It is important to understand that prices determine of how much of something will be bought and how much of it will be produced. In other words price effects supply and demand. The higher the price, the more of that good a producer wants to make because they can sell it for that high price and make a profit off of it. This also makes consumers demand less of it, thus preserving the good that has been produced for the people who want or need it the most.
Gas prices demonstrate this in an extroardinary way. Oil is sold on a world market and thus prices are set for oil based on the demand and supply of the world. The more the world demands something the higher the price will go. This is a good thing. The reason for it is that while prices rise, producers will make more to try and make that extra profit. When the supply then rises, prices will come back down. The other benefit is that when prices originally rise, people buy less and thus those who need it the most will have more available for them. Recently prices of gas have fallen quickly. After the recent hurricane, supply of gas was hurt because some of our refineries in Texas were disturbed by the hurricane. If the government stays out, prices will rise quickly enough so that only those who need the gas will buy it. I myself chose not to take a casual trip to Chattanooga because it would have cost me a dollar more per gallon. But prices rising in a time when supply is low or tight, is not such a bad thing. The man or woman who had to go to work on Saturday and Sunday and needed gas, would not have to worry about finding gas for sell. Some gas stations ran out of gas. If they had been free to and had raised their prices to what the price needed to be to curve demand, then they would not have ran out of gas to sell.
Recently the refineries are up and running at top speed and prices have fallen back down very quickly. We have also seen the economy sliding but not only here at home but world wide. This means that speculators or investors who buy oil on the world market expect demand to to be lower in the future. So they have bid the price of oil down because people are not going to be buying it as much nor will world economies be using as much gas to operate. Thus oil prices dropped. Within a few weeks that oil that is bought for cheap, gets refined into gas and when that gas gets to the gas station is is sold there for less than the older gas and thus gas stations can lower their prices. This is why prices have dropped so much. At the same time of our refining capacity getting back to normal, world demand for oil has dropped and thus prices drop considerably.
Some people complain about the profits of oil companies. Remember their profit per dollar of gas sold is less than $.10. This is a very low profit margin. It is a good thing that these companies make a lot of money because that means they can expand their company and produce more oil and supply will rise and thus prices will eventually go back down. The only problem is that our government currently restricts this from happening because liberals are held by the grip of extreme environmentalists. That means when the economy starts to grow again, prices for gas will rise again. We can keeps this from happening as quickly and as high, if we start drilling now. I'm afraid we won't though.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
What really caused this serious Financial Crisis
I have attempted to write about the housing crisis on my blog. It is a really complicated issue that when reading about, unless you have some good economic background might be hard to understand. This video helps out tramendously. It is 10 minutes long. Which is long for many of you probably. It will be worth it and it makes lots of sense. Please read and share with friends if you would please....
444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0" id="JibJabPlayer" width="440" height="370" align="middle">
444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0" id="JibJabPlayer" width="440" height="370" align="middle">
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Powell endorses McCain
I'm sure the mainstream media will run this for at least three days even if there is another terrorist attack. "Former Bush Secretary of State and fellow Republican, surprisingly endorses the monumental figure Obama!" Lets put this in perspective.
Powell has never been a true conservative and thus this should be of no surprise. In fact as Secretary of State, Bush was probably trying to be non-partisan with the appointment. When Powell and former First head of Homeland Security- Tom Ridge were both rumored to be possible V.P. picks, conservatives hammered McCain into not picking them. Powell is pro-choice and has not been extremely supportive of Bush since he has left his position as Secretary of State. He has always leaned a little left which means he is more of an internationalist and not a nationalist like conservatives are. That is why he cited his belief that Obama will bring back some of our reputation from the other countries of the world. Don't get me wrong I wish other nations loved me too. But most nations loved Chamberlain when he waved the letter from Hitler back before WWII because they did not want war. But in the end it was the aggressive Churchill that saved Western Civilization. I don't want other countries to like me if it risks my existence or strength in the world. I could care less about the majority. Hitler had the majority of support before he killed millions of Jews.
Powell is a republican in name only. He is also Black. There are Black Republicans such as the conservative writer, John McWhorter who are favoring Obama because of the history. It should not be a huge surprise that Powell has done this. He was also not picked to be the Veep for McCain, so he might have some animosity towards him. The fact is, this does not mean a thing, but the media will make it a huge story!
