30.08 - 12:07 am
reply
Sounds like the Big Three killed JB's baby.
It is a myth that peak oil is a myth.
Oil is a finite resource. and what User1 said is exactly right. Once we reach peak oil , there will still be oil, its just that demand will always exceed supply, and the only oil available will be the hardest and most difficult to get.
Don't tell me the future's electric, cause gasoline's not measured in metric.
la duderina12.30.08 - 9:44 am
reply
"Oil is a finite resource. and what User1 said is exactly right. Once we reach peak oil , there will still be oil, its just that demand will always exceed supply, and the only oil available will be the hardest and most difficult to get. "
All of this is true, it's just that we're many decades, if not centuries from reaching actual peak oil, and with the ever-growing number of new oil finds and substitute fuels (biodiesel, electricity, algae-based fuels, etc., etc.), we'll probably replace petroleum as a major fuel source long before we actually run out of it.
Here's an actual source that provides a pretty good rundown of why peak oil is a myth.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/82236-the-peak-oil-myth-new-oil-is-plentiful
The 'Peak Oil' Myth: New Oil Is Plentiful
by: Jason Schwarz June 22, 2008
The data is becoming conclusive that peak oil is a myth. High oil prices (USO) (OIL) are doing their job as oil exploration is flush with new finds:
1. An offshore find by Brazilian state oil company Petrobras (PBR) in partnership with BG Group (BRGYY.PK) and Repsol-YPF may be the world's biggest discovery in 30 years, the head of the National Petroleum Agency said. A deep-water exploration area could contain as much as 33 billion barrels of oil, an amount that would nearly triple Brazil's reserves and make the offshore bloc the world's third-largest known oil reserve. "This would lay to rest some of the peak oil pronouncements that we were out of oil, that we weren't going to find any more and that we have to change our way of life," said Roger Read, an energy analyst and managing director at New York-based investment bank Natixis Bleichroeder Inc.
2. A trio of oil companies led by Chevron Corp. (CVX) has tapped a petroleum pool deep beneath the Gulf of Mexico that could boost U.S. reserves by more than 50 percent. A test well indicates it could be the biggest new domestic oil discovery since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay a generation ago. Chevron estimated the 300-square-mile region where its test well sits could hold up to 15 billion barrels of oil and natural gas
3. Kosmos Energy says its oil field at West Cape Three Points is the largest discovery in deep water West Africa and potentially the largest single field discovery in the region.
4. A new oil discovery has been made by Statoil (STO) in the Ragnarrock prospect near the Sleipner area in the North Sea. "It is encouraging that Statoil has made an oil discovery in a little-explored exploration model that is close to our North Sea infrastructure," says Frode Fasteland, acting exploration manager for the North Sea.
5. Shell (RDS.A) is currently analyzing and evaluating the well data of their own find in the Gulf of mexico to determine next steps. This find is rumored to be capable of producing 100 billion barrels. Operating in ultra-deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the Perdido spar will float on the surface in nearly 8,000 ft of water and is capable of producing as much as 130,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day.
6. In Iraq, excavators have struck three oil fields with reserves estimated at about 2 billion barrels, Kurdish region's Oil Minister Ashti Horami said.
7. Iran has discovered an oil field within its southwest Jofeir oilfield that is expected to boost Jofeir's oil output to 33,000 barrels per day. Iran's new discovery is estimated to have reserves of 750 million barrels, according to Iran's Oil Minister, Gholamhossein Nozari.
8. The United States holds significant oil shale resources underlying a total area of 16,000 square miles. This represents the largest known concentration of oil shale in the world and holds an estimated 1.5 trillion barrels of oil with 800 billion recoverable barrells – enough to meet U.S. demand for oil at current levels for 110 years. More than 70 percent of American oil shale is on Federal land, primarily in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. In Utah, a developer says his company already has the technology to produce 4,000 barrels a day using a furnace that can heat up rock using its own fuel. ``This is not a science project,'' said Daniel G. Elcan, managing director of Oil Shale Exploration Corp. ``For many years, the high cost of extracting oil from shale exceeded the benefit. But today the calculus is changing,'' President George Bush said. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said the country has to do everything it can to boost energy production. ``We have as much oil in oil shale in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado as the rest of the world combined,'' he said.
