Luv2Read's Account Talk

Sort by newest Sort by date
"A major new program in the recently enacted farm bill could increase taxpayer-financed payments to farmers by billions of dollars if high commodity prices decline to more typical levels, administration and congressional budget officials said" Tuesday, the Washington Post reports. "The potential costs came to light as administration officials pored over details of the 673-page, $307 billion legislation."
Click to expand...
This is pretty much the same as royalty relief that big oil gets. Oil companies pay less in royalties if the price of oil drops below a certain threshold. It's not a direct payment, just less money in federal coffers. The farm bill is proposing yet another direct-payment farm subsidy if commodity prices decline below given thresholds.

Both are taxpayer-financed giveaways to help big corporations and don't do much for the small farmers or independent oil companies. BTW, there aren't many of either one left.
 
Posted by Robo in The Bear Cave:
Support for the SPX notches down to 1383 and then 1364, with resistance now at 1410 and then 1438. Short term momentum is oversold, as well as near term momentum.

Tomorrow at 8:30 is the weekly jobless claims, and at 9:00 a speech by FED governor Kroszner.

Two days ago the market ran into the long term overhead resistance pivot at 1438. After a couple of hours of trying to break through that level it retreated.

Yesterday, the core PPI came in higher than expected, and the market retreated some more. Then today, even the FED acknowledged that inflation is rising and raised their forecast from 2% to 3%. In real consumer dollar terms, that's 4% to 6%.

The market responded by retreating even further. The SPX is now approaching an important support pivot at 1383. Should this fail to hold, as well, the uptrend is likely over. And, the entire rally from 1257 in March, until 1440 on monday, would have failed to create an impulse wave.

This would indicate that the bear market is still in force. The OEW 1383 pivot is a must watch tomorrow. Best to your trading!

MEDIUM TERM: uptrend may have topped at 1440

LONG TERM: bear market

CHARTS: http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/F...?obj=ID1606987

http://caldaroew.spaces.live.com/
Click to expand...
Oversold. Time to get back in with both feet (not just toes)..soon!:D
 
luv2read said:
Posted by Robo in The Bear Cave:Oversold. Time to get back in with both feet (not just toes)..soon!:D
Click to expand...

DDsmilie_waiting.gif
 
Birchtree said:
"Yet if you were to sit down and calmly explain to these average folk that the invasion of Iraq has secured such vast oil reserves for the United States, that they will be able to continue their prolifigate lifestyle...."

http://safehaven.com/article-10087.htm

Since you like to read...
Click to expand...

I guess it's up to me then Birch. Will say a few things and then head home. Why does the United States have any right to go outside of their borders and do whatever they please - take whatever resources they want and think nothing of the population who innocently and by nature occupy that nation??

Do we have a right to invade Iraq to take their oil??

Per global policy Bush needed the conscent of another country - EVERY MAJOR COUNTRY AROUND THE WORLD OF ANY REAL SIGNIFICANCE ALL SAID NO - BUT BUSH GAVE EVERYONE THE FINGER AND SAID "I DON'T CARE WHAT THE REST OF YOU SAY WE ARE THE USA AND WE WILL DO WHAT WE WANT" SO HE BRIBES AN UNKNOWN PLACE IN AFRICA FOR A HUGE AMOUNT TO WAGE WAR. HE USES "TERRORISM" AS THE "UNDENIABLE JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE" WHEN ALL INTELLIGENT SOURCES AND EVERYONE ELSE KNEW THEY HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11.

What is the sense in that Birch - how to we have the right to tell the whole world "Screw you - we are comming to take whatever we want - just try to stop us". Who are the real terrorists Birch? Who are the ones that go to places they don't belong without the slightest thought or care for all the suffering they inflict - so they can be comfortable taking way more than their fair share.
Do we have a right to take from other countries around the globe what should belong to them - natural resources they should benefit from first and all others second??

In other words the population in Iraq should be the ones to most benefit from their oil supplies - but that has not been the case.

The population in Iran should be the ones to most benefit from their oil supplies - BUT ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES TOOK ALL THE OIL and left the native population with nothing. They finally got tired of it and the CIA launched conflicts - then a leader in the later 1970's finally said enough is enough and got rid of the foreigners.

But we bombed them and we black balled them from world trade and taught them a "good lesson".

