Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=S8WReKlUFP4

mmarshall

Didn't impress me much. He sounded to me like he was trying to put a spin on it, blaming the Fed because of money-printing, dollar-devaluation, and the lack of a gold-standard. Oil prices, from what I can tell, are simply being bid up by continually-growing demand in China and India, speculators worried about the international situation with Iran, and reaction of the oil-markets to Obama's decision to drop the Keystone pipeline, which could affect future supply in the U.S.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

so youre saying the amount of money weve printed over the last decade has nothing to do with the rising prieces of everything? So there is no side effect to printing money? It's basic economics.

Its funny how gas is cheaper today than what it was in the 1960s when you view it in terms of gold and silver. Gas isnt truly inflating, the dollar is getting weaker.

So you say increasing demand from China and India, why is OPEC revising its oil demand forecast down for 2012? Where is this increased demand? Not to mention demand in the US is down to 1997 levels. Yet the price keeps going up. Its clearly not demand.

KA8

iTrader: (1)

The more general public don't know the more I accumulate gold and silver. I won't stop stacking until 5H!T hits the fan.

Compared to gold/silver oil has actually gone down... just sayin'

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

if people think gas prices are higher now, they havent seen nothing yet. Im still surprised they can make money off $4/gallon gas. If you think about what it takes to bring it up and the huge amount of capital and equipment. I dont get how it is still just $4.

Starbucks is a hell of a lot more expensive than $4/gallon yet it doesnt require a multi billion dollar platform, pipeline, and refineries to produce it.

anthrax144

When was it "dropped"? Last I saw they agreed to begin construction on a portion of it from Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico. You mean he didn't accept the oil industry's word that there would be no ecological problems with running a pipeline through sensitive and protected habitats without further studies? I for one could care less if it costs a Canadian company hundreds of millions of additional dollars to re-route their pipeline through less sensitive areas considering Canadians don't want it going through their own environment. Go ahead and let them build their own refineries if it's that big of an issue. The US gains almost nothing in the long run from the existence of this pipeline other than being a port of call for refined oil being distributed on the world market.