9. In western North Dakota there is a formation known as the Bakken Shale. The formation extends into Montana and Canada. Geologists have estimated the area holds hundreds of billions of barrels of oil. In an interview provided by USGS, scientist Brenda Pierce put the North Dakota oil in context. "Of the current USGS estimates, this is the largest oil accumulation in the lower 48," Pierce says. "It is also the largest continuous type of oil accumulation that we have ever assessed." The USGS study says with todays technology, about 4 billion barrels of oil can be pumped from the Bakken formation. By comparison, the 4 billion barrels in North Dakota represent less than half the oil in the Arctic National Wildlife refuge which has an estimated 10 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
The peak oil theory is a money making scam put out by the speculators looking for high commodity returns in a challenging market environment. Most of the above mentioned finds have occurred in the last two years alone. I didn't even mention the untapped Alaskan oil fields or the recent Danish and Australian finds. In the long term, crude prices will find stability at historic norms because there is no supply problem. How much longer will investors ignore these new oil finds? Probably until they can find other investment alternatives which won't happen in the broad market until financials (XLF) stop hemorrhaging. Respect the trend but understand that this is a bubble preparing to burst. When oil hit it's high of $139 it represented more than a 600% increase in crude since the bull market began, returns eerily similar to the dot.com craze.
There are many theories that sound good but just aren't true. Take Al Gore's global warming crusade. It sounded great, it made perfect sense but there was just one problem, the facts didn't support it. It seems that the masses who were loudly calling for a global warming crisis have shifted their energies to oil. We are bombarded on a daily basis by those who tell us that we should be fearful. They spin good news into bad. The latest absurdity had Goldman Sachs telling investors that China's 18% price increase will actually increase demand! That's a new one. Just like global warming, the rationale for peak oil sounds great, it makes sense, but there is just one small problem, the facts don't support it.
JB12.30.08 - 9:55 am
reply
None of those 'newly discovered' sources would even put a dent in the demand for oil. The problem is that demand is rising everyday and supply is not/will not keep up with it.
For every argument you posted up there there is about 5 counter arguments that I really don't feel like looking up right now. I had a whole class on this last year. Peak oil is simply just not a myth. That's like saying evolution doesn't exist!
la duderina12.30.08 - 10:06 am
reply
"None of those 'newly discovered' sources would even put a dent in the demand for oil. The problem is that demand is rising everyday and supply is not/will not keep up with it."
Not exactly true. The global recession we're in HAS ALREADY put an ENORMOUS dent in the demand for oil, which is why oil has dropped from a high of $147 a barrel this July to less than $40 a barrel right now.
You don't see a 70% drop in prices if there's a rising demand and a severe limit to the supply.
OPEC shot itself in the foot. The high prices this summer spurred a lot of investment in new technologies, and we can expect to see that investment bearing fruit over the next few years.
JB12.30.08 - 10:19 am
reply
Obama will be blamed for the comming ECONOMIC COLAPSE, Thats why the republicians let him win.
Dedicated81812.30.08 - 10:40 am
reply
the thing with oil is that the demand is pretty inflexible with price--adjusting your oil consumption generally takes major structural changes. your commuters need to move closer to your cities, your factories need to be reconfigured, your power plants need to switch sources etc. and there are a lot of things that simply cannot be made without oil like most plastics.
but at the same time, it is hard to store any serious amount of oil aboveground... really the only thing you can do is either pump it or not pump it, once you've pumped it it pretty much needs to get consumed.
and at the same time, you can buy oil from pretty much anyone and sell it to pretty much anyone.
the result of that is that the world supply of oil has to match the world demand for oil pretty goddamn closely, if there is a teensy bit more supply than there is demand, the price drops way down--even at $40 a barrel, the saudis are making a shitload of money. and if there is even a teensy bit more demand, the price shoots up.
the thing is, it used to be that the daily demand for oil, and the potential supply for oil were very far apart. so oil producers could just supply more whenever demand went up. what happened this summer was that the actual supply really started pushing against the potential supply. the economic situation has knocked us off just a couple percent of that, but since oil prices are so inherently volatile, it caused a huge drop. but it will go back up again as soon as production starts increasing again (which might not be for a while).
if you don't believe me, right now OPEC is cutting production hard because there's no point in them selling oil for $40 a barrel. they know it's going to be back over $100 or more in a few years.
stevestevesteve12.30.08 - 10:47 am
reply
Obama will be blamed for the comming ECONOMIC COLAPSE, Thats why the republicians let him win.
Dedicated818
12.30.08 - 1:40 pm
this guy cracks me up.
ruinedbyidiots12.30.08 - 10:53 am
reply
I have learned that discussing the world oil supply on this site, is that people have come to there own conclusion and have very little ability to listen to what someone else point of view on the subject is.
I find it much better to click
here and celebrate another aspect of why midnight ridazz is so cool.
sexy12.30.08 - 10:55 am
reply
I just wish CalTrans and other agencies would stop using the notion that "More Lanes=Less Traffic" on the freeways.
