The link between the USD and Price of oil
- Thread starter jdoggg12
- Start date
Good thing the US doesn't import hardly any Iranian oil, since, their whacko President calls our money a worthless piece of paper.
Canada and Mexico aren't members, and we get most of our crude oil from them.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil...ts/current/import.html
Blame Canada, Blame Canada...
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
Uh, it is a worthless piece of paper. I pity the man who believes otherwise.
The dollar IS attached to oil. That's what backs the dollar, and I'm not being facetious.... After we removed the gold standard due to the French calling us out on our BS tactics, we replaced it with an oil standard of sorts.
Then pity me, because I pity you for your ignorance. Oil is denominated in dollars because we have the most stable currency, it's one where everybody knew the value and it was easy to transact in since the dollar is the most liquid currency in the world.
The dollar isn't backed by oil, fool, it's backed by the economy, military, and ability to pay of the US.
The French didn't "call" us on anything. MOdern economists realized that a gold backed currency is deflationary and not nearly as flexible as is needed for a modern economy, that's why all major economies have fiat currencies.
I am sure you love reading conspiracy theories like Jekyll Island, but you need to pull your head out of your ass, or at least stop publicly commenting on issues you clearly do not have a balanced outlook on.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
Lots of insults from a man who is attempting to prove to forum-goers that he's right? I think.
Or you're just angry because you are insecure and feel threatened because you aren't QUITE so sure your position on the topic is really correct ?
No no, that could never be the case with a swearing, degrading person such as yourself.
Anyway, it is true. You need to read up or bring the facts.
http://www.house.gov/paul/cong...ngrec2006/cr021506.htm
Or you're just angry because you are insecure and feel threatened because you aren't QUITE so sure your position on the topic is really correct ?
No no, that could never be the case with a swearing, degrading person such as yourself.
Anyway, it is true. You need to read up or bring the facts.
http://www.house.gov/paul/cong...ngrec2006/cr021506.htm
lol, yes, I am "insecure". I've forgotten more about economics and finance than you'll ever know, especially since all you can do is read Ron Paul gutter trash. The endless streams of RP lemmings is quite amusing, since you all think you can read *just* RP and gain a perfect amount of knowledge. That's called stupidity, since you are just as guilty as anybody you claim as ignorant of reality since you never get a balanced outlook.
Oil was denominated in dollars, worldwide, long before OPEC, despite what RP says. It's funny that we have let OPEC nations raise and fall, yet we are somehow bought by oil? Please. It's pure conjecture and attempting to connect dots that aren't there. Anybody can do it and RP doesn't have a monopoly on it. I guess because your oracle says it, it must be true, regardless of any other data. Wow, sounds like a christian fundamentalist mentality to me.
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
Yeaahhh.. the thing is, I'm going to have to take Ron Paul's opinion, who has a lifetime of experience and is a Doctor... over you.
I know you keep insisting how you are so WELL BALANCED and such a brain.
You brought nothing but your own words (mostly insults directed towards me and my intelligence). No sort of backing to your position at all, outside of "I'm right, you are wrong".
Besides, my uncle is a tenured professor at Minnesota (if you even graduated from there), and he agrees with me... not you.
So I don't know who's right, even though you "forgot" most of the knowledge I still know as I have a bachelors degree, and my uncle (who probably taught you what little you do know)... still does.
Did you fail out of Minnesota or what?
While you are "forgetting" things that WOULD prove your point... and you are recalling your gradeschool insults quite well! Humorous, but I would stop posting YOUR garbage in public if you can't back anything up.
Time to hit the books again and regain, "forgotten" knowledge.
I know you keep insisting how you are so WELL BALANCED and such a brain.
You brought nothing but your own words (mostly insults directed towards me and my intelligence). No sort of backing to your position at all, outside of "I'm right, you are wrong".
Besides, my uncle is a tenured professor at Minnesota (if you even graduated from there), and he agrees with me... not you.
So I don't know who's right, even though you "forgot" most of the knowledge I still know as I have a bachelors degree, and my uncle (who probably taught you what little you do know)... still does.
Did you fail out of Minnesota or what?
While you are "forgetting" things that WOULD prove your point... and you are recalling your gradeschool insults quite well! Humorous, but I would stop posting YOUR garbage in public if you can't back anything up.
