← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Walter Yannis
Thread ID: 17208 | Posts: 26 | Started: 2005-03-09
2005-03-09 16:55 | User Profile
Oil Pushes to $55 on Weather, Weak Dollar
[URL=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=580&ncid=580&e=1&u=/nm/20050309/bs_nm/markets_oil_dc]Yahoo![/URL]
By Matt Falloon
LONDON (Reuters) - Oil prices marched toward $55 a barrel on Wednesday, within sight of all-time highs, as late wintry blasts in the United States reignited demand and a tumbling dollar drew more speculators into energy markets.
Key U.S. government fuel stocks data due at 1530 GMT could provide the momentum to nudge prices to new highs, traders said.
U.S. light crude for prompt-month April delivery traded up 21 cents to $54.80, less than a dollar below record prices of $55.67 hit in October last year. May and June delivery crude touched contract highs above that level on Tuesday.
Britain's Brent crude was up 28 cents at $53.12, having earlier brushed even closer to Tuesday's record high of $53.30.
"It is cold weather and a weak dollar that is encouraging market participants to push up the price," said Tetsu Emori, chief strategist at Mitsui Bussan Futures in Tokyo. "We have to look at the currency markets rather than the oil fundamentals."
Forecasters predicted the fresh U.S. cold snap to last into the weekend, boosting heating oil demand in the Midwest and the world's largest market for heating oil -- the Northeast.
That demand may strain U.S. heating oil inventories that are already 8 percent below last year, dealers said.
Analysts polled by Reuters expected U.S. distillate stockpiles, which include heating oil, to have fallen by 1.3 million barrels in the seven days to March 4, the seventh consecutive fall.
But analysts predicted crude oil stocks to rise for the fourth-straight week, climbing 1.8 million barrels and keeping a healthy surplus compared to the same period in 2004. Gasoline inventories, at their highest since 1999, were seen unchanged.
In Japan, gasoline stocks fell from a five-year high last week, but rose 11.7 percent on a year ago, industry data showed.
FUNDS FLEE FOREX, EYE TIGHT OIL
Strong demand growth and lower-than-expected production have put further pressure on world supply this year.
The rally has gathered pace as a steep fall in the dollar -- the currency of international oil trade -- spurred funds to switch money out of foreign exchange markets and into commodities such as energy, metals and coffee.
But so far there have been few signs that high oil prices are hurting economic growth.
"Oil prices appeared to have risen very much in dollar terms, but they have not risen much in terms of other currencies," South Korea (news - web sites)'s Deputy Finance Minister Bahk Byong-won said in a radio interview on Wednesday.
The New York Mercantile Exchange said an option with a strike price of $100 a barrel traded on Tuesday, the highest level thought to have traded on the exchange.
Plentiful crude stocks have convinced many members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC (news - web sites)) production should remain steady after next week's meeting in Iran (news - web sites), despite prices soaring more than 20 percent in a month.
OPEC's own oil market experts expect a quota rollover.
"The market is well supplied now, but OPEC needs to be cautious because we're expecting demand to stay robust," an OPEC source said.
Indonesia, Iran, Venezuela, Qatar and Algeria have lined up against pumping more oil, and OPEC's President Sheikh Ahmad al-Fahd al-Sabah has said supply was adequate. However, Nigeria has called for action to stem rising prices.
2005-03-16 18:02 | User Profile
[URL=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=580&ncid=580&e=4&u=/nm/20050316/bs_nm/markets_oil_dc]Oil Surges to New High, $56.10 a Barrel[/URL]
LONDON (Reuters) - High flying oil prices surged to set new records on Wednesday after the U.S. government reported a sharper than expected draw in gasoline supplies.
U.S. crude prices were up $1.05 to $56.10 a barrel, after striking an all-time high of $56.35.
London Brent traded up 85 cents to $54.70 after setting its own record of $54.85.
The bigger-than-expected gasoline draw rode over a decision by OPEC (news - web sites) producers to raise oil output to try to cool the red-hot market.
Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration showed gasoline stocks fell 2.9 million barrels last week to 221.4 million barrels.
Analysts polled by Reuters had expected a drop of just 800,000 barrels.
"We certainly did not expect that much of a draw in gasoline," Energy Merchant analyst Ed Silliere said. "The bulls need any sign of strength and that gets them excited."
U.S. gasoline stocks figures are watched ahead of the summer when the world's biggest consumers of the fuel fill up their cars and hit the road for the vacation season.
