OT: Why are crude oil prices rising?

Yup. Jeff just said that, too. But Smirnoff didn't reference that, only saying that "So and So saying it is as good as Bush saying it."

But not any smarter for it.

Maybe you're wrong. Again.

Not doing well the past couple days there, Joe...

Whatever you say, bitch.

Part of it is speculators. Part of it is the extremely weak dollar, for which you can blame the Republicans. Part of it is the oil companies, both U.S. and foreign, not increasing the amount they pump, in order to keep prices higher. Part of it is having two oil men as president and vice president, ensuring that they buddies in the oil business make as much money as possible, and damn the poor middle class. Part of it is that we have no coherent energy policy, but that's been a problem even before Bush.

But basically, most of the problems in the U.S. right now are due to the Republicans. Look at the state of the country at the end of eight years of Democratic rule, and now at the end of eight years of Republican rule, in terms of deficits, inflation, oil prices, housing, and foreign affairs. Nearly all of the problems that were created in the past eight years have been a direct result of failed Republican policies.

What will happen next is the real question. Whether it's McCain or Obama, neither could possibly be as bad as Bush (though people said that no one could be worse than Reagan and were proven wrong with Bush, so you have to careful!).

As do the U.S. oil companies pumping up in Alaska.

George Soros has nothing to do with it. As to why you get that feeling, it's probably a combination of ignorance and anti-semitism. Soros sold most of his oil holdings (in producers) several years ago (which may have been foolish in hindsight) and invested in oil equipment, services, and distribution (which is probably a safer bet, since these will pay off no matter what the price of oil is).

No, you don't have the highest prices in the nation. That would be several islands in Hawaii.

The taxes on gasoline, whether sales tax or gasoline tax have very little to do with the retail price. If the tax were elminated, the oil companies would simply raise their prices to keep the total retail price the same.

I don't believe your conspiracy theories about Bush, but I can't help but wonder if the oil prices from the Mid East will be used to try to sway our upcoming elections. It will be interesting to see if the prices sharply turn up or down from where they are now leading up to November. If they go moderately or sharply up, then they are trying to get the Dems in, if down, then they are trying to help the Repubs.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

I never claimed that what Bush, Cheney, et al did was any kind of a conspiracy. What they did in terms of policies designed to increase the cost of oil was not unlawful.

As to oil prices coming down just before the election to help the Republicans, remember, the oil futures prices are not price increases from OPEC, or Venezuela, or Russia or from U.S. producers. The producers have some power to bring down futures prices by pumping more, but they aren't setting a cartel price. I.e. BP/Arco's costs haven't gone up in Alaska, they're just able to use the futures prices to jack up the cost of oil they send to their refineries, and also the weak dollar makes it uneconomical to continue to use the oil themselves rather than sell it to other countries, unless they follow the market price. OTOH, starting in August or so, the U.S. oil companies could increase supply from Alaska, where they're not pumping at maximum capacity, in order to drive futures prices down.

Certainly the oil producing countries, including the U.S. oil companies would much rather have a Republican in office since this would ensure no big increase in CAFE standards, no new nuclear power plants in the U.S., no big push for conservation, and no real funding for alternative energy. OTOH, if they looked at the bigger picture, they might conclude that driving the U.S. into recession and depression, which Republicans are good at doing, might not be in their best long term interest.

That is why I'm wondering if George Soros has something to do with this. He wants a DimoCrap in the White House, and apparently the political process isn't going to yield the results he wanted, so now he's working on pumping up crude oil prices. If oil were all of a sudden as scarce as the price indicates it should be, then that means that oil demand is nearly twice what it was, and I don't think the demand has actually gone up that much. I think what's keeping the price going up is speculation. The man who has enough money to nearly break the Bank of England has enough money to pump speculative bubbles.

Charles the Curmudgeon

Here are some of what I call "recreational investors", who affect your household budget by dicking around with oil prices. Maybe Steve Cohen would like it if you stopped by his 32,000 sq ft home in Greenwich to discuss why his fund should be allowed to affect the economy of this country.

Here are some excerpts from news articles you're pretending you never saw. They point out how recreational investors are making money at our expense, by dicking around with oil prices based on "fears" and pure guesswork. Keep in mind that investors can make money regardless of which direction prices move, if they know what they're doing.

"Oil prices fell Monday as worries of a possible U.S. recession that would stunt oil demand more than offset the impact of fresh gains in global stock markets. Energy investors often view stocks as a proxy for economic growth, and in some recent sessions, movements in the oil market have closely followed that of global equities. Stocks rose Monday in Asia and Europe. But Monday investors appeared to remain focused on weak economic data in the U.S. that pushed oil futures down almost $3 a barrel at the end of last week."

"NEW YORK (AP) - Oil futures drifted higher in light holiday trading Monday after predictions of a drop in crude inventories raised new supply concerns. With little other news to motivate buying or selling, investors focused on forecasts by analysts including Addison Armstrong, director of exchange traded markets at TFS Energy Futures LLC, who predicted crude supplies fell by 1.5 million barrels last week. Tim Evans, an analyst at Citigroup Inc., predicted that crude supplies fell by 2 million to 3 million barrels." Crude futures have since retreated as OPEC boosted supplies and several forecasters cut demand predictions. But in recent weeks, prices have held generally to a range between $87 and $95, leading some analysts to conclude some investors may be poised to make another push for $100 a barrel in the new year.

