SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)3/7/2006 12:56:17 AM
From: Karen Lawrence  Respond to of 362463
 
The U.S. trade deficit is a bigger threat to the domestic economy
than either the federal budget deficit or consumer debt
and could lead to "political turmoil".
Warren Buffett

Running Chinese Trade Deficits

Just look at the U.S. trade deficit and track the evaporation of your standard of living in one extended exhale of life’s breath. Reported by the Economic Policy Institute, the U.S. Department of Commerce reported that the international deficit in goods and services trade reached a record level of $726 billion in 2005, an 18% increase over 2004. The growth of the trade deficit with China, which reached $202 billion in 2005, was responsible for the entire increase in the United States’ non-oil trade deficit. Factor out the enormous cost of waging a contracted garrison presence in the Middle East and the subsequent increase in the cost of oil from regional market disruptions and you are left with a trade crisis that threatens the very economic independence of the American economy.

As most sophisticated observers of the world economy understand, the very mention of maintaining economic independence for a domestic economy is international sacrilege. The macro theorists eagerly look to impose micro management on national economics in the name of Free Trade. Their notion of free means conformity to global trade rules is applied to some and ignored by others. Lest one misconstrue that it is simply an enforcement issue, the basic error in the Free Trade model is that sovereign countries resist formulas that have major disruptions and disadvantages to domestic economies. The one great example of a country ignoring their national self-interest is the United States.

China has no such problem. Their hierarchical authority structure serves their commerce needs well. Reaching rapprochements among transnational State/Capitalists is natural when deals are made among similar authoritarians. While Chinese generals exploit their peasants, globetrotting masters of the universe extort their host countries. And what impact does such unnatural non-national transactions have on the United States? EPI concludes: “The rapid growth of imports and the loss of U.S. shares of world export markets, especially since 2000, have damaged the competitiveness of U.S. producers. The rising trade deficit in manufacturing has opened an ever-wider wedge between U.S. production and the nation’s purchases of manufactured goods.”

That assessment is a fact, only the drumbeaters for Free Trade will explain away the domestic consequences of vanished American jobs as a healthy economy. To add insult to injury the economist, Chen Wenjing, urged the United States to give up its "Cold War" attitude toward China. "It's known to all that the United States curbs exports and selectively sells only Boeing aircraft, soybeans and cotton to China, and that is also discriminatory as it doesn't apply the same policy to other countries," he told Reuters. "The United States needs to abandon its discriminatory policy and give up its Cold War mentality by removing the restrictions on high-tech exports to China," he said, referring to a ban intended to deny technology to the Chinese military.

So from the horse’s mouth you get the certainty that the Wall Street traders are always seeking. Sell China any high tech advancement to pay for all that discounted mass merchandise that clogs up the landfills. A formula to cook Chinese egg soup that will leave you hungrier every time. Bamboo shoots don’t build a healthy community, but the charlatans of WTO commerce want you to believe you will be dining on steak! The American public is a slow learner but they are not even that dumb. So why do all the politicians fall in line and take their marching orders that are determined to destroy a self-sufficient national economy? How will learning to speak Spanish help in a world where Asia will be selling every incidental must less essential product needed to sustain a civilized life?

trade_picture_figA_20060210.jpg
Track your wealth being transferred overseas

But it gets worse! More from the EPI: “The U.S. also had a $44 billion trade deficit in “advanced technology products” (ATP) in 2005, an increase of 20% since 2004. The United States has had a deficit in ATP products since 2002, and the balance in this sector has fallen steadily since 1997, when the United States had a surplus of $33 billion in these sectors. Imports of high-tech goods from China were responsible for the entire U.S. deficit in ATPs.”



You know things are desperate when the New York Times gives print to protectionism. “In the Senate, Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, and Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, have proposed imposing a 27.5 percent tariff on Chinese goods until Beijing allows its currency to float more freely against the dollar.” Though the lack of confidence in the dollar has an affect, the fundamental reason that the greenback is doomed is the ‘triplet treason treatment’.