Part 2 on prices coming soon
Powell has never been a true conservative and thus this should be of no surprise. In fact as Secretary of State, Bush was probably trying to be non-partisan with the appointment. When Powell and former First head of Homeland Security- Tom Ridge were both rumored to be possible V.P. picks, conservatives hammered McCain into not picking them. Powell is pro-choice and has not been extremely supportive of Bush since he has left his position as Secretary of State. He has always leaned a little left which means he is more of an internationalist and not a nationalist like conservatives are. That is why he cited his belief that Obama will bring back some of our reputation from the other countries of the world. Don't get me wrong I wish other nations loved me too. But most nations loved Chamberlain when he waved the letter from Hitler back before WWII because they did not want war. But in the end it was the aggressive Churchill that saved Western Civilization. I don't want other countries to like me if it risks my existence or strength in the world. I could care less about the majority. Hitler had the majority of support before he killed millions of Jews.
Powell is a republican in name only. He is also Black. There are Black Republicans such as the conservative writer, John McWhorter who are favoring Obama because of the history. It should not be a huge surprise that Powell has done this. He was also not picked to be the Veep for McCain, so he might have some animosity towards him. The fact is, this does not mean a thing, but the media will make it a huge story!
Part 2 on prices coming soon
Friday, October 17, 2008
PRICES Part one
One of the toughest classes I had (at my surprise) in college was The History of Economic Theory. The thing that was toughest to understand was the history of setting prices on goods. How to come up or set a price for a good has been debated and studied for centuries especially since the 1700's when the study of economics really began with Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations book came out. Smith is considered the "Father of Capitalism" some call him the "Father of Economics". I am now going to do the best I can to explain why prices are set the way they are today and answer some recent questions and complaints from friends of mine who do not understand why gas prices have fluctuated so much lately and is there manipulation going on.
Should prices be set just above cost? This way the producer will make just a little profit to pay him for his work and pay him enough to cover his cost. Should prices be set exactly at cost? Should government set prices? Should government subsidize or help pay for important goods so that consumers or citizens can pay less for a good they need since the government is helping pay for part of it? All interesting questions but they are the wrong questions. The question should be: In relation to setting prices what is the most efficient way to get goods produced, allocated or spread throughout the economy, and bought by customers to satisfy their needs and want. In other words: Supply and Demand. I find the theory of Supply and Demand one of the most interesting concepts in the world. I know I must be a geek but so be it. In a true free market (which has shown to be the most efficient way of allocating resources) prices are set wherever producers want to put them..... but not exactly. What do you mean Jess "but not exactly"? Consumers can buy products at whatever price they want to by telling the producer "NO" by not buying their good at that current price. In a free market there is competition and only very very few technical monopolies and thus competition will allow consumers to have the most power in the economy not the producer. This is because there are far more of them! So the consumer can not be taken advantage of in a true free market.
Producers want to make as much as they can but if they charge too much they will not have buyers and thus go out of business. This is why Wal-mart has been so successful in selling for cheap and thus other businesses that charge more are put out of business. Not by Wal-mart. But put out of business by US the consumer who chooses to buy from Wal-Mart instead of them. Prices thus are set by a market of producers (the suppliers) and consumers (the demanders). Now lets apply this to prices in our economy.
Economist that think like I do, do not care about how much it cost to make something and thus producers should make a little profit to pay them for their services. They care about what people are demanding, thus what needs to be produced, and the price can determine both of these things. How? The higher the price the more suppliers will make of that good because they can make a lot of money. Plus that higher price serves another great function. It curves demand for that good. In other words, if the price is high, because there is a lot of demand for it, you will buy less of it because at a high price you will only buy what you need, not necessarily what you want. The good news is that because of this action, there is more of the good to go around to ALL people that need it. Back to that first good thing. The higher the price the more that good will be produced. This means what people demand the most will be made the most and quickest so that consumers can get it and producers can make a buck. Or in this case, a lot of bucks. But in the long term, that means the supply will rise, and eventually over take demand, and thus producers will lower prices to sell off their extra supply. This is why goods that are made are expensive at first (video games, new types of technology like computers and cars, medicine, etc...) and then later the price falls. Then a new, better technology comes out, the price of the older technology falls even more, but the new goods price is high, and the same thing happens all over again.
In the next posts I will explain why this is good, and its effects on gas prices, and why so many Americans complain about price gougers, and manipulation and so forth.