Ho Chi Minh's dream was to defeat South Vietnam's US endorced government and reunite the country. He hoped for reunification of Vietnam, which had fought China on and off for 1000 years, spent nearly 100 years under French rule and was occupied by Japan in WW II. So he had a dream of reuniting the county so that the people native to that region would be one country - a united people and no longer be controlled by foreigners. So how did we respond - we said, "No way in hell are you building the Ho Chi Minh trail". For every soldier the US killed on the trail it dropped, on average, 300 bombs (costing a total of $140,000). The US totally wiped out 1/4th of the population of Cambodia (a neighboring country) in a matter of like 4 or 5 years. And all for what Birch - to show that we are the USA and that gives us the right to destory any population and any nation if it suits our fancy. Who are the real terrorists Birch.

Do you know what the Vietnamese call that war? The American War

Let's go to the Mexican/Texas Border - check it out Birch.

Let's go to Latin American -- who takes all the produce and leaves the populations to work and live like slaves??

Go around the world and see how the overall global population compares to us. Largely because of us.

Why are we better than them?? What gives us the right do to whatever we want??

OK - that's a good starter... later dudes..I'm heading home

YEEE HAAAAAAAA
 
You are asking questions regarding the old Democratic Party. Beginning in the 1940s, the Democratic Party was forced to confront two of the most dangerous enemies our nation has ever faced: Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The politicians forged and conducted a foreign policy that was principled in the name of freedom. I don't believe we;ve ever taken anything from anyone. Bush saw 9/11 for what it was: a direct ideological and military attack on us and our way of life. We could have confronted the Islamist terrorists with unity and strength - but no the new donkeys had to practice partisanship which continues today. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy - not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush - activists have sucessfully pulled the Donkey Party further to the left than it has been at anypoint in the last 20 years.

I'll leave Vietnam alone for now - there'll be plenty of time to discuss that issue especially the communist part.
 
I propose the Mods rename the Daily Bulletin Board the Political Forum and get all these threads in it.

second anyone?
 
Asylum said:
I propose the Mods rename the Daily Bulletin Board the Political Forum and get all these threads in it.

second anyone?
Click to expand...
Second. And amen. This year the political discussions are going to get nothing but more intense through November 4.

Lady
 
Asylum said:
I propose the Mods rename the Daily Bulletin Board the Political Forum and get all these threads in it.

second anyone?
Click to expand...

XL-entLady said:
Second. And amen. This year the political discussions are going to get nothing but more intense through November 4.

Lady
Click to expand...
Thank you Steady, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Asylum and Lady, so moved, seconded, and I concur. Politics needs its own thread, and this isn't it...it's mine. Enough politics on this thread for now please. Let's get back to the business of making money.;):D
 
This week in Congress Exxon changed its tune...to speculation is NOT the problem..LMAO!
Oil Price Bubble?
Supply is up, demand is down, yet the price is soaring. Here's why.
Ronald Bailey | March 12, 2008

