For the oil clueless

[Homeslice]

"There is practically nothing that Washington can do that would materially change the price of fuel in this country," said Raymond James analyst Pavel Molchanov, noting that the United States produces about 5 percent of the world's petroleum while consuming about 20 percent. "Given that imbalance, there is simply no policy shift that could plausibly come from the federal government that can significantly change that dynamic."

['73 H1 Triple]

Since the speculators are currently responsible for about 20-25% of the increase in the per barrel price, why not tax them at 5X what they make?

I can guarantee that if the oil speculators were taxed $500 for every $100 they made, the price of oil would would drop.

You can also be sure that someone in the industry would NOT suggest that

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by '73 H1 Triple

Since the speculators are currently responsible for about 20-25% of the increase in the per barrel price, why not tax them at 5X what they make?

I can guarantee that if the oil speculators were taxed $500 for every $100 they made, the price of oil would would drop.

You can also be sure that someone in the industry would NOT suggest that

How about not letting speculators buy futures, unless they are physically capable of taking delivery?

[derf]

Originally Posted by '73 H1 Triple

Since the speculators are currently responsible for about 20-25% of the increase in the per barrel price, why not tax them at 5X what they make?

I can guarantee that if the oil speculators were taxed $500 for every $100 they made, the price of oil would would drop.

You can also be sure that someone in the industry would NOT suggest that

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

How about not letting speculators buy futures, unless they are physically capable of taking delivery?

Both viable but completely unrealistic options. Too many people are making too much money for them not to screw everyone else.

[Adeptus_Minor]

Originally Posted by derf

Both viable but completely unrealistic options. Too many people are making too much money for them not to screw everyone else.

Quoted for effin' truth.

[marko138]

Originally Posted by derf

Both viable but completely unrealistic options. Too many people are making too much money for them not to screw everyone else.

Smart motherfucker right here.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by derf

Both viable but completely unrealistic options. Too many people are making too much money for them not to screw everyone else.

Realistic actually, if politicians started to be charged for getting kick-b...., I mean if 'campaign contributions' were limited.

[derf]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

I don't agree..he aligns himself with the Libertarian party view of non-interventionism and limited government for which most decisions should be left up to the states. He is consistent in his voting.

Yes, hes very consistent, but hes also a politician, thus he is a proffessional liar and thief and has been deemed to be operating in his own self interest. Since his actions can only be assumed for his own benefit, it can also be assumed that he votes a certain way to benefit himself, and my guess would be that his major benefit is keeping his job, so he votes the way he dos to stay in office. Most politicians follow party lines and vote for stuff because thats where their election money comes from, the party and the party affiliation. Paul has established himself as the libertarian republican guy from TX who bucks the system. Thats what people donate their money to, the libertarian republican who bucks the system. Its the role he plays and the niche he fills.

I might be completely wrong about that ^, but I dont really trust anybody in DC, they are all theifs and liars. Until proven otherwise (and even then I truly doubt it) I will belive that they are all self serving corrupt liars. Including Paul. And thats my opinion.

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Realistic actually, if politicians started to be charged for getting kick-b...., I mean if 'campaign contributions' were limited.

Again, too many people making too much money off it to change it now. Thus it is completely unrealistic.

[101lifts2]

Originally Posted by '73 H1 Triple

Since the speculators are currently responsible for about 20-25% of the increase in the per barrel price, why not tax them at 5X what they make?

I can guarantee that if the oil speculators were taxed $500 for every $100 they made, the price of oil would would drop.

You can also be sure that someone in the industry would NOT suggest that

I listened to John Stossell say that speculators are not responsible for the price of oil. I'm sure to some extent, but it's def. not the driving factor.

And if what you say (20/25% control) is true, shouldn't we be worrying about the 75/80% i.e. the weakening dollar?

['73 H1 Triple]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

I listened to John Stossell say that speculators are not responsible for the price of oil. I'm sure to some extent, but it's def. not the driving factor.

And if what you say (20/25% control) is true, shouldn't we be worrying about the 75/80% i.e. the weakening dollar?

Our current pres is spending money like it's water flowing over the dam further devaluing the US$