Time to hit the books again and regain, "forgotten" knowledge.
Professor of what? I hope neither rhetoric nor economics. And last I checked, advanced courses in economics were not required coursework for medical doctors. False authority.
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
True, but Dr. Paul is far beyond most bags of meat with eyeballs who think they have a mind nearly as sharp as Ron Paul.
I might listen to this kid if he was a professor of economics himself, but if he was he'd be able to backup his statements far better than using derogatory statements.
He's just a hater talking about things he "forgot" and can't back up himself so why bother commenting?
Might as well have said, "I oppose what you've said, but offer no real solution myself."
Not everyone has all the answers, but I'd venture a wild guess that Ron Paul blows this kid away who has nothing. Shot in the dark.
I might listen to this kid if he was a professor of economics himself, but if he was he'd be able to backup his statements far better than using derogatory statements.
He's just a hater talking about things he "forgot" and can't back up himself so why bother commenting?
Might as well have said, "I oppose what you've said, but offer no real solution myself."
Not everyone has all the answers, but I'd venture a wild guess that Ron Paul blows this kid away who has nothing.
Shot in the dark.If you hope to win an argument you should cut back on the bullshit and, when your opponent questions your information, come up with a variety of sources. I'm not even saying he is right I'm just saying you are doing a bad job of addressing his point.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
You might want to actually read some of LK's post history at AT before you start stepping in it too deep, kiddo.Originally posted by: Obsoleet
True, but Dr. Paul is far beyond most bags of meat with eyeballs who think they have a mind nearly as sharp as Ron Paul.
I might listen to this kid if he was a professor of economics himself, but if he was he'd be able to backup his statements far better than using derogatory statements.
He's just a hater talking about things he "forgot" and can't back up himself so why bother commenting?
Might as well have said, "I oppose what you've said, but offer no real solution myself."
Not everyone has all the answers, but I'd venture a wild guess that Ron Paul blows this kid away who has nothing.
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
Yeaahhh.. the thing is, I'm going to have to take Ron Paul's opinion, who has a lifetime of experience and is a Doctor... over you.
I know you keep insisting how you are so WELL BALANCED and such a brain.
You brought nothing but your own words (mostly insults directed towards me and my intelligence). No sort of backing to your position at all, outside of "I'm right, you are wrong".
Besides, my uncle is a tenured professor at Minnesota (if you even graduated from there), and he agrees with me... not you.
So I don't know who's right, even though you "forgot" most of the knowledge I still know as I have a bachelors degree, and my uncle (who probably taught you what little you do know)... still does.
Did you fail out of Minnesota or what?
While you are "forgetting" things that WOULD prove your point... and you are recalling your gradeschool insults quite well! Humorous, but I would stop posting YOUR garbage in public if you can't back anything up.
Time to hit the books again and regain, "forgotten" knowledge.
Wow, so he was a gyno, BFD. I guess since I am married that makes me just as smart as him, right? That doesn't make him any more knowledgeable than I am about finance. I went to just as many years of education as he did.
What do you have backing you besides Ron Paul's or other speculation? Do you have documents? Proof? Nope, sorry, just conjecture. The dollar was the world's currency long before 1949 and it was a fiat currency, more or less, 17 years prior. I know you bots like to try to make illogical connections, but it is quite funny.
The amount of money that transacts, in dollars for oil, is minuscule compared to what transacts in every other good. Furthermore, the ability of the government to pay, which is what actually makes currency worthwhile, is not set by oil, it is set by our continued ability to pay for our debt, goods, and services. As such, that is set by our economy, the American public, and our government. It is not set by oil, since, if we chose to, we could stop buying, selling, and transacting our dollar in oil, and it would *still* be worth just as much. Sorry if you can't understand economics.
Wow, your uncle is a professor at UofMN, congrats (oohh, tenure! Prove it, since you so doubt my background)! I was a professor also, in finance and economics! Amazing! I have a masters, and am a CFA charterholder, and I work in i-banking! Amazing!
Funny that you pretend to have a high-road, as such, you've just prove than you're a hypocrite also by attacking me, personally. It only builds on your hypocrisies in saying I have no "proof" as you aren't showing anything besides conspiracy theories. At least I have all of economics backing me up.
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
Wait wait wait... I'm still waiting for your documents of proof.
