VintonCounty

23 Comments

    • ON: Fri Oct 10th 06:34 AM
      Commented on:
      California: Canary in the Economic Coal Mine
      Skeedaddy:
      If Californians can't save themselves, then they are not worth saving. The greedy practices you mention were in response to edicts from Congress to grant mortgages to people who could not afford them. The Federal Reserve helped by flooding America with money and credit. Don't blame your local banker, etc.; blame Congress.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri Oct 10th 06:09 AM
      Commented on:
      Why the Financial Markets Haven't Responded
      John Mason's post is rubbish. Actions are what counts. The markets evaluate government actions and judge them good or bad. The president and Congress select financial experts to head Treasury and Federal Reserve, and those experts naturally propose actions and implement actions authorized by Congress. If the president disagrees with the proposed actions, he has the responsibility and authority to block the participation of the Treasury and Treasury Secretary. If a majority of Congress disagrees, it has responsibility and sufficient authority to block both the Treasury and Fed. Note: Congress has all the power. Congress can keep all of the executive department and the Supreme Court on a short leash if it wants. Even if Bush were articulate, a rousing speech would affect markets for only about 5 minutes. Only actions matter. John Mason appears to dislike Bush and so blames him for a situation caused by the body with the most power: Congress.
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Sep 15th 14:07 PM
      Commented on:
      Buy, Sell or Hold: Garmin Defends Its Market Leadership
      If HM is so enthusiastic about GRMN, why does he own none?
      View article »
    • ON: Thu Sep 11th 02:47 AM
      Commented on:
      Halliburton at a Discount - Despite Continuously Meeting Expectations
      P/E is 12.5 for HAL and 19 for SLB. Tax may explain the difference. The effective income tax rates are 25% for HAL and 20% for SLB. The difference is likely due to domicile; HAL is incorporated in the U.S. (Delaware), and SLB is incorporated in Netherlands Antilles. U.S. tax rate of about 40% (35% fed. + state taxes) is the world's highest. For HAL to have 25% effective tax rate, it must divide itself into domestic Halliburton and foreign Halliburton; and the foreign funds must not come to the U.S. That restricts management's freedom of action. So the shadow of the IRS may be the reason for the lower P/E for HAL.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Aug 27th 19:33 PM
      Commented on:
      Integrated Oil Spin-Off Propels EnCana's Growth
      jjason: If there really is a reason, it might be that the oil sands operation needs lots of hydrocarbon energy.

      FP Trading Desk: It sounds like the joint venture will use in situ extraction. I am skeptical about in situ extraction; isn't anyone else? For just one example, what fraction of the oil is recovered? How does that compare with the alternative of surface mining, in which the "dirt" is loaded into a truck and carried to an onsite factory. I have never seen recovery data for either method. An investor should be more than curious.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Aug 27th 19:17 PM
      Commented on:
      The Economics of Political Spin
      Fitz, your hostility toward Bush is misplaced. It should be directed at Congress. Congress has all the power. It can keep the president on a short leash if it wants to. Congress can cow the Supreme Court, too. Congress has all the power, so it has responsibility for all of the federal government's actions and inactions. Don't give the president responsibility without authority. Remember: Congress has all the power.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Aug 13th 16:51 PM
      Commented on:
      A New Global Market for Natural Gas
      Each form of energy has a best use, and it is foolish to use it other ways. For example, liquid hydrocarbons are ideal for transportation. It is foolish to use any other form of energy for transportation, and in a free market liquid hydrocarbons will find their highest prices in transportation.

      For coal the best uses are generating electrical energy and making coke. For nuclear fuel the best use is generating electrical energy.

      For natural gas, the best use is space heating. To use it for electrical generation is wasteful. It is so used because governments have shackled coal and nuclear with laws and regulations. If governments did not rig the game, economic decision makers would choose coal or nuclear for most electrical generation. An investor would say, "Why should I care about that theoretical stuff?" The reason is that it will benefit future generations.
      View article »
    • ON: Sun Jul 20th 09:46 AM
      Commented on:
      Out Goes Gold Fields, In Comes Tata
      Powering a car with compressed air is impractical, as any competent mechanical engineer can deduce. If Tata is serious about that concept, they don't listen to their engineers.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Jul 2nd 16:22 PM
      Commented on:
      Minimum Wage Hikes vs. Tax Rebates - What's More Effective?
      Minimum wage, like all price controls, is harmful. It makes unemployable those not worth the minimum wage, and those worth more don't benefit. That's all anyone needs to know about that subject. Studying subsequent spending patterns is pointless, and it tells you that those studying it are bad economists.
      View article »
    • ON: Tue Jun 3rd 21:58 PM
      Commented on:
      Why Is Oil Going Up?
      Dr. No is the one who does "not take into account the mechanics of a futures driven market". That market is totally dominated by transactions in which an actual commodity is bought and sold. The other participants in futures settle their contracts with cash payments equal to the differences between contract and market prices. That is a parallel industry of side betting about what the actual commodity market prices will be. The side bets have no more effect on commodity prices than sports betting has on the scores of college football games.
      View article »
    • ON: Sat May 3rd 01:05 AM
      Commented on:
      Walter Industries a One-Stop Shop for Coal, Natural Gas and Housing
      Metallurgical coal and coking coal are the same thing.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri Apr 25th 03:36 AM
      Commented on:
      Opportunities in Natural Gas: Baker Hughes, Halliburton, Schlumberger
      Return on capital must not be defined in GAAP, because many definitions of both the numerator and denominator are used. This data on returns on capital are of little use, because it's undefined.

