On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Blame oil producers like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela for trash talking in a > clear attempt to unnerve analysts and push the price of oil ever higher. The > dramatic rise in the price of oil spurred inflation in all kinds of goods > all around the world and played a significant role in the current crisis. > Just shows you how little the leaders of those countries know about market > economics.
As opposed to OPEC? :) Oil is a commodity but is not traded on anything resembling an open market using market economics. One of the best reasons for the US to get out of the oil game as a consumer and, ideally, as a producer. Short term, if we get out as a consumer we can make money as a producer. Long term, its a big hairy mess anyone involved in that racket risks substantial, well, risk. > Blame Congress for pushing cheap money and risky lending practices in the US > in a misguided attempt to broaden home ownership among the poor. Broadening home ownership amongst the poor is not a bad thing. Programs that encourage people to get into financial contracts that they don't understand and can't afford are. > Blame Americans (and others) for a negative savings rate. Spot on there. That's actually one thing that I've been curious about but haven't seen a good write up on. How did we go from a positive savings culture just post WWII to the negative savings culture now? And what can we do to reverse the trend? There seems to be a consensus that we save too little and I definitely agree. There also seems to be a notion that you can save too much (usually referencing the Japanese) and that this can cause a liquidity crisis in the economy. How are savings rates encouraged/discouraged and what is optimal? A question I'd rather like to see some discussion on. > Blame the culture of greed in corporate boardrooms worldwide for allowing > CEOs to make very risky decisions in pursuit of maximum profits. And blame investors/analysts who demand that certain numbers be hit and profit and revenue targets be nailed and improved every quarter come hell or high water. Corporations are required to maximize profits and the market is in it for the short term, generally speaking. Too much sacrifice of the short term for the long term risks not only your job as a CEO but potential litigation as well. > Blame China for keeping its currency depressed to allow its companies to > sell huge amounts of goods to the rest of the world. Hard to blame them for doing the smart thing. > Blame Wall Street "gurus" for creating an entire industry of derivatives > even the heads of the biggest banks in the world don't understand. And blame the lax oversight of government and the corporate backers of deregulation that didn't bother to call insurance insurance and turned a blind all to all meaningful oversight of industries that they are supposed to be monitoring for the public good. > Blame the EU for not responding effectively to the devaluation of the dollar > over the last few years. Just like we blamed the US when the Euro was at 2 to a dollar? A strong Euro isn't necessarily a bad thing for them and they don't necessarily have our best interests in mind. Currencies will fluctuate and different segments of the economy prosper and fall accordingly. We can identify severe imbalances perhaps but there is no overall optimal equilibrium for the worlds currencies as far as I'm aware. Cheers, Judah ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:282468 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
