PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Exxon CEO Admits that Oil Should Be $60-70 Dollars a Barrel Based on Supply ...


KILLER_CLOWN
05-17-2011, 12:35 AM
Exxon CEO Admits that Oil Should Be $60-70 Dollars a Barrel Based on Supply and Demand

Under probing questioning by Senator Cantwell, Exxon Mobil CEO Rex W. Tillerson admitted that oil should be $60-70 dollars a barrel based on supply and demand:

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LY420_U4U0I?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LY420_U4U0I?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

Some of the increase in price above this "supply and demand" level price is due to companies using futures contracts to lock in oil prices to ensure certainty (which is a valid business purpose).

Some of it is due to speculation. Indeed, using high frequency trading, it is relatively easy to manipulate the price of oil.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/05/exxon-ceo-admits-that-oil-should-be-60.html

WV
05-17-2011, 09:29 AM
What pisses me off the most is how they are so quick to bump the price of gas up when crude increases by a dollar, but so slow to lower the price of gas when crude drops.

Donger
05-17-2011, 09:32 AM
What pisses me off the most is how they are so quick to bump the price of gas up when crude increases by a dollar, but so slow to lower the price of gas when crude drops.

That's because the stations set their prices based on what they think it will cost to replace the gasoline in their tanks.

Hydrae
05-17-2011, 09:46 AM
That's because the stations set their prices based on what they think it will cost to replace the gasoline in their tanks.

I know you have said that many times but I still do not understand how that works. When the price of crude goes up by a dollar a barrel, the price at the pump goes up the next day. This is due to the anticipated increase for the next delivery. I get that, not please but I get it. But when the price drops at the crude level, it is a week or more before it hits the pumps. This is the part I don't get. If the price goes up because the next load will be more expensive then the price should drop at the same speed because the next load will be LESS expensive. It should go both ways, as it is, I understand why the consumer gets upset about this form of pricing.

WV
05-17-2011, 09:47 AM
That's because the stations set their prices based on what they think it will cost to replace the gasoline in their tanks.

Still is doesn't seem quit right that it's ok to raise the price by ten cents at the drop of a hat, but then they take their sweet time to lower them. The whole thing reeks of price gouging.

WV
05-17-2011, 09:48 AM
I know you have said that many times but I still do not understand how that works. When the price of crude goes up by a dollar a barrel, the price at the pump goes up the next day. This is due to the anticipated increase for the next delivery. I get that, not please but I get it. But when the price drops at the crude level, it is a week or more before it hits the pumps. This is the part I don't get. If the price goes up because the next load will be more expensive then the price should drop at the same speed because the next load will be LESS expensive. It should go both ways, as it is, I understand why the consumer gets upset about this form of pricing.

Thanks for clarifying my point...well stated.

Donger
05-17-2011, 09:57 AM
I know you have said that many times but I still do not understand how that works. When the price of crude goes up by a dollar a barrel, the price at the pump goes up the next day. This is due to the anticipated increase for the next delivery. I get that, not please but I get it. But when the price drops at the crude level, it is a week or more before it hits the pumps. This is the part I don't get. If the price goes up because the next load will be more expensive then the price should drop at the same speed because the next load will be LESS expensive. It should go both ways, as it is, I understand why the consumer gets upset about this form of pricing.

When crude is surging, the stations routinely don't raise their prices enough to cover their costs, so they actually lose money. So, when crude begins to drop (and they have to guess that it is going to CONTINUE to drop), they lower their prices slower in order to recoup their losses.

Cave Johnson
05-17-2011, 10:01 AM
This news should surprise exactly no one.

http://www.futuresmag.com/News/2011/5/Pages/Senators-want-CFTC-to-look-into-oil-speculation.aspx

"In a March 2011 research note, Goldman Sachs estimated that for every million barrels of oil held by speculators, the price of gas went up 8 to 10 percent. As of May 3, speculator-held positions in U.S. crude oil contracts were equivalent to a near record of 258 million barrels."

The government, if they were truly concerned about economic growth and cutting unemployment, would implement position limits for those without a valid business purpose (e.g., airlines, trucking companies).

Donger
05-17-2011, 10:02 AM
This news should surprise exactly no one.

http://www.futuresmag.com/News/2011/5/Pages/Senators-want-CFTC-to-look-into-oil-speculation.aspx

"In a March 2011 research note, Goldman Sachs estimated that for every million barrels of oil held by speculators, the price of gas went up 8 to 10 percent. As of May 3, speculator-held positions in U.S. crude oil contracts were equivalent to a near record of 258 million barrels."

