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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (24633)	6/25/2008 1:38:26 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

I honestly don't believe that oil speculation is a significant portion of the price, rather, I think it is mostly due to supply and demand imbalances. However, I do have to point out a fallacy in this article's assumptions: The truth is that speculation in oil futures adds almost nothing to the price of oil because futures trading is a zero sum game. It is like a poker game in which money is won only by others loosing. At the end of the game the same amount of money is on the table; it has merely changed hands. Although, he is correct is stating that oil future trading is a zero sum game, he then goes on to jump to the conclusion that "the same amount of money is on the table". That is incorrect. Actually, we have seen tremendous money flows out of other sectors and into commodities trading over the last 8 years. Specifically, money flows into oil futures has increased. What props up stock prices is in part a money flow demand for futures measured against futures supply, which is anchored to the underlying supply of the commodity. As such, when we see alot of money moving out of other sectors to buy up oil futures, then that actually DOES lead to large price increases in the price of oil futures. His article seems to ignore this impact. Now, I don't have the data to calculate the percentage of the current oil price that can be attributed to net money flows into oil futures markets, but I would bet there is a statistically significant impact, even if it is a small one.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (24633)	6/25/2008 4:07:20 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 149317

Obama Tells Hillary Supporters to 'Get Over It' [Not really] Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:18 PM By: Rick Pedraza Article Font Size Sen. Barack Obama is being criticized for the choice of words he used last week during a meeting with members of the Congressional Black Caucus in which he reportedly degraded senior female allies of his one-time rival Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., by telling them to "get over it.” According to an ABC report, the fray began when Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, expressed the desire that Obama, D-Ill., and his campaign reach out to the millions of women still aggrieved by Clinton’s disappointing loss of the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Obama agreed with Lee, a staunch supporter of Clinton, that a lot of work still needs to be done to heal the party, adding he hopes the Clinton supporters in the room would help as much as possible. “However, I need to make a decision in the next few months as to how I manage that since I’m running against John McCain, which takes a lot of time,” Obama is purported to have said. “If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it.” Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., a longtime Clinton supporter, did not like those last three words — “Get over it.” Watson said she finds them to be dismissive and off-putting. “Don’t use that terminology,” Watson reportedly chastised Obama at the meeting. Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., disagreed, saying, “I, personally, as a Hillary supporter, did not take that as something distasteful – nothing like that.” According to Clarke, Watson didn’t appreciate as a woman being told to "get over it." She says Watson then emphasized to Obama that it was a heated campaign and a lot of healing remains to be done. "I agree," Obama said. "There's healing on both sides." Obama reminded the caucus that he held his tongue when Clinton allies falsely suggested he was a Muslim and when the candidate herself said he wasn’t ready to be commander-in-chief, according to the ABC report. Clarke says the rest of the meeting went on cordially, and after a presentation by Obama's pollster, many members of the caucus reportedly had nothing but pleasant exchanges with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. Republican campaign operatives, however, immediately jumped on Obama’s faux pas by collecting other women’s takes on the phrase. It sent an e-mail with Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., that says Obama tells women who have questions about his record and his campaign to ‘get over it.’ “Working women in New Mexico are worried that Obama has yet to come up with a plan to lower gas prices – we won’t just ‘get over it.’ Obama has put New Mexico jobs at risk with his economic plan and tax increases on small businesses – we won’t just ‘get over it.’ Women’s votes should not be taken for granted, and this sort of language reminds us why,” Congressman Wilson says. “I’m supporting John McCain because he’s campaigning for the vote of all Americans, including the former Clinton supporters and women to whom Obama is referring, and many of them, like me, see him as a leader who can keep our nation safe and get our economy back on track,” Wilson adds. newsmax.com