I know this may sound crazy to some, but crude oil prices are arguably low relative to other risk-assets.
Crude oil price returns have under-performed the stock market and commodities in general (including copper, silver, gold, agricultural goods, and livestock) on a risk-adjusted basis since at least 2006 (that's as far back as I looked).
Any thoughts?
Follow posts
For reasons I mention above, the advent of the CFMA has created a rift between real supply/demand, unless you're convinced the timing of oil's rate of surge since 2000 is purely coincidental to the CFMA, and global demand has tripled (it hasn't) or supply has diminished (it hasn't)
In 2008 -
Demand was down, supply was up, yet prices went from $60 to $145 a barrel, that's not supply/demand. (I already explained the relationship to the CDO market, banks timing & effects on buying power to push defaults, collect on short positions as a result...etc)
The premise above, to link prices to consumer buying power (debt/wages), is only food for thought to look into what may come down, not just oil - unless you're of the thinking that wages (or entitlements) will come up, there is no home equity or credit to bail us out for consumption this time, no wages either.
Look at the chart of consumer debt, factor government debt/spending, in terms of the fact that right now 35% of all wages are entitlement spending in one form or another.
I specifically stated above that " Oil is in a bubble relative to wage growth, that's a basic tenet of supply/demand "
If you also look at a chart of MEW (mortgage equity withdrawals) and ICI retail fund outflows over the last decade, there's even greater food for thought.
I'm a family man, I tend to take notice of price changes on things a young fella like yourself won't.
I.E. grain prices - a decade ago I could stock up on pasta @ $0.50 a LB, last week a box of spaghetti was ranging from $1.25 to $1.80.
Coffee has gone from $3 a 2lb can to $11
That sounds silly, until you factor the huge increase in costs collectively, prices relative to wages over the last decade are insane, as with wheat, cocoa, corn, and meats, it all adds up.
I'm not saying it's 100% speculation, some is real supply/demand, but, As futures speculation drives costs up for a variety of staples, my wife and I have to trim the budget, drive less, and maybe a "staycation" this year.
We represent an accurate cross section of the middle class.
I definitely think natural gas will gain more use. Not sure how soon that would be for things like cars. The major issue I see is inferior energy density of natural gas. I believe natural gas needs to be pressurized to about 3500 psi to give the equivalent (in terms of energy/volume) to that of gasoline. Obviously this presents some danger considerations at the pump and especially in impact situations. (I'm envisioning an old lady trying to handle a pump hose at 3500 psi) Also compressors to that pressure aren't the cheapest things in the world. But if the price is right someone will work it out.
I'm actually hoping for gas prices to rise, but just for this summer, so that boat prices can drop and I can get a good deal come fall/winter. Sorry to everyone else.
If we couldn't produce oil at a competitive rate, it would be pointless not to just get oil from the Saudi's in the first place.
At the time we were sold the idea that it was OPEC that was causing the price surge.
It wasn't, it was the CFMA allowing unregulated trading in futures, unless, despite the charts I posted above, you somehow believe oil was fairly priced at $145 that Summer.
The power to manipulate & control commodity or energy pricing is virtual omnipotence, politically, economically and financially.
You can alter public opinion on a political/presidential election, or you can intentionally restrict disposable incomes to effect an outcome, say, in mortgage defaults to collect on short positions, the possibilities are endless.
You don't need LNG, just CNG (at maybe 100+ PSI), there are already service stations right now that offer CNG, and, as you point out on another thread, it's not unfeasible to imagine residential compressors that tie into standard gas mains and trickle pump to a storage tank.
At a current $2 MMBTU price for Natgas, and a ridiculous over supply of the stuff that ensures a continued low price, a 114Kbtu per RBOB gallon equivalence to NG comes to $0.23 cents.
I'm sure my math is crude, or the NG equivalence requires more BTU, but for reference -
If you drive 20K miles p/year @ 20MPG, you save $3500 each year, the price of retrofits, generator or compressor paid at year one, maybe two..
"World crude oil consumption by year"
Sub, the charts above are ~ GLOBAL~ supply & demand, hence the title "World crude oil consumption by year"
Global reserves have increased more than double since 1980, from 600B to near 1,400B- an increase of 230%
Global demand has only increased from 60M to 85M since 1980.- an increase of 42%
Yes, demand is steadily increasing, the point was to illustrate that contrary to your statement "... And frankly a lot of things have changed since 2000. You mention that global demand hasn't "tripled" and supply hasn't "diminished," but this isn't any kind of real analysis or evidence whatsoever. "
Demand has NOT "tripled", not even doubled over the last 30 years ~ never mind the last decade ~, reserves are at a historic high, increasing at a greater rate than demand - ESPECIALLY with the advent of drilling technologies.
