|
branmann
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: Brandon Country: United States State: District of Columbia Birthday: 5/22/1980 Gender: Male
Interests: Music-listening, writing and playingSports-football, basketball, volleyball, tennis, golf, pole vaulting, kite-surfingTraveling - everywhere! Occupation: Other Industry: Other
Message: message me Website: visit my website
Member Since:
4/1/2003
|
|
| Just to confirm that I'm not the only person on earth that roots against cheap oil prices....and this story made the primo spot on the front page of CNN.com!!
adFactory.getAd(728, 90).write();
Is Cheaper Oil A Good Thing?
KAREN BLEIER / AFP / Getty
How far can it fall? People have been anxiously wondering as they watch
the plunging stock market. But increasingly the same question is being
asked about another crucial figure: the price of oil. It has plummeted
nearly 40% in just three months, from about $147 a barrel in July to
below $83 on Friday, with no obvious bottom in sight. If that sounds
good, you are probably a driver who winces these days at filling your
gas tank. But the downward spiral could mean trouble for oil-rich
countries and for the environment.
Oil analysts admit that most of them failed to predict how fast oil
prices would drop. Just a few months ago, some were saying oil might
reach $200 a barrel by year's end. "The analysts have been quite
surprised by the pace and volatility of the decline," says David Fyfe,
senior oil analyst for the International Energy Agency in Paris, which
as a rule does not predict oil prices. "The volatility has been quite
marked."
This year's sky-high oil prices are partly responsible for the drop.
Since oil hit $100 a barrel for the first time early this year,
Americans (who consume one-quarter of the world's energy) began cutting
back. When gas began selling above $4 a gallon, American consumers made
"a psychological shift into the sense of crisis and a sense of
permanence," says Greg Priddy, oil analyst for the Eurasia Group in
Washington. Instead of believing that gas prices would finally fall
again, many began changing their daily habits — they started driving
the smaller car in a two-car garage or consolidating shopping trips.
That has meant a huge slump in Americans' gas use. Even before the
market meltdown, Americans consumed 800,000 barrels of oil a day less
during the first half of this year than the same period last year. As
demand fell, so did prices, and as prices have fallen, investors have
begun pulling money out of the oil market, fearing a collapse, says
Leila Benali, an expert on Middle East oil for the Cambridge Energy
Research Associates in Paris, adding: "People are getting nervous about
demand next year. There is talk of a global recession."
For oil-rich countries the slump has come at a bad time. As the oil
price began rising during the past few years, governments and big oil
companies plowed billions into exploring and developing new fields in
Russia, Angola, Mexico, Brazil and Saudi Arabia — projects whose costs
have more than doubled in the past few years, in part because soaring
steel prices drove up drilling equipment costs and oil-rig rentals.
Just as global demand has begun to slow, millions more barrels of oil a
day from new fields have hit the world market.
The big oil producers have good reason to be nervous. Many are still
haunted by a disastrous error made at an Opec meeting in Jakarta in
1999, when the cartel — which produces more than a third of the world's
oil — opted to raise its production levels. Within weeks Asian stock
markets tumbled, driving world oil prices down to $11 a barrel. Oil
officials in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere have cited that price crash as
the reason they've rebuffed pleas from President Bush to pump more oil.
Says Benali: "Countries have learned the lessons of the past."
Though oil-producers and environmentalists rarely agree about
anything, both groups have done extremely well from sky-high oil prices
during the past year. The high price at U.S. gas pumps has pushed both
Barack Obama and John McCain into making the development of alternative
fuels and electric cars key elements of their campaign platforms. But
if gas prices continue to drop, those initiatives might begin to seem
unnecessarily costly to many Americans. (Time's Bryan Walsh reported
this week that some countries are already reviewing environmental initiatives as gas prices fall.)
"If gas prices drop under $3 a gallon, it will be interesting to see
whether it saps the political will," says Priddy. "Americans like their
sprawl and generally don't like to give those things up."
If oil producers have their way, oil prices could start rising
again. Their growing anxiety erupted early this week, when Iranian and
Venezuelan officials warned that if Opec waited much longer before
cutting its output, it could face another massive price collapse. On
Thursday, Opec officials scheduled an emergency meeting in Vienna for
Nov. 18 rather than wait until the cartel's scheduled summit in Algiers
in early December. In the meantime, the world's biggest oil producer,
Saudi Arabia — which increased production in the summer — has already
begun loading less oil on its tankers, according to global oil figures.
