CL hits $100 and nobody blinks?

[TonyM]

How very interesting, I can remember when $80 oil had every one in a panic and not a peep from anyone today. Does this indicate that inflation has finally dawned on the majority? Fwiw, today's price is still not a record when adjusted for inflation, it is in fact $27 shy using the figures provided by the various talking heads.

RBOB hit a record $2.57 today, shouldn't the economy be diving headfirst into a recession? What a double-edged sword eh?

Maybe the shock of the worst opening day of a New Year since 1983 has everyone's mind on other things? Energy was the upside sector today though, food for thought.

[kingfisher]

All I can say is GS didnt miss there predicition by many days!

[TonyM]

All I can say is GS didnt miss there predicition by many days!


What I'd do for a look at their energy positions;)

Now Steven Schork is saying that the floor trader that bought the $100 oil today did so just for bragging rights to be able to say that he was the first person to buy $100 oil. However, he goes on to say that he expects the price to keep on climbing and he is doubting the US refining capacity this summer.

[madcowdisease]

How very interesting, I can remember when $80 oil had every one in a panic and not a peep from anyone today. Does this indicate that inflation has finally dawned on the majority? Fwiw, today's price is still not a record when adjusted for inflation, it is in fact $27 shy using the figures provided by the various talking heads.

RBOB hit a record $2.57 today, shouldn't the economy be diving headfirst into a recession? What a double-edged sword eh?

Maybe the shock of the worst opening day of a New Year since 1983 has everyone's mind on other things? Energy was the upside sector today though, food for thought.

Tony, I have gotten to the point of dismissing the talking heads copletely. They are perma-bulls that believe the price of everything should be higher since that is sensatonalism and sensationalism is what they've built their careers on.

Everytime oil reaches a new high, nominally speaking, I hear a different inflation adjusted record high. If you wanted you could probably go back and figure it out yourself by looking at governmentally supplied data. However, I believe the inflation adjusted record has already been breached and they are simply setting new "target" so their is something to discuss in their bs roundtables.

We've had this conversation before, and nothing has changed; oil is being manipulated due to money flows. The dotcom bubble burst, and now the housing bubble has popped. Government regulation has kept traders from excessive leverage in traditional stock markets after 2000, and now they are clamping down on lenders that feed the CDO and SIV markets. The last bastion for excessive leverage and manipulation is the futures/commodity markets. I've said it before, for the first time in my life I am actually for government intervention.

[TonyM]

I agree on dismissing the talking heads. I will never agree on government intervention solving anything though. The government is only interested in staying in power and will do what it takes to do so. To quote an unsavory but witty character; Majority rule is fine as long as individual rights are considered, you can't have five wolves and one sheep deciding what's for dinner.

What you term as manipulation can more accurately be called capitalism in action; there has to be a buyer that is happy to pay the ask for it to work. One year ago today the perma-bears were weaving their hype to manipulate the price downward, there were sellers willing to hit the bid.

The energy sector has in the past year kept the markets afloat during the subprime fallout, in my estimation.

[netwrangler]

I agree on dismissing the talking heads. I will never agree on government intervention solving anything though. The government is only interested in staying in power and will do what it takes to do so. To quote an unsavory but witty character; Majority rule is fine as long as individual rights are considered, you can't have five wolves and one sheep deciding what's for dinner.

What you term as manipulation can more accurately be called capitalism in action; there has to be a buyer that is happy to pay the ask for it to work. One year ago today the perma-bears were weaving their hype to manipulate the price downward, there were sellers willing to hit the bid.

The energy sector has in the past year kept the markets afloat during the subprime fallout, in my estimation.
The other "assumed fact not in evidence" is that the government has any clue as to how to help. You don't have to assign the government venal political motives. They can screw up with the best of intentions.

As I see it, folks in government, and the citizenry in general, just can't bring themselves to admit that the long term energy problems are as bad as the really are. This promotes a lot of finger pointing and some cosmetic "fixes."

It has to get a lot worse before we will have the will to do what is necessary to make it better.

[TonyM]

That is a valid point, we could put the govt in charge of Antarctica and they would be short on snow before long.

Price controls have been shown to be ineffective here and elsewhere, how can we expect the gluttonous usage of natural resources to decline if the commodity is made readily affordable? The inevitable result of price controls is either exhausting supplies more rapidly or being subject to usage restrictions.