Should prices be set just above cost? This way the producer will make just a little profit to pay him for his work and pay him enough to cover his cost. Should prices be set exactly at cost? Should government set prices? Should government subsidize or help pay for important goods so that consumers or citizens can pay less for a good they need since the government is helping pay for part of it? All interesting questions but they are the wrong questions. The question should be: In relation to setting prices what is the most efficient way to get goods produced, allocated or spread throughout the economy, and bought by customers to satisfy their needs and want. In other words: Supply and Demand. I find the theory of Supply and Demand one of the most interesting concepts in the world. I know I must be a geek but so be it. In a true free market (which has shown to be the most efficient way of allocating resources) prices are set wherever producers want to put them..... but not exactly. What do you mean Jess "but not exactly"? Consumers can buy products at whatever price they want to by telling the producer "NO" by not buying their good at that current price. In a free market there is competition and only very very few technical monopolies and thus competition will allow consumers to have the most power in the economy not the producer. This is because there are far more of them! So the consumer can not be taken advantage of in a true free market.
Producers want to make as much as they can but if they charge too much they will not have buyers and thus go out of business. This is why Wal-mart has been so successful in selling for cheap and thus other businesses that charge more are put out of business. Not by Wal-mart. But put out of business by US the consumer who chooses to buy from Wal-Mart instead of them. Prices thus are set by a market of producers (the suppliers) and consumers (the demanders). Now lets apply this to prices in our economy.
Economist that think like I do, do not care about how much it cost to make something and thus producers should make a little profit to pay them for their services. They care about what people are demanding, thus what needs to be produced, and the price can determine both of these things. How? The higher the price the more suppliers will make of that good because they can make a lot of money. Plus that higher price serves another great function. It curves demand for that good. In other words, if the price is high, because there is a lot of demand for it, you will buy less of it because at a high price you will only buy what you need, not necessarily what you want. The good news is that because of this action, there is more of the good to go around to ALL people that need it. Back to that first good thing. The higher the price the more that good will be produced. This means what people demand the most will be made the most and quickest so that consumers can get it and producers can make a buck. Or in this case, a lot of bucks. But in the long term, that means the supply will rise, and eventually over take demand, and thus producers will lower prices to sell off their extra supply. This is why goods that are made are expensive at first (video games, new types of technology like computers and cars, medicine, etc...) and then later the price falls. Then a new, better technology comes out, the price of the older technology falls even more, but the new goods price is high, and the same thing happens all over again.
In the next posts I will explain why this is good, and its effects on gas prices, and why so many Americans complain about price gougers, and manipulation and so forth.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Barack Obama's Friends
If your not dead or hate your country to a point that you don't pay a bit attention to our government, then you have probably been hearing a lot about Obama's connection to the Great American William Ayers, The Community Organization of Acorn, and of course this brings back up one of America's great Evangelicals The Reverend Jeremiah Wright.
Ok so Ayers is a terrorist and Wright is a racist, anti-American, Socialist so they are not great people. For you who do not keep up with it closely lets talk about these organizations, people, and the significance of it to the Presidency.
William Ayers was a leader and in fact co-founder of the Weather Underground which was a group of people who became domestic Terrorist and blew things up. Ayers and Obama met early on in his political career about Education reform. Ayers believes that our education system needs to be reformed in a way that students are taught about the evils of Capitalism (which made our nation rich), and to radicalize their thinking to change everything about America. Ayers is a Marxist. Obama met with him about education reform but also to jump start his political career! Ayers is from Illinois and has donated to his election bids early on in his career. Both of them have also served on anti-poverty boards together. This should be a problem for Obama as Ayers is against everything that has made our country so rich and has brought more people out of poverty than any other economic system in history. Ayers is a believer in Communism. Obama has some tendencies to agree with those principles as well. He was a marxist early on in his career. For you who don't know what I mean by marxist, Karl Marx is considered the "father of communism". This is scary to anyone that knows the smallest amount about economics!
Acorn is a community organization that specializes in getting poor and minority families in homes and helps get people registered to vote. Since they deal with mostly inner-city, poor families, this would mean they register likely liberal democrats to vote. They have been known to participate in voter fraud as well. I will not dive into that part of their association that much. But they are a group that also lobbies congressmen to be tough on banks to make loans to poor people. They are a group that supports laws like the Community Reinvestment Act that I mentioned in a past blog, which was the first of government interference in the free market of housing, which has led to this so called "crisis" we have today. The Free market did not cause this, government interference by creating laws that forced banks to make bad loans did. Obama has worked with them closely before. They too are a very radical leftist organization.
