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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (373455)	3/10/2008 6:07:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572963

And the sellers would be less wealthy... hum, sounds like there is a transfer of wealth going on! No it doesn't. Two changes over time don't amount to a transfer. If you get a better job, and I get fired, then you have more money and I have less, but I didn't transfer the money to you. The value of oil is variable. Its worth, to the extent it has any objective worth, what the market says its worth. If the price goes up than people with a lot of it are wealthier, (they have a larger stock of wealth) directly because the value of what they owned changed, not because of a transfer. The change in the price of oil isn't a transfer or exchange from anyone or too anyone. Its an increase in the value of a commodity, it isn't someone giving something to someone else. Or we have no alternative... other than shutting down out economy. If the alternative is shutting down the economy than that means we benefit more than we costs. Avoiding the economy "shutting down" or being greatly harmed is a massive benefit.