The government, if they were truly concerned about economic growth and cutting unemployment, would implement position limits for those without a valid business purpose (e.g., airlines, trucking companies).

Obama loves Big Oil.

Cave Johnson
05-17-2011, 10:05 AM
When crude is surging, the stations routinely don't raise their prices enough to cover their costs, so they actually lose money. So, when crude begins to drop (and they have to guess that it is going to CONTINUE to drop), they lower their prices slower in order to recoup their losses.

I'd love to see a link on that.

Obama loves Big Oil.

And Goldman, etc. But it still has to pass Congress to get on his desk.

Hydrae
05-17-2011, 10:05 AM
This news should surprise exactly no one.

http://www.futuresmag.com/News/2011/5/Pages/Senators-want-CFTC-to-look-into-oil-speculation.aspx

"In a March 2011 research note, Goldman Sachs estimated that for every million barrels of oil held by speculators, the price of gas went up 8 to 10 percent. As of May 3, speculator-held positions in U.S. crude oil contracts were equivalent to a near record of 258 million barrels."

The government, if they were truly concerned about economic growth and cutting unemployment, would implement position limits for those without a valid business purpose (e.g., airlines, trucking companies).

There is something screwy about those numbers. If each million barrels increased the price by 8 - 10 percent, then 258M barrels would mean the price has been inflated by 2064 to 2580 percent. Prices may be inflated but not by a factor of 20-25 times. I really don't think prices should be in the $.15 - $.19 range. It would be nice but not realistic.

Cave Johnson
05-17-2011, 10:09 AM
There is something screwy about those numbers. If each million barrels increased the price by 8 - 10 percent, then 258M barrels would mean the price has been inflated by 2064 to 2580 percent. Prices may be inflated but not by a factor of 20-25 times. I really don't think prices shold be in the $.15 - $.19 range. It would be nice but not realistic.

Yeah, I'm guessing some critical details from the report vis-a-vis the math were left out.

Hydrae
05-17-2011, 10:10 AM
When crude is surging, the stations routinely don't raise their prices enough to cover their costs, so they actually lose money. So, when crude begins to drop (and they have to guess that it is going to CONTINUE to drop), they lower their prices slower in order to recoup their losses.

No problem guessing the price will continue to increase, eh?

I knew this was the kind of response I would get and I am not going to beat my head against this wall for very long.

When the price of a barrel goes up 10%, I see a 10% increase at the pump very quickly. First off, this is wrong because there are set prices in the processing of the crude that are not affected by the cost of the oil itself. So when the raw product goes up 10%, the cost of the labor to process it does not change. The end costs increase is probably more in the 6-8% range at most.

At the same time, I have seldom, if ever, seen the price drop by an equivalent percentage. You say it is to reduce losses when the price was raising. So if the price continues to rise we would see gas stations going out of business due to these losses? Give me a break. If they are not raising them quickly enough to cover losses then they are some of the worst businessmen out there and I don't believe that for a minute.

Amnorix
05-17-2011, 10:36 AM
As usual, "speculators" are being blamed like they're a satanic cult put on earth to kill hard-working Americans. What nobody understands or appreciates, perhaps, is that while these evil ne'er-do-wells may very well drive up costs in the short term, they are a key component of a smoothly operating trading market.

1. they provide an objective, third party viewpoint of the market. Buyers and sellers of any given commodity may in some respects be too close to the situation, or have too narrow a viewpoint. Financial investors (i.e. speculators) are going to have a more realistic view of the short term and long term big picture, in many instances.

2. they provide liquidity.

3. to the degree they are either driving up prices (by buying) or driving down prices (by shorting), it's out of a PROFIT MOTIVE, because their cold, hard look at the situation has determined that the current price is WRONG. It is too high or too low, given all of the factors in play. They are therefore doing EXACTLY what an EFFICIENT MARKET, THE VERY BEATING HEART OF A CAPITALIST ECONOMIC SYSTEM, demands -- affecting the price to accurately reflect the value of the commodity in question.

