"JohnH" wrote in message
...

Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
John

Limit futures trading to companies which have a material interest in the
commodity being traded, in this case, oil. Eliminate speculators, who, by
definition, are in no way involved with the production of petroleum
products. This latter group is simply playing games. Stopping this would not
totally eliminate the fluff in the price, but it would go far in that
direction.

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:40:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
John

Limit futures trading to companies which have a material interest in the
commodity being traded, in this case, oil. Eliminate speculators, who, by
definition, are in no way involved with the production of petroleum
products. This latter group is simply playing games. Stopping this would not
totally eliminate the fluff in the price, but it would go far in that
direction.


Are the oil companies the only futures traders, 'doing whatever they want
with the price' which, as you stated, is a crime?

Would you make that a law for all futures trading? Would the SEC then have
to check whether all futures traders had a 'material interest' in the
commodity. How would you define 'material interest'?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:40:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..

Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of
our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should
be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
John

Limit futures trading to companies which have a material interest in the
commodity being traded, in this case, oil. Eliminate speculators, who, by
definition, are in no way involved with the production of petroleum
products. This latter group is simply playing games. Stopping this would
not
totally eliminate the fluff in the price, but it would go far in that
direction.


Are the oil companies the only futures traders, 'doing whatever they want
with the price' which, as you stated, is a crime?

John, I stated above that there were two general categories of traders, so
the obvious answer to your question is NO. There are companies with a
material interest in production costs, like Exxon, etc. Then, there are pure
speculators. You and I can trade contracts, but more often, it's
institutional traders who are managing (?) other peoples' money (mutual
funds, retirement money, etc).



Would you make that a law for all futures trading?

Just oil, and perhaps natural gas. These are two products we cannot stop
using for various reasons. We don't hear much outrage about wild price
swings for other products which are subject to gambling, like cocoa, sugar,
pork bellies, etc., so why bother with them?


Would the SEC then have
to check whether all futures traders had a 'material interest' in the
commodity. How would you define 'material interest'?

The SEC is fully capable of determining who is trading ANYTHING on the
various exchanges. As far as "material interest", that was also explained
earlier. Why are you asking again?

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...

So now the US is an island, insulated from the rest of the world?
Everyone else is "irrelevant"? Really?

So the price is 25 - 35% "trading excess" (cite?), which is the
futures traders as you've said before, right? But then the oil
companies are to blame for the price, not the traders. Uh huh.

CITE: It was provided earlier in this discussion. Use your search feature to
find the first message containing "PBS", and read forward from there.




Did the investment company run you off because of customer complaints,
or did you leave voluntarily?

I banged the manager's wife while his 17 year old daughter videotaped the
whole thing.

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 15:53:50 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should
be
dealt with.

I asked the questions I did because of the statement you made, above. You
state the oil companies are committing a crime and make the solution to
high prices sound very simple.

I don't think it is.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

This had been pretty good, when you get down to a real discussion. I've
always wondered about gold. buying gold. a reletive of min has some
gold. actually over the years of collecting, he's got a pretty good
stash, like maybe a 10 troy pounds. He has stated that gold is a great
investment, and I've kind of been reserved about it. because he says
when all else fails you always have gold. OK, my arguement is that if
all else fails (economy?) then gold will fail too. After all, you can't
eat it. I mean, if you're starving, then what is worth more to you? 5
chickens? or an ounce of gold?

Doug, you got any thoughts on buying and selling gold?
THANKS!

Tim



JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:40:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..

Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of
our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should
be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
John

Limit futures trading to companies which have a material interest in the
commodity being traded, in this case, oil. Eliminate speculators, who, by
definition, are in no way involved with the production of petroleum
products. This latter group is simply playing games. Stopping this would
not
totally eliminate the fluff in the price, but it would go far in that
direction.


Are the oil companies the only futures traders, 'doing whatever they want
with the price' which, as you stated, is a crime?