Horizontal drilling increases extraction/output by up to 10X per site.
So why is oil $100+/barrel when it was $30 ten years ago?
Again, I could understand maybe $60, but a tripling in price when the supply/demand curve doesn't match it is senseless.
The ONLY potentially valid argument for higher prices is Bakes comment on extraction/drilling costs, but the Saudi's are openly stating they have no problem selling it to us @ $55 a barrel while still laughing all the way to the bank.
This leaves us to scrutinize speculation's affects on price, the Saudi Oil minister has made his intentions to fight further price bubbles very clear.
The Saudi's possess 20% of the worlds oil reserves.
The sourced article for your first chart is from Business insider, - " Here's More Proof That The Fed Didn't Create The Commodity Boom "
Hate to burst bubbles, but the chart further supports my assertion of speculation.
You're using global industrial production's increase by 40% over the last decade to justify oil's price increase of over 300%.
It supports my argument, it also supports Rex Tilllerson's testimony that oil is over-priced by $40 a barrel from speculation, the math fits perfectly.
Global industrial production is only up 40% on YOUR chart, the non-energy CRB lags it by 5%, which is easily expected through production efficiency and technological improvement.
The charts I posted are right to the source, oil supply/demand NOT projected/speculated supply/demand, but if you insist, your chart further makes my argument.
Hell, I can accurately predict with 100% certainty that oil supply will not be able to meet current demand once global population reaches 2 trillion,
But that ignores technological advancement, alternatives, solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, coal and Nat gas that are going to provide substantial relief on demand in the immediate future.
Meanwhile, we fund the executive/ prop trading bonus pool at Goldman Sachs every time we fill 'er up.
Are Oil Prices Relatively Cheap???
Displaying entries 1 - 20 of 27 forum posts in total
12
Since 2008, oil prices are dismal relative to equities.
Since 2000, oil prices are insane relative to equities.
This chart from the Economist should answer the question & also provide food for thought on how consumer credit acts as a buffer - until now -
Since 2000, oil prices are insane relative to equities.
This chart from the Economist should answer the question & also provide food for thought on how consumer credit acts as a buffer - until now -
That is only because US equities have been flat since 2000 (what you say isn't true if we go back to 1996 or 1994 for example). Besides, how has oil done compared to other commodities or risk-assets in general since 2000 (only looking at equities can be misleading)?
My point is this. I've heard so many people acting like oil is in some kind of bubble over the past year, but it clearly isn't unless of course risk-assets in general are in a bubble.
My point is this. I've heard so many people acting like oil is in some kind of bubble over the past year, but it clearly isn't unless of course risk-assets in general are in a bubble.
Sub, "what you say isn't true...." connotes an adverse interpretation, or a hostile stance.
Let's not be adverse, let's look at data, do some math, and see where it takes us..
The charts say everything, the only thing I "said" was that oil relative to stocks is insanely high since 2000, and it is - oil was about $30 a barrel, it's now 3X that price.
The S&P was right about where it is now, at a ratio of greater than 3 to 1, I guess I feel safe using the word "insane", FYI, wages are actually down 6% over the same period, that's even more "insane".
Bubbles don't happen over periods of weeks, months or even years, they occur over decades
Oil is in a bubble relative to wage growth, that's a basic tenet of supply/demand, but even in recent years wages/income have fallen more than oil has since your referenced 2006.
Oil isn't the only problem, but I'll use reference to other expenses to arouse the question of price V real supply/demand.
I refuse to get into a debate over semantics about foolish or lazy American consumers, bad policies, monetary, Austrian or Keynes, left or right.
I just want to crunch numbers...and see where it takes us in terms of supply/demand and consumer buying power.
Here's a couple more charts -
Consumer debt (though down recently, still staggering)
-
And, healthcare costs (there are obviously numerous others expenses, but I don't want to crowd the page)
Let's not be adverse, let's look at data, do some math, and see where it takes us..
The charts say everything, the only thing I "said" was that oil relative to stocks is insanely high since 2000, and it is - oil was about $30 a barrel, it's now 3X that price.
The S&P was right about where it is now, at a ratio of greater than 3 to 1, I guess I feel safe using the word "insane", FYI, wages are actually down 6% over the same period, that's even more "insane".
