Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front Economy

Oil Drops on Expectations of Slack Demand

2008-09-28

Crude-oil futures dropped Friday on concerns that a U.S. bailout of financial firms wouldn't be enough to reverse declining oil demand. Light, sweet crude for November delivery settled $1.13, or 1%, lower at $106.89 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Oil futures, like other commodity and currency markets, were in limbo Friday as traders waited for congressional leaders and President George W. Bush to settle on a final bailout package for troubled financial firms. Investors see the $700 billion plan as the best hope of avoiding a full economic meltdown, a fear punctuated by the seizure of Washington Mutual Inc. by regulators.

Traders nervously bid crude lower in the absence of a deal, though few were willing to take bets on a big price move in either direction. "The prospect that a deal gets done helped support the market," said Andy Lebow, senior vice president for energy at brokerage MF Global Ltd. in New York. "It doesn't mean the price is going to rally...the market is still grappling with near-term demand issues."

Posted by:Steve White

#9 Problem is, how do you convince sitting members to essentially vote away their own cushy jobs?

There is one way to make it happen Constitutionally. It still is the United States of America. Consequently if the smaller states call for a Constitutional Convention to avoid the utterly corrupt big ones, you can convene a body to write amendments which would then be sent back to the states for ratification. That way the few large states, beyond redemption, can not inhibit change through their numbers in the House of Representatives. Thus the political machines of IL, MA, NY, CA, NJ, and the like can not stop such a movement to remove their pawns from the game. The mechanism exists, just lacks the will.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-09-28 19:33

#8 Apply #3 to lobbyists, heh.

Posted by: Alaska Paul 2008-09-28 17:45

#7 When you get term limits for lobbyists, it will work.

Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-09-28 16:58

#6 I've been opposed to term limits, because it penalizes experience. That just doesn't make sense.

I've recently come around. I finally realized that, in this context, more experience = more sleaze, not better legislators.

Problem is, how do you convince sitting members to essentially vote away their own cushy jobs?

Posted by: Kirk 2008-09-28 16:50

#5 Actually, #3 is sort of the conventional Pakistani approach. We don't need that.

We need term limits. Two terms max in the Senate (12 years max) would clear it for some useful folks to serve. There should be no way to be a career politician at the federal level.

Posted by: Darrell 2008-09-28 15:30

#4 Congress is probably the most culpable, as they enacted the legislation then enabled the irresponsible financing. Then Wall Street and their buddies ran with it.

The problem is that members of Congress have little accountability, other than getting turned out of office. But even with that, their bennies are secure. How many of you Rantburgers have that kind of cushy deal with your employers?

I just see no real way out of this in the long term until we start doing the public business based upon sound financial principles, and that will not happen until present members of congress are removed and independents come into office.

Then you can reform congress and the rules under which it operates. Once that is done, then you can attack the federal bureaucracy.

But you cannot get good people to run for office because it is nothing but a massive slimey environment that you would not want to put your family through, witness the Palins.

So we middle class taxpayers are all f*cked, which can lead to #3. And violent revolution does not work in the long run very often.

Posted by: Alaska Paul 2008-09-28 15:16

#3 Time for a new government.

I'm all for the Army taking over and shooting all of congress and then returning the government to the people when they've instituted term limits.

Am I dreaming?

Posted by: Hellfish 2008-09-28 14:04

#2 So basically the middle class is screwed no matter what happens. Deal, no deal, good deal, bad deal, we get the shit end of the stick. The richest 1% and poorest 5% come out fine.

Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-09-28 10:10

#1 Traders nervously bid crude lower in the absence of a deal,

Does this mean as soon as "the deal" is signed oil prices will skyrocket? Lovely second-order effect.

Posted by: Besoeker 2008-09-28 08:43

00:00