4. If they drive up prices in the short term, then in the long term that should (if other market-players are being efficient as well) drive up production, which will REDUCE long term prices.

a. for example. Let's say that the market absent these evil speculators would price a barrel of oil at $70/barrel, but evil speculators are making it $100 per barrel. What ought to happen, if that high price is sustained for a reasonable period of time -- is that excess productive capacity gets put online to take advantage of the higher price. Also, additional oil fields that may not be economically viable at $70/barrel may be explored or developed, leading to increased production further down the line. All because investors have looked at current supply/demand numbers, and short term supply/demand numbers, factored in the various risks, and determined (by buying the goods and driving up the price) that the market is underpricing the commodity.

5. Financial Investors smooth out the rough spots. By increasing the efficiency of the market, the financial investors help curb sudden gluts or shortages, which have THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY plagued markets. Everyone loves gas at $2.00/gallon without speculators, but if their doubts are proven right and some risk factors that they were plugging into their equation become true and there is suddenly a worldwide shortage of oil (because oil had been UNDERPRICED and so new production didn't com eonline, then everyone has gas lines, the price of oil suddenly spikes wildly up to something much higher than $100/gallon, etc. etc.


Here's the absolutely bottom line -- YOU LIKE CAPITALISM?! THEN YOU LIKE FINANCIAL INVESTORS, BECAUSE THEY HELP CAPITALISM WORK BETTER. So quit your goddamn bitching. They're not doing it to fuck over the guy at the pump. They're buying oil because their analysis says oil is underpriced. If they are wrong (which is entirely possible) then they get burned and lose money. So they try really hard not to be wrong.

dirk digler
05-17-2011, 10:52 AM
When crude is surging, the stations routinely don't raise their prices enough to cover their costs, so they actually lose money. So, when crude begins to drop (and they have to guess that it is going to CONTINUE to drop), they lower their prices slower in order to recoup their losses.

I am sure I don't understand all of this but it doesn't make sense to me.

When a station receives gas from the truck and puts it in the ground at that point or maybe prior they have already negotiated a price so how could they lose money?

To me it would be similar to a restaurant buying a whole cow and cutting it up and serving half of it and then a few days later the price of beef goes up so they jack up the price of a steak that they already bought and paid for and used half of it.

I don't get it...

FD
05-17-2011, 10:58 AM
As usual, "speculators" are being blamed like they're a satanic cult put on earth to kill hard-working Americans. What nobody understands or appreciates, perhaps, is that while these evil ne'er-do-wells may very well drive up costs in the short term, they are a key component of a smoothly operating trading market.

1. they provide an objective, third party viewpoint of the market. Buyers and sellers of any given commodity may in some respects be too close to the situation, or have too narrow a viewpoint. Financial investors (i.e. speculators) are going to have a more realistic view of the short term and long term big picture, in many instances.

2. they provide liquidity.

3. to the degree they are either driving up prices (by buying) or driving down prices (by shorting), it's out of a PROFIT MOTIVE, because their cold, hard look at the situation has determined that the current price is WRONG. It is too high or too low, given all of the factors in play. They are therefore doing EXACTLY what an EFFICIENT MARKET, THE VERY BEATING HEART OF A CAPITALIST ECONOMIC SYSTEM, demands -- affecting the price to accurately reflect the value of the commodity in question.

4. If they drive up prices in the short term, then in the long term that should (if other market-players are being efficient as well) drive up production, which will REDUCE long term prices.

a. for example. Let's say that the market absent these evil speculators would price a barrel of oil at $70/barrel, but evil speculators are making it $100 per barrel. What ought to happen, if that high price is sustained for a reasonable period of time -- is that excess productive capacity gets put online to take advantage of the higher price. Also, additional oil fields that may not be economically viable at $70/barrel may be explored or developed, leading to increased production further down the line. All because investors have looked at current supply/demand numbers, and short term supply/demand numbers, factored in the various risks, and determined (by buying the goods and driving up the price) that the market is underpricing the commodity.

5. Financial Investors smooth out the rough spots. By increasing the efficiency of the market, the financial investors help curb sudden gluts or shortages, which have THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY plagued markets. Everyone loves gas at $2.00/gallon without speculators, but if their doubts are proven right and some risk factors that they were plugging into their equation become true and there is suddenly a worldwide shortage of oil (because oil had been UNDERPRICED and so new production didn't com eonline, then everyone has gas lines, the price of oil suddenly spikes wildly up to something much higher than $100/gallon, etc. etc.