Bubbles don't happen over periods of weeks, months or even years, they occur over decades
Oil is in a bubble relative to wage growth, that's a basic tenet of supply/demand, but even in recent years wages/income have fallen more than oil has since your referenced 2006.
Oil isn't the only problem, but I'll use reference to other expenses to arouse the question of price V real supply/demand.
I refuse to get into a debate over semantics about foolish or lazy American consumers, bad policies, monetary, Austrian or Keynes, left or right.
I just want to crunch numbers...and see where it takes us in terms of supply/demand and consumer buying power.
Here's a couple more charts -
Consumer debt (though down recently, still staggering)
-
And, healthcare costs (there are obviously numerous others expenses, but I don't want to crowd the page)
I like arguing with you Incubus, so please forgive me if I sounded too hostile. (Admit it, you enjoy arguing too...)
Anyways, you mention a couple stats relating to US consumer demand in general, but I guess the main thing I would say is that oil prices are driven by global demand from consumers and industry and not just by US consumers.
But here is the point I'm trying to make in this forum. So many analysts, pundits, and so called experts have acted as if oil prices are in a bubble every time they have risen over the last several years, even though these increases in prices seem to be associated with increases in the prices of risk assets in general.
In other words, if oil is overpriced right now, then one of the following must be true. Either oil has been overpriced for at least a decade (I don't think for a moment that this is true), or risk assets in general are overpriced.
Anyways, you mention a couple stats relating to US consumer demand in general, but I guess the main thing I would say is that oil prices are driven by global demand from consumers and industry and not just by US consumers.
But here is the point I'm trying to make in this forum. So many analysts, pundits, and so called experts have acted as if oil prices are in a bubble every time they have risen over the last several years, even though these increases in prices seem to be associated with increases in the prices of risk assets in general.
In other words, if oil is overpriced right now, then one of the following must be true. Either oil has been overpriced for at least a decade (I don't think for a moment that this is true), or risk assets in general are overpriced.
BTW. I don't actually see oil prices as being cheap (I do like flashy titles), but rather as being relatively fairly priced.
I know why we see things differently, I provide for a family, have been providing long enough to see the changes in staples over the years, firsthand.sublimevotum said: BTW. I don't actually see oil prices as being cheap (I do like flashy titles), but rather as being relatively fairly priced.
For reasons I mention above, the advent of the CFMA has created a rift between real supply/demand, unless you're convinced the timing of oil's rate of surge since 2000 is purely coincidental to the CFMA, and global demand has tripled (it hasn't) or supply has diminished (it hasn't)
In 2008 -
Demand was down, supply was up, yet prices went from $60 to $145 a barrel, that's not supply/demand. (I already explained the relationship to the CDO market, banks timing & effects on buying power to push defaults, collect on short positions as a result...etc)
You caught the gist, but I don't think it's been a decade, just since 2007 when oil was @ $60.sublimevotum said:In other words, if oil is overpriced right now, then one of the following must be true. Either oil has been overpriced for at least a decade (I don't think for a moment that this is true), or risk assets in general are overpriced.
The premise above, to link prices to consumer buying power (debt/wages), is only food for thought to look into what may come down, not just oil - unless you're of the thinking that wages (or entitlements) will come up, there is no home equity or credit to bail us out for consumption this time, no wages either.
Look at the chart of consumer debt, factor government debt/spending, in terms of the fact that right now 35% of all wages are entitlement spending in one form or another.
I specifically stated above that " Oil is in a bubble relative to wage growth, that's a basic tenet of supply/demand "
If you also look at a chart of MEW (mortgage equity withdrawals) and ICI retail fund outflows over the last decade, there's even greater food for thought.
I'm a family man, I tend to take notice of price changes on things a young fella like yourself won't.
I.E. grain prices - a decade ago I could stock up on pasta @ $0.50 a LB, last week a box of spaghetti was ranging from $1.25 to $1.80.
Coffee has gone from $3 a 2lb can to $11
That sounds silly, until you factor the huge increase in costs collectively, prices relative to wages over the last decade are insane, as with wheat, cocoa, corn, and meats, it all adds up.
I'm not saying it's 100% speculation, some is real supply/demand, but, As futures speculation drives costs up for a variety of staples, my wife and I have to trim the budget, drive less, and maybe a "staycation" this year.
We represent an accurate cross section of the middle class.
I'll agree with you that for the US consumer, oil seems expensive. But being expensive is very different than being overpriced.
