On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:00:02 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Aha! You're the reason society is failing, tech support went overseas,
and everyone has voice mail.

I knew it.

You forgot about Bird Flu, HIV, and West Nile virus.

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:06:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Here's an idea: "Rochester Institute of Technology reports that enrollment
in their computer science department was down 14% compared with last year".
Next day, every IT person who's got a resumé online cranks up their salary
requirements because they interpret RIT's enrollment data to mean an
immediate shortage of IT staff.

If students graduated intstantly, and were hired the next day in an
auction market, that is exactly what would happen.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:06:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Here's an idea: "Rochester Institute of Technology reports that enrollment
in their computer science department was down 14% compared with last
year".
Next day, every IT person who's got a resumé online cranks up their salary
requirements because they interpret RIT's enrollment data to mean an
immediate shortage of IT staff.

If students graduated intstantly, and were hired the next day in an
auction market, that is exactly what would happen.


Speculators function as if oil supplies behaved like those instant
graduates. The problem is that the prices do not come down when yesterday's
Baghdad incident is forgotten (usually the next day).

Chuck Gould wrote:
Don White wrote:

Chuck Gould wrote:



All something to think about while watching the price wheels whirl like
an old time Vegas slot machine next time you're pumping fuel into the
good ship CostaLotta.


I think the 'oil executives' should be the *******s considered terrorists.


Not at all. They have found a way to exploit the system, and are doing
so.
I'm surprised that they didn't realize, long ago, that there is no
practical upward limit to the amount they can raise prices. Even Bush
says, "We're addicted to oil". We are, and the Big Oil boys have a
corner on the crack supply. Doesn't matter how high the price goes, we
will pay. And if the only thing a person gives a ding about is the
amount of money going into the profit column on the p&l statement,
(with no regard to social costs
generated by prices spiraling out of sight) there's nothing wrong with
doubling, tripling, or quintupling quarter to quarter profits from the
sale of a resource that for many people isn't discretionary, but rather
essential.

What is disingenuous, however, is the constant running and ducking
behind "free market" and "supply and demand" excuses or the greatest
belly laugh of all, "our margin per gallon is only a few cents." Hoist
the skull and crossbones on the corporate spreader, clear for action,
and stand proud. I'd have more respect for BIG OIL if they would just
say, plainly, "We're going to gouge you, simply because we can, and if
you don't like it you can park your car or sell your boat. With his
$30-million annual salary, our CEO is contracting for a new 180-footer,
so don't come around here with some crap that these high oil prices
make boating unaffordable! As far as we're concerned, these high prices
make boating more affordable than ever. Neener, neener, neener."

In the '70s when this was happening, Canadians paid an extra 10 cents
per liter to buy our own oil business...Petro Canada.
The idea was to use it to keep the Esso/Texaco/Gulf people 'honest'.
Then a conservative gov't got in (led by Reagan's bum boy Brian
Mulroney) aand all of a sudden, Petro Canada went public and shares were
sold to Canadians (after we already paid for it through the levy).
I've never voted Conservative since and won't ever again.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:32:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Perhaps if we'd successfully gone after the country that sponsored those
9/11 animals, the world would've applauded. Even NOYB would've loved it.
-We were already ass deep in Iraq on 9-11. I agree we should have
simply said screw the Kurds and let Israel take care of themselves
(that was really who was threatened by WMDs).
The time to come home was 1991. THREE presidents had the chance and
ignored it.
If we were not in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, 9-11 would have just
been the boring news day between 9-10 and 9-12
It certainly is not about oil. We buy from who ever sells it. We don't
seem to have a problem buying from Chavez and he hates our guts.

If the NSA has Chavez' phones & facilities bugged, they must be in stitches
listening to what goes on there. My theory is that he really doesn't hate
us. Rather, he fakes his rants just to yank Bush's chain. Then, he goes back
to his home or office and laughs hysterically with his pals.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:32:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Perhaps if we'd successfully gone after the country that sponsored
those
9/11 animals, the world would've applauded. Even NOYB would've loved
it.
-We were already ass deep in Iraq on 9-11. I agree we should have
simply said screw the Kurds and let Israel take care of themselves
(that was really who was threatened by WMDs).
The time to come home was 1991. THREE presidents had the chance and
ignored it.
If we were not in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, 9-11 would have just
been the boring news day between 9-10 and 9-12
It certainly is not about oil. We buy from who ever sells it. We don't
seem to have a problem buying from Chavez and he hates our guts.