Here's the absolutely bottom line -- YOU LIKE CAPITALISM?! THEN YOU LIKE FINANCIAL INVESTORS, BECAUSE THEY HELP CAPITALISM WORK BETTER. So quit your goddamn bitching. They're not doing it to **** over the guy at the pump. They're buying oil because their analysis says oil is underpriced. If they are wrong (which is entirely possible) then they get burned and lose money. So they try really hard not to be wrong.

Well said.

Simplex3
05-17-2011, 11:18 AM
Here's the absolutely bottom line -- YOU LIKE CAPITALISM?! THEN YOU LIKE FINANCIAL INVESTORS, BECAUSE THEY HELP CAPITALISM WORK BETTER. So quit your goddamn bitching. They're not doing it to **** over the guy at the pump. They're buying oil because their analysis says oil is underpriced. If they are wrong (which is entirely possible) then they get burned and lose money. So they try really hard not to be wrong.

While this entire post is true, I do wonder if it all holds now that we have some companies (Goldman Sachs?) that are so damned big they can game the system for themselves. I haven't looked into it enough to be sure, but could it be a function of massive investment houses buying up massive supplies of a commodity, Joe Douche seeing the rising price on E-Trade and buying, then the investment houses selling and leaving Joe holding the bag? Lather, rinse, repeat.

I think I might be all for re-enacting the law requiring that you have a physical location capable of taking delivery of anything you purchase on speculation. Just as a physical barrier to insanity.

Bowser
05-17-2011, 11:24 AM
While this entire post is true, I do wonder if it all holds now that we have some companies (Goldman Sachs?) that are so damned big they can game the system for themselves. I haven't looked into it enough to be sure, but could it be a function of massive investment houses buying up massive supplies of a commodity, Joe Douche seeing the rising price on E-Trade and buying, then the investment houses selling and leaving Joe holding the bag? Lather, rinse, repeat.

I think I might be all for re-enacting the law requiring that you have a physical location capable of taking delivery of anything you purchase on speculation. Just as a physical barrier to insanity.

You realize you're risking incurring the wrath of Donger here, right?

Amnorix
05-17-2011, 11:29 AM
While this entire post is true, I do wonder if it all holds now that we have some companies (Goldman Sachs?) that are so damned big they can game the system for themselves. I haven't looked into it enough to be sure, but could it be a function of massive investment houses buying up massive supplies of a commodity, Joe Douche seeing the rising price on E-Trade and buying, then the investment houses selling and leaving Joe holding the bag? Lather, rinse, repeat.

I think I might be all for re-enacting the law requiring that you have a physical location capable of taking delivery of anything you purchase on speculation. Just as a physical barrier to insanity.

Not sure that Joe Douche invests in too many commodities futures. If he does, then he's an idiot that deserves to be burned.

If you're saying the big investment houses are coordinating this type of activity, then that would be very illegal. If they aren't coordinating, then they're taking a tremendous risk that its their investment house, nto Joe Douche, left holding the bag when the intentionally created bubble bursts.

Simplex3
05-17-2011, 11:30 AM
You realize you're risking incurring the wrath of Donger here, right?

I don't think anyone is evil, or doing it to screw the middle class. I do think they're doing everything in their power to maximize their profits and the returns of their shareholders and clients, which they're legally and morally bound to do. I'm just wondering if we've allowed some people to control so much that they can game the system by a few percent. I don't think for a second those people are the oil companies or the gas station on the corner.

Simplex3
05-17-2011, 11:40 AM
Not sure that Joe Douche invests in too many commodities futures. If he does, then he's an idiot that deserves to be burned.

If you're saying the big investment houses are coordinating this type of activity, then that would be very illegal. If they aren't coordinating, then they're taking a tremendous risk that its their investment house, nto Joe Douche, left holding the bag when the intentionally created bubble bursts.

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970204853904576089991672044866.html
High-frequency trading firms love to buy from and sell to "dumb" individual and institutional investors. Individuals tend to place market orders rather than using limit orders at or below the bid price. Thus, they pay the maximum. As for mutual funds and other institutional investors, they are easily front-run by the new trading operations, which have faster access to market data as well as faster trading computers.

The key there is that the biggest players have hooks into the market computers that give them a millisecond preview of the price before it goes out to everyone else, so they can see the price declines and sell before you even know the price was declining.

Donger
05-17-2011, 02:26 PM
No problem guessing the price will continue to increase, eh?

I knew this was the kind of response I would get and I am not going to beat my head against this wall for very long.

