[QUOTE=John Mace]
Cutting interest rates when you think you’re headed into a recession is SOP.
[/QUOTE]
Not when you are staring down the barrel of stagflation. Then the bitter medicine may be to keep the interest rates up. *See, Volker, Paul. * You may have to bite the bullet and accept a short-term recession to avoid a more chronic and intractable problem.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
I’m sure OPEC finds it very convenient to blame the US economy for the price of oil. There such good guys, and we’re the bad guys. Give me a freakin’ break. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Lowering interest rates and “injecting” money into the economy only weakens the dollar. Oil has remained much more stable in other currencies.
[QUOTE=Desert Nomad]
Lowering interest rates and “injecting” money into the economy only weakens the dollar.
[/quote]
But that’s not necessarily “mismanaging” the economy. Bernake was widely recognized as a good successor to Greenspan, and once he is in place, his policies are his, not Bush’s. And, as I said, he is doing pretty much what most people think he should be doing at this point in time. I doubt very much that a Clinton or Obama administration would get rid of him.
[QUOTE=spoke-]
Except that supplies are very high at the moment. So simple supply and demand don’t explain it.
The problem is that oil is traded in dollars and we are deflating the dollar by spending wildly in Iraq, cutting taxes, and lowering interest rates. The value of the dollar goes down, the price of oil goes up.
[/QUOTE]
Even worse, isn’t it also true that as we continue to send more dollars overseas–demand for oil is largely non-elastic and we’ll buy it if we have to mortgage our internal organs–that this exacerbates the problem?
We’ve been mismanaging the economy for at least sixty years. Right after the Second World War, the consensus grew up that the efficiencies of the past, like comprehensive mass transit, railroads, centralized patterns of homes and workspaces were outmoded. Highways, suburbs and cars were in. Since then nearly all development has been dependent on an endless supply of cheap oil. That supply is now ending. While I do not expect the utter collapse of civilization as a result, I do think the dislocations, disappointments, and diminished expectations that result will haunt us for generations to come. I wish to hell I wasn’t in this handbasket but I am.
[QUOTE=Barry From Eastenders]
The economy would manage itself just fine if they would leave it alone.
[/QUOTE]
You mean private corporate industry would be a kid in a candy store. The rest of us would have all the cavities as a result of their greed and selfishness. Well, at least until it all falls apart and government has to step in.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/06/business/06oil.php
OPEC responding to Bush’s request for increasing the oil supply has tossed the ball back into Bush’s court. They claim it is a mismanaged economy that has driven up prices. We are inflating and expecting the dollar to buy just as much. We want them to take the loss. Can you imagine they refused?
Prices climbed to 3.25 in Detroit today. Yet the supply is very HIGH already. How do we get out of these messes this admin keep conjuring up?
[/QUOTE]
We’re in the mess because the Democratic politicians have consistently derailed all attempts at oil and coal extraction from our own country. Attempts at building hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, or even wind generation have been fought against by left wing enviro-mental wackadoos. Hell, Ted Kennedy had to be badgered by his own party to rescind his objection to off shore wind generators (which he’d barely be able to see when sober).
If you don’t like the price of energy then find a mirror and complain to the voter who caused it.
[QUOTE=Barry From Eastenders]
The economy would manage itself just fine if they would leave it alone.
[/QUOTE]
How do you know that? Are you familiar with any historical examples where it has worked out that way?
[QUOTE=Desert Nomad]
Lowering interest rates and “injecting” money into the economy only weakens the dollar. Oil has remained much more stable in other currencies.
[/QUOTE]
What would you suggest the Fed do at this point? What would YOU do if you had a free hand? What do you suppose Clinton or Obama would do (if they could actually tell the Fed what to do)?
And if OPEC claims it, it MUST be true! I mean, if you can’t trust a cartel of oil barons to know right from wrong, who can you trust?
We are? We do?
I’ve asked you this in the past but…did you actually READ the article you quoted? We asked them to increase production…not ‘take the loss’. They certainly refused to increase production…so the truth is vaguely wafting up from your statement here. In a kind-a-sort-a way…
They climbed for a variety of reasons, most of which have to do with the commodities market and various other economic factors.
BTW, I think it (if you mean the price of oil) actually rose about $5/barrel (this is from memory though).
No it isn’t. ‘very HIGH’ would mean there is a glut of oil on the market. There is no such thing. Unless you want to produce a cite showing that of course.
Why do <explicative deleted to preserve my account> keep blaming everything on the administration? Oh, to be sure they have the lions share of the blame in everything…but it’s not the administration alone who has gotten us into THIS mess. We did it to ourselves.
-XT
[QUOTE=Magiver]
We’re in the mess because the Democratic politicians have consistently derailed all attempts at oil and coal extraction from our own country. Attempts at building hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, or even wind generation have been fought against by left wing enviro-mental wackadoos. Hell, Ted Kennedy had to be badgered by his own party to rescind his objection to off shore wind generators (which he’d barely be able to see when sober).
If you don’t like the price of energy then find a mirror and complain to the voter who caused it.
