You are viewing the older version of this Weblog. I have left this version available for those of you who do not have Javascript enabled in your web browser.

If you have Javascript enabled and would like to view the lastest version of this Weblog, please go here.

September 28, 2006

Informatio: ,

Gasoline, homicide, etc...

I put gas in the car this morning and it was $1.99 per gallon. Now we’re talkin’!

Yesterday, before heading to court, I called and they told me not to come. They said they were “running behind.” So, this morning, I’ve got to be there at 8:30a. Ugh. If you’d like to know about the case I am taking part in, this will whet your whistle (in a horrible way). And, here‘s the whole story.

They began painting the breezeway last night. Awesome. This really is going to be cool to share with all of you when it’s complete.

On Saturday, my wife is throwing a wedding shower for a good friend of ours. Us husbands are having a little get together of our own at the renowned . I’m looking forward to it. will be in town and in attendance.

Posted at 08:16 am

Trackback:
Please enable javascript to generate a trackback url

Comments (17):
Sigh…we’re still at $2.61 here. Dropping 1 cent at a time though…

jpierce (URL) - September 28, 2006 at 1:04 pm

I too am happy about the price drop. I was able to do some research as to how the prices could drop. What I found as the main reason was that a major oil strick was discovered that was totally unexpected in the Gulf of Mexico and Tahiti. The currect price now reflects this addtional supply of oil and thus has resulted in a price drop.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14678206

In the post above it appears it could increase our domestic production of oil by 50%. This exlains how in KC it went from $2.99/gl to $1.99/gl pretty close to the 50% mentioned in this post.

Just a little information I found that might be of interest to somebody. :)

dh () - September 28, 2006 at 2:06 pm

I put gas in the car this morning and it was $1.99 per gallon. Now we’re talkin’!\n\nJust a little present from the Bush administration to you. Mid-term elections are coming up, after all. :)

wheat () (URL) - September 29, 2006 at 09:50 am

Wheat did you read what I posted previously? It appears there are other more logical and truthful factors. No gas tax decreases have brought into law, no policies from Bush have taken place lately to have this be a political motive. It is just flat supply and demand and the report says the new oil sites found would increase domestic oil production by 50%. If you look at the price now compared to earlier comfirming the current price.

DH () - September 29, 2006 at 10:15 am

Well, like you and every other red-blooded American, I believe everything Bush and Big Oil tell us. Afterall, this administration’s record of truthfullness is without blemish. The fact that this administration has incredibly close ties to big oil and that big oil has been posting unprecidented profits throughout this war shouldn’t make us suspicious. No, that would be un-American. We should just listen to what Bush and Big Oil’s PR hacks spin and call that “logical and truthful” on every message board we can.

The truth is, the jury is still out on this one. Here’s a prediction for you: gas will be back up to $3.00 or better by Christmas. Pure market forces, of course, of course…

wheat (URL) - September 29, 2006 at 7:31 pm

Of course, of course… Hehe! :-D

timsamoff () (URL) - October 02, 2006 at 08:42 am

I wasn’t even thinking about Bush and the other things. I’m sure people are upset for some reason for all that. However, unexpected oil finds from Tahiti and the Gulf of Mexico with the Gulf of Mexico find increasing domestic oil production by 50% seem to have a greater impact on why oil went down around 50%. All of those things you mentioned were besides the point of what I found which is not biased in any way. If you read my post I didn’t make any value judgements regarding your post. I was just pointing out a great oil find and then politics keep bringing up regarding my response. It doesn’t make sense. I made nodefense of Bush in my post nor attacked anyone who responded negatively against him so the accusations of accusing people of being “un-American” just can’t stick. I would be interested in someone take on this great oil find.

dh () - October 02, 2006 at 09:38 am

I’m sure people are upset for some reason for all that.

“for some reason”? Does it surprise you that people would be upset that their president has a documented track record of lying to them? Does it surprise you that people would be upset that their government spies on them without bothering to follow its own laws regarding requesting warrants? Does it surprise you that people are upset when their government practices torture and defends it as necessary and proper? It surprises me that anyone still has any confidence in this band of liars.

Tim mentioned gas prices, so I made a quip about gas prices and a current conspiracy theory about why they’re dropping. That’s relevant.

The info that you posted is irrelevant to the discussion, as the article itself makes clear:

“But the vast oil deposit roughly four miles beneath the ocean floor won’t significantly reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil and it won’t help lower prices at the pump anytime soon.”

“Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Fadel Gheit estimated that the first production for the Chevron-led partnership might not come on line until after 2010, [. . .]”

So, as the source you cited clearly states, this new find has nothing to do with current gas prices. It may help us in the future, but we’ve got to get it out of the ground first, and that’s going to cost money and take time.