John, I stated above that there were two general categories of traders, so
the obvious answer to your question is NO. There are companies with a
material interest in production costs, like Exxon, etc. Then, there are pure
speculators. You and I can trade contracts, but more often, it's
institutional traders who are managing (?) other peoples' money (mutual
funds, retirement money, etc).



Would you make that a law for all futures trading?

Just oil, and perhaps natural gas. These are two products we cannot stop
using for various reasons. We don't hear much outrage about wild price
swings for other products which are subject to gambling, like cocoa, sugar,
pork bellies, etc., so why bother with them?


Would the SEC then have
to check whether all futures traders had a 'material interest' in the
commodity. How would you define 'material interest'?

The SEC is fully capable of determining who is trading ANYTHING on the
various exchanges. As far as "material interest", that was also explained
earlier. Why are you asking again?

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 15:53:50 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should
be
dealt with.

I asked the questions I did because of the statement you made, above. You
state the oil companies are committing a crime and make the solution to
high prices sound very simple.

I don't think it is.
John

Although Supreme Court justices use hypothetical questions as a tool ***ALL
THE TIME*** in their sessions with attorneys, I'm aware of the fact that
here in this NG, lesser minds like to apply the term "straw man" (an
inaccurate term), because they need to belittle a process they cannot
fathom. (Dave Hall was the queen of that group). Let's try a hypothetical
question anyway, though, and hope no mental midgets show up and clutter
things.

(You've just been flattered. You're welcome.)

Let's say I had more money than Bill Gates. I see in the newspaper that the
entire crew of a Norwegian ***OIL TANKER*** was found to have Legionnaire's
disease. Not only that, but the ship's owner makes a habit of moving a
portion of each crew from one ship to another whenever possible, so that
they're exposed to any operational differences between the ships. They own
10 ships. Not knowing (or caring) whether Legionnaire's disease is
contagious, I decide that ALL the company's ships are at risk, which may
have an enormous impact on the availability of oil. I place a huge futures
trade, of a size that rivals those of institutional traders, and of course,
it's noticed, as such trades always are. Sometimes, lots of sheep mimic such
trades, because without checking the source, they think there must be
SOMETHING going on. Is it just some yahoo playing with extra money, or were
Saudi oil fields attacked within the last few hours? Who cares? More people
jump in.

Although large institutional traders are sometimes asked why things go a
certain way, nobody interviews me because I'm just some yahoo with a bunch
of money, and I don't have to reveal my identity to anyone but my broker, or
whatever web site I trade through. Later that day, you hear on the news "Oil
jumped $2.15 a barrel today". Absolutely nothing else in the world happened
which would cause this. Even the "professionals" are clueless, and can't pin
it on news events of any sort.

This is not as hypothetical as you will probably want to say it is. What do
you think about this scenario?

I think the idea's weird, but that's based on MY picture of "when all hell
breaks loose". Who will decide what gold is worth? A lot of survivalists
would correctly say that food, ammo, serious boots & clothing and gasoline
are gonna look real good compared to a bunch of gold coins that are stuck in
a bank vault that you can't access.


"Tim" wrote in message
ups.com...
This had been pretty good, when you get down to a real discussion. I've
always wondered about gold. buying gold. a reletive of min has some
gold. actually over the years of collecting, he's got a pretty good
stash, like maybe a 10 troy pounds. He has stated that gold is a great
investment, and I've kind of been reserved about it. because he says
when all else fails you always have gold. OK, my arguement is that if
all else fails (economy?) then gold will fail too. After all, you can't
eat it. I mean, if you're starving, then what is worth more to you? 5
chickens? or an ounce of gold?

Doug, you got any thoughts on buying and selling gold?
THANKS!

Tim



JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:40:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..

Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the
US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to
the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design
of
our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and
should
be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
John

Limit futures trading to companies which have a material interest in
the
commodity being traded, in this case, oil. Eliminate speculators, who,
by
definition, are in no way involved with the production of petroleum
products. This latter group is simply playing games. Stopping this
would
not
totally eliminate the fluff in the price, but it would go far in that
direction.


