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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (137188)	6/20/2004 9:22:14 PM
From: quehubo	Respond to of 281500

If someone called Zeev makes you feel better about oil without SA then good for you. A 30 minute review of the DOE EIA website and some common sense would tell you that the loss of SA oil would be a disaster. Do you know how many years tiny reserves that require $45+ to make them economical would take to bring to the market? Think the duration of our involvement in WWII.

To: Sam who wrote (137188)	6/21/2004 12:11:35 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 281500

Regular gas has dropped to about $1.90 per gallon in my area over the past few days...seems headed lower to according to the station owner... JLA

To: Sam who wrote (137188)	6/23/2004 1:25:48 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Sam; Re: "Oil won't go much higher than $45/barrel or so for long. Above that price, there are a lot of reserves available, even here in the US. Zeev knows more details than I do, but oil won't go over $45 except for relatively short periods of time." The alternative sources take years to develop. I consider "years" as "long". But as far as figuring out a top price for oil there are other factors. The oil shock itself will cause high price inflation in the US, and interest rates will have to rise accordingly. We're already running big time budget deficits with all time low interest rates, higher rates will push those deficits even higher. The oil shock will put a lot of people out of work, and that will put more pressure on those budget deficits. Higher bill for oil will push the trade deficit, already high, that much higher, and in the face of high unemployment, the Fed will tend to let the dollar drop rather than raise rates high enough to put people out of work. All I'm doing is describing the "stagflation" that we've already been through as a result of a relatively mild oil shock back in 1973. Cut off oil from Saudi Arabia (and Iraq and whoever else ends up in flames) and we could get much much worse. Zeev could be right, but only in the long term, and only in dollars corrected for inflation. -- Carl