Crude Oil Futures Speculator Crooks Drive Up Oil Prices and Cause Financial Crisis

[Guest Fedup]

Our Money.

 

[Guest Human]

Still waiting for an explanation?? Come on, you democrats beat my group "Republicans" over the head with it. That it was ALL Bush’s Fault.

 

This should be REAL GOOD!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"JT Allen, on 10 November 2009 - 07:47 AM, said:

 

Remember: There IS NO SHORTAGE OF OIL in 2009-2010, so if you're paying $4.00+ a gallon like last summer (2008) you know you are being SCAMMED by big oil! Call you leaders and raise a stink!

Power to the people!"

[Guest Enron Ex]

The only reason why gas prices are low is the oil market continues to bet on a weak dollar. Our financial crisis has caused investment in oil futures to decrease dramatically. As long as the Federal Reserve keeps the dollar value low and interest low investors will slowly come back to the American energy market. The recent increase in price oil is the effect of storm weather patterns that potentially impede the flow of oil into the United States.

[Guest Human]

When Bush said " The era of cheap oil is over" there was a reason he said that. When you folks in here figure out the truth?

 

Then we can have an honest debate about it. Till then? play on, and guess about it.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The recent increase in price oil is the effect of storm weather patterns that potentially impede the flow of oil into the United States."

[Guest Enron Ex]

I am very happy to see this CFTC crackdown on these crooks.

 

A transparent and consistent playing field for all physical commodity futures should be the foundation of our regulations. Thus, position limits should be applied consistently to all markets and trading platforms and exemptions to them also should be consistent and well-defined.

While we currently set and enforce position limits on certain agriculture products, we do not for energy markets. Though there are some differences between energy markets and agricultural markets, those distinctions do not suggest to me that the federal government should set position limits on one and not the other.

 

The proposed energy Federal limits builds upon the Commission’s experience in several ways:

 

• The proposed energy limits would be responsive to the size of the market and administratively reset on an annual basis, rather than remaining unchanged until a new rule is issued.

• The proposal extends contract aggregation by applying all-months-combined and single-month energy speculative position limits both to classes of contracts (all physical delivery or cash settled contracts in a commodity at a reporting market) and to positions held across all reporting markets.

• The proposed energy limits aggregate positions at the owner level rather than permitting disaggregation for independent account controllers.

I believe that the staff recommendation is a measured and balanced approach to setting position limits in the energy markets.

 

In addition to resetting position limits in the energy futures and options markets, the proposed rulemaking both addresses exemptions for bona fide hedgers and establishes a consistent framework for certain swap dealer risk management exemptions. The Commission and the exchanges currently grant relief from agriculture and energy position limits to swap dealers on a case-by-case basis via staff no-action letters or similar methods at the exchanges. The proposed rule would, for the first time, bring uniformity to swap dealer exemptions. Swap dealers would be required to file an exemption application and update the application annually. Exempted swap dealers also would be required to provide monthly reports of their actual risk management needs and maintain records that demonstrate their net risk management needs. The CFTC would publicly disclose the names of swap dealers that have filed for an exemption after a six-month delay.

 

http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/speechandtestimony/genlerstatement2_011410.pdf

[Guest Joe Jefferis]

We did not have a financial crisis in the USA until after oil prices collapsed between July 2008 and September 2008.

 

Timmy the G-man was the person who correctly and thoughtfully pointed out that we should not listen to the people who were in positions of power and influence during the financial crisis. He is the problem. He is a fruadster who is aiding in the coverup of the root cause of the man caused disaster we refer to as the financial crisis of 2008.

 

There are many people who have elevated their power and status as a result of the man caused disaster. Timmy the G-man is one of them. Ken Lewis had the dignity to resign. The former CEO of Merrill Lynch expressed his regret for supporting the Glass-Steagall segregation of duties and recognized that it faciliated the too big to fail:failed financial system of the globalists.

 

Implementing market to market accounting in 2006 ensured certain collapse as investing in oil contracts became the fashionable "sure thing" from the Spring of 2007 through June 2008, then reality set in and the oil market collapsed leaving the too big to fail:failures short on cash to cover their bad oil bets. Timmy the G-man came to the rescue and purchased their garbage so that the oil derivative contracts could be paid off by the too big to fail:failures.

