Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Once again, the big banks are sticking it to us by trading oil futures for no other reason than to jack up their profits. Naturally, the cast of characters include Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. (where have we heard of them before?)
It's estimated that trading on futures with no expectation of ever taking delivery of a single barrel of oil adds 38-40% to the cost of crude, which translates to about a $1 a gallon at the pump.
What will it take to rein in the big banks? Does either party have the guts?
The Democrats in Congress will offer legislation to curtail investment banks from dealing in oil, but let's see if they can get it past the House. And, let's see just how serious they are.
Once again, the big banks are sticking it to us by trading oil futures for no other reason than to jack up their profits. Naturally, the cast of characters include Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. (where have we heard of them before?)
It's estimated that trading on futures with no expectation of ever taking delivery of a single barrel of oil adds 38-40% to the cost of crude, which translates to about a $1 a gallon at the pump.
What will it take to rein in the big banks? Does either party have the guts?
The Democrats in Congress will offer legislation to curtail investment banks from dealing in oil, but let's see if they can get it past the House. And, let's see just how serious they are.
Actually some banks do take delivery. They rent tankers, take delivery and let the ships sit offshore until prices spike and then sell. The banks are profiting at every point in the delivery pipeline.
The oil companies are not doing this, the banks are. And yet the MSM loudly points to the oil companies.
Actually some banks do take delivery. They rent tankers, take delivery and let the ships sit offshore until prices spike and then sell. The banks are profiting at every point in the delivery pipeline.
The oil companies are not doing this, the banks are. And yet the MSM loudly points to the oil companies.
As does Obama. Obama is owned by the big banks; just look at the revolving door in his administration with people from Government Sachs & JP Morgan. It is no different with the Obama administration than it was with the Clinton administration (and I suspect Bush's as well).
Actually some banks do take delivery. They rent tankers, take delivery and let the ships sit offshore until prices spike and then sell. The banks are profiting at every point in the delivery pipeline.
The oil companies are not doing this, the banks are. And yet the MSM loudly points to the oil companies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal
As does Obama. Obama is owned by the big banks; just look at the revolving door in his administration with people from Government Sachs & JP Morgan. It is no different with the Obama administration than it was with the Clinton administration (and I suspect Bush's as well).
And these two posts are the reason why we're a mess. One blames MSM, the other blames Obama. Neither show any desire to address the point made in the OP and both show what the political opposition is about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
The Democrats in Congress will offer legislation to curtail investment banks from dealing in oil, but let's see if they can get it past the House. And, let's see just how serious they are.
Some might be serious, but I bet they are easily outnumbered considering the numbers from both sides of the aisle.
It's estimated that trading on futures with no expectation of ever taking delivery of a single barrel of oil adds 38-40% to the cost of crude, which translates to about a $1 a gallon at the pump.
I have to dig up the article - but the 38-40% is normal. An article I sourced a while ago stated that the percentage actually is now around 60-70% which is a large part of the price increases we have now.
Historically, financial speculators accounted for about 30 percent of oil trading in commodity markets, while producers and end users made up about 70 percent. Today it's almost the reverse.
A McClatchy review of the latest Commitment of Traders report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates oil trading, shows that producers and merchants made up just 36 percent of all contracts traded in the week ending Feb. 14.
Last edited by DRob4JC; 04-11-2012 at 10:58 AM..
Reason: Add source link
Once again, the big banks are sticking it to us by trading oil futures for no other reason than to jack up their profits. Naturally, the cast of characters include Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. (where have we heard of them before?)
It's estimated that trading on futures with no expectation of ever taking delivery of a single barrel of oil adds 38-40% to the cost of crude, which translates to about a $1 a gallon at the pump.
What will it take to rein in the big banks? Does either party have the guts?
The Democrats in Congress will offer legislation to curtail investment banks from dealing in oil, but let's see if they can get it past the House. And, let's see just how serious they are.
I dont see you complaining about any other COMODITY other that what your handlers tell you to complain about
are you complaining about coffee speculation????...up way more than oil
are you complaining about sugar speculation???....up way more than oil
I have handlers? Wow! Who knew?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.