<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oil Prices Have Peaked?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/oil_prices_have_peaked/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/oil_prices_have_peaked/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:07:43 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Plunk</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/oil_prices_have_peaked/comment-page-1/#comment-499110</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Plunk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24845#comment-499110</guid>
		<description>Does admission of a bubble mean we can accept speculators had a part in the price run up?  I know many economists don&#039;t want to accept that idea but you cannot have such a large influx of cash and increase in the number of futures contracts without driving prices up.  Now that money is leaving oil futures we are seeing prices fall.  Reduced demand is part of it but speculators clearly had a substantial effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does admission of a bubble mean we can accept speculators had a part in the price run up?  I know many economists don't want to accept that idea but you cannot have such a large influx of cash and increase in the number of futures contracts without driving prices up.  Now that money is leaving oil futures we are seeing prices fall.  Reduced demand is part of it but speculators clearly had a substantial effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bithead</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/oil_prices_have_peaked/comment-page-1/#comment-499068</link>
		<dc:creator>Bithead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24845#comment-499068</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;. Of course, it also helps that consumers are using less oil and oil based products than they were previously.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

To say this is to suggest that the problem was more than psychological. The facts dno&#039;t seem to bear this out. As of the time that this price spike started, the US already had 15% more in the way of both crude and distalates such as Gasoline, Diesel and so on, than they&#039;d had since they started keeping records of such.  Clearly this was not a price spike caused by a shortage of product. 

That&#039;s excluding what we know of oil deposits of shale and so on.

&lt;blockquote&gt;We wont see oil prices back in the $50 to $60 range, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they drop a bit more.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Frankly, Steve, I&#039;d be shocked if they didn&#039;t.  Indeed; They might not get to $50 or $60, per se&#039;... but I see that as a function of inflationand the relative strength of the US dollar, as much as anything, and suggest that we will see prices drop down that low again, &lt;em&gt;inflation adjusted&lt;/em&gt; assuming we&#039;re smart enough to start drilling here in the US... not to increase oil supply so much as to get the trade balance numbers back in line so as to make a stronger dollar.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>. Of course, it also helps that consumers are using less oil and oil based products than they were previously.</p></blockquote>
<p>To say this is to suggest that the problem was more than psychological. The facts dno't seem to bear this out. As of the time that this price spike started, the US already had 15% more in the way of both crude and distalates such as Gasoline, Diesel and so on, than they'd had since they started keeping records of such.  Clearly this was not a price spike caused by a shortage of product. </p>
<p>That's excluding what we know of oil deposits of shale and so on.</p>
<blockquote><p>We wont see oil prices back in the $50 to $60 range, but I wouldn&rsquo;t be surprised if they drop a bit more.</p></blockquote>
<p>Frankly, Steve, I'd be shocked if they didn't.  Indeed; They might not get to $50 or $60, per se'... but I see that as a function of inflationand the relative strength of the US dollar, as much as anything, and suggest that we will see prices drop down that low again, <em>inflation adjusted</em> assuming we're smart enough to start drilling here in the US... not to increase oil supply so much as to get the trade balance numbers back in line so as to make a stronger dollar.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/oil_prices_have_peaked/comment-page-1/#comment-498444</link>
		<dc:creator>Zelsdorf Ragshaft III</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 00:25:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24845#comment-498444</guid>
		<description>So, Steve, what you are trying to say is we will still be giving 700 billion dollars to folks who will not spend it here?  Drill here, drill now.  The price of oil is not ever going to get substantially less.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, Steve, what you are trying to say is we will still be giving 700 billion dollars to folks who will not spend it here?  Drill here, drill now.  The price of oil is not ever going to get substantially less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