      Earnings yield is the inverse of P/E, but not here. So what is it?

      SLB has the advantage of a low income tax rate and the disadvantage of a small earnings yield.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri Apr 25th 03:10 AM
      Commented on:
      Consol, Synthesis Energy: Waste Coal is the Next Boom
      It sounds like U-Gas is better than sliced bread, but Wichman does not describe it or compare it to other gasification methods. He also does not explain what waste coal is and whether it currently has no value. Without that info, I suspect U-Gas is just a story to baffle politicians with bullshit.
      View article »
    • ON: Tue Apr 22nd 22:30 PM
      Commented on:
      When Will Solar Achieve Grid Parity? We're Already There!
      To Tedspick:
      I had two reasons for saying the Nature Nazis depend on computer models:
      1. Data are quite inadequate to demonstrate human effects on climate.
      2. Without a model you don't know the temperature effect of a change in CO2 concentration. I'll make just two comments on data.

      First is that accuracy is mostly terrible, and conflicting concllusions are drawn from data. Consider correlations of CO2 concentration (from ice cores) and temperature (from unreliable indirect values). Some see a correlation and say it supports the claim that increasing CO2 concentration causes increasing temperature. Others say the correlation is better with a time lag (T effect trails), supporting the view that temperature changes cause the CO2 changes.

      The other data comment is that accuracy for the last century is inadequate to support the associated claims. To detect a temperature drift of 1K/century, which the Nature Nazis claim, requires an extraordinary temperature measurement program (which did not exist). It gets worse. To detect a correlation with temperature over that 100 years requires far better accuracy, which is totally infeasible. An example of what may charitably be called inaccurate data is a comparison of surface and air temperatures. Over about the last 50 years the surface temperatures have increased, but not air temperatures (according to measured values). That is a problem for the Nature Nazis, because the greenhouse mechanism predicts the air will warm before the surface.

      To Yetiv:
      Concentrations of Hg and S in coal combustion products can be greatly reduced with "scrubbers." It's expensive, but much cheaper than removing and disposing of CO2. So, to a first approximation, coal is the cheapest way to make electrical energy in absence of onerous CO2 regulation.

      The result of a scientific study is a conclusion, not a belief. Believing pertains to religion. You may have "studied the science", but it did not influence your attitude.

      You emphasize that SCE chose PV generation. I'll comment. Regulated utilities typically must get approval for any major capital expenditure from a state utility commission. Along with the approval, the commission promises to allow electric rates sufficient for a guaranteed return on invested capital (ROIC). If the CA commission approved PV (which surely it did), SCE would not care whether PV is cost-competitive. So SCE's choice might only indicate CA goofiness.

      To all:
      This discussion has two ethical questions hiding in plain view.

      1. Is government justified in forcing us to use a particular type of electrical power generation? The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution both say the national government cannot impose such political choices on us. Congress routinely ignores those stuffy documents, of course. Those who care about this should understand how things work. The subsidy on PV generation, for example, is, I think, a production tax credit. A production tax credit may not literally be a subsidy, but it distorts the market like one. Also, Congress tends to use sneaky methods. If there are choices A and B, and Congress wants us to use A; it may achieve that result by imposing burdens on use of B. Taxing CO2 emissions, if it happens, would be such a burden.

      2. Is it moral to advocate (mandatory) government actions that make Americans less prosperous? Friends of farmers recently did that by mandating use of ethanol in motor fuels and precluding any source but American corn. The propaganda drums are beating to change American opinions about electrical energy, so be alert.
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Apr 21st 16:41 PM
      Commented on:
      Aurelian and Corriente Shares Down as Equador Suspends Mining Exploration
      This illustrates the main risk to mining companies: thieving governments. Mining companies must operate where the minerals are, and they must invest much capital in mine development. If the host government then imposes high royalty/tax or seizes majority interest at dictated price, the miner can't afford to leave. All it can do is avoid that country in the future, but that can cause missed opportunities. A country's government can swing from honest to pirates to honest again to pirates again during the long lifetime of a mine. This can make a small miner insolvent. Conclusion: big miners are safer.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»