Simple economics and the cost to fuel a boat....
 

While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

On 23 Aug 2005 17:48:55 -0700, wrote:

While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

What you say is true, but a nice side effect is that my friends from Holland are
coming to visit in a few weeks. They can afford it because the dollar is so
cheap!

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

I give him more credit than that. Once you recognize that the goal of the
bush presidency is to make his "insiders" richer then every action the
current administration has taken makes sense. Including the war.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?



Not to worry; Bush hasn't done squat in 4.5 years to help our trade
imbalances, or the clobbering of our currency.

I'm reading in this weeks Time mag which states we only import 42% of our
oil. American oil companies SCREWING Americans! Just like Enron and all the
other American companies F'in us!



wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


"The value of the US dollar has no bearing on how many US dollars
Americans must pay for imported oil"? Did you really just advance such
a theory, NOYB?

Why would you do that? Could it be because the runaway federal spending
by the R majority congress and approved by the R president is one of
the primary factors causing our dollar to take a beating?

Please explain why the relative value of a nation's currency has no
effect on the pricing of imported commoditites (such as gourmet Iraqi
hogwash).

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:31:30 +0000, Scooby Doo wrote:


Yet another cogent argument in favor of increased domestic production,
including that tiny 7% sliver of ANWR as well as offshore.

A little short sighted, and a little too late. M. King Hubbert's
predictions were correct. US oil production peaked in 1971 and has been
falling ever since. Get used to it. We can not produce our way out of
dependence on foreign oil, never, ever.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/energy/energy-a.htm


What is wrong with sucking everyone else's oil out of their ground and
buring it up here in the US?

You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil" as a
way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US to your
liking.

Bert Robbins wrote:
You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil" as a
way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US to your
liking.


You and your ilk always whine about how the rest of the world resents
your greed & your wastefulness & your pollution, as you suck up half the
worlds resources to support your beer belly life style.

The whining is getting much louder as the US ability to support this
erodes due to poor leadership.

DSK

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 07:26:19 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:



You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil" as a
way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US to
your liking.

The operative word is "dependence". When the economy tanks because of the
escalating price of oil, your "ilk" will blame it on Clinton. Or when
supplies get tight, and we are in yet another oil war, blame it on the
liberals. Or when Chavez says "F* you" and stops shipping us oil,
assassinate him. It's a fair trade, blood for oil.

35 years ago, when the first oil crunch occurred, the smart money was on
developing an effective oil policy to prevent future occurrences. That
still hasn't happened, but then we aren't very smart, are we?

wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


"The value of the US dollar has no bearing on how many US dollars
Americans must pay for imported oil"? Did you really just advance such
a theory, NOYB?

Oil prices are based in U.S. dollars. If fifty US dollars buys a barrel of
oil, and the dollar's value drops relative to the Euro, then the price of
oil appears cheaper to countries that use the Euro. Oil doesn't appear more
expensive to people buying it in US dollars! Only supply and demand can do
that.





Why would you do that? Could it be because the runaway federal spending
by the R majority congress and approved by the R president is one of
the primary factors causing our dollar to take a beating?

A weak dollar is good for trade. We may have some of the highest trade
imbalances that we've ever seen...but they're mostly with China. And that's
only because China has pegged its currency to the US dollar.

If the dollar was strong, the trade imbalance would be even worse because it
would cause a larger trade deficit with other countries besides China.


Please explain why the relative value of a nation's currency has no
effect on the pricing of imported commoditites (such as gourmet Iraqi
hogwash).

Because the price of oil is based in US dollars. Always.

A weak dollar just makes the oil cheaper to other countries. It doesn't
make the oil more expensive to the US consumer.
However, oil is *not* cheaper to other countries despite the relative
strength of their currency. Why? Because the price of oil is a factor of
supply and demand (whether that demand is real or perceived)...and not the
strength of the US dollar.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well
to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as
we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it
almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going
to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?
Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay
more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents.
The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those
situations.

