Michael Hardner Posted October 9, 2014 Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 There's really nothing worse than people arguing about numbers without providing any links or supporting evidence. Read the rules people. Here's the 1 year crude graph for your lazy selves, you're welcome: http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx Also a 1 year graph here: http://www.infomine.com/investment/metal-prices/crude-oil/1-year/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 It's just recently dropped back down to 90-95 what it was when I was working in Estevan from 2010-2012, after that it began dropping below 90 again right around the same time America left Iraq. It's back up to it's minimum high right now and It will jump to 101-105 by this years end. Mark my words. Conflict has a direct effect on oil prices, if you haven't noticed that it must be fun living in lala land. so by your own 'data', the price of oil wavers a few percentage points over a few years, up and down, while conflicts also come and go? I don't get your point. I don't see your point. My sympathies on having to work in Estevan. Was it a court order? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeNumber Posted October 9, 2014 Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 (edited) so by your own 'data', the price of oil wavers a few percentage points over a few years, up and down, while conflicts also come and go? I don't get your point. I don't see your point. My sympathies on having to work in Estevan. Was it a court order? If you refuse to look into it that's fine with me, I'm just presenting some facts what your do with that information is up to you of course. Ignorance is a choice in the age of information. Estevan wasn't pretty but the $32/hr with isolation pay and living allowance helped me deal with it. Edited October 9, 2014 by PrimeNumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 (edited) If you refuse to look into it that's fine with me, I'm just presenting some facts what your do with that information is up to you of course. Ignorance is a choice in the age of information. Estevan wasn't pretty but the $32/hr with isolation pay and living allowance helped me deal with it. So you claim prices of oil are directly related to conflict, always. Correct?. Now you can explain how poil has dropped 15% in htree months as the ISIL fight boils over in the very same time frame. As per M Hardners graph:http://www.infomine.com/investment/metal-prices/crude-oil/1-year/ Ignorance? Edited October 9, 2014 by overthere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeNumber Posted October 9, 2014 Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 So you claim prices of oil are directly related to conflict, always. Correct?. Now you can explain how poil has dropped 15% in htree months as the ISIL fight boils over in the very same time frame. As per M Hardners graph:http://www.infomine.com/investment/metal-prices/crude-oil/1-year/ Ignorance? It rises and falls constantly obviously as does the price of everything. A couple months of comparison over a 11 year span is peanuts on the grand scheme. The fact of the matter is before the 1st Iraq war oil was in decline, it rose shortly after they landed maintained its pace then dipped again when America left. Once the war really kicks into gear it will rise. Especially if American boots touch down in Iraq. Like I said it will finish over 100 at the end of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2014 Hopeless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 where? Everywhere. Crude is at $90/barrel, and I paid $1.11/litre at the pump yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Everywhere. Crude is at $90/barrel, and I paid $1.11/litre at the pump yesterday. The price of oil hit a 23 month low today. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/10/stocks-in-the-red-again/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 The price of oil hit a 23 month low today. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/10/stocks-in-the-red-again/ imagine that! An ongoing OPEC price war has lowered oil prices... c'mon, can't we get a real war going to bring some stability forward! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Everywhere. Crude is at $90/barrel, and I paid $1.11/litre at the pump yesterday. This would appear much like the global warming debate. Taking the price now vs a little while ago.(Not suggesting you are Brian) Whats the price difference from pre-iraq war? Is it up a little ? .....methinks its more than just a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 The price of oil hit a 23 month low today. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/10/stocks-in-the-red-again/ Yup. This would appear much like the global warming debate. Taking the price now vs a little while ago.(Not suggesting you are Brian) Whats the price difference from pre-iraq war? Is it up a little ? .....methinks its more than just a little. It is a LOT like the Global Warming debate in that you're stating an obvious universal natural factor (in this case inflation), and attributing it to something irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Yup. It is a LOT like the Global Warming debate in that you're stating an obvious universal natural factor (in this case inflation), and attributing it to something irrelevant. So inflation took a barrel from 30 or $40 up to $170? Oi vey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 So inflation took a barrel from 30 or $40 up to $170? Oi vey. Prices for plenty of things have peaked and valleyed in that time frame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Prices for plenty of things have peaked and valleyed in that time frame.Yup, all true. But oil prices havent gone up that much due to inflation, as was said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) They've gone up. That's what inflation is. Edited October 10, 2014 by Bryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 (edited) Price of oil started jumping in 2003 and peaked shortly thereafter. As soon as the Americans started leaving Iraq it dropped now that they're back its going up again. Easily verifiable. The graphs are all over the internet. Just pointing out Facts. Not my problem if you refuse to see them. The price of oil started jumping,actually, in early 1999 after reaching a bottom in the $10/bbl. area. By the time of the Iraq invasion it was already up to around $28 or so (I forget exact numbers). On August 14, 2003 we had a power failure in much of the eastern U.S. and Canada. At that point product prices led the way, triggered by refinery issues. Crude prices were pulled up by them and in early 2004 exceeded previous records set during 1981 and the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Katrina drove prices to a new peak in mid-2006. After a brief softening oil started surging from 2007 to a July 2008 all-time peak of $146. Nothing in particular related to the U.S.'s activities in Iraq. The financial crisis brought prices down briefly to $33 at the end of 2008, and since then have fluctuated between $75 and $112. Recent weeks have seen oil drop from around $97 to around $75. I am not saying that U.S. re-engagement drove the prices down. I am saying that Iraq's portion of world oil supply is too small to matter much. What is far more important is the psychological perception that North America is both politically stable and awash in crude, natural gas and refined products. That and the recent strength of the dollar is currently driving prices down. So inflation took a barrel from 30 or $40 up to $170? Oi vey. Remember though, the last $30-$40 a barrel was in late 2003 to early 2004. Oil first reached that level in 1981. Oil didn't drop resounding under $30 again until late 1985. So to which $30-$40 a barrel period are you referring? Inflating 1981's price of $41 per barrel would take oil to $107.28 according to this inflation calculator (link). Inflation from 1982's less fevered price of around $34 per barrel would take oil to $83.80 in 2014 . So basically you have 2014's price fluctuations right there, in the general range of inflation. Your answer to those figures? Come on, let's hear it. Edited October 11, 2014 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) Andrew Coyne from a year ago - so his "savaging" of Trudeau was just a timely follow-up...........rather prescient: Rather, the Trudeauvian gaffe generally involves a quite deliberate statement, presented not flippantly or off-hand but in a determined effort to sound provocative or profound. If they instead strike the listener as ill-judged, it is because he seems to have invested so little actual thought in them. It is in the gulf between his intellectual reach and grasp that his reputation as a ninny has been earned................................The next election is nearly two years away. There will be many more chances to take the measure of Trudeau, who will have many more chances to demonstrate his capacity to grow and mature. One gaffe does not disqualify him from office, nor even do four or five. But the more evidence they are given of his flightiness, the less willing Canadians will be to hand him the keys to the car. Link: http://o.canada.com/news/national/justin-trudeaus-gaffes-getting-harder-to-ignore Edited October 13, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 Andrew Coyne from a year ago - so his "savaging" of Trudeau was just a timely follow-up...........rather prescient: Link: http://o.canada.com/news/national/justin-trudeaus-gaffes-getting-harder-to-ignore exact same column, verbatim... is there anything... you don't recycle? From Andrew Coyne today: Link: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/11/11/andrew-coyne-justin-trudeaus-gaffes-reveal-the-gulf-between-his-intellectual-reach-and-grasp/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 exact same column, verbatim... is there anything... you don't recycle? Waldo....you are so darn sensitive when it comes to your boy Justin. Those columns - and the post that you had to feverishly looked for - were a year apart - certainly worthy of pointing out that back then, Coyne sent out a warning that Trudeau had better start showing better judgement, if not a grasp of the issues. Not really a laughing matter - I wish they had picked someone of substance - because it's not a question of Liberals/Conservatives, my boy/your boy....it's about having two strong political alternatives to choose from - and it starts with leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 Waldo....you are so darn sensitive Simple... you are so darn sensitive to having your perpetual recycling efforts highlighted. Now, typically, I showcase your efforts around your repeated recycling of your same failed fake-skeptic/denier AGW/CC related posts. In this case, your claimed "feverish look" was a simple keyword search... I'd seen the article before... it was simply gravy to realize you had posted it. Recycle-R-Us, hey Simple! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 Coyne devotes much, much more of his time to hammering Harper and the Cons than he has beating on Trudeau. I don't think it is because he likes or dislikes either man. It's more that Trudeau has had so very little to say. That in itself witll bring attention. Slowly but surely though, he may have to stand up on his hind legs and walk like a man as an election nears. Some of his first forays, including this one, have not been promising. His handlers may have to shut him up again and ensure he never speaks without a script unless he absolutely must. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 The Liberals have been playing this game for years, where they talk a lot without saying much of anything. They're the guiltiest party when it comes to double-speak and leaving promises open to interpretation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 They're the guiltiest party when it comes to double-speak and leaving promises open to interpretation. and an NDP government with no chance of ever forming government can pretty much say and promise anything (on any interpretive or double-speak level)... without regard to ever being held to account. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 The Liberals have been playing this game for years, where they talk a lot without saying much of anything. They're the guiltiest party when it comes to double-speak and leaving promises open to interpretation. To be fair, it's a game played by everybody in Opposition. You don't have to actually do anything, and can say more or less what you please because you have no power and no need to back your words with actions. The Liberals have had a couple of anomalies. Trudeau has said little and what he has said has not floated well. He can win a minority, maybe a majority, with little more than a zipped lip and a weekly trim. He risks more with speaking than with silence or the occasional platitude. The other anomaly was Chretien, who spoke constantly with a majority, but was proud of doing little as PM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted October 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 and an NDP government with no chance of ever forming government can pretty much say and promise anything (on any interpretive or double-speak level)... without regard to ever being held to account. nobody is held to account for shooting off their faces, as long as it is criticism . The libs don't want to do anything rash like presenting a coherent policy for fear it will be stolen. It has always been open season on the government, you of all people know that! One exception was Sheila Copps rashly promising to quit over the GST. She quit three years later, knowing she could run again and win her riding. So, no harm done from her side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.