• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

DOW down 250 points, oil up 3.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: 351Cleveland
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: OrByte
Big government defined.

I like the fact that our government is gobbling up bad debt and taking over private companies but market confidence continues to slide.

that makes alot of sense, no?

:roll:

Would you rather pay for everything in cash?

YES! More cash, less credit.

How much is your mortgage?
 
Originally posted by: glugglug
Originally posted by: Engineer
Political flavor for fun....

Today's close:

Dow 10,609.66

Nasdaq 2,098.85

S&P 500 1,156.39

Start of day on Jan 4th, 2001 (day Bush took office):

Dow 10,945.75

Nasdaq 2,616.69

S&P 500 1,347.56

Points lower since Bush took office...

Dow: 10,609.66 - 10,945.75 = - 336.09 = 3.07% lower

Nasdaq: 2098.85 - 2616.69 = -517.84 = 19.79% lower

S&P 500: 1156.39 - 1347.56 = -191.17 = 14.19% lower

I don't know if that's mission accomplised or not....but it's sure fucked up. Sits back and waits for someone to post "It's all Clinton's fault"....

Presidents take office on Jan. 20, not Jan. 5.

The Nasdaq was 2770.38 when he took office (it was rising during the weeks before), so its actually a 24.23% drop.

Bush's Chart

Clinton's Chart

Bush Senior's Chart

Reagan's Chart

Carter's Chart

Even Carter left office with the S&P up. I had to put a stock on there to get the comparisons, so you can ignore the GE line 😉.
 
Originally posted by: glugglug


Presidents take office on Jan. 20, not Jan. 5.

The Nasdaq was 2770.38 when he took office (it was rising during the weeks before), so its actually a 24.23% drop.

Thank you. My mistake. So it's actually "worse" than I had posted?!? Imagine that....<bah>

Edit: I re-ran all the numbers. The Dow is actually up a whopping 22 points in the last 7-3/4 years. The Nasdaq was worse by 5% (not suprising since tech brokedown) and the S&P was down 13.8x% instead of 14.19 like I had reported earlier).

Sorry for the confusion and thanks glugglug for the correction.
 
Originally posted by: Infidel
Is it too late to put Social Security into the market? Maybe McCain can get that done for us.

Idiots, all of them.

Funny you should mention that. Makes you wonder if the Republicans still support privatizing Social Security.
 
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: Infidel
Is it too late to put Social Security into the market? Maybe McCain can get that done for us.

Idiots, all of them.

Funny you should mention that. Makes you wonder if the Republicans still support privatizing Social Security.

what's it matter? it's already gone. mismanaged and spent. I wish i could just opt out...
 
The Saudi new fields aren't of the same quality as the old ones, so more refining etc etc
So production and that's what peak oil is about not reserves or quantity.

"The heritage supergiants are those mature fields that together with Ghawar and Abqaiq have made up Saudi production for the last 50 years. These include Safaniyah, Berri, Shaybah, Qatif, Marjan, Zuluf, Abu Safah and the Hawtah trend fields. These fields are much less mature than Ghawar and it is difficult to estimate their future performance. The oil in Safaniyah, Zuluf and Marjan is very sour (contains high sulphur content) which creates refining and hence marketability problems. I consider it likely that these fields are not producing flat out but are production constrained owing to poor marketability of their oil. The Saudis are taking steps to increase their own refining capacity to deal with this problem."


Same for Tar Sands they have been at it since the 70's to get to 1.5 to 2 MBPD
It can't be ramped up quickly at all , and now lots of environmental backlash against the projects.

Brazil?
http://www.planetark.org/daily...newsid/50267/story.htm

BRAZIL: September 18, 2008

RIO DE JANEIRO - Technological advances will help oil giant Petrobras and its foreign partners tap huge subsalt reserves off Brazil's coast, but a shortage of skilled workers and tight equipment supplies pose challenges.

High oil prices, previous under-investment in training by the energy industry, and increasingly hard-to-access reserves have driven up the cost of the complex equipment and skilled engineers needed for major oil projects.
"Perhaps our single greatest hurdle lies in the hiring and training of people," said Mark Riding, the deep-water theme director for oil field services supplier Schlumberger Ltd, during a seminar at the biennial Rio Oil and Gas conference this week.

"Years of under-investment in talent have led to a limited and aging pool of skilled workers."

Again lots of oil, big challenges to produce it in any meaningfull numbers
 
Originally posted by: Engineer
Political flavor for fun....

Today's close:

Dow 10,609.66

Nasdaq 2,098.85

S&P 500 1,156.39

Start of day on Jan 4th, 2001 (day Bush took office):

Dow 10,945.75

Nasdaq 2,616.69

S&P 500 1,347.56

Points lower since Bush took office...

Dow: 10,609.66 - 10,945.75 = - 336.09 = 3.07% lower

Nasdaq: 2098.85 - 2616.69 = -517.84 = 19.79% lower

S&P 500: 1156.39 - 1347.56 = -191.17 = 14.19% lower

I don't know if that's mission accomplised or not....but it's sure fucked up. Sits back and waits for someone to post "It's all Clinton's fault"....

In a society with one lord and 100,000 serfs, how well the lord does can count for more than how well the serfs do.

The thing to remember is the fact of how the top 0.01% are skyrocketing in wealth, are getting a larger share of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 80% get none of the growth.

 
Back
Top