1Perry
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2011
- Messages
- 7,624
- Reaction score
- 1,859
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
And I'm sure that trolling is trolling there too.
What a cowardly answer.
And I'm sure that trolling is trolling there too.
Our number one export product last year was what? Gasoline.
I understand your need to change the subject.Hmmmm....every years gas prices have been rising, and every year less is produced. Every year we pay a little More at the pump, and every year there seems to be something happening in the middle east.
Yeah....The President of the United States is responsible for these things...Dayum, he deserves Kudos just for bein' such a Bad Ass.
I just realized that Fox News not only sells lies, they also sell passion for the re-telling of lies.
Look at how the Foxies and Far-righties cling to the bullcrap like honey flavored gold.
View attachment 67123363
So factual!
On the subject matter however, we have locked up supply by not expanding our refinery capacity. Im anxious to see the impact of the oil shale process on domestic supply. We need every energy supply on the table and every alternate transportation source as a viable commercial enterprise to really make a dent into gas prices. Right now we arent doing everything. We are doing everything with non combustion but we could be doing more with that, too.
Our refineries are exporting 400,000 Barrels a day of gasoline and you stil want more production? What we aren't doing is passing the bill that would stop speculators from owning more than 25% of the market at a time. I don't know why should we tolerate anybody buying up oil that doesn't use it at all but isn't 25% of the market enough?
I don't think anyone was surprised you are unaware that big oil was kicked out or Iraq when they nationalized their oil 40 years ago. It took an invasion/occupation/regime change to accomplish getting them back in.
Mission accomplished!!!
I don't think anyone is surprised that you are unaware that a dictator controlled Iraqi oil since 40 years ago. In order to do business with him, substantial bribes and kickbacks were required. It took an invasion/regime change to open the markets to legitimate oil companies.
You are right on one thing though, it was mission accomplished.
Hundreds of thousands of dead and $2 trillion dollars to replace one corrupt regime with another corrupt regime that is backed up by the most powerful military on the planet. You consider that a good deal do you?
I agree with the majority of Post 9/11 Veterans and Americans, it wasn't worth it.
America is still the world's largest importer of crude oil. From January to October, the country imported 2.7 billion barrels of oil worth roughly $280 billion.So we import a raw material and export a finished product.
Fuel exports, worth an estimated $88 billion in 2011, have surged for two reasons:
— Crude oil, the raw material from which gasoline and other refined products are made, is a lot more expensive. Oil prices averaged $95 a barrel in 2011, while gasoline averaged $3.52 a gallon — a record. A decade ago oil averaged $26 a barrel, while gasoline averaged $1.44 a gallon.
— The volume of fuel exports is rising. The U.S. is using less fuel because of a weak economy...
View attachment 67123363
So factual!
On the subject matter however, we have locked up supply by not expanding our refinery capacity. Im anxious to see the impact of the oil shale process on domestic supply. We need every energy supply on the table and every alternate transportation source as a viable commercial enterprise to really make a dent into gas prices. Right now we arent doing everything. We are doing everything with non combustion but we could be doing more with that, too.
Long term price trends are driven by fundamentals, not short term plays on volatility. By enacting such reforms, you limit producers abilities to hedge against exogenous supply shocks that can emerge from wars, natural disasters, and other types of disruptions. The best way to curb unnecessary speculation is to simply raise margin requirements at various clearing houses. But even that sort of action carries its own risks, as limiting market participation increases the likelihood of information asymmetries that are just as dangerous as short term speculators.
How would you like us to expand our refining capacity? Should the government build refineries (socialism)? Should the government force the oil companies not to close refineries, or to reduce capacity? Because, you know ... that's exactly what they're doing! Conoco to sell or shut Pennsylvania refinery | Reuters
Something you should be aware of regarding refineries. Several of the big oil companies here in the US are currently selling or closing down their entire refinery operations wholesale because EPA regulations keep driving overhead costs up. Refineries used to be very profitable, thats no longer the case; refineries actually drag down profits on oil companies.
I never said they should force companies to keep them open or have the government force them to stay open; by the way, thats an excellent straw man, try voicing your own thoughts and let me voice mine ok? I dont put words into your mouth, dont put words into mine.
