Home Precious Metals

GOLD AND SILVER WORLD NEWS, ECONOMIC PREDICTIONS

1129130132134135217

Comments



  • << <i>Extreme-Liberals (Liberal Fascists if you will) should be very happy. They are getting exactly what they've wanted for years...high fuel prices, stupid alternatives to tie up the US and render it helpless to "tree-huggers" and their ilk. And the end effect is to severely weaken the US. That is the goal of the self-loathing capitalist-hating extremists (to be lead by Obama.)

    Ren >>



    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies.
  • renman95renman95 Posts: 7,037 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Extreme-Liberals (Liberal Fascists if you will) should be very happy. They are getting exactly what they've wanted for years...high fuel prices, stupid alternatives to tie up the US and render it helpless to "tree-huggers" and their ilk. And the end effect is to severely weaken the US. That is the goal of the self-loathing capitalist-hating extremists (to be lead by Obama.)

    Ren >>



    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    It wasn't a rant just an observation. Our current Presidential Impersonator is a R I N O. All these politicians do not represent their title. A new slate is needed.

    Ren


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Extreme-Liberals (Liberal Fascists if you will) should be very happy. They are getting exactly what they've wanted for years...high fuel prices, stupid alternatives to tie up the US and render it helpless to "tree-huggers" and their ilk. And the end effect is to severely weaken the US. That is the goal of the self-loathing capitalist-hating extremists (to be lead by Obama.)

    Ren >>



    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    It wasn't a rant just an observation. Our current Presidential Impersonator is a R I N O. All these politicians do not represent their title. A new slate is needed.

    Ren >>



    I Agree.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,637 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    This is not a political issue it's a global economic issue.

    If it were a political issue then I'd have to point out that there was no big problem until the democrats took over Congress.

    There's hardly a dimes worth of difference between the two parties anyway. One pulls the other pushes.
    Tempus fugit.
  • Can we keep this on the economy please.
    I hear enough of the REP vs DEM crap everywhere else I go.

    If you pay attention, their policies are identical, only their rhetoric is different.
    Mark Piersall
    Random Collector
    www.marksmedals.com


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    This is not a political issue it's a global economic issue.

    If it were a political issue then I'd have to point out that there was no big problem until the democrats took over Congress.

    There's hardly a dimes worth of difference between the two parties anyway. One pulls the other pushes. >>



    Okay compare prices before the Democrats took over to the price during the Clinton administration. Substantially lower during the Clinton Administration. The oil price rise has lot to with the uncontrolled spending by both sides which has weakened the dollar. I didn't start the political stuff but blaming one group for all the trouble we're in is inaccurate.
  • mhammermanmhammerman Posts: 3,769 ✭✭✭
    Yep, I agree. These guys and gals, both republicans and democrats, go to the same parties, live in the same subdivisions, play golf at the same club, go to each others childrens weddings, went to the same colleges, have each other on their speed dial, were in the same frats, etc.; there is little difference.
  • The stimulus package money was not "created out of thin air", was it? I believe the government must go deeper in the red to provide that money. They purchase bonds that our kids must pay back some day.
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If we don't pay for it directely via the FED's treasury bonds (ie off balance sheet shenanigans) then we pay for it indirectly through a weaker dollar and price inflation. Either way we pay.

    The government cannot continue and cannot afford to bail the American people and American Business out everytime something goes wrong.

    Sure they can. It may be by design. The end effect is total control over your citizens which seems to be what our politicians want to have.
    In 1913 we got started on this course when the FED was created in order to gain better control of the economy and minimize bank runs and other such panics. As each "planned" catastrophe occurs, we give more control to the regulators and lose another hunk of freedom. The latest act in this play was to remove Glass-Steagal in 1999 (initially enacted in 1933) and then create the sub-prime/derivatives nightmare.
    The banks have padded their individual accounts for years, taken large annual bonuses, and then await bail-outs as the ponzi-scheme crumbled.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • 57loaded57loaded Posts: 4,967 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Yep, I agree. These guys and gals, both republicans and democrats, go to the same parties, live in the same subdivisions, play golf at the same club, go to each others childrens weddings, went to the same colleges, have each other on their speed dial, were in the same frats, etc.; there is little difference. >>



    Amen
  • GOLDSAINTGOLDSAINT Posts: 2,148


    “A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies.”