"The value of the US dollar has no bearing on how many US dollars
Americans must pay for imported oil"? Did you really just advance such
a theory, NOYB?

Oil prices are based in U.S. dollars. If fifty US dollars buys a barrel
of oil, and the dollar's value drops relative to the Euro, then the price
of oil appears cheaper to countries that use the Euro. Oil doesn't
appear more expensive to people buying it in US dollars! Only supply and
demand can do that.




Why would you do that? Could it be because the runaway federal spending
by the R majority congress and approved by the R president is one of
the primary factors causing our dollar to take a beating?

A weak dollar is good for trade. We may have some of the highest trade
imbalances that we've ever seen...but they're mostly with China. And
that's only because China has pegged its currency to the US dollar.

If the dollar was strong, the trade imbalance would be even worse because
it would cause a larger trade deficit with other countries besides China.

Please explain why the relative value of a nation's currency has no
effect on the pricing of imported commoditites (such as gourmet Iraqi
hogwash).

Because the price of oil is based in US dollars. Always.

A weak dollar just makes the oil cheaper to other countries. It doesn't
make the oil more expensive to the US consumer.
However, oil is *not* cheaper to other countries despite the relative
strength of their currency. Why? Because the price of oil is a factor
of supply and demand (whether that demand is real or perceived)...and not
the strength of the US dollar.




We have very little to trade, Dr. Cavity.

Of course. Whatever intellectual property we have and they want, China just
pirates.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


It is simple economics.....but it is not the value of the dollar against
foreign currency........It is supply and demand. Right now, demand is
nearly equal to supply, THAT is why the cost has increase so dramatically

Doug,
What do you do to stop sucking up the world resources? What car do you
drive, does your sailboat have a engine? Do you have air conditioning? Do
you car pool?


"DSK" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil" as
a way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US to
your liking.

You and your ilk always whine about how the rest of the world resents your
greed & your wastefulness & your pollution, as you suck up half the worlds
resources to support your beer belly life style.

The whining is getting much louder as the US ability to support this
erodes due to poor leadership.

DSK

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What do you do to stop sucking up the world resources? What car do you
drive, does your sailboat have a engine? Do you have air conditioning?
Do
you car pool?

The only whining I hear is from the liebrals.



"DSK" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil"
as
a way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US
to
your liking.

You and your ilk always whine about how the rest of the world resents
your
greed & your wastefulness & your pollution, as you suck up half the
worlds
resources to support your beer belly life style.

The whining is getting much louder as the US ability to support this
erodes due to poor leadership.

DSK

Sounds like DSK talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk.


"Red Cloud©" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:07:27 -0400, "Juan Valdez"
wrote:

Doug,
What do you do to stop sucking up the world resources? What car do you
drive, does your sailboat have a engine?

... Sailboat???? Bwhahahahahahahahaha! Tougboat has an old diesel
trawler that belches black smoke every where he goes.

rusty redcloud



Do you have air conditioning? Do
you car pool?


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Bert Robbins wrote:
You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil"
as
a way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US
to
your liking.

You and your ilk always whine about how the rest of the world resents
your
greed & your wastefulness & your pollution, as you suck up half the
worlds
resources to support your beer belly life style.

The whining is getting much louder as the US ability to support this
erodes due to poor leadership.

DSK

He sounds like Harry Krause lobbying for eliminating handguns, then posting
pictures of his handgun and pictures of his target. I really don't care if
handguns are made illegal, but I sure as heck would take a strong vocal
stand proposing they be made illegal, and then brag about how I was going to
kill someone with my handgun.




"Red Cloud©" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:32:37 -0400, "Juan Valdez"
wrote:

Sounds like DSK talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk.


So what else is new? LOL!

rusty redcloud


"Red Cloud©" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:07:27 -0400, "Juan Valdez"
wrote:

Doug,
What do you do to stop sucking up the world resources? What car do you
drive, does your sailboat have a engine?

