July 20, 2005

SUPPLY HAS NOTHIN G TO DO WITH IT:

Oil prices fall on rising U.S. supplies (BRAD FOSS, 7/20/05, AP)

Oil prices fell by more than $1 a barrel on Wednesday after new government data showed rising U.S. supplies of diesel and heating oil and only a smaller-than-expected decline in crude oil inventories.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 20, 2005 1:50 PM
Comments

Price goes up. Supplies go up. less is consumed out of inventory. Whodathunkit.

Next Surprise: Sun to disappear in evening.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 20, 2005 2:03 PM

a one dollar move in the crude pit is chump change.

Posted by: lonbud at July 20, 2005 3:45 PM

Even $4 or $5 doesn't mean much - not from $55 or $60.

Posted by: ratbert at July 20, 2005 4:30 PM

lonbud: send me the dollar.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 20, 2005 4:36 PM

why, robert? it's only worth 60 cents of what it was but two years ago.

Posted by: lonbud at July 20, 2005 4:44 PM

Excuse me, lonbud, but on July 7th you agreed that the decline of the American dollar against foreign currencies DOES NOT MEAN that the average American household's purchasing power has declined by 1/3.

Are you incapable of learning, or do you just have short-term memory problems ?

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 20, 2005 6:05 PM

thanks for posting the link, michael, but wherein do you find my agreement that the decline in the value of the dollar has not affected the average american household's purchasing power?

you were the one who said, "strip out housing and energy costs, inflation barely exists." except that housing and energy costs are significant portions of the average household's expenses. there has also been significant inflation in the costs of other staple items, so, I stand by my assertion that the decline in the value of the dollar affects more of us than just the FOREX junkies.

Posted by: lonbud at July 20, 2005 6:52 PM

lonbud:

I pointed out that the yuan is linked to the U.S. dollar, and further that American-produced goods and services are U.S. dollar-denominated, with therefore NO CURRENCY RISK.

You wrote: "Well, yes...", which sounds like agreement to me.

You then proceeded to argue that there is domestic inflation, as well, but, even if that's true, it DOES NOT RISE to the level of decline of purchasing power of the U.S. dollar vs. the Euro, yen, et al.

Further, I pointed out that although prices for HOME-BUYERS have increased significantly in most American markets, RENTAL COSTS have remained flat, so one need not have higher housing costs unless one CHOOSES to do so.
I also pointed out that higher energy costs can be mitigated by conservation measures, such as planning one's trips, to reduce convenience commuting.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 20, 2005 7:39 PM

Michael: I admire your patience but . . . pearls before swine, man.

Posted by: John Resnick at July 20, 2005 8:15 PM

lonbud:

Even Alan Greenspan wouldn't endorse an inflation rate of 20% a year. But Krugman might, if you got him frothing enough.

Posted by: ratbert at July 20, 2005 10:28 PM

rat:

A brief period of Weimar style hyperinflation would allow us all to pay off our loans--though it would also lead to blood in many streets.

Posted by: oj at July 20, 2005 10:41 PM

for once oj and i agree.

Posted by: lonbud at July 21, 2005 12:16 AM

China announced today they are giving up the yuan-dollar peg. This is big news.

Posted by: Gideon at July 21, 2005 7:29 AM

"why, robert? it's only worth 60 cents of what it was but two years ago."

People who shop at Wal*Mart find that its worth $1.05.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 21, 2005 10:01 PM
« WHO GETS TO FRISK AMELIE?: | Main | TEXTBOOK: »