The one jpeg that I couldn't part with is this one.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Cleaning Out My Junk Folder
At the time I started this site, it was hard to imagine how much crap I would accumulate in my junk blog folder. Anything from jpegs to tiffs to .wav files to quicktime movies to assorted photos of Jack Palance smoking I assume are from the movie City Slickers but who is to say.
The one jpeg that I couldn't part with is this one.
The one jpeg that I couldn't part with is this one.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
RUSH on tour again
Just when you couldn't get enough of the most deserving band NOT in the Rock 'N Roll Hall of Fame, they are starting their 2008 tour in the south culminating in multiple dates in Canada in July. A DVD is scheduled for release in the fall with a documentary sometime thereafter. Maybe a new studio album late next year. 34 years a counting baby...
A few other side notes...
The Colonel is back after an almost 3 month hiatus with his latest entry. His beard is well but his state of mind is, shall we say, somewhat gloomy. Read his glass-is-empty update for further details. He did use the phrase "Objective Megalomaniac". Good stuff.
An interesting fact...
Ja Rule is only 5 feet 6 inches.
...didn't know that.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Ultimate Quote From My 2 Year Old
Just when you think you've heard it all, just 5 minutes ago, my son while going had this dialogue with my wife:
My wife: "Are you done?"
My Son: "Butt full. Poop sleeping. Poop stuck hole."
My wife, laughing uncontrollably runs to me in the other room and relays his now classic retort.
Again, no pictures required nor appropriate.
My wife: "Are you done?"
My Son: "Butt full. Poop sleeping. Poop stuck hole."
My wife, laughing uncontrollably runs to me in the other room and relays his now classic retort.
Again, no pictures required nor appropriate.
Monday, April 07, 2008
Random Phrase
Yesterday, my wife said:
"Random Nipple"
The context of which isn't important. It's the fact that she said this and that no person in the history of the English language had ever uttered it up until now.
A picture isn't necessary nor appropriate.
"Random Nipple"
The context of which isn't important. It's the fact that she said this and that no person in the history of the English language had ever uttered it up until now.
A picture isn't necessary nor appropriate.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Weather Outlook: Wet/Stormy Spring
As the La Nina pattern continues to sustain itself well into the spring, an active southern storm track should continue bringing wetter than normal days throughout the Ohio Valley and midwest. Judging by the above normal frequency of tornadic weather since the first of the year,
this La Nina pattern could also be responsible for a greater frequency of severe weather.
this La Nina pattern could also be responsible for a greater frequency of severe weather.
So far in 2008, in the first three months, there have been 368 confirmed tornadoes, 181 above the average over the last three years.
List of Tornado Outbreaks Through April 4th
Flooding in La Nina years averages nearly $4.5 billion compared to an average of $2.4 billion. We've already seen examples of this with the flooding in Missouri and Arkansas.
Has a La Nina pattern been the culprit for severe weather outbreaks in the past? Absolutely.
Major tornado outbreaks occurred in January 1999, a recent La Nina year, in Arkansas and Tennessee and in May in Oklahoma and Kansas with $2.3 billion in damages. And of course the super tornado outbreak of April 1974 with its 148 tornadoes that left 315 dead and 500 injured occurred during a very strong La Nina. In a prior La Nina event in 1965, the so-called Palm Sunday Outbreak had 78 tornadoes, 271 deaths and 1500 injuries.
List of Tornado Outbreaks Through April 4th
Flooding in La Nina years averages nearly $4.5 billion compared to an average of $2.4 billion. We've already seen examples of this with the flooding in Missouri and Arkansas.
Has a La Nina pattern been the culprit for severe weather outbreaks in the past? Absolutely.
Major tornado outbreaks occurred in January 1999, a recent La Nina year, in Arkansas and Tennessee and in May in Oklahoma and Kansas with $2.3 billion in damages. And of course the super tornado outbreak of April 1974 with its 148 tornadoes that left 315 dead and 500 injured occurred during a very strong La Nina. In a prior La Nina event in 1965, the so-called Palm Sunday Outbreak had 78 tornadoes, 271 deaths and 1500 injuries.
Does this mean that we are doomed and every severe weather event will be loaded with tornadoes. Certainly not. The atmospheric conditions present are just more condcive for tornadic development. I just hope as do all of us that this doesn't materialize.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
Just The Facts - Part III - My Thoughts
Continued from last Tuesday...
