Chat Forum
It is currently Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:50 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6304 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 ... 158  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9983
towny wrote:
Silver, don't you understand that you are able to separate the science from the suggested remedies?

What exactly is your argument? You seem to spin all over the place and blindly lurch from one attack to another.

You don't like the science? Based on what?

You don't like the taxation? Just say so.

You think this the whole thing is a con to consolidate the power with the ruling elite?? You're insane!!! The 'ruling elite' are the precise people who are paying for the websites you are getting your 'information' from.


You are seriously being deluded here mate. Please, please, please, have a look around and look at who's pulling your strings!! Really rich people involved in old industries like energy; i.e. the RULING ELITE!!


I would sooner you just ignored my post. For the reason given above. But you are seriously out of you depth on this subject.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
Silver wrote:
towny wrote:
Silver, don't you understand that you are able to separate the science from the suggested remedies?

What exactly is your argument? You seem to spin all over the place and blindly lurch from one attack to another.

You don't like the science? Based on what?

You don't like the taxation? Just say so.

You think this the whole thing is a con to consolidate the power with the ruling elite?? You're insane!!! The 'ruling elite' are the precise people who are paying for the websites you are getting your 'information' from.


You are seriously being deluded here mate. Please, please, please, have a look around and look at who's pulling your strings!! Really rich people involved in old industries like energy; i.e. the RULING ELITE!!


I would sooner you just ignored my post. For the reason given above. But you are seriously out of you depth on this subject.


No one is going to ignore your posts. You may be an idiot, but you're our idiot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:56 pm
Posts: 391
Location: AGM, Association for Bringing Down Statues
Silver wrote:
Trillions????? Who do you think the ruling elite are?

The Aussie carbon tax is going to the treasury. It's just another tax that will do nothing to reduce world temperatures. But it gives meddling Govts an excuse to tax and regulate.


Mate, the carbon taxes, even according to the most hysterical predictions, are one drop of mouse piss in the ocean of what is already being stolen. Wake the fudge up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9983
Farva wrote:
Silver wrote:
Psychologist wrote:
Silver wrote:
Unless of course we hand over huge money to the ruling elite.


I love this argument. The global elite have already stolen trillions and put it in tax havens. No-one on the right bats an eyelid. But if anyone suggests that applying some brakes might stop the car from going over the cliff, a 45-page shitfight ensues


Trillions????? Who do you think the ruling elite are?

The Aussie carbon tax is going to the treasury. It's just another tax that will do nothing to reduce world temperatures. But it gives meddling Govts an excuse to tax and regulate.


Silver, what about the tax cuts that have come about at the same time as the carbon tax was implemented? You know, the one where the tax free threshold is increased to $18,000 as a part of it? The one that makes the carbon tax a revenue neutral tax?

Towns, its really not worth it, Silver genuinely believes that printing money is a great way to pay off government debt, and is in no way inflationary. He is a genuine loon. He would not look out of place with a tin foil hat making unvalidated claims that Area 51 was a secret CIA base where the Sept 11 attacks were plotted from by our alien overlords.



FFS. If you are going to bring in another topic. Printing money can not pay off Govt debt. Its impossible and if you knew anything about this subject ... But this is about climate change


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9983
Psychologist wrote:
Silver wrote:
Trillions????? Who do you think the ruling elite are?

The Aussie carbon tax is going to the treasury. It's just another tax that will do nothing to reduce world temperatures. But it gives meddling Govts an excuse to tax and regulate.


Mate, the carbon taxes, even according to the most hysterical predictions, are one drop of mouse piss in the ocean of what is already being stolen. Wake the fudge up


It's a separate (quite complex) issue. And most believe crap on this topic (due to ignorance and / or believing everything they read on loony websites) anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16343
Location: Perth
Silver wrote:
towny wrote:
Silver, don't you understand that you are able to separate the science from the suggested remedies?

What exactly is your argument? You seem to spin all over the place and blindly lurch from one attack to another.

You don't like the science? Based on what?

You don't like the taxation? Just say so.

You think this the whole thing is a con to consolidate the power with the ruling elite?? You're insane!!! The 'ruling elite' are the precise people who are paying for the websites you are getting your 'information' from.


You are seriously being deluded here mate. Please, please, please, have a look around and look at who's pulling your strings!! Really rich people involved in old industries like energy; i.e. the RULING ELITE!!


