But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly proportional to
the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...
But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly proportional
to the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)



It's not always that simple. On the PBS news show I mentioned earlier, the
futures trader had a graph of price changes going back a month or two, and
labels indicating news events that either caused price changes, or didn't.
In some cases, there were events that really should've caused spikes, but
nothing happened. And, events which had no imaginable impact on oil produced
jumps. This is the investor stupidity I pointed out a few days back, which
Bertie got so inflamed about.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:42:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly proportional
to the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)



It's not always that simple. On the PBS news show I mentioned earlier, the
futures trader had a graph of price changes going back a month or two, and
labels indicating news events that either caused price changes, or didn't.
In some cases, there were events that really should've caused spikes, but
nothing happened. And, events which had no imaginable impact on oil produced
jumps. This is the investor stupidity I pointed out a few days back, which
Bertie got so inflamed about.


Hmm... maybe the events the "futures trader" chose to put on his graph
had little, or nothing, to do with the changes in the oil prices.

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:42:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly
proportional
to the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)



It's not always that simple. On the PBS news show I mentioned earlier, the
futures trader had a graph of price changes going back a month or two, and
labels indicating news events that either caused price changes, or didn't.
In some cases, there were events that really should've caused spikes, but
nothing happened. And, events which had no imaginable impact on oil
produced
jumps. This is the investor stupidity I pointed out a few days back, which
Bertie got so inflamed about.


Hmm... maybe the events the "futures trader" chose to put on his graph
had little, or nothing, to do with the changes in the oil prices.

He put them there because they resembled events which had, in the past,
caused blips.

Are you familiar with the way some individual investors dump half their
mutual funds because just one corporation fires its CEO?

On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:58:27 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:42:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly
proportional
to the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)



It's not always that simple. On the PBS news show I mentioned earlier, the
futures trader had a graph of price changes going back a month or two, and
labels indicating news events that either caused price changes, or didn't.
In some cases, there were events that really should've caused spikes, but
nothing happened. And, events which had no imaginable impact on oil
produced
jumps. This is the investor stupidity I pointed out a few days back, which
Bertie got so inflamed about.


Hmm... maybe the events the "futures trader" chose to put on his graph
had little, or nothing, to do with the changes in the oil prices.

He put them there because they resembled events which had, in the past,
caused blips.

But you also wrote:

When that Chechnyan terrorist died a few weeks back, the price blipped down
a buck, according to the traders in the interview. That's fantasy at work.

So these PBS experts showed how prices may have moved up and down in
reaction to some events, but don't react at all to other similar
events that should, by their reckoning, cause a flunctuation. It
seems they really aren't sure what causes the flunctuations, or at
least can't point to the real cause with any regularity.

It sounds to me like they can't see the forest for the trees. Think
about it, and get back to me on what that might mean.


Are you familiar with the way some individual investors dump half their
mutual funds because just one corporation fires its CEO?


That *may* have happened at some point. How many "individual
investors" share their private portfolio transactions with you, and
their personal reasons for carrying out those transactions? Or is
this something else a PBS expert told you?

The profiteers do not need much of an excuse to raise oil prices. I think we
should
take all the oil executives and line them up against a wall and shoot them.
They
recently opened up a significant pipeline through Turkey to help deliver oil to
the
West, but did we see oil prices go down? It's a one way street for these oil
companies. There is plenty of oil available, but they try their hardest to
convince us
it is in short supply. It's amazing to me that we Americans put up with this
kind of
nonsense. We can't expect any government action, while we have a Texan
president
with big interests in the oil business.

Sherwin D.

NOYB wrote:

But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly proportional to
the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)

sherwindu wrote:

The profiteers do not need much of an excuse to raise oil prices. I think we
should
take all the oil executives and line them up against a wall and shoot them.

What, to encourage the others?

They
recently opened up a significant pipeline through Turkey to help deliver oil to
the
West, but did we see oil prices go down? It's a one way street for these oil
companies. There is plenty of oil available, but they try their hardest to
convince us
it is in short supply.

Yeah, all that BS about the Hubbert peak is just libby-rull
psycho-babble, huh? The Earth has enough oil to last
forever, no matter how much we use!


... We can't expect any government action, while we have a Texan
president
with big interests in the oil business.


What do you expect him to do? He already started a war for
cheap oil and colluded with the Saudis (of course, that was
just in the short term for the election).

DSK

snip

Yeah, all that BS about the Hubbert peak is just libby-rull psycho-babble,
huh? The Earth has enough oil to last forever, no matter how much we use!

snip

DSK


Mentioning "peak oil" around here will likely fall on deaf ears. Anyone who
is open minded and hasn't already read about it should google "peak oil" and
see what it's all about.

Scary stuff.

"ACP" wrote in message
...
snip

Yeah, all that BS about the Hubbert peak is just libby-rull
psycho-babble, huh? The Earth has enough oil to last forever, no matter
how much we use!

snip

DSK


Mentioning "peak oil" around here will likely fall on deaf ears. Anyone
who is open minded and hasn't already read about it should google "peak
oil" and see what it's all about.

Scary stuff.


The literal peak (whether the oil's actually there or not) may end up not
being as much an issue as whether sane people are prepared to see more and
more places put at risk in order to obtain that oil.

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

Yeah, all that BS about the Hubbert peak is just libby-rull
psycho-babble, huh? The Earth has enough oil to last forever, no matter
how much we use!

snip

DSK


Mentioning "peak oil" around here will likely fall on deaf ears. Anyone
who is open minded and hasn't already read about it should google "peak
oil" and see what it's all about.

Scary stuff.


The literal peak (whether the oil's actually there or not) may end up not
being as much an issue as whether sane people are prepared to see more and
more places put at risk in order to obtain that oil.

"[T]here is a different and more fundamental cost that is independent of the
monetary price. That is the energy cost of exploration and production. So
long as oil is used as a source of energy, when the energy cost of
recovering a barrel of oil becomes greater than the energy content of the
oil, production will cease no matter what the monetary price may be."

That was Dr. M. King Hubert in response to David Nissen of Exxon.

http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/