Which is exactly why we need free trade with Colombia!

Jaun El Samo.

This is another subject, but it goes to show the way we calculate unemployment is a joke. The unemployment numbers went down when job loss went up. What a freaking joke! The 'real' unemployment rates are probably 7 percent.

And I though all those tax cuts and the war would spurn job creation! The last time we had it good was when Bill Clinton was president. (Though 'free' trade with Mexico is a big mistake, any 'free' trade with a country with a lower standard of living than your own is trouble.)

Jaun El Samo.

FF!

Big John,

I have read estimates that the true long term unemployment is closer to 8.5%. Couple that with the short term unemployment rate and you get a much higher number than the governemnt is willing to report.

Thanks for the links 726!

Unemployment in the 30s peaked around 25%. If the BLS kept statistics by the same methodology in the 30s, it would be over 12%. Given that conditions are much worse than in the 30s, unemployment upwards of 50% in the years ahead wouldn't surprise me. This time, the feds won't have the money to help the unemployed.

The 'real' unemployment rates are probably 7 percent.

You know this... how?

even if it is 7% or 8.5%, that's still pretty fucking good... 93%-91.5% have a job... I'll take that.

Rob, did you see this?

even if it is 7% or 8.5%, that's still pretty fucking good... 93%-91.5% have a job... I'll take that.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

I'm sure that makes those without jobs very happy to hear.

93%-91.5% have a job

Like hell. It means many have given up looking for work so they are not counted as unemployed.

it is a wonderful statistic if you have a job. if you dont have a job it is a tragedy

When you are unemployed for 6 months or more, the Feds stop counting you as unemployed. How convenient for them and their numbers.
It's as if you went to the doctor for 6 months, didn't get better, so the doctor unilaterally decalres you "cured."

If you work one hour a week as a crossing guard, you are employed, according to the BLS. I don't think people could live on one hour of work picking Juan el Samo's lettuce, even when he pays $50 an hour, but they'd be counted as employed.

little Israel's AIPAC steers American foriegn policy. Our lenders steer our economic policy.

There is every indication that Obama is more thoughtful than Shrub. But, listening to Obama kiss AIPAC's ass makes me sick.

The results of a Government hijacked by Corporations and foriegners speaks for itself.

Why is it so few understand what's going on?

Ray

"Given that conditions are much worse than in the 30s, unemployment upwards of 50% in the years ahead wouldn't surprise me. "

I was just a squirt during those years (born in '33),
but seriously doubt that we've sunk to that level.

My mother hoed hops for $1 a day, and in '38 my dad opened an auto repair in a rickety little wooden building because he could not find work.

Years later my grandfather had a farm where there was a very well built outhouse, that was erected by the Civilian Conservation Corps during the depression.

If you are unemployed, you have 100% unemployment.

i think at this point we're in a depression not a recession which is bloody worst.

LOL. You guys are out of your minds.

Godalmighty. Have a beer, watch some fireworks.

"LOL. You guys are out of your minds.

Godalmighty. Have a beer, watch some fireworks."

Why don't you walk up to the people unemployed, literally cannot find a job, and say that?

If you really think we're in a depression--when the definition of "recession" hasn't even been triggered yet--you're a dumbass. Do not pass go, do not collect $200--you're a dumbass.

Unemployment today is 5.5%. Show me where all the soup lines are. The job riots. The tent cities. Pick up a book, find some pictures of the Great Depression, and show me just where the hell you get your stupid ideas from. What a retard.

The 'real' unemployment rates are probably 7 percent.

You know this... how?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2008-07-04 10:11 AM

To be honest I heard that number on the radio. I hadn't read about 'real' estimates until 726's links.
What bothers me is how asinine the 'unemployment' numbers are.
But because employment levels can be directly affected by domestic and foreign policy, we see all governments trying to shrink the actual size.

Too many unemployed and we'll have problems, big problems. We are seeing the effects right now, with job loss after job loss, and domestic and foreign policy changes could help that.