    Now, Now, Joe

    Remember the election in 2006?

    A little over one year ago:


    1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
    2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
    3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.


    Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:


    1) Consumer confidence plummet;
    2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
    3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
    4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
    5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
    6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.


    America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
    Remember it's Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.

    Actually nothing can be done about the fuel cost and its ever increasing price increases.

    We have gridlock in Washington, and that will not change until there is a National crisis.
    I for one am not for punishing any group. Are we going to tell the Baby Boomers they cannot have their RV’S?

    What about the millions of teenagers that drive cars to school rather than taking the bus? We could drop consumption like a rock if you had to be out of school and have a job in order to even get a license.

    No my friends the free market will weed out those who cannot afford to drive and burn gas.

    Europe, China, India, etc. have millions of motorcycles all getting 60 miles per gallon.
  • mrearlygoldmrearlygold Posts: 17,858 ✭✭✭

    Bar Stool Economics

    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
    comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go
    something like this:

    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
    The fifth would pay $1.
    The sixth would pay $3.
    The seventh would pay $7.
    The eighth would pay $12.
    The ninth would pay $18.
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

    So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day
    and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw
    them a curve. Since you are all such good customers, he said, I’m going to
    reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just
    $80.

    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the
    first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

    But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they
    divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
    They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that
    from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
    up being paid to drink his beer.
    So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill
    by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each
    should pay!

    And so:

    The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
    The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5
    instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25%
    savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now
    paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to
    drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare
    their savings.

    I only got a dollar out of the $20, declared the sixth man. He pointed to
    the tenth man, but he got $10!

    Yeah, that’s right, exclaimed the fifth man. I only saved a dollar, too.
    It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!

    That’s true!! shouted the seventh man. Why should he get $10 back when I
    got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!

    Wait a minute, yelled the first four men in unison. We didn’t get
    anything at all. The system exploits the poor!

    The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

    The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down
    and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
    discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of
    them for even half of the bill!

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax
    system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from
    a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they
    just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas
    where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

    David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
    Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

    For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
    For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible

    Anyway, there's your lesson on bar stool economics!
  • renman95renman95 Posts: 7,037 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Yep, I agree. These guys and gals, both republicans and democrats, go to the same parties, live in the same subdivisions, play golf at the same club, go to each others childrens weddings, went to the same colleges, have each other on their speed dial, were in the same frats, etc.; there is little difference. >>



    We can blame elephants and jackass's, tree-huggers, FED, big-oil or big-whatever, a large portion of our current inflation can be traced back to BC or AC.

    BC-Before China: a bicycle economy
    AC-After China: awakens as a manufacture (Wal Mart et.al.), creating a class of workers that want motorcycles not bicycles

    Throw in India as well and mix with a little supply and demand.

    Ren


  • 57loaded57loaded Posts: 4,967 ✭✭✭
    it's just getting harder to wade through all the bull-stuff

    even my pea-brain can laugh at some of the cr$p on CNBC and WSJ...FNews is (not fox) is still above water.
  • mrearlygoldmrearlygold Posts: 17,858 ✭✭✭


    << <i>it's just getting harder to wade through all the bull-stuff
    >>




    Agree
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,102 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • critocrito Posts: 1,735


    << <i>The end effect is total control over your citizens which seems to be what our politicians want to have. >>



    Control of people (labor) is the only thing of real value in our system of fiat money. We're all wage slaves to the power brokers.
  • mhammermanmhammerman Posts: 3,769 ✭✭✭
    News from the Front: Went to the Credit Union today, my "girl" told me that I should have kept those CD's in there at 5.35% because they were now at 3.50% for 10K for a year. Market watch this week shows how the indexes in my other fund have fared since the first of the year

    stock fund -4.45%
    global equities -4.66%
    growth fund -5.75%
    inflation linked bond +2.91%

    These two entries in news from the front seem to reflect that this thing is screwed down real tight and regular guys can't make a good play. The PPT has the metals supressed pretty good, stocks are worse than a crap shoot because they are so manipulated, savings accounts/cd's offer squat for deposits, cash is being eroded by food and energy costs so it seems the best thing to do is just keep your powder dry, keep accumulating metals, stash cash and wait, maybe buy some real estate (raw dirt) from a distressed situation...but certainly the opportunities to grow buks is very limited at the moment.

    doo dah, doo dah
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,102 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>The Great Depression of the 2010s >>



    Since I believe the first sentence is entirely wrong, I read no further.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • CalGoldCalGold Posts: 2,608 ✭✭


    << <i>Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

    1) Consumer confidence plummet;
    2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
    3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
    4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
    5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
    6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

    America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
    Remember it's Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him. >>



    And exactly what laws did the Democratic congress pass that caused any of this, other than approving the Bush Administration's Iraq war buget?