I would sooner you just ignored my post. For the reason given above. But you are seriously out of you depth on this subject.



:lol:

Mate, you mightn't be aware of it, however just last week I completely schooled the entire oz PR 'left' wing. The very same individuals which smash you on each and every thread. They came at me and were destroyed for 7 straight days. So dominant was my display, that they now refer thread argument domination as TOWNED!!!

So, you're a ridiculous loon and a proven intellectual light weight. I lose more IQ points having a shit than you possess. I was accepted into all the good schools due to my proven brains. I've never lost a single game on Trivial Pursuit in the history of my life. My trivia-night skills are legendary; I once heard a girl from another team say to one of my gloating team mates after a victory, "but you had Towny on your team". I get paid really good money to fly around drinking beer and coffee with Oil & Gas companies who flock to me like the salmon of Capistrono. I sit on PR for most of each day and still get my job done to high regard and general acclaim.

should I continue?


I'm a really, really, really smart person.


Tell me again about my depth plum and how exactly am I out of it.



btw, you just got f**king TOWNED plum!!! You like that shit?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15720
Silver wrote:
Waratah wrote:
towny wrote:
Those on the side of 'anti-science' are just unknowingly being ignorant puppets of smart, rich, unscrupulous people. How the likes of the Koch brothers must laugh at their devoted sheep.

Unfortunately many of the denialist ringleaders are not 'unknowingly' ignorant, but willingly so. In fact you can't even call it ignorance, more like deliberate deceit, such as in the case of Lomborg, Monckton, Milloy, Inhofe, Booker, Nova etc, all of whom have been shown to be not merely misinformed, but outright liars.

On PR we have flat-earthers like Silver and Bill, who have been shown up time and again as comprehensively wrong in most of their claims, but that does not stop them making these same claims over and over. If we 'warmists' were proved to have been so comprehenmsively wrong as often as these guys are, our claims to credibility would be in ruins. But it makes absolutely no difference to Bilver & co, because they are not trying to argue an honest case, and never have been.


Alarmists are the flat-earthers. They completely ignore the evidence (including climategate etc). And put money or ingrained beliefs above evidence and common sense etc.

edit

And I'm not trying to convince you waratah. You are a lost cause. You want to believe (just like a religious devotee) regardless of the evidence.



Quote:
In a 2010 interview with the New Statesman, Lomborg summarized his position on climate change: "Global warming is real – it is man-made and it is an important problem. But it is not the end of the world."


And I'm not sure if even the most avid adherent of AGW would claim that it would destroy the world.

So how do you feel, Silver, cheated, duped, conned?

All your own doing of course. You need to start taking responsibility son.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
Silver wrote:
Printing money can not pay off Govt debt. Its impossible and if you knew anything about this subject ... But this is about climate change


Okaaaaaaaaaaay... I'll bite. Of course a government can pay its debts with money it prints (whether physically as fiat money or as credit). All that's required is for its creditors to accept it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16533
Location: STRAYA PLUM
towny wrote:
Silver wrote:
towny wrote:
Silver, don't you understand that you are able to separate the science from the suggested remedies?

What exactly is your argument? You seem to spin all over the place and blindly lurch from one attack to another.

You don't like the science? Based on what?

You don't like the taxation? Just say so.

You think this the whole thing is a con to consolidate the power with the ruling elite?? You're insane!!! The 'ruling elite' are the precise people who are paying for the websites you are getting your 'information' from.


You are seriously being deluded here mate. Please, please, please, have a look around and look at who's pulling your strings!! Really rich people involved in old industries like energy; i.e. the RULING ELITE!!


I would sooner you just ignored my post. For the reason given above. But you are seriously out of you depth on this subject.



:lol:

Mate, you mightn't be aware of it, however just last week I completely schooled the entire oz PR 'left' wing. The very same individuals which smash you on each and every thread. They came at me and were destroyed for 7 straight days. So dominant was my display, that they now refer thread argument domination as TOWNED!!!

So, you're a ridiculous loon and a proven intellectual light weight. I lose more IQ points having a shit than you possess. I was accepted into all the good schools due to my proven brains. I've never lost a single game on Trivial Pursuit in the history of my life. My trivia-night skills are legendary; I once heard a girl from another team say to one of my gloating team mates after a victory, "but you had Towny on your team". I get paid really good money to fly around drinking beer and coffee with Oil & Gas companies who flock to me like the salmon of Capistrono. I sit on PR for most of each day and still get my job done to high regard and general acclaim.

should I continue?