When you are unemployed for 6 months or more, the Feds stop counting you as unemployed. How convenient for them and their numbers.
It's as if you went to the doctor for 6 months, didn't get better, so the doctor unilaterally decalres you "cured."

Posted by johnjkavanagh
* * * *

That's false. And a quick Google search would have cured your ignorance.

And by the way, there's plenty of evidence too to support the idea that the unemployment rate is overstated. People moving from W-2 jobs to independent contractor status, for example, don't show up in the payrolls surveys. People starting their own companies don't either, unless they set it up as a C-Corporation and themselves up as an employee, which is rarely done in the age of a Sub-S or an LLC. So every time a few guys leave a company and start another one--every time a guy leaves his painting company and opens up one for himself--every time a college kid sells books door-to-door--they're not counted among the nation's employed, until the Household Survey catches up with them, two quarters later.

If you really think we're in a depression--when the definition of "recession" hasn't even been triggered yet--you're a dumbass. Do not pass go, do not collect $200--you're a dumbass.

Not yet, but it's coming. $200 buys almost nothing anyway.

RiR, does the IRS not have numbers on who is making income? Would that not give us fairly accurate numbers at least for legal citizens that make income and therefor do something to make that income?

I know it's hard to be 100% accurate, but the way they do it now seems stupid and artificially low.

RR

Unemployment today is 5.5%.

If you want to believe that bullshit, be my guest. If you have the balls to break out of your dream, Kevin Phillips wrote a good book on how statistics lie.

I was just a squirt during those years (born in '33),
but seriously doubt that we've sunk to that level.

Our monetary system is a complete sham. It's only a matter of years before we do sink to that level.

Yes, but the problem is that most of the self-employed won't show up in the IRS numbers until they file a tax return. You could start a company today, take regular paychecks, and not file a tax return until March 15 of next year (for a corporation) or April 15 (for a pass-through).

Unemployment statistics are useful to spot trends in employment--where the jobs are being created or lost--but to say that the UE rate is definitively this or that is stupid. That isn't the point. If my bathroom scale is always five pounds off, it's still useful for something. If I step on the scale this month and I'm at 190, and next month I'm at 200, I'm gaining weight--it doesn't matter how wrong the scale is, or even in which direction, as long as it's consistently wrong in the same direction. Simple as that. But the idea that the scale says 200, and I'm actually 510--that's a little preposterous. The UE rate is probably half point either way of actual legal unemployment rates.

Believe whatever the hell you want. If you really believe that the unemployment rate is 11%, though--why haven't they filed for benefits? Why aren't they demonstrating? Why are ANY jobs showing up in the classifieds? It's not enough to just say you don't believe the government stats--if we have twice as many unemployed, where are they? Wouldn't other statistics be blowing off the charts?

Get a clue. This one-trick pony is getting stale.

And by the way, there's plenty of evidence too to support the idea that the unemployment rate is overstated.

Laughable. RR got his education from the Bernanke/Paulson school of economic theology.

Our monetary system is a complete sham. It's only a matter of years before we do sink to that level.

Posted by Ray
* * * *

I've been hearing that for 40 years, from people who make big commissions selling gold and silver. That's what's called a "vested interest". And they've been so wrong for so long, I wonder why anyone takes them seriously at all.

Believe whatever the hell you want. If you really believe that the unemployment rate is 11%, though--why haven't they filed for benefits?

They have. It's been a long slow increase in unemployment that doesn't show up the six month snapshot taken in the statistics.

Get a clue. This one-trick pony is getting stale.

That's the fascinating part about this. Reality separates those who have a clue from those who don't. It's your money kid. I'll take the silver.

My economic education predates Bernanke and Paulson.

Time will tell. Why isn't silver $100 an ounce? In inflation-adjusted terms, it should be.

It can't even keep pace with inflation. Neither does gold. Makes we wonder if you're in the business selling the stuff.

Going to the beach. Have a nice weekend.

And they've been so wrong for so long, I wonder why anyone takes them seriously at all.

When the boy cried wolf for the third time, nobody came except the wolf.

I've been warning you that inflationary cycles always end in disaster. The dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power since 1914. We're down to the last 2%. I don't give a shit if you are too lazy to do the research.