I'm pretty sure you agree Net, I'm just expounding on the reply to MCD

[Bman409]

Gold hit an all time high as well.. and I haven't heard a peep about it, outside the gold sites (kitco, etc)


I remember when Gold broke over $725... man that was a big deal.. alot of people calling the "top", etc..


Today... I haven't heard a peep

[goldbug70]

Apparently oil hitting $100 is blamed on a single jerk off trader who bumped it up, if true probable motive is merely bragging rights. 8O :? Click BBC story below.

Wonder if his buddies work for GS? Can you imagine this unfolding due to a dare? Worth it for a laugh and right to tell a tall tale for years to come... if they're real chums they'll pay back his $$$ (loss) then flip for the best drink & steak in town. :roll::cool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7169543.stm


Personally, i think oil should be up and stay up. That'll ween us off this sh*t, finally. Talk about a collective 100 year 'drug' addiction! The original oil cartels and car manufactures set us all on the wrong path so long ago the masses now can't even comprehend a world without cars, bizarre.

Bitching about $3 a gallon is lame, just look at our European neighbors paying $5 and have for awhile. The result of a "sin" tax is human behavior changes for the better- they drive more fuel efficient, smaller cars, generally drive less, tend to take high speed trains/subway/buses without issue, and bicycle or use scooters if in a more urban setting. Other direct result is overall savings not folking out thousands for insurance, repairs, parking, et c. combined with low obesity rates and less accidents. Win Win Win.

Why this great expansive country of ours doesn't have a brilliant train system running coast to coast is unfathomable, truly a shame. We built it up so wrong since the '50's huge highway push the damaged infrastructure (replacing train travel with freeways) will never recover or adapt. So much for "thinking ahead". And you know, highways really are are so bloody ugly.

I say with complete guilt of being an antique car lover too! :p Modern life is ironic.

[Svenwulf]

GM Drops V-8 Engine on Rising Fuel Prices, Regulation (Update4)

By Jeff Green

Jan. 3 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., the world's largest automaker, canceled a $300 million program to build an advanced V-8 engine for luxury vehicles, citing rising oil prices and tighter U.S. fuel economy restrictions.

``We have seen a declining demand for V-8 engines as fuel prices have risen,'' GM spokeswoman Sharon Basel said today. New requirements for carmakers to boost average mileage 40 percent by 2020 also figured in the decision, she said.

more- http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a9GHnI29dcrU

edit- reminds me of the part in mad max, talking about "last of the V8s."

[goldbug70]

GM Drops V-8 Engine on Rising Fuel Prices, Regulation (Update4)

By Jeff Green

Jan. 3 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., the world's largest automaker, canceled a $300 million program to build an advanced V-8 engine for luxury vehicles, citing rising oil prices and tighter U.S. fuel economy restrictions.

``We have seen a declining demand for V-8 engines as fuel prices have risen,'' GM spokeswoman Sharon Basel said today. New requirements for carmakers to boost average mileage 40 percent by 2020 also figured in the decision, she said.

more- http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a9GHnI29dcrU

edit- reminds me of the part in mad max, talking about "last of the V8s."


The maxims "Little to little, little too late." + "Those who can't adapt, die" come to mind.

Bloated clunky ideas and designs lead to their own demise... a V-8 fuel hog vehicle for casual use? :roll: Only a fool would shed any tears over that loss. Filling up that gas tank every week makes me think of toilet made of gold.

((Yawn)) If looking tough is *that* important, just buy a tank already! No one ever uses those for SUV hyper muscular powered things for hauling or heavy work, it's laughable rolling testament to insecurity and vanity. Highly polished scratch free black coffins. The world is so beneath you oh grand Sultan, we bow as you roll past... lol.

In related news, Toyota surpassed Ford sales today. Efficiency rules.

[madcowdisease]

That is a valid point, we could put the govt in charge of Antarctica and they would be short on snow before long.

Price controls have been shown to be ineffective here and elsewhere, how can we expect the gluttonous usage of natural resources to decline if the commodity is made readily affordable? The inevitable result of price controls is either exhausting supplies more rapidly or being subject to usage restrictions.

I'm pretty sure you agree Net, I'm just expounding on the reply to MCD

Tony, perhaps this thread has gotten a little out of control with my mention of government intervention in such a hyper-capitalistic atmosphere. What I am suggesting is not all that unreasonable.

