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

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (66086)	5/3/2006 4:09:36 PM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 362351

Boy you're old <vbg> My thinking is that it means our money is not as much MONEY as it used to be. Otherwise why would everything cost so much more of our money? So the question is if money is no longer money, then what is money? I have been investing in gold like you but lately I think I need to go further and invest in other countries. I threw a dart today and happened to buy an india fund that went gangbusters. I've always been opposed to globalization but for investing purposes I think that's the future, the chickens are coming home to roost.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (66086)	5/3/2006 4:09:55 PM
From: T L Comiskey	Respond to of 362351

'11 percent of Americans said Fox News,' 'Billy O.. must be cummin in his pin stripes' Fox, BBC, Al Jazeera most trusted: poll news.yahoo.com Asked to name the news source they most trusted, without any prompting, 59 percent of Egyptians said Al Jazeera, 52 percent of Brazilians said Rede Globo, 32 percent of Britons said the BBC, 22 percent of Germans said ARD and 11 percent of Americans said Fox News, each leading their respective nations. The most trusted news brands globally were the BBC, Britain's publicly funded broadcaster, and CNN, which is owned by the world's biggest media conglomerate, Time Warner Inc..

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (66086)	5/3/2006 4:35:45 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 362351

With a few exceptions (I'll get to the exceptions), the price of gasoline has been declining in real terms (inflation adjusted) for a century. For your example, a person with a similar starting job would usually be able to buy more gallons per hour worked than their parents. This makes sense: a combination of economies of scale and a learning curve has made the oil/gasoline industry more efficient. Now the interesting part: the exceptions. The first major exception was the Depression. The real price of gasoline increased, even though the retail price (nominal price) stayed steady in the '30s - this was a period of deflation. The next exceptions were in the '70s - the two supply driven oil shocks. Nominal prices rose significantly, reaching $1.37 per gallon for 1981 (National Average for entire year). That equates to $2.96 per gallon in 2005 dollars (real terms). The final exception is the last few years. Real prices are near the record highs of 100 years ago and 1981. Since the real price has recently risen so dramatically, your daughter can buy less per hour than you with a starting job. So why are real prices near record levels? Especially when the long term trend is for cheaper real prices? Clearly demand has risen faster than supply in the least few years ... mostly because of the surge in demand in China and other countries. Currently there is very little excess capacity in the World. Was the oil industry caught off guard by the surge in demand? Or is it a more sinister problem - peak oil - and they simply cannot increase the quantity supplied. We don't really know.