Why isn't silver $100 an ounce? In inflation-adjusted terms, it should be.

That's why it's so cheap. Much manipulation to keep prices of gold and silver low. Same with unemployment statistics and all the other bullshit statistics coming from the feds.

Yes once again jobs are being lost and all while democrats sit around doing nothing about gasoline prices. They stand in the way of drilling for more oil but don't offer any alternative to alleviate the gas prices that exist today.

They sit around and talk about alternative that don't exist and may not for 30-40 years. That want cut the cost of gas today and bring down the price of the necessities that we need which become more pricey every day.

If we made a serious effort to drill for more oil here gas prices would come down in the near term as well as the long term. Since speculators gamble on the future it would scare them away from running up the price of futures contracts. It would also scare the shit out of OPEC and make them realize that selling more now is better than selling none in the future.

Bee Swell

CPJ, is it possible for a single post to have so many inaccuracies and outright lies as you 2:19 one does? Amazing. Even scarier, you maybe even believe some of the bullshit you post. (And Southerners wonder why so many people in this Country and the World stereotype Southerners as stupid rednectks?)

"They (Democrats) stand in the way of drilling for more oil."

First, oil companies have over 10,000 existing leases on their books that THEY CHOOSE not to drill on. Why not? Tell ya...

Why should they spend $10 to $100 billion drilling new holes and building refineries that would lower the price to, say, $90 a barrel when they can get $146 for the existing oil? Its simple economics; would you spend big money so you could get LESS for your product? I would not either.

Second, you can bash Dems, Libs or Marxists Commie Berkeley traitors from now to forever but it's not going to change simple economics: Oil companies will not spend money to lower the price of their product.

Third, bringing on all known domestic reserves would lower the amount we import by 5-6%. Think that's going to bring gas prices down substantially?

Do the math.

My economic education predates Bernanke and Paulson.

Posted by rightisright

Your parents taught you to lie early and often.

I've been warning you that inflationary cycles always end in disaster. The dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power since 1914. We're down to the last 2%.
Posted by Ray

That about sums (pardon the pun) it up!

"The silent market crash"

This year's stock market decline has received a lot of media attention. But what most people don't realize is that the stock market has been silently losing value for almost a full decade.

Measured in dollars, the S&P 500 is down almost 15% since its 2000 highs. Adjusting for inflation or measuring with almost any other yardstick, the index is down substantially more.

This would be great if stocks were finally cheap again, but I don't see any evidence of that yet. When all is said and done, I expect the stock market to go quite a bit lower from its current level, not only in dollars but even more in terms of purchasing power.

When you are unemployed for 6 months or more, the Feds stop counting you as unemployed. How convenient for them and their numbers.
It's as if you went to the doctor for 6 months, didn't get better, so the doctor unilaterally decalres you "cured."

Posted by johnjkavanagh at 2008

and if you are unemployed for more than 6 months there is something else wrong besides the economy. if your job is gone and you cant do something else...MOVE......reminds me of the sam kennison bit about people starving in the desert....when he said....dont send them food. send them a UHAUL....

but seriously, do you really see a way that you are out of work for 6 months and there isnt SOMETHING else for you to do. I am sure that many people in this situation could have a job but it doesnt pay as much or something like that......WELL......a job at less pay....is that worse than NO JOb?

AND>....I guarandamntee it.......IF obama is in office there will not be ON FUCKIN WORD here about how unemployment is counted...and if one of US brings it up, we will be called who knows what for doing so..........
so lets put this in the archive just in CASE barrywayne wins and the job market ebbs and flows. I am telling you that the liberals here will be talking a WHOLE DIFFERENT TUNE>.....so lets wait and see...........

If the American people ever realized or understood how the Fed operates and how money is created in the US, there would probably be a ten million man and woman march on Washington and more specifically a march on the Federal Reserve Building. The Fed is a private banking monopoly that has "grabbed hold" of the money-creation of the United States. Who controls a nation's money, controls that nation.