... Sailboat???? Bwhahahahahahahahaha! Tougboat has an old diesel
trawler that belches black smoke every where he goes.

rusty redcloud



Do you have air conditioning? Do
you car pool?


"DSK" wrote in message
t...
Bert Robbins wrote:
You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil"
as
a way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the
US
to
your liking.

You and your ilk always whine about how the rest of the world resents
your
greed & your wastefulness & your pollution, as you suck up half the
worlds
resources to support your beer belly life style.

The whining is getting much louder as the US ability to support this
erodes due to poor leadership.

DSK

Harry Krause wrote:

We have very little to trade, Dr. Cavity.


Besides Hollywood & the music industry, America's greatest exports seem
to be death & destruction.
What a sad state of affairs for a country with such potential.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:27:57 GMT, Don White wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

We have very little to trade, Dr. Cavity.


Besides Hollywood & the music industry, America's greatest exports seem
to be death & destruction.
What a sad state of affairs for a country with such potential.

And it's all due to Bush. Damn shame Kerry wasn't elected. He would have gotten
a lot of new manufacturing and ten million (high paying!!!) jobs in his first
year as president.

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


"The value of the US dollar has no bearing on how many US dollars
Americans must pay for imported oil"? Did you really just advance such
a theory, NOYB?

Oil prices are based in U.S. dollars. If fifty US dollars buys a barrel of
oil, and the dollar's value drops relative to the Euro, then the price of
oil appears cheaper to countries that use the Euro. Oil doesn't appear more
expensive to people buying it in US dollars! Only supply and demand can do
that.





Why would you do that? Could it be because the runaway federal spending
by the R majority congress and approved by the R president is one of
the primary factors causing our dollar to take a beating?

A weak dollar is good for trade. We may have some of the highest trade
imbalances that we've ever seen...but they're mostly with China. And that's
only because China has pegged its currency to the US dollar.

If the dollar was strong, the trade imbalance would be even worse because it
would cause a larger trade deficit with other countries besides China.


Please explain why the relative value of a nation's currency has no
effect on the pricing of imported commoditites (such as gourmet Iraqi
hogwash).

Because the price of oil is based in US dollars. Always.

A weak dollar just makes the oil cheaper to other countries. It doesn't
make the oil more expensive to the US consumer.
However, oil is *not* cheaper to other countries despite the relative
strength of their currency. Why? Because the price of oil is a factor of
supply and demand (whether that demand is real or perceived)...and not the
strength of the US dollar.


Your reply overlooks the fact that the seller will demand a greater
number of US dollars for a bbl of oil when that currency is weak. The
exporters of oil make a vast number of purchases in Euros and other
currencies that are ascending against the dollar, and want to maintain
or increase their own purchasing power when the transaction is
completed.

Suppose you accepted returnable pop bottles for a filling. Let's say
that the deposit refund in FLA is 5-cents a bottle, so if you accepted
payment in bottles, I would need to bring in 4000 pop bottles for a
$200 drill and fill at your practice. If the depopsit refund dropped to
4 cents (the value of my currency declined) I would need 5000 pop
bottles to pay for the exact same work.

Yes, the price of oil is express in USD, (for now- may soon be in
Euros). But as the purchasing power of those US dollars spent in the
international marketplace continues to drop a greater number of them
will required for the seller to maintain a consistent purchasing power.

Harry Krause wrote:
Don White wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:


We have very little to trade, Dr. Cavity.



Besides Hollywood & the music industry, America's greatest exports
seem to be death & destruction.
What a sad state of affairs for a country with such potential.



It's pretty sad that we manufacture so little, and there is so little
interest in what we do manufacture, that we mostly export scrap metal
and commodities.

From this province, it's mostly forestry, fishing, farming & mining.
Very little manufacture of finished goods to consume internally, or to
export.