In traditional trading, traders that wish to deal with stocks can borrow, or leverage, up to twice what there account is worth. Ergo, if I have $50K in my account I can hit up my broker for another $50K, assuming I meet their requirments, for a grand total of 100K. However, in commodities and futures trading one can leverage 9Xs the value of the account. Therefore, that same 50K allows me to purchase 500K worth of X-commodity with 450K on margin (this is for example only -- I think the actual margin requirment is closer to 20Xs). No wonder the market for CL is going haywire, we've essentially created a 10 fold increase in demand with such fatuous, yet very real, conceptions and practices. Perhaps if we weren't allowed to leverage our cash so much the price of oil wouldn't have doubled in a year.

[englishman26]

Perhaps if we weren't allowed to leverage our cash so much the price of oil wouldn't have doubled in a year.

Well the whole economy of the world is based on leverage and borrowing so this point is sort of mute. I mean, are you about to argue that house prices would have to be much lower if people weren't allowed to borrow so much money?! Oh wait - that's true!

While we're digressing slightly - at what point does the US national debt get to the point when all we can do is pay the interest on it? (kind of like an African nation)

[TonyM]

Tony, perhaps this thread has gotten a little out of control with my mention of government intervention in such a hyper-capitalistic atmosphere. What I am suggesting is not all that unreasonable.

In traditional trading, traders that wish to deal with stocks can borrow, or leverage, up to twice what there account is worth. Ergo, if I have $50K in my account I can hit up my broker for another $50K, assuming I meet their requirments, for a grand total of 100K. However, in commodities and futures trading one can leverage 9Xs the value of the account. Therefore, that same 50K allows me to purchase 500K worth of X-commodity with 450K on margin (this is for example only -- I think the actual margin requirment is closer to 20Xs). No wonder the market for CL is going haywire, we've essentially created a 10 fold increase in demand with such fatuous, yet very real, conceptions and practices. Perhaps if we weren't allowed to leverage our cash so much the price of oil wouldn't have doubled in a year.

Perhaps, but I doubt that GS et al need the leverage to bid the price upwards. We have no way of knowing how much of an impact 9x leverage is having on the crude futures market, I would suspect that it is the smaller players using electronic trading mainly. However if there is a dramatic decrease in the price of crude and a company such as GS is leveraged at 9x for billions of dollars, a margin call would follow rather quickly and then we would have our answer.

Let's say for arguments sake that the available leverage has contributed to a more rapid increase in price. I still don't see a problem, just so long as those that extend the credit do not get a bailout if they lose their investments due to defaults. The CDOs that Merrill sold Bear Stearns were done so with 90% of the face value loaned to Bear, and we all know how that turned out. I say let the markets work independently and let them live and die by their own sword.

[netwrangler]

While we're digressing slightly - at what point does the US national debt get to the point when all we can do is pay the interest on it? (kind of like an African nation)I can hear the Current Administration spin doctors getting themselves in a huff as they prepare to discredit [not to say, "beg"] your question.

Monetary policy decisions lag their economic effect by six months or more.

Fiscal policy decisions, it appears, lag their economic effect by a Presidential term or more.

Any administration can play fast and loose with deficits and monetary policy. There are some great short term benefits.
But, not to worry, by the time the long term effects are toted up, someone else will be President.

Good question, Englishman26

[cramerica1972]

Gold hit an all time high as well.. and I haven't heard a peep about it, outside the gold sites (kitco, etc)


I remember when Gold broke over $725... man that was a big deal.. alot of people calling the "top", etc..


Today... I haven't heard a peepmanipulation.the look for ANY reason to raise crude prices.....my tooth hurts, etc.

[englishman26]

manipulation.the look for ANY reason to raise crude prices.....my tooth hurts, etc.

Please define "manipulation" and then give me an example of where it doesn't happen.

[Rich]

I remember when Gold broke over $725... man that was a big deal.. alot of people calling the "top", etc..