    CG
  • ttownttown Posts: 4,472 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The Great Depression of the 2010s >>



    Since I believe the first sentence is entirely wrong, I read no further. >>




    Well you missed a good read that compares what happened in the last depression and the laws that we're removed in 1999 that we're put into place to avoid this in the future.....your loss.
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies

    Forget AC or BC and place the blame clearly on the FED and its buddy banks and congress as well who gave them all the tools they asked for
    to grow the sub-prime/credit derivatives mess. Repealing Glass-Steagel in 1999 was the key factor in unchaining the banks from going hog wild. Without the whacky derivatives mess we now have ($550 TRILLION in casino bets where most of the losers could not possibly pay off)
    we'd be fine. The banks, brokerages, mortgage companies, and hedge funds were given licenses to steal and commit fraud and that's just what they did...with Greenspan's, Congress', and the President's approval. We now reap what we have sown.

    Gold's demise has been quote overstated. Some of the key producing miners are up 10% or so in the past few days. A nice play to those who went for it. PM's and industrial metals will continue to be a good long term play. Those waiting for $800 gold to buy again may have to wait a lot longer.

    Depressions are monetary phenomena caused by central bank issuance of excessive credit .

    Was the first sentence in Schoon's article. I firmly believe that the FED's raging liquidity punch bowl in the 1920's lead to the depression.
    It might have only been a recession if not for the post-actions of the FED and govt. In any case we are on the exact same path today and doing the exact same types of things to make it worse (more liquidity and bail outs of the culprits who caused it, tarrifs, windfall profit taxes on those who didn't cause it, etc.). Most of the crazy gyrations in our economy over the past 90 years can be attributed to the FED. The last 40 years have even been more amazing considering we've gone to pure fiat and massive liquidity injections. The FED's continuing actions (1999-2009) have the potential to equal, if not exceed their stupidity from 1913-1933.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,102 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>The Great Depression of the 2010s >>



    Since I believe the first sentence is entirely wrong, I read no further. >>




    Well you missed a good read that compares what happened in the last depression and the laws that we're removed in 1999 that we're put into place to avoid this in the future.....your loss. >>



    Ttown,

    Honestly thank you for providing the link. I believe all information must be evaluated. I just dont believe in the premise so we will have to agree to disagree on the value of the writer's perspective.image


    BTW---There is a new platinum ETF--actually ETN--that will be coming to market in a few days.
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • 57loaded57loaded Posts: 4,967 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>The Great Depression of the 2010s >>



    Since I believe the first sentence is entirely wrong, I read no further. >>




    Well you missed a good read that compares what happened in the last depression and the laws that we're removed in 1999 that we're put into place to avoid this in the future.....your loss. >>



    Ttown,

    Honestly thank you for providing the link. I believe all information must be evaluated. I just dont believe in the premise so we will have to agree to disagree on the value of the writer's perspective.image


    BTW---There is a new platinum ETF--actually ETN--that will be coming to market in a few days. >>



    i agree the PREMISE (or first sentence) is all wrong in that article..although interesting to read and evaluate
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    It is truly sad,that legislation like Glass Stegall have been removed.
    The laws did their job for over 50 years. In fact they worked so well
    that folks said we did not need the laws anymore. We now know the
    real cost of such stupidity and greed.
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • ebizgobroebizgobro Posts: 595 ✭✭✭
    I heard on CNBC today that UBS will soon be offering electronic traded notes (ETN) on platinum.

    The difference between ETN and EFT is that the ETN on platinum will not hold platinum, unlike the ETF on gold which does.

