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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JimisJim who wrote (123683)	8/26/2009 5:18:57 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206093

JJ, I took that piece of info from the article. PBR is squeezing suppliers is due to this low level of investment. Low level of investment breeds Cantarells. Commodities skyrocketed early this decade because of the past lack of investment created bottlenecks. During the eights all developing countries were up tho their necks. Did not invest. Today, not lack of investment is causing bottlenecks: the infrastructure is dilapidated. Bridges, harbors, railways, ships...Only now this is being corrected.

To: JimisJim who wrote (123683)	8/27/2009 3:19:51 AM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206093

So you agree with the Economist that energy simply cannot be left to the free market? I suppose oil and gas producers should be forced by law to continue to produce at full capacity when prices decline? Or they need a state subsidy and direction? Or perhaps governments around the world need to raise taxes to support the oil market by purchasing surplus supply and storing it in new special purpose facilities? These histrionics in the Economist do have a thin veneer of sensibility. But once you pierce beyond the pleasing gloss, you have to ask yourself what system you prefer to implement other than market forces. .