-------------------------------------------------------------
* We are in the infancy of the technology revolution. Consider This. The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago, The New World was discovered 500 years ago (Chris Columbus), The United States is 232 years old. The light bulb only 129 years ago. By comparison, the computerization of the world is only a few decades old. The World Wide Web in comparison is only going on 17 years (August 6, 1991) as a publicly available service. A proverbial "drop in the bucket" on the human development timeline. Most people didn't get online service at home until the late 1990s.
The world is now linked together with the ability to access information anywhere on the planet almost instantly. As new, faster, easier technology floods the market, the cost will be high initially but will eventually level off as the supply increases. Gradually, as the technology becomes more integrated in society, the cost will lower. Remember how expensive plasma TVs were 7 years ago?
For the developing world to take advantage of these technological goods to better their lives and increase their quality of living, a free market has to be opened up by the governments of these countries. While I firmly believe that these governments will eventually acquiesce under pressure from their peoples to open their society (North Korea et all), the adaptation of these societies psychologically to a free market economy must be the first step in fostering an environment conducive in creating growth and ultimately a greater standard of living. It will take time, undoubtedly a few generations for any country.
For example, I believe you can argue even within our own country, society as a whole has yet to grasp Internet technology as a "fully-integrated" system capable of many wondrous things. The World Wide Web as of this writing, 2008, has been fully absorbed into many disciplines but it continues to be a novelty as a whole. How many people do you know over the age of 50 that refuse to use the Internet? Many are still scared of computers. A huge paradigm shift is needed to quell this fear. How this will manifest itself is any one's guess. Expect to wait another generation--20 or 30 years before we see the fruits of this shift. Indeed, we have a long way to go in our own developmental hangups.
* While not sexy to report in the media, free-market forces have a very pronounced effect on the global economy that, in my opinion, are many times too large for any president to alter wholesale with policy. Policy can help for sure but its not the ultimate remedy. Can you imagine a presidential candidate on the campaign trail explaining the macroeconomic forces at work for their constituents in the rust belt? Most of them wouldn't understand and probably wouldn't give a damn especially if they just lost their job. Yet, these macroeconomic effects probably govern more what happens than what most of us realize.
The next president has to fiscally responsible. I have to hand it to Bill Clinton. He acted like a fiscal Conservative, much to the dismay of his fellow democrats in congress, when he pulled back spending and trimmed the deficit in his first several years in office setting the stage for a government surplus.
He didn't push for tax cuts increasing the potential spending tendencies of Congress. Whoever is the next president, he or she cannot cut taxes and increase spending on social programs at the same time while reducing the deficit along with keeping campaign promises of universal health care or changes in medicare at the same time infusing money into Social Security while funding the military at these levels. Even if we pulled out of Iraq and devoted all of that money to these programs, it would still be short. Its mathematically and realistically impossible to achieve everything.
Something has to give. Someone or some group will be ticked off. We shall see what or who this "something" or 'someone" is.
You won't hear any of this from either side of the political isle. Maybe we don't want to hear it because its complexity scares us and we all hope for a simply solution. Maybe all we want to hear is the tone of what the candidates say not the underlying dirty truth.
On a lighter note, Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index is my favorite global market indice. I chuckle every time I say it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
* We are in the infancy of the technology revolution. Consider This. The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago, The New World was discovered 500 years ago (Chris Columbus), The United States is 232 years old. The light bulb only 129 years ago. By comparison, the computerization of the world is only a few decades old. The World Wide Web in comparison is only going on 17 years (August 6, 1991) as a publicly available service. A proverbial "drop in the bucket" on the human development timeline. Most people didn't get online service at home until the late 1990s.
The world is now linked together with the ability to access information anywhere on the planet almost instantly. As new, faster, easier technology floods the market, the cost will be high initially but will eventually level off as the supply increases. Gradually, as the technology becomes more integrated in society, the cost will lower. Remember how expensive plasma TVs were 7 years ago?
For the developing world to take advantage of these technological goods to better their lives and increase their quality of living, a free market has to be opened up by the governments of these countries. While I firmly believe that these governments will eventually acquiesce under pressure from their peoples to open their society (North Korea et all), the adaptation of these societies psychologically to a free market economy must be the first step in fostering an environment conducive in creating growth and ultimately a greater standard of living. It will take time, undoubtedly a few generations for any country.
For example, I believe you can argue even within our own country, society as a whole has yet to grasp Internet technology as a "fully-integrated" system capable of many wondrous things. The World Wide Web as of this writing, 2008, has been fully absorbed into many disciplines but it continues to be a novelty as a whole. How many people do you know over the age of 50 that refuse to use the Internet? Many are still scared of computers. A huge paradigm shift is needed to quell this fear. How this will manifest itself is any one's guess. Expect to wait another generation--20 or 30 years before we see the fruits of this shift. Indeed, we have a long way to go in our own developmental hangups.
* While not sexy to report in the media, free-market forces have a very pronounced effect on the global economy that, in my opinion, are many times too large for any president to alter wholesale with policy. Policy can help for sure but its not the ultimate remedy. Can you imagine a presidential candidate on the campaign trail explaining the macroeconomic forces at work for their constituents in the rust belt? Most of them wouldn't understand and probably wouldn't give a damn especially if they just lost their job. Yet, these macroeconomic effects probably govern more what happens than what most of us realize.
The next president has to fiscally responsible. I have to hand it to Bill Clinton. He acted like a fiscal Conservative, much to the dismay of his fellow democrats in congress, when he pulled back spending and trimmed the deficit in his first several years in office setting the stage for a government surplus.
He didn't push for tax cuts increasing the potential spending tendencies of Congress. Whoever is the next president, he or she cannot cut taxes and increase spending on social programs at the same time while reducing the deficit along with keeping campaign promises of universal health care or changes in medicare at the same time infusing money into Social Security while funding the military at these levels. Even if we pulled out of Iraq and devoted all of that money to these programs, it would still be short. Its mathematically and realistically impossible to achieve everything.
Something has to give. Someone or some group will be ticked off. We shall see what or who this "something" or 'someone" is.
You won't hear any of this from either side of the political isle. Maybe we don't want to hear it because its complexity scares us and we all hope for a simply solution. Maybe all we want to hear is the tone of what the candidates say not the underlying dirty truth.
On a lighter note, Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index is my favorite global market indice. I chuckle every time I say it.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Just the Facts Part II - My Thoughts
If you missed the "Just the Facts" blog from March 5th, click here to check it out before you read my thoughts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My thoughts in no certain order:
* We cannot cut ourselves off from our global trade partners. It is a necessity for the market as a whole. But it has to be fair to us so as not to offset the manufacturing sector in this country any further. NAFTA was supported by Bill Clinton, a democrat. Is it fair to everyone? Probably not. Will we see the manufacturing employment of the 50s and 60s? Nope. Even the days of the late 90s resurgence--great for the short term, but still a long term aberration--are long gone. But we can make changes in the agreement to facilitate growth in manufacturing in this country again but rewarding the companies that choose to stay in the US. Obama has said this countless times. Is NAFTA going away? Nope. Neither Obama, Clinton or McCain have even hinted at this. Democrats and Republicans both understand that this is vital for the economy in the long term even if we don't see the benefits right now as we sit on the brink of recession. Should we blame China? Sure. We can't ignore China's huge component of the manufacturing equation in finding the causes for the drop in manufacturing but other global influences and market pressure are to blame too..
* We need to invest in other forms of domestic products such as alternative energy. I recall a push for this back in the late 70s and early 80s shortly after the oil shortages. Then all of a sudden, the talk of wind, solar, geothermal, etc power disappeared as oil prices dropped in the mid to late 80s up until the first Gulf War in 1990. Other countries have invested in alternative energy, we should as well. Regardless of whether you believe in man made global warming (there has been some global warming but natural causes are also a big part of it as are the human influence. How much does each contribute? That is up for debate), alternative energy sources are the way of the future. While the economy might take a hit in the short-term, in the long run (decades), this will stimulate the economy and growth in other fields.