The US needs money to pay for building roads, for buying war planes, for fighting wars, for paying Congressmen, for paying IRS and Post Office employees, for a thousand different items. For this the government turns to the tax payers or it turns to the Federal Reserve. The Fed is nothing more than a group of private banks that charge interest on money that never existed before.

How does the system of money creation work? A simplified but true explanation. The government needs ten billion dollars (aside from what it takes in income taxes or from what it borrows). So the government then prints ten billion dollars worth of interest-bearing US government bonds. Next, it takes the bonds to the Fed. The Fed accepts the bonds, and then places ten billion dollars in a checking account. The US government then writes checks to the tune of ten billion dollars against their checking account. But where was that ten billion dollars before the Fed issued the money? The money didn't exist. Can you believe it, the money was created by the Fed "out of thin air."

In other words, the Fed lends the US government the money -- and the crowning irony is that the Fed then charges the government interest forever on the bonds that the US government sold to the Fed in the first place. And the debts build and build and the national debt grows ever- larger.

How about the interest that is owed on the national debt, which has now grown to a choking $500 billion a year? That's part of where our income taxes go. The government taxes our sorry asses partly to pay for expenses incurred by our very own government. And a further crowning irony -- the government taxes us to pay for the interest on the ever-expanding national debt.

Well, Ray--most of that post is false. The Fed doesn't loan the government the money, private investors do. There are auctions biweekly for varying maturities, sold through brokerages, to insurance companies, pension plans, private individuals, and so on.

Hopefully you don't rely on this kind of tripe when it comes to your personal investing.

Well RR, that post was written by Richard Russell of Dow Theory Letters, one of the most respected and longest running newsletters in the business.

You're playing semantic games with me. The Fed is committed to buying bonds the Treasury can't sell to private and foreign sources. It's euphemistically called "monetizing the debt." That's the source of new money that accounts for inflation and the subsequent collapse of the dollar.

I certainly wouldn't rely on your investment advice. When this banking system collapses, you might be out of a job. If I were you, I would be thinking about a future doing something else.

And while this thread is on unemployment, I'm stunned that you don't know about the phony estimates of new job creation the BLS puts out each month.

They recently reported that the US lost 62,000 jobs last month. All the while their "Birth-Death computer model created 177,800 jobs. Without that fudge factor, the numbers would have shown 230,000 lost jobs last month.

BLS statistics are a sham and someone in your business should have no excuse for not knowing it.

I don't care who wrote it. Anyone who writes something like this doesn't know what he's talking about:

"The government needs ten billion dollars (aside from what it takes in income taxes or from what it borrows). So the government then prints ten billion dollars worth of interest-bearing US government bonds. Next, it takes the bonds to the Fed. The Fed accepts the bonds, and then places ten billion dollars in a checking account."

* * * *

Fact is, money is created every time a loan is created to anyone. Every time a kid borrows money to go to college, every time a family buys a home and takes out a mortgage, every time someone buys a car on installment debt, or I charge my hotel bill to a credit card. And, just so you know, money is being destroyed in this economy, not created. Banks aren't lending, even to each other. And they are writing off trillions of dollars worth of loans they believe are bad.

All those things are deflationary, not inflationary. Falling asset prices, falling home prices, falling stock markets, falling bond prices despite Fed easing--it's deflationary. Which explains why your gold and silver are down by double digits in three months.

But by all means, continue reading your little Dow Theory letters. Aren't they like $1200 a year? LOL. Why not just save the money, and ask Bani to print off his conspiracy websites and fax them over to you?

"But by all means, continue reading your little Dow Theory letters. Aren't they like $1200 a year? LOL. Why not just save the money, and ask Bani to print off his conspiracy websites and fax them over to you?"

Stock market newsletters are, generally speaking, a scam.

. Anyone who writes something like this doesn't know what he's talking about:

Richard Russell? Don't make me laugh. You are not in his league.

Fact is, money is created every time a loan is created to anyone.

Yes. Courtesy of reserves put there by the Federal Reserve and the magic of fractional reserve banking. You don't know this?

And, just so you know, money is being destroyed in this economy, not created.

