bkinn

Trying to Outsmart This Foolish Market

rdr4,

I think the article was about STOCK PERFORMANCE, and the market. You seem to have gone off on a paraniod tangent relating to secret wars being fought by the CIA.

The author of this article is posting a list of stocks and giving a summary statement regarding the market reasoning. He is NOT attacking China. Please come out of your paranoid dillusion long enough to take a look at reality before you post a flaming comment.

Commodities: Bubble or Not?

On the other hand, if commodities are all that we hold valuable in a growing society, how much progress will we be making?

During the late 90's OPEC had a hard time keeping oil above $20 a barrel. At $120 a barrel, do you really think that our supply line has changed that drastically within a 10 year period? If we continue to live in a commodities bubble, valuation for innovation outside of commodities related interests will continue to flounder and we will suffer due to a lack in demand for technology growth. Where will that leave our economic development when one of the most valuable assets the US has traditionally offered has been innovation? Sure, innovations on greater food sources is fantastic, but I don't see a blossoming economy based soley on food nor tech based on defending our energy positions, do you?

My point here is that we need to look at history to find the answer to the question: "are we in a bubble or will this commodities based market simply continue forever?". Historically, we have always seen periods like this. Each time someone has said "yes but it is different this time because... blah blah blah". Sure there are differences .. if there weren't there would not be repeat markets. This commodities boom will pass .. just as it always has. Tech and innovation will return, just as it always has. People don't want to live their lives within a context of simply "finding enough food to eat". As humans, we always reach for more; we always have, and we always will.




On May 11 04:14 PM phillips49 wrote:

> OPEC is working very hard to produce only what is necessary to meet
> demand. They can keep oil prices at current levels for the foreseeable
> future. Some nations, including the USA have already reached peak
> oil production and output is in decline.
> The dot com bubble was based on speculation over assets and demand
> that existed only in the minds of the participants. The real estate
> bubble was based on demand for tangable but optional assets, that
> are worth only what someone else was willing to pay for them. <br/>Natural
> resources are very real needs, the demand is very real, and the supply
> is limited and controlled. It is not in the suppliers best interest
> to flood the market with product.
> There may be some froth due to speculation, but bubble, I think not.
>
> I like investments with solid demand for products that people NEED,
> where there is limited supply that provides some pricing power, with
> limited competition and high prospects for continued growth. For
> me, oil, natural gas, oil field services, pipelines and distribution,
> metals, mining, mining equipment, seed, fertilzer, weed and pest
> control all satisfy these criteria and in my opinion are the investments
> to be in for the long haul because a growing world needs these things.

Commodities: Bubble or Not?

On May 12 03:46 AM JREwing wrote:

> To those above who blame the Iraq War for high oil prices should
> read one of the pieces on STRATFOR once in a while.
>
> The real reason for the Invasion of Iraq was to make sure, that Iran
> never ever controls the oil reserves of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia
> and the Emirates.
>
> Iran obviously tries to gain influence over the countries of the
> region from Lebanon to Pakistan.
>
> If you think the Invasion of Iraq is responsible for the rise in
> oil, think how high the oil price would be, if Iran would control
> the bulk of the worlds oil reserves.
>
> Democratically elected governments don't go to war unless they absolutely
> have to, for the peoples of the world hate wars. Since the goal of
> every politician is to get reelected, it is illogical to think they
> go to war for the fun of it.

I wish I could believe that