dcb

Why Is Congress Agnostic About Natural Gas?

With Lobby money does the market transition naturally? When coal companies do not have to pay for the damage done to the environment and get a free ride, is the market really working? When coal gets 400 billion in hand out with the new carbon legislation is the market moving naturally. I think if we really had a free market we'd have more natural gas already. Look what is going on in europe with NG, china is making huge deals with australia regarding NG. Why aren't we. Maybe the market can't move naturally because of lobby money, and senators from coal states ensuring that the market does not move naturally.


On Sep 09 04:25 PM doubleguns wrote:

> If we use our own gas instead of imported oil I would be happy. TOO
> MUCH MONEY LEAVES THIS COUNTY EVERY DAY ON OIL.
>
> Spend it here even if the price gets on par with oil it is money
> spent at home. Electric cars will off set some demand and this wont
> happen overnight. Yes nuke would be a great addition but this administration
> has their head in a dark moist hole between their butt cheeks and
> they have no intention of fixing the problem

Cramer's Lightning Round - What to Buy on a Housing Turn Around (6/2/09)

Jim cramer is part of the goldman group. so he has been conditioned to tell you to stay away from something when he wants to take a position, then tell you to buy when you should be selling. that way you may get the chump change profits and the players keep the rest.

The Next Bull Market Is 4-8 Months Away

I think the term bull is short for bull shi....

The Next Bull Market Is 4-8 Months Away

I agree I'd like another big sell off so I can have a nice entry, but that doesn't mean I would stay in m position if i had nice gains. that makes no sense.


On May 26 04:53 AM ValueInvestor88 wrote:

> I am so happy when people are selling their stock!!! I already load
> in almost 75% of my portfolio in stock since last 2 months. Hope
> the sell off on March can happen again as my 25% cash can be used!!!!

Why You Should Stick With the Dollar and the U.S.

The perverse thing is each tax dollar I spend propping up the financial system in the untied states causes more and more people to flee dollar (united states assets). This is our governments idea of money well spent. The insanity of continuing this (because of lobby money), proves the american empire is over. when our government would rather throw money at the political connected while rome is burning we know we are done. We can't even get our act together when it is a matter of life and death.

More proof of this in the KBR contacts in the Iraq War. Our own contractors will short change the American troops resulting in additional deaths if it means some extra bucks for their own companies and their CEO's. Remember dick Chaney (the great patriot and former VP) was the head of this company. Our own VP instills a corporate culture where american lives and american soldiers lives are less impt than profits. This man became the VP of the United states. No, our system is working just fine.

Why You Should Stick With the Dollar and the U.S.

Dude, the data just does not support your argument. I understand the emotional reaction to the idea of one's country going down the tubes, but staying in china 10 years made you good money. staying in the us market hasn't.

from the market peak in october (2007 to the bottom around march 9th you would see that ewz, veu, s&P had all dropped about 65% or so(all markets equalized) since the rebound many foreign stocks has doubled the performance of the US.

High levels of savings mean large amounts of capital to invest in future growth. high levels of consumer consumption just mean more garbage in the end. this is easily accepted macro theory, and many studies show how savings get invested and enhance future growth.

High levels of savings means more to spend in future, high levels of debts means less to spend in future. We spent in past and now will save, they saved in past and have money to spend. do not make the mistake of assuming the future must look like the past. it doesn't, and likely wont.
But hey, if you were roman talking about the decline of the roman empire didn'[t make you popular, or get you elected. It didn't stop it. I would add that the decline of the empire was hastened in expensive foreign conflicts and when decisions were more based on "politics" that merit. (think our current financial bailout strategy, and how it enriches those who caused it and have been giving money to congress).

The american purchasing power has been in decline for 30 years. when did you think taking on that debt to maintain living standards was actually going to catch up with us. did you think it could go on forever. But, once more you don't get elected telling people the truth about their future lifestyle. you get elected telling people the future looks bright and "yes we can". While at the same time you enact policies to ensure that we can't and put the same old people in power. you may want to read this if you think what I am saying isn't supported by data.

buffalobeast.com/136/C...

When the engine of the world economy runs out of gas, what happens when those with the gas (china, countries with savings) decide not to give it anymore. the engine stops. why should they keep giving us money to buy things when they can use it to buy their own.

Why You Should Stick With the Dollar and the U.S.