Yes. There is good evidence that the money supply is contracting. There is still the matter of those offshore $trillions that foreigners are starting to send back to these shores. Commodity prices are going up at a faster rate while the dollar is sinking like Enron stock.

Which explains why your gold and silver are down by double digits in three months.

No it doesn't. Bernanke was bluffing about supporting the dollar. Market watchers are on to him now. Look for faster rate increases in all commodities and a faster rate in decline of the dollar. In a word: stagflation. Big time.

Some friendly advice. You better wake up.

Do you guys have any prediction on when you think the bottom will be reached on homes for sale or do you see home prices dropping even lower due to money not being loaned out?

Um, the Federal Reserve doesn't put reserves anywhere. And I remember Richard Russell predicting his gloom-n-doom all through the 1990's--Barron's always had a feature on him in the very back pages, and I used to pay attention to him until I realized he didn't understand credit markets.

I don't deny the dollar has fallen. But your doomsday scenario on stagflation requires constant infusions of new money, without accompanying falls in asset prices. Problem is, neither of those is happening. The money supply is contracting sharply, and asset prices are coming down. Even the commodities stocks have fallen--hard--while the spots are rising, though less slowly. And given that equities markets are right, albeit early, and commodities markets usually are not--look for the latter to unravel also.

Back out food and gasoline, and there's no inflation in this economy. And get the government out of the ethanol business, you'll see food inflation turn negative also. The dollar bottomed in April and has snapped back strongly since, and commodities ex-crude have turned the other way.

But we'll see. I've been wrong before.

Do you guys have any prediction on when you think the bottom will be reached on homes for sale or do you see home prices dropping even lower due to money not being loaned out?

Posted by CalifChris
* * * *

Further. Impossible to call tops, and impossible to call bottoms. And when these bottoms take place, it isn't a 'V' shape, where it bounces back and shoots back up again--it bumps along the bottom for years, until it finds its footing and gradually climbs.

I had clients (inherited ones) close their accounts to buy speculative real estate in 2005 and 2006. I told them it was nuts, that it was the top of the market.
But silly me--it had another 50% to go. A couple even called me and told me all the money they had made, and were plowing back into new projects. "Thank God we didn't listen to you"--they said--having tripled their money in Gulf condos in about nine months. I haven't heard from them lately. Goes to show you, though, that you can go broke trying to pick the top, or the bottom. And you can go broke faster by going long either way.

RiR

Thanks for your answer. Your clients buying those Gulf condos should have taken your advice. I doubt they are seeing much of a return on their investment if they bought in 2005/2006. It seemed those were the years when the home selling prices peaked. Yet right now, one block from my house, some guy is building a two-story McMansion -- and it's BIG -- so either he had no problem securing a loan or money is no object for him. Probably both.

Bill O'Reilly was just on Fox. He said we definitely are now in a recession and that it was driven first by the housing slump and now by high oil prices and he doesn't see it getting much better anytime soon. If all the foreigners who have loaned us money (such as China which is bankrolling Bush's war in Iraq) pull their money out because they don't want to get stuck with a worthless U.S. dollar we are looking at some bad times ahead. How did our country get in such a mess?

By what date was someone recently predicting $100 barrels of oil?

New report out --

Those who keep saying oil companies don't want to drill for more oil cos it would lower their selling price, Consider this, right now oil companies have to purchase 60% of all oil used in the U.S. from other oil producing countries at $140+ dollars a barrel. If they could pump more out of the ground here at $10-$20 a barrel they would certainly do it.

Bee Swell

Crachpipe-
They have scores of millions of acres under lease and they're just sittin' on 'em.

BETELG, there's very little oil under the land of those leases. Hell if there was I would offer to buy it from them and start drilling myself.

If there was much oil there they would be going crazy trying to pump it out at 1/7 the cost of buying it from overseas.

So know that you know the truth how about explaining why the democrats won't just call our bluff and allow them to drill in places that are known to have large quantities of oil?

Bee Swell

Crackpipe-
Why would they want to increase supply when they are running record profits and they always sell all they have at $4.00 a gallon?

...but they own the leases.