U.S. crude stocks grew a little more than expectations by 2.6 million barrels to 305.2 million barrels. Distillate stocks fell 1.9 million barrels to 107.3 million barrels.
Strong demand forecasts have exacerbated concern that cartel supply may not be able to meet growing global demand later this year.
OPEC decided at its Iran (news - web sites) meeting to lift oil production limits by 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) with immediate effect, and said it could later add another 500,000 bpd if prices remained high.
PRICES WILL STAY HIGH
OPEC's president said he saw prices remaining high, especially in the fourth quarter when demand is highest.
"I think it will be at this level or like last October when it was at record levels," said Sheikh Ahmad al-Fahd al-Sabah, also Kuwait's oil minister.
"That is why we are trying to decrease prices now to stabilize the market."
OPEC's actual production will now increase to 28.2 million bpd, including leakage over the new 27.5 million bpd limit.
The cartel is already creeping toward last September's 25-year-high of more than 30 million bpd and many OPEC members are pumping close to capacity.
Last week, the International Energy Agency raised its 2005 oil demand growth forecast by 290,000 bpd to 1.81 million bpd.
"This market is like a long distance runner," said Nauman Barakat at brokers Refco. "It needs to pause to take a breath now and again but the trend remains in the same direction, going higher."
2005-03-16 18:10 | User Profile
The scuttlebut seems to be that higher prices are demand driven, with China being a bottomless pit of demand, while oil producers are already at or near capacity. Saudi's promise to increase production by 500,000bbl/day won't matter much, since Saudi's the only OPEC country with unused capacity.
It looks like prices are up for a long time, and that means inflation. At least so one would think, but I suppose that productivity gains tend to keep the lid on that, but nevertheless inflation has upward pressure, and interest rates have to go up.
There is also much less demand for dollars, as our trade deficits have flooded the world with dollars. Interest rates will have to go up to keep the foreigners buying T-Bills.
Since Americans are so deep in debt, rising interest rates threaten bring down the whole house of cards.
I'll stick my neck out and predict $60 oil by mid-year, the dollar trading at 1.5 Euro (as I did previously), a major correction in the DOW (9500 EOY 2005), and a very soft or even declinging American real estate market (especially acute on the overpriced coasts).
That's my best guess, and I've taken actions accordingly. Sure hope I'm right.
2005-03-16 19:25 | User Profile
Walter,
Should would be nice if the market had those barrels of oil that Iraq was exporting before the "liberation". The only liberating going on here is money from wallets that could be spent on other things or saved.
2005-03-17 03:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]The scuttlebut seems to be that higher prices are demand driven, with China being a bottomless pit of demand, while oil producers are already at or near capacity. Saudi's promise to increase production by 500,000bbl/day won't matter much, [B]since Saudi's the only OPEC country with unused capacity[/B]. This is interesting actually. It does seem to show to me that there is not much ultimate downward potential on oil prices. The world's oil fields have already limited out. It looks to me like the more pessimistic assessements of world oil capacity reserves are starting to hold out.
Its interesting to me because the mainstream GOP in this country since the early Reagan era has been going with the beocon Julian Simon theory, that shortages of natural resources were only an illusion caused by gov't regulation, and that the world's natural resources were really limitless. This meant of course (at least one economic justification)that immigration controls were unnecessary. The carrying capacity of any nation was basically infinite - the more people the merryer.
Now it does some that the push for globalization is starting to run into a major reality MacDonald always noted multicultural theory downplays - the reality of competition for scarce resources.
I have no idea how this will play out. But I personally think our country is unprepared for another major debate over energy like we had in the 70's. Pol's are committed now to the never ending search for gimmicks to evade the problem.
It looks like prices are up for a long time, and that means inflation. At least so one would think, but I suppose that productivity gains tend to keep the lid on that, but nevertheless inflation has upward pressure, and interest rates have to go up. [/QUOTE]That's the most common notion. Actually though I think higher oil prices tend more to depress the economy. They take dollars out of the hands of American consumers after all.
2005-03-17 06:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Walter,
Should would be nice if the market had those barrels of oil that Iraq was exporting before the "liberation". The only liberating going on here is money from wallets that could be spent on other things or saved.[/QUOTE]
Good point.
I would have thought that the US would have made getting Iraq's oil pumping again at full throttle a top priority. But it seems to have been pretty far down the list of things to do for them.