These associations bring up other past associations that Obama has had, particularly with his Pastor-Jeremiah Wright. This should not be a surprise to most of you. Obama is a leftist and is one of the most liberal politicians in the country. In fact he is historically a radical leftist himself and only appears slightly more moderate than people like Ayers because he is a great politician. These are important issues that McCain should have been hammering on long ago. But he has to do it in the right way. Don't just attack Obama because he was friendly with an unrepentant terrorist. Explain that his association with him was over his political career, especially in the field of education reform. Then explain the kind of reform that Ayers and thus Obama really want. Obama can't claim that he wants these extreme changes but if McCain makes the obvious connection, he can explain what Obama really wants. Then explain in a savvy fashion the housing crisis and how bad laws led to this. Then explain that as President, these laws would be eliminated and this housing crisis would never happen again.
If McCain does this and hammers it home, he still has a chance to be elected President. He has a lot of things working against him. Obama is a better politician than him, the mainstream media is supportive of Obama, Young people are so perverted in their education about economics and history that they are too ignorant to know better until they are older and enter the real world (this is why so many switch from Democrats to Republicans within ten years upon graduation). Young people are beginning to vote now, this helps Obama. But McCain can hammer this home, demand interviews, show passion, and explain how radical Obama and his friends are. Explain that our founding fathers and even the beloved Democrat- Franklin Roosevelt would never associate with Obama themselves. Our founders would not have allowed him to even participate in the developement of our great nation even. I doubt he will do this. But I'm praying he does!
Ok so Ayers is a terrorist and Wright is a racist, anti-American, Socialist so they are not great people. For you who do not keep up with it closely lets talk about these organizations, people, and the significance of it to the Presidency.
William Ayers was a leader and in fact co-founder of the Weather Underground which was a group of people who became domestic Terrorist and blew things up. Ayers and Obama met early on in his political career about Education reform. Ayers believes that our education system needs to be reformed in a way that students are taught about the evils of Capitalism (which made our nation rich), and to radicalize their thinking to change everything about America. Ayers is a Marxist. Obama met with him about education reform but also to jump start his political career! Ayers is from Illinois and has donated to his election bids early on in his career. Both of them have also served on anti-poverty boards together. This should be a problem for Obama as Ayers is against everything that has made our country so rich and has brought more people out of poverty than any other economic system in history. Ayers is a believer in Communism. Obama has some tendencies to agree with those principles as well. He was a marxist early on in his career. For you who don't know what I mean by marxist, Karl Marx is considered the "father of communism". This is scary to anyone that knows the smallest amount about economics!
Acorn is a community organization that specializes in getting poor and minority families in homes and helps get people registered to vote. Since they deal with mostly inner-city, poor families, this would mean they register likely liberal democrats to vote. They have been known to participate in voter fraud as well. I will not dive into that part of their association that much. But they are a group that also lobbies congressmen to be tough on banks to make loans to poor people. They are a group that supports laws like the Community Reinvestment Act that I mentioned in a past blog, which was the first of government interference in the free market of housing, which has led to this so called "crisis" we have today. The Free market did not cause this, government interference by creating laws that forced banks to make bad loans did. Obama has worked with them closely before. They too are a very radical leftist organization.
These associations bring up other past associations that Obama has had, particularly with his Pastor-Jeremiah Wright. This should not be a surprise to most of you. Obama is a leftist and is one of the most liberal politicians in the country. In fact he is historically a radical leftist himself and only appears slightly more moderate than people like Ayers because he is a great politician. These are important issues that McCain should have been hammering on long ago. But he has to do it in the right way. Don't just attack Obama because he was friendly with an unrepentant terrorist. Explain that his association with him was over his political career, especially in the field of education reform. Then explain the kind of reform that Ayers and thus Obama really want. Obama can't claim that he wants these extreme changes but if McCain makes the obvious connection, he can explain what Obama really wants. Then explain in a savvy fashion the housing crisis and how bad laws led to this. Then explain that as President, these laws would be eliminated and this housing crisis would never happen again.