Keep in mind that fossil fuels are in the process of being depleted. Scarcity raises prices. Whatever the cause of the current dip in gas prices, it will be short lived when you consider the bigger picture: that we’re running out of oil and that we need to find sustainable fuel sources.

If the American people had any confidence in Bush, 40% of them would not be willing to believe the current conspiracy theory about him and his Big Oil friends controlling gas prices. I’m normally skeptical of conspiracy theories. But Bush has such a reputation for lying that I’m taking a wait-and-see attitude toward this one. Here’s the sad thing (for BushCo): even if it turns out that Bush and company had a hand in this price dip, it won’t matter in November. His hand is played out. People are sick of him. And they have every reason to be.

wheat (URL) - October 02, 2006 at 10:53 am

But in anefficient market those new found supplies DO affect oil prices for that is supply that originally wasn’t reflected in the currect price. True it must betaken out of the ground but valuation are based on all available supply and thefact is this is new supply. True it won’t affect our demand for foreign oil but this new supplydoes affect oil prices. Especially since it is equivilent to 50% of the US domestic production. Also, shows oil, while still scarce is less scarce than before in that this new supply is again 50% of US doestic production.
What is so wrong for me to point out something that has a direct impact on oil price, supply? Prices reflect all available information on past, present and future supply and demand as part of an efficient market. This new information of additional supply does therefore affect prices. My response gave no indication short term or long term. I was only looking at the current price (supply and demand).

I will agree with you this will have an intermediate affect. However, at this current point the prices reflect this new information on supply that wasn’t factored into the price previously. I won’tbedragged into a political back and forth when that wasn’t my intent of my response. Where in my response did you get an indication of my confidence or lack of confidence in Bush other than from previous posts which are not germane to this discussion?

dh () - October 02, 2006 at 11:33 am

dh: I posted my comment in hopes of amusing Tim, not you. History has shown that you and I can’t have a profitable exchange of ideas here. Perhaps we simply do not agree on enough key things to have a meaningful discussion. So if you don’t want to be “dragged into” a discussion with me, try not responding directly to my comments and I’ll gladly return the favor. Or let’s both do Tim a favor and take it to email, rather than cluttering his comments with questionably relevant commentary.

wheat () (URL) - October 02, 2006 at 1:47 pm

I thought what I said was profitable. I guess I don’t see what I said as being “questionably relevant commentary”. One must define that on this subject when an economical explaination is directly relevant to this particular subject. Also, oil is a publically traded commodity strongly giving credence that the information I found about new found oil sources has an impact on the current oil price. I was trying to put some objective facts to the reason for the decrease in oil prices and I don’t see a political connection in such an economic way on oil prices that would cause as big a drop on the price of oil as compared to the facts I mentioned. That’s all

dh () - October 02, 2006 at 2:15 pm

dh: your attempt to link the results of this test drilling directly to current prices at the pump is what I find “questionably relevant.” Your own source says that no such link exists. You keep referring to these test results as “new supply,” but your own source says oil from this find will not become part of our supply until 2010 or later. Your source contradicts the points you’re attempting to make.

wheat (URL) - October 02, 2006 at 4:26 pm

I’m sorry it isn’t contradictory. It is new oil in the ground that wasn’t there previously. True, it will take some time to get it out but it is new supply. After 10 economics courses, the understanding of how valuations occur should be understood. This new information is being reflected in the price. If you feel there is an overraction then why not buy some oil futures or oil stocks. It isn’t a contradiction. New found oil in the ground whatever timetable has impact on oil prices if we are talking about the levels that were in the source. The fact remains the price went down the same day this was disclosed. That is more than coincedence.

dh () - October 02, 2006 at 5:32 pm

I just think it’s funny that all of this came from one sentence at the very beginning of the post. I wasn’t even trying to make an economical or political statement… I was just happy about it.

But, I’d have to say that Wheat’s arguments are pretty intriguing. To be honest, it does happen every election period, big oil find or no.

timsamoff () (URL) - October 03, 2006 at 07:49 am

Tim and all here are the prices for the oil futures it includes the DEC 2010 futures contract. So who says this find doesn’t affect oil prices. ;) :)

http://futures.tradingcharts.com/marketq..

dh () - October 03, 2006 at 4:27 pm

Last I checked, correlation does not equal causation. Did you have to take at least one basic level statistics class along with all those economics classes? Or are you now going to start arguing that increased summer ice cream sales and murder rates are related? Source: http://allpsych.com/researchmethods/corr..

wheat (URL) - October 03, 2006 at 4:59 pm

Wee! (jokerp)

timsamoff () (URL) - October 03, 2006 at 10:57 pm

Commenting has been permanently disabled. Please use the Contact button above.