patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,237,492 comments by 14,795 users - AmericanKulak, Patrick, Someone_else online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 218 - 226 of 226 Search these comments
Peter P
2008 Nov 9, 12:00am
We can have "peak oil" and falling prices at the same time. But it may take a supply shock to send prices up again.
Do not blame the speculators. Without them, price shocks will still be there, price discovery will be slower, and liquidity will be less readily available.
Yet here we are, at 1/2 the price and dropping while OPEC is decreasing production. I'm not arguing that we shouldn't have speculators.
Just that they were very wrong this time as happens at times.
DennisN
2008 Nov 9, 1:17am
Justme,
The assets in a 401(k) are generally held in trust by a fiduciary for the benefit of the plan members. The fiduciary's duties are specified under ERISA, and breach of fiduciary responsibility is a serious crime - up to 1 year in jail and a big fine. Second occurance is a felony.
Did anyone ever answer Charles' (the original poster's) question?
DennisN
2008 Nov 9, 1:22am
See for example www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/fiduciaryresponsibility.html
Peter P
2008 Nov 9, 5:21am
TOB, democrats do not tolerate liberty because free-minded people are impervious to their populist claims.
YES WE CAN!
When those young people were chanting, they failed to realized that the word 'WE' was referring to populist elites.
I still think Ron Paul was the only good candidate.
justme
2008 Nov 9, 1:28pm
Deflation,
>>I may be wrong, but I always considered peak oil to be the maximum rate at which they are able to pump (irrespective of demand) and implied a depletion of oil from the source.
Good point, and this is exactly the distinction I was trying to make.
From Wikipedia:
Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline.
Since this definition uses the word *extraction*, it does not refer to peak pumping capacity (per day or month or year), but rather the peak volume actually getting pumped.
The peak volume getting pumped will occur at some point in time where the current price combined with current demand causes a never-to-be-exceeded (daily, monthly, yearly) production numeric value.
Another way of saying the same thing: It is likely that peak oil will occur because of higher price pushing the demand down rather than a constant or falling price and hitting a hard limit on pumping capacity. Oil price has a way of soaring instantly once demand gets even close to the supply capacity.
I agree that the difference can perhaps be called somewhat subtle or technical, but also think that it means that peak oil *production* will be reached sooner rather than later. The reason simply being that oil production will peak at the point of maximum oil affordability, as determined by oil price and expendable income (or macro-economic equivalent).
justme
2008 Nov 9, 1:31pm
DennisN,
I should have thought of you right away, thanks for the lawyerly answer.
hmm, did someone say socia1ised medicine? too late, thread's over...
obama rules...
« First « Previous Comments 218 - 226 of 226 Search these comments
Hello,
I just read an article in the NYTimes that was disconcerting and even frightening.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02global.html"> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02global.html
According to the article, school districts, municipalities, and just about every governmental entity that either has money to invest or borrows money could potentially end up getting sucked into the credit crisis. That means that there could be countless ticking time bombs across the United States in the form of pending financial shortfalls and bankruptcies that will further depress home values in towns and cities across the country.
Imagine buying a home at what seems like a bargain price, only to find that the local school district or government is on the hook for a couple hundred million dollars in losses because a few unsophisticated board members fell for what's turned out to be a global investment scam. Once the word gets out, the town's home values will nose dive. After all, it's the local tax payers who will eventually have to pay the pipers.
The Wisconsin school board in the article might not only lose the $35 million dollars earmarked for teachers' pensions, they're liable for an additional $165 million that the board borrowed on their behalf. Where does a town that can't afford to lose $35 million in the first place come up with another $165 million? What happens to the teachers who lose their pensions? Who wants to buy a home in an area where the schools are forced to lay off teachers, cut programs, and cant afford to purchase books or supplies?
Is there any way to find out what municipalities and school boards are in potential trouble? Can a potential home buyer request relevant information from a town or city? Is there a website that contains this type of information?
As a prospective home buyer I'd have to say that this concern belongs at the top of the list of reasons to postpone buying a home in this market.
Charles