Thus far, we have your conjectures which you say is correct... versus Ron Paul.
Wrong. Oil is backed by the pricing of oil in dollars.
The dollar is destabilized now by the entrance of the Euro into the market.
I'm sorry you don't understand reality and feel sorry for your company! But all you listed were reasons why confidence in the dollar has fallen (ability to pay ect). The final blow (what really matters) is the weight behind the dollar is falling out as "rogue" states start using Euros.
So it appears in the end, your factors end up at the same conclusion: the dollar is backed on oil! You and the US gov't can print as many dollars as you want to, can promise to pay back promissory notes all day long, but once its not backed by the worlds main source of energy (oil), its game over. Everyone's going to want the one backed by the energy supply.
I guess you can watch and wait to see once you're completely proven wrong. But we're already seeing what people have been claiming, you know those "conspiracists" that you hate.
You're not one, because you've already been proven wrong by history.
I'm not going to out of my family on a public forum, nor am I going to ask you to fax me copies of your supposed degrees. You don't have to believe me that he agrees with RP's economic views.
I accept your statements on your background, but you'd have to have quite a bit of experience to hang with Ron Paul and even though you might be credible, I'm not going to take YOUR conjectures over his.
I know for someone arrogant enough to attack me out of nowhere for my viewpoint this is hard to believe. Yet true.
I didn't attack you personally, I merely revealed you for what you were acting as. If you want to shape up, then by all means. By insulting me, you can bet that I won't ever change my mind in this conversation because you've already proven yourself to be absurd.
But I doubt you were ever looking to spread the truth. Just be insecure and lash out at people preemptively. Not that you have any truth to offer anyway.
If you did, I'd probably still take an arrogant loudmouth's POV and absorb what knowledge you had to offer. But that's not an issue here.
And actually, you don't have any economics backing you up. What you have proven, is why economics are called the dismal science.
Everything but YOUR viewpoint, which is flawed, is a conspiracy, of course. Even though all signs point to you being wrong.
So, we are at an impasse, you have nothing but conjecture to show that the dollar has some sort of oil backing and I have nothing to prove that it isn't. Thus, it comes down to one of theories.
Let me ask you, if we removed oil from the equation, what then would happen to the US dollar? If we suddenly had some sort of other energy, what then, would support the dollar? What if we alone had that technology?
Furthermore, your supposition that only the economies that do well are backed by oil. What then, of China, Japan, Germany, and the Euro in general? They aren't backed by gold, oil, or anything else, yet you are saying that they have some magical support without any commodity backing them?
Your whole premise is flawed in that the absence of oil still yields countries with very strong currencies in relation to many countries with gold. What about Venezuela, or Brazil, who actually produce oil, which are OPEC members? Somehow, despite actually producing the one thing that you say supports the dollar, they themselves cannot support their own currency?
Could this be because they somehow managed to fuck up their economies beyond belief? Could it be because that nobody believed in their ability to pay their debts, nor in their ability to have the social structure or sociological wherewithal to generate any GDP beyond oil? Have you ever heard of the Dutch Effect? Could it be that these countries, despite having their whole economy tied to oil, still cannot get it right because it is tied to oil?
Naw, Russia, Venezuela, Brazil, never had massive inflation, far exceeding what the US ever had. Economies which are massive net importers of oil and (japan) never have had good currencies, because their currencies were never "backed" by oil.
Naw, the absence of something in almost *every other country* means that none have done well outside of that item! In fact, I'd go as far as saying that every country that doesn't have their currency backed by oil is a failure, they cannot innovate, their people cannot pay for their debt, nor can their governments?
Shit, then that means *every* *country* in the *world* except the US is failing, right? Because they don't produce anything at all!
In fact, the US economy produces nothing either, since only oil matters.
Screw the idea that wealth is created by production and we *ARE* the best in the world for productivity and we far outstrip *anybody* in that field. Screw the idea that wealth created is then leveraged by debt, further gaining economic power far in excess of any country in the world. Screw the idea that, provided everybody in the world thinks that we can repay that debt they will keep buying it.
Naw, economic theory is so narrow minded as to define itself and all economies, by a single basis, the economy that is backed by oil is the *only* successful one.
But I guess that logic is just too damn simple for you, eh?
