$2.00 Gas ?

Since we are discussing gas prices, and Donald was somewhat instrumental in that. "inquiring minds" need to know, what's the story behind the avatar?

Appearances,...

..., R definitely deceiving.
Well, thatz my take on ole' Rummy-boy.
Still, he was about the only member of the regime who cud speek proper englesh, no?
Wound a bit (just at bit) tite - thought this photo of the "happy man" mite prove provocative, eh?
Remember, "..., there are known knowns, and known unknowns,..., itz only the unknown unknownz we have to worry about" (or something like that).
Cheers!
Eric
(justbecausewesailthepotomacdoesntnecessarilymeanweknowanymilitarysecrets)

I find it absolutely unconscionable that Rumsfeld, the architect of the failed war strategy in Iraq, and who is responsible for 98% of the Coalition deaths, still maintains an office in the Pentagon.

OTOH, when Fitzgerald sees fit to charge Rumsfeld with high crimes and misdemeanors, he knows where to find him.

Well (speaking in my most Reaganesque voice now) Catty, what's really unconscionable is almost the entire policy agenda pursued by the current (can't bring myself to utter the owner's name) regime. The fact that someone would find Rummy's maintenance of an office in the Pgon "offensive" strikes me as rather absurb - since it only means that he has to keep on working (all the while feeling the disdain & pure hatred of the building cast upon him) and watching (a la Clockwork Orange) as his bad bet in Iraq goes further & further south. He owes us that, eh? Instead, I would encourage you to think of it as his just reward (kinda like what Sartre & C.S. Lewis said about hell) -- hopefully this will allow you to sleep alot (alot) easier at night, no?
PS - As for ur perspective on the current Messopotamia imbroglio, I say "Blame it on Canada" : )

Does anybody here remember this other criminal's name, McNamara?? ...another Defense Sect
http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/secdef_histories/bios/mcnamara.htm

At least he came to eventually recoqnize the failure of force to resolve all conflicts, and he resigned.

The Vietnam conflict came to claim most of McNamara's time and energy. The Truman and Eisenhower administrations had committed the United States to support the French and native anti-Communist forces in Vietnam in resisting efforts by the Communists in the North to control the country. The U.S. role, including financial support and military advice, expanded after 1954 when the French withdrew. During the Kennedy administration, the U.S. military advisory group in South Vietnam steadily increased, with McNamara's concurrence, from just a few hundred to about 17,000. U.S. involvement escalated after the Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964 when North Vietnamese naval vessels reportedly fired on two U.S. destroyers. President Johnson ordered retaliatory air strikes on North Vietnamese naval bases and Congress approved almost unanimously the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authoriz-ing the president "to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the U.S. and to prevent further aggression."

In 1965, in response to stepped up military activity by the Communist Viet Cong in South Vietnam and their North Vietnamese allies, the United States began bombing North Vietnam, deployed large military forces, and entered into combat in South Vietnam. Requests from top U.S. military commanders in Vietnam led to the commitment of 485,000 troops by the end of 1967 and almost 535,000 by 30 June 1968. The casualty lists mounted as the number of troops and the intensity of fighting escalated.

Although he loyally supported administration policy, McNamara gradually became skeptical about whether the war could be won by deploying more troops to South Vietnam and intensifying the bombing of North Vietnam. He traveled to Vietnam many times to study the situation firsthand. He became increasingly reluctant to approve the large force increments requested by the military commanders. The Tet offensive of early 1968, although a military defeat for the enemy, clearly indicated that the road ahead for both the United States and the South Vietnamese government was still long and hard. By this time McNamara had already submitted his resignation, chiefly because of his disillusionment with the war.

We Were Warned

Forty-five years ago - January 1961 - Dwight Eisenhower gave his final address as President of the United States.

[CENTER]President Dwight Eisenhower, January 17, 1961[/CENTER]
My fellow Americans, this evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen. We have been compelled to create a permanent armament industry of vast proportions. Three-and-a-half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

(Dwight Eisenhower was quit a visionary)

Those words are the starting point for a new film that takes a look at the American war machine over the past half century. "Why We Fight" by filmmaker Eugene Jarecki looks at conflicts from World War II right up to the current war in Iraq to examine the political, economic and ideological reasons that drive American war policy..

History - Repeats, repeats,...,

Indeed, once the Army's operational doctrine became, "We have to destroy the village in order to save it" - pouring more gasoline on the fire began to appear counterproductive.

Well, as much as Rummy was "possessed" with the idea of not fighting another Vietnam (and trying repeatedly to "win" it back, at least in his own mind) - he failed to stay around long enough to see a repeat of a Tet -style Offensive in Baghdad; which my friends is right around the corner (i.e., the due date on GEN Patraeus's report on the Surge, come September).
Ready?

I'm not so sure of that 'big offensive". In this case I think the enemy wants us to stay there so they can continue to beat up on us. We're playing right into their hands, propoganda wise. They continue to recruit with us there as a whipping boy.

New Oil Price Realities

Well it appears as though we don't need to wait for the 'new conflict' to affect this price rise, but rather the world's economy and dependance. We are closing in on that $100 barrel prediction.