    Any comments on the appropriateness of this note for investing in precious metals?
  • Goldsaint, start telling the truth. The Democrats took over Congress in early 2007 not 2006. The Republicans had this law making body in their hands going back to about 1994. This is Bush's eighth year in charge of everything. U.S. Supreme Court is majority Republican appointed and has been for dozens of years. Before Clinton was elected, Republicans were in charge 20 of the previous 24 years!

    Don't blame all these problems on the liberals when they have not been in charge. That's why so many people hate politics. Too many blind mice ranting for their party. Not to mention the talk show mafia!
  • Edited duplicate post
  • mhammermanmhammerman Posts: 3,769 ✭✭✭
    "The difference between ETN and EFT is that the ETN on platinum will not hold platinum, unlike the ETF on gold which does."

    So, you're just buying air?


  • << <i>. . . A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. . . . Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon. Who is reaping the "huge profits"?

    The same people that claim the oil companies are screwing the little people and making huge profits are the same people that have not allowed a refinery to be built is thirty years!!! They are also the same people that prevent the US from extracting its own oil increasing dependency on foreign nations.
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,637 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    Don't blame all these problems on the liberals when they have not been in charge. That's why so many people hate politics. Too many blind mice ranting for their party. >>




    This is still not a political thread and there is no difference between republicans and democrats in office.

    There's one big difference among their adherants though; When democrats take over and everything goes
    to hell the democrats will blame it on the republicans and when the republicans take over and everything
    goes to hell the democrats will blame it on the republicans.

    One thing nice about having democrats in charge is that the media will tell us how good everything finally
    is and we'll hear about how happy days can last forever.
    Tempus fugit.
  • coinlieutenantcoinlieutenant Posts: 9,310 ✭✭✭✭✭
    We are in the situation we are in because of the repeal of S-O and G-S. Bank fraud, mortgage fraud, and the encouragement of these practices by non action of the SEC combined with fed easy money practices are what has got us here.

    If you think it is a dem/repub thing, you are drinking the Kool-aid.

    When you combine those issues with the fact that we have shifted to a world economy and demand destruction is not occuring as predicted...you have a mess.
  • GOLDSAINTGOLDSAINT Posts: 2,148


    In my humble opinion politics is a non issue at this point, and will be until a severe crisis happen or a collapse occurs in several areas of our society.

    To put it quite simply the numbers can NO LONGER be crunched to make any significant changes.

    We are now a socialist country, and we have already given up most of our freedoms. Sure those few America first types are out there, but there vote no longer counts.

    WE all know the numbers of those who are going to vote for more socialism, 50 % of working Americans pay no taxes, 40% of those get checks back, 75% are now getting rebate checks and only 25% of those paid anything in.

    One out of every three workers in the country either work for one government or another, or get all of their pay check form a government i.e. military, government contractors etc.

    What can be done about gas prices now, and going higher? NOTHING!
    What can be done about lowering tax burdens on those that pay? NOTHING!
    What can be done about the growing size of all types of government? NOTHING!
    What can be done about any of these issues, Global trade, Inflation, loss of good American manufacturing jobs, etc? NOTHING!

    Those that depend on the various governments have all the votes and they are NEVER going to give up their checks, and all of this is going to get much worse as the 70 million plus Boomers get their hands held out!


  • << <i>“A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. So much for your political rant. Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies.”

    Now, Now, Joe

    Remember the election in 2006?

    A little over one year ago:


    1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
    2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
    3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.


    Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:


    1) Consumer confidence plummet;
    2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
    3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
    4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
    5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
    6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.


    America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
    Remember it's Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.

    Actually nothing can be done about the fuel cost and its ever increasing price increases.

    We have gridlock in Washington, and that will not change until there is a National crisis.
    I for one am not for punishing any group. Are we going to tell the Baby Boomers they cannot have their RV’S?

    What about the millions of teenagers that drive cars to school rather than taking the bus? We could drop consumption like a rock if you had to be out of school and have a job in order to even get a license.

    No my friends the free market will weed out those who cannot afford to drive and burn gas.

    Europe, China, India, etc. have millions of motorcycles all getting 60 miles per gallon. >>



    Gas was 1.51 a gallon the week Clinton left office 1-20-01. As stated previously, your timing on the Democrats coming in is a bit off and the housing collapse was inevitable. I seem to recall Bush pushing the "ownership society" (actually debt slave society) that pushed Federal agencies and private companies to give no-down loans in a very misguided attempt to increase home ownership %. Maybe good intentions but very bad reality. A big factor in oil is the falling dollar and a big reason for that is the Iraq War. Who started that?


