WTI CRUDE

Lionfish said:
Where were you when the brandon adminstration drove the price from $2.00/gal to $4.50/gal?

Your selective outrage is all too frequent and comical.
Now, go sell aftermarket warranties.
Click to expand...
It amazes me @Jarod how during a pandemic when the price of goods went up worldwide, idiots like @Lionfish want us to forget that Biden's recovery from trump's fucked up pandemic handling was the envy of the world.
 
LurchAddams said:
It amazes me @Jarod how during a pandemic when the price of goods went up worldwide, idiots like @Lionfish want us to forget that Biden's recovery from trump's fucked up pandemic handling was the envy of the world.
Click to expand...
They do not care about facts, they care about trying to get everyone, especially themselves that Strong Daddy Trump is infallible and will protect them.
 
Jarod said:
They do not care about facts, they care about trying to get everyone, especially themselves that Strong Daddy Trump is infallible and will protect them.
Click to expand...
Another thing that amazes me is the trump cult's amnesia. Trump campaigned on bringing prices down "the first day" and no more foreign wars.

Now they're all a-ok with it. They have unlimited forgiveness for Trump's broken promises. I think the reason why is because they hate Democrats so much, they're willing to take the entire country into the shitter as long as "iibs are sad".

So pathetic.
 
FastLane said:
WTI Crude July contracts are in the 80s
Click to expand...


What ignorance.

The July WTI Crude futures contract trading in the 80s (or whatever level it’s at) does not mean that physical oil will automatically be delivered at that price in July.

>98–99% of WTI futures contracts are closed out or “rolled” before expiration. Traders (speculators, hedge funds, many hedgers) simply buy or sell an offsetting contract and walk away with a cash profit or loss.

No oil changes hands.

The actual physical (spot) price of crude in July will be set by supply, demand, refinery runs, geopolitics, storage levels, etc., at that time.

The futures price is the market’s current consensus/best guess of what July oil should be worth, and the physical-delivery option keeps the futures price anchored to reality. But it is still just an expectation, not a binding price for every barrel produced or consumed.

Seeing a July contract “in the 80s” tells you the price at which you (or a refinery, producer, airline, etc.) could lock in July oil right now via the futures market. It does not mean that the physical barrels that will be bought and sold in July will automatically trade at exactly that number.
 
مرگ بر آمریکا said:
What ignorance.

The July WTI Crude futures contract trading in the 80s (or whatever level it’s at) does not mean that physical oil will automatically be delivered at that price in July.

>98–99% of WTI futures contracts are closed out or “rolled” before expiration. Traders (speculators, hedge funds, many hedgers) simply buy or sell an offsetting contract and walk away with a cash profit or loss.

No oil changes hands.

The actual physical (spot) price of crude in July will be set by supply, demand, refinery runs, geopolitics, storage levels, etc., at that time.

The futures price is the market’s current consensus/best guess of what July oil should be worth, and the physical-delivery option keeps the futures price anchored to reality. But it is still just an expectation, not a binding price for every barrel produced or consumed.

Seeing a July contract “in the 80s” tells you the price at which you (or a refinery, producer, airline, etc.) could lock in July oil right now via the futures market. It does not mean that the physical barrels that will be bought and sold in July will automatically trade at exactly that number.
Click to expand...
Idiot future contract show what investors think oil will be selling for at a given point of in time in the future
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
It is actually a much smaller percent of earnings than those at the bottom level.
FICA taxes make up the next largest portion of government revenues.

A person earning $50,000 pays 7.65% of their income in FICA taxes, 15.3 if you include the employer match
A person earning $500,000 pays 4.08% of their income in FICA taxes, 7.6% if you include the employer match.
A person earning $5,000,000 pays 2.5% of their income in FICA taxes, 4.18% if you include the employer match.
Click to expand...
This is because they only pay in over a specific amount of their earnings as it will only pay out a specific level of benefits. This is a central disconnect from how people think as to what social security is... What it isn't is just another tax. What it is supposed to be is a way to force Americans to have some savings for retirement as too many were ill prepared and could not retire. Hence Al Gore's "lockbox" and how it would save social security, as the money paid in would actually be there to be paid back out later...

Social Security is supposed to function more like a 401K than another tax and spend scheme.
 