If McCain does this and hammers it home, he still has a chance to be elected President. He has a lot of things working against him. Obama is a better politician than him, the mainstream media is supportive of Obama, Young people are so perverted in their education about economics and history that they are too ignorant to know better until they are older and enter the real world (this is why so many switch from Democrats to Republicans within ten years upon graduation). Young people are beginning to vote now, this helps Obama. But McCain can hammer this home, demand interviews, show passion, and explain how radical Obama and his friends are. Explain that our founding fathers and even the beloved Democrat- Franklin Roosevelt would never associate with Obama themselves. Our founders would not have allowed him to even participate in the developement of our great nation even. I doubt he will do this. But I'm praying he does!
Monday, October 13, 2008
Why I am so Angry!
"We need to punish those "greedy" Ceo's at those financial institutions!" "Down with Greed! and the high salaries of CEO's!" "To %$*@ with those rotten, rich, greedy Sons of $&#*$&@!" Ok the last couple phrases are used on far left websites but that is not what has me angry. It is hearing Bill O'reilly, Political Analyst Dick Morris, and of course Presidential Candidate John McCain condemning the same people. Let me put in perspective what they are saying in essence. "I have the knowledge and understanding of this 13 trillion dollar economy to know exactly what you should be paid for being the CEO of a massive financial institution." "I know better and by God you do not deserve what you are getting paid!" How conceded can someone be to believe they truly know this information. The problem I have recently is that it is conservatives like the men I mentioned above doing the complaining. Why are they complaining? Because it makes the American Ignorant Citizen feel good that someone is fussing at those rich Entrepreneurs!
Put yourself in this situation. Your boss tells you that you can come to work late, make bad decisions, and not work that hard and you will still make your current salary and keep your job. Or you are a manager of a specific branch of a very large company and the head of that company comes to you and says whatever decisions you make, if you win that is great, if you lose money in the decision, don't worry we will give your branch the profits from other branches to offset it. Oh by the way your job is guaranteed. How would you work? Would you work extra hard? Would you think twice before making decisions? No. Well that is what the government has done. It has guaranteed bailouts for companies that make bad decisions on loans. That means you win whether those loans are paid back or not. Thus there is no risk in decision making and no cost in making the wrong decision. How can you blame a CEO from running a company that gives loans to almost anyone when that is the guarantee? I would do it that way. Besides, these politicians that are calling these guys names are the same politicians that have pressured those CEO's and institutions into giving risky loans to risky borrowers for the sake of "Social Reconstruction." Don't get me started on the laws that do this for the sake of helping the needy, poor, minority, and other people who would not get a loan in a true free market.
In recent blogs I have covered the reasons for so many bad loans being made. I will not explain all that over again there. It is the fact that so many people are so mad at the wrong people that has me so angry! It shows the ignorance of economics and the current situation that has me so angry.
These Greedy people are loved when those companies make a lot of money and employ tons of people and allow millions of people to have loans at great rates. But when times get hard we hate them. If your wondering if these CEO's deserve this much money then go back and read my columns on "Why CEO's Make So Much Money." I think it is a three part series and it will help you understand. If the market calls for millions to be paid and these Multi-Billion dollar institutions need someone that makes multi-billion dollar decisions it might be worth paying them multi-millions to get a good CEO. Even if there is a risk in doing so. Most of my readers are athletes and probably like the Tennessee Vols. If Coach Fulmer was to be replaced do you think a proven Coordinator looking for a head coaching position would take the job if Athletic Director Hamilton said if you win 10 games we will pay you 2 million and give you an extension. If you win 9 or less then you have not done what we want and thus you will be paid nothing. Would anyone take that job that was a pretty good coach? No! For one, there would be far better offers somewhere else. The risk of no pay would not be worth it. Thus you have to guarantee these guys some money. Besides, if every CEO in the world gave back all their salaries to help pay for the losses the economy during this housing and financial crisis, it would pay for less than 1% of it. SO POLITICIANS, TAKE CARE OF THE OTHER 99% OF THE PROBLEM BEFORE TALKING ABOUT THE 1% YOU GREEDY POLITICAL MORONS!
If you were mad or are still mad about the current situation and blame it on the free market and the lack of regulation please comment on this blog entry. I would love to hear your thoughts.
