Posted on 07/26/2008 5:28:44 AM PDT by decimon
Exactly zero. However, I’ve advised MO and IL farmers and elevators on marketing for about 35 years.
Ok you proved you can parrot horseshit. The real question is whether you can understand the nonsense that you just posted.
Of course in any market whenever a trade clears there is a seller for every buyer and vice versa. That is almost a meaningless triviality.
What it does not do is tell you who the sellers are and who the buyers are. If you have a lot of long side only index speculators who are accumulating growing contract positions in time, then hedgers (producers) are selling ever larger positions to speculators rather than hedgers on the other side, i.e. genuine consumers.
What that means is that supply is being taken out of the market. Producers can sell for future delivery to speculators rather than into the market. Since contracts are turned over, actual delivery is forestalled, and so speculators are, indeed, affecting actual supply and actual demand.
Keep you eye on the ball and not on what idiot college professors say.
It is clear that no one has thought about the market dynamics of ever growing long side positions. An exponentially growing long side futures position, means a growing quantity of stuff sold forward that does not have to be delivered because the contracts just get turned over. It compounds the price increases that happen when actual demand is growing by compounding it with artificial demand. Of course some day it must all comes crashing down, just like Greenspan’s debt bubble. But that had a 20 year run.
The gasoline that has been coming to market the past 13 weeks was in fact purchased and processed between 3-6 months ago.... and has little to do with the falling demand of the past few weeks.
That gallon of gasoline you purchased this morning was purchased at a price certain a few months back.
Yes, day-to-day fluxuations in demand do have a slight psychological effect on today's prices, but the cost of the product has mostly to do with the price that product was bought at.
I was talking about crude oil, not a refined product.
" In those two weeks prices (for) crude dropped $24-$25 a barrel."
The reference to the 13 week decline in demand is for crude. There is no price "before" that, so to speak.
I should choose to believe some flamethrower on the internet. Got it.
Glad to see the prof’s at my Alma Mater are still clueless idiots.....if it was a supply and demand issue we would have lines at the gas pumps driving prices up....best I can see here in Texas...no lines. Drill Now....Drill Here...Pay Less
If it's not supply and demand then drilling more won't have you paying less.
Nope. You should exercise the grey matter between your left and right ears. Before it is too late.
Repent, ye sinner.
I turn into a pillar of salt for not accepting your insulting, self-assured utterances?
Ok. Don’t use your god-given brain for all I care. It’s a free country.
You can't even shame or dare folks into using their own brains.
Not agreeing with you is not using your brain. Got it.
Nope. Not using your brain is not using your brain. Parroting horseshit and ending up with nothing more than a bad taste in your mouth and a squawk that wouldn’t fool Inspector Clouseau is not using your brain.
You offer nothing but bile and invective.
You can say what you like about me, but your invective ad hominem is not an argument in defense of the fact that this idiot professor has proffered an intellectually empty argument in support of commodities index speculation. His arguments have all the sophistication of Monica Lewinsky. If you had a brain you would either supply the missing arguments or stop defending this idiot. Instead, you do the opposite on both points.
Gee, but you are an obsessive troll.
I don't know what is an "invective ad hominem" but anyone can see that the invectives and ad hominem attacks were yours. Up to a point, that is. At some point it becomes necessary to return fire.
And it's odd that you would give a reply accusing me of "invective ad hominems" while liberally indulging same.
Well guess which way it is turning out, now that we are down a couple of trillion and counting, more dependent than ever on imported oil, and no prospect in sight for energy autonomy any time soon. In fact we might be facing the prospect of not being able to raise the capital to invest in domestic energy supply. These boyz and girlz were focused on financial shenanigans for a quick kill rather than patient capital to improve the productive capabiities of the country. Hell. They and apparently folks like you don't even know the difference.
And idiot sycophants like you join in the chorus of the now discredited "experts" and try to cheer the popped bubble on screaming "free markets" etc. etc.
First learn latin. Second trace back to your irrelevant and provocative post #17 in response to my post #14, which is a well informed point, even if you are clueless about what it is.
The entire issue of commodities speculators in the congress revolves around what to do about long side only index speculators. Go f'in look it up if you don't understand what I am talking about. This idiot missed all of that unless he is just a shilling shyster trying to mislead everyone. So, you, either not understanding the issue try to defend him, or you do understand the underlying issue, and are a shilling shyster like this idiot professor. Knowing hundreds of professors professionally, I will give him the benefit of the moral doubt and presume that he just missed the whole point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.