Geez, I remember when everyone was afraid that it hit the top when it was $285 and gas went up to 39 cents!!! Seriously,

Anyway, is CL a stock symbol? The charts show the high for the year was $87.21. Guess I'm missing something

Changing my name to Methusela

[netwrangler]

Geez, I remember when everyone was afraid that it hit the top when it was $285 and gas went up to 39 cents!!! Seriously,

Anyway, is CL a stock symbol? The charts show the high for the year was $87.21. Guess I'm missing something

Changing my name to MethuselaHi Rich,

It's good to have someone else remember such things. Actually, I remember when gold was plugged a $35/oz

Anyway, a few months back TonyM was talking about CL [things never change :D ] and I asked a question about the source of CL quotes. Here is his answer:

CME offers live quotes on all of their futures, just go here CME (http://www.cme.com/mycme/) then click on CME Real Time data, then click on Nymex, then click on the "click here to view real time quotes" link toward the center of the page. You should then be asked to register, which is just a matter of supplying an email address and then the next page you agree to their TOS and then you're in...24 hr live quotes, volume and bid/ask, forward month live data as well.

CL is the symbol for crude oil on the commodity exchange.

Hope this helps.

[Rich]

Sure does help, thanks as usual Net,

Its nice to know I'm not the only elder here :-)

Rich

[cramerica1972]

Please define "manipulation" and then give me an example of where it doesn't happen.english,dont be a dummy there is manipulation playing into the $100 crude and the markets overall.

[madcowdisease]

Well the whole economy of the world is based on leverage and borrowing so this point is sort of mute. I mean, are you about to argue that house prices would have to be much lower if people weren't allowed to borrow so much money?! Oh wait - that's true!

While we're digressing slightly - at what point does the US national debt get to the point when all we can do is pay the interest on it? (kind of like an African nation)

Sarcasm, a nice way to add some levity to the argument. Your first statement illustrates my point exactly. Look where we are now with the subprime mess. The first part of my theory is that the spike in oil is partially attributable to the fallout in housing preceded by the dotcom bust -- all of which was made possible by excessive credit/leverage. We can only hope oil experiences the same -- which it will if someone would step in and demand that no longer a $100K contract for CL can be bought with ~$5K.

To answer your second comment, I have no idea. But it has been argued that though the US national debt is the largest in history, nominally speaking, it is still a lesser percentage of GDP than many times previously in history. You'd have to investigate this for yourself since I am completely wasting my economics degree in my current profession and am therefore a little out-of-touch on the subject.

Perhaps, but I doubt that GS et al need the leverage to bid the price upwards. We have no way of knowing how much of an impact 9x leverage is having on the crude futures market, I would suspect that it is the smaller players using electronic trading mainly. However if there is a dramatic decrease in the price of crude and a company such as GS is leveraged at 9x for billions of dollars, a margin call would follow rather quickly and then we would have our answer.

Let's say for arguments sake that the available leverage has contributed to a more rapid increase in price. I still don't see a problem, just so long as those that extend the credit do not get a bailout if they lose their investments due to defaults. The CDOs that Merrill sold Bear Stearns were done so with 90% of the face value loaned to Bear, and we all know how that turned out. I say let the markets work independently and let them live and die by their own sword.

Tony, I respect you and your opinions on these boards, but please don't kid yourself. Goldman, along with every other financial firm, is taking advantage of the financial tools available to them such as purchasing CL, and other commodity contracts, with only 5% collateral. That is by nature what makes these markets so potentially profitable. Just like trading options a small amount of money can be used to make large percentage gains. But when we're not talking about small money but rather billions, such is the case with Goldman et al, we see the price of commodities double in a year wreaking havoc on some economies and the pocketbooks of millions.

And though I will agree that Goldman doesn't need 9Xs leverage to make the price rise I will contend that they do need such leverage to make it increase as rapidly as it has in the past 2-3 years. You are an experienced enough investor to understand the law of supply and demand and when we're talking about contracts, just pieces of paper, that have values placed on them and we can increse the potential demand for them 10 or even 20Xs we see what we are experiencing at the present time, the doubling of prices at will.

In addressing your second statment, you see no problem that a whole segment of the population, perhaps first time buyers aged 18-30 are having difficulty purchasing a home due to the extreme price appreciation of the last 5 years? I do, and I was one of them, and though I undercut the hell out of the seller on my house I will likely be upsidedown on this mortgage in a short time as prices continue to fall -- as they should. And don't think I'm the only one. I have many friends from college still waiting, postpoing their lives (babies) waiting for prices to fall, because speculators jumped at the opportunity to lend with impunity artificially increasing demand for housing and driving up the price of homes in some markets 100%. We're seeing the same thing in oil. Profligate spending that has now become the trend in this sector is causing a bubble. I don't know how long it is sustainable or if it will ever "pop".