When the price of a barrel goes up 10%, I see a 10% increase at the pump very quickly. First off, this is wrong because there are set prices in the processing of the crude that are not affected by the cost of the oil itself. So when the raw product goes up 10%, the cost of the labor to process it does not change. The end costs increase is probably more in the 6-8% range at most.

At the same time, I have seldom, if ever, seen the price drop by an equivalent percentage. You say it is to reduce losses when the price was raising. So if the price continues to rise we would see gas stations going out of business due to these losses? Give me a break. If they are not raising them quickly enough to cover losses then they are some of the worst businessmen out there and I don't believe that for a minute.

You are assuming that the increase/decrease is not only perfectly linear but symmetrical with regard to timing? Sorry, but it isn't. Don't forget that these are RETAIL prices.

Donger
05-17-2011, 02:27 PM
I am sure I don't understand all of this but it doesn't make sense to me.

When a station receives gas from the truck and puts it in the ground at that point or maybe prior they have already negotiated a price so how could they lose money?

To me it would be similar to a restaurant buying a whole cow and cutting it up and serving half of it and then a few days later the price of beef goes up so they jack up the price of a steak that they already bought and paid for and used half of it.

I don't get it...

The price is set for the retailers long before it shows up at the station.

Donger
05-17-2011, 02:28 PM
You realize you're risking incurring the wrath of Donger here, right?

Not at all. As long as crude isn't the only commodity that that applies to.

WV
05-17-2011, 02:33 PM
What no one is explaining and I don't think there is a good explanation is if the price for the consumer is set long before it reaches the consumer, then why does it go up almost immediately when crude goes up, yet doesn't come down immediately when the price of crude drops.

Donger
05-17-2011, 02:38 PM
What no one is explaining and I don't think there is a good explanation is if the price for the consumer is set long before it reaches the consumer, then why does it go up almost immediately when crude goes up, yet doesn't come down immediately when the price of crude drops.

See #7

KC native
05-17-2011, 02:52 PM
Not sure that Joe Douche invests in too many commodities futures. If he does, then he's an idiot that deserves to be burned.

If you're saying the big investment houses are coordinating this type of activity, then that would be very illegal. If they aren't coordinating, then they're taking a tremendous risk that its their investment house, nto Joe Douche, left holding the bag when the intentionally created bubble bursts.

The growth in retail futures and other derivatives trading over the last 10 yeas has been exponential. You'd be surprised how many investors have futures trading ability. The discount brokers make a shit ton of money on these guys.

While these firms may not directly collude they know how to tell who is trading what and they make sure not to step on each othr's toes.

orange
05-17-2011, 02:55 PM
"In a March 2011 research note, Goldman Sachs estimated that for every million barrels of oil held by speculators, the price of gas went up 8 to 10 percent CENTS. As of May 3, speculator-held positions in U.S.

There is something screwy about those numbers. If each million barrels increased the price by 8 - 10 percent, then 258M barrels would mean the price has been inflated by 2064 to 2580 percent. Prices may be inflated but not by a factor of 20-25 times. I really don't think prices should be in the $.15 - $.19 range. It would be nice but not realistic.

Yeah, I'm guessing some critical details from the report vis-a-vis the math were left out.

Beware the typo. futuresmag.com requires a sharp rebuke.

http://www.thewilbournegroup.com/Specialties/AshNewWithHoles.jpg

KC native
05-17-2011, 02:58 PM
The growth in retail futures and other derivatives trading over the last 10 yeas has been exponential. You'd be surprised how many investors have futures trading ability. The discount brokers make a shit ton of money on these guys.

While these firms may not directly collude they know how to tell who is trading what and they make sure not to step on each othr's toes.

Also, subsidize the banks with 0% money and they can trade back and forth with eachother and make more money than lendingit out.

notorious
05-17-2011, 03:50 PM
To me it would be similar to a restaurant buying a whole cow and cutting it up and serving half of it and then a few days later the price of beef goes up so they jack up the price of a steak that they already bought and paid for and used half of it.

I don't get it...


Beautifully put.

I don't believe that oil companies are evil, though. They are just doing the same shit that they have been getting away with for the last 2 decades.

RedNeckRaider
05-17-2011, 04:08 PM
That damn George Bush~

RedNeckRaider
05-17-2011, 04:10 PM
Obama loves Big Oil.