I suggest you try to buy one out from under them, as you boasted. Let me know how that turns out, okay?

Betelg, try reading this article.

Crackpipe-
What astounds me is not that you are a sucker, but that you are born every minute.

Here's another one for you BETELG,

Crackpipe-
When gas is $12.00 a gallon I'm sure it will make sense to bring out the fairy dust and make oil by paying people to clap their hands and collect and distill the natural fat in a home recollection kit for use in lanterns, but until then this bullshit you link me to is not a solution to your problems.

So know that you know the truth how about explaining why the democrats won't just call our bluff and allow them to drill in places that are known to have large quantities of oil?

Why let the oil companies drill of OUR shorelines and drill on OUR land preserves when there is NO guarantee from big oil that any of that oil will be used only for U.S citizens. The oil companies put the oil into a world common oil market. We might not even see a single drop of it in an American gas tank. Look at the Alaskan pipeline. All that oil goes over to Asia. What good does it do us here? Nothing. Beijing now puts 20,000 new drivers on its roads every month. China already has most of our jobs. Should we now guarantee China gets all our oil too?

Saw an interview on tv the other day with the CEO from Chevron and Robert Kennedy. Some caller phoned in with a question and asked the Chevron CEO if we Americans would be guaranteed the oil if it was drilled for in our country. I never saw a guy do a faster verbal tap dance than the Chevron CEO. He hemmed and hawed and then finally Robert Kennedy jumped in and told the caller the exact same thing I've been bitching about on DR for 3 weeks -- there is NO guarantee we Americans will see one drop of any of the oil they want to drill out of our land and off our shorelines. The Chevron CEO knew that was true and didn't dispute it.

Big oil could set aside so much oil, it could lower our prices at the gas stations if they wanted to, but they do not.

What you are now seeing with Bush Co. and their big "we're running out of oil fast" scare along with the huge rise in gas prices is Bush/Cheney's swan song -- their last chance while still in office to push thru drilling on U.S. soil and off our shorelines.

When you can tell me "yes" to ALL of the following items then I will say "yes" to drilling on U.S. soil:

1. GUARANTEE me with a rock solid written agreement from the U.S. oil companies that all oil drilled from this point onward coming from U.S. soil and off our shorelines will be used ONLY for the benefit of American citizens in this country;

2. GUARANTEE me that big oil will set aside a set amount of money to look into alternative means of energy and, should anyone else come up with another source or idea for alternative fuel, they will not be hounded and bullied out of business -- which is what happened when big oil wanted no competition in the past.

3. GUARANTEE that big oil will use all our oil refineries to their ultimate capacity.

4. Bush is privatizing and selling off our country's assets to foreigners as fast as he can. Big oil must also GUARANTEE us as part of the deal no other foreign oil company will be allowed to drill in the U.S. and break the agreement.

5. And as the final guarantee by big oil -- if they do not keep their word on any of the above guarantees, the U.S. government will nationalize all oil drilled for in the U.S. Just the word "nationalize" should make them toe the line.

CC-
Those are all deal-breakers, but I'm sure that was your point.

BetelG

No, I meant it sincerly and put up what I thought would be the only fair agreement if big oil wants to drill here in the U.S.. Well, then Bush and his oil boys can just forget it. No drilling on U.S. soil without a guarantee we are the ones who will get the use of the oil. Seemed like that would be a simple no brainer for all involved.

CC-
I agree, but none of that will happen.

BetelG

I know. And that's why drilling in the U.S. won't happen either.
No reason big oil can't guarantee the first "X" billion barrels of oil they drill from here go to us. If big oil has a surplus after their set quota has been met for the year then they can sell that surplus on the world common oil market. If the oil companies expect to get drilling rights on our soil then we Americans have every right to know what we will be guaranteed in return. Tit for tat.

No, I meant it sincerly and put up what I thought would be the only fair agreement if big oil wants to drill here in the U.S.. Well, then Bush and his oil boys can just forget it. No drilling on U.S. soil without a guarantee we are the ones who will get the use of the oil. Seemed like that would be a simple no brainer for all involved.