 

They are failures. Their plans failed. They need to be quickly removed from positions of power and influence.

[Guest Phillip]

Saudi Arabia is now the largest oil exporter in the world, but that status is about to change, if the assessment made by US officials prove to be correct. The Wikileaks cables revealed that the United States believe that the country had it wrong when it evaluated the oil reserves it possesses. Way wrong.

 

The documents show that the US believes Saudi Arabia has in fact 40 percent less oil reserves that initially believed, or 300 billion barrels less. That means that sooner than later, the exporter will become unable to maintain its current output, a fact which would lead to an increase in prices.

[Guest American4Progress]

Crude Profits

 

The cost of filling up a gas tank has shot up in recent weeks as oil trades at unusually high prices for this time of year. Oil prices have come down slightly since hitting a high of $106.95 a barrel two weeks ago -- the highest price for a barrel since the record 2008 oil price hike -- but early trading today has already pushed prices back up. The spike in the cost of oil this early in the year poses a serious threat to the fragile economic recovery, with experts saying that prolonged high gas prices could cripple economic growth at a critical time. Some economists are even warning that high oil prices could cost the economy up to 600,000 jobs. "ustained rises in the prices of oil or other commodities would represent a threat [to] both to economic growth and to overall price stability, particularly if they were to cause inflation expectations to become less well anchored," Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned Congress earlier this month. A new CNN poll of experts shows that "economists are most fearful of one major headwind [to recovery]: oil prices." So what's causing this spike in prices? One factor is Wall Street speculation. The government has new powers created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law to deal with this problem, but as part of their war on consumer protection regulation, Republicans have so far prevented this from happening.

 

WHAT'S BEHIND OIL PRICES: While there are several causes that contribute to rise in oil prices, many experts point to Wall Street speculation: hedge funds, investors, and big banks trying to make money by betting on the price fluctuation of oil and other commodities. Speculation in and of itself isn't a bad thing -- in fact, it's necessary in moderation with proper regulation to help end users like airlines hedge against price fluctuation -- but excessive speculation, especially when it is based on fear about inherently unknown future events, can artificially inflate the price of oil beyond the price that natural supply and demand forces would set. Experts concluded in 2008 that that year's spike in oil and other commodity prices couldn't possibly be explained by supply and demand forces, and that speculation must have played a role. "[T]here is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices," a House Homeland Security Committee report on oil prices from 2008 concluded. The same appears to be true today. While many blame high oil prices on the crisis in Libya, the country accounts for only 2 percent of the world's output. More importantly, Saudi Arabia has vowed to make up for any shortfall in global supply by increasing its own production. So supply issues are not likely having a significant impact on prices. And despite conservatives' scapegoating, President Obama's policies are clearly not to blame either. Meanwhile, a commissioner of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) -- the government agency charged with policing commodity speculation -- said earlier this month that speculation on energy futures, including oil, is at an all-time high, jumping 64 percent even since 2008. Speculation was blamed by both Republicans and Democrats three years ago for oil prices, and even with conservatives' tea party embrace of Wall Street today, several Republican congressmen, and conservative leaders have acknowledged that speculation is a driver of oil prices.

 

A SOLUTION: Recognizing the problem of oil speculation, Congress gave the government new powers to protect consumers and help ensure market stability with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law passed last year. The law gives the CFTC the ability to limit "excessive speculation" by limiting the bets speculators can make. The law expanded the CFTC's authority to regulate the entire market for the first time. While futures -- bets on the future prices of commodities like oil and wheat -- were regulated before the law passed, traders could choose to instead purchase "look-alike" futures that were not subject to regulation. Dodd-Frank changes this by allowing the CFTC to "impose a uniform set of rules across exchanges and the over-the-counter market, replacing a patchwork of inconsistent restrictions for different venues and commodities." Curbing regulation could help make these markets more stable and transparent, and help bring down the cost of oil.