I'm a really, really, really smart person.


Tell me again about my depth plum and how exactly am I out of it.



btw, you just got f**king TOWNED plum!!! You like that shit?


:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4565
Location: Straya c**ts.
Farva wrote:
towny wrote:
Silver wrote:
towny wrote:
Silver, don't you understand that you are able to separate the science from the suggested remedies?

What exactly is your argument? You seem to spin all over the place and blindly lurch from one attack to another.

You don't like the science? Based on what?

You don't like the taxation? Just say so.

You think this the whole thing is a con to consolidate the power with the ruling elite?? You're insane!!! The 'ruling elite' are the precise people who are paying for the websites you are getting your 'information' from.


You are seriously being deluded here mate. Please, please, please, have a look around and look at who's pulling your strings!! Really rich people involved in old industries like energy; i.e. the RULING ELITE!!


I would sooner you just ignored my post. For the reason given above. But you are seriously out of you depth on this subject.



:lol:

Mate, you mightn't be aware of it, however just last week I completely schooled the entire oz PR 'left' wing. The very same individuals which smash you on each and every thread. They came at me and were destroyed for 7 straight days. So dominant was my display, that they now refer thread argument domination as TOWNED!!!

So, you're a ridiculous loon and a proven intellectual light weight. I lose more IQ points having a shit than you possess. I was accepted into all the good schools due to my proven brains. I've never lost a single game on Trivial Pursuit in the history of my life. My trivia-night skills are legendary; I once heard a girl from another team say to one of my gloating team mates after a victory, "but you had Towny on your team". I get paid really good money to fly around drinking beer and coffee with Oil & Gas companies who flock to me like the salmon of Capistrono. I sit on PR for most of each day and still get my job done to high regard and general acclaim.

should I continue?


I'm a really, really, really smart person.


Tell me again about my depth plum and how exactly am I out of it.


btw, you just got f**king TOWNED plum!!! You like that shit?


:lol:


This is a mighty good approach to Silver. No amount of logic and reason will make a dent, but he may well have met his match in Towns2012.

I suspect this is why Silver wants Towns to ignore him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16343
Location: Perth
Silver's gone. Obviously the fierce TOWNING was too much for him!!

It would seem that the right-wing loons don't have the heart and fortitude of their left wing cousins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
Just a quick note to keep everyone on track with the facts :

West african Drought is 40 years long now, it has actually eased in the last 2 years, it is not thought to be Cliamte change caused.

The drought in the Horn of Africa is of more concern for individuals but is simlar to the drought 20 years ago and the consensus of it being related to climate chnage is by no means there.

The drought in the US that is causing food prices to rise has no real basis in Climate change but enviromentally the farming methods on weak soil are very bad, of course the only way to stop that would be to not farm grain crops there. For everybodies digestion this years terrible crop will still be the 8th largest yield of grain production in history from that region.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4565
Location: Straya c**ts.
bimboman wrote:
Just a quick note to keep everyone on track with the facts :

West african Drought is 40 years long now, it has actually eased in the last 2 years, it is not thought to be Cliamte change caused.

The drought in the Horn of Africa is of more concern for individuals but is simlar to the drought 20 years ago and the consensus of it being related to climate chnage is by no means there.

The drought in the US that is causing food prices to rise has no real basis in Climate change but enviromentally the farming methods on weak soil are very bad, of course the only way to stop that would be to not farm grain crops there. For everybodies digestion this years terrible crop will still be the 8th largest yield of grain production in history from that region.


According to whom?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:56 pm
Posts: 391
Location: AGM, Association for Bringing Down Statues
towny wrote:
It would seem that the right-wing loons don't have the heart and fortitude of their left wing cousins.


Heart and fortitude are meaningless for anyone facing a TOWNSING

A hundred thousand hakas could not equal the shock and awe


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16343
Location: Perth
Psychologist wrote:
towny wrote:
It would seem that the right-wing loons don't have the heart and fortitude of their left wing cousins.


Heart and fortitude are meaningless for anyone facing a TOWNING

A hundred thousand hakas could not equal the shock and awe




:blush:

Well, perhaps a haka or two, but let's not be silly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3772
Location: Still at the end of the world
bimboman wrote:
Just a quick note to keep everyone on track with the facts :

West african Drought is 40 years long now, it has actually eased in the last 2 years, it is not thought to be Cliamte change caused.