There was a time when oil companies desperately wanted to open refineries in the south, southeast and northwest. Guess what the supply implications of that would be and guess what the eventual result of that was?
With the Shale issue, the time will come again to try to open refineries to make the logistics different for profit on oil. If refineries get opned near large deposits, the gas can largely mitigate supply fluctuations that are used for temporary price hikes every time a natural event hits an area where we have a large group of refineries like the Gulf. Every time a hurricane hits, the price spikes. My argument is that more supply stability and a non maxed out refining capacity would offset some stability but certainly not all of it.
My original argument stands though: we are not doing everything we can and not applying every resource, we are taxing and impeding some resources to make others viable. Which ultimately means those resources will fail under any economic stress.
We have too much refining capacity now or we wouldn't be exporting 400,000 barrels a day of gasoline. You must be sniffing too much gas.
Something you should be aware of regarding refineries. Several of the big oil companies here in the US are currently selling or closing down their entire refinery operations wholesale because EPA regulations keep driving overhead costs up. Refineries used to be very profitable, thats no longer the case; refineries actually drag down profits on oil companies.
Does that mean that every industry that exports product has too much capacity ???
Absurd comment.
The problem speculation isn't coming from producers OR consumers, but rather from investment banks and hedge funds. This has the exact opposite of the desired effect; it creates price volatility when the intended purpose of oil futures is to provide price certainty to industries that are heavily reliant on oil, like airlines and trucking companies. Bernie Sanders has got it right. What Wall Street doesn’t want us to know about oil prices - The Washington Post
Investment banks and hedge funds are incapable of cornering commodity markets;
there is nothing to build a case for cornering futures markets, because for every long or short order contract, there is a counter-party required to take the other position. And if and when delivery is met, this opens up a plethora risk scenarios for entities holding vast tanks of petro, e.g. natural disaster, leaks, insurance costs, etc.... If a speculator is willing to assume such risk, why would they not be able to profit from it? Speculation can only drive up (or down) prices on very discrete intervals. In the long run, its all based on supply and demand and speculation simply adds liquidity to the respective market.
P.S. Bernie Sanders is an idiot.
I've seen nobody argue that they can corner the market.
Why? Easy. Because the positives (increased income for investment banks) are far outweighted by the negatives (higher everything for consumers). All speculation is as used here is those making money doing nothing off the backs of those actually working.
Oil is a commodity, not an investment vehicle and should be treated as such.
Then speculation cannot drive prices higher.
You miss my point. Speculation driven price spikes are realized on discrete time intervals, and are not.... i repeat.... are not a driver of long term price trends. Because of this fact, short term price volatility does not create real inflation. As stated, price trends are entirely driven by supply and demand determinants on an infinite continuum.
Despite the fact that it is. It's the herd mentality. We have done this. I've provided the links that showed that a percentage of the costs connected with $145 a barrel was do to nothing but speculation. Despite this, you still claim it doesn't happen. :shrug:
I do not miss your point. Your point is wrong. Will supply and demand continue on a certain trend for awhile? Yes, most likely but those fundementals do not take oil from $45 to $120.
Activity in the crude oil futures market increased appreciably in the past decade, as did the number of noncommercial traders, the so-called speculators. This coincided with rising oil prices but didn’t necessarily cause them. No transmission mechanism linking futures prices to spot prices appears until transactions occur in the spot market. Looking at the 2007–09 period, the data are consistent with how a well-functioning futures market would behave, initially when there is tightness in the market, and later when there is considerable slack due to the global recession. Futures market traders, therefore, seem to have been routine market participants.
Investment banks and hedge funds are incapable of cornering commodity markets; there is nothing to build a case for cornering futures markets, because for every long or short order contract, there is a counter-party required to take the other position. And if and when delivery is met, this opens up a plethora risk scenarios for entities holding vast tanks of petro, e.g. natural disaster, leaks, insurance costs, etc.... If a speculator is willing to assume such risk, why would they not be able to profit from it? Speculation can only drive up (or down) prices on very discrete intervals. In the long run, its all based on supply and demand and speculation simply adds liquidity to the respective market.
P.S. Bernie Sanders is an idiot.
Here's one reason why it might not be such a great idea: CFTC charges traders over oil price - FT.com