Re: hyper inflation in the USA?
Oh jeez JR! I have no opposition to you. I do have opposition to you unfairly attacking someone as opposed to attacking an idea, just like you did over on PSW. I'm not out to get you and in general I find many of your posts to be informative and helpful. However there are two things that regularly bother me about forums. One is discussion that just can't seem to rise above petty jabs or ad hominem attacks against others. The second is when new posters to a forum get attacked for making a point that the regulars consider wrong and unpopular. Early in my days on the LAB, I forwarded my beliefs about how phase slopes would effect the interaction between 2 different models of subs in a room and was immediately attacked by a large number of members who didn't agree with my point. In that case I was lucky and Tom Danley came to my rescue and validated my statement.
I don't recall that event, and hope I wasn't guilty of shooting from the hip. It is my experience that the LAB usually gets it right eventually thanks to people like TD. That said it is frustrating to hear the endless repetition of misinformation that would take over like weeds if not pruned back.
The point I'm trying to make is that by taking an adversarial stance in these sorts of discussions, we turn them into an argument instead of a civil discussion, create negative feels, and create division. Do we want new posters to leave this forum feeling like they were unfairly attacked, no matter how right or wrong their comments are? Or do we want them to feel like they were treated kindly and educated about the topic at hand, while giving them a fair chance to make their case? If we want this forum to expand and grow to include more posters from the massive ranks of those who lurk on these forums, then we need to be kind to those that post here. Otherwise they will leave and not come back.
There is no place for abuse and ad hominum. Since I campaign against it, I take being accused of it pretty seriously.
It is possible to hold and argue an opposing viewpoint without degenerating into ad hominum. In fact it is a common strategy among partisan operatives when the facts aren't in their favor to attack the people instead and preventing more exposition of the facts.
PS I know what a troll is
Then do you really believe I am trolling? or is this an emotionally charged attack knowing how I feel about it (or changing the subject?). You did get my attention.
PPS You did jump the shark. Oil executives and investors will happily embrace higher oil prices, and will in fact fight for them just as much as the "treehuggers", if not more so.
I will try to not pretend I know everybody's motives. I am a believer in the old saw, "follow the money". Yes the oil industry can make a larger profit from higher oil prices, but only "IF" they can pass those cost increases along to the consumer. The only modest drop in demand in light of these price increases, supports my old (unpopular) statements that oil was still relatively cheap. It is worth note that the oil industry also buys oil at international prices, so that per barrel price and profit goes to the producing nations, or is shared with them in nationalized development projects. The oil companies are regulated and taxed, and owned by public shareholders so that profit on higher margins flows through to the public owners. We all benefit from availability of low cost energy. We can debate feeling guilty for how much we use proportionately, but relatively low cost energy is good for the entire world economy, employment and us. High oil prices disproportionately benefit, alternative energy industries, and oil producing nations who get the bulk of that high oil price.
In recent years a huge amount of tax dollars have been channeled into alternate energy ventures that only make sense if oil (and fossil fuels) run out quickly or remains silly expensive. Oil exploration and extraction technology (despite the occasional glitch, like BP with their known bad safety record), has progressed dramatically and we have more NG than we can use (at the moment). Massive new oil finds are occurring too, not to mention areas we haven't even seriously started developing (polar regions). The economic cost to get oil out of the ground is nowhere near the current $100 barrel, so a fair free market price for that oil is a fraction of the current $100. The OPEC cartel is happy because others are doing their work for them... if anything in a strange irony, they are trying to keep oil prices from rising too high and causing demand destruction and/or more drilling. Once they lose control over marginal supply, they lose control over all prices.
As I mentioned before, I was breaking my own rules to speculate about motives, but there are several different groups that benefit from high oil prices, while the public loses. These high prices are a major sea anchor on economic growth, almost as bad as the regulatory uncertainty. So I remain perplexed by policy that works against lower cost oil and higher economic growth and employment.
=====
Finally regarding my tone.. you are entitled to you opinion, but if you think I am abrasive and prone to ad hominum, I wish you were around for 5 minutes of the early days of PSW. This web forum phenomena is relatively recent, and to have any access to real working professionals is a remarkable gift. It is a shame to see even more drop out, for whatever reasons.
I try to deal with fact and not wishful thinking, or how we would like the world to be. The world is ugly and mean.
Good luck. If I get voted off this island, I can keep myself plenty busy.
JR