The drought in the Horn of Africa is of more concern for individuals but is simlar to the drought 20 years ago and the consensus of it being related to climate chnage is by no means there.

The drought in the US that is causing food prices to rise has no real basis in Climate change but enviromentally the farming methods on weak soil are very bad, of course the only way to stop that would be to not farm grain crops there. For everybodies digestion this years terrible crop will still be the 8th largest yield of grain production in history from that region.


Is that why the food prices are going to rise by 4 - 5% because of the 8th largest yield this year?

Quote:
WASHINGTON — Scorching heat and the worst drought in nearly a half-century are threatening to send food prices up, spooking consumers and leading to worries about global food costs.

On Wednesday, the government said it expected the record-breaking weather to drive up the price for groceries next year, including milk, beef, chicken and pork. The drought is now affecting 88 percent of the corn crop, a staple of processed foods and animal feed as well as the nation’s leading farm export.

The government’s forecast, based on a consumer price index for food, estimated that prices would rise 4 to 5 percent for beef next year with slightly lower increases for pork, eggs and dairy products.

The drought comes along with heat. So far, 2012 is the hottest year ever recorded in the United States, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, whose records date to 1895. That has sapped the production of corn, soybeans and other crops, afflicting poultry and livestock in turn.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16343
Location: Perth
So, what's the problem with AGW caused droughts?

Drought = famine = reduce in population = reduction in carbon


That's the goal right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:46 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16978
Location: balbriggan
towny wrote:
So, what's the problem with AGW caused droughts?

Drought = famine = WAR


That's the goal right?

Fixed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16343
Location: Perth
Laurent wrote:
towny wrote:
So, what's the problem with AGW caused droughts?

Drought = famine = WAR


That's the goal right?

Fixed



:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
easyray wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Just a quick note to keep everyone on track with the facts :

West african Drought is 40 years long now, it has actually eased in the last 2 years, it is not thought to be Cliamte change caused.

The drought in the Horn of Africa is of more concern for individuals but is simlar to the drought 20 years ago and the consensus of it being related to climate chnage is by no means there.

The drought in the US that is causing food prices to rise has no real basis in Climate change but enviromentally the farming methods on weak soil are very bad, of course the only way to stop that would be to not farm grain crops there. For everybodies digestion this years terrible crop will still be the 8th largest yield of grain production in history from that region.


Is that why the food prices are going to rise by 4 - 5% because of the 8th largest yield this year?

Quote:
WASHINGTON — Scorching heat and the worst drought in nearly a half-century are threatening to send food prices up, spooking consumers and leading to worries about global food costs.

On Wednesday, the government said it expected the record-breaking weather to drive up the price for groceries next year, including milk, beef, chicken and pork. The drought is now affecting 88 percent of the corn crop, a staple of processed foods and animal feed as well as the nation’s leading farm export.

The government’s forecast, based on a consumer price index for food, estimated that prices would rise 4 to 5 percent for beef next year with slightly lower increases for pork, eggs and dairy products.

The drought comes along with heat. So far, 2012 is the hottest year ever recorded in the United States, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, whose records date to 1895. That has sapped the production of corn, soybeans and other crops, afflicting poultry and livestock in turn.



Yep, still the 8th largest by tonnage. print what you like but that's a fact. The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures. Also as your report mentions the grain is a staple feed for Protein production, but yes it will still be the 8th largest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
Waratah wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Just a quick note to keep everyone on track with the facts :

West african Drought is 40 years long now, it has actually eased in the last 2 years, it is not thought to be Cliamte change caused.

The drought in the Horn of Africa is of more concern for individuals but is simlar to the drought 20 years ago and the consensus of it being related to climate chnage is by no means there.

The drought in the US that is causing food prices to rise has no real basis in Climate change but enviromentally the farming methods on weak soil are very bad, of course the only way to stop that would be to not farm grain crops there. For everybodies digestion this years terrible crop will still be the 8th largest yield of grain production in history from that region.


According to whom?