You misspelled George Bush~

BigChiefFan
05-17-2011, 05:43 PM
I don't think anyone is evil, or doing it to screw the middle class. I do think they're doing everything in their power to maximize their profits and the returns of their shareholders and clients, which they're legally and morally bound to do. I'm just wondering if we've allowed some people to control so much that they can game the system by a few percent. I don't think for a second those people are the oil companies or the gas station on the corner.The obvious answer is, Enron is proof that we have allowed corporations too much control. Maximizing profits, often results in illegal behavior and those players should be prosecuted to the fullest. Unfortunately, companies like Goldman Sachs, Enron, etc, the records of their illegal behavior conviently were destroyed when building 7 of the WTC collpased. It's been open season ever since.

Brock
05-17-2011, 05:47 PM
The obvious answer is, Enron is proof that we have allowed corporations too much control. Maximizing profits, often results in illegal behavior and those players should be prosecuted to the fullest. Unfortunately, companies like Goldman Sachs, Enron, etc, the records of their illegal behavior conviently were destroyed when building 7 of the WTC collpased. It's been open season ever since.

LMAO

BigChiefFan
05-17-2011, 05:58 PM
Go back to living under your rock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4&feature=related

Simplex3
05-17-2011, 08:03 PM
I don't know that I'm buying the WTC connection there. First, if I wanted to destroy the only copy of a piece of paper I'd probably choose a shredder over killing 3k people and destroying two buildings. Second, I don't believe there aren't other electronic copies of almost all that info.

Brock
05-17-2011, 08:33 PM
Go back to living under your rock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4&feature=related

Go on thinking that hasn't been posted here 1000 times.

Donger
05-17-2011, 08:33 PM
The obvious answer is, Enron is proof that we have allowed corporations too much control. Maximizing profits, often results in illegal behavior and those players should be prosecuted to the fullest. Unfortunately, companies like Goldman Sachs, Enron, etc, the records of their illegal behavior conviently were destroyed when building 7 of the WTC collpased. It's been open season ever since.

Is this how it went down?

9/11 Terrorists: Death to America!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, but make sure you hit WTC 7, okay?

9/11 Terrorists: Seriously?

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, seriously. We're conspiring with you guys, right?

9/11 Terrorists: Well, yeah, but we didn't know that you'd be so precise. Death to Israel!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, get those nasty Jews! So, make sure you hit the right tower that when it falls, it precipitates the collapse of WTC 7, umkay?

9/11 Terrorists: WTF!? (in Arabic).

Nasty Oil Types: Look, it has to look an ancillary collapse, or the kooks will suspect.

9/11 Terrorists: Look, we will be half-assed flying a 767 at 500 mph into a fucking building, and you want us to be that precise?!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, or we'll get someone else.

9/11 Terrorists: Allahu Akhbar!

Brock
05-17-2011, 08:34 PM
PULL IT

KC native
05-17-2011, 11:43 PM
The obvious answer is, Enron is proof that we have allowed corporations too much control. Maximizing profits, often results in illegal behavior and those players should be prosecuted to the fullest. Unfortunately, companies like Goldman Sachs, Enron, etc, the records of their illegal behavior conviently were destroyed when building 7 of the WTC collpased. It's been open season ever since.

You are dumb. The records of their illegal behavior exist. Unfortunately regulators have been asleep at the wheel since 1998.

BigChiefFan
05-18-2011, 01:58 AM
LMAO

I really would like to know what makes you have so much faith in the system to be able to laugh at something, that actually makes you think of something other than the swiss cheese official story.

To suppose you have so many answers that you can laugh at others, tells me you don't know shit. Our leaders are running amok, like Boss Tweed. Do you not acknowledge our country has gone on to get into several wars, since 9-11?
Do you not see a parallel to the event happening and our country going on the offensive throughout the world, including against it's own citizenry?

To suppose that life is the same since that event is to be living in denial.

How many fucking wars do we have to get in, before you'll acknowledge our government is out of control?

BIG_DADDY
05-18-2011, 03:01 AM
Obama loves Big Oil.

Oh yea, BIG OIL, Federal Reserve, BIG PHARM, you name it. All BIG MONEY loves this guy. Think there is any chance he doesn't get re-elected? Sellout of epic proportions.

Amnorix
05-18-2011, 07:20 AM
You are dumb. The records of their illegal behavior exist. Unfortunately regulators have been asleep at the wheel since 1998.

