seems like this is the most likely case here.Not really. He just attempted to calm markets for a trading week. The following week is a low volume week because we all go on vacation through Easter Monday.
seems like this is the most likely case here.Not really. He just attempted to calm markets for a trading week. The following week is a low volume week because we all go on vacation through Easter Monday.
I needed to sell some stuff off to make money so this was actually helpful for meNot really. He just attempted to calm markets for a trading week. The following week is a low volume week because we all go on vacation through Easter Monday.
Farmers are about to have to decide whether they'll plant corn or soybeans (which need less/no fertilizer since they fix their own nitrogen). Given that ethanol is derived from corn and required to be added to gasoline in the US, there's likely about to be some baked in increases in gasoline prices assuming that less corn is grown this year.The potential impact this will have on the ammonia/fertilizer industries is deeply concerning
I would actually like to see an EO suspending the ethanol requirement. This policy is ridiculous.Farmers are about to have to decide whether they'll plant corn or soybeans (which need less/no fertilizer since they fix their own nitrogen). Given that ethanol is derived from corn and required to be added to gasoline in the US, there's likely about to be some baked in increases in gasoline prices assuming that less corn is grown this year.
It would significantly harm the agricultural industry in the US (or benefit it I suppose if you think corporations owning more farmland would be good) and increase our reliance on foreign oil while increasing prices at the pump. You gotta replace that 10% of ethanol with something, and it'd just be more gas.I would actually like to see an EO suspending the ethanol requirement. This policy is ridiculous.
At a much lower price for that 10%. Ethanol is an economic loser up to $80/bbl crude WITH subsidies.It would significantly harm the agricultural industry in the US (or benefit it I suppose if you think corporations owning more farmland would be good) and increase our reliance on foreign oil while increasing prices at the pump. You gotta replace that 10% of ethanol with something, and it'd just be more gas.
So... ethanol is currently making gasoline cheaper given present oil prices.At a much lower price for that 10%. Ethanol is an economic loser up to $80/bbl crude WITH subsidies.
Anniston Army Depot is a major hub for armor maintenance, so could be related to that. I'm guessing regardless of the reason the destination would be Fort Benning. Not sure if they'd run large scale flights out of ATL.This may be unrelated, by drove down I-20 through ATL and into Alabama yesterday. I have never seen so much military equipment and armor on the interstate. Troop carriers, trucks, 18 wheelers carrying large assault boats, tanks, etc. All headed East.
Anniston Army Depot is a major hub for armor maintenance, so could be related to that. I'm guessing regardless of the reason the destination would be Fort Benning. Not sure if they'd run large scale flights out of ATL.
About time someone did something about Columbia.This may be unrelated, by drove down I-20 through ATL and into Alabama yesterday. I have never seen so much military equipment and armor on the interstate. Troop carriers, trucks, 18 wheelers carrying large assault boats, tanks, etc. All headed East.
About time someone did something about Columbia.
No, the government is paying farmers to make more corn than necessary which eventually leads to lower gas prices at current rates.So... ethanol is currently making gasoline cheaper given present oil prices.
It really is amazing how that board can't handle any difference of opinion.Had to give up on tMB thread. Too many guys spamming the same nonsense from Twitter and calling people who disagreed f*gs and r*tards. Any good discussion got buried
And stop providing subsidies to the oil and gas industry as well, I agree.No, the government is paying farmers to make more corn than necessary which eventually leads to lower gas prices at current rates.
It’d be far more efficient to just stop taxing gas.
Removing gas taxes would just increase demand and lead to new equilibrium at higher prices.No, the government is paying farmers to make more corn than necessary which eventually leads to lower gas prices at current rates.
It’d be far more efficient to just stop taxing gas.
Boy they aren’t gonna like that one around here
This whole Iran business is really doing a number on his REM patterns.
Actually heard a really interesting fact about Sherman the other day. Apparently when he was in charge of the Army while Grant was president, I don't know what the official title was, he took himself and all his direct reports and moved to St. Louis because he thought DC was so corrupt.Boy they aren’t gonna like that one around here
I like to think there just was not enough booze in DC for the both of them.Actually heard a really interesting fact about Sherman the other day. Apparently when he was in charge of the Army while Grant was president, I don't know what the official title was, he took himself and all his direct reports and moved to St. Louis because he thought DC was so corrupt.
OK, cool. So remove only enough taxes to offset the ludicrous, roundabout way of deflating prices by converting food to fuel. Take the acreage you just freed up and install solar farms. (I know that last bit will be controversial)Removing gas taxes would just increase demand and lead to new equilibrium at higher prices.
Solar farms should be on rooftops and over parking lots. Don’t waste good landOK, cool. So remove only enough taxes to offset the ludicrous, roundabout way of deflating prices by converting food to fuel. Take the acreage you just freed up and install solar farms. (I know that last bit will be controversial)
interesting perspective from the guy who resigned his position earlier this week
There’s no such thing as harm to agricultural industry. Just pro Monsanto activity.It would significantly harm the agricultural industry in the US (or benefit it I suppose if you think corporations owning more farmland would be good) and increase our reliance on foreign oil while increasing prices at the pump. You gotta replace that 10% of ethanol with something, and it'd just be more gas.
Hahahaahahah. The government actually going to give the people….. the people’s money back?No, the government is paying farmers to make more corn than necessary which eventually leads to lower gas prices at current rates.
It’d be far more efficient to just stop taxing gas.
doesn't seem like we're banking on long term deescalation.
It’s not that people can’t handle a difference of an opinion. It’s that people who are BRAND LOYALISTS are incapable of constructive criticism of any kind.It really is amazing how that board can't handle any difference of opinion.
Seems like the utility of Kharg as a bargaining chip assumes that most if not all of the infrastructure on the island remains intact. I'm confident that if we decided to we'd be able to take it, the question is 1) how many American lives will be lost in the process and 2) how much of the island remains intact that it's worthwhile for Iran to want it back. Iran's economy is built around oil, and 90% of their exports go through Kharg Island. If the island's ability to export oil was significantly damaged, possessing it or not doesn't impact the calculus as much. And with how heavily defended it is, I'm sure there's going to be at least some damage to the infrastructure that arises just from trying to capture it.Seems to me it's become pretty obvious that this is moving towards us landing troops to take Kharg Island and then using that as some bargaining chip to put this thing to an end.
Nightmare, can't believe we've gotten to this point.
FIFYIsrael finally found a US President dumb enough to dragdraggedus into this and now there is no reasonable, quick way out. Stupid, stupid, stupid...will we ever learnprevious US Presidents realized this but our current President struggles with history and reading?
I don't think the Iranian people have the means to truly rise up against the IRGC or it would have happened already. It would take who knows how many years of support from US troops on the ground to rebuild the nation like that. The only reason it was ever even stated as a goal is because Trump was grasping at straws to justify this cluster **** he's created. Every other US official has tried to walk that back since.Seems like the utility of Kharg as a bargaining chip assumes that most if not all of the infrastructure on the island remains intact. I'm confident that if we decided to we'd be able to take it, the question is 1) how many American lives will be lost in the process and 2) how much of the island remains intact that it's worthwhile for Iran to want it back. Iran's economy is built around oil, and 90% of their exports go through Kharg Island. If the island's ability to export oil was significantly damaged, possessing it or not doesn't impact the calculus as much. And with how heavily defended it is, I'm sure there's going to be at least some damage to the infrastructure that arises just from trying to capture it.
It might also feed into the calculus if the US legitimately is hoping that the Iranian people rise up to overthrow the IRGC. Ignoring that an actual invasion of Iranian territory could lead to a (temporary) rally around the flag effect for Iran, it hurts the US' cause if the Iranian people oppose the IRGC but see the US destroying the infrastructure they would need to be a stable and successful country during whatever replaces the IRGC.
US raised with the big blind while holding a mismatched 7-2 and, given Iran's response to the flop, is starting to get concerned they might not have a good hand.
Every American needs …... HISTORY in their life!!I don't think the Iranian people have the means to truly rise up against the IRGC or it would have happened already. It would take who knows how many years of support from US troops on the ground to rebuild the nation like that. The only reason it was ever even stated as a goal is because Trump was grasping at straws to justify this cluster **** he's created. Every other US official has tried to walk that back since.
I continue to believe that he thought this would be a Venezuela situation where we cut the head off the snake, blow a bunch of stuff up and then they come begging for mercy. It clearly has not gone like we thought it would.
I still don't see how any of this serves any country other than Israel.
Doing regime change in Iran would take the largest commitment of US troops since the second world war and a marshall plan level investment.I don't think the Iranian people have the means to truly rise up against the IRGC or it would have happened already. It would take who knows how many years of support from US troops on the ground to rebuild the nation like that. The only reason it was ever even stated as a goal is because Trump was grasping at straws to justify this cluster **** he's created. Every other US official has tried to walk that back since.
I continue to believe that he thought this would be a Venezuela situation where we cut the head off the snake, blow a bunch of stuff up and then they come begging for mercy. It clearly has not gone like we thought it would.
I still don't see how any of this serves any country other than Israel.
And even if we were committed to it, Russia, China, Israel, and the Sunnis have too much invested in the region to make a regional American vassal tolerable.Doing regime change in Iran would take the largest commitment of US troops since the second world war and a marshall plan level investment.
Agreed that they thought it would be like Venezuela.