I wish we'd get the hell over the myth that oil/gas automatically = bad. A lot of people in this country make their living either directly or indirectly through all kinds of services to the oil and gas industry. It's usually non-union and rather high paying work blue collar workers who buy cars, houses, electronics and, and, and....
It isn't just wealthy Arab sheiks or Venezuelan thugs who benefit. Economies in many parts of the US also benefit from profitable oil and gas prices.

Sharp drastic drops are the equivalent to any other bubble bust. Do just as much damage in those segments. Yes there are winners. At the pump and heating your home... just as the housing bust is providing opportunities for people to buy homes that they were priced out just a couple of years ago.

It's part of the business cycle and will rectify itself... it's painful for many just the same.

Might I advise. In Latin: Discussionis anjinis, sillius wasteuss of timus.

You'll get sophomoric platitudes, off point assertions and sarcatic comments masquerading as argumentation.

But you will NEVER EVER get facts and a point by point logical argument.

Never.

In English: Mission Impossible.

You are all probably asleep. But here in Hawaii we are still waiting.

Happy New Year all...........

So why have I never seen anything from you but defense of the left?

Dunno, maybe because you have your head stuck up somewhere? Here are a few quickies:

I voted for Reagan, a fine president, twice.

This sounds like a good thing to me. A rare win for the Bush White House. And I agree with Bit, there is such a thing as a win/win.

Let's wrap up 2008 with yet another of your 180 degrees from reality statements:

In other words, the case is stronger than ever that President Bush's tax cuts, rather than creating a budget deficit, are fueling economic growth that is swelling federal revenues and shrinking the deficit.

If this is such horrible straits, Anjin, I'd be interested in seeing what you'd call 'good'....
Posted by Bithead | June 17, 2008 | 04:20 pm | Permalink

Don't confuse my not sharing your rabid hatred of government with me loving the government, or having undue faith in it.

We are stuck with government. So we might as well try and get the best one possible.

Isn't that like being a little pregnant? In any event, the ususal suspects invariably question privet enterprise when they make a statement. Quoting government sources makes for less arguments. Unless of course one is trying to find one.

A reasonable person seeks some balance in their thinking.

So why have I never seen anything from you but defense of the left?

And get it outta the sunshine, Anjin. Suddenly, in your eyes, someone in government isn't credible? Yeah, right.

Don't confuse my not sharing your rabid hatred of government with me loving the government, or having undue faith in it.

We are stuck with government. So we might as well try and get the best one possible. We have seen the consequences of bad government up close and personal for the last 8 years.

There are a lot of folks who, for a number of reasons, have trouble taking care of themselves. Government has a role in trying to people in our society from sinking to an unacceptable level of human misery. I don't have a problem with that.

Government is, in my view, a necessary counterbalance to the excesses of "unbridled" capitalism. We have also seen the downside of that concept very graphically under the outgoing government. Things are not black and white in the world, no matter what Hannity tells you.

It remains noteworthy that you are perfectly happy to cite someone in the government, as long as they are singing your tune.

A reasonable person seeks some balance in their thinking. Of course, that kind of leaves you out...

[Link]

It looks like you pasted the text on top of the OTB URL.

[Comment edited to fix linewrap problem - CNL]

Your link doesn't work Bit, and you definitely did a bait-and-switch from oil to gas.

It works here. (Where do you suppose I got the text?) And no, I didn't switch, since the two are directly related. You can't drill for oil without getting Natural gas in the process. And if you're going to question API, I can't help you much. Apparently your gauge of credibility is how closely their nose is to Al Gore's backside.

And get it outta the sunshine, Anjin. Suddenly, in your eyes, someone in government isn't credible? Yeah, right.

Show me a data link and not a promotional video, from someone reputable.

Link? 40 years with consumption growing at what rate?

A link? Hell, I'll go one better. I've got a vid for you.

(Text:Oil and natural gas powered the past. But the future? Fact is a growing world will require more, 45 percent more by 2030 along with greatly expanding alternatives. We have substantial oil and natural gas resources1 right here [NARRATOR STROLLS OVER MAP OF THE LOWER 48 STATES]. Enough to power 60 million cars3 and heat 160 million households for 60 years. With advanced technology and smart policies,5 together we can secure America's energy future. Log on to learn more.)

Bill Shuster, (House, 9th distriuct of PA )

We don’t have a shortage of oil and gas reserves here at home. However, government policies restrict us from taking advantage of them. In doing so, the government is literally handing our future over to dictators in the Middle East and Venezuela. For example, the U.S. Geologic Survey estimates that the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) could produce up to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil. The American Petroleum Institute estimates that if you combine the oil and gas reserves in Alaska with our reserves in the Gulf of Mexico and other public lands, we would have enough oil and gas to fuel 60 million cars for 60 years and heat 60 million homes for 160 years. However, over 85 percent of costal waters have been restricted to oil and gas exploration and ANWR has become a haven to special interests that many politicians are fearful of angering.

We need to explore these reserves. We need to invest in a domestic supply of energy. If we increase supply to meet demand, prices will go down. In addition to domestic exploration for oil and gas, we must also look to coal.

If the Shuster quote doesn't let me make this clear; By no means am I suggesting that this will deal with all our energy needs. What it WILL do however is give us leverage on the world market we'd not otherwise have.

And by the way, Shuster shorts the production in ANWR by quite a bit, in my view. Remember how much larger the reality of Prudhoe is, versus what the predictions were? Factor that in and you can add another zero or two to Shuster's statement. But we'll never know until we explore the thing, will we?

Messrs Taleb and Triana do make a good point that assigning a precise value to these assets has its problems. But, models such as Black-Scholes really are meant to act as a road map. It does not include every detour and cannot predict every accident that might occur, but it does give you some guidance as to what the asset is worth. To some degree this guidance becomes (channelling Bob Merton's father) a self-fulfilling prophecy because many others use the same model. The models are also meant to be amended as the market develops and is better understood. This guidance caused the derivatives market to grow over the last 30 years to what it has become today. So given the present circumstances, are we worse off as a result? Absolutely not.

Just as the gas price guys must call a do-over, this essayist thinks that "maps" that must be "redrawn" are nonetheless a guide.

That is a contradiction, and probably a dissonance.

We still have another 40 years' worth, at that point, assuming we make no more finds, or technical advancements on extraction methods, and longer if we do.

Link? 40 years with consumption growing at what rate?