 

DEFENDING WALL STREET: But the CFTC has so far failed to take up this responsibility and write the rules that would rein in oil speculators. The agency missed a January deadline to file new rules because of opposition from the commission's Republican members and one of its Democrats, CFTC commissioner Michael Dunn. The agency's chairman, Gary Gensler -- a Democrat and former Goldman Sachs banker -- has taken a lead in advocating strong new rules on speculation, but the Republican commissioners have been foot dragging to defend Wall Street's profits, making Dunn the swing vote. Dunn has said he does not have enough information to sign off on new rules, despite the fact that the agency has received hundreds of public comments and held at least 75 meetings with experts, stakeholders, and the public on the matter. But Dunn's term is ending this summer, giving President Obama an opportunity to appoint someone who is willing to follow the law and rein in speculation. But the CFTC faces another threat from Republicans on a different front. H.R.1, the House Republican approved spending plan for the remainder of 2011, includes a nearly one-third cut in the CFTC's budget. Such a draconian cut would require the CFTC to lay off more than 30 percent of its staff. Moreover, House "Republicans are threatening repercussions for regulators that ignore their concerns." "We'd have to have significant curtailment of our staff and resources," CFTC Chairman Gensler said. "We would not be able to police…or ensure transparent markets in futures or swaps." The Republican effort to take cops off the oil trade beat would allow speculators to continue to drive up prices, ensuring even bigger profits for oil companies.

[Guest HUMAN]

American4Progress I agree with you that your group messed this up big time.

 

Libya is in Africa, your group never got the African countries on board, but at least Rwanda "I'm sure" is enjoying your groups' mistake "They have a million reasons as to why?".

 

If you don't understand what I just posted? Google It.

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crude Profits

 

The cost of filling up a gas tank has shot up in recent weeks as oil trades at unusually high prices for this time of year. Oil prices have come down slightly since hitting a high of $106.95 a barrel two weeks ago -- the highest price for a barrel since the record 2008 oil price hike -- but early trading today has already pushed prices back up. The spike in the cost of oil this early in the year poses a serious threat to the fragile economic recovery, with experts saying that prolonged high gas prices could cripple economic growth at a critical time. Some economists are even warning that high oil prices could cost the economy up to 600,000 jobs. "ustained rises in the prices of oil or other commodities would represent a threat [to] both to economic growth and to overall price stability, particularly if they were to cause inflation expectations to become less well anchored," Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned Congress earlier this month. A new CNN poll of experts shows that "economists are most fearful of one major headwind [to recovery]: oil prices." So what's causing this spike in prices? One factor is Wall Street speculation. The government has new powers created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law to deal with this problem, but as part of their war on consumer protection regulation, Republicans have so far prevented this from happening.

 

WHAT'S BEHIND OIL PRICES: While there are several causes that contribute to rise in oil prices, many experts point to Wall Street speculation: hedge funds, investors, and big banks trying to make money by betting on the price fluctuation of oil and other commodities. Speculation in and of itself isn't a bad thing -- in fact, it's necessary in moderation with proper regulation to help end users like airlines hedge against price fluctuation -- but excessive speculation, especially when it is based on fear about inherently unknown future events, can artificially inflate the price of oil beyond the price that natural supply and demand forces would set. Experts concluded in 2008 that that year's spike in oil and other commodity prices couldn't possibly be explained by supply and demand forces, and that speculation must have played a role. "[T]here is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices," a House Homeland Security Committee report on oil prices from 2008 concluded. The same appears to be true today. While many blame high oil prices on the crisis in Libya, the country accounts for only 2 percent of the world's output. More importantly, Saudi Arabia has vowed to make up for any shortfall in global supply by increasing its own production. So supply issues are not likely having a significant impact on prices. And despite conservatives' scapegoating, President Obama's policies are clearly not to blame either. Meanwhile, a commissioner of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) -- the government agency charged with policing commodity speculation -- said earlier this month that speculation on energy futures, including oil, is at an all-time high, jumping 64 percent even since 2008. Speculation was blamed by both Republicans and Democrats three years ago for oil prices, and even with conservatives' tea party embrace of Wall Street today, several Republican congressmen, and conservative leaders have acknowledged that speculation is a driver of oil prices.