I may regret asking this but....what's so special about 1998?

Amnorix
05-18-2011, 08:47 AM
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970204853904576089991672044866.html


The key there is that the biggest players have hooks into the market computers that give them a millisecond preview of the price before it goes out to everyone else, so they can see the price declines and sell before you even know the price was declining.

The traders are always going to have a very slight advantage, which can translate into VERY significant money over the course of millions of trades.

None of that turns $70 oil into $100 oil, however.

BucEyedPea
05-18-2011, 08:48 AM
Is this how it went down?

9/11 Terrorists: Death to America!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, but make sure you hit WTC 7, okay?

9/11 Terrorists: Seriously?

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, seriously. We're conspiring with you guys, right?

9/11 Terrorists: Well, yeah, but we didn't know that you'd be so precise. Death to Israel!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, get those nasty Jews! So, make sure you hit the right tower that when it falls, it precipitates the collapse of WTC 7, umkay?

9/11 Terrorists: WTF!? (in Arabic).

Nasty Oil Types: Look, it has to look an ancillary collapse, or the kooks will suspect.

9/11 Terrorists: Look, we will be half-assed flying a 767 at 500 mph into a ****ing building, and you want us to be that precise?!

Nasty Oil Types: Yes, or we'll get someone else.

9/11 Terrorists: Allahu Akhbar!

So home come we don't declare war on them?

BucEyedPea
05-18-2011, 08:49 AM
Oh yea, BIG OIL, Federal Reserve, BIG PHARM, you name it. All BIG MONEY loves this guy. Think there is any chance he doesn't get re-elected? Sellout of epic proportions.

Mitch Daniels was formerly employed by BIG PHARMA as was his father. Plus he's half Arab but I see Republicans touting him here.

Donger
05-18-2011, 08:57 AM
So home come we don't declare war on them?

What?

morphius
05-18-2011, 09:04 AM
I am sure I don't understand all of this but it doesn't make sense to me.

When a station receives gas from the truck and puts it in the ground at that point or maybe prior they have already negotiated a price so how could they lose money?

To me it would be similar to a restaurant buying a whole cow and cutting it up and serving half of it and then a few days later the price of beef goes up so they jack up the price of a steak that they already bought and paid for and used half of it.

I don't get it...
I don't know that what Donger said is true by any means, I've had one member here who ran a gas station say he never lost money on gas.

Donger
05-18-2011, 09:09 AM
I don't know that what Donger said is true by any means, I've had one member here who ran a gas station say he never lost money on gas.

Price gouger, eh?

Brock
05-18-2011, 10:33 AM
I really would like to know what makes you have so much faith in the system to be able to laugh at something, that actually makes you think of something other than the swiss cheese official story.

To suppose you have so many answers that you can laugh at others, tells me you don't know shit. Our leaders are running amok, like Boss Tweed. Do you not acknowledge our country has gone on to get into several wars, since 9-11?
Do you not see a parallel to the event happening and our country going on the offensive throughout the world, including against it's own citizenry?

To suppose that life is the same since that event is to be living in denial.

How many fucking wars do we have to get in, before you'll acknowledge our government is out of control?


Just answer one question ON YOUR ORIGINAL POINT, not all of this other mish mash of conspiracy theorist talking points. Do you really thing that WTC 7 contained a bunch of "evidence of wrongdoing" that could be found nowhere else? Because, yeah, stupid.

The Mad Crapper
05-22-2011, 10:48 AM
http://www.moonbattery.com/obama-gas-station.jpg

morphius
05-22-2011, 11:13 AM
Price gouger, eh?
Actually I believe in the 90's there was a law passed in MO that made it illegal for them to charge less than what the gas cost.

KC native
05-22-2011, 11:14 AM
I may regret asking this but....what's so special about 1998?

Commodity Futures Trading Modernization Act.

KC native
05-22-2011, 11:17 AM
The traders are always going to have a very slight advantage, which can translate into VERY significant money over the course of millions of trades.

None of that turns $70 oil into $100 oil, however.

The traders aren't the one pulling the trigger on those trades. The colocated servers are strictly algo computers flooding the quote system with noise to figure out what the other algos are doing.

Chiefshrink
05-22-2011, 11:21 AM
Mitch Daniels was formerly employed by BIG PHARMA as was his father. Plus he's half Arab but I see Republicans touting him here.

a RINO for sure:thumb: