There is a lot of stuff here that can be a bit misleading. Price of oil and cost of oil are different things. The cost of oil is how much it costs to extract it and refine it, this doesn't change too much day to day, or month to month. The price of oil is determined by too many factors to list. Basically it combines supply, demand, and speculation on what those two will do in the near future. It probably includes greed too.
So, drilling for more oil won't reduce the cost of oil until the entire operation can come on line which will take years. Is 10 too many? probably. 5 sounds too short. But the act of announcing that the supply will increase - that will reduce the price immediately.
A similar disconnect between facts and reality happens on the stock market. People don't trade rationally, they trade to make money and to avoid losing money. The price of a stock reflects not on how the company is doing, but how people feel that they can make money by buying that particular stock (in this case GM) and selling it in the near future at a higher price. This relationship is based partially on fact, partially on the actions of others. The facts are what gets presented by the media, regardless of what reality may be. And so, when the media reports bad news prices go down. Good news and they go up. When they say that a company stock is going down and they may need to file for bankruptcy, well you can guess what investors will think then do.
And no, that is not merely my personal opinion on the matter. That is how computers are programed to trade. Search for keywords related to a company, and act (or at least advise). For GM, reports of "sales down 20%" is a giant flashing red light with a siren blazing. "Bankruptcy" is a loud speaker telling everyone to abandon ship. More or less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chevydude26
the dems right now have control of congress but if we continue to make an uproar and threaten to vote those marxists out they will do what the american people want
the dems want the price of oil to stay high because they think less use of fossil fuel is good for the environment which is total bunk
|
Couple things. First, while I don't follow American politics too closely, I am quite certain that the Democratic party is not Marxist or any form of communist for that matter. Secondly, as a concept communism is a good idea, and if people weren't greedy (which is a sin in christianity) it could work. Thridly, wasn't it the american people who voted them in in the first place? As I understand it, the majority of people are the ones who are supposed to get what they want in a democracy not the minority. Fourthly, do the intentions of the democrats matter as much as their results? if people use less fuel you won't have to import oil from people like Hugo Chavez. But I am going a bit off topic. If you wish to continue talking about politics, I would be glad to continue in another thread. But for now, please don't throgh out exadurations and generalizations about the politicians that your fellow citizens have voted into office.