Now imagine that my conflict prediction comes true. I'm betting we will see $200 per barrel price spike when that happens.

There are some nations, and some oil companies, that are loving this situation....huge profits and transfers of wealth.

Hi,

The title of this thread got my eye.

You guys on the west side of the Atlantic have it good it's now more than $2.00 a litre in the UK which makes it around $9.50 a gallon for them

$100 per barrel reached

Its looks like I missed it by a day or two. On Jan 2, 2008, the price of crude broke the $100/barrel price tag

A good part of it is that the US$ has lost so much value against other currencies. The price of oil converted to Euros has not been that drastic a change.
I was in Nigeria just a short time ago and that supply source has some, ahem, how do I put this, security issues.

I just took a look and the volumes traded are pretty low so it seems that the short hit at 100.00 is purely speculative. Anyway, demand will decrease, supply will increase or the price will simply go to wherever it needs to be until things balance out.

This morning's BBC News corrected me.
It was a one shot trade just so that the trader could have bragging rights as to being the first person to pay a hundred bucks a bbl.

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

The Perfect Storm (economically)

So does that mean we should treat it as just another little unconsequential blip, and nothing too serious, as does the majority of this Washington crowd that continues to drink the same kool-aid??

We have the gathering of the 'perfect storm' with big energy price increases, housing market failure, lost of manufacturing, and the coming lost of a great portion of creative IT. We need to get some different kool-aid to drink.

My point exactly. If you want to bring this country to its knees, you never have to enter this country. And you certainly don't need to bring down some aircraft. Just go to Nigeria, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and get at one of those sources of oil...refinery, loading platform, etc..... then watch what happens with the world's economy.

And you never had to penetrate the USA borders. And it could be weeks away.

The actual 100/bbl is just a blip and it received some attention. The blip itself is of no consequence in and of itself. That it got the press and attention that it did suggests that there was some surprise at the price finally getting there. I doubt that anyone outside the US was surprised by it. The real price of oil hasn't risen much recently, it's just that the commodity used for the most part in exchange, the US$, for oil has lost quite a bit of it's value over the past year.
If I was an American I'd probably be a bit concerned about the direction that the US is taking in it's dependence on foreign capital and manufacturing.
I've been away for a few months and returned to a pile of mail, newspapers and email. Sitting down and scanning through 3 months worth of information has been an interesting experience. Major concentrated download instead of the the usual daily stream of normal life. Odd patterns emerged while catching up and the one observation I'd make is that as foreign ownership of US businesses has increased so has the influence of the new owners.
To balance this all, there is an interesting fact that at first glance makes no sense. The US Debt is about $31,000.00 per person. Looking from the outside would you feel comfortable looking for every American being able to service that debt? Riyadh, Singapore and Beijing seem to believe that that capability is there as proven by their recent investments.

...depends on how you define 'recently'
Trading below $51 a barrel less than 12 months ago, crude prices hit their first in a fusillade of all-time highs in July and never looked back.
While some blame the frothy crude market on speculation rather than the simple rules of supply and demand, the only force that managed to slow prices down at all this year was fear of an economic slowdown, as oil fell below $90 a barrel just weeks after hitting a record

The year 2007 began quietly enough, with oil prices at $61.05, comfortably below the previous record of $77.03 set July 14, 2006.

It fell to a low of $50.48 on Jan. 18 only to begin an upward climb, cracking $60 on Feb. 21 and $70 on June 29.

On July 31, the first of several all-time records began rewriting the books with a closing trade at $78.21, up $1.38, on the heels of a six-year high in consumer confidence.

"What's great about this rally is that it is being driven by good economic news and not some type of bad news -- no hurricane, war -- just good old fashion demand and rising demand expectations," Alaron Trading Senior Analyst Phil Flynn said at the time.

The next record of $78.23 came on Sept. 11 after OPEC moved to boost production by 500,000 barrels, amid doubts that the group could actually achieve the increase. Six out of the next seven sessions saw fresh records amid speculation over recession, OPEC and other issues.

Oil broke through $80 for the first time on Sept. 13. It continued setting records in subsequent trading days until hitting $83.32 on Sept. 20 on jitters about refinery shutdowns in the Gulf of Mexico as the 10th storm of the Atlantic hurricane season bore down.

That record lasted less than a month, until oil jumped to $83.69 on Oct. 12, and then rose another $2.44 the next trading day to close at a fresh record of $86.13 on Oct. 15. The rise still wasn't over, as records fell at $87.61 on Oct. 16 and $89.47 on Oct. 18.

With the dollar weakening against foreign currencies, oil staged yet another rally within a couple of weeks, breaking through the $90 barrier on Oct. 25 and hitting $95.93 a barrel on Nov. 2.

____________________________________
Brian added: OVERALL ...$61 to $100...thats quite an increase in one year !!! Enough to affect one's economy quite a bit. In fact so rapid it may not have fully digested itself.

I suggest that a whole lot of American consumers have just bitten the bullet and added these extra fuel charges to their credit cards. But what happens when they start cutting back on spending for other items?...consumer spending in America is a huge driving force of our economy. Cut it back substantially and the economy will follow.