Lastly, this isn't some bleeding heart liberal speaking. I'm as capitalistic as any on these boards since I have had money in the markets for 11 years too, however, I am for sustainability and justness and, call me crazy, but the fact a few (speculators) are controlling the many (consumer) doesn't seem "right" nor does this seem sustainable and I, for one, can't wait for the crash in commodity prices though with the current state of affairs I am not holding my breath.

In sum, all I'm asking for is limit the magnitude of X-commodity that can be bought with X-amount of money. I stand firm in the thought that holding the futures markets to same standards as the stock markets, 2Xs leverage, would mitigate these extreme price flucuations.

[englishman26]

english,dont be a dummy there is manipulation playing into the $100 crude and the markets overall.

Isn't that what I just said dummy?!

[netwrangler]

Apparently 'manipulation' is like 'pornography' in that:

"I can't define it, but I know it when I see it."

Well, fair enough, but I think investors and traders can be more observant.
In my view, manipulation in energy is an omnipresent blip on a long-term trend.
Is manipulation there? Well, yes!
Does It matter? No, unless you are trying to trade against the manipulators.
But if you want to invest for longer than a day or so, the best strategy [IMHO] is to filter out any manipulation you may see.
The key element regarding 'manipulation' is that it doesn't last.
Any 'manipulation' of CL [or stock] prices must resolve toward a long-term [unmunipulated] norm.

Course, if you are a short-term contrarian...well, happy trading.
Note: No sarcasm here. I have great respect for traders who can buck a short-term trend. I just don't happen to be one of them.

[TonyM]

Sarcasm, a nice way to add some levity to the argument. Your first statement illustrates my point exactly. Look where we are now with the subprime mess. The first part of my theory is that the spike in oil is partially attributable to the fallout in housing preceded by the dotcom bust -- all of which was made possible by excessive credit/leverage. We can only hope oil experiences the same -- which it will if someone would step in and demand that no longer a $100K contract for CL can be bought with ~$5K.

To answer your second comment, I have no idea. But it has been argued that though the US national debt is the largest in history, nominally speaking, it is still a lesser percentage of GDP than many times previously in history. You'd have to investigate this for yourself since I am completely wasting my economics degree in my current profession and am therefore a little out-of-touch on the subject.



Tony, I respect you and your opinions on these boards, but please don't kid yourself. Goldman, along with every other financial firm, is taking advantage of the financial tools available to them such as purchasing CL, and other commodity contracts, with only 5% collateral. That is by nature what makes these markets so potentially profitable. Just like trading options a small amount of money can be used to make large percentage gains. But when we're not talking about small money but rather billions, such is the case with Goldman et al, we see the price of commodities double in a year wreaking havoc on some economies and the pocketbooks of millions.

And though I will agree that Goldman doesn't need 9Xs leverage to make the price rise I will contend that they do need such leverage to make it increase as rapidly as it has in the past 2-3 years. You are an experienced enough investor to understand the law of supply and demand and when we're talking about contracts, just pieces of paper, that have values placed on them and we can increse the potential demand for them 10 or even 20Xs we see what we are experiencing at the present time, the doubling of prices at will.

In addressing your second statment, you see no problem that a whole segment of the population, perhaps first time buyers aged 18-30 are having difficulty purchasing a home due to the extreme price appreciation of the last 5 years? I do, and I was one of them, and though I undercut the hell out of the seller on my house I will likely be upsidedown on this mortgage in a short time as prices continue to fall -- as they should. And don't think I'm the only one. I have many friends from college still waiting, postpoing their lives (babies) waiting for prices to fall, because speculators jumped at the opportunity to lend with impunity artificially increasing demand for housing and driving up the price of homes in some markets 100%. We're seeing the same thing in oil. Profligate spending that has now become the trend in this sector is causing a bubble. I don't know how long it is sustainable or if it will ever "pop".

Lastly, this isn't some bleeding heart liberal speaking. I'm as capitalistic as any on these boards since I have had money in the markets for 11 years too, however, I am for sustainability and justness and, call me crazy, but the fact a few (speculators) are controlling the many (consumer) doesn't seem "right" nor does this seem sustainable and I, for one, can't wait for the crash in commodity prices though with the current state of affairs I am not holding my breath.

In sum, all I'm asking for is limit the magnitude of X-commodity that can be bought with X-amount of money. I stand firm in the thought that holding the futures markets to same standards as the stock markets, 2Xs leverage, would mitigate these extreme price flucuations.