2005-03-17 06:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Good point.
I would have thought that the US would have made getting Iraq's oil pumping again at full throttle a top priority. But it seems to have been pretty far down the list of things to do for them.[/QUOTE]Well it strikes me as pretty hard to produce oil in an area with a war going on. However if we weren't there, a regime would emerge pretty soon in some form or theother that would get the oil flowing again. Otherwise regimes don't last long. With us footing the bill for things over there though, things can drag on forever.
2005-04-05 02:28 | User Profile
Do I smell some shady speculators at work?
[url]http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/31/news/international/goldman_oil.reut/[/url]
Goldman sees oil spiking to $105
LONDON (Reuters) - Oil prices could touch $105 a barrel in the next few years, the influential investment bank Goldman Sachs said Thursday.
The bank's analysts said in a research report that the world energy market is in the early stages of a "super-spike" period that could see 1970s-style price surges. The bank called its forecast "conservative."
Click here for oil news
The report sent crude oil soaring Thursday, with U.S. light crude for May delivery adding $1.41 to close at $55.40 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. U.S. oil futures on NYMEX have averaged $50.03 a barrel so far in 2005 after hitting record highs in recent weeks.
But adjusted for inflation, oil would have to hit about $80 a barrel to top the levels seen during the oil crisis of the late 1970s.
Goldman's Global Investment Research note also raised the bank's 2005 and 2006 New York Mercantile Exchange crude price forecasts to $50 and $55 respectively, from $41 and $40.
"We believe oil markets may have entered the early stages of what we have referred to as a 'super spike' period -- a multi-year trading band of oil prices high enough to meaningfully reduce energy consumption and recreate a spare capacity cushion only after which will lower energy prices return," Goldman's analysts wrote.
Goldman is the biggest trader of energy derivatives, and its Goldman Sachs Commodities Index is a widely-watched barometer of energy and commodities prices.
Goldman said its predictions were supported by thin spare capacity in the energy supply chain and long response times for bringing on additional supply. The report also pointed to robust demand in the United States and in developing heavyweights China and India, despite the recent rapid increase in energy costs.
Back to the '70s
Goldman said the current oil market environment was much like that seen in the 1970s -- when oil prices spiked dramatically following the Arab oil embargoes on supply to the West and Iran's revolution.
High energy prices threw the world into recession, and triggered several years of declining oil demand.
During 1980-1981, gasoline spending in the United States corresponded to an average 4.5 percent of GDP, 7.2 percent of consumer expenditures, and 6.2 percent of personal disposable income, Goldman said.
"Our new $50-$105 per (barrel) super spike range perhaps conservatively corresponds to gasoline spending in the United States that reaches 3.6 percent of forecasted GDP, 5.3 percent of consumer expenditures, and 5.0 percent of personal disposable income.
Goldman said that assuming gasoline spending needs to reach 1970s levels to destroy demand, its upside super-spike estimate would be $135 per barrel for New York crude.
"Perhaps the ultimate answer to how high oil prices need to go before demand destruction occurs is derived from knowing when American consumers will stop buying gas guzzling sport/utility vehicles and instead seek fuel efficient alternatives," the analysts wrote.
"Based on our analysis of gasoline spending and the economy noted above, we estimate that U.S. gasoline prices may need to exceed $4 per gallon," they said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Contrarian view:
[url]http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&oi=news&start=0&num=3&q=http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/11309370.htm[/url]
Oil contrarian sees bubble ready to burst
BRAD FOSS
Associated Press
Most energy analysts on Wall Street expect oil prices to remain high for the foreseeable future because of strong demand and limited supply.
Then there is Tim Evans, a contrarian who says today's crude oil prices above $50 a barrel reflect nothing more than a market bubble fed by speculation and unwarranted fear. Evans, a senior analyst at IFR Energy Services in New York, believes oil prices could plummet to $28 a barrel as early as this summer.
"I guess that makes me the lunatic fringe," Evans said, followed up by a burst of laughter.
Evans' basic message is that the world's oil supply is sufficient to meet demand, that motorists will soon show that they're not willing to pay any price for gasoline and that the market is unreasonably receptive to worst-case-scenario thinking.
The 45-year-old analyst, who earned his bachelor's degree in mineral economics from Pennsylvania State University, has led energy research at IFR, a division of Thomson Financial, for the past 10 years, following stints as a copper trader and an analyst at a mining concern. Evans writes a twice-daily technical analysis of the petroleum markets that costs $395 a month and is read by institutional investors, major oil companies, fuel distributors, traders and journalists.
