Bah! The fed is part of the globo-corpo-commo-toto-agenda formulated by the Illuminati at Brenton-Woods.
Anytime anyone references the price fluctuations of rare metals that is always the first thing that comes to mind.
Bah! The fed is part of the globo-corpo-commo-toto-agenda formulated by the Illuminati at Brenton-Woods.
Anytime anyone references the price fluctuations of rare metals that is always the first thing that comes to mind.
this one time, i poured some milk futures on my cereal
tasted bad, man
Oh and btw, I have a master's degree, own a house and a small business and make 6-figures a year.
Spoiler: show
Lol Cherry picked? I said from 1998 lows, what are the odds every commodity on earth hit a trough within the same year? Slim to none, unless it was the value of the "commodity" it was priced in - dollars - peaking in value rather than the commodities hitting a synchronized trough in value.
Please explain this synchronized trough in commodities without creating a fallacious loop in logic that references output in terms of the very thing in question - the dollar. Ofcourse if the dollar devalues than every export and import is going to look like it imported/exported extraordinarily more than previously. I.e. we sold $5b of corn this year, and $4b in corn last year, the fed would say imports increased 25%, in reality it could be a number of factors. For instance it could be that corn production dropped 25%, it could be that people are eating 25% more corn like the fed is implying, it could be that the dollar is worth 25% less. These are all empirically measurable things, you don't need to make any assumptions just use the process of elimination. Are people using 17% more commodities? Doubtful (prove me wrong on any of these, by measuring in terms of weight and not dollars). Are people producing 17% less commodities? Maybe a couple percentage points in this economy but not 17%. Is the dollar worth 17% less? Very possible considering this graph of money supply with respect to the quantity theory of money.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2...ax_630_378.png
So let's say production dropped by 2-3% in 2008, consumption continued to increase by 2-3%, and money supply increased by 10% (Basically the same YoY change every year since 1980). Then you don't need to make ANY assumptions at all to explain a 17% increase in prices. No hoarding speculators, no panic buying, no "supply/demand shock", no politics, no war-fears.
All you need to do is plug the damn numbers into the mainstream formula.
However the Fed doesn't like doing this because it makes prices look like the government's fault. The politicians that appoint fed chairmen wouldn't like that. They could lose their job. And if the politicians cut spending, well they could lose their job too - who doesn't like a good handout of printed money? Not to mention most of this money created is actually debt lent to the biggest corporations, they love these low interest rates that basically give them free money. If their politicians raise interest rates then the businessmen will find another politician who won't. The fed is caught between a tiger and a wolf to keep blaming external factors on the value of the dollar.
So why hasn't the price of milk on the store shelves increased more than 3% a year, if they're getting pummeled so hard by inflationary pressure?
Did they teach you to read charts in school? http://www.wikinvest.com/futures/Milk_Futures
What'd you get your masters in? French art history? What kind of business? Selling cocaine? I can't imagine what else you could do to make 6 figures with that major.
For the record I'm a petroleum engineer
I calculate backpressures and outlet pressures across pipelines miles long, draw isometric maps of reservoir pressure, do cost/recovery analysis.
When you were being taught your multiplication tables in elementary math asking when you will ever use math, yea this is stuff you use it in.
And yet you still won't answer his question like it's dodgeball up in here.
The math question? 1 1/2 years of calculus and a semester of linear algebra. I also took statics, dynamics, thermodynamics & electromagnetism, calculus based fundamental physics, so most of my math experience is applied math and I'm sure there are some courses I'm forgetting. Is that enough math for you?
Awww, where did he go?
I wanted a seasoned chart reader to read a chart for me.
http://markets.financialcontent.com/...1%3A1900100027
Dunno what's going on here, but Petroleum Engineers (basic bachelors) are one of the highest (if not highest) paid engineers with only a 4 year degree. IIRC the starting salary can be over 6 figures if you get picked up by one of the big companies.
But yeah, as someone who's traded futures -- comparing futures prices to actual prices is a no-no, lol.
isn't milks future in gay porn
He probably does make more but meh, from talking to engineer friends, people only go into Petro Engineering for the quick money anyways. One of my closest friends actually said to me "I was thinking about going the petro route, but fuck selling my soul to the devil" (he's an Environmental Engineer now). So you've probably got the moral high ground![]()
I operate a reality television editing business, there's no high ground between us.