Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (8700)	4/6/2002 7:12:16 AM
From: quehubo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206131

Ray, quite an oversimplified response to the reality of what happens during war and major civil unrest. Supply may be restored after an extended period after a new regime takes over and restores production. How many major conflicts have occurred in the last 40 years in the ME without major impacts to oil prices? If maximum revenues are the goal why would they not shoot for a higher price with lower exports over the coming decades. Last time I looked they hold most all the incremental oil supply and their ability to control prices will only increase.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (8700)	4/6/2002 3:36:18 PM
From: Frank	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 206131

Well Ray, the sad thing is we will soon know who is correct----you and the Cato writers or me. You see, I don't believe our oil supply is stable and I certainly do not think it it is diverse. Quehub correctly notes the importance of incremental supply---it is not in our favor. We do not have the rigs, we do not have the drilling prospects and we do not have the personnel to stabilize our supply. We are at the mercy of our suppliers. Have you looked at where the world's oil reserves lie---in the most politically unstable areas of the world. Were you around in the 70s when this Nation's economy went into a tailspin over reduced supply--and took years to recover. Are you willing to trust the stability of our economy over the next 15 years to Russia? Have you heard of the new one billion kids on the block that want oil---they are called China and will be our competitors for supply. Both you and the Cato Institute apparently believe SA and other ME producers will just continue to produce and sell oil to the infidels (that's us) regardless of who is in charge of the government. This effort to impose rational economic theory on the irrational proves once again that economics is far too important to be left to economists. I have a few energy credentials myself--as you may know. And I say, you and the Cato Institute are wrong. Our Nation has an unstable incremental supply of oil and it is becoming more precarious every day. We do not need to run out of oil to have social and economic problems of a huge scale--a few million barrel shortfall will do us in. We produce 9 billion a day and consume 20. Of these imports, fully one fourth comes from ME. Japan produces nil and consumes 6. Europe imports 8. Have you heard of competition? --i.e. supply and demand. Hear my rede--the "diversity'' you tout applies to consuming nations far more than producing ones. The thirst for oil is no longer confined to the U.S. and a few other nations. Our children and granchildren will rue the day we allowed our energy infrastructure to atrophy and placed ourselves at the whims of those who despise us, our way of life and our freedom. Yet, with all my heart I hope you are correct. Tonight my Marine son will be walking guard duty in a "safe" desert----but tomorrow? For his sake, and for thousands like him, I pray I am wrong----Frank