Oil prices began rising above historical norms a few months before the U.S. invaded Iraq and have maintained their upward momentum since then due to rising demand, a shrinking supply cushion and market worries about everything from a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico to pipeline sabotage in Iraq. The declining value of the dollar and increased hedge fund activity on futures markets have magnified the runup.
Rapid economic growth has largely masked the negative impact of high oil prices in the U.S., analysts say, though the airline industry has been stung, as have low-income families and those living on fixed incomes. Gasoline demand is about 2 percent higher than a year ago in spite of pump prices averaging $2.15 a gallon.
Veteran oil market analyst Peter Beutel of Cameron Hanover Inc. said Evans' outlook is not as crazy as his willingness to publicly stick out his neck.
"I don't disagree oil prices are going to drop precipitously at some point," Beutel said. "But, boy oh boy, they tell analysts to pick a time or pick a price, but don't do both. I certainly honor his bravery."
When pressed to do just that, Beutel said he could envision $28 a barrel, too - in 2008.
Most oil analysts have steadily raised their oil price forecasts over the past two years, keeping themselves in sync with the market's upward momentum.
They back up their upward revisions with data pointing to a limited global supply cushion at a time of rising demand, particularly in the United States and China. They also cite the declining value of the dollar and they voice fears about possible supply disruptions all around the world: from labor strife in Nigeria to refinery snags in America.
Goldman Sachs analyst Arjun Murti last week raised his forecast for 2005 from $41 a barrel to $50 a barrel. The report said the market may be in the early stage of a "super spike" that sends prices as high as $105 a barrel - the price Goldman Sachs said may be necessary to significantly curb energy consumption.
The report has contributed to a recent rise in crude futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange, where oil for May delivery settled Monday at $57.01 a barrel. Nymex futures closed at a record $57.27 a barrel on Friday.
Evans scoffed at the Goldman Sachs report, saying "the probability of reaching that price level is so small it's, like, laughable."
"Yes, $105 could happen. Texas could slide into the Gulf of Mexico. There could be a nuclear war with Iran. But you know that in a scenario like that I somehow don't think the world economy is going to be screaming for more oil."
Evans is not the only contrarian - there are still a handful of analysts forecasting prices below $40 a barrel in the second half of the year - but he may be the most blunt voice of opposition to the bullish market consensus. He sums up the group-think this way: "Greed makes you stupid."
Some of Evans' main arguments are as follows:
_ There is no worrisome lack of supply. With 1.8 million barrels a day of excess production capacity, Saudi Arabia can quickly pump enough oil to offset any disruptions, short of the most catastrophic scenarios.
"Oil prices have been rising for the last 18 months on hypothetical supply disruptions," Evans said. "Every time we come up with a new 'what if?', the oil price manages to go $5 higher."
_ Higher prices will eventually cause gasoline demand, which is now about 2 percent higher than a year ago, to taper off. And higher prices will lead producers, including Saudi Arabia, to pump more oil.
_ The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which the Bush administration has been filling at an average rate of nearly 250,000 barrels a day, is nearly full. By August, the market should have that much more supply of light, sweet crude available to it.
All of these factors have been ignored, Evans said, by the growing number of hedge funds and other speculators betting on crude futures, proving only that there is demand at any price for "paper barrels."
When asked why the market would ignore what he considers to be an adequate supply situation and instead focus on everything that could wrong to disrupt it, Evans answered with a question.
"Why did people chase Internet stocks in the late 1990s, and why did they shift from looking at earnings to looking at revenues and from looking at revenues to looking at the number of hits on a Web site as a method of valuation?
---
### Ponce
*2005-04-05 03:58* | [User Profile](/od/user/901)
This is only the beginning of the end, there are 5,883 items that we use every day that uses oil in its production and no one is talking about it (yet) the only ones that are passing the cost of gasoline directly to the public are the truckers and the ariliners.
This is not something that you cannot import from China or Taiwan and when everything comes together and prices go up it will be real costs that will really hurt your pocket.
As you know sinse June of 04 we havent been exporting any food overseas and now that fertilizer will go up in price two things will happen one=higher price for food and 2=less food.
---
### Okiereddust
*2005-04-05 04:08* | [User Profile](/od/user/29)
[QUOTE=Blond Knight]Do I smell some shady speculators at work?
