I'm a big fan of the bail-out for a couple reasons. Oil and gold. I figure both are going to have a heyday when the US$ starts tumbling. And tumble it will, with a nice 700B injection...
Location: Oklahoma - Where they call a puck a ball...
Exp:
gold yes and i dont see oil rising that much ....... if our economy slows due to inflation or even just plain fear, so does yours and asia's and europe's which will slow down demand even more..... My friends work at devon and they say all the talk at work is all signs point to oil at 65-75 bucks a barrel..
im not an expert , i just cant see oil sky rocketing with demand being so down , weaker dollar or not
Washington doesn't have $700 billion. Nor did it have the $592 billion it's already shelled out since August of last year, when the crisis began.
In fact, the U.S. government was broke before this bailout package. Now, it's even more broke.
So the money has to be borrowed from the public. Yet again. From investors in this country and from other countries. By issuing loads more government notes and bonds. Loads more IOUs.
Right now, it seems like investors around the world still have enough faith in the U.S. government to lend it most of the $700 billion. But it remains to be seen what interest rates they'll want to receive.
So we should be able to borrow most of the money for the bailout package.
And what about the amount that the public isn't willing to lend to the Treasury? No problem there either. The Federal Reserve will just print up the balance.
You see, the ultimate source of all money in the U.S. is either debt, or monopoly money created by the Federal Reserve. Or some combination of the two.
Either way, it's not real money. It's fictitious money. It's nothing but a bunch of IOUs and electronic credits and debits.
It's nothing more than a promise to pay you something of value. If you wait around long enough to get paid.
So we have that settled. We'll be able to borrow the money, or print it up. Either way, it's clear: The U.S. government, already in hock past its eyeballs, has to go even deeper in debt. A lot deeper.
I'm a big fan of the bail-out for a couple reasons. Oil and gold. I figure both are going to have a heyday when the US$ starts tumbling. And tumble it will, with a nice 700B injection...
Yep, if people were smart....they'd have bought oil stocks when it hit $90/bbl a few days ago.
How much do you want to be that it won't be addressed properly anytime in the near future?
Even if it's not addressed, the psychological shift can be worth it. How many of us have cut back our daily spending based purely on all this negative news in the air?
Yep, if people were smart....they'd have bought oil stocks when it hit $90/bbl a few days ago.
If there is a global slow-down and people arent driving as much, companies aren't producting products as much (ie things with petrochemical plastics), goods aren't shipped as much.....why would the demand for oil go up?
Interesting. I actually don't mind if oil is higher...it at least forces our leaders to seriously look at alternatives and makes other options more viable. I know that's not what most Calgarians want to hear of course!
If there is a global slow-down and people arent driving as much, companies aren't producting products as much (ie things with petrochemical plastics), goods aren't shipped as much.....why would the demand for oil go up?
Pretty sure the jump to $148/bbl had nothing to do with supply and demand.
Interesting. I actually don't mind if oil is higher...it at least forces our leaders to seriously look at alternatives and makes other options more viable. I know that's not what most Calgarians want to hear of course!
Meh, Calgary is thriving because of a high oil price.
Meh, Calgary is thriving because of a high oil price.
I would think most support it.
Maybe for the short-term they would. But if alternative energy sources are fast-tracked with more funding and research due to high oil prices, then the long-term prospects for oil are not very good. If it comes to the point where there are better alternatives (and that probably is only a matter of time) that are cheaper, cleaner, and don't handcuff countries to the shady middle-east, why stick with oil?
Calgary either needs to function on the 3 bears method (not too expensive to force people to look elsewhere, but not to cheap to not make any money) or start getting in the alternative energy game. The latter is the smart option, but honestly, Im not sure if Calgary will take it.
Maybe for the short-term they would. But if alternative energy sources are fast-tracked with more funding and research due to high oil prices, then the long-term prospects for oil are not very good. If it comes to the point where there are better alternatives (and that probably is only a matter of time) that are cheaper, cleaner, and don't handcuff countries to the shady middle-east, why stick with oil?
Calgary either needs to function on the 3 bears method (not too expensive to force people to look elsewhere, but not to cheap to not make any money) or start getting in the alternative energy game. The latter is the smart option, but honestly, Im not sure if Calgary will take it.
Do you have some information we don't have re economically competing alternative energy sources to oil?
Do you have some information we don't have re economically competing alternative energy sources to oil?
nope, just stating my opinion. does it not make sense though that if something is too expensive, you look for alternatives? and if those alternatives offer distinct advantages, they will replace the incumbent technology?
nope, just stating my opinion. does it not make sense though that if something is too expensive, you look for alternatives? and if those alternatives offer distinct advantages, they will replace the incumbent technology?
Sure it makes sense.
But I think too many people are under-estimating just how important oil is.
We are FAR from developing an alternative that could replace oil.
Maybe for the short-term they would. But if alternative energy sources are fast-tracked with more funding and research due to high oil prices, then the long-term prospects for oil are not very good. If it comes to the point where there are better alternatives (and that probably is only a matter of time) that are cheaper, cleaner, and don't handcuff countries to the shady middle-east, why stick with oil?
I believe R&D spending and start ups usually tank during a recession, don't they?
The dot com crash was a little diff and helped the solar energy market, because of the excess supply of semiconductors that wasn't being bought for the high-tech made it available for solar energy companies to buy.
__________________
"With a coach and a player, sometimes there's just so much respect there that it's boils over"
-Taylor Hall
Not at all, as I've said, I would rather start with LA over any of the other WC playoff teams. Bunch of underachievers who look good on paper but don't even deserve to be in the playoffs.