  • << <i>

    << <i>. . . A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. . . . Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon. Who is reaping the "huge profits"?

    The same people that claim the oil companies are screwing the little people and making huge profits are the same people that have not allowed a refinery to be built is thirty years!!! They are also the same people that prevent the US from extracting its own oil increasing dependency on foreign nations. >>



    For one, Chevron is.

    If you don't want to read the article I'll give the important points
    1. Chevron had a profit of 5.17 billion. Not sure where you're living but that's a lot to me.
    2. Chevron-here's the REAL IMPORTANT PART-CHEVRON LIKE THE OTHER COMPANIES DOESN"T PRODUCE ENOUGH OIL TO FEED THEIR REFINERIES! THERE IS NO REFINERY SHORTAGE!


    Chevron's first-quarter profit of $5.17B caps another big round of earnings for Big Oil


    SAN RAMON, Calif. (AP) -- Astounding profits in the oil industry are becoming as routine as the anguished looks of motorists filling up their gas tanks.
    Chevron Corp. put yet another exclamation point on the oil patch's long run of prosperity Friday with a first-quarter profit of $5.17 billion, or $2.48 per share. That was up 10 percent from net income of $4.72 billion, or $2.18 per share, last year.


    The performance exceeded the lofty expectations of analysts, helping lift Chevron shares 38 cents to $95.32.

    It was the second-highest quarterly profit in the company's 129-year history and marked the most money that it has ever made during the January-March period. That puts the No. 2 U.S. oil company on track for its fifth straight year of record earnings.

    About the only downside to the quarter was that Chevron earned relatively little from gasoline sales because it couldn't raise its prices fast enough to recover its own rising costs for oil. Like its peers, Chevron doesn't produce enough oil on its own to feed its refineries, forcing it to buy some on the open market.

    Edited to add like most others here I don't think there is much of a difference between the parties but I object to blaming one party for everything. The problems we have now have been building for a LONG time and there's plenty of blame to go around.
  • GOLDSAINTGOLDSAINT Posts: 2,148
    Joe,
    It looks like we posted at about the same time.
    Who’s fault are all these serious problems we now face? We can all look in the mirror!

    We, or at least the majority of the American people, have been voting for a socialist government for 50 years, and now we have it, and NOTHING can or will be done about any of these issues. Politics is dead, and the politicians, no matter what party they are from are all the same now.

    If you look at your posts and my posts you will see that no matter who is in the White House, or no matter who runs Congress the outcome is going to be the same, more Socialism until things start to collapse, and then we will see what happens! Until then just sit back and watch as things go from bad to worse.
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Clinton got things going by tweaking the CPI to it's current useless state. When you have a useless indicator that won't call recessions, won't show inflation, etc., then you have the starting point to abuse economic policy as the stats will never show it.

    It is truly sad,that legislation like Glass Stegall have been removed.
    The laws did their job for over 50 years. In fact they worked so well
    that folks said we did not need the laws anymore. We now know the
    real cost of such stupidity and greed.


    Well said Bear.
    The stupidity and greed started in 1913 with the FED. Bankers finally got their way with control of the purse strings.
    Then came FDR altering the gold standard and commencing socialism.
    Then came Nixon in the 1970's abandoning real money to go pure fiat.
    Then came the repeal of GS in 1999 to stoke the kindlings into a raging fire.

    The money has been redirected to those who certainly don't need it. The average guy is getting squeezed out of the equation.
    It's not a good long term prognosis for the patient. The cheap foreign goods and labor that allowed us to accelerate our living standards in the 1960's to 1990's is becoming extinct. The inflation that we exported so well from 1995-2007 is now coming home.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold


  • << <i>Joe,
    It looks like we posted at about the same time.
    Who’s fault are all these serious problems we now face? We can all look in the mirror!

    We, or at least the majority of the American people, have been voting for a socialist government for 50 years, and now we have it, and NOTHING can or will be done about any of these issues. Politics is dead, and the politicians, no matter what party they are from are all the same now.