P. Fritz wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


It is simple economics.....but it is not the value of the dollar against
foreign currency........It is supply and demand. Right now, demand is
nearly equal to supply, THAT is why the cost has increase so dramatically


Because supply can barely keep up with demand, the seller will ask for
a greater number of dollars (a variable) against a bbl of oil (a
constant) when the dollar is weak.

Our irresponsible federal spending spree is destroying the dollar and
contributing to the increase in the number of dollars demanded for a
bbl of oil. I know that's an uncomfortable fact for some people (who
insist the R govt can do no wrong) to accept, but it cannot be ignored.

By the way, it looks like we're going to be $8 TRILLION in the hole by
late September. Wasn't this bout $5.5 Trillion when Bush took office?
Heck, even Bush ought to be able to comprehend VETO, it's only a
four-letter word. :-)
One of you guys in his "approved audience" ought to send him an email
and explain that he can exert some control over congressional
spendthrifts, if only he will choose to do so.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

All I can say is thank heaven we have the party that pledged to bring
us fiscal accountability and reduce government spending in power. Can
you imagine where we'd be if those fiscally irresponsible D's were at
the helm?

On 24 Aug 2005 14:51:14 -0700, wrote:


P. Fritz wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


It is simple economics.....but it is not the value of the dollar against
foreign currency........It is supply and demand. Right now, demand is
nearly equal to supply, THAT is why the cost has increase so dramatically


Because supply can barely keep up with demand, the seller will ask for
a greater number of dollars (a variable) against a bbl of oil (a
constant) when the dollar is weak.

Our irresponsible federal spending spree is destroying the dollar and
contributing to the increase in the number of dollars demanded for a
bbl of oil. I know that's an uncomfortable fact for some people (who
insist the R govt can do no wrong) to accept, but it cannot be ignored.

By the way, it looks like we're going to be $8 TRILLION in the hole by
late September. Wasn't this bout $5.5 Trillion when Bush took office?
Heck, even Bush ought to be able to comprehend VETO, it's only a
four-letter word. :-)
One of you guys in his "approved audience" ought to send him an email
and explain that he can exert some control over congressional
spendthrifts, if only he will choose to do so.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

All I can say is thank heaven we have the party that pledged to bring
us fiscal accountability and reduce government spending in power. Can
you imagine where we'd be if those fiscally irresponsible D's were at
the helm?

Quadrillion?

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well
to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as
we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone
down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it
almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going
to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay
more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents.
The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those
situations.


"The value of the US dollar has no bearing on how many US dollars
Americans must pay for imported oil"? Did you really just advance such
a theory, NOYB?

Oil prices are based in U.S. dollars. If fifty US dollars buys a barrel
of
oil, and the dollar's value drops relative to the Euro, then the price of
oil appears cheaper to countries that use the Euro. Oil doesn't appear
more
expensive to people buying it in US dollars! Only supply and demand can
do
that.





Why would you do that? Could it be because the runaway federal spending
by the R majority congress and approved by the R president is one of
the primary factors causing our dollar to take a beating?

A weak dollar is good for trade. We may have some of the highest trade
imbalances that we've ever seen...but they're mostly with China. And
that's
only because China has pegged its currency to the US dollar.

If the dollar was strong, the trade imbalance would be even worse because
it
would cause a larger trade deficit with other countries besides China.


Please explain why the relative value of a nation's currency has no
effect on the pricing of imported commoditites (such as gourmet Iraqi
hogwash).

Because the price of oil is based in US dollars. Always.

A weak dollar just makes the oil cheaper to other countries. It doesn't
make the oil more expensive to the US consumer.
However, oil is *not* cheaper to other countries despite the relative
strength of their currency. Why? Because the price of oil is a factor
of
supply and demand (whether that demand is real or perceived)...and not
the
strength of the US dollar.


Your reply overlooks the fact that the seller will demand a greater
number of US dollars for a bbl of oil when that currency is weak.

Nope again. What drives the price is competition from competing currencies.
Not the deflated value of the dollar.