If anything, with oil being as cheap as it is right now, we got to find more effective means to convince people that it won't always stay that way.
Some of this would include;
-Making public-transportation more appealing to a broader demographic.
-Longer systems/networks of cycling and pedestrian paths.
-Further encouraging the development of localized economies to further eliminate the concept of "bedroom community".
I could go on forever with some ideas, but I'm pretty sure others have been spouted here before.
bentstrider12.30.08 - 10:57 am
reply
JR,
Your reference leaves alot to be desired. I was hoping you would at least produce some researcher's study or a university study or something along these lines. What is given is some investor's opinion. It's obvious this hack has an angle to his argument. His paper is filled with "could contain", "could boost", "could hold", "potentially is encouraging", "is rumored", "is expected", etc etc etc. How bout some concrete answers? How bout references to the study?
People that support the idea of Peak Oil are people that study the world's natural resources, such as scientist, researchers, professors, and educational institutions. Their job is get it right and provide as accurate of a picture as possible. Pretty much the whole scientific community is in unison on this. Where there is debate is in when exactly it is estimated we'll hit peak oil. Not if there is one or not. They reference their studies with research and other studies.
Sure there's going to be continuing discoveries of new fields, but it's getting tougher and tougher for them to find these fields. The markets are expected to really drive up demand with China and India coming up too.
And no, it's not going to an easy fix by just magically coming up with alternatives either.
User112.31.08 - 1:09 am
reply
FYI
For those of you who feel the theroy of peak oil is valid. It is important to read the full paper that M. King Hubbert wrote on peak oil
titled "Nuclear Energy and The Fossil Fuels". The future has proved that Hubbert was right in regards to what he was writing about peak oil. He talks about the availability of shale oil which in my eyes says that he really haven't peaked when you have a huge proven reserve of shale and can sell oil from shale over a profit for what it takes to refine and bring the oil to market. At $40-$50 barrel it is still profitable. What many people who quote Hubbert miss was his motivation for writing this paper was to push the use of nuclear energy. His paper makes this clear.
Also take into account the United States' STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE INVENTORY. This can have a dramatic effect on the market for oil. Clinton sold off the reserve when the price of oil rose. Cheney continuously bought and bought, which helped artificially raise the price of oil. When Cheney did release oil from the Reserve it was at negligible amounts to where it didn't make a big difference in the price.
sexy12.31.08 - 2:17 am
reply
user! us right. if we're not at peak production, we're pretty close.
to those who don't agree. peak oil in itself is pretty self explanatory. there is a lot of crude around during peak oil because you're in the peak of production. that doesn't mean oil is plentiful, thus it will last forever. it means the opposite. yeah, oil will still be discovered, but it will eventually dry up. oil is organic. it's not just some element that's created through plate tectonics. once we reach the point where it's apparent that oil production is subsiding, it's not hard to see many wars created over this resource.
coldcut12.31.08 - 2:47 am
reply
I don't think anyone's arguing that it's theoretically possible to run out of oil, it's just a question of whether we're actually near peak oil right now and should panic about it, or whether we've got another century plus of reasonably affordable petroleum.
We've got a century plus of supply, and with the substitute fuels, electric cars coming online, running out of oil isn't really a major concern.
There are plenty of good reasons to conserve gasoline (CO2 in the atmosphere, CO2 in the oceans turning them acidic and killing marine life, not funding oil rich dictatorships/theocracies, the general wisdom of not putting more toxics in the air than necessary, etc., etc.), but we're not going to run out any time soon.
This whole argument is similar to those that think the world is overpopulated and we're running out of food, despite the fact that the "Green Revolution" of the last 40 years has provided more people with more food than at any time in human history, and the average lifespan is longer than it has ever been.
JB12.31.08 - 10:18 am
reply
JR,
No you weren't arguing that it's not theoretically possible to run out of oil, at least you never stated it, but you did say peak oil's a myth. If you look at what most of the researchers are saying is that we are nearing a tipping point, some say we are past the tipping point. Coupled with our ever increasing demand for the crude, along with other countries bringing up their standards of living, spells some very dramatic changes in the future. That doesn't mean two years from now or a 100 years from now. Most look at it 20 years or so. That's not very long.
There's nothing that can take the place of oil. It's resource that has provided growth for the industrial revolution and all that has spawned from it. Things will be worst for countries that depend the most on it and have their economy fueled by it. Shale oil isn't going to replace it and neither is coal.
You think we have 100 years? Where's the study on it?
User112.31.08 - 12:59 pm
reply
"You think we have 100 years? Where's the study on it?"