If the NSA has Chavez' phones & facilities bugged, they must be in
stitches listening to what goes on there. My theory is that he really
doesn't hate us. Rather, he fakes his rants just to yank Bush's chain.
Then, he goes back to his home or office and laughs hysterically with his
pals.


It would be revealing for many to learn that while there is dislike and
even hatred in the world for our current political leader and his cronies,
there is great love and affection among many of those same folks for the
American people. Much of the world realizes we are suffering, too. I'm
sure Chavez is delighted to sell his countries exports to us.

I'm hoping that in my lifetime, we'll have a president and a congress that
restores full, normal, diplomatic relations with Cuba.

That'll happen when another generation of Cuban immigrants dies. There'll
still be lots of lobbying money aimed at keeping Cuba cut off, from
corporations like Bacardi, but I suppose (in a fairy tale), there could be
legislators who'd ignore that pressure.

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:07:43 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:



I'm
sure Chavez is delighted to sell his countries exports to us.

I'm not so sure. Chavez is developing other markets, S. America and
China, for those exports. While Bush hasn't done anything to help the
situation, it is not his fault alone. A hundred years of American
imperialism with our southern neighbors is finally biting us in the ass.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/08/news...reut/index.htm

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 19:14:53 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

I'm hoping that in my lifetime, we'll have a president and a congress
that
restores full, normal, diplomatic relations with Cuba.

That'll happen when another generation of Cuban immigrants dies. There'll
still be lots of lobbying money aimed at keeping Cuba cut off, from
corporations like Bacardi, but I suppose (in a fairy tale), there could be
legislators who'd ignore that pressure.

The embargo really has more to do with protecting Florida tourism and
"big sugar".

True, but there was an interesting story on one of the TV news mags a few
years back. Interviews with members of the Bacardi family. Two generations
later, these people are still really bitter. And have money & friends like
you wouldn't believe.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"ACP" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"ACP" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 11:39:59 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

So, a bunch of
suits are playing games and sending a ripple effect throughout the
economy.

Time for the law to change.

Ahhhh yes, government price controls. Great idea, have you ever seen
it in action? You wouldn't be able to buy oil at any price because
everyone would be on allocation, and another giant federal
bureauacracy would spring up to (mis)manage the whole mess.

If you think commodities are such an easy get-rich-quick scheme, why
not put on your own "suit" and throw some money in the ring. A quick
call or two to your broker and you can be a master of the universe
also.


I'm not talking about price controls. I'm talking about eliminating
the trading of one particular commodity for "sport", by people who are
in no way connected to the business. You know as well as I do that the
majority of the price jumps have been "on concerns about" things in
places like Iraq which, in your wildest dreams, could not have
materially affected oil production in any way, shape or form. The
concept is as stupid as private investors selling all their mutual
funds because Home Depot reports bad earnings for the last quarter.


Ah, but if problems in Iraq expand to other oil producing countries in
the region, there could be a "real" problem in the oil supply pipeline.

That's "if". In the past, they have not. Here's a question: What are
your 3 favorite main courses for dinner?

The past does not always indicate the future.

"If" Bush 43 hadn't been elected. "If" Gore HAD been elected. "If Kerry
HAD been elected.

Chicken, Fish, and Pizza....

Chicken - perfect! Hypothetical headline on the radio news as you're
driving home tonight:

"The price of chicken jumped 4% today. Our reporter covering the Chicago
Board of Exchange explained that speculators are worried about new reports
indicating bird flu was found for the first time in Greenland"

This continues, and a year from now, whole Perdue roasting chickens are
selling for $32.99 per pound, with no end in sight.

See...certain industries and professions think they're entitled to special
treatment. Doctors don't like it when patients are called customers. Oil
companies think they're special and should be insulated more than other
businesses from the vagaries of raw material costs.

I don't buy Perdue, the yellow color turns me off 80.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:27:57 -0400, "ACP"
wrote:

Exxon 3Q 2005 gross profit 9.8%
Citigroup 2004 gross profit 15.7%
Altria Group 2004 gross profit 22%
Merck 2004 gross profit 25.3%

So there are other devils in the wood pile.

Figures from:

http://tinyurl.com/dj683

And exactly what is wrong with that? Do you have a problem with free
enterprise? If so, what would you replace it with?

There is nothing wrong with it in my view. I was just pointing out that Big
Oil is not the only group making what some would say is excessive profits.