The
exporters of oil make a vast number of purchases in Euros and other
currencies that are ascending against the dollar, and want to maintain
or increase their own purchasing power when the transaction is
completed.

Suppose you accepted returnable pop bottles for a filling. Let's say
that the deposit refund in FLA is 5-cents a bottle, so if you accepted
payment in bottles, I would need to bring in 4000 pop bottles for a
$200 drill and fill at your practice. If the depopsit refund dropped to
4 cents (the value of my currency declined) I would need 5000 pop
bottles to pay for the exact same work.

Or I could look towards people paying with pop cans if their value is
higher relative to the bottles.

Your reply overlooks the fact that the seller will demand a greater
number of US dollars for a bbl of oil when that currency is weak.


NOYB wrote:
Nope again.

You just flunked freshman econ... again... will you (and the rest of the
Bush-Cheney cheerleaders) ever learn?

... What drives the price is competition from competing currencies.

That is a factor, yes.

Not the deflated value of the dollar.

Ahem... look up the definition of "deflated" with respect to currency...
and re-think this statement... actually, don't "re-" think it, think for
the first time...

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Your reply overlooks the fact that the seller will demand a greater
number of US dollars for a bbl of oil when that currency is weak.


NOYB wrote:
Nope again.

You just flunked freshman econ... again... will you (and the rest of the
Bush-Cheney cheerleaders) ever learn?

... What drives the price is competition from competing currencies.

That is a factor, yes.

Not the deflated value of the dollar.

Ahem... look up the definition of "deflated" with respect to currency...
and re-think this statement... actually, don't "re-" think it, think for
the first time...

It's deflated in value relative to other currencies. But not relative to
how much oil a dollar will buy...at least until the other "inflated"
currencies have driven the price of oil up. However, this once again has to
do with supply and demand.

If demand from other countries didn't increase while the dollar's value
fell, then the price of oil would actually fall.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 07:26:19 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:



You and your ilk always use the canard of "dependence on foreign oil" as
a
way to try and change the behavior of the people that live in the US to
your liking.

The operative word is "dependence". When the economy tanks because of the
escalating price of oil, your "ilk" will blame it on Clinton. Or when
supplies get tight, and we are in yet another oil war, blame it on the
liberals. Or when Chavez says "F* you" and stops shipping us oil,
assassinate him. It's a fair trade, blood for oil.

Let's see we can crack open ANWR, start drilling of the west coast and the
gulf of mexico. We have our own oil fields crank the pumps up on.

You pansy's keep talking about our blood for oil trades, well lets start
trading blood for oil and start pumping our own. Problem solved.

35 years ago, when the first oil crunch occurred, the smart money was on
developing an effective oil policy to prevent future occurrences. That
still hasn't happened, but then we aren't very smart, are we?

And what did the "smart money" produce? The private sector is fully capabile
of developing alternative energy sources without the governments
involvement. What are you waiting for?

PocoLoco wrote:
On 24 Aug 2005 14:51:14 -0700, wrote:


P. Fritz wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


It is simple economics.....but it is not the value of the dollar against
foreign currency........It is supply and demand. Right now, demand is
nearly equal to supply, THAT is why the cost has increase so dramatically


Because supply can barely keep up with demand, the seller will ask for
a greater number of dollars (a variable) against a bbl of oil (a
constant) when the dollar is weak.

Our irresponsible federal spending spree is destroying the dollar and
contributing to the increase in the number of dollars demanded for a
bbl of oil. I know that's an uncomfortable fact for some people (who
insist the R govt can do no wrong) to accept, but it cannot be ignored.

By the way, it looks like we're going to be $8 TRILLION in the hole by
late September. Wasn't this bout $5.5 Trillion when Bush took office?
Heck, even Bush ought to be able to comprehend VETO, it's only a
four-letter word. :-)
One of you guys in his "approved audience" ought to send him an email
and explain that he can exert some control over congressional
spendthrifts, if only he will choose to do so.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

All I can say is thank heaven we have the party that pledged to bring
us fiscal accountability and reduce government spending in power. Can
you imagine where we'd be if those fiscally irresponsible D's were at
the helm?