Once our currency collapses foreign investors will flock to the country to buy up cheap assets. you just don't want to be holding them until that happens. the same way you didn't want to hold an emerging market currency while the global finaincial system was in danger of collapsing. When things got cheap enough money flowed into Iceland. Do you want to hold icelandic currency before that? You keep your dollars, I'll keep my other currencies and when the value of your dollar drops enough I'll buy your assets with my other currency that has increased in value. You realize that is essentially what you are advising people to do. :-)


On May 24 05:37 PM cameroni wrote:

> We all know of course that the US is a major consumer economy and
> a great deal of domestic activity is dependent on consumption. We
> cannot forget thought that the US is still a manufacturing powerhouse
> and goods are shipped around the world in good times and bad. I do
> not see the dollar collapsing as many predict. Quite the contrary,
> via devaluation the US will in effect draw in capital and foreign
> investment as the opportunity to buy quality US assets becomes irresistable.
> A point will be reached when foreign investors will look seriously
> at bargains as they go on the chopping block. And not necessarily
> to repackage and move to overseas locations.
>
> Cheap labor is simply not able to fill all the specialized needs
> and demands that only a well educated and organized population can
> provide. I am also referring to a properly functioning Judiciary,
> government agencies and the plethora of private sector services that
> support so many great industries, Apple and Boeing as only two examples.
>
>
> The dollar will devalue only to the point where excess is cleansed
> from the system and market forces can start to assert themselves.
> The US is a good buy at all times but it will be a real bargain sooner
> than we expect. I expect a real recovery will take a decade but the
> US cannot be counted out of the action yet. It simply has too much
> going for it in a thousand ways that the rest of the world still
> wishes to emulate and own a piece of.
>
> Perhaps the biggest risk is the loss of prestige as foreigners flush
> with cash start to buy up some of the best and brightest companies
> we have. We need this correction though. We need it because we are
> not competitive enough right now. Coming back to earth may be a
> little painful but it will payoff in the end.
>
> We could not have carried on with the economies trajectory of two
> years ago. That was unsustainable on every level. The bubble had
> to burst and now it is time to pick up the pieces and start rebuilding.

Why You Should Stick With the Dollar and the U.S.

For those who believe this post I would send you to the baseline scenario web site and read the article in the atlantic by simon johnson (former head IMF). One factor to understand is that there are two types of corruption. in Russia we have what I would call overt corruption. the type of thing that gets you in jail here. In the us we have sot corruption. In this "legal" process in the US, which doesn't merit moral outrage here< the political process is corrupted by the influence of money on the legislative process. The net effect is basicly the same. I am sorry I do not have the link anymore. While Russia ranked very high for the first type of corruption, the us was one of the world leaders in the second type.

The clearest evidence is simply AIG. the bonus money wasn't allowed until the white house called Dodd and had it given. we could used the company to get money to godlman et al without the oversight restrictions of Tarp. Now they will repay what they got using the money we got to them via a back door. While naked shorting is against the law, the SEC didn't enforce and instead of getting a bribe up front they/ or their family get jobs in the industry when their time in the SEC is over with. One of Barney Franks's top Guys just got a job with Goldman. The bribe is still a bribe, it is just the order of payment has been changed in the US system.

A Natural Gas Centric Strategic Long-Term Comprehensive Energy Policy

If it is logical and makes good policy I can assure you the vested interests will kill it. Or they will kill it so they can buy it up then adopt it (is that what is going on with natural gas now)

Stick with Gold and the Oil Stocks

I disagree with the keep with gold. As the market stabilizes and currencies in other countries stabilize they will see their gold holdings because their currency is rising. this will drop gold and the dollar together. if you are looking for the inflation trade it is in materials because this has been beaten down.

Why Is Oil Trading at $53 When Supply and Demand Is So Bearish?

There is a differrence between a critical thinker who has an idealogy already in place and then packs and chooses data that he likes. And someone who looks at the data and then males an opinion. I can tell you are the former. Even if you support a right wing agenda, Rush distorts and lies about the information he passes on and is not very reliable. Find someone who at least has a degree of credability. Lastly, Rush himself will admit he is an entertainer. Have you read interviews from him. He knows a lot of what he says is BS, but his goal is to get listeners and advertising money so he can make more money. He is fairly honest about it, and when he says things like this he comes across as someone likable. The problem is that people actually listen to him and think he's telling the truth. At least he knows he isn't.