You see, I don't need to have quips like RP to be smarter than RP. I don't need a schnazzy website, nor a public seat. All I need is the ability to reason and the specialty of my keyboard to type, which allows me to bitchslap you RonPaulBots time and again.
What's funny is that I do, in fact, support RP for President. However, I take the balanced approach that he is not an oracle, and like all men, is flawed in some ways. He isn't a perfect candidate, but he is the best out of every one for pushing the ability to change this country in the correct way.
If you even tried to look at my posts, you'd see that many of the positions you espouse, I do also, but at least I take a balanced approach to them all and I am able to do more than point to conspiracies, conjecture, and bullshit.
Do we need to pull out of the oil war, Iraq, certainly. Do we need to stop bolstering our economy through easy credit, absolutely. Do we need to do whatever we can do bolster our currency? Definitely. Do we need to balanced the budget, cut the size of the government, eliminate bureaucracy, cut taxes after that is done, and fight a smart war (not a foreign war) against terrorists? Damn straight.
However, tying the dollar to Gold is utter stupidity and one that, thankfully, RP would never get away with. It'd ruin this country so fucking quickly that we'd spiral into a recession and bring the world with us. The chaos that would ensue would make WW2 look like a cakewalk and the inability of governments to fight their ways out of it, since they'd be too busy grabbing gold, would lead to worldwide calamity and death.
The idea that we need to tie ourselves to a commodity is foolish. It limits our ability to grow and flexibly adjust to economic trends. It's deflationary and it is finite and is more prone to speculation than a multi-trillion dollar economy.
I laugh at your attempt to undermine my knowledge by saying that "RP says so, so he must be right" please, do you have any thoughts of your own? Any analysis? Any ideas or theories?
Nope, you have nothing but RP, which makes you more misguided than a neocon.
Obsoleet
Platinum Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 2,181
- 1
- 0
I got to get to bed because I have to work early in the morning but wanted to respond quickly here. edit- or not so quickly..
First of all, that was a far more pleasant post than calling me a fool among other things when you don't even know my background (which is why I dismissed your claims of forgotten knowledge and all your other sources of credibility).
No one responds positively when you lash out with insults instead of facts, then take the high road like that. You must be around my age and seem educated, so I'm not sure why you decided to do so.
Anyway, oil is not the ONLY source of support, it's merely the largest and most profound (by far). Dollar hegemony in the pricing of oil is why it's still the world's premier.
I'm willing to take the bet that as this situation continues to decline, things only get worse for the greenback. It's what solidifies its position.
Is the dollar under threat from the Euro if it assumes this position? Who could/would ever say this is a good thing for the dollar??
You price the worlds energy source on the dollar, you just gave the person who prints those pieces of paper a mighty big stick.
It's as good as gold... I mean oil.. I mean... nevermind. Curses, its only a promissory note.
You are right in that the confidence factors are falling out due to our economy due to many reasons. It's true the US economy is diverse and a huge part of the reason why it is strong, but the crown jewel is our current position in the oil industry.
No, you can't base a currency soley on it. But you can do a LOT if you can back up your currency with the worlds most popular energy source. Gold's a heckuva backer too, which is why they even bothered with the idea in the first place.
Stunning we've had the economic power to be able to back ours up with it, without even owning the oil. But it is largely backed by it.
We will see who is right, as the mideast is further destabilized due to our own actions if the dollar balances out, goes up, or continues to plunge as it is.
And actually, I too oppose RP's idea to go back to the Gold Standard. I never said I was a "ronpaulbot" that believes everything he says is correct. What he says about the dollar today IS true though, I see this as hard to deny.
I don't think it's in the US's best interests to return to a gold standard, and ironically my view was that he'd never get away with it so I wasn't worried about it.
The gold in Ft. Knox isn't going anywhere, besides our oil connections that is the true source of our wealth. I don't know if there'd be any calamity, as no nation (or possibly coalition) of nations could get in that far in on the east coast and actually take it.
This country is far too armed for that. We could spiral out of control far worse than Clinton and Bush have set us into, and the majority of the world's gold which we hold.. won't go anywhere.
Theres a chance the whole world could unite and get that far, but the only other danger is if China builds a military up by the end of this century to be able to crack it. But probably never going to happen even then.
US hegemony is probably here to stay for the most part.