This one, among others - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15715744/
"Cambridge Energy Research Associates said in a report that the world has some 3.74 trillion barrels of oil left -- enough to last 122 years at current consumption rates and triple the amount estimated by “peak oil” theorists."
Ultimately though, this has the character of an apocalyptic religious argument, as at least one Peak Oil theorist has pointed out.
http://patternliteracy.com/doomer.html
"... The Modern Doomsday
America is perhaps the most apocalypse-believing nation on Earth. It was so from the beginning, even before the stormy death-rebirth cycle of the American Revolution. After Christopher Columbus’s third journey to the New World, he began signing his letters “Christ-carrier” and wrote that the world would end in 1650.
America’s apocalyptic tendencies peak in hard times. In the 1830s, the rise of the anti-slavery movement coincided with a resurgence of doomsday sects and prophets. William Miller, an abolitionist minister with 50,000 followers and perhaps a million more sympathetic to his message, predicted that Judgement Day would arrive on October 14, 1844. After that date, his movement collapsed. But the abolitionists and their foes, as their acts became more violent, continued to invoke end-times rhetoric in their arguments. Slavery was seen, with good reason, as having the potential to destroy the nation.
In recent centuries, people’s lives have become less occupied by piety and the church, and more oriented toward technology and economics. So too have the causes and results of the apocalypse. In the 16th century, astrology was the favored method of predicting the future, marking early stirrings of the scientific view. The newly improved methods of planetary observation were conscripted by catastrophists. In the 1530s, French astrologer Pierre Turrel used four different methods to calculate final dates of 1537, 1544, 1801, and 1814. Astrologer Richard Harvey marked the end as 1583, during a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn.
The newly refined sciences were enlisted to prove the end was near. In 1578, physician Helisaeus Roeslin of Alsace used observations of a nova visible in 1572 to foretell a final date of 1654. In 1688, John Napier, inventor of the logarithm, made his first doomsday calculation based on a mathematical analysis of the Book of Revelation. The 19th-century astronomer Charles Piazzi Smith used the dimensions of the Great Pyramid to prove that the world would end between 1892 and 1911. The date December 17, 1919 was chosen by meteorologist Allbert Porta, when six planets would enter conjunction, creating a magnetic force that would, this scientist wrote, “pierce the sun, cause great explosions of flaming gas, and eventually engulf the Earth.” The result was not world’s end, but panic and waves of suicide on that date. David Berg, leader of the Family of Love, predicted that Comet Kohoutek would destroy the planet in 1974. A few of the dozens of other “scientifically verified” causes of world’s end were a planetary alignment in 1982, comet Schoemaker-Levy 9’s 1994 collision with Jupiter, and of course, Y2k. As science has replaced God as our source of certainty and faith, so have our myriad predictions of apocalypse become more rationally defensible.
The doomer Peak Oil scenario also replicates the final phase of the apocalypse story: that of rebirth after the collapse. Richard Heinberg, in a speech to the E. F. Schumacher society, said that after the peak, we will return to a more agrarian way of life, when “we actually regain much of what we have lost.” He and others envision a future with far fewer people, many of them living rurally and raising most of their own food using permaculture and bio-intensive gardening. Some argue that post-peak, only those with primitive skills such as tanning and flint-knapping will survive. Suburban drones will die. So after the collapse, we follow the myth’s final trajectory into the survival of an elect, and a rebirth in the Garden and simpler times.
Again, my point here is not that Peak Oil doomerism is wrong. The apocalypts may, for the first time in thousands of predictions, be right. We face enormous crises and we have the tools to end civilization. But remember, as you feel yourself drawn to the apocalyptic story, that it is the natural place to go in uncertain and dangerous times. We are culturally programmed to do it. Whether we are describing first-century Christians who were threatened with death for their beliefs, 14th-century weavers whose jobs were being automated and outsourced out of existence, or oil addicts about to tumble down Hubbert’s Curve, people who take the apocalyptic view often have good reason to believe they are in mortal danger. The source of the threat varies—an angry god, a brutal empire, a class struggle, or resource depletion—but the response has remained the same over the millennia. The path to “end of the world” thinking is well trod, most heavily so in times of oppression, uncertainty, and corruption. But perhaps some of us can recognize how familiar is this dark road, resist the natural urge to repeat the story once more, and remember that there are many routes into the future other than the one toward the lowest common denominator."
The sky isn't falling. Gasoline will be abandoned because the other alternatives are preferable, not because we run out of it, just like we didn't switch to electric lighting because we ran out of whale oil and kerosene.
