A tragically flawed economic analysis...

[4est_4est_Gump]

... to any student of Austrian economics.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-10-13-15-54-50

Anything that puts more money into the pocket of the producer and the consumer is going to mean a net increase in jobs. True, some jobs may lose in the short-term, but more jobs will benefit.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

“This is not your garden variety autumn price decline,” said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at GasBuddy.com, which reports fuel prices from filling stations across the country. “Clearly there is a rift in OPEC, and that means we are more likely to see a price war over the next six months. Crude oil is teetering on the brink of collapse.”

Mr. Kloza predicted that the national average for regular gasoline was headed to between $2.95 and $3.10 a gallon. The average household consumes 1,200 gallons of gasoline a year, translating into an annual savings of $120 for every 10-cent drop in the price of gasoline.*

Most oil analysts say that the companies that have led the boom in drilling across North Dakota and Texas are insulated from the declines for the time being, with the break-even levels for investments around $60 a barrel — which is more than $20 below current levels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/14/b...opec-members-fight-for-market-share.html?_r=0


* Let us hope that it is more than that!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Not if the plan is to liquidate America.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Anything that puts more money into the pocket ...the consumer is going to mean a net increase in jobs. True, some jobs may lose in the short-term, but more jobs will benefit.

I tried explaining this theory to your fruit booty padawan Query the other day. He would not believe me. Maybe hearing it from you will change his mind.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

I listened to a buttload of NPR talking shows about the economy and heard all sorts of magical stuff. I liked the bit about the Stimulus was too small.


There is room in my bank account for more Stimulus Dollars, that's for sure.


Then Panetta was on to say that Barry has no stomach for doing what needs to be done. I think he's just plain old-fashioned waiting-for-someone-else-to-do-it.


They call that "lazy" in some parts . . . .

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Exactly.

 

[unregistered]

 

[cowslinger64]

So many things in our every day lives aside from fuels and lubricants are manufactured out of petroleum, and when that resource becomes cheaper it will eventually be reflected in the price of everything in the market. The entire economy depends on cheap energy, to the extent that oil prices rise the economy is stunted. When oil is plentiful and thus cheap we all benefit.

Finally....you said something intelligent.


Congrats!


Diesel is still a buck a gallon higher than gas tho.. and that is still a huge problem.


But it's 3 bucks here for gas, THANK YOU OBAMA!

 

[Sean]

Another flawed analysis is the theory of maintaining a "favorable trade balance." As Milton Friedman points out:

"In the international trade area, the language is almost always about how we must export, and what’s really good is an industry that produces exports. And if we buy from abroad and import, that’s bad. But surely that’s upside-down. What we send abroad we can’t eat, we can’t wear, we can’t use for our houses. The goods and services we send abroad, are goods and services not available to us. On the other hand, the goods and services we import, they provide us with TV sets we can watch, automobiles we can drive, with all sorts of nice things for us to use. The gain from foreign trade is what we import. What we export is the cost of getting those imports. And the proper objective for a nation as Adam Smith put it, is to arrange things, so we get as large a volume of imports as possible, for as small a volume of exports as possible.

This carries over to the terminology we use. When people talk about a favorable balance of trade, what is that term taken to mean? It’s taken to mean that we export more than we import. But from the point of view of our well-being, that’s an unfavorable balance. That means we’re sending out more goods and getting fewer in. Each of you in your private household would know better than that. You don’t regard it as a favorable balance when you have to send out more goods to get less coming in. It’s favorable when you can get more by sending out less."

Just quoting.

 

[Que]

Finally....you said something intelligent.


Congrats!


Diesel is still a buck a gallon higher than gas tho.. and that is still a huge problem.


But it's 3 bucks here for gas, THANK YOU OBAMA, for not wrangling a method to slow production of oil through fracking from private lands!

Fixed you post, lest someone ascribe you the position that Obama has done something proactive to encourage oil production and immediately debunk your fatally flawed (apparent) position.

 

[cowslinger64]

Fixed you post, lest someone ascribe you the position that Obama has done something proactive to encourage oil production and immediately debunk your fatally flawed (apparent) position.

Don't need you to fix anything i say...you're a fucking idiot.

 

[Que]

Doesn't pay to fix anything I say...I'm a fucking idiot.

:nods:

 

[cowslinger64]

:nods:

Once again Captain Limpdick has nothing.

Gotcha.


You're on here enough, you should have a shitload of things saved up.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Here, regular was under $1.40/gallon in December of 2008.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Que]

I can't recall the piece or the author so I will steal the concept as my own. It dovetails nicely with Friedman. Every single dollar spent with a particular foriegn entity has to at some point work it's way back to our shores in some means. Even if that money is simply invested in a US dollar investment account in Singapore. A lot of the exchange works its way back in oil trades.