How about all of the freight companies and airlines that have just 'absorbed' this fuel increase without really raising there rates,YET...it's coming.
_______________________________________

Eric Bolling, an independent oil trader at the Nymex, said conditions that led to a record-breaking year will likely persist over the next 12 months at least.
"It's a weak dollar, it's a strong global economy, it's China growing quickly at 13%," he said. "It's been a perfect storm for a commodity bull run. That's going to continue to go. There's no signs of its slowing down, by any means."
He sees oil ranging from $60 to $120 a barrel next year, with spikes as high as $130 or more in the case of a major hurricane or geopolitical flare-up.
"Oil is going to be very volatile," he said. "It's an election year, there's going to be a possible recession..."
That could translate to gasoline prices of about $4 a gallon by the time the hot summer driving season arrives, he said.

The $2.00 gas issue has become pretty common and since predictions say that a barrel of crude will probably rise to about $160, prices will only keep on rising. You'll never buy your gallon cheaper than you've done today.

Both my cars run on LPG which as you know is a by-product of oil-drilling and also a left over in the refinery process. It is a lot cleaner and cheaper than regular gas. every couple of months I have to add a some regular gas because the engines start on regular gas and when the LPG tanks are empty, you'll have to get to the next gas station. Yesterday I've paid $2.00 per litre regular unleaded. Mind you; 70% of the fuel prices in Holland are taxes. Nothing more, nothing less. In case our gouvernment does something sensible with it, I won't complain. I'm lucky I only need about 5 litres every 3 months.

The bottom line is that people choose to pay $2.00 per litre or gallon, depending on the place of the world your in. The only way to avoid these prices is to rethink your need for fuel. Figure out if there's a way you can save fuel or simply search for alternatives.

I had my carbon footprint measured out last year and although we are an average 1 house, 2 kids, 2 cats and 2 cars family, the outline was shocking. I've taken appropriate measures by compensating my CO2 production by energy saving electronics, lightbulbs, solar panels on the roof, Sunlight boiler on the roof, water saving showerheads, simply the works. I've reduced our families footprint by 60% and compensate the remaining 40% by investing in green energy projects. We are now CO2 neutral. This also reduced my energy bill by 40%! saving simply has its pleasant side effects.

Once again it simply comes down to your personal choices. If you choose to consume fossil fuels, be prepared to pay the bill.

In yachting we seek for ways to get to "zero energy" yachts, trying to produce the same amount of energy as the yacht uses without (or as little as possible) the use of fossil fuels. It has become more than just an issue of fuel bills, it will become a matter of social responsibility. If the industry doesn't find a way to reduce fossil fuel consumption, our customers will in the end take the heat for it by experiencing public criticism. It takes a completely different approach to designing and building yachts. New hybrid techniques are required, new and lighter build materials are necesarry.
We have a lot of work to do and I truly hope that we can crack this issue within the next decade.

But to get back to the topic; I bet that we will be at $2.30 by March.

I predict that the prices will drop eventually. That will be at the time we don't need the stuff anymore

"Recently" becomes a longer and longer period of time, the older you get.
Do you think that it was a 16 year old that came up with the Soviet 5 year plans? Nah, a month is a long time for a sixteen year old to plan ahead for.
In this context I be talkin 12 months or less.

When I bought US $ forward just about 11 months ago I was paying $1.30 ish Canadian. Now I need some short term and I just paid .99 Cdn for those same US$. I'm not going to get in to production costs per bbl since they really don't have squat to do with the price of the refined product at the pump, let alone the market price of crude oil, but just for the sake of this conversation say that the bbl that the pumpjack a couple of hundred yards away from me just now pulled out of the ground cost me 10 bucks CDN. The US$ back a while ago would have allowed you to get that bbl out for 7ish US dollars but now it'll cost you 10. Not to put too fine a point on it I'd be checking real quick on what I'd get for those 10 US$ which I normally have no reason to hold since I pay everything out in Cdn$ or Euros or Yen, before I let anyone turn a valve.
Translated to recent times there's 25-30 bucks a bbl more that you can account for just with currency. You don't even want to consider the multiplier effect on that difference that the guvmint folks with their hands out for royalties and other donations have on the final price. If you really believe that any government wants to see the price of oil fall then PM me and I'll give you the name of a little place in the 14 arrondissement in Paris where you can further explore your perhaps already excessive use of hallucinogens.

Now, back to Africa... the place seemed to be an endless stream of stories about this Chinese trade delegation or that Chinese trade delegation and the chunks of US cash that they are converting in to raw material deals of one sort or another. Yessiree bub! The demand is increasing.


I paid a buck a litre for gasoline yesterday so about 3.78 a US Gallon. That's still dirt cheap compared to what that same litre goes for in much of the rest of the world. Ok, you can buy cheap gas in Caracas or Tripoli, but do you really want to live there?

There will be some adjustments in the US economy as the general population joins the rest of the world and looks at what the overall cost of a BTU has become. There is no lack of inventive people in the US so I'd bet that local solutions will be found.