Are the oil companies the only futures traders, 'doing whatever they
want
with the price' which, as you stated, is a crime?

John, I stated above that there were two general categories of traders,
so
the obvious answer to your question is NO. There are companies with a
material interest in production costs, like Exxon, etc. Then, there are
pure
speculators. You and I can trade contracts, but more often, it's
institutional traders who are managing (?) other peoples' money (mutual
funds, retirement money, etc).



Would you make that a law for all futures trading?

Just oil, and perhaps natural gas. These are two products we cannot stop
using for various reasons. We don't hear much outrage about wild price
swings for other products which are subject to gambling, like cocoa,
sugar,
pork bellies, etc., so why bother with them?


Would the SEC then have
to check whether all futures traders had a 'material interest' in the
commodity. How would you define 'material interest'?

The SEC is fully capable of determining who is trading ANYTHING on the
various exchanges. As far as "material interest", that was also explained
earlier. Why are you asking again?

On 1 Aug 2006 09:17:23 -0700, "Tim" wrote:

This had been pretty good, when you get down to a real discussion. I've
always wondered about gold. buying gold. a reletive of min has some
gold. actually over the years of collecting, he's got a pretty good
stash, like maybe a 10 troy pounds. He has stated that gold is a great
investment, and I've kind of been reserved about it. because he says
when all else fails you always have gold. OK, my arguement is that if
all else fails (economy?) then gold will fail too. After all, you can't
eat it. I mean, if you're starving, then what is worth more to you? 5
chickens? or an ounce of gold?

Doug, you got any thoughts on buying and selling gold?
THANKS!

Tim



For some thoughts on buying gold, as a last ditch hedge, read the article
in the link below. The article is a little long, but interesting as hell.
It was provided by Eisboch, I think.

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

I'm thinking of buying a small horse and a lot of canned goods!
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 16:58:07 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 15:53:50 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should
be
dealt with.

I asked the questions I did because of the statement you made, above. You
state the oil companies are committing a crime and make the solution to
high prices sound very simple.

I don't think it is.
John

Although Supreme Court justices use hypothetical questions as a tool ***ALL
THE TIME*** in their sessions with attorneys, I'm aware of the fact that
here in this NG, lesser minds like to apply the term "straw man" (an
inaccurate term), because they need to belittle a process they cannot
fathom. (Dave Hall was the queen of that group). Let's try a hypothetical
question anyway, though, and hope no mental midgets show up and clutter
things.

(You've just been flattered. You're welcome.)

Let's say I had more money than Bill Gates. I see in the newspaper that the
entire crew of a Norwegian ***OIL TANKER*** was found to have Legionnaire's
disease. Not only that, but the ship's owner makes a habit of moving a
portion of each crew from one ship to another whenever possible, so that
they're exposed to any operational differences between the ships. They own
10 ships. Not knowing (or caring) whether Legionnaire's disease is
contagious, I decide that ALL the company's ships are at risk, which may
have an enormous impact on the availability of oil. I place a huge futures
trade, of a size that rivals those of institutional traders, and of course,
it's noticed, as such trades always are. Sometimes, lots of sheep mimic such
trades, because without checking the source, they think there must be
SOMETHING going on. Is it just some yahoo playing with extra money, or were
Saudi oil fields attacked within the last few hours? Who cares? More people
jump in.

Although large institutional traders are sometimes asked why things go a
certain way, nobody interviews me because I'm just some yahoo with a bunch
of money, and I don't have to reveal my identity to anyone but my broker, or
whatever web site I trade through. Later that day, you hear on the news "Oil
jumped $2.15 a barrel today". Absolutely nothing else in the world happened
which would cause this. Even the "professionals" are clueless, and can't pin
it on news events of any sort.

This is not as hypothetical as you will probably want to say it is. What do
you think about this scenario?


Knowing almost nothing of futures trading, because I don't do it, I would
say it sounds plausible.

But, why should the oil companies be accused of criminal activity if this
occurs?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John