And frankly a lot of things have changed since 2000. You mention that global demand hasn't "tripled" and supply hasn't "diminished," but this isn't any kind of real analysis or evidence whatsoever. This totally ignores the fact that demand and supply dynamics have certainly changed since 2000. For one, demand has increased by about 1.8% per year while supply growth has steadily declined over roughly the last decade.
Again, I tend to see more assumptions (and emotions) rather than facts when people talk about oil prices.
And frankly a lot of things have changed since 2000. You mention that global demand hasn't "tripled" and supply hasn't "diminished," but this isn't any kind of real analysis or evidence whatsoever. This totally ignores the fact that demand and supply dynamics have certainly changed since 2000. For one, demand has increased by about 1.8% per year while supply growth has steadily declined over roughly the last decade.
Again, I tend to see more assumptions (and emotions) rather than facts when people talk about oil prices.
Technologies are dramatically increasing supply & reserves, Horizontal drilling magnifies the amount of oil a single rig can produce by up to 10X, older locations can be re-drilled.
That said, demand has nowhere near tripled in the last 15 years, not even double over the last 30 years -
Source: EIA
Global proven oil reserves (not production)
And, then we have to wonder what's going o w/price?
Price V inventories 2006 - 2009
That said, demand has nowhere near tripled in the last 15 years, not even double over the last 30 years -
Source: EIA
Global proven oil reserves (not production)
And, then we have to wonder what's going o w/price?
Price V inventories 2006 - 2009
Some consideration should be given on prices to extract as well as process crude. Environmental health and safety regulations and spotlight has increased substantially since the 70s in the US. I believe in other countries this hadn't started until this last decade (00s). Now it is no longer acceptable to have people maimed and killed and the environments destroyed in even third world countries. I assume this has added dramatic costs to production. I however lack real data to back this up. I will say that chemical production in the 70s vs the present in the US is night and day.
Sir Bakesalot (sorry, couldn't resist),
The oil minister of Saudi Arabia says the price of production is less than $11 a barrel, Saudi makes more than enough money to subsidize it's entire economy at $55 a barrel.
Unless the Saudi's are coo-coo for coa-coa puffs, I can't see why they want to talk down the price when they make more if the price is high.
The Saudi's concern is long term demand destruction, the U.S. has more N-gas reserves than Saudi has oil...food for thought on the long term price of oil, not to mention the ongoing public attention and political pressure on speculation.
Disclosure, I'm long NG (UNL, less roll decay than UNG), not because I'm convinced I'm right, but because as long as Nat-G is low, the money I get back in the utility bill and the materials it effects is well worth the hedge.
The oil minister of Saudi Arabia says the price of production is less than $11 a barrel, Saudi makes more than enough money to subsidize it's entire economy at $55 a barrel.
Unless the Saudi's are coo-coo for coa-coa puffs, I can't see why they want to talk down the price when they make more if the price is high.
The Saudi's concern is long term demand destruction, the U.S. has more N-gas reserves than Saudi has oil...food for thought on the long term price of oil, not to mention the ongoing public attention and political pressure on speculation.
Disclosure, I'm long NG (UNL, less roll decay than UNG), not because I'm convinced I'm right, but because as long as Nat-G is low, the money I get back in the utility bill and the materials it effects is well worth the hedge.
Ha, that would be my brother, who was about 12 when he decided that alias. $11 a barrel i Saudi Arabia doesn't really surprise me. I wonder what it was 15 years ago, probably less than $2. There is a reason those saudi princes bathe in gold (bought buy black gold). I highly doubt though that barrels coming out of the gulf, Canada, or elsewhere are as cheap as $11 to produce. According to some at the time, the Iraq War was only for oil... I am still not seeing those "benefits." This doesn't reflect any opinion I have or had on that war, just my opinion of that opinion.incubus said: Sir Bakesalot (sorry, couldn't resist),
The oil minister of Saudi Arabia says the price of production is less than $11 a barrel, Saudi makes more than enough money to subsidize it's entire economy at $55 a barrel.
Unless the Saudi's are coo-coo for coa-coa puffs, I can't see why they want to talk down the price when they make more if the price is high.
The Saudi's concern is long term demand destruction, the U.S. has more N-gas reserves than Saudi has oil...food for thought on the long term price of oil, not to mention the ongoing public attention and political pressure on speculation.
Disclosure, I'm long NG (UNL, less roll decay than UNG), not because I'm convinced I'm right, but because as long as Nat-G is low, the money I get back in the utility bill and the materials it effects is well worth the hedge.