    If you look at your posts and my posts you will see that no matter who is in the White House, or no matter who runs Congress the outcome is going to be the same, more Socialism until things start to collapse, and then we will see what happens! Until then just sit back and watch as things go from bad to worse. >>



    I agree. It's very difficult to watch our country slide down.
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,286 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Whitman's effect on silver is a lot different than the Russ™ Effect but the end result is HIGHER prices.
    image
    Okay boys, back on topic.


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>. . . A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. . . . Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon. Who is reaping the "huge profits"?

    The same people that claim the oil companies are screwing the little people and making huge profits are the same people that have not allowed a refinery to be built is thirty years!!! They are also the same people that prevent the US from extracting its own oil increasing dependency on foreign nations. >>



    For one, Chevron is.

    If you don't want to read the article I'll give the important points
    1. Chevron had a profit of 5.17 billion. Not sure where you're living but that's a lot to me. >>



    Yes 5.17 billion is allot to single person but Chevron is not a single person and has massive expenses.



    << <i>2. Chevron-here's the REAL IMPORTANT PART-CHEVRON LIKE THE OTHER COMPANIES DOESN"T PRODUCE ENOUGH OIL TO FEED THEIR REFINERIES! THERE IS NO REFINERY SHORTAGE! >>



    REAL IMPORTANT WE ARE IMPORTING REFINED PRODUCTS AT HUGE PREMIUM BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE REFINING CAPACITY TO REFINE IMPORTED CRUDE!


    I'll say it again. . .

    Oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon.




    Who is reaping the "huge profits"? :-)

  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It's funny that during times of recession no one was looking to cut the oil companies a break. But when they do well because of the FED's loose monetary policy (weak dollar), everyone is up in arms. Oil, gold, commodities have all risen sharply due to these poor policies. The speculating hedge funds and major banks probably have caused more of the rise in oil prices than the oil companies themselves. And it's shameful that the next step will be to call those people buying metals to protect themselves from this mess as "unpatriotic speculators." Ironic since our system was founded on precious metals and not paper bills. The framers would be up in arms today.

    Also funny that when the big banks were making billions and earning record bonuses on shams year after year, no one suggested a windfall profits tax on their skullduggery. Next step will be a windfall profits tax on gold mining companies who will be earning extraordinary profits for years to come.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>. . . A Republican has been president during the high oil prices. . . . Not surprised two oil men in office produce high oil prices and huge profits for oil companies. >>



    The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon. Who is reaping the "huge profits"?

    The same people that claim the oil companies are screwing the little people and making huge profits are the same people that have not allowed a refinery to be built is thirty years!!! They are also the same people that prevent the US from extracting its own oil increasing dependency on foreign nations. >>



    For one, Chevron is.

    If you don't want to read the article I'll give the important points
    1. Chevron had a profit of 5.17 billion. Not sure where you're living but that's a lot to me. >>





    Yes 5.17 billion is allot to single person but Chevron is not a single person and has massive expenses.



    << <i>2. Chevron-here's the REAL IMPORTANT PART-CHEVRON LIKE THE OTHER COMPANIES DOESN"T PRODUCE ENOUGH OIL TO FEED THEIR REFINERIES! THERE IS NO REFINERY SHORTAGE! >>



    REAL IMPORTANT WE ARE IMPORTING REFINED PRODUCTS AT HUGE PREMIUM BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE REFINING CAPACITY TO REFINE IMPORTED CRUDE!


    I'll say it again. . .

    Oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon.




    Who is reaping the "huge profits"? :-) >>



    5.17 billion= Chevron's revenue minus Chevron's expenses. That's the most basic economic equation that you clearly don't understand so further arguing is futile. Have a nice day.

    Edited to try to make it clearer
  • mhammermanmhammerman Posts: 3,769 ✭✭✭
    "The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon. Who is reaping the "huge profits"?"

    Actually I saw that for every dollar of gasoline sold the profits are closer to 8 cents, production costs are about 70 cents. and taxes are about 22 (fed/state) cents. I would provide the link but I can't find the article on line but I did read in another source that the profits are near 10 cents. The way the money comes in is that they sell hundreds of millions of barrels a day and a hundred million of anything is going to be something. So as sales go up, profits are going to go up. The thing that makes their profits seem obscene is the amount of oil the world is using right now...huge.