Posted by CalifChris
* * * *

Well, that seems kinda stupid. What if the price falls, and Canada wants to import crude from us? What about US refineries that process diesel fuel for export to Europe? How about coal--should coal companies restrict their use to the US, where politicians hate the stuff? Or are you going to put tens of thousands of UCW out of work?

Almost all the oil drilled in the US stays in the US, but we do export a lot of distillates. Should that stop? How about chemicals made from US oil, but exported to the world? Is that OK? How about plastics?

The US is the world's largest oil market, so it makes sense that virtually all the oil developed here, stays here. And that's what does happen. But just because on occasion the Japanese get a tanker full of Texas Sweet instead of Brent doesn't mean that we shouldn't allow any companies to expand drilling or refining operations. How dumb is that? Why should a wildcatter in Louisiana be punished just because the some Japanese oil wholesaler got a good price on Alaskan crude?

Califchris I am sure that most if not all of any additional oil pumped from U.S. soil would be sold here unless we had a glut that was not being used.

It would only make sense to sell to those who are closest to you since all oil is traded on an open market at market prices.

Fear that these companies will benefit but we won't is just silly and irrational.

If oil companies could comepletely control the price of gas it would have never been around a dollar a gallon for much of the 80's and 90's.

There used to be excess oil on the world market now there is not because supply has stayed constant while demand has increased by millions of barrels due to demand in India and China.

For our own national security sake we should start expanding drilling for more oil now.

Also I am not opposed to continued research of alternative energy and fuel sources. I would even approve of government funds to explore viable alternatives.

Bee Swell

RiR

It seem almost every country is getting a better deal from our oil companies except us. What is the excuse for shipping the oil from the Alaskan pipeline to Asia again? I hear the story its a cheaper (or whatever) type of crude and it can't be used here, blah blah blah. Americans are fed up being told we're "selfish and spoiled" and all the rest of the garbage I hear from the oil company lobbyists such as we won't use mass transit and all the rest. Well it won't work. I'd use mass transit but it doesn't exist in my state of over 26 million people. And it probably never will. My state is big and it is car country. Besides, mass transit only works well in highrise filled, closer-in bigger cities.

Oil is too important to let a group of 4-5 big oil companies set the price. And don't kid yourself that isn't what is happening. If the oil companies don't want to see the oil nationalized then they better take a hard look at what their prices are doing to our U.S. economy. We give them billions in tax breaks and for R&D and still are getting screwed.

I don't want to see the oil companies nationalized myself, and I do understand the HUGE cost of off shore oil exploration. The deeper they have to drill offshore the more it costs and not every location they drill is a guarantee of finding oil costing big oil more billions in loss of money and time wasted. New technology costs and so does leasing out those deepwater oil rigs.

Still, the oil companies are making a fortune and everything here is skyrocketing in cost because of the high price of oil. The truckers pay more so all the products the ship get jacked up in price. People are being hurt under this worst President we've ever had iin U.S. history and, whether rightly or wrongly in blaming Bush for the high oil prices, Americans have had it with his rotten ecomony.

Okay, getting tired so I'm out of here for tonight.
Sweet dreams or, since you investin oil, I'll say sweet crude. (grin)

Well, only about 1% of Alaskan crude makes its way to Asian markets--it's a myth that we're pumping it just to sell it to the Japanese or the Koreans. It's propaganda, pushed by the enviros, who don't want any more drilling, anywhere.

Which is fine. I do a lot of work with oil companies, and they will find it wherever they're allowed to go. I never quite understood why libs were so uptight about sending textile jobs to Mexico, but are so blase about shipping off tens of thousands of high-paying energy jobs. But it's not my problem. And neither are high gas prices, which affects me a whole lot less than the tens of millions of people who will be electing Obama president. Gas prices are high because of the falling dollar (caused by government), severe restrictions on drilling and refining (created by government) and lack of supply growth (exacerbated by government). And since our government is popularly elected, the only ones we can really blame for high gas prices are ourselves.

why are democrats crying and whining about oil prices in this thread?
SHUT THE FUCK UP. Your all your faults, you brought it on yourself, and us, so don't even talk on the matter.