But there is little consensus on that theory. Other analysts maintain that oil's fall rally was driven more by speculative buying than the underlying fundamentals of supply and demand. Analysts in this school of thought believe oil's true value is closer to $50 or $60 a barrel.

"Although we cannot predict the highs and lows of oil prices, we are more certain that volatility will continue and the current bubble will eventually burst," said Fadel Gheit, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co., in a recent research note.

Remember who created the instability in the Middle East to begin with (Bush), which is one of the reasons the price of oil is where it is?

In message news:phfZj.1496$ snipped-for-privacy@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com, SMS burned some brain cells writing:

What have the Democrats done to fix the situation? Every war funding request has sailed through. Cut off the funding and the war ends.

WHY SHOULD WE NOT BE DRILLING FOR OIL ON OUR OWN SOIL, JOE?

Your question assumes I agree that we should not be drilling for oil on our own soil. I don't, so there's no logical way for me to answer the question. If you'd asked the question differently, it might be possible for me to answer it.

Answer the questions.

WHY SHOULD WE NOT BE DRILLING FOR OIL ON OUR OWN SOIL, JOE?

WHY AREN'T WE DRILLING FOR OIL ON OUR OWN SOIL, JOE?

READING COMPREHENSION TEST 1

FIRST NAME ____________________________ INITIAL _____________

Put a circle around the number next to each correct answer.

I. Can we SEE that the earth is a globe? Yes, we can, when we watch a ship that sails out to sea. If we watch closely, we see the ship begin to disappear. The bottom of the ship disappears first, and then the ship seems to sink lower and lower, until we can only see the top of the ship, and then we see nothing at all. What is hiding the ship from us? It is the earth. Stick a pin most of the way into an orange, and slowly turn the orange away from you. You will see the pin disappear, just as a ship does on the earth.

A. This story is mainly about -

1. the shape of the earth.

1. traveling to the New World.

2. sailing ships in the old days.

1. the shapes of fruits, such as oranges.

B. The ship in this story -

1. probably sank to the bottom of the ocean.

1. was going farther and farther away.

2. was actually a toy.

1. was a sailing ship.

C. A globe is shaped like -

1. a box.

1. a pyramid.

2. an orange.

1. an ice cream cone.

D. The pin on the orange is most like -

1. the ship on the earth.

1. a person watching the ship.

2. a sailor on the ship.

1. a needle for mending a rip.

In message news:y2nZj.159$ snipped-for-privacy@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com, SMS burned some brain cells writing:

Yes, "supporting the troops" means bringing them home.

The poor perception of imbeciles is not my concern.

LBJ was a Republican?

No there's not. As Ron Paul said, we marched right in and we can march right out.

All the more justification for admitting our mistake and leaving.

"Al Qaida in Iraq" has little to no connection to OBL.

Iraq is not our problem. Let Iraq solve Iraq.

Your 65-IQ partisanship shows there's no hope for you. Or for the Democrats. Your primary should be down to Gravel and Kucinich, not two puppets of the Bilderbergs and Rockefellers.

Just keep coming up with ideas not to answer any questions there, Joe.

| > wrote: | >

| >>But basically, most of the problems in the U.S. right now are due to the | >>Republicans. | >

| > Pssssssssssssssssssssst | >

| > The Democrats are in charge. | >

| > Remember the election of 2006? | >

| > -- | >

| > Scott in Florida | | | Remember who created the instability in the Middle East to begin with | (Bush), which is one of the reasons the price of oil is where it is? | |

DAMN! Was Bush in office when the Arabs boycotted oil shipments to the USofA and cut us off in 1973? That's damn well oil instability in the Middle East got its inception and OPEC was born. Since then those guys have constantly had us by the short hairs, and the more we use, the more we have to buy from THEM to meet our needs, on THEIR terms. Dump this drivel of 'It's the Republican's fault.' 'NO, it's the Democrat's fault.' They can share and share alike about standing around with their thumbs up their keisters, blowing smoke in all directions, and not doing a goddamned thing about solving the problem. Just like they are doing right now. NOTHING but adding to global warming with all of their jawing. I'll make a bet right now. In 10 years, not a friggin thing will have been done to solve energy problems (except that oil companies will be being taxed more than they are and gas will be more expensive), and our economy will be at third world level while others worse off then we will be even more grim. If I live long enough to see it that is.

It is time to pull out all stops and maximize all efforts to get the hell as far away from Middle East, Mexican, Venezuelan and Nigerian oil as we can get by drilling wherever there are known reserves (this will still be faster than any dream alternate energy plan will), getting on the ethanol or other alternate fuels bandwagon, grow, grow, grow more corn, sugar and anything else that helps, saturate wind source usage, and build more nuclear electricity plants. If we don't and we snooze; We Lose!

And I swear, I still cannot remember Bush being in office in '73!

You are correct about there being instability in the Middle East way before Bush-2.

You are incorrect if you think Bush-2 didn't introduce a whole new level of instability by invading Iraq.

Speculators *require* instability to make money. When nothing's happening, commodities get sleepy.