I definitely think natural gas will gain more use. Not sure how soon that would be for things like cars. The major issue I see is inferior energy density of natural gas. I believe natural gas needs to be pressurized to about 3500 psi to give the equivalent (in terms of energy/volume) to that of gasoline. Obviously this presents some danger considerations at the pump and especially in impact situations. (I'm envisioning an old lady trying to handle a pump hose at 3500 psi) Also compressors to that pressure aren't the cheapest things in the world. But if the price is right someone will work it out.
I'm actually hoping for gas prices to rise, but just for this summer, so that boat prices can drop and I can get a good deal come fall/winter. Sorry to everyone else.
Remember in the Summer of 2008, the ""Drill baby drill" frenzy?BAKES THE GREAT said:
...... I highly doubt though that barrels coming out of the gulf, Canada, or elsewhere are as cheap as $11 to produce. According to some at the time, the Iraq War was only for oil... I am still not seeing those "benefits." This doesn't reflect any opinion I have or had on that war, just my opinion of that opinion.
If we couldn't produce oil at a competitive rate, it would be pointless not to just get oil from the Saudi's in the first place.
At the time we were sold the idea that it was OPEC that was causing the price surge.
It wasn't, it was the CFMA allowing unregulated trading in futures, unless, despite the charts I posted above, you somehow believe oil was fairly priced at $145 that Summer.
The power to manipulate & control commodity or energy pricing is virtual omnipotence, politically, economically and financially.
You can alter public opinion on a political/presidential election, or you can intentionally restrict disposable incomes to effect an outcome, say, in mortgage defaults to collect on short positions, the possibilities are endless.
1 gal of RBOB is about 114K BTU, vs 1 CF of atmospheric NG @ 1K BTU,BAKES THE GREAT said:
I definitely think natural gas will gain more use. Not sure how soon that would be for things like cars. The major issue I see is inferior energy density of natural gas. I believe natural gas needs to be pressurized to about 3500 psi to give the equivalent (in terms of energy/volume) to that of gasoline. Obviously this presents some danger considerations at the pump and especially in impact situations. (I'm envisioning an old lady trying to handle a pump hose at 3500 psi) Also compressors to that pressure aren't the cheapest things in the world. But if the price is right someone will work it out.
You don't need LNG, just CNG (at maybe 100+ PSI), there are already service stations right now that offer CNG, and, as you point out on another thread, it's not unfeasible to imagine residential compressors that tie into standard gas mains and trickle pump to a storage tank.
At a current $2 MMBTU price for Natgas, and a ridiculous over supply of the stuff that ensures a continued low price, a 114Kbtu per RBOB gallon equivalence to NG comes to $0.23 cents.
I'm sure my math is crude, or the NG equivalence requires more BTU, but for reference -
If you drive 20K miles p/year @ 20MPG, you save $3500 each year, the price of retrofits, generator or compressor paid at year one, maybe two..
Incubus. You keep showing some great charts, but it seems like you are not looking at the big picture.
First you show charts relating to US consumers, when oil is driven by global issues.
Now you show a chart showing demand steadily going up just like I said its been doing. So thank you. Like your chart shows Incubus, demand has been steadily increasing, and this trend is expected to continue at an increasing rate IMO.
Your next chart of "proven oil reserves" is not a direct reflection of actual supply by any means (its a piece of the puzzle).
You can argue that oil may have been overpriced back in 2008, but you still haven't provided any evidence that oil is overpriced now or that its been consistently overpriced for a decade (like you asserted).
First you show charts relating to US consumers, when oil is driven by global issues.
Now you show a chart showing demand steadily going up just like I said its been doing. So thank you. Like your chart shows Incubus, demand has been steadily increasing, and this trend is expected to continue at an increasing rate IMO.
Your next chart of "proven oil reserves" is not a direct reflection of actual supply by any means (its a piece of the puzzle).
You can argue that oil may have been overpriced back in 2008, but you still haven't provided any evidence that oil is overpriced now or that its been consistently overpriced for a decade (like you asserted).
"World crude oil consumption by year"
Sub, the charts above are ~ GLOBAL~ supply & demand, hence the title "World crude oil consumption by year"
Global reserves have increased more than double since 1980, from 600B to near 1,400B- an increase of 230%
Global demand has only increased from 60M to 85M since 1980.- an increase of 42%
Yes, demand is steadily increasing, the point was to illustrate that contrary to your statement "... And frankly a lot of things have changed since 2000. You mention that global demand hasn't "tripled" and supply hasn't "diminished," but this isn't any kind of real analysis or evidence whatsoever. "
Demand has NOT "tripled", not even doubled over the last 30 years ~ never mind the last decade ~, reserves are at a historic high, increasing at a greater rate than demand - ESPECIALLY with the advent of drilling technologies.
