You cannot just use short term price information to understand a long term problem!
Please, this does not contribute to the flow of ideas. Maybe we are facing a problem of peak thought. On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 02:43:33PM -0700, The Buffalo In Da' Midst wrote: > On 9/12/07, Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Leigh, you may be correct, but the information you are providing does not > > really show > > much. When oil fell to $20 dollar a barrel some time ago, what did that > > prove? > > > > If this is the way the debate will proceed, I was wrong to give it a > > reprive. > > > > This is the money quote... for some reason oil prices AREN'T going > down as expected from a previous OPEC action. Why not? That is where I > would hope the discussion would lead. > > > > > . > > > ...It had been expected that Opec's (Previous!) move would eventually > > > depress > > > prices and that this could help ease recent US economic and global > > > stock market jitters. > > > [...] > > > > > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6991567.stm> > > > > > > > So Opec tries again. > > Is there historic precedence for this? > I know that the Saudis can only truly control production by brute > force (capacity cleansing), threats and intimidation. Venezuela's > bucked them before. > > Maybe no one is interested in what is current, and all that will > become of this thread are people critiquing the present because the > market's behavior isn't apparent from the past. > > But then, isn't economics a 'lagging' science? > > Peak oil, or whatever you want to call it can't be discussed by past > behavior because there ISN'T any. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