For some countries there is a fear far greater than an economic
recession: political turmoil. Iran, which earns 80% of its revenues
from oil exports, set this year's budget on the assumption that oil
would trade at $90 a barrel — a figure which seemed conservatively low
until recently, but which is now above the world price. "If the price
stays there a while Iran would cut spending," Priddy says. That might
include cutting heavy gas subsidies for Iranian drivers, who have
rioted in the past when the government tried to ration gas or raise the
price at the pump. Hugo Chavez could face similar problems in Venezuela
if oil prices drop below $75 a barrel — the rate at which the country
calculated this year's budget. The problems lower prices could cause in
those countries could be more visceral than those posed so far by the
current financial upheaval.
| | |
| In the midst of the election hoopla many months ago, I felt compelled to write a song about my feelings on the whole political scene, for whatever reason. I figure I might as well post it while it's still somewhat relevant...
Politickle
I lie to you You lie to me We lie together Lie with each other Come let's play Play this game
Poli-tickle you pink
How many ways For how many days Can we poly-tickle them pink
I lie to you
You lie to me
We lie together
Lie with each other
Do they care About the mask we wear When they only hear What they want to hear Don't fret what is not true Truth is relative from each view
Don't think, just listen
While we poli-tickle them pink
| | |
| I've held out for a while on commenting about the election and current political events...but I have to throw in just a few thoughts. I've always been the uber-moderate, and have been undecided for a very long time, being pretty critical on both sides of the house...
1) I'm sorry, but I think the Republicans really shot themselves in the head (not foot, but head) with the Palin move. Right when the move was announced, it was a sure sign of complete election sell-out to me, but I'd thought I'd give her a chance. Not that Biden can't be viewed a sell-out type move too, but at least I can respect the guy and take him seriously. Palin? Man, it was so painful to watch her debate with Biden...
2) Financial crisis: all this hoop-la about who's fault the financial crisis is is such garbage. Factcheck has their thoughts, which are pretty neutral: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html. However, I think it's something related to the fundamentals of modern economies. We are still carrying on many core economic fundamentals of very old anglo-saxon societies that started in back in old England. This fundamental is the focus on wealth creation from financial leverage instead of industrial production. One of the big financial shortfalls in England's history is when they had to face the repercussions of shifting their economic focus from industrial production to banking and financial markets. Instead of creating wealth by producing something, they generated wealth by loaning money all over the place and investing in foreign nations, and getting wealth through interest and financial manipulation. It eventually caught up to them, and they experienced a financial crisis like ours.
In all markets, there are winners and losers. That applies to the stock market, real estate market, loans market, everything. What we've seen the past 10 years is not really winners and losers at the same time, but winners and losers within cycles of non-production wealth. With the dot-com boom, you had all these companies that went IPO and skyrocketed when they didn't produce anything to justify that value. It was an artificial inflation of value, but it was ok because everybody was winning. If you buy an overvalued stock, you still win if it gets even more overvalued. So you have a time period where relatively everybody is winning. Eventually, this over-inflation has to adjust and when over-inflation has gone on for a very long time, you get a crash. If everybody is winning before, then everybody is going to lose now. So ultimately, you're only a winner if you got in during the winning streak, and got out before the losing streak. Unfortunately, crashes are all encompassing and good companies will fall victim as well (and become undervalued, making them a bargain).
The same thing happened with the real estate markets and loans/credit markets. Nothing changed with a piece of property to legitimately increase the value of real estate to match the increase of prices. Artificial price inflation again. During the boom, everybody was winning again. You had all these properties that nobody needed, but used as only investments (myself included), to ride the winning wave. So what's inevitable if everybody is winning at one point in the cycle? Everybody has to lose later in the cycle (fortunately, I haven't lost nearly as bad as many).
When the credit/loans scene was dependent on the winning real estate market, if was bound for disaster...just like the dot-com scene, just like the housing market. We are also at our lowest manufacturing production rate in years. Granted, this crisis is much more unique with it receiving a $700 billion bail-out...
This is a pretty over-simplified take on the whole financial crisis, but the point is that no matter how "bad" an administration can be, it can't single handedly destroy an economy just by erring on the side of deregulation. It's not like our economy transformed into a black market economy, existing completely independent of regulated financial environments (which happens to African countries all the time...in fact, I met diplomats in Zimbabwe who were instructed by the embassy to purchase local money on the black market, because the inflation variance was so ridiculous)...
| | |
| For
whatever reason, for a while I've been pondering about things theological,
and the nature of Satan has popped up. And then for a business ethics class I just started, one of the main course books is "The Lucifer Effect" (very interesting book about human nature by the way). But anyways, my thoughts...
Generally, Satan is regarded as a
fallen angel, who was the highest of all the angels, and possibly the
highest form of creation prior to his fall. Being the highest
creation, he was the most beautiful and most intelligent, but became
prideful and eventually wanted to take God's place. That led him and a
third of his fellow angels to rebel against God and eventually be
condemned.