  • fcfc Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭
    are many here looking at the past through rose colored glasses?

    was life really that "swell" during the 50s? (i was not born yet).
    it seems if people went about living in that level of comfort with
    children, they would have plenty of money to make it happen with.
    Assuming the father made 40,000 a year which is reasonable for
    someone without a college degree in my mind.

    didn't the kids only have two pairs of shoes? basic clothing. no video
    games. probably were not college bound.

    didn't the father only have one car? a modest house? basic furniture
    and utilities?

    if that is considered the "peak" of american living and standards what
    do you call today for the average family of 4-5?

    yes this country has challenges to overcome but it seems if we do have
    a crisis many here will get their dream of the 50s again.

    basically you will get less and you are supposed to like it more.

    i think you know what i am saying. i bet any man who worked in the
    50s would probably trade spots with us right now without much thought? can you honestly say you want to go back to the way it was?

    too much doom and gloom ruins such beautiful logic in this thread.

    rambling
  • secondrepublicsecondrepublic Posts: 2,619 ✭✭✭


    << <i>are many here looking at the past through rose colored glasses?

    was life really that "swell" during the 50s? (i was not born yet).
    it seems if people went about living in that level of comfort with
    children, they would have plenty of money to make it happen with.
    Assuming the father made 40,000 a year which is reasonable for
    someone without a college degree in my mind. >>



    You make a good point, but the problem is that today's (higher) living standards are not sustainable. In the 1950s these households were usually supported by just one parent (the father) working. Today both parents work and it's even more of a struggle. People have lost the virtue of saving for the future that they had back then. Our country as a whole is running the most massive trade deficits the world has ever seen. Back in the 1950s we had trade surpluses. Our currency was "as good as gold" around the world; our industries led the world as well.

    We are better off in absolute terms but not relatively. You could compare ancient Rome at its pinnacle to what are today some of its former provinces -- relatively poor countries like Romania or Bulgaria. Everyone in those countries today has electricity and many people have cars. They have aspirin and thousand other drugs. The ancient Romans didn't have any of that. Yet we still speak of the great Roman empire because in its time and place it was top dog. We used to be top dog as well, but we're losing that, and that's why you hear the nostalgia. It's not because we want to actually return to the 50s; it's because of what the 50s represent.
    "Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,637 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Another problem today is the amount of work people have to do and
    the lack of control they have on their jobs. Sure $4,000 a year was good
    money back then but only the man worked and he usually worked only
    about 40 per week. Now people spend 10 hours a week just commuting
    from one job to another and they both work. Back then there was a lot
    less stress because each person made most of his own decisions about
    the job. Now days even jobs like school teachers have strict sets of rules
    about how and when to do things. There's endless paperwork and it all
    has a deadline as well.

    This cuts pretty much across the board and affects even most of the boss-
    es. It was hardly a utopia in those days but most people had far more
    than they were used to and it was far easier for non-professionals and
    most other workers to avoid stress. Today there has to be a lot of stress
    on people who are burdened with rules, responsibilities, and lack of time.
    Getting out of high school and working 40 hours is no longer an option
    even for single people and a pipedream for couples. Every year a college
    degree means less but is more necessary to success. Kids get out of school
    with huge debts from student loans that will take much of their careers to
    pay off.

    People do have more now but we're working harder and have more stress.
    Tempus fugit.


  • << <i> 5.17 billion= Chevron's revenue minus Chevron's expenses. That's the most basic economic equation that you clearly don't understand so further arguing is futile. Have a nice day. >>




    Not futile at all :-)

    5.17 billion= Chevron's profit for PRODUCING a product.

    25 billion = tax TAKEN at the pump.


    I'll say it again. . .

    The oil companies EARN about 15 cents per gallon at the pump for producing the product; the Federal and state governments TAKE 80 cents per gallon.

    Who is reaping the "huge profits"? :-)


  • fishcookerfishcooker Posts: 3,446 ✭✭
    REAL IMPORTANT PART-CHEVRON LIKE THE OTHER COMPANIES DOESN"T PRODUCE ENOUGH OIL TO FEED THEIR REFINERIES! THERE IS NO REFINERY SHORTAGE!


    Sorry, but that's quite a bit illogical. No refinery is required to use their own oil.

    It comes down to a business decision. Some companies invest money and choose to build refinery capacity. Others, like mine, invest in oil production, and have no interest in refining.





This discussion has been closed.