[/QUOTE]
Senator Ted Kennedy has tirelessly worked against offshore oil drilling, the Cape Cod Windfarm project (it would spoil his view), and drilling in the NWR in Alaska. Why people keep voting this moron in amazes me.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
What would you suggest the Fed do at this point? What would YOU do if you had a free hand? What do you suppose Clinton or Obama would do (if they could actually tell the Fed what to do)?
[/QUOTE]
Cry.
Yeah, I’m guessing they would (and will) do that. To be sure.
(why anyone would WANT to be President of the US is beyond me…especially as things stand atm. No matter who gets in they are going to get slammed by events and the state of the economy)
-XT
[QUOTE=Barry From Eastenders]
No, every government tries to manage the economy. They all do a piss poor job of it. The economy would manage itself just fine if they would leave it alone.
[/QUOTE]
They claim they can change the economy, and they do have an impact, but I’ll agree that we need to use manage as in managing a herd of cats.
We tried no management at all a while ago, and it didn’t turn out too well. Despite the problems, we have a much more stable economy than at the end of the 19th century.
AFAIK we NEVER tried ‘no management’. If you have some evidence that it’s ever been tried I would love to hear it. If you are talking about the 19th century the government had it’s fingers in the pie constantly. We didn’t have a Fed then, if that’s what you meant…but no Fed does not equal no management or manipulation.
-XT
[QUOTE=xtisme]
What would you suggest the Fed do at this point? What would YOU do if you had a free hand? What do you suppose Clinton or Obama would do (if they could actually tell the Fed what to do)?
And if OPEC claims it, it MUST be true! I mean, if you can’t trust a cartel of oil barons to know right from wrong, who can you trust?
We are? We do?
I’ve asked you this in the past but…did you actually READ the article you quoted? We asked them to increase production…not ‘take the loss’. They certainly refused to increase production…so the truth is vaguely wafting up from your statement here. In a kind-a-sort-a way…
They climbed for a variety of reasons, most of which have to do with the commodities market and various other economic factors.
BTW, I think it (if you mean the price of oil) actually rose about $5/barrel (this is from memory though).
No it isn’t. ‘very HIGH’ would mean there is a glut of oil on the market. There is no such thing. Unless you want to produce a cite showing that of course.
Why do <explicative deleted to preserve my account> keep blaming everything on the administration? Oh, to be sure they have the lions share of the blame in everything…but it’s not the administration alone who has gotten us into THIS mess. We did it to ourselves.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Can you read even a little. The article says OPEC blames the prices on our mismanagement. OPEC,ts a consortium of producing countries that set the amount of oil they make available. This in a large measure determines price.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
The article says OPEC blames the prices on our mismanagement.
[/QUOTE]
Let me put this in simple terms you can perhaps understand.
Who. Gives. A. Fuck? OPEC can say whatever they want. It’s obvious that you DIDN’T actually read the article in question…you simply posted it because you thought it conformed to your own skewed world view (though the irony of you posting the words from a cartel as if they were gospel is…well, pretty fucking ironic. A CARTEL! Too rich!).
-XT
[QUOTE=Barry From Eastenders]
No, every government tries to manage the economy. They all do a piss poor job of it. The economy would manage itself just fine if they would leave it alone.
*The idea that presidents can control it lies between an exaggeration and an illusion. *- Robert J. Samuelson
The current US economic situation makes a solid argument against a laissez-faire economic philosophy. The invisible hand is a miserable failure, yet again. A corporate controlled newspaper with an OP-Ed defending the current American free market model is propaganda and dismisses the reality most Americans live everyday. If the public is inculcated in the supremacy of neoliberalism, it becomes the accepted truth.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
though the irony of you posting the words from a cartel as if they were gospel is…well, pretty fucking ironic. A CARTEL! Too rich!).
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Ben Bagdikian asserts that American corporate controlled media function as a cartel, so the information people read and see everyday serves corporate interests.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
A minority view among economists. Perhaps arguable, but not the sort of thing you can cite as established fact.
[/QUOTE]
Those numbers are damn near 50/50. Seems to me that you can’t just say that the New Deal helped, either.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
We’re in the mess because the Democratic politicians have consistently derailed all attempts at oil and coal extraction from our own country. Attempts at building hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, or even wind generation have been fought against by left wing enviro-mental wackadoos. Hell, Ted Kennedy had to be badgered by his own party to rescind his objection to off shore wind generators (which he’d barely be able to see when sober).
If you don’t like the price of energy then find a mirror and complain to the voter who caused it.
[/QUOTE]
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE7D71139F935A35755C0A967958260
The problem with coal production is whether we have to destroy mountains and rivers to mine it. We have the 2nd most coal production in the world. How has the industry been derailed.?
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Let me put this in simple terms you can perhaps understand.
Who. Gives. A. Fuck? OPEC can say whatever they want. It’s obvious that you DIDN’T actually read the article in question…you simply posted it because you thought it conformed to your own skewed world view (though the irony of you posting the words from a cartel as if they were gospel is…well, pretty fucking ironic. A CARTEL! Too rich!).
-XT
[/QUOTE]
OK now OPEC isn’t a cartel. You are sad.