Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"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.

And made the manager watch, too, right??!!

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"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.

And made the manager watch, too, right??!!


Whatever scenario would make jackoff happy. I slit all their throats
afterward, and stole the manager's accounts. Whatever.

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
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?
John

Because as I mentioned much earlier in this thread, much of the trading
occurs because of emotional reactions to events, many of which have
absolutely ZERO material effect on oil production or shipment. Vapor, in
other words. But, it ceases to be vapor when oil companies have to buy into
a market that's inflated because of idiots, and then adjust their prices
according to vapor. (I'm being charitable here and portraying them as
victims in this mess. Not totally true, but...whatever).

There are plenty of businesses which are enormously successful, even though
they have to deal with unknown price swings for their raw materials and have
no commodity market in which they can hedge their bets. They find ways to
smooth the bumps in other ways, perhaps through their own form of dollar
cost averaging. This is exactly what MY business is about.

More directly than any other product, petroleum is vital to the economy of
this country. The way pricing is determined now, it may as well be run by
OTB.

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

I was thinking on that same line. I've heard various conspiricy
theorists alway say that gold is a great "hedge against inflation"
huh? Lets face it, it's only worth what you can get out of it. I've
seen gold trade a year ago for $256.00 per troy ounce, then it shoots
up to $358. per ounce, and people think their gold is worth a lot but
they don't sell it.

25 yrs ago I saw the stuff break $800.00 per ounce, then crash down to
$335. (+/-) almost over night. So I've always thought that it was a
volitile market. Especially seeing our economy isn't set on a gold
standard and hasn't been for many, many years.

A friend of mine told me once when I was skeptical about investing in
some no-load mutual funds. he said. "Listen Tim, if you think that if
the economy is going to tank and you'll lose money, remember. If the
economy tanks. Nobody has any money anyhow."






JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
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?

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

Depends on what you or your friend mean by "tanks". In the typical scenario,
you buy more of that mutual fund, assuming the concept behind the fund still
makes sense to you.

"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...
I was thinking on that same line. I've heard various conspiricy
theorists alway say that gold is a great "hedge against inflation"
huh? Lets face it, it's only worth what you can get out of it. I've
seen gold trade a year ago for $256.00 per troy ounce, then it shoots
up to $358. per ounce, and people think their gold is worth a lot but
they don't sell it.

25 yrs ago I saw the stuff break $800.00 per ounce, then crash down to
$335. (+/-) almost over night. So I've always thought that it was a
volitile market. Especially seeing our economy isn't set on a gold
standard and hasn't been for many, many years.

A friend of mine told me once when I was skeptical about investing in
some no-load mutual funds. he said. "Listen Tim, if you think that if
the economy is going to tank and you'll lose money, remember. If the
economy tanks. Nobody has any money anyhow."






JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
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?

Gasoline prices - gold as a hedge
 

Tim wrote:

I was thinking on that same line. I've heard various conspiricy
theorists alway say that gold is a great "hedge against inflation"
huh? Lets face it, it's only worth what you can get out of it.

Exactly, but gold is for one thing a valuable commodity
itself. For another, it's value tends to peak at times when
other economic functions are very chaotic.


... I've
seen gold trade a year ago for $256.00 per troy ounce, then it shoots
up to $358. per ounce, and people think their gold is worth a lot but
they don't sell it.


Of course. Their behavior may be considered irrational if
they forego a profit but OTOH they may be awaiting further
chaos & even higher gold prices.

Of course, as you and Doug (Joe) pointed out, at a certain
level of chaos, gold becomes valueless. So you want to sell
before then and gain some commodity(s) of greater practical
everyday use.


25 yrs ago I saw the stuff break $800.00 per ounce, then crash down to
$335. (+/-) almost over night. So I've always thought that it was a
volitile market. Especially seeing our economy isn't set on a gold
standard and hasn't been for many, many years.


Yes, and very few are... but gold is still perceived by many
as valuable... which of course, makes it so...


A friend of mine told me once when I was skeptical about investing in
some no-load mutual funds. he said. "Listen Tim, if you think that if
the economy is going to tank and you'll lose money, remember. If the
economy tanks. Nobody has any money anyhow."


True enough... and you'll have a bigger piece of the nothing.

For most people, no load mutual funds are a great way of
protecting their investments from themselves. Very few
investors beat the long-term average returns, which shows
that you'd be better off with those than any other
investment... *if* you want the money. Many people are
actually gambling, not investing, ie doing it for
entertainment value (or for prestige) rather than for value
gained. In fact I would say 99.9% of individuals who indulge
in commodities trading are exactly that.

Oh well, diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.

DSK

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Depends on what you or your friend mean by "tanks".

In general wheen we were talking about the economy "tanking" was in
reference to a reply of the market crash of 1929.

That kind of "tanking"

Gasoline prices - gold as a hedge
 

DSK wrote:


True enough... and you'll have a bigger piece of the nothing.
DSK

LOL! exactly!

hey guy's, this is great.

THANKS!

Gasoline prices - another record high/ supply and demand
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


Whatever scenario would make jackoff happy. I slit all their throats
afterward, and stole the manager's accounts. Whatever.



Oh my! Jackoff will make sure those Palm Sisters take a beating tonight.

Gasoline prices - gold as a hedge
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:03:29 -0400, DSK wrote:

Many people are actually gambling, not investing,

All people investing in stock/bond/commodities are gambling.

It's the nature of the process.

I, on the other hand, never gamble on something I can't put my hands
on. Gave that up right before 9/11. The only stocks I own are IBM
(big dollars - bought really low) and a couple of oil companies.

My new investment strategy is if I can't put my hands on it, I ain't
investing in it.

Real estate - in particular multi-family homes.

Can't go wrong - everybody gotta live somewhere. :)

Just playing a little devils advocate....but real estate has it's ups and
downs also.

As the current real estate "boom" begins to cool off, many people around the
country are going to find themselves upside down with their mortgages.

Real estate is not immune from price depreciation. This is something you or
I have no control over anymore than we do with stocks/bonds/commodities
except the latter are much more liquid, and for that matter can be more
volatile.