On Mar 24 09:09 PM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> My Dear Fitz:
>
> Ah, I see. You're speaking of an accident in the Valley. That's a
> different annimal all together, because I know the land in the area
> is not generally polluted.
>
> But sadly, our rivers and lakes are in sad shape. I support a group
> in Florida that fights for cleaner lakes, rivers, and streams, but
> the radical eco-maniacs won't do that because they have a bigger
> agenda to accomplish with getting "global warming" legislation passed.
>
>
> Hey Fitz, why don't you get on the subject of cleaning up our highways
> and rivers, et al. I'll be with you on that, but just don't do it
> on this site. This is an investing site, you know?
>
> By the way, who was it that created the TN Valley Power system? One
> of your heroes, no doubt.
>
> I'll agree with you that cancer will continue to increase (as it
> has for the last eighty years), but I don't agree with you at all
> that CO2 or accidental spills is what's causing it. That's a tunnel-vision
> view if I've ever heard it.
>
> As far as Bush and Rush are concerned, I think Bush was a bad president,
> but we've had a line up of them since his dad took office in the
> 1980s (can you remember back that far?); and I know that you leftists
> are very jealous of Rush, because he's rich and he has your number,
> and that's a sad thing; but I've not listened to the man since the
> 1980s. I have no idea where he's coming from nowadays.
>
> Again, I think you'd be an asset to this site as a writer if you'd
> keep your eco-maniac, global-warming ideology to yourself and report
> and reason on investing ideas and companies. That might help someone.
> You're going to get the restrictive legislation you want passed.
> Don't worry.
>
> But as I've told you before, I've dealt with people who have ingrained
> themselves with your mindset all my life, and no amount of reason,
> truth, or proof will change their minds.
>
> Therefore, as you noted, you'll continue using this site as a sounding
> board for the Global Warming Hoax that you've bought into.
>
> Oh yes, here's a quotation for you that someone recently sent me.
> I'm sure you've been worried about those melting polar caps killing
> off the polar bears. Well, maybe you ought to sleep better after
> this, but I doubt it.
>
> "Polar bears are definitely not disappearing; their numbers are holding
> steady at about 24,000. That's more than there were forty years ago."
> (Ph.D. polar bear biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor, speaking at the
> Heartland International Conference on the science of "Global Warming")
>
>
> And Here Are Two New Books That Further Expose the Global Warming
> Hoax
> One
> "Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and
> Deception to Keep You Misinformed" ~ by Christopher Horner
>
> Two
> "Blue Planet in Green Shackles -- What is Endangered: Climate or
> Freedom?" ~ by Czech Republic President and rotating President of
> the European Union Vaclav Klaus
>
> The best to you and yours, Fitz. Continue writing. You have the potential
> to be a decent one, if you keep cutting down on the info and sticking
> closer to the subject, as I must say you're doing a better job of
> doing at this point.
>
> Strike out a little more of that leftist nonsense you have to toss
> in here and there in your articles, and you and all the rest of us
> will be the better for it.
>
> It's called discipline, Fitzy me boy, discipline.

Why Is Oil Trading at $53 When Supply and Demand Is So Bearish?

The us goverment is investing in the industry that is paying them the most to do so. Unfortunately the bankers are smart enough to have made friends with both the dems and the republicans. Therefore, we are screwed.


On Mar 24 10:09 AM Michael Fitzsimmons wrote:

> long_on_oil: sorry, i missed your comment as i got your name confused
> with longoil. wrt natural gas production, the nat gas E&amp;P guys
> are cutting back on production if the baker hughes rig count is any
> indication (and it is). it will take awhile for natural gas supplies
> to come down, but as i mentioned in the article, the depletion rates
> on the new shale discovery wells, are, in general higher than past
> more "conventional" gas wells. therefore, once natural gas production
> starts to decline, it will do so more rapidly in the past. when this
> decline will begin to any significant extent is a big question, but
> it will certainly be this year and from the trendlines i follow,
> may well be early summer. if the economic stimulus works, we could
> see an abrupt rise in natural gas prices on the NYMEX.
>
> StoneFox: wrt your earlier comment, i forgot to mention how insightful
> it is to notice that while the US government was investing in financial
> fraudster bonuses, the chinese were snapping up oil reserves and
> deliveries in Brazil and Russia. sad, but is shows how much more
> economic power china currently has over the US. we go broke fighting
> idiotic oil wars and ignore our natural gas reserves. meantime, china
> simply buys oil reserves and deliveries.

Why Is Oil Trading at $53 When Supply and Demand Is So Bearish?

It is often a mistake to assume markets are acting for rational reasons. I have found that I get the largest insight when I assume the opposite.

Why Is Oil Trading at $53 When Supply and Demand Is So Bearish?

The carbon tax is being removed from the Obama budget due to pressure from the coal and oil industry ( mainly coal). This tax will be used to pay for programs and wean america off high carbon fuels. Big money gets what they want again and the american people suffer. we all know the story by now. The carbon tax will remain in the budget, but the vote on it will be seperate from the rst of the budget allowing it to be killed. Of course there will be some reason for this. (hurts the economy, too expensive, etc). It is a real shame. One of these days Obama is going to have to learn to be a man and step up to the plate. this isn't the harvard debating team he is dealing with.