 

A SOLUTION: Recognizing the problem of oil speculation, Congress gave the government new powers to protect consumers and help ensure market stability with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law passed last year. The law gives the CFTC the ability to limit "excessive speculation" by limiting the bets speculators can make. The law expanded the CFTC's authority to regulate the entire market for the first time. While futures -- bets on the future prices of commodities like oil and wheat -- were regulated before the law passed, traders could choose to instead purchase "look-alike" futures that were not subject to regulation. Dodd-Frank changes this by allowing the CFTC to "impose a uniform set of rules across exchanges and the over-the-counter market, replacing a patchwork of inconsistent restrictions for different venues and commodities." Curbing regulation could help make these markets more stable and transparent, and help bring down the cost of oil.

 

DEFENDING WALL STREET: But the CFTC has so far failed to take up this responsibility and write the rules that would rein in oil speculators. The agency missed a January deadline to file new rules because of opposition from the commission's Republican members and one of its Democrats, CFTC commissioner Michael Dunn. The agency's chairman, Gary Gensler -- a Democrat and former Goldman Sachs banker -- has taken a lead in advocating strong new rules on speculation, but the Republican commissioners have been foot dragging to defend Wall Street's profits, making Dunn the swing vote. Dunn has said he does not have enough information to sign off on new rules, despite the fact that the agency has received hundreds of public comments and held at least 75 meetings with experts, stakeholders, and the public on the matter. But Dunn's term is ending this summer, giving President Obama an opportunity to appoint someone who is willing to follow the law and rein in speculation. But the CFTC faces another threat from Republicans on a different front. H.R.1, the House Republican approved spending plan for the remainder of 2011, includes a nearly one-third cut in the CFTC's budget. Such a draconian cut would require the CFTC to lay off more than 30 percent of its staff. Moreover, House "Republicans are threatening repercussions for regulators that ignore their concerns." "We'd have to have significant curtailment of our staff and resources," CFTC Chairman Gensler said. "We would not be able to police…or ensure transparent markets in futures or swaps." The Republican effort to take cops off the oil trade beat would allow speculators to continue to drive up prices, ensuring even bigger profits for oil companies.

[Doug White]

Listen to the lyrics of this Beatles redo "Cant Afford To Drive My Car"

Edited March 29, 2011 by Doug_White

[Guest HUMAN]

Eypt, Saudi Arabia ARE strategic Partners. Libya is NOT. Saudi Arabia more then makes up for the loss of Libya.

 

If we as a country decided to stop buying from Venezuela? It WOULD destroy Venezuela’s economy, or what's left of it.

 

 

We can still get Venezuela's oil from a third party though, and still the United States would and could achieve its aim if it wanted too?

 

<Prices would go up an estimated 2 dollars a gallon in the United States if such actions were taken.>

 

 

The Presidents Visit to Brazil was a signal to the world that the democrat mentality is still "Not in my back yard" as well as to The people of the United states as to where this President Stands.

 

Even Bill Clinton is against this type of policy;

 

http://reddogreport.com/2011/03/bill-clinton-criticizes-obamas-drilling-policy/

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Listen to the lyrics of this Beatles redo "Cant Afford To Drive My Car"

[Guest David]

Goldman Sachs has issued a warning that the price of oil has grown out of control due to excessive speculation. This has driven down the price of Brent crude oil for the past two days. David Sheppard from Reuters reports:

 

Goldman Sachs chief energy analyst David Greely said the recent run-up in prices, in which Brent rallied as much as 33 percent since the start of the year, looked overdone.

 

"While prices are back at levels of spring 2008, supply-demand fundamentals are significantly less tight," Greely said in an April 12 note emailed to clients.

 

"We believe that the market will experience a substantial correction toward our $105 a barrel near-term target for Brent crude oil in coming months," he stated.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/12/us-goldman-brent-recommendation-idUSTRE73B3EN20110412

[Guest Whodoufollow]

What do you expect when our country is so much in debt and the dollar is at a 3 year low.