I understand and respect your posts also MCD, I just can't bring myself to sacrifice freedom for the morals of the less fortunate. Have you ever thought about the fact that the greater the leverage the more chances for the average guy to get a piece of the pie? I just don't see why the amount of leverage should be limited, hell make it 200x and then even minimum wage earners could have a shot at some real money. Limit everything to 2x and the working class will always be shut out of the best damn game going.

I also don't understand why oil is the only financial instrument not allowed to have unlimited upside. Nobody kicks up a fuss when goog is trading @ $700. I know some will say that goog does not have the economic impact that oil does, but hey, is that oil's fault? Is it the fault of all the good folks that bring you that oil you so desperately need? I tell ya, if I was a fat cat Saudi Prince with more money than I could ever spend, I would turn the tap off and tell all of the whiners to kiss my rear, don't like it, I won't sell it to you, how do you like them apples? Give me a sincere apology and keep your mouths shut and I'll sell you some at whatever price the market sets, and yes if it gets too low I will manipulate supply to protect my profit margin. Good thing I'm not running the oil show eh?:lol:

[englishman26]

In some cases what you're saying is true but the problem is the potential downside of the amount of free market economics that you're proposing. If lots of people were to get on the wrong side of a trade at the same time (eg. the subprime/MBS mess), and all be that leveraged, you'd end up with a catastrophic situation where there might be more money owed than was present in the economy as a whole! The result would be something like a great depression (eg. the great depression) or worse.

As for your working class man argument - isn't the subprime problem somewhat due to working class people being lent mortgages that were 10-30 times their annual salary. Some of these people were never able to afford the first payment. I would encourage you to watch the E! channel program on lottery winner nightmares for an education into what is possible when people unable to handle money get too much to handle. Then extend that to an effect that, in your scenario, would engulf the whole economy. (Don't ask me why I was watching the E! channel!)

Google and oil are not the same thing and it's just silly to suggest that they are.

[TonyM]

In some cases what you're saying is true but the problem is the potential downside of the amount of free market economics that you're proposing. If lots of people were to get on the wrong side of a trade at the same time (eg. the subprime/MBS mess), and all be that leveraged, you'd end up with a catastrophic situation where there might be more money owed than was present in the economy as a whole! The result would be something like a great depression (eg. the great depression) or worse.

As for your working class man argument - isn't the subprime problem somewhat due to working class people being lent mortgages that were 10-30 times their annual salary. Some of these people were never able to afford the first payment. I would encourage you to watch the E! channel program on lottery winner nightmares for an education into what is possible when people unable to handle money get too much to handle. Then extend that to an effect that, in your scenario, would engulf the whole economy. (Don't ask me why I was watching the E! channel!)

Google and oil are not the same thing and it's just silly to suggest that they are.

If we have no regulation against the lenders' margin limitations then we the people should not have to concern ourselves with a bailout, conversely with regulation comes the expectation of help should the regulation fail to protect the lender. With no debtors prison, what exactly is the recourse of the lender? (Speaking only of individuals with little in the way of assets.) They report you to a credit bureau, but that does not pay the note.

Having more money owed than is in circulation, hmm, I think Uncle Ben can crank the printing press up a notch or two above the already hideous levels. I see where you're coming from though, but I'm not convinced that our government's current and future fiscal policy won't lead to economic disaster anyway. In a utopia I would like to see businesses share in the financial ruin due to poor decision making. In the Bear / Merrill CDO relationship that is exactly how it played out with no government assistance required.

So we have a catch 22; either the politicians and lobbyists protect the working man from himself by enslaving him in socialist rule or they live and let die as nature intended. I'd rather die free than live as a servant, I acknowledge that some are comfortable with sacrificing freedoms for the perceived good of the masses, I'm just not one of 'em.

Aww c'mon English, I explained the goog / oil analogy and I did not suggest that they were the same only that it is not the fault of speculators, oil companies or Sheiks that the world became reliant on a specific commodity no more than it is the fault of the various companies involved in the manufacture of ammunition that those prices have skyrocketed, particularly in the caliber most widely used by our military, to the tune of about 400%.

My position on the subject is far from a perfect solution and there are admittedly many side effects to be considered, but that only puts my preference on equal footing with the idea of more and more government control, because as we all know, the govt can't fix a sandwich.

E channel has Talk Soup which is usually good for a laugh;)