Horizontal drilling increases extraction/output by up to 10X per site.
So why is oil $100+/barrel when it was $30 ten years ago?
Again, I could understand maybe $60, but a tripling in price when the supply/demand curve doesn't match it is senseless.
The ONLY potentially valid argument for higher prices is Bakes comment on extraction/drilling costs, but the Saudi's are openly stating they have no problem selling it to us @ $55 a barrel while still laughing all the way to the bank.
This leaves us to scrutinize speculation's affects on price, the Saudi Oil minister has made his intentions to fight further price bubbles very clear.
The Saudi's possess 20% of the worlds oil reserves.
Incubus said, "
For reasons I mention above, the advent of the CFMA has created a rift between real supply/demand, unless you're convinced the timing of oil's rate of surge since 2000 is purely coincidental to the CFMA, and global demand has tripled (it hasn't) or supply has diminished (it hasn't)."
My point in mentioning that demand hasn't "tripled" is that your analysis, as quoted above, is totally ridiculous.
Again, just looking at reserves is totally ridiculous. You are ignoring other supply dynamics as well as what the market is expecting going forward.
The US dollar has weakened (oil prices aren't so bad in some other countries), global supplies will certainly decrease going forward (we can only argue about the timing), and oil demand is expected to increase significantly going forward.
My point in mentioning that demand hasn't "tripled" is that your analysis, as quoted above, is totally ridiculous.
Again, just looking at reserves is totally ridiculous. You are ignoring other supply dynamics as well as what the market is expecting going forward.
The US dollar has weakened (oil prices aren't so bad in some other countries), global supplies will certainly decrease going forward (we can only argue about the timing), and oil demand is expected to increase significantly going forward.
As you can see from this chart, non-energy commodities have risen just like oil has, and the evidence suggests that it is due to changes in demand. Oil has risen in conjunction with other commodities (and to a lesser extent with the stock market). The idea that oil is overpriced is not based on fact at all. Also, the only reason that oil has risen even more than other commodities is because of its (quite) higher risk, the fact that oil supplies are expected to go down (we only have so much oil, unlike some other commodities like agricultural goods), and oil demand is expected to grow at an increasing rate going forward.
While these charts are old, they are still pretty accurate today.
The sourced article for your first chart is from Business insider, - " Here's More Proof That The Fed Didn't Create The Commodity Boom "
Hate to burst bubbles, but the chart further supports my assertion of speculation.
You're using global industrial production's increase by 40% over the last decade to justify oil's price increase of over 300%.
It supports my argument, it also supports Rex Tilllerson's testimony that oil is over-priced by $40 a barrel from speculation, the math fits perfectly.
Global industrial production is only up 40% on YOUR chart, the non-energy CRB lags it by 5%, which is easily expected through production efficiency and technological improvement.
The charts I posted are right to the source, oil supply/demand NOT projected/speculated supply/demand, but if you insist, your chart further makes my argument.
Hell, I can accurately predict with 100% certainty that oil supply will not be able to meet current demand once global population reaches 2 trillion,
But that ignores technological advancement, alternatives, solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, coal and Nat gas that are going to provide substantial relief on demand in the immediate future.
Meanwhile, we fund the executive/ prop trading bonus pool at Goldman Sachs every time we fill 'er up.
Incubus said, "You're using global industrial production's increase by 40% over the last decade to justify oil's price increase of over 300%."
That is right. Since 2000, oil has indeed tripled, non-energy commodities have risen 150%, and industrial production has risen 40%.
Do you really think that the relationship between output and prices is linear??
And your charts were focused on the US consumer (are you saying they weren't?), which is only a piece of the global puzzle.
That is right. Since 2000, oil has indeed tripled, non-energy commodities have risen 150%, and industrial production has risen 40%.
Do you really think that the relationship between output and prices is linear??
And your charts were focused on the US consumer (are you saying they weren't?), which is only a piece of the global puzzle.
Displaying entries 1 - 20 of 27 forum posts in total
12
You must Log In to post to this forum.
Not a member? Register Now to …
- See what other traders are doing
- Make your own trades public
- Share your thoughts on a trade
- Join or start a group
- Connect with like-minded traders