FastLane said:
So the US has just as much or more authority as Spain does.
Click to expand...
I do not know what authority the government of Spain has, I do however know the Government of the USA is limited by the Constitution to what authority the Constitution gives it. There is nothing in Article 3 that gives a President authority to rename international bodies of water.
 
Damocles said:
This is because they only pay in over a specific amount of their earnings as it will only pay out a specific level of benefits. This is a central disconnect from how people think as to what social security is... What it isn't is just another tax. What it is supposed to be is a way to force Americans to have some savings for retirement as too many were ill prepared and could not retire. Hence Al Gore's "lockbox" and how it would save social security, as the money paid in would actually be there to be paid back out later...

Social Security is supposed to function more like a 401K than another tax and spend scheme.
Click to expand...
Yes, and that system allows them to pay less taxes the more money they make. Was that intentional, yes.
 
Jarod said:
Yes, and that system allows them to pay less taxes the more money they make. Was that intentional, yes.
Click to expand...
This was because Americans didn't want yet another welfare program where others pay for your retirement. It was very specifically sold as a savings plan, and not a welfare program. They also promised that the social security number would never be used to identify you...

We know that leftists always lie to get stuff passed, then incrementally apply it as they really wanted, this is just one of the most obvious examples of the pattern.
 
Damocles said:
This is because they only pay in over a specific amount of their earnings as it will only pay out a specific level of benefits. This is a central disconnect from how people think as to what social security is... What it isn't is just another tax. What it is supposed to be is a way to force Americans to have some savings for retirement as too many were ill prepared and could not retire. Hence Al Gore's "lockbox" and how it would save social security, as the money paid in would actually be there to be paid back out later...

Social Security is supposed to function more like a 401K than another tax and spend scheme.
Click to expand...
It was also intended to be a sort of insurance policy for those who became disabled. Something that is now abused to the point it has become an ATM for fraudsters.
 
Lionfish said:
It was also intended to be a sort of insurance policy for those who became disabled. Something that is now abused to the point it has become an ATM for fraudsters.
Click to expand...
SSDI.... Insurance, you pay into it based on your level of risk, unless it is a government program...
 
Damocles said:
This was because Americans didn't want yet another welfare program where others pay for your retirement. It was very specifically sold as a savings plan, and not a welfare program. They also promised that the social security number would never be used to identify you...

We know that leftists always lie to get stuff passed, then incrementally apply it as they really wanted, this is just one of the most obvious examples of the pattern.
Click to expand...
It was another way to keep the elites wealthy, once the Republicans got ahold of it.
 
Damocles said:
This is because they only pay in over a specific amount of their earnings as it will only pay out a specific level of benefits. This is a central disconnect from how people think as to what social security is... What it isn't is just another tax. What it is supposed to be is a way to force Americans to have some savings for retirement as too many were ill prepared and could not retire. Hence Al Gore's "lockbox" and how it would save social security, as the money paid in would actually be there to be paid back out later...

Social Security is supposed to function more like a 401K than another tax and spend scheme.
Click to expand...
Except the Republicans have used FICA as a source of money they could raid in order to give income tax cuts to rich people. That created our current crisis where US debt now exceeds annual GDP.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Except the Republicans have used FICA as a source of money they could raid in order to give income tax cuts to rich people. That created our current crisis where US debt now exceeds annual GDP.
Click to expand...
I notice how you gave Clinton a pass on that, though he was the one that signed it all as they lied and said they balanced the budget. Y'all are super proud of Clinton when you want to pretend you are fiscally sound, then blame it all on the republicans when you talk about what they did to make it temporarily look like they had balanced something, and how it was all a lie.
 
Damocles said:
I notice how you gave Clinton a pass on that, though he was the one that signed it all as they lied and said they balanced the budget. Y'all are super proud of Clinton when you want to pretend you are fiscally sound, then blame it all on the republicans when you talk about what they did to make it temporarily look like they had balanced something, and how it was all a lie.
Click to expand...
Lovely straw man argument there. It's almost like you don't know that the Republicans claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility.
 
Jarod said:
Did you buy big?
Click to expand...
I have shares in oil wells. My former partner is a petroleum geologist. I have invested in several of his projects in the Permian Basin. I make money when oil goes up and make less when oil goes down. So I keep a close eye on the price of WTI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top