Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
alarmclockParticipant
I read that much of the rise in commodities prices right now is could be from billions of dollars chasing a fairly small commoties market. Sure the hedgies are helping *themselves* (albeit at some risk) by investing in this way. But is it reasonsble to let them use the necessities of life in order to dig themselves out of their hole?
I do remember reading that lehman (and goldman) own/owned some considerable oil storage facilities, so in this resepect they are willing to invest in the costly infrastructure as well.
Re doofrat: I believe the airlines, vis a vis tank farms at airports, can actually store many millions of gallons of fuel, and they surely use lots of it.
Anyway, if driving up the cost of wheat is the only way I can bag 15% this year then I wouldn’t do it. Maybe I don’t understand how the system works. Hopefully the excuse isn’t: “If I don’t do it, someone else will.”
alarmclockParticipantI read that much of the rise in commodities prices right now is could be from billions of dollars chasing a fairly small commoties market. Sure the hedgies are helping *themselves* (albeit at some risk) by investing in this way. But is it reasonsble to let them use the necessities of life in order to dig themselves out of their hole?
I do remember reading that lehman (and goldman) own/owned some considerable oil storage facilities, so in this resepect they are willing to invest in the costly infrastructure as well.
Re doofrat: I believe the airlines, vis a vis tank farms at airports, can actually store many millions of gallons of fuel, and they surely use lots of it.
Anyway, if driving up the cost of wheat is the only way I can bag 15% this year then I wouldn’t do it. Maybe I don’t understand how the system works. Hopefully the excuse isn’t: “If I don’t do it, someone else will.”
alarmclockParticipantI read that much of the rise in commodities prices right now is could be from billions of dollars chasing a fairly small commoties market. Sure the hedgies are helping *themselves* (albeit at some risk) by investing in this way. But is it reasonsble to let them use the necessities of life in order to dig themselves out of their hole?
I do remember reading that lehman (and goldman) own/owned some considerable oil storage facilities, so in this resepect they are willing to invest in the costly infrastructure as well.
Re doofrat: I believe the airlines, vis a vis tank farms at airports, can actually store many millions of gallons of fuel, and they surely use lots of it.
Anyway, if driving up the cost of wheat is the only way I can bag 15% this year then I wouldn’t do it. Maybe I don’t understand how the system works. Hopefully the excuse isn’t: “If I don’t do it, someone else will.”
alarmclockParticipantI read that much of the rise in commodities prices right now is could be from billions of dollars chasing a fairly small commoties market. Sure the hedgies are helping *themselves* (albeit at some risk) by investing in this way. But is it reasonsble to let them use the necessities of life in order to dig themselves out of their hole?
I do remember reading that lehman (and goldman) own/owned some considerable oil storage facilities, so in this resepect they are willing to invest in the costly infrastructure as well.
Re doofrat: I believe the airlines, vis a vis tank farms at airports, can actually store many millions of gallons of fuel, and they surely use lots of it.
Anyway, if driving up the cost of wheat is the only way I can bag 15% this year then I wouldn’t do it. Maybe I don’t understand how the system works. Hopefully the excuse isn’t: “If I don’t do it, someone else will.”
June 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM in reply to: “Phantom Inventory” . . . gets bulldozed????? Guess that’s one way to reduce inventory. #415628alarmclockParticipantfixing homelessness by putting a homeless person in a house is post hoc reasoning. using similar reasoning, if homebuilding is a sign of a healthy economy, can’t we simply make the economy healthy by building more houses?
June 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM in reply to: “Phantom Inventory” . . . gets bulldozed????? Guess that’s one way to reduce inventory. #415866alarmclockParticipantfixing homelessness by putting a homeless person in a house is post hoc reasoning. using similar reasoning, if homebuilding is a sign of a healthy economy, can’t we simply make the economy healthy by building more houses?
June 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM in reply to: “Phantom Inventory” . . . gets bulldozed????? Guess that’s one way to reduce inventory. #416123alarmclockParticipantfixing homelessness by putting a homeless person in a house is post hoc reasoning. using similar reasoning, if homebuilding is a sign of a healthy economy, can’t we simply make the economy healthy by building more houses?
June 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM in reply to: “Phantom Inventory” . . . gets bulldozed????? Guess that’s one way to reduce inventory. #416191alarmclockParticipantfixing homelessness by putting a homeless person in a house is post hoc reasoning. using similar reasoning, if homebuilding is a sign of a healthy economy, can’t we simply make the economy healthy by building more houses?
June 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM in reply to: “Phantom Inventory” . . . gets bulldozed????? Guess that’s one way to reduce inventory. #416349alarmclockParticipantfixing homelessness by putting a homeless person in a house is post hoc reasoning. using similar reasoning, if homebuilding is a sign of a healthy economy, can’t we simply make the economy healthy by building more houses?
alarmclockParticipantback of envelope calculations
seoul, south kr -> long beach, ca = 6000 miles
inland barge offers 514 ton-miles / gallon of fuel (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=2571)hyundai elantra curb weight = 2522 lbs = 1.25 tons
assuming a panamax or cape sized cargo ship gets roughly same eff as a barge (??), then it required 14.6 gallons of fuel to ship an elantra here. If a cargo ship is 25% as efficient as a barge, then it only cost 60 gallons of fuel to get it to long beach.
alarmclockParticipantback of envelope calculations
seoul, south kr -> long beach, ca = 6000 miles
inland barge offers 514 ton-miles / gallon of fuel (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=2571)hyundai elantra curb weight = 2522 lbs = 1.25 tons
assuming a panamax or cape sized cargo ship gets roughly same eff as a barge (??), then it required 14.6 gallons of fuel to ship an elantra here. If a cargo ship is 25% as efficient as a barge, then it only cost 60 gallons of fuel to get it to long beach.
alarmclockParticipantback of envelope calculations
seoul, south kr -> long beach, ca = 6000 miles
inland barge offers 514 ton-miles / gallon of fuel (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=2571)hyundai elantra curb weight = 2522 lbs = 1.25 tons
assuming a panamax or cape sized cargo ship gets roughly same eff as a barge (??), then it required 14.6 gallons of fuel to ship an elantra here. If a cargo ship is 25% as efficient as a barge, then it only cost 60 gallons of fuel to get it to long beach.
alarmclockParticipantback of envelope calculations
seoul, south kr -> long beach, ca = 6000 miles
inland barge offers 514 ton-miles / gallon of fuel (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=2571)hyundai elantra curb weight = 2522 lbs = 1.25 tons
assuming a panamax or cape sized cargo ship gets roughly same eff as a barge (??), then it required 14.6 gallons of fuel to ship an elantra here. If a cargo ship is 25% as efficient as a barge, then it only cost 60 gallons of fuel to get it to long beach.
alarmclockParticipantback of envelope calculations
seoul, south kr -> long beach, ca = 6000 miles
inland barge offers 514 ton-miles / gallon of fuel (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=2571)hyundai elantra curb weight = 2522 lbs = 1.25 tons
assuming a panamax or cape sized cargo ship gets roughly same eff as a barge (??), then it required 14.6 gallons of fuel to ship an elantra here. If a cargo ship is 25% as efficient as a barge, then it only cost 60 gallons of fuel to get it to long beach.
-
AuthorPosts