Quadrillion?

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

Good grief. Is "Qaudrillion" what comes after the trillions? I don't
have use for many numbers that large so I wouldn't even know.

Joking aside, the best combination we have seen in DC in a long time
(from a fiscal standpoint) was a Democratic president and a Republican
congress. We were actually running a small surplus the last years when
Clinton was in office; and whether one cares to credit Clinton or the
R's in congress the fact is that we had a handle on spending and
budgeting that is now, sadly, lost. We still have much the same
congress we had during the 90's, so it is tempting to say that the only
factor to have changed significantly is the party in control of the
White House.

Maybe the D's will take control of congress in the mid-terms and Bush
will then begin vetoing some spending bills to confound the opposite
party's agenda. If that happens, we will have an opportunity to see if
a D congress and a R White House is as fiscally restrained a
combination as the opposite alignment proved to be.

On 24 Aug 2005 16:31:51 -0700, wrote:


PocoLoco wrote:
On 24 Aug 2005 14:51:14 -0700, wrote:


P. Fritz wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
ups.com...
While fuel prices are in the news a lot these days, we might do well to
realize that the value of crude oil hasn't really gone up as much as we
think- much of the price pain is because the US dollar has gone down.

Oil is an international commodity, and the producers can sell it almost
anywhere in the world. The US dollar is getting clobbered on foreign
exchanges all around the planet. It took $1.60 Canadian to buy a US
dollar about a year ago, and it now takes only about $1.20. It's the
same with almost all other currencies vs. the dollar. If we're going to
buy an internationally marketable resource and pay for it with a
declining currency, why should we be surprised if it takes more of
those depreciating dollars to buy the same bbl of oil?

Hogwash. Denmark, the Netherlands, and several other countries pay more
than $6/gallon for gas. Countries like Iraq pay less than 20 cents. The
value of the US dollar has nothing to do with either of those situations.


It is simple economics.....but it is not the value of the dollar against
foreign currency........It is supply and demand. Right now, demand is
nearly equal to supply, THAT is why the cost has increase so dramatically


Because supply can barely keep up with demand, the seller will ask for
a greater number of dollars (a variable) against a bbl of oil (a
constant) when the dollar is weak.

Our irresponsible federal spending spree is destroying the dollar and
contributing to the increase in the number of dollars demanded for a
bbl of oil. I know that's an uncomfortable fact for some people (who
insist the R govt can do no wrong) to accept, but it cannot be ignored.

By the way, it looks like we're going to be $8 TRILLION in the hole by
late September. Wasn't this bout $5.5 Trillion when Bush took office?
Heck, even Bush ought to be able to comprehend VETO, it's only a
four-letter word. :-)
One of you guys in his "approved audience" ought to send him an email
and explain that he can exert some control over congressional
spendthrifts, if only he will choose to do so.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

All I can say is thank heaven we have the party that pledged to bring
us fiscal accountability and reduce government spending in power. Can
you imagine where we'd be if those fiscally irresponsible D's were at
the helm?

Quadrillion?

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

Good grief. Is "Qaudrillion" what comes after the trillions? I don't
have use for many numbers that large so I wouldn't even know.

Joking aside, the best combination we have seen in DC in a long time
(from a fiscal standpoint) was a Democratic president and a Republican
congress. We were actually running a small surplus the last years when
Clinton was in office; and whether one cares to credit Clinton or the
R's in congress the fact is that we had a handle on spending and
budgeting that is now, sadly, lost. We still have much the same
congress we had during the 90's, so it is tempting to say that the only
factor to have changed significantly is the party in control of the
White House.

Maybe the D's will take control of congress in the mid-terms and Bush
will then begin vetoing some spending bills to confound the opposite
party's agenda. If that happens, we will have an opportunity to see if
a D congress and a R White House is as fiscally restrained a
combination as the opposite alignment proved to be.