Now, I don't have anything against the above, as it's pretty much
all from scripture...but my personal opinion is that there's more. But
before I continue, my intent is definitely not to "add to the
scriptures" or claim an ounce of holy revelation...but rather to just
share some thoughts pondering on the subject, and nothing more.
If Satan truly was the most intelligent creation, I don't think he
was foolish enough to truly believe he could ever overthrow God. It
could have been a legitimate desire of his, but it's hard for me to
think that the entire intent of his rebellion was to defeat God. Also,
if Satan just wanted to overthrow God and be supreme, why would the
other angels join him just to be servants to someone else, especially
someone undoubtedly inferior to God? From my optic, that's just
senseless if that's the entire story. (not to say my optic can't be completely wrong...)
I believe Satan convinced the other angels to join him in the
ultimate display of selfishness possible, and I don't mean just the
obvious selfishness of wanting to be God. It's far simpler yet far
deeper than that. Plain and simple, this was the ultimate choosing of
self over God.
These angels were immortal and were in the very presence of God
since their creation. They were created to be eternal servants, and
were created to give every piece of their being to worship God. But is
that not the ultimate goal of Christianity, to eventually spend
eternity worshiping God, with God? Christians pursue their entire life
of faith with the hope of reaching an existence of what these angels
already had.
So if these angels were already at the peak of created existence,
what possible incentive is there to leave it? I think Satan made his
100% deliberate decision knowing full well the consequences. I think
the angels that followed him also knew full well the consequences. The
decision? They decided that they would rather experience a finite time
of freedom to worship self, and face eventual condemnation, than an
infinite time of worshiping God.
So to me the rebellion wasn't so much Satan and his followers
saying, "alright, let's defeat God our creator and take over the
throne!" Rather it was all of them saying, "we all consciously choose
to worship self and die than to spend eternity as servants to God."
There's a cliche from other novels where Satan says "I'd rather rule in
hell than serve in heaven." I think that over glorifies Satan's
decision, and takes away from the core of the choice he made. Satan
isn't going to rule anything in hell, nor is hell meant to be a
bad-boys club where condemned spirits plot against God, as commonly
depicted in Hollywood. It's a place of eternal isolation and
suffering, and the ultimate fate of self without God.
And as such, Satan's mission on earth became not a
story-book-like physical battle against God, but rather the battle to
convince humanity to choose self over God, just as he did, for he truly
believes that is the better decision. It's almost saying, "nah, you
don't want eternity with God. I had that more than you'll ever have,
and I deliberately left it, and would rather literally be tormented in
hell than go back to it."
Satan portrayed this from the beginning, when he told Eve she could
be like God, knowing good and evil, if she ate from the forbidden
tree. Satan didn't convince Eve to worship him, nor did he convince
her to challenge God's throne. He simply convinced her to choose self
over obedience to God. That's how it began, and that's how it
continues to this day.
I made a post a while back about whether there's free will in
heaven or not, and what started me on the thought was reading C.S.
Lewis define sin as the choosing of self over God. It seems I've just
taken the super scenic route of agreeing with that statement.
Ezekiel 28
12
"You had the seal of perfection
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13"You were in (M)Eden, the garden of God;
(N)Every precious stone was your covering:
The (O)ruby, the topaz and the diamond;
The beryl, the onyx and the jasper;
The lapis lazuli, the turquoise and the emerald;
And the gold, the workmanship of your (P)settings and sockets,
Was in you.
On the day that you were created
They were prepared.
14"You were the (Q)anointed cherub who covers,
And I placed you there
You were on the holy (R)mountain of God;
You walked in the midst of the (S)stones of fire.
15"You were (T)blameless in your ways
From the day you were created
Until (U)unrighteousness was found in you.
16"By the (V)abundance of your trade
You were internally (W)filled with violence,
And you sinned;
Therefore I have cast you as profane
From the mountain of God.
And I have destroyed you, O covering cherub,
From the midst of the stones of fire.
17"Your heart was lifted up because of your (X)beauty;
You (Y)corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor
I cast you to the ground;
I put you before (Z)kings,
That they may see you.
18"By the multitude of your iniquities,
In the unrighteousness of your trade
You profaned your sanctuaries.
Therefore I have brought (AA)fire from the midst of you;
It has consumed you,
And I have turned you to (AB)ashes on the earth
In the eyes of all who see you.
19"All who know you among the peoples
Are appalled at you;
You have become (AC)terrified
And you will cease to be (AD)forever."'"
| | |
|