1. Debt created central banking used to control the velocity of exchange while ignoring the quality of the medium.

2. Free Trade treaties that fraudulently promise prosperity, while stripping the economy of the domestic capacity to make, produce or employ citizens to meet the domestic needs of the country.

3. The axis of corruption willing to sell out our true national interest for access to international power and global influence.



Tariffs are the solution to cripple China’s insatiable voracity to super power dominance. America’s blindness to the very real Chinese ascendancy goes well beyond economic credits from U.S. debits. The trade deficit is real money gone forever and will need to be earned back if it ever returns.



The summary and warning offered by the EPI is so obvious that only a deliberate liar could deny the empirical reality. “The U.S. trade deficit poses great risks for the economy. The U.S. must borrow abroad to finance its trade deficits. The recent decline in the dollar indicates that private foreign lenders are less willing to supply new credit. Foreign governments stepped into the gap and financed a growing share of U.S. international debt in recent years. A rapid, uncontrolled decline in the dollar could destabilize U.S. financial markets and sharply increase interest rates and inflation. Foreign governments, primarily in Asia, have provided a substantial share of the net capital inflows in recent years.”



The United States used to be a pragmatic country with common sense citizens. Today, America is occupied by a “Ship of Fools”. Investors are so confused that they peddle worthless pieces of paper as they sail around the globe looking for a rainbow that was always back in their own land. Putting your fellow neighbor out of work for the promise of foreign returns on capital is suicidal. Fantasy utopian trade leads to a very real version of dystopia deprivation, oppression and state terror.



Depriving China of the technical means and the financial muscle to bury our society seems the sensible national interest. Is this a country of individuals or has it become a stable of beasts of burden. Paying for a ridiculous trade deficit to build up China is part of the plan to bankrupt this country. Free Trade backers are “Fifth Column” subversives. Turn off the spigot, end the debt and stop the bleeding. China may be a fake friend to corporate boards, but is a foe to our own best interests.



U.S. trade representative, Rob Portman issued a report that would establish a chief counsel for China trade enforcement to lead a task force to ensure better compliance by China with rules of the World Trade Organization. If this is the best that can be done by our government to reign in this predatory tiger, then we better form a better domestic government. The WTO has proven its destructive policies. Long ago was the time for rational protection, now is the juncture for national survival. Correct our priorities and put an end to trade deficits. That’s how you restore prosperity and put America back to work at living wage employment. The future is now, before your country goes broke . . .

batr.org

SARTRE - February 20, 2006



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)3/7/2006 1:54:47 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362463
 
Best Quotes of February 2006

By John Rubino

dollarcollapse.com

Texas Congressman Ron Paul
“Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation’s people--just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.

The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to ‘rule’ the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can’t last.

Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble-- generated by easy money-- has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world’s rejection of the dollar. It’s bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979-1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct.”

Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley
“Suffering from the greatest domestic saving shortfall in modern history, the US is increasingly dependent on surplus foreign saving to fill the void. The net national saving rate -- the combined saving of individuals, businesses, and the government sector after adjusting for depreciation -- fell into negative territory to the tune of -1.3% of national income in late 2005. That means America doesn’t save enough even to cover the replacement of its worn-out capital stock. This is a first for the US in the modern post-World War II era -- and I believe a first for any hegemonic power over a much longer sweep of world history.”

Richard Daughty, the Mogambo Guru
But, for some perverse reason that future historians will make whole careers arguing about, the moronic people of America think all of these price inflations are good! Hahaha! A nation of morons! I sort of remember a quote by Benjamin Franklin, who was asked, when they finished work on the Constitution, 'And what kind of government do we have?' and he replied 'A democracy, if you can keep it.'

What he surely meant by that enigmatic phrase was if you let people decide tax policy, the numerous have-not people will always vote to give themselves somebody else's money. A democratic, majority-rule government always elects to provide a 'free lunch' for everybody! Whee! Thus, democracy will ultimately destroy the economy. That is why the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution that money shall only be of silver and gold, which is the only thing that would possibly prevent it.”

Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve Board Chairman
"In the past, when the inverted yield curve presaged a slowdown in the economy, it was usually in a situation where both long-term and short-term interest rates were actually quite high in real terms, suggesting a good bit of drag on the economy. With the real interest rate not creating a drag on economic activity, I don’t anticipate that the term structure signals an oncoming slowing of the economy.”

Peter Schiff, Euro Pacific Capital
"The only way for housing prices to stay high is for the Fed to keep inflating. Conveniently, the captain currently at the helm of the monetary ship of state just happens to be Ben Bernanke, who as a Fed governor spoke about the Fed’s ability to fend off deflation by using the handy invention of the printing press. Though his words may have may have spoken in reference to consumer prices, his actions will certainly be concentrated on asset prices, especially housing. Like a lounge club magician, the Feb distracts the audience with short-term rate hikes, while behind its back it monetizes long-term government bonds. It creates the illusion of its being an inflation fighter, while in reality it is an inflation creator. No wonder it wants to further cover its tracks by no longer reporting M3!”

James Turk, GoldMoney
"We moving closer to that moment in time when silver breaks down from its current pennant formation, which is the first step needed for the precious metals to resume their uptrend in this ongoing bull market. If this first step happens, then I expect everything to fall into place. A breakout from the rising trend channel will not be far behind, and by then, the precious metals will be near or at new high prices - with silver leading the way.”

Bill Fleckenstein, Fleckenstein Capital
“But let me just ask you this: If you feared for the value of this piece of paper called the dollar and you put it into a hard asset, does that de facto constitute a bubble? Of course not. That constitutes a bull market. To be a bubble, in my opinion, behavior in and around the asset class under discussion has to spin so out of control as to distort the underlying economy. I don't believe the commodity markets are anywhere near that point. Maybe they'll reach it somewhere down the road, though I kind of doubt that. In the meantime, I anticipate a bullish chain of events for the metals: When the ‘right’ data emerge to support the fact that the economy is weaker than it appears, I believe the Fed will make clear that it's closer to pausing than people think. (Bernanke himself told Congress last Wednesday that whatever the Fed does will be ‘dependent on the data.’) If that turns out to be the case, I think there will an explosion in the precious metals and currencies, an outcome that I intend to capture.”

Ted Butler, Investment Rarities
"This proposed silver ETF, as well as any ETF on any commodity, is as dumb as a bag of rocks. Sure, it will make the price explode, and precisely for that aspect virtually all silver investors, including me, look upon it favorably. Suddenly take away a big chunk of any commodity’s supply and there will be a big impact on price. That’s elementary. But there is more to the story than that.

My main objection with commodity ETFs is that, in addition to artificially altering supply and demand, they turn legitimate commodity law and regulation on its head. The main thrust of commodity law is to prevent concentrated speculative buying and selling from artificially influencing prices. This primary premise and intent of commodity law is obliterated by the concentrated buying (and selling someday) that a commodity ETF insures. It’s as if someone sat down and devised an idea that would upend all the safeguards and regulations against manipulation that have taken many decades to develop.

Over twenty-five years ago, the weight of commodity law came to bear on the Hunt Brothers in the most famous manipulation of them all, the great silver manipulation. The basis of the manipulation was the related and concentrated buying and resultant price pressure brought on the price of silver. The proposed Barclays silver ETF promises to legitimize the very acts which the US Government succeeded in prosecuting. Talk about irony."

Doug Noland, PrudentBear
“A solid case can be made that 14 rate increases have failed to tighten monetary conditions. Despite the inverted yield curve, Credit conditions are generally as loose as ever and, as one would expect, imbalances balloon only larger. Of course, the bond bulls will contend that we are merely waiting patiently for the traditional monetary policy lag to run its course. I suggest there’s much more to it than that.