See, there's another reason the Dems should have run Gephardt. I really think he
would have won.

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

NOYB wrote:
It's deflated in value relative to other currencies.

Really? Who'd a thunk it?

... But not relative to
how much oil a dollar will buy...

Bzzt, try again

... at least until the other "inflated"
currencies have driven the price of oil up.

The other currencies are irrelevant to whether or not the dollar is
deflated, unless you're sepcificaly talking about the exchange rate.


If demand from other countries didn't increase while the dollar's value
fell, then the price of oil would actually fall.


???

Better think this one over again too.

If the dollars value falls (and BTW this is not deflation) then it will
take more of them to buy whatever... oil, bread, ammo, other currency...

The basic relationships of monetarism are simple, when you get them
wrong you show that you're poorly educated on the subject. Probably
parroting some right-wing talk radio nonsense.

DSK

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 19:05:08 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


Let's see we can crack open ANWR, start drilling of the west coast and the
gulf of mexico. We have our own oil fields crank the pumps up on.

You pansy's keep talking about our blood for oil trades, well lets start
trading blood for oil and start pumping our own. Problem solved.

You just don't get it. It can't be done. In this country, oil
discoveries peaked in the 1930's, production in 1971 and has been falling
ever since. It's not that the oil companies haven't been trying, it's
because the oil isn't there anymore. Oil is a *finite* resource, and this
country's tank is heading towards EMPTY.

Take a look:

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/energy/energy-a.htm


35 years ago, when the first oil crunch occurred, the smart money was on
developing an effective oil policy to prevent future occurrences. That
still hasn't happened, but then we aren't very smart, are we?

And what did the "smart money" produce? The private sector is fully
capabile of developing alternative energy sources without the governments
involvement. What are you waiting for?

That very well may be, but when you are heading for a brick wall at 90
mph, stepping on the brakes may be prudent.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
It's deflated in value relative to other currencies.

Really? Who'd a thunk it?

... But not relative to how much oil a dollar will buy...

Bzzt, try again

... at least until the other "inflated" currencies have driven the price
of oil up.

The other currencies are irrelevant to whether or not the dollar is
deflated, unless you're sepcificaly talking about the exchange rate.


The value of the dollar is a direct function of exchange rates. If the US
dollar was the only currency in the world, then the value of the dollar
couldn't fall...because there would be no other currency to measure it
against.




If demand from other countries didn't increase while the dollar's value
fell, then the price of oil would actually fall.


???

Better think this one over again too.

No need to. If nobody else needed oil besides the US, then we would drive
demand...and consequently, we would drive the price.


If the dollars value falls (and BTW this is not deflation) then it will
take more of them to buy whatever... oil, bread, ammo, other currency...


Not if bread, ammo, and other currency is pegged to the dollar...like oil.

Oh wait! China's currency (yuan) *is* pegged to the dollar. And it costs
no more additional US dollars to purchase a yuan today even with the fall of
the value of the dollar. Imagine that! Thank you for proving my point.

The basic relationships of monetarism are simple, when you get them wrong
you show that you're poorly educated on the subject. Probably parroting
some right-wing talk radio nonsense.

I don't listen to talk radio.

If demand from other countries didn't increase while the dollar's value
fell, then the price of oil would actually fall.


???

Better think this one over again too.


No need to. If nobody else needed oil besides the US, then we would drive
demand...and consequently, we would drive the price.


Aren't you forgetting half the equation? There's a little thing called
supply...

Or are you daydreaming about a world where George Bush Jr (on the advice
of Pat Roberson) has nuked the rest of the world into the Stone Age,
thus leaving all the oil for us?


If the dollars value falls (and BTW this is not deflation) then it will
take more of them to buy whatever... oil, bread, ammo, other currency...


NOYB wrote:
Not if bread, ammo, and other currency is pegged to the dollar...like oil.