* This shift from oil/gas to alternate energy will take years--decades probably. Why? Part of it is economical in nature. Most of it is psychological. As other undeveloped countries need to change their way of thinking in order to develop themselves out of third world status (mainly people in government who restrict their people), so must we change our way of thinking in adapting this new technology. This has to occur from the top of our government (many politicians are more concerned with grand-standing for constituents than making sound, economic policy); at the corporate level (management of large corporations such as the car companies are slow, if not leery, of change according to a friend of mine who works as a developer for one of the "Big Three". Corporate "fraternities", as I like to call them are so interwoven into the fabric of what makes these businesses function that a multitude of events would need to take place for those in power to subscribe to a whole scale change like this); at the union level (They are also slow to respond to change for fear of job loss and bargaining power); and at the working level which most of us reside, we the consumer/worker are scared of the unknown as well. For all of these levels of our market structure to implement the necessary changes in shifting their focus to these new technologies, many philosophical and psychological barriers which took generations to erect need to be reshaped. The bottom line: human nature is far stronger than any economy. I fear this technological transition will take 20-40+ years.
* The economy of the late 90s in retrospect was unrealistic, unrealistic sustain for long periods and probably will not happen again. While the late 1990s was a period of unprecedented growth, it also brought irresponsibility in the ways of investing. The myopic mindset of hopping on the moneymaking bandwagon with reckless abandon contributed to the surge and ultimately to the rapid decline. Don't look for a late 90s-type boom to occur unless some huge innovation like the internet/technology boom occurs in the next 50-75 years for investors as a whole to latch onto. If and when this boom happens, it, like the 1990s boom will be temporary and a decline will ensue. Who knows what the "next-big-thing" will be? I just hope its under my Christmas tree wrapped up real nice.
* The tax bracket for people who are married/filing jointly back in 1998 who make up to $42K was 15%. In 2007, if you make up to $42K, the percentage is 25%. The bracket in 1998 for income between $42K to $102K jumps to 28% whereas in 2007, the 28% bracket is between $77K and $160K. Basically, if you are married with joint incomes between $70K and $100K (working class, each making between $35K and $50K), the tax bracket hasn't changed in 10 years.
Check back next week for "My thoughts: Part III"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My thoughts in no certain order:
* We cannot cut ourselves off from our global trade partners. It is a necessity for the market as a whole. But it has to be fair to us so as not to offset the manufacturing sector in this country any further. NAFTA was supported by Bill Clinton, a democrat. Is it fair to everyone? Probably not. Will we see the manufacturing employment of the 50s and 60s? Nope. Even the days of the late 90s resurgence--great for the short term, but still a long term aberration--are long gone. But we can make changes in the agreement to facilitate growth in manufacturing in this country again but rewarding the companies that choose to stay in the US. Obama has said this countless times. Is NAFTA going away? Nope. Neither Obama, Clinton or McCain have even hinted at this. Democrats and Republicans both understand that this is vital for the economy in the long term even if we don't see the benefits right now as we sit on the brink of recession. Should we blame China? Sure. We can't ignore China's huge component of the manufacturing equation in finding the causes for the drop in manufacturing but other global influences and market pressure are to blame too..
* We need to invest in other forms of domestic products such as alternative energy. I recall a push for this back in the late 70s and early 80s shortly after the oil shortages. Then all of a sudden, the talk of wind, solar, geothermal, etc power disappeared as oil prices dropped in the mid to late 80s up until the first Gulf War in 1990. Other countries have invested in alternative energy, we should as well. Regardless of whether you believe in man made global warming (there has been some global warming but natural causes are also a big part of it as are the human influence. How much does each contribute? That is up for debate), alternative energy sources are the way of the future. While the economy might take a hit in the short-term, in the long run (decades), this will stimulate the economy and growth in other fields.
* This shift from oil/gas to alternate energy will take years--decades probably. Why? Part of it is economical in nature. Most of it is psychological. As other undeveloped countries need to change their way of thinking in order to develop themselves out of third world status (mainly people in government who restrict their people), so must we change our way of thinking in adapting this new technology. This has to occur from the top of our government (many politicians are more concerned with grand-standing for constituents than making sound, economic policy); at the corporate level (management of large corporations such as the car companies are slow, if not leery, of change according to a friend of mine who works as a developer for one of the "Big Three". Corporate "fraternities", as I like to call them are so interwoven into the fabric of what makes these businesses function that a multitude of events would need to take place for those in power to subscribe to a whole scale change like this); at the union level (They are also slow to respond to change for fear of job loss and bargaining power); and at the working level which most of us reside, we the consumer/worker are scared of the unknown as well. For all of these levels of our market structure to implement the necessary changes in shifting their focus to these new technologies, many philosophical and psychological barriers which took generations to erect need to be reshaped. The bottom line: human nature is far stronger than any economy. I fear this technological transition will take 20-40+ years.
* The economy of the late 90s in retrospect was unrealistic, unrealistic sustain for long periods and probably will not happen again. While the late 1990s was a period of unprecedented growth, it also brought irresponsibility in the ways of investing. The myopic mindset of hopping on the moneymaking bandwagon with reckless abandon contributed to the surge and ultimately to the rapid decline. Don't look for a late 90s-type boom to occur unless some huge innovation like the internet/technology boom occurs in the next 50-75 years for investors as a whole to latch onto. If and when this boom happens, it, like the 1990s boom will be temporary and a decline will ensue. Who knows what the "next-big-thing" will be? I just hope its under my Christmas tree wrapped up real nice.
* The tax bracket for people who are married/filing jointly back in 1998 who make up to $42K was 15%. In 2007, if you make up to $42K, the percentage is 25%. The bracket in 1998 for income between $42K to $102K jumps to 28% whereas in 2007, the 28% bracket is between $77K and $160K. Basically, if you are married with joint incomes between $70K and $100K (working class, each making between $35K and $50K), the tax bracket hasn't changed in 10 years.
Check back next week for "My thoughts: Part III"
Friday, March 21, 2008
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Evening With Sabs: The Best Of Segment
Coming up for Post 175, everyone here at Evening With Sabs will try to come up with a "Best Of" segment. Why try? Because narrowing down 175 award-winning posts to a list that is only 9 or 10 is a feat that is barely achievable by mear mortals. Still, we will harness our strengths in numbers and whittle down our immense archive to a Best Of Post.
The big question will be what will this 'Best Of" Include?
Date of Release: Sometime in May
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Just the Facts
Let me make this clear before I start this column. I didn't vote for Bush in 2004.
I'm not a big fan of the guy.
I remember the day we invaded Iraq back in 2003 while in Europe watching the events unfold on CNN World. My wife and I both said almost simultaneously that we aren't leaving here anytime soon. I distinctly remember saying that this is going to be street warfare at its worst. Any local or national news program today will confirm that assessment we made back in '03. Little did I know that this would continue for more than five years. Three years, I thought, maybe four but definitely not five plus as it looks now. I have no formal education on foreign relations or a doctorate in middle eastern studies. Yet yet my analysis that day of what would happen as the fighting would esclate wasn't that far off unfortunately. Many others the same writing on the wall. While this has no direct relation on what this blog is about, I felt it necessary to establish this before I continue.
--------------------------------------------------------
I have heard alot of comparisons/contrasts to the last 8 years of Bush to the previous 8 years under Clinton and what might happen if a democrat (Obama or Clinton) gets into office versus John McCain who just won the GOP nomination. Many are trying to compare/contrast the economy, the global landscape (how will Iraq be handled), domestic programs, etc to how it was under Clinton (1993-2000) and Bush II (2001-2008) to what might happen in the years 2008 through 2012.
Foreshadowing any of these areas would be an exercise in futility for me. So I've decided to keep it somewhat simple to what I know...that ain't much I confess.
The purpose of this writing isn't to sway an opinion either way but rather to lay out some facts on two distinct, hot-button areas: The Economy and Foreign Policy. I'm not an expert in any of these areas. I don't pretend to be. What I try to do is put issues in their proper national context with information that I do know. Information that is not suspect or debated. Information that is void of political dogma. Information that is not jaded or purposefully leaning to the right or left. Information that might not be on the evening news. If the conclusions that you draw from these facts are left-leaning? Great. If they are right-leaning? Great. I could care less either way. Here are a few I found listed in no certain order...
From 2002 until late 2007, the stock market has regained all that it lost after the dot com bubble burst in from 2000 to early 2002. Since March of 2007 through March 2008, the S&P 500, a pretty good measure of market growth, lost 3.9%.
The unemploymment rates for the presidents from Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II are as follows: 7.6%, 6.4%, 5.1%, 5.3% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These numbers are found by taking the average employment level throghout each presidency.