Put yourself in this situation. Your boss tells you that you can come to work late, make bad decisions, and not work that hard and you will still make your current salary and keep your job. Or you are a manager of a specific branch of a very large company and the head of that company comes to you and says whatever decisions you make, if you win that is great, if you lose money in the decision, don't worry we will give your branch the profits from other branches to offset it. Oh by the way your job is guaranteed. How would you work? Would you work extra hard? Would you think twice before making decisions? No. Well that is what the government has done. It has guaranteed bailouts for companies that make bad decisions on loans. That means you win whether those loans are paid back or not. Thus there is no risk in decision making and no cost in making the wrong decision. How can you blame a CEO from running a company that gives loans to almost anyone when that is the guarantee? I would do it that way. Besides, these politicians that are calling these guys names are the same politicians that have pressured those CEO's and institutions into giving risky loans to risky borrowers for the sake of "Social Reconstruction." Don't get me started on the laws that do this for the sake of helping the needy, poor, minority, and other people who would not get a loan in a true free market.
In recent blogs I have covered the reasons for so many bad loans being made. I will not explain all that over again there. It is the fact that so many people are so mad at the wrong people that has me so angry! It shows the ignorance of economics and the current situation that has me so angry.
These Greedy people are loved when those companies make a lot of money and employ tons of people and allow millions of people to have loans at great rates. But when times get hard we hate them. If your wondering if these CEO's deserve this much money then go back and read my columns on "Why CEO's Make So Much Money." I think it is a three part series and it will help you understand. If the market calls for millions to be paid and these Multi-Billion dollar institutions need someone that makes multi-billion dollar decisions it might be worth paying them multi-millions to get a good CEO. Even if there is a risk in doing so. Most of my readers are athletes and probably like the Tennessee Vols. If Coach Fulmer was to be replaced do you think a proven Coordinator looking for a head coaching position would take the job if Athletic Director Hamilton said if you win 10 games we will pay you 2 million and give you an extension. If you win 9 or less then you have not done what we want and thus you will be paid nothing. Would anyone take that job that was a pretty good coach? No! For one, there would be far better offers somewhere else. The risk of no pay would not be worth it. Thus you have to guarantee these guys some money. Besides, if every CEO in the world gave back all their salaries to help pay for the losses the economy during this housing and financial crisis, it would pay for less than 1% of it. SO POLITICIANS, TAKE CARE OF THE OTHER 99% OF THE PROBLEM BEFORE TALKING ABOUT THE 1% YOU GREEDY POLITICAL MORONS!
If you were mad or are still mad about the current situation and blame it on the free market and the lack of regulation please comment on this blog entry. I would love to hear your thoughts.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Good News with Economy
LOL I kind of laugh reading my own title. The Dow is below 9000 for the first time in years! Unemployment is believed to rise a few more tenths to around 6.3 percent which is getting kind of high for America. And no one can get credit and yet I say there is good news. Well there is. Despite our government causing the current economic turmoil with terrible laws beginning with the Community Reinvestment Act in the 1970's, I believe there are a couple good things to point out here.
Oil is down to below 85 dollars a barrel for the first time in a long time. This means that unless something happens, gas will be........... close to $2.50 by December. That is given the current global situation does not change, and there are no natural disasters that cause disruption in the supply of oil. So folks, expect to spend less on travel soon.
Secondly, the stock market has officially dropped some 20% which is a "correction" by definition. This means that there is a chance that the markets have bottomed out or are at least close to doing so. So get ready to reinvest. Warren Buffet is about to buy up a lot, you should too.
Don't get me wrong the next President will have low ratings. It might be a good thing for Obama to get elected. If he does what he says he will then he will cause this problem to be a lot worse like Roosevelt did. But maybe that means we won't have to put up with Democrats but for 4 years and then Rudy Guiliani or Bob Portman, or better yet, Bobby Jindel will run for President and this crap will turn around just in time for a true conservative to get elected. Bobby Jindel would be my man!
Oil is down to below 85 dollars a barrel for the first time in a long time. This means that unless something happens, gas will be........... close to $2.50 by December. That is given the current global situation does not change, and there are no natural disasters that cause disruption in the supply of oil. So folks, expect to spend less on travel soon.
Secondly, the stock market has officially dropped some 20% which is a "correction" by definition. This means that there is a chance that the markets have bottomed out or are at least close to doing so. So get ready to reinvest. Warren Buffet is about to buy up a lot, you should too.
Don't get me wrong the next President will have low ratings. It might be a good thing for Obama to get elected. If he does what he says he will then he will cause this problem to be a lot worse like Roosevelt did. But maybe that means we won't have to put up with Democrats but for 4 years and then Rudy Guiliani or Bob Portman, or better yet, Bobby Jindel will run for President and this crap will turn around just in time for a true conservative to get elected. Bobby Jindel would be my man!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