Oh wait! China's currency (yuan) *is* pegged to the dollar. And it costs
no more additional US dollars to purchase a yuan today even with the fall of
the value of the dollar. Imagine that! Thank you for proving my point.

Proving what? Are commodities pegged to the yuan? You're saying that the
US dollar's value is strictly controlled by the value of the yuan, and
China is on an "oil, bread, & ammo" standard" (vice the old time gold
standard)?

I'd suggest some basic (very very basic) econ texts.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
If demand from other countries didn't increase while the dollar's value
fell, then the price of oil would actually fall.


???

Better think this one over again too.


No need to. If nobody else needed oil besides the US, then we would
drive demand...and consequently, we would drive the price.


Aren't you forgetting half the equation? There's a little thing called
supply...


Supply isn't as much of an issue when it greatly exceeds demand. Remember
that in my hypothetical scenario, there are no other countries or other
countries driving demand.




Or are you daydreaming about a world where George Bush Jr (on the advice
of Pat Roberson) has nuked the rest of the world into the Stone Age, thus
leaving all the oil for us?

No. But you need to remove the demand from other countries from the
argument in order to see what effect a falling value of the dollar would
have.



If the dollars value falls (and BTW this is not deflation) then it will
take more of them to buy whatever... oil, bread, ammo, other currency...

I didn't call it "deflation". I called it a deflated currency. There's a
big difference.




NOYB wrote:
Not if bread, ammo, and other currency is pegged to the dollar...like
oil.

Oh wait! China's currency (yuan) *is* pegged to the dollar. And it
costs no more additional US dollars to purchase a yuan today even with
the fall of the value of the dollar. Imagine that! Thank you for
proving my point.

Proving what? Are commodities pegged to the yuan?

No. The yuan is pegged to the dollar.

Oil is priced in US dollars. If the dollar falls in value relative to other
currencies, the price of oil doesn't change unless:

1) the suppliers start selling more to the other countries because their
money is worth more

2) the demand for the oil increases.


All things being equal, the value of the dollar in and of itself has no
effect on the price of oil...The only thing that affects it is supply and
demand (real or perceived).


You're saying that the
US dollar's value is strictly controlled by the value of the yuan,

No. The yuan's value is strictly controlled by the dollar. Not the other
way around.


and China is on an "oil, bread, & ammo" standard" (vice the old time gold
standard)?

No. China is on a US dollar standard.


I'd suggest some basic (very very basic) econ texts.

For you maybe.

NOYB wrote:
Supply isn't as much of an issue when it greatly exceeds demand. Remember
that in my hypothetical scenario, there are no other countries or other
countries driving demand.




Or are you daydreaming about a world where George Bush Jr (on the advice
of Pat Roberson) has nuked the rest of the world into the Stone Age, thus
leaving all the oil for us?


No. But you need to remove the demand from other countries from the
argument in order to see what effect a falling value of the dollar would
have.

Oh, I see. So, your statements are supposing that there should be no
other country in the world buying oil except the US, then we could
dictate price?

A nice daydream. Let us know when you're ready to wake up.



If the dollars value falls (and BTW this is not deflation) then it will
take more of them to buy whatever... oil, bread, ammo, other currency...


I didn't call it "deflation". I called it a deflated currency. There's a
big difference.


Oh, you finally caught this error? Go back to sleep, Nobby.


No. The yuan is pegged to the dollar.

Oil is priced in US dollars. If the dollar falls in value relative to other
currencies, the price of oil doesn't change

Wrong. If the dollar falssin value relative to other currencies, then
all goods purchased from other countries... including oil... will
require more dollars to buy.



All things being equal, the value of the dollar in and of itself has no
effect on the price of oil...

Now there, I agree.

The only catch is when you actually try to *buy* oil with those dollars,
then the sellers perception of the dollars value becomes important.



I'd suggest some basic (very very basic) econ texts.


For you maybe.


No thanks, I prefer to live in the real world, where daydream economics
don't really work.

DSK