Still Laughing

Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
comments6
  • Positive ratings 0
  • Negative ratings 0
  • Net rating 0
Filter comments by:
Highest rated Latest comments
Or filter by symbol:

Latest Comments
6 Comments

    • Sun Jun 29th 03:00 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Congress’ Love Affair with Convenient Solutions
      So the housing crisis was caused by idiots buying things they couldn't afford and NOT by banks lending to people they knew couldn't afford it? I'm not a consumer advocate by any stretch, but wouldn't it be more logical to blame the MORE educated and MORE informed person who STILL did something stupid rather than the idiot who probably wouldn't know any better? And then blame the investors who were stupid enough to accept the collaterilized loans in their portfolio and made the idiocy profitable. Don't blame the Democrats for bailing out the consumers. Blame the Democrats for bailing out the banks because THAT's who's ass is getting saved.
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 29th 02:38 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Alt Energy and Trading Green
      I'm sorry, what did that last comment have to do with investing? The capitalist interest in green energies has nothing to do with being good or helping the Earth. That's a nice thing to pat yourself on the back for, but no one makes money doing that.

      Green energy investment comes from the belief that if the science can catch up, you can take an abundant, almost unlimited resource (like sunlight) and sell the energy back at an unbelievably high profit because your COGS will be substantially less than a commodity based energy source.

      I think the solar panel discussion is funny only because it rests on the assumption that no matter what we do, the technology can only be THIS efficient.

      And while it may be true that green energy can only be funded through government subsidies, it may very well be true that private investors simply will not shoulder the risk involve in capitalization of a new technology of that magnitude. This is not a defect of the concept or a problem with the profit potential, rather it is simply something more fundamental like a Sharpe ratio decision.
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 29th 02:26 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Kling's Oil Speculation Question
      That was a great analysis. But I still think what investors now really need to start pondering is: regardless of the current supply and demand and any shocks that happen in the future, are we reaching the point where the current price now justifies capitalization required to develop the infrastructure and technology of a replacement energy source? Oil is not a in an economic vacuum. It is subject to the same substitute good laws of any commodity.

      I think there are two groups of people who are calling the high price speculation: those that want it to be because it's just so expensive and those that realize that the high price invites substitution. In other words, the very existence of the high price is why the price will crash. I think it's also why even executives in oil producing companies are starting to make divergent statements about oil prices. There are those that want to reap the short term profit (so they say, "the price will go up to xxx"), and those that realize a substitution scenario would have a far greater and lasting negative impact on their firms (and they say "we're supplying more than the price would suggest" in an attempt to drive the price down.)
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 29th 02:05 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      So You Think Oil’s Expensive Now?
      KoS - you know while you're right and maybe the best thing would be to just let the speculators drive it up and eat the loss, I'm still trying to grasp the half-assed economic logic of the "low supply" argument.

      So many people are trying to say that it's high because supply is dwindling, but these are futures that are being traded and not gas which means they expect the price to continue to increase. However, how can the price continue to increase when it is heading past the point of being more expensive than a substitute energy and the research cost to develop it. It's like half of Wall Street was only paying attention in economics class to a basic supply and demand curve and missed the opportunity cost and substitute good lectures. The tragedy is that unlike other "bubbles", energy behaves like a tax and and the true cost of speculation isn't the gas high price but the slowing overall slowing of global GDP.
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 29th 01:53 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Oil Inventories Report Full of Surprises
      I'm sorry, I'm in no way impuning the fact that whoever reports is obviously inflating inventories to set a pro oil bubble "agenda" but wouldn't it make sense that if the price is skyrocketing and economic production growth has slowed, the U.S. might not be buying as much? After all, oil is the only source of energy right?
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 29th 01:41 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Bye, Bye Oil Bubble?
      To all the speculators who are sure that we're not in a bubble because oil has a finite supply, thank you for stating the only one half of the obvious. Unfortunately oil is a form of energy with substitutes. Speculative pricing rests on future cash flows. If the price becomes too inflated and invites substitution, oil will crash hard. Oil is OIL because it is the cheapest and most efficient form of energy on the market today. Remove that, invite research on more effective nuclear fission/fusion and renewable energies and more effective batteries and oil becomes irrelevant and worthless except to the chemicals industry. As energy, it is simply a substitute good. That's not wishful thinking, that's the same economics book you are reading for when you trumpet lack of supply as the reason we're not in a bubble.
      View article »