---------------------------------------------------

Regardless. Let me construct an example:

Country A imports a million widgets at $2 a piece from country C and sells raw material of .50 cents a piece per widget exported. The "trade imbalance' is 1.5 million. However we traded some otherwise worthless scrap iron and some printing press money for their labor and ingenuity.

Time passes. They become even more efficient at widgets and "flood' our markets with 2 million widgets at only $1.50 a piece. We still sell them refined Iron oxide at 50 cents a widget. Our "trade imbalance" is now 2 million dollars but we have TWICE as many widgets that we can sell to each-other, service and use the proceeds to make our scrap iron processing more efficient.

They are making 4 cents per widget, and we are shipping them scrap at a net cost to us of 42 cents per widget. We are making twice as much per widget sold domestically as what they are making.

Oh part of the reason they are making only 4 cents per widget is the major retailer that is importing them for them is making 16 cents per unit. So now "we" are making 20 cents a unit on a product that they produce at a profit of 4 cents per unit.

Poor us.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Ishmael]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/14/b...opec-members-fight-for-market-share.html?_r=0


* Let us hope that it is more than that!

Locally gas prices are currently $2.81/gal. and falling.

Ishmael

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I can't recall the piece or the author so I will steal the concept as my own. It dovetails nicely with Friedman. Every single dollar spent with a particular foriegn entity has to at some point work it's way back to our shores in some means. Even if that money is simply invested in a US dollar investment account in Singapore. A lot of the exchange works its way back in oil trades.

---------------------------------------------------

Regardless. Let me construct an example:

Country A imports a million widgets at $2 a piece from country C and sells raw material of .50 cents a piece per widget exported. The "trade imbalance' is 1.5 million. However we traded some otherwise worthless scrap iron and some printing press money for their labor and ingenuity.

Time passes. They become even more efficient at widgets and "flood' our markets with 2 million widgets at only $1.50 a piece. We still sell them refined Iron oxide at 50 cents a widget. Our "trade imbalance" is now 2 million dollars but we have TWICE as many widgets that we can sell to each-other, service and use the proceeds to make our scrap iron processing more efficient.

They are making 4 cents per widget, and we are shipping them scrap at a net cost to us of 42 cents per widget. We are making twice as much per widget sold domestically as what they are making.

Oh part of the reason they are making only 4 cents per widget is the major retailer that is importing them for them is making 16 cents per unit. So now "we" are making 20 cents a unit on a product that they produce at a profit of 4 cents per unit.

Poor us.

True until the dollar is used as a reserve currency by everyone and ends up in Afghanistan to pay for opium and hash for American liberals.

 

[BotanyBoy]

True until the dollar is used as a reserve currency by everyone and ends up in Afghanistan to pay for opium and hash for American liberals.

Liberal Americans don't smoke afghan hash....that shit is lame and goes to the trailer parks and sold cheap to the white trash (conservatives) who can't afford the good shit. The best hash in the world is in the PNW starting with them emerald triangle and going right up to the Matanuska valley in Alaska... and liberals pay through the nose for it....so do conservatives.

Opium? Close but if you want to talk about all the liberals using heroine we gotta talk about the trailer trash (conservative) meth problem too...."at least it's M'urican" is about all the high ground you guys got on that....

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Liberal Americans don't smoke afghan hash....that shit is lame and goes to the trailer parks and sold cheap to the white trash (conservatives) who can't afford the good shit. The best hash in the world is in the PNW starting with them emerald triangle and going right up to the Matanuska valley in Alaska... and liberals pay through the nose for it....so do conservatives.

Opium? Close but if you want to talk about all the liberals using heroine we gotta talk about the trailer trash (conservative) meth problem too...."at least it's M'urican" is about all the high ground you guys got on that....

There yuh go. The ragheads get Cadillacs and teen pussy for ISIS, and we get bad shit in the trailer parks.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Well, obviously, those folks still drinking the Keynesian Kool-Aid are gonna come off dumb, because when it comes to economics, they have so many lies, distortions, and myths to unlearn.

Part of the deliberate use of propaganda to confuse and deceive the public from the mainstream media.

 

[unregistered]

 

[rosco rathbone]

As Dr. Friedman said: "a sustained trade deficit is the best possible outcome…. we get physical goods like cars, flash memory, oil, computers, toys, and all sorts of other goods for cheaply produced ‘paper’ known as currency."

And we all know how cheap it is to print money.

Then the question is, "why do they keep taking our money"???

answer: Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy Of American Empire