JB12.31.08 - 4:13 pm
reply
JB,
You keep bringing up alternatives to oil yet there's isn't an alternative that delivers so much on energy on return of investment. If there was, we be using it. It's not going to be from oil shale or from coal. It maybe from algae, but the technology isn't there yet. And bet on the technology being there like Cambridge Energy Research Associates is doing, is rather foolish.
There's alot of criticism that's been leveled out there in regards to CERA "study". One of my favorite is that there study is not available to the public for review, but at a price of $2500!! WTF? And as this article clearly shows, http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/06/post_mortem_on.html
They got less than two years for their projections to bear fruit.
I like these reports too.
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/22533
http://energybulletin.net/node/20418
I also take exception to having peak oil being equated to biblical apocalyptic references. Peak oil is grounded in science not superstition. It's based on the best information out there and is altered as the picture gets clearer.
So yeah we go lump the idea that peak oil is a myth, along with the idea that humans don't cause global warming, but think of the consequences if we are wrong.
User101.2.09 - 11:48 am
reply
"So yeah we go lump the idea that peak oil is a myth, along with the idea that humans don't cause global warming, but think of the consequences if we are wrong. "
Well, given that 2/3rds of oil use in this country is for transportation, rather than power, etc., which are powered by coal/natural gas/nuclear, none of which are scarce, the consequences of us being wrong and running out of oil is that we'll have to ride our bikes more.
It's not something you have to worry about.
JB01.2.09 - 12:20 pm
reply
SO WHAT THE HELL IS THIS 'GAS' YOUR REFERRING TO?
eddieboyinla01.2.09 - 12:25 pm
reply
Natural Gas - also a fossil fuel, but not one in short supply.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/nat_gas.html
JB01.2.09 - 12:51 pm
reply
Whether we are at or near or even a ways off from peak oil, the issue remains that extracting and transportation of oil is devastating to the environment and as we are forced to tap into more uncharted sources, how many more landscapes and how much more biodiversity are we going to ruin in the process. Oil spills and leaks are disturbingly common, but only epic disasters like Exxon Valdez get any media attention. Sure there are probably more places to drill for oil, but at what cost to our planet and the sanctity of life. We need to start preparing for post fossil fuel world long before we have no other choice or it will be a much harsher transition later.
Lets stop thinking about the cost of gas for a second and think about the fact we are in a time of rapid species extinction not seen since the collapse of the dinosaur age, but this time it is at the hands of the human race.
GarySe7en01.2.09 - 1:20 pm
reply
I wish I had such a romanticized view as you do JR. Everyone is going to ride around on bikes and everything is going to be just beautiful.
Don't worry, be happy!
wwooooo
hoooooooooo!!!!!
User101.3.09 - 1:21 am
reply
I'm still wondering what up with those gas prices right before the election. Who are the speculators? I mean, precisely who were they?
Roadblock01.3.09 - 2:10 am
reply
who are the speculators?
That is like asking who plays the market. Speculators are investors that bet the prices is going to go up and or down. Unfortunately the more people bet one way, the great the chances are that it will go in that direction. Investors thought crude was going to be harder and harder to get and that the dollar was weakening, hence that the price of oil was going to rise and so they invested into crude future rising and voila it did.
Now the question you should be asking is...who provided the speculators with loan to hedge(bet) on the price rising? That not so clear from internet research. I did find that Citibank was reported as one of the major lenders.
What happen before the election is that you had the famous financial crises. Where nobody was loaning money to each other. Thats what the bailout was for, so that banks would continue loaning to each other. They got the money, but they still stayed slow on loaning the money out. Why did the price go down?
There was no money to loan to continue to allow investors to bet on commodity futures. No betting, caused the true price of oil to surface.
Thats my understanding of it. I sure somebody may have a different story. The one thing I learned through the years is that you can never really know for sure with the economy. Even hindsight is hard to see the economy clearly.
sexy01.3.09 - 4:20 am
reply
oh yeah, your right. OPEC did put massive amounts of dollars into crude future.
Now the question is? Aren't OPEC so much of a power player that they don't need to borrow? Obviously they have money tied into many different investment and where not the only ones playing the Crude futures. They may have there money set up where they needed to borrow alsw. I know that Saudi prince who I think is the fifth richest man in the world hold a control stake in Citibank, among 500 other company/corporations.
sexy01.3.09 - 4:26 am
reply
Was it really OPEC that speculated?
One question: who pumps the oil in nearly all OPEC nations? what companies?
Roadblock01.3.09 - 4:28 am
reply
I really think the speculation was bigger then just a handful of players. Like oil service companies or OPEC nations.
sexy01.3.09 - 4:31 am
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