I'm not espousing any POV on oil, just calling it as it is with the current state of things. I am more than willing to hand over all the oil to China and India, have at it. Then watch in amazement as environmentalism suddenly, mysteriously disappears as China continues to pollute at the highest levels in the world. Once we have a hydrogen economy and hopefully joint efforts with Canada to extract the oil discovered up north which should suit our industrial needs by that point.
I have plenty of my own theories, you didn't approach very appropriately to extract any exactly. Am I an expert? No. My day to day experience is IT in a manufacturing environment. Though I tend to believe economics on this scale, backgrounds mean little as it's bigger than most of us can really rein in and comprehend fully. Am I going to believe someone else is who is insulting me (usually a sign of NOT being an expert)? No.
What is annoying, everyone in this world runs around spouting off things. You don't know who's a RONPAULBOT or whatever, and I certainly don't feel "bitchslapped". lol..
one thing for sure is that you feel very strong emotions!
First of all, that was a far more pleasant post than calling me a fool among other things when you don't even know my background (which is why I dismissed your claims of forgotten knowledge and all your other sources of credibility).
No one responds positively when you lash out with insults instead of facts, then take the high road like that. You must be around my age and seem educated, so I'm not sure why you decided to do so.
Anyway, oil is not the ONLY source of support, it's merely the largest and most profound (by far). Dollar hegemony in the pricing of oil is why it's still the world's premier.
I'm willing to take the bet that as this situation continues to decline, things only get worse for the greenback. It's what solidifies its position.
Is the dollar under threat from the Euro if it assumes this position? Who could/would ever say this is a good thing for the dollar??
You price the worlds energy source on the dollar, you just gave the person who prints those pieces of paper a mighty big stick.
It's as good as gold... I mean oil.. I mean... nevermind. Curses, its only a promissory note.
You are right in that the confidence factors are falling out due to our economy due to many reasons. It's true the US economy is diverse and a huge part of the reason why it is strong, but the crown jewel is our current position in the oil industry.
No, you can't base a currency soley on it. But you can do a LOT if you can back up your currency with the worlds most popular energy source. Gold's a heckuva backer too, which is why they even bothered with the idea in the first place.
Stunning we've had the economic power to be able to back ours up with it, without even owning the oil. But it is largely backed by it.
We will see who is right, as the mideast is further destabilized due to our own actions if the dollar balances out, goes up, or continues to plunge as it is.
And actually, I too oppose RP's idea to go back to the Gold Standard. I never said I was a "ronpaulbot" that believes everything he says is correct. What he says about the dollar today IS true though, I see this as hard to deny.
I don't think it's in the US's best interests to return to a gold standard, and ironically my view was that he'd never get away with it so I wasn't worried about it.
The gold in Ft. Knox isn't going anywhere, besides our oil connections that is the true source of our wealth. I don't know if there'd be any calamity, as no nation (or possibly coalition) of nations could get in that far in on the east coast and actually take it.
This country is far too armed for that. We could spiral out of control far worse than Clinton and Bush have set us into, and the majority of the world's gold which we hold.. won't go anywhere.
Theres a chance the whole world could unite and get that far, but the only other danger is if China builds a military up by the end of this century to be able to crack it. But probably never going to happen even then.
US hegemony is probably here to stay for the most part.
I'm not espousing any POV on oil, just calling it as it is with the current state of things. I am more than willing to hand over all the oil to China and India, have at it. Then watch in amazement as environmentalism suddenly, mysteriously disappears as China continues to pollute at the highest levels in the world. Once we have a hydrogen economy and hopefully joint efforts with Canada to extract the oil discovered up north which should suit our industrial needs by that point.
I have plenty of my own theories, you didn't approach very appropriately to extract any exactly. Am I an expert? No. My day to day experience is IT in a manufacturing environment. Though I tend to believe economics on this scale, backgrounds mean little as it's bigger than most of us can really rein in and comprehend fully. Am I going to believe someone else is who is insulting me (usually a sign of NOT being an expert)? No.
What is annoying, everyone in this world runs around spouting off things. You don't know who's a RONPAULBOT or whatever, and I certainly don't feel "bitchslapped". lol..
one thing for sure is that you feel very strong emotions!
If you think that there is a huge advantage to having oil denominated in dollars, then what is that advantage?