It is worth noting that broad money supply has rapidly approached $10.3 Trillion. It is also worth pondering that M3 has inflated almost 40% since Fed funds were last at 4.50% (May 2001). At a 5% rate, M3 savers will receive more than $500 billion of interest-income, a huge increase from only a couple years back when rates were 1% and M3 was significantly smaller. There is scant attention paid to this source of augmented income, with analysts instead focusing on the restraining effect of adjustable-rate mortgage resets. But with the ongoing proliferation and easy-availability of mortgage products with low initial payments (teaser-rate ARMs, negative amortization and option-ARMs, and balloon structures), I would be surprised if the household sector in aggregate experiences a significant increase in monthly mortgage payments this year.”

Steven Saville, Speculative Investor
"We would be extremely surprised if the uninterrupted inflation of the past 70 years were followed by a period of genuine deflation (a prolonged decline in the total supply of money and credit). One of the reasons this would surprise us is that there IS so much debt in the system. The high debt levels actually make deflation LESS likely, not more likely, because the current monetary system -- the world's greatest-ever Ponzi scheme -- could not survive a bout of genuine deflation. That is, deflation will never be a viable policy option regardless of how bad things get. Instead, the central banks of the world will likely risk destroying their currencies and obliterating the values of their bonds before they will permit deflation to occur."

Tom Au, TheStreet.com
"Another commentator opined that the U.S. government is probably underestimating inflation because it is focusing on the wrong type of inflation. I would agree with that, having identified no less than five different types of inflation: commodity inflation, wage inflation, monetary inflation, fiscal inflation, and foreign exchange inflation. Before discussing 'inflation,' it helps to identify which form of inflation is being talked about."



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)3/7/2006 11:56:58 PM
From: ThirdEye  Respond to of 362463
 
Been there, done that. This ain't Mish's house.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)3/8/2006 12:23:23 AM
From: SiouxPal  Respond to of 362463
 
Yes, you are.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)3/8/2006 6:14:37 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362463
 
Fastow details Enron maneuvers
__________________________________________________________

by Claire Poole in Houston
TheDeal.com
11:42 EST, 8, Mar 2006

Former Enron Corp. CFO Andrew Fastow fought back tears as he told a jury in the Enron fraud trial it was his fault his wife went to prison for a year for signing a tax return that included $36,000 in "gifts" that were actually kickbacks related to a partnership he set up to hide losses at the one-time energy giant.

"I misled my wife. I led her to believe that these checks were gifts," Fastow said, wiping back tears and struggling to compose himself. "She would not in my opinion have ever signed a fraudulent tax return."

Fastow, 44, pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy in January 2004, contingent upon the government striking a deal for his wife so neither one of them would be in prison at the same time and not be able to care for their two young sons.

Fastow has provided some of the most damning testimony yet against former CEO Jeffrey Skilling in the sixth week of trial. Skilling has pleaded not guilty to 31 counts of fraud, conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors, while former chairman Kenneth Lay has pleaded not guilty to seven counts of fraud and conspiracy. Both face decades in prison if convicted.

Fastow spent some of the afternoon explaining more of LJM's investments on his "Global Galactic" list, which he described earlier Tuesday, March 7. These investments helped hide Enron losses and enriched him. Among the investments was "Backbone," which was the purchase of unused fiber-optic cable from Enron Energy Services to help it make its earnings targets for the quarter.

Fastow also proposed to Skilling that LJM buy Enron's wind unit and have Fastow leave Enron to manage it and other private equity investments in the energy industry. That way, Enron wouldn't have to disclose the sale because Fastow — a related party — would no longer be at Enron.

"I thought it was a good investment and a good platform for me to do it," he said. "It would also allow me to expand LJM, which could do more deals with Enron." Fastow said that could include "parking," or warehousing, other hard-to-sell assets for Enron, including Portland General Electric Co. and Wessex Water Services Ltd.

When asked by Assistant U.S. Attorney John Hueston if LJM by itself was illegal, Fastow said no. "It made legal deals," he said. "Certain things I did as general partner of LJM were illegal."

Then Hueston launched into a discussion of the Raptors, which were four shell companies Enron created and funded with its own stock — and in which LJM invested — to shore up value-losing investments and further hide losses. Fastow mentioned as an example Catalytica Combustion Systems Inc., which it actually wrote up before moving it to one of the Raptors, thus booking a gain.

David Delainey, former chief executive of Enron North America, previously testified that Catalytica's own management valued Enron's stake at $90 million in advance of an initial public offering versus Enron's valuation of $120 million, which Delainey called "a stretch." The sale of its interest through the Raptors allowed Enron to book a $70 million earnings boost in one quarter in 2000 and avoid a $90 million loss by year's end.

"The Raptors were hiding losses," Fastow explained simply. "LJM's role was to help Enron paint a rosy picture, to help Enron's numbers look better than they were."

What advantage did Enron have with the Raptors versus another third party? "It would open up a kimono and show problems Enron had with its merchant portfolio," Fastow said.

Why would Enron agree to pay LJM a front-end and back-end fee on some Raptor deals? "Enron was paying $11 million to hide hundreds of millions of dollars it would have to report," Fastow said.

Did Fastow ever hesitate to accept a Raptor asset? He testified the only one was oil explorer Mariner Energy Inc., which he believed was "way overvalued" and Enron had at one time hired investment banks to sell. "My fear was the [difference in the] value by investment banks and us would highlight what was going on," he said.

Private equity firms Acon Investments LLC and Carlyle/Riverstone bought Mariner Energy from Enron in March 2004 for about $275 million, including $100 million of equity. Last year, they quadrupled their investment in a $385 million private placement.

But Fastow became so lackadaisical about the Raptors that once, when he got a frantic call on the last business day of the year that someone needed to hedge an asset via a Raptor to make his earnings target and could he meet with him, Fastow told him: "Don't bother" and "go ahead and do the deal." Why? "I got my money back," he said.

"I didn't exercise control," he testified later of LJM and the Raptors. "I let Enron hedge at any price they wanted." When the Raptors later ran into trouble after Enron's stock began to decline in value, Fastow said there was a plan to merge the four Raptors into one. Fastow balked at the idea because LJM wouldn't get $30 million that was owed to it. Fastow recalls former chief accounting officer Rick Causey's retorting: "Hey, that's not yours to begin with."

Fastow also admitted that Enron backdated documents on router maker Avici Systems Inc. by looking back at its highest stock price in time, then hedging it at that amount through the Raptors, which resulted in a $160 million earnings boost in the third quarter of 2000. Skilling's response to the maneuver? "A pat on the back and 'keep it up,'?" Fastow testified.

Fastow admitted that he was criticized on his performance review by Skilling for not getting along with other top Enron managers. "Given the role I was playing, it was embarrassing for unit heads not to make their numbers. We created vehicles to solve the problem, which was embarrassing for them," he said. "I was also obnoxious about it. I rubbed their faces in it."

When Fastow asked Skilling in the spring of 2001 if he intended to use LJM anymore, Fastow said Skilling replied: "I love LJM. I want to do all the deals that we can. I just don't like the footnotes," referring to their required disclosure in Enron's financial statements and increasing questions from analysts and the media about them.

Fastow disagreed with Skilling's and Lay's comments to employees and the investing public that Enron was not a trading company, saying he heard Skilling once tell Enron North America chief John Lavorato not to get "spooked" after he lost hundreds of millions of dollars in one-day trading and encouraged him to get back into the game "twice as hard."

Fastow said Skilling also told Lavorato when he complained that his earnings target for 2001 was too high: "I've got $1 billion in reserves for you. If you can't f'ing meet that with that head start, I'll find someone else who can."

Fastow even suggested at a meeting of top executives in 2001 that Enron come clean and admit that it was not only a trading company, but one of the best in the world. "I got stunned silence when I said it," he remembers.

Fastow also recalled a day when Skilling came into his office exhausted, saying, "I've hit a brick wall. I don't know what to do." Fastow suggested "parking assets" like Enron's underperforming international holdings, until Skilling could find a merger partner, and Skilling directed him to "work on it."

According to an Enron internal risk document in August 2001, the value of Enron's international assets — including its water unit Azurix Inc. — had diminished from $10.1 billion on Enron's books to $5.5 billion, by Skilling's estimation, which was never disclosed to the public. He then named at least 10 serious problems Enron was facing that could lead to a third-quarter loss and write-down.

"I thought the foundation was crumbling and we were doing everything we could to prop it up," he said. "It was a pretty tough picture."

Shortly after that, Skilling resigned for what he claimed were personal reasons, which Fastow said surprised him. "Holy cow is a nice way to say it," he said.

After the jury was dismissed for the day, Hueston said he had a few more hours to question Fastow on Wednesday, to which Judge Simeon Lake III responded: "Sharpen your pencil." Skilling's lead attorney, Daniel Petrocelli, said he would cross-examine Fastow himself.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (60255)5/31/2006 12:35:10 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362463
 
The Oil Bubble Is Next to Burst

article.nationalreview.com

The free market is the ticket for this commodity round trip.

By Thomas E. Nugent*

Tune in to any of those financial news networks and you’ll be sure to find a commodity guru still predicting $1,000 an ounce for gold and $100 a barrel for oil. Should the little guy jump on this bandwagon? Or is it too late? Well, the recent plunge in some commodity prices is giving speculators second thoughts about the durability of the commodity bull market.

The price volatility of another well-known commodity, natural gas, can be instructive here. As the world frets about energy shortages, natural gas is suffering from rising inventories and sluggish demand. Last year, the gurus were looking for $20 per million BTUs of natural gas. Recently, that price dropped below $6 per million BTUs. Natural-gas price fluctuations, as represented in the following chart (prepared by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis), indicate the forming of a price bubble, with natural gas prices rising from a low of approximately $6.50 in March 2005 to a peak of $14.50 in December 2005. But once the peak heating season reflected a warmer-than-normal winter, the price of natural gas plummeted back below the low levels of 2005. (Incidentally, many tech stocks charted much the same course between 1998 and 2002.)

One irony here is that little news about the recent natural-gas round trip makes it into the media. Why aren’t raucous politicians singling out gas-company executives — labeling them patriots for sacrificing profitability in the name of helping the country through an energy crisis? The reason for the silence is that energy-company executives do not determine energy prices and the politicians know it. In Washington, good news is no news — so you won’t hear any good news about the fall in natural gas prices.

On the other hand, when it comes to the bad-news rise in oil prices, Washington politicians are not only vocal, they are predictably nearsighted in their proposed solutions: Punish the auto companies by imposing higher CAFÉ requirements! Impose windfall profits taxes on oil-company profits! Prohibit drilling for oil off our coasts and Alaska! Pillory the oil-company execs!

But our experience from the energy-price run-up of the 1970s reminds us that free markets will resolve high energy prices, while politicians will only exacerbate them.

In particular, here are a few reasons why free-market factors will erode the current high price of oil: More windmills and solar power will pop up, the billions of dollars invested to get oil from tar sands will begin paying dividends, nuclear power will reincarnate, a rising number of drilling rigs will begin operating within the U.S., smaller cars with higher fuel mileage will proliferate, substitute fuels such as ethanol and hydrogen will take hold, and on and on.

Efforts to innovate, substitute, or even conserve at the same time the oil supply is expanding will create the perfect environment for an oil-price decline. Back in the early 1970s, and then again in the early 1980s, high oil prices led to lower oil prices. Oil bulls rely on rising global demand, but few of them fear a rise in supply through incremental oil as well as new energy sources that will displace oil as the primary fuel.

When Hertz begins to charge less for big car rentals than small car rentals, as pointed out in a recent Wall Street Journal article, the handwriting, as they say, is on the wall.

From a high price eclipsing $75 per barrel, oil has recently fallen below $68. If the fall in natural-gas prices is a good indicator, oil prices still have a long way to drop.

*Thomas E. Nugent is executive vice president and chief investment officer of PlanMember Advisors, Inc., and principal of Victoria Capital Management, Inc.