Oil prices climbed to their highest level ever, reaching over $108 per barrel this week. And Americans are feeling this price spike at the pump, with gasoline averaging $3.22 per gallon. An analysis released by the investment firm Goldman Sachs suggested that oil prices might soar to $200 per barrel. Does this make sense?
Not really. Although U.S. crude oil inventories have fallen, gasoline inventories are at their highest since March, 1993, notes Tim Evans, an energy futures analyst at Citigroup's Futures Perspective. World oil production was up 2.5 percent in the first quarter of 2008 over the same period in 2007 while world oil consumption rose by just 2 percent. In fact, world production is projected to be 3.3 percent higher in the second quarter and 4.1 percent higher in the third quarter than the same periods a year ago. On the other hand, world demand is projected to rise by just 1.6 percent over the next six months.
In fact, demand is falling in some countries. According to economist John Kemp at the commodities firm Sempra Metals, the U.S. consumed 4 percent less petroleum in January 2008 than it did the year before. Evans agrees, noting that the U.S. demand for petroleum products began falling off last July. Interestingly, this drop in U.S. oil consumption began before crude prices turned vertical and before we began to see weakness in the broader economy. Even China's thirst for oil is abating somewhat. Its demand for oil, which once rose at 10 percent per year, has now dropped to 6 percent per year. In addition, world surplus oil production capacity has gone from a very tight 1.5 million barrels per day a couple of years ago to more than 3 million barrels today, says petroleum economist Michael Lynch.
So supply is up; relative demand is down and yet, the price of oil is soaring. What's going on? Last week, Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson blamed a third of the recent run up in oil prices on the weak dollar, another third on geopolitical uncertainty, and the rest on market speculation.
Let's start with geopolitical uncertainties. Last year, oil consumers watched warily as unrest in Nigeria's oil fields, the possibility of war between the U.S. and Iran, and the antics of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez threatened to disrupt oil supplies. That analysis may have once made sense, but most of those tensions have abated in recent months. Nevertheless, it remains true that most of the world's oil is produced in volatile regions and by erratic governments, so the price of crude must still include some kind of political risk premium.
What effect does the falling dollar have on the price of crude? Most oil price contracts are denominated in dollars. The dollar has fallen in value by more than 30 percent against a Federal Reserve index of major currencies since 2002. This means that the price of imports, including oil, have gone up. To some extent, the chief of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) Chakib Khelil was correct when he said earlier this week, "What's happening in the oil market is due to the mismanagement of the U.S. economy." Continuing U.S. trade and fiscal deficits along with lower interest rates are stoking inflationary fears.
That brings us to speculation. Evans observes that since September 2003, the total number of open crude oil futures and options contracts rose by 364 percent. Meanwhile the global demand for petroleum rose by just 8.2 percent. "So the futures and options market has become more important than the physical supplies in driving the price," concludes Evans. "We are seeing investment flows into the oil market that don't have anything to do with the demand and supply of oil."
Investors are treating oil as a hedge against inflation and a falling dollar. Oil markets are part of a negative positive feedback loop in which higher oil prices contribute to higher inflation, which in turn lowers the value of the dollar, which boosts oil prices, and so forth. In other words, the oil market is coming to resemble the gold market (which has also been soaring). Evans notes that most gold traders don't even ask the question of how much gold was mined last year or how much spare gold mining capacity there is.
In the short run, oil prices are very inelastic: A large change in price produces only a small change in demand. If the price of gas goes up a dollar per gallon overnight, you still have to fill your tank to get to work. However, over the long run, consumers and producers respond to higher oil prices. For example, Americans are driving less and have switched to buying more fuel efficient cars.
Higher prices also encourage innovation. Economist Richard Rahn from the Institute for Global Economic Growth believes battery technologies are improving so rapidly that the majority of cars sold in 10 years will be all-electric. This would certainly help drive down the price of oil. Supply is also inelastic—it takes a long time to do the exploration, drilling, and refining necessary to boost production in response to higher prices. This inelasticity of demand and supply means that petroleum prices are very sensitive to relatively small changes in either. This means that prices can fall as steeply has they rose.
Whenever you begin to hear market gurus decree that "this time it's different," as we did during the dot-com bubble and the housing bubble, that's a sure sign of danger in the market. Naturally, proponents of the peak oil theory claim that the recent run up in prices is evidence that the end is nigh. Evans responds, "Fears of peak oil are what this market has in common with the 1980s, not what is different." Recall that during the "oil crisis" of the 1970s when oil prices were as high as they are today, U.S. oil consumption declined by 13 percent between 1973 and 1983. The higher prices of the 1970s led eventually to an oil glut and prices fell to about $10 a barrel by 1986.
So what will happen to oil prices over the next few years? No one is predicting $10 per barrel oil. However, once the current bubble bursts, both Evans and Lynch believe that the price of crude will settle at around $60 to $70 per barrel in the next couple of years. "It's very hard to pinpoint just how long a bubble can expand before it breaks. Getting the timing right is not an easy matter," says Evans. But he adds, "I think that this is the riskiest time to be long in crude oil since 1980."
Click to expand...
...
 
Thanks for the post L2R:

Sounds like he Lily Pad or the Fantastic Fund may be the best short term bets...As Sylvester would say...That's Diss-SpecaBullll...:D:D:D

FS
 
Asylum said:
I propose the Mods rename the Daily Bulletin Board the Political Forum and get all these threads in it.

second anyone?
Click to expand...