[url]http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/31/news/international/goldman_oil.reut/[/url]
Goldman sees oil spiking to $105
[/QUOTE]Well I'm sure there are all sorts of conspiracy theories that will refloat. And no doubt a few speculators may try to take advantage of the system a bit. But I think nothing is going to change the underlying dynamics, which is yes Virginia, the world really does appear to be finally running out of oil - there isn't a bottomless sink there after all, contrary to what people like Julian Simon, the neocon godfather of the business-libertarian Republicans, have to say.
And of course its running out because neither of the two parties have chosen to do anything about it. Bottom line, something is in short supply, and there's no substitute, the price goes up, unless regulated. (if regulated you just have shortages)
2005-04-05 11:12 | User Profile
The government highway industry is a subsidy to oil consumption and a disincentive to technological innovation. I think about this whenever I'm stuck on one of Atlanta's five eight-lane highways and see all that empty airspace above me.
Another factor in rising oil prices is classic monetary inflation, which common sense tells you should be measured by those things for which demand stays constant over time: food, energy, and housing. The government's econometrists remove all three from the CPI and calculate in "hedonic deflators" as well.
2005-04-05 13:26 | User Profile
So, I guess we can assume all of you are short oil? Just asking. :wink:
2005-04-05 17:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Stuka]So, I guess we can assume all of you are short oil? Just asking. :wink:[/QUOTE]Either you ride a bike to work, live in big city and use the subway and bus for everything or own your own oil well. Those are the only people who aren't affected.
2005-04-05 21:44 | User Profile
The report also pointed to robust demand in the United States and in developing heavyweights China and India, despite the recent rapid increase in energy costs.
My reckoning is that massive industrialization and rising standards of living in China, India and other nations are contributing to higher oil prices more than anything else.
There's also the fact that in the US, refining capacity hasn't kept up with the number of automobiles on the road, particularly in California.
2005-04-05 21:57 | User Profile
I agree with Mr. Evans: The oil "shortage" is an illusion created by speculation. which commenced before the rubble of the WTC had time to hit the ground. The Iraq War aggravated the situation. When the futures speculators decide to pocket the profit then oil prices will plummet and all the spare producing capacity OPEC has harnessed will produce a short term glut. A good way to effect this is for Congress to pass a bill criminalizing crude oil futures trading.
2005-04-06 02:52 | User Profile
Oklahomaman, do you realize how many congressman are in the oil business?
Why hell even Bush is playing the game, but I do like your idea and that would be one way to get a new government by placing all those that we now have in jail.
2005-04-06 04:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oklahomaman]I agree with Mr. Evans: The oil "shortage" is an illusion created by speculation. which commenced before the rubble of the WTC had time to hit the ground. The Iraq War aggravated the situation. When the futures speculators decide to pocket the profit then oil prices will plummet and all the spare producing capacity OPEC has harnessed will produce a short term glut. A good way to effect this is for Congress to pass a bill criminalizing crude oil futures trading.[/QUOTE]Naw, if you really believe this, you'd should go out now, sell all these oil futures short, and make yourself a killing.
I tend to disagree with Evans, and think the oil shortage is real this time of course. The only way one can really prove Evans is right is show where all the hidden extra oil is. And that's a lot of oil to hide.
2005-04-06 05:50 | User Profile
I had no trouble filling up today other than the pain of paying extortionate prices. If there is a shortage, then why aren't there lines at the pump like in the 70's and why is our strategic reserve essentially full?
I don't buy the alternative theories: Increased demand from China and India and production woes. To my mind, they are disinginious rationalizations for speculation.
China and India demand for oil is tempered by the fact that they lack the infrastructure to use that much oil. They have no highway system and the personal ownership of automobiles is almost non-existent compared with Europe and the US. I see no increased demand for electrical power in either country. Large jumps in power consumption would require equally large government mandates to upgrade poor infrastructure. Short term production problems have never caused oil to jump 10%.
The same thing happened with the cattle market in the late 70's: Futures were through the roof and every one that had a weed infested lot were raising cattle. In the span of about two weeks, the futures market simply collapsed from trading at $112 ctw down to $20 ctw. You practically couldn't give the damn things away.
2005-04-06 06:30 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oklahomaman]When the futures speculators decide to pocket the profit then oil prices will plummet and all the spare producing capacity OPEC has harnessed will produce a short term glut.[/QUOTE] I remember reading just a few days ago how Saudi Arabia is the only OPEC country with any unused capacity at all. OPEC is running pretty close to its limits, and they're the world's biggest supplier.