[Guest American4Progress]

"Speculators today have about 70 percent of the open interest in the commodity markets," explains hedge fund manager Michael Masters, who has founded the financial reform group Better Markets. "Ten years ago - they controlled roughly 30 percent of the market." Commodities "index funds," "which allow investors to bet on the price of several commodities at once," have exploded in value from "about $15 billion in 2003 to $200 billion in 2008, and are currently valued at over $250 billion." What the adm inistration and others should do, which they have the power to do quickly, is impose position limits, which would stop excessive speculation now," says Better Markets' Dennis Kelleher. The Dodd-Frank legislation signed into law by Obama last year requires the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to set "position limits" on speculation, but the agency is planning to implement its proposed limits only by "early 2012, a year after the deadline set by lawmakers." The CFTC has found that there are only about ten energy traders who are large enough to be affected by these position limits. "On CBS's Face The Nation, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) "called for an aggressive federal probe -- including a possible grand jury -- into whether rising gasoline prices stem from illegal manipulation of energy markets." On Thursday, Obama "unveiled a new working group to combat any fraud or manipulation in the oil and energy markets" led by the CFTC and the Department of Justice. "If we can work more closely with the DOJ folks, we may be able to put more people in jail," CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton told The Huffington Post. By swamping the market, even without any deliberate fraud, these oceans of money swamp the traders who actually need to buy and sell the underlying commodities, such as oil producers and gasoline distributors. "A ban of both commodity index funds and exchange-traded funds that use commodity futures, removing much of this investment, would be an important and instantly measurable first step," believes former oil trader Daniel Dicker. At a minimum, a transaction fee on speculators would keep the oil markets more reliable.

[Guest HUMAN]

With the policy of "Not in our Back Yard" it was never that hard to guess. Some of us are NOT BRAIN DEAD.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Speculators today have about 70 percent of the open interest in the commodity markets," explains hedge fund manager Michael Masters, who has founded the financial reform group Better Markets. "Ten years ago - they controlled roughly 30 percent of the market." Commodities "index funds," "which allow investors to bet on the price of several commodities at once," have exploded in value from "about $15 billion in 2003 to $200 billion in 2008, and are currently valued at over $250 billion." What the adm inistration and others should do, which they have the power to do quickly, is impose position limits, which would stop excessive speculation now," says Better Markets' Dennis Kelleher. The Dodd-Frank legislation signed into law by Obama last year requires the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to set "position limits" on speculation, but the agency is planning to implement its proposed limits only by "early 2012, a year after the deadline set by lawmakers." The CFTC has found that there are only about ten energy traders who are large enough to be affected by these position limits. "On CBS's Face The Nation, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) "called for an aggressive federal probe -- including a possible grand jury -- into whether rising gasoline prices stem from illegal manipulation of energy markets." On Thursday, Obama "unveiled a new working group to combat any fraud or manipulation in the oil and energy markets" led by the CFTC and the Department of Justice. "If we can work more closely with the DOJ folks, we may be able to put more people in jail," CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton told The Huffington Post. By swamping the market, even without any deliberate fraud, these oceans of money swamp the traders who actually need to buy and sell the underlying commodities, such as oil producers and gasoline distributors. "A ban of both commodity index funds and exchange-traded funds that use commodity futures, removing much of this investment, would be an important and instantly measurable first step," believes former oil trader Daniel Dicker. At a minimum, a transaction fee on speculators would keep the oil markets more reliable.

[Guest American4Progress]

