2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 399.29

+0.9%

4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: elmatador who wrote (1269)	10/21/2005 1:10:46 AM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) of 218544

Oil is a very good example. The Economist has also displayed their same total ignorance of the business world in reporting on the oil business, as they do when reporting on the automobile manufacturing business. Their message is that the world needs many more refineries, echoing the misinformed pablum Bush has unsuccessfully tried to peddle. After decades of barely breaking-even, refiners are finally enjoying a good, even lush, return on investment. What would motivate an oil company to expand existing refineries enough, to bring their return on investment back to zero? Let alone the lunatic idea of building additional refineries. No doubt you believe business profits should be prohibited as a compliment to your call for lower wages. This reminds me of Carlo Cipolla's Third Law of Stupidity: A stupid person is one who causes losses to others - while deriving no gain himself, and even possibly incurring losses. The only person who would eliminate their profits by expanding capacity would be: a bunch of out of touch old boys in a stuffy London club writing a magazine with "know it all advice" on how the world should be run; or a lunatic addict-alcoholic turned politician who finds himself the American President. Supply of refined product is somewhat tight right now because of the enormous demand caused by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but this problem is temporary and will diminish when Bush leaves office so the war in Iraq without a purpose can end. The more you know about a topic, the more wildly hilarious and misinformed the Economist becomes. You should be less inclined to believe just anything that you read, especially when reading a news source which has such a long history of misunderstanding the world around them. .

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next