Which is not good, considering the increasing industrialization in India and China. It isn't just cars that consume crude oil, but power plants, factories, refineries (lots of things are refined from crude, including plastic)... America isn't "the" energy hog anymore; we now have two up-and-coming energy hogs with four times our population each, competing for the same waning oil supply.
And let's not forget our own increased consumption. A decade ago, families in my neighborhood had one car, maybe two. Now, the streets are lined with cars. In one area in my neighborhood, three houses sport no fewer than twelve cars. They're parked so densely I can't tell which cars belong to which house. And gas guzzlers like SUVs have been very popular the past few years, too.
The shrinking oil supply, increased competition for it, and increased demand within the US tell pretty much the whole story so far.
2005-04-07 17:45 | User Profile
Gasoline in this one mule town is now $2.71 meaning that at this time because of my pre paid 1,000 gallons I save $1.01 per gallon.
Still have 675 gallons in my account at $1.69....... yesterday the owner saw me coming and told me "shuuuuu go away" hahahahahaha.
2005-04-08 02:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oklahomaman]I had no trouble filling up today other than the pain of paying extortionate prices. If there is a shortage, then why aren't there lines at the pump like in the 70's and why is our strategic reserve essentially full? In the seventies there were price controls, so the full impact wasn't felt in the pocketbook, rather the queue.
Without price controls, merchants never run completely out of product. Merchants, when they're running short of product, just raise the prices as high as they can till people quit buying.
I don't buy the alternative theories: Increased demand from China and India and production woes. To my mind, they are disinginious rationalizations for speculation.
China and India demand for oil is tempered by the fact that they lack the infrastructure to use that much oil. They have no highway system and the personal ownership of automobiles is almost non-existent compared with Europe and the US. I see no increased demand for electrical power in either country. Large jumps in power consumption would require equally large government mandates to upgrade poor infrastructure.
The numbers are there. Look into them if you doubt them.
China and India are changing if didn't know that. Sure, they're much poorer than us per capita, but they have collectively 2 billion capita's. That can add up.
Short term production problems have never caused oil to jump 10%.
The same thing happened with the cattle market in the late 70's: Futures were through the roof and every one that had a weed infested lot were raising cattle. In the span of about two weeks, the futures market simply collapsed from trading at $112 ctw down to $20 ctw. You practically couldn't give the damn things away.[/QUOTE]The meat traders were probably spending too much time comparing their markets with oil. Don't do the same thing in reverse.
Some people might even say if you do that to oil futures your analysis is just a lot of cow :dung: :dung: :lol:
Seriously, I don't rule out completely a price drop or speculation. But, as with any commodity, you really have to have some grasp of the fundamentals.
Its odd, in Oklahoma, since the 70's, the oil industry has left the state pretty much, and there doesn't seem to be nearly as much general knowledge about it.
2005-04-08 02:58 | User Profile
If that ever happenned you would see change in motion Yes they gauge us But the need to move has changed in America., so it feels less painful.
2005-07-06 23:10 | User Profile
Hey XD - you reading this ?
[url]http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050706/wall_street.html?.v=30[/url]
I like the part of the article that trys to speculate why a uptick in the service sector doesnt offset the effect of rising oil prices ? Umm, maybe because all those $5/hr mcjobs dont stimulate the economy the same way new engineering or manufacturing jobs do ?
2005-07-07 16:16 | User Profile
Any of you Okies know of Frank Cole, who used to be at OU? I have some shares in his company Energytec (EYTC on the pink sheets), which looks like something poised to take advantage of the price rise.
[url]http://www.energytec.com/main.htm[/url]
2005-07-07 16:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The only way one can really prove Evans is right is show where all the hidden extra oil is. And that's a lot of oil to hide.[/QUOTE]
Well, some conspiracy theorists talk of Gull Island off Alaska, though the mention of the Illuminati always throws credibility into doubt.
And then there's the Russian-Ukrainian abiotic oil theory championed by Mr Crispin at Lew Rockwell.
2005-07-07 16:44 | User Profile
I see the first sign of trouble comming from Japan, remember that Japan was number two in the use of oil and that now China is hogging all the oil that they can get from Asia, Middle East, Latin America, Africa and elsewhere.
What will Japan do when their oil tankers start returning to Japan empty?