Americans spent 28 percent more for gasoline during the first three months of 2011 than during those in 2010. The five big oil companies -- BP, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell -- made 38 percent more profit. In fact, this week, those companies announced that their first quarter profits, with oil well over $100 per barrel, came to more than $30 billion. Exxon alone registered nearly $11 billion in profits , up 69 percent from its first quarter profit last year. This windfall is not coming from the pumps alone, it's also coming straight out of the American taxpayer's pocket. Oil companies specifically benefited from $3.96 billion in tax expenditures in 2010. As the Center for American Progress's Seth Hanlon outlines in detail, these unnecessary and outdated tax breaks include a break for percentage depletion, a break for domestic manufacturing of oil production, a break for "intangible drilling costs," a break for doing business overseas, a break to write off the costs of searching for oil, and the "last in, first out" break which essentially allows oil companies to pay less income taxes if the price of oil goes up. As Vasquez notes, these are activities that companies would already undertake and profit from without federal assistance. In total, these subsidies will cost taxpayers as much as $76.6 billion over the next decade. But rather than investing these profits in alternative energy or even more oil exploration, Big Oil is spending the vast majority of its net profit on enriching executives. A Citizens for Tax Justice report reveals that, between 2005 and 2010, the five largest oil companies used their profits to pay dividends and purchase its own stock . In doing so, the companies are driving up the companies' share prices to the benefit of their board of directors and senior managers "whose compensation depends in part on rising stock values."

 

GOP HYPOCRISY: Incidentally, another chunk of Big Oil profits pays campaign contributions to friendly lawmakers. 77 percent of the $65 million the oil and gas industry contributed in 2009 and 2010 went to Republicans. But the rising resentment of Americans who are footing the bill is sharply diluting that influence. GOP lawmakers are facing 74 percent of Americans who support eliminating tax breaks to oil. Even when presented with Big Oil's bogus argument that ending the tax breaks would increase gas prices, 69 percent of voters -- including a majority of Republicans -- supported their elimination. Even Tea Party activists want them gone. The Republican response to the idea has ranged from confusion to sheer laughter to outright denial that the subsidies even exist. GOP presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty (MN) called the notion a "ludicrous" "tax increase" on oil companies. But as more and more Americans condemn such corporate welfare at townhalls, several Republican lawmakers are backpedaling hard to get in line with public opinion. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC), Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA), and Rep. Dan Webster (R-FL) all told constituents they'd support eliminating the subsidies. Even House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) admitted -- however fleetingly -- that oil companies "ought to be paying their fair share." This support signals a promising shift that is only undermined by one small detail. Every single Republican voted in lockstep to protect the Big Oil subsidies on March 1, 2011. And since Ryan's budget "retains $40 billion in Big Oil tax loopholes," they actually supported them twice.

[Guest Robert]

Looks like the American people are starting to see it is the oil companies that are the crooks here.

 

[Guest Fedup]

Here we go again. Futures advanced as Morgan Stanley increased its Brent oil 2011 outlook by 20 percent to $120 a barrel and Goldman Sachs estimated prices would hit $130. Our elected officials should have learned the by now the schemes these crooks do grab every dollar we have.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2011-05-30-gas-costs-blame_n.htm

 

"There won't be another drop in the price of gasoline this weekend, and it's due to Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley," said Mark Meyer, president of Keck Energy. On Tuesday, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, both major investors in crude oil markets, issued forecasts of higher crude oil prices this summer -- even as prices at the pump in some areas began to descend.

 

The price of oil promptly rose more than $1 a barrel in the next two trading days on exchanges.

[Guest American4Progress]

The billionaire Koch Brothers; their giant oil conglomerate, Koch Industries; and their vast network of right-wing political groups, think tanks, and other organizations are rarely out of the news these days, but the oil profit-fueled, multi-pronged assault on clean energy that Koch groups launched this week is particularly notable — and worrisome. Here’s what you need to know about the latest Koch-fueled attack on clean energy and President Obama, which is, at its core, an effort to make the American people forget that oil companies like Koch Industries are responsible for and benefit from today’s high gas prices and our reliance on dirty energy.

 

WHO: Americans for Prosperity (AFP), the Koch Industries, oil-funded front group with state chapters in at least 32 states. The group, bankrolled in part directly by the Koch Brothers, spent $45 million in last year’s elections, and is positioning itself to be a force in 2012.

 

WHAT: AFP is involved in at least five major campaigns against clean energy right now:

 

The Please Don’t Blame Oil Companies for High Gas Prices Campaign : This week, AFP announced it was launching a “Running on Empty” tour to try to falsely blame President Obama for high gas prices. The tour will travel to Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Missouri, Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The tour is, of course, funded in part by the profits Koch Industries is making as a result of today’s high oil prices.