Which bit? the west African droughts age is just a matter of fact, so is the yield tonnage on the grain production. The horn of Africas problems are more contentious as I said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6426
Location: emmerdale
:?

is towny a bird?

seems a bit emotional/dramatic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15720
A drought is not necessarily the only product of global warming. Quite the reverse, storms can also be a symptom.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6408
Its a tax raising con


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
Ted. wrote:
A drought is not necessarily the only product of global warming. Quite the reverse, storms can also be a symptom.



Yeah but bad storms no thte good ones.... Keep up Ted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3772
Location: Still at the end of the world
Bill wrote:
Its a tax raising con


Can you be a bit more specific?

1: What is the tax raising con being pulled, the drought or the Arctic ice melt?
2: Who is responsible for the drought and ice melt so they can raise our taxes?
3: How have the government (for I assume they must be responsible) managed to manipulate the weather so they can pull this con?

I think we should be told.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 1:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6252
Quote:
The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures.


Not that old chesnut.

Even lefties like Krugman have pointed out that spot prices only rise when there is physical delivery. Physical purchases and storage moves the physical price. Futures do not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures.


Not that old chesnut.

Even lefties like Krugman have pointed out that spot prices only rise when there is physical delivery. Physical purchases and storage moves the physical price. Futures do not.


Lefties and the spot price? Whenever I feel I must've already read the most pretentious tripe ever, something new pops up. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures.


Not that old chesnut.

Even lefties like Krugman have pointed out that spot prices only rise when there is physical delivery. Physical purchases and storage moves the physical price. Futures do not.



Hedge funds are buying Physicals, tonnes of it.. You are right to some degree though which is why a market with a 25% rise (Dec wheat) is only causing a 4-5 % rise in underlying food costs at the moment. Krugman is also a bit out of date as with regard to the Role that differential trading is interlinked with the cash futures market.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6408
1: What is the tax raising con being pulled, the drought or the Arctic ice melt? the con whereby they claim to be fighting 'AGW' by raising taxes
2: Who is responsible for the drought and ice melt so they can raise our taxes?the planet is responsible for the drought/ice melt its been happening since year dot
3: How have the government (for I assume they must be responsible) managed to manipulate the weather so they can pull this con?they havnt manipulated the weather they have manipulated the gullible


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:05 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16978
Location: balbriggan
Bill wrote:
Drivell

So the ice cap is at normal level ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9505
Location: Gangly Beehive
Bill wrote:
1: What is the tax raising con being pulled, the drought or the Arctic ice melt? the con whereby they claim to be fighting 'AGW' by raising taxes
2: Who is responsible for the drought and ice melt so they can raise our taxes?the planet is responsible for the drought/ice melt its been happening since year dot
3: How have the government (for I assume they must be responsible) managed to manipulate the weather so they can pull this con?they havnt manipulated the weather they have manipulated the gullible


Are you drunk?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6252
bimboman wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures.


Not that old chesnut.

Even lefties like Krugman have pointed out that spot prices only rise when there is physical delivery. Physical purchases and storage moves the physical price. Futures do not.



Hedge funds are buying Physicals, tonnes of it.. You are right to some degree though which is why a market with a 25% rise (Dec wheat) is only causing a 4-5 % rise in underlying food costs at the moment. Krugman is also a bit out of date as with regard to the Role that differential trading is interlinked with the cash futures market.



I'm sure they are also buying physical. But the point was about futures trading. The only people who think increased futures trading is moving the commodities spot price are the muppets at the World Development Movement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
zzzz wrote:
bimboman wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
The main factor in the steepness of the price rise's is hedge fund activity in the futures.


Not that old chesnut.

Even lefties like Krugman have pointed out that spot prices only rise when there is physical delivery. Physical purchases and storage moves the physical price. Futures do not.



Hedge funds are buying Physicals, tonnes of it.. You are right to some degree though which is why a market with a 25% rise (Dec wheat) is only causing a 4-5 % rise in underlying food costs at the moment. Krugman is also a bit out of date as with regard to the Role that differential trading is interlinked with the cash futures market.



I'm sure they are also buying physical. But the point was about futures trading. The only people who think increased futures trading is moving the commodities spot price are the muppets at the World Development Movement.



Not really true, my point about the differentials stands. The future is the tail wagging the dog right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6252
Quote:
Not really true, my point about the differentials stands. The future is the tail wagging the dog right now.


Futures can't be wagging anything! The whole thing is a wash.


Quote:
Many people on the “speculators did it” side like to point to financial data, especially large purchases of futures by various players. But food is a physical commodity, and plays in the financial markets can only move the price to the extent that they affect physical flows and stocks...how can speculation affect this picture? The answer is, it has to work through accumulation of inventories — physical inventories. If high futures prices induce increased storage, this reduces the quantity available to consumers, and it can raise the price. And you can, in fact, argue that something like this has been happening for cotton and copper, where there are apparently large and growing inventories...My experience in these debates is that the response consists of a blizzard of statistics about the size of forward positions, etc.. But remember, every purchase of a futures contract is also a sale — there’s someone on the other side. And neither the purchase nor the sale changes the physical quantity of the commodity available to the market.


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0 ... eculation/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
Not really true, my point about the differentials stands. The future is the tail wagging the dog right now.


Futures can't be wagging anything! The whole thing is a wash.


Quote:
Many people on the “speculators did it” side like to point to financial data, especially large purchases of futures by various players. But food is a physical commodity, and plays in the financial markets can only move the price to the extent that they affect physical flows and stocks...how can speculation affect this picture? The answer is, it has to work through accumulation of inventories — physical inventories. If high futures prices induce increased storage, this reduces the quantity available to consumers, and it can raise the price. And you can, in fact, argue that something like this has been happening for cotton and copper, where there are apparently large and growing inventories...My experience in these debates is that the response consists of a blizzard of statistics about the size of forward positions, etc.. But remember, every purchase of a futures contract is also a sale — there’s someone on the other side. And neither the purchase nor the sale changes the physical quantity of the commodity available to the market.


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0 ... eculation/



Krugman is missing a point here, the differential is the trade done by the physical trader either Long or short normally against delivery delay or in the case of Soft commodities more importantly quality, these are real One sided trades with the other side effectively being the Physical. an increased level in the Future up s the cost of hedging increasing the over all cost, financing required futures margin etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3772
Location: Still at the end of the world
bimboman wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
Not really true, my point about the differentials stands. The future is the tail wagging the dog right now.


Futures can't be wagging anything! The whole thing is a wash.


Quote:
Many people on the “speculators did it” side like to point to financial data, especially large purchases of futures by various players. But food is a physical commodity, and plays in the financial markets can only move the price to the extent that they affect physical flows and stocks...how can speculation affect this picture? The answer is, it has to work through accumulation of inventories — physical inventories. If high futures prices induce increased storage, this reduces the quantity available to consumers, and it can raise the price. And you can, in fact, argue that something like this has been happening for cotton and copper, where there are apparently large and growing inventories...My experience in these debates is that the response consists of a blizzard of statistics about the size of forward positions, etc.. But remember, every purchase of a futures contract is also a sale — there’s someone on the other side. And neither the purchase nor the sale changes the physical quantity of the commodity available to the market.



http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0 ... eculation/



Krugman is missing a point here, the differential is the trade done by the physical trader either Long or short normally against delivery delay or in the case of Soft commodities more importantly quality, these are real One sided trades with the other side effectively being the Physical. an increased level in the Future up s the cost of hedging increasing the over all cost, financing required futures margin etc.


So in plain English, the bankers are still fiddling while the earth burns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56447
Yeah pretty much.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6252
Quote:
Krugman is missing a point here, the differential is the trade done by the physical trader either Long or short normally against delivery delay or in the case of Soft commodities more importantly quality, these are real One sided trades with the other side effectively being the Physical


For the third time, no one is talking about physical trades.



Quote:
an increased level in the Future up s the cost of hedging increasing the over all cost, financing required futures margin etc.


Absolute bollocks.

Firstly, and it often gets lost sight of, speculation moves price risk form producers and consumers to speculators - that's the point of the futures market.

Secondly, increased speculation means increased liquidity which means lower margins.

Finally, it’s hard to see how speculation would lead to higher prices. Futures markets are zero sum games. For every person who takes a long position there must, by definition, be another person or group of people who have taken an equal and opposite short position.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6408
Wow - Antarctic ice coverage at record levels

Surprised it hasnt been mentioned in the news


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6304 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 ... 158  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A5D5E5, Bing [Bot], corentin44, dinsdale, DOB, Fenman, flaggETERNAL, frillage, Jensrsa, LandOTurk, Laurent, Lazer, Lemoentjie, message #2527204, mr flaps, Mr. Very Popular, MungoMan, Sandstorm, ZappaMan and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group