The manufacturing sector employment numbers have fallen sharply over the last 10 years from 17.6 million in June of 1998 to 13.8 in June of 2007, a decline of almost 22% according to the BLS.
We have now occupied Iraq more than 15 months longer than World War II. The military lives lost over the last year is more than in the previous 4 years.
Our relationship with the middle east has existed since the turn of the century. Based on that fact, the relationship seems to be driven by oil. Anyone will find it hard not to argue against this fact.
We had oil independence (from the middle east) until the early 70s when the middle east nationalized their oil companies. Most of the information on these companies are national secrets so much estimating is done to gauge quantities and production. The spike in oil prices is due to a combination of middle east unrest (no doubt our occupation of Iraq a huge contributor), increased demand in China and other "developing" countries, Venezuelan political unknowns (Chavez isn't exactly running his country with his people in their best interes--huge infrastructure problems, weather, terrorist attacks and a decrease in supply from many countries belonging to OPEC just to name a few.
My thoughts on what I would like to see from 2008 to 2012 coming in Part II.....
I'm not a big fan of the guy.
I remember the day we invaded Iraq back in 2003 while in Europe watching the events unfold on CNN World. My wife and I both said almost simultaneously that we aren't leaving here anytime soon. I distinctly remember saying that this is going to be street warfare at its worst. Any local or national news program today will confirm that assessment we made back in '03. Little did I know that this would continue for more than five years. Three years, I thought, maybe four but definitely not five plus as it looks now. I have no formal education on foreign relations or a doctorate in middle eastern studies. Yet yet my analysis that day of what would happen as the fighting would esclate wasn't that far off unfortunately. Many others the same writing on the wall. While this has no direct relation on what this blog is about, I felt it necessary to establish this before I continue.
--------------------------------------------------------
I have heard alot of comparisons/contrasts to the last 8 years of Bush to the previous 8 years under Clinton and what might happen if a democrat (Obama or Clinton) gets into office versus John McCain who just won the GOP nomination. Many are trying to compare/contrast the economy, the global landscape (how will Iraq be handled), domestic programs, etc to how it was under Clinton (1993-2000) and Bush II (2001-2008) to what might happen in the years 2008 through 2012.
Foreshadowing any of these areas would be an exercise in futility for me. So I've decided to keep it somewhat simple to what I know...that ain't much I confess.
The purpose of this writing isn't to sway an opinion either way but rather to lay out some facts on two distinct, hot-button areas: The Economy and Foreign Policy. I'm not an expert in any of these areas. I don't pretend to be. What I try to do is put issues in their proper national context with information that I do know. Information that is not suspect or debated. Information that is void of political dogma. Information that is not jaded or purposefully leaning to the right or left. Information that might not be on the evening news. If the conclusions that you draw from these facts are left-leaning? Great. If they are right-leaning? Great. I could care less either way. Here are a few I found listed in no certain order...
From 2002 until late 2007, the stock market has regained all that it lost after the dot com bubble burst in from 2000 to early 2002. Since March of 2007 through March 2008, the S&P 500, a pretty good measure of market growth, lost 3.9%.
The unemploymment rates for the presidents from Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II are as follows: 7.6%, 6.4%, 5.1%, 5.3% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These numbers are found by taking the average employment level throghout each presidency.
The manufacturing sector employment numbers have fallen sharply over the last 10 years from 17.6 million in June of 1998 to 13.8 in June of 2007, a decline of almost 22% according to the BLS.
We have now occupied Iraq more than 15 months longer than World War II. The military lives lost over the last year is more than in the previous 4 years.
Our relationship with the middle east has existed since the turn of the century. Based on that fact, the relationship seems to be driven by oil. Anyone will find it hard not to argue against this fact.
We had oil independence (from the middle east) until the early 70s when the middle east nationalized their oil companies. Most of the information on these companies are national secrets so much estimating is done to gauge quantities and production. The spike in oil prices is due to a combination of middle east unrest (no doubt our occupation of Iraq a huge contributor), increased demand in China and other "developing" countries, Venezuelan political unknowns (Chavez isn't exactly running his country with his people in their best interes--huge infrastructure problems, weather, terrorist attacks and a decrease in supply from many countries belonging to OPEC just to name a few.
My thoughts on what I would like to see from 2008 to 2012 coming in Part II.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)