 

In reality, polls show that nine of out 10 Americans blame Wall Street speculators and Big Oil’s greed for the high prices. Even Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil agree that speculation is to blame for today’s high oil prices.

 

Unlikely to be mentioned on the tour? How the Kochs built an oil speculation empire that is partially responsible for driving up oil prices right now.

[Guest Fedup]

Goldman Sachs has issued a warning that the price of oil has grown out of control due to excessive speculation. This has driven down the price of Brent crude oil for the past two days. David Sheppard from Reuters reports:

 

This would be funny if GS was not so pathetic. They are ruining America's financial reputation.

 

Goldman just got busted for oil speculation manipulation during this time period. If our government does nothing to them, then we know are current leaders on both sides of the aisle are purchased monkeys.

 

http://www.bloomberg...trading-1-.html

 

 

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) was fined 25,000 pounds ($40,000) by the ICE Futures Europe exchange for "disorderly" oil trading, the London-based exchange said.

 

An ICE committee that investigated the trades "found no evidence of intentional manipulation of the market; nevertheless it considered the breach to be of a serious nature," ICE said in a circular on its website dated June 17.

 

Kelly Loeffler, Atlanta-based spokeswoman for IntercontinentalExchange Inc. (ICE), which owns ICE Futures Europe, said the company doesn't comment on investigations. Joanna Carss, a London-based spokeswoman for Goldman Sachs, said she couldn't comment on the matter immediately.

 

The penalty relates to "price spikes" on the April 2011 Brent-WTI crude spread that occurred on Jan. 28 from 2:26 p.m. U.K. time to 2:31 p.m., according to the circular. The moves were found to be the result of several large market orders placed in quick succession by a Goldman trader, ICE said.

[Guest LAW]

Some public servants are doing the best that they can.

 

Federal Trade Commission Agrees to Senator’s Request to Investigate Oil and Gas Markets

 

Senator Jay Rockefeller today announced that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has agreed to start an investigation into oil and gasoline markets and the impact on the amount Americans are paying for gas. Rockefeller pushed the FTC to probe this issue back in March.

 

“I’ve been saying for some time that a strong and vigorous investigation into gas prices is appropriate, timely, and essential, and now the FTC is taking the action I’ve asked them to take,” said Rockefeller. “West Virginians are rebounding from the economic downturn, and we have to keep bad actors from threatening that recovery. The steep increases in gas prices this spring hurt families here in West Virginia while putting the entire economic recovery at risk. I am not convinced that these price increases were necessary or reflected true market conditions. And the high profits in the oil industry only increase my concerns that West Virginians are paying more at the pump while the big companies are getting richer. The FTC appears to be appropriately taking a broad approach to this investigation, looking at practices across the industry. I look forward to the results of the investigation.”

 

Actions by Senator Rockefeller to Address Rising Gas Prices and End Subsidies for Big Oil:

 

Rockefeller continues to work on immediate and long-term energy solutions to the rising cost of gas for people in West Virginia and across the country so that they can that they can use the extra money that they would spend at the pump on things that really count. In addition to a letter asking the FTC to investigate the oil and gas markets, Rockefeller has taken the following steps this year to address high oil and gasoline prices and end subsides for big oil companies:

 

Divert Oil Subsidies to Deficit Reduction – Wrote to Vice President Biden with 19 other Senators on May 31 urging that any agreement during budget negotiations include an end to the billions of dollars in subsidies for the largest oil companies.

 

No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2011 (NOPEC) – Cosponsored a bill that would allow the federal government to take legal action against any foreign state, including members of OPEC, for price fixing and for artificially limiting the amount of available oil.

 

Questioned Oil Company CEOs – Strongly questioned the executives of five largest oil companies about the need to end tax subsidies for oil and gas companies making record profits during a May 12 Senate Finance Committee hearing.

 

Close Big Oil Tax Loopholes Act – Cosponsored legislation to eliminate subsidies for the five largest oil companies which have posted near-record profits in early 2011

 

Use It or Lose It Act of 2011 – Cosponsored a bill to spur oil companies into using the leases they already have on federal lands and waters. There are over 60 million acres worth of leases that are not yet producing oil. This oil, like coal in West Virginia, is a domestic resource that should be working for us.

 

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) – Sent a letter urging the FTC on March 25 to fully use its authority to make sure that people are paying a fair price for gas.

 

Full Funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) – Sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader McConnell and House Speaker Boehner on March 22, calling on Republicans to abandon the efforts in their spending bill that would cut the CFTC’s funding by one-third.

 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) – Sent a letter to CFTC on March 16 pressing them to use their new authority in the Wall Street reform law to stop oil speculation by reining in market speculation, protecting consumers, and helping stabilize gas prices.

 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) – Sent a letter to President Obama on March 3 asking him to be prepared to release oil from the SPR, should further supply disruptions occur.

 

Federal Surface Transportation Policy and Planning Act – Reintroduced a bill to establish a transportation policy to meet America’s 21st century needs. It would establish a clear set of goals and objectives for the Department of Transportation to develop a surface transportation system that advances our nation’s economic, energy, and national security

[Guest StillMadMatt]

United States of Goldman Sachs sounds about right. Keep watching Dancing With the Stars and give a big collective yawn.

[Guest devildog0311usmc]

Rep. Bernie Sanders is saying that if we get rid of the Goldman Sachs Speculator­s that gas prices should be around $ 250 a gal and not $ 4 a gal... Republican­s are trying to protect them because they are making Goldman Sachs super rich...

[Guest LAW]

Federal regulators should stop thumbing their noses at a year-old law and enforce limits on excessive speculation in oil markets, Sen. Bernie Sanders said on Tuesday. He urged the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to hold an emergency meeting. Secret data collected by the commission showed that Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other banks and hedge funds dominated oil markets in 2008 when prices rose sharply and to more than $140 a barrel. The records - first made public by Sanders - shed light on the role of speculators at a time when oil prices soared and the pump price for gasoline spiked to around $4 a gallon.

 

"While making this confidential information public may have upset Wall Street oil speculators, the American people have a right to know exactly what caused gasoline prices to skyrocket to more than $4 a gallon back in the summer of 2008," Sanders said. "Further, there is little doubt that the same speculators who caused gasoline and heating oil prices to unnecessarily spike in 2008 are playing the same games again in 2011. This is simply unacceptable and must not be allowed to continue."

 

The average price for a gallon of gasoline is now $3.57, still 87-cents more than gas cost two years ago when oil supplies were lower and demand for gasoline was higher. Sanders also noted that the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that the price of heating oil in the northeast will be about 33 percent higher than last winter.

 

The Wall Street reform law enacted last year gave the CFTC until Jan. 17 to impose strict limits on the amount of oil that speculators could trade in the energy futures market. Seven months later, the commission is still breaking the law.

 

The commission says it lacks enough information, a claim Sanders called "laughable." In the letter to Gensler, Sanders said the CFTC has been collecting this data for at least three years and called for an emergency meeting "to eliminate excessive oil speculation as soon as possible."

[Luke_Wilbur]

Here is the current Wall Street investment bank projections.

 

Both JP Morgan and Citigroup cut their oil price forecasts this week, citing waning oil demand forecasts and an improving supply picture, while Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley injected a note of caution following developments in Libya.

 

Analysts had previously based their bullish forecasts on robust oil demand outstripping tighter supplies and draining global inventories.

 

The picture began to shift last week when several banks lowered their economic growth forecasts as U.S. and euro zone recovery appeared to be faltering and slipping back into recession--a development that negatively impacts oil demand.

 

And over the weekend, the supply side of the picture began to shift as Libyan rebel forces stormed the capital Tripoli, sparking widespread expectations that it is now only a matter of time until Col. Moammar Gadhafi's regime is toppled and crude oil supplies can resume from the North African country.

 

Gadhafi's downfall would be a significant step toward returning the 1.3 million barrels a day of oil exports the country was producing prior to the outbreak of violence in February, although most analysts acknowledge that the resumption of Libyan oil supplies would take time.

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/banks-trim-oil-forecasts-amid-economic-gloom-2011-08-23