Kuma

"Job Lost for Sixth Straight Month", SINCE THE DEMOCRATES TOOK OVER CONGRESS. Can we afford to elect an Arab American President and see the job lose get worse?

RR
I don't deny the dollar has fallen. But your doomsday scenario on stagflation requires constant infusions of new money, without accompanying falls in asset prices. Problem is, neither of those is happening. The money supply is contracting sharply, and asset prices are coming down.

Yes it is true the money supply is contracting and asset prices are coming down. That doesn't mean commodity prices have to go down. The stagflation of 70s serves as a precursor of what is happening today.
-The money already in the system needs a place to go.
-The dollar is a faith based currency. Once investors lose faith, they'll unload dollars as fast as they can. We are seeing that psychology beginning to take hold.
-Every banking system in the world is on the same faith based fiat currency system. Inflation is getting worse worldwide.

In this environment, like rats running from a smoking building, there is a lot of money out there seeking refuge in something safe. With financial assets falling everwhere, that leaves things with intrinsic value, namely commodities. Unless you are an industrial user, that leaves gold and silver as the only two safe havens. You don't see fundamentals like this in a hundred years. The current prices are a steal that pale in significance to the fundamentals.

You don't remember the 1970's. Asset prices were soaring--land prices shooting up, a real estate boom in Florida and California, you could even get 100% financing on farm equipment for the first time, because used equipment was selling for more than the original purchase price. Car prices were soaring--obviously not like today.

No, this is different. Show me a single place outside of corn and gasoline that is showing signs of high inflation. It ain't there. In the seventies, it was everywhere. New money supply is being destroyed. In order for your formulation to work, that has to reverse, and cause an across-the-board staggering increase in asset prices. Real estate has to boom, again. Cars and trucks and heavy machinery has to soar in cost, again.

I won't be holding my breath.

good one ozzie. bad news is good news for the dems, they love this kind of news

MAVERICK: I noticed since Iraq has turned around and their oil production is at an all time high, Stretch Polosi and Dirty Harry are silent. I wonder why?

It's your money RR. This is an environment your education and experience didn't prepare you for. That's as best as I can briefly explain it. What can I say.

New money supply is being destroyed. In order for your formulation to work, that has to reverse, and cause an across-the-board staggering increase in asset prices.

The flaw in your reasoning is assuming prices are synchronized with the money supply. Not necessarily. You got a bad education as did every other college grad with a degree in economics.

Show me a single place outside of corn and gasoline that is showing signs of high inflation.

You must be cut off from the outside world.

Faith based fiat currencies alway go to their intrinsic value of zero. It's a sure as death and taxes.

"MAVERICK: I noticed since Iraq has turned around and their oil production is at an all time high, Stretch Polosi and Dirty Harry are silent. I wonder why?"

Probably because someone has to figure out how to pay for this 3 trillion dollar gift to ExxonMobil.
Gee, with increased pumping I'm sure that the oil will now pay for the war like we were told.

The flaw in your reasoning is assuming prices are synchronized with the money supply. Not necessarily. You got a bad education as did every other college grad with a degree in economics.
* * * * *

And the flaw in your argument, is that whenever you're confronted with evidence that contradicts your position, you attack the other person's erudition.

* * * * *

You must be cut off from the outside world.

Faith based fiat currencies alway go to their intrinsic value of zero. It's a sure as death and taxes.

Posted by Ray

* * * * *

See? You did it again. I've disagreed with you, so I must be cut off from the outside world. And, for the hundredth time, if you're right, why isn't gold at $4,000 an ounce? If your silly shiny metals can't even keep up with inflation, what does that suggest about the rest of your thesis?

Maybe my education hasn't failed me after all, and maybe I spend more time in the real world than you do. Your Dow Theory letters have been predicting the collapse of our markets for 30 years, and in September of last year, said that we were in a BULL market--just as they would hit all-time highs, before pulling back 20%.

How many investors will lose their life savings, before admitting that Russell doesn't know anything?