Last night when I wrote whatever I wrote I thought of the many underlying problems that keep our civilization in discord and basically was trying to highlight the true cause of our problems. Men have often believed by sheer nature of their gender that they are superior to women. To me that is an obvious misconception - but one that is firmly grounded in the general belief and thought of the world population. Men are in reality not superior to women. Even worse is the belief that because you were born a US Citizen that in inself makes you superior to any other person born in any other part of the entire world. To me that displays the ultimate ignorance and a truely warped and unhealthy belief system. Yet this belief grants us the power to go anywhere we want - take whatever we want - and do whatever we want to anyone and to any foreign nation. Lastly is the belief that a political system different from our own deserves nothing but disrespect and shoud be despised. China is the very best friend the USA has - no other country has done more to keep us floating. The Trillions and Trillions "we" borrow to keep things running mostly comes from them. We buy their products and use them more than any others. We are now becoming more and more a communist country in striving to provide Univeral Health Care and the Christian Religion is increasingly becoming illegal our society.

ANYWAY, I COULD GO ON AND ON. BUT AFTER I GOT HOME I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS MB - ABOUT HOW THIS IS LIKE A BIG HOME TO ALL OF US. I ESPECIALLY THOUGHT ABOUT BIRCH - HOW HE IS KIND OF A FATHER FIGURE TO EVERYONE - HE HAS PROBABLY BEEN HERE THE LONGEST. AND I REALIZED THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO AVOID CHALLENGING HIM (OR ANYONE ELSE) ON THE MB - AND THAT THE ULTIMATE GOAL SHOULD BE A HARMONY FOR EVERYONE.

So I decided the very best thing is to NOT try to challenge or outdo each other. If I prove "irrational beliefs" are the root behind the way we feel about others and the way we treat them - but I cause someone to leave - or it results in greater division between the MB members - then what did I really accomplish? NOTHING

So just to make it officially clear - I respect everyone on this BOARD and I could care less what your gender is; what your religious beliefs are; what your nationality is; or what political party (or lack of) you belong to.

I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT DISCUSSIONS ON POLITICS SHOULD BE AVOIDED ON THE MB AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD KEEP TO OURSELVES. IT IS A PERSONAL ISSUE AND EACH PERSON HAS TO DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG.
 
Steadygain said:
THE ULTIMATE GOAL SHOULD BE A HARMONY FOR EVERYONE.

So I decided the very best thing is to NOT try to challenge or outdo each other. If I prove "irrational beliefs" are the root behind the way we feel about others and the way we treat them - but I cause someone to leave - or it results in greater division between the MB members - then what did I really accomplish? NOTHING

So just to make it officially clear - I respect everyone on this BOARD and I could care less what your gender is; what your religious beliefs are; what your nationality is; or what political party (or lack of) you belong to.

I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT DISCUSSIONS ON POLITICS SHOULD BE AVOIDED ON THE MB AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD KEEP TO OURSELVES. IT IS A PERSONAL ISSUE AND EACH PERSON HAS TO DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG.
Click to expand...
Steady,

You are the man. I agree with everything you said...but I wouldn't go quite so far as to ban politics from the MB. It needs its own forum, and we just need to be respectful of others' threads and not hijack them, especially if the "owner" doesn't want politics on their thread - or feels a discussion has gone far enough. "Thread rules of respect?";)
 
luv2read said:
Steady,

I wouldn't go quite so far as to ban politics from the MB.;)
Click to expand...

Nor would I darling. I believe anyone should be able to talk about anything. Still remember fondly when a member talked about having to put his dog down and the outpouring from the others. All I'm saying is I will strive to not contribute to things that bring discord; whether it be politics, religion, or "banning bras". :rolleyes::embarrest:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk Weekly Wrap Up - Opportunistic Investors
Replies
0
Views
88
TommyIV
TommyIV
TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk AutoTracker - Up 14% for November and Clinging to the S-fund
Replies
0
Views
319
TommyIV
TommyIV
NewsFeeder
‘I feel like I've been tricked’: Some property buyers in China’s Tianjin have been wa
Replies
0
Views
666
NewsFeeder
NewsFeeder
TommyIV
  • Article Article
Winning Strategies - Lessons from Top TSP Talk AutoTracker Performers in November
Replies
0
Views
318
TommyIV
TommyIV
TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk Weekly Wrap Up
Replies
0
Views
16
TommyIV
TommyIV
Back
Top