As we have seen, we have no control over oil, in fact, we are at OPEC's mercy when it comes to it. Additionally, as seen by the massive jump in wholesale inflation, we are even worse off than non-oil transacting currencies, since our economic policies, which have a much greater effect than the liquidity provided by oil, cause our currency to devalue, denominating oil to a higher level for domestic consumption. The rest of the world doesn't care, since they can use their currency to buy cheap dollars and essentially transact instantly into oil, getting out of the dollar. Thus, their price for oil hasn't changed one iota, keep in mind that PPP and the liquidity of the currency markets eliminates most arbitrage of currencies, especially with a commodity like oil.
Finally, of far greater impact to any currency, is inflation, rate of return, the volatility of both of those numbers, economic outlook, and monetary policy. As you can see of any country in history, management of those issues is paramount to keeping a strong currency. Oil producing nations that don't manage these issues find themselves in far deeper trouble. This is highlighted by the coming crisis in Venezuela, the ones that have already happened in Brazil, Argentina, and Russia.
Why hasn't the US had one of these issues, when we have almost always been a net-importer of oil, and our currency is fiat, but supposedly has more "power" due to, as you say, oil?
In fact, it has nothing to do with oil. It has to do with one fundamental attribute caused by one fundamental piece of paper. Stability caused by the Constitution affords the US much more power than any country on this planet. Property rights, the ability to grow, and the knowledge that fosters has kept us ahead, not oil transacting dollars. Additionally, we have had the correct mix of Fed and economic policies in the past that has kept hte dollar on the correct path. All of this equates to one thing, knowledge that the US will be invested in due to it's stability and certainty of return. Thus, our economy keeps growing, spurring the demand for dollars.
Naturally, one could say that oil still backs the dollar since it fuels the growth. However, that's a derivative effect, not a direct effect, as you, Ron Paul, and others infer. It *IS* our economy, guaranty of return, and political stability that maintains the dollar, not whether it is used as the grease for the transfer of oil from one party to another.
------------------------------------------------------------------
As to the OP, the "link" is one of cause and effect and relative pricing of currencies.
Let's say that the US dollar is worth $1 for every 1.5 EUR, meaning that the EUR is worth less than the dollar.
If oil were transacted at $100bbl, then it would cost the EUR 150 to buy a barrel of oil.
Now, if the dollar were to depreciate to $1 to 1, but oil stay the same, then oil would be $100bbl, but only EUR100, meaning that it just became instantly 33% cheaper for the EU to buy oil.
Thus, oil costs go up when the dollar depreciates relative to the EUR. Thus, oil goes to $150, the EUR is still at 1:1, and they still spend 150 EUR to buy oil.
That's exchange rate parity. In order to keep this, any good denominated in dollars, has to appreciate in price, as our currency depreciates. Naturally, this appreciation is only felt domestically, as all of theo the other currencies maintain their parity on an international scale.
The dollar and oil aren't intertwined, per say, but falling currencies in which oil is denominated in, will cause the price to fluctuate domestically, in alignment with the currency devaluation, but not internationally.
If oil were to go to lower, then the US currency would go up, but that would only be because economic forces would increase and inflationary tendancies would decrease, spurring growth. This is a natural effect on *all* economies, not just the US with oil being denominated in dollars.
People really misunderstand the role of currency and international currency parity and the role that the USD has with oil. It'd be good to pick up a book on international investing. I admit, it's not the easiest topic and one I struggled with (and still do somewhat).
Obsoleet, I think the resistance you're receiving here (aside from perhaps LegendKiller) can be easily described as blind faith in country, or nationalism. There is no reason behind most of it.
lol, perhaps? Please, the resistance he is receiving from me only has to do with the technical and fundamental attributes as to the relationship he is describing are absolutely incorrect. There's not one primary economist that will agree that the biggest reason why the dollar is valued where it is is because oil. Sorry, there are too many working parts to an economy and country. History has proven that in many areas with many people and many countries.
Take your own blind faith elsewhere, as I have trouced you and your RonPaulBots all over this thread and forum regarding economics. Your blind faith and limited knowledge is laughable and, like usual, when trounced you guys flee threads. Obsoleet definitely deserves credit for sticking around this far, but his premise is still failed and most people (other then RPBs) will ackwnowledge that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter