Letters to the Editor
rockstar8989
Published Letters: 47 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Mexico should copy Norway
[Read the article: How not to prepare for peak oil]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Leonard again pushes an agenda, provides shallow analysis, and misses the point. To start, let’s all agree that “peak oil” is real, at least in soft form. Specifically, oil is a finite resource, the sweetest, easiest to extract crude is diminishing, and global consumption is rapidly growing as the world becomes more prosperous. What most peak oil proponents refuse to grasp is that the current global supply of oil is as much a result of government incompetence as the geological certainty of depletion. We have known for some time through publicly available data that Iran, Venezuela, and Mexico have declining year over year oil production; now Russia has joined this club. In other words, the nationalized oil companies - who control 80% of the world’s oil reserves - have not done a good job at maintaining their production capacity. One can argue that this is a good thing; sell less, make more. The problem – using Mexico as an example – is that Mexican production is expected to decline precipitously. Given that the majority of government revenues (>65%) are generated from oil, the country will not be able to fund its social programs, or much else for that matter. The solution – and a benefit to the Mexican people – is to open up their market to international investment, negotiate favorable terms, and invest in a sovereign wealth fund for the benefit of the entire country. In other words, copy Norway.
-
Citizen X
[Read the article: How not to prepare for peak oil]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Help me out. We already agree that peak oil is real; oil in a finite resource. You ask the question about what explains the US production peak in 1970. That’s an easy one. The US is running out of oil. You raise another obvious fact; that Mexico will also run out of oil. I don’t find that to be an altogether deep thought. We agree that it’s a certainty Mexico will run eventually run out of oil. Ok. As I’ve already posted, the solution is to maintain production for the benefit of the Mexican economy. It's what funds their budget after all. I would think we also agree the Mexican government should maintain their social programs, funded primarily from oil sales. Pemex cannot do this alone without an infusion of technology and capital. The solution, as I’ve said before, is international investment coupled with a sovereign wealth fund for the benefit of the Mexican people. Your comments regarding PBR and STO seem to support my argument; Pemex cannot maintain production without international investment. The fact that Norway is in decline is also true. Lucky for them, they have a sovereign wealth fund to provide for their future. Mexico should do the same.
-
Andrew say what?
[Read the article: Dawning of the age of the Asian PC]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did Andrew Leonard just say something positive about global free market capitalism? Am i dreaming?
-
The recession that never was
[Read the article: Is the American consumer finally giving up?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For several months HTWW insisted recession was certain & ongoing. No reason to wait for the data! Even the word “depression" was recklessly bantered about on this board. Those who suggested otherwise, or took a more patient view, were vilified.
So now Q1 GDP comes in at +0.6. The data is nothing to celebrate, and is still subject to two future revisions. But its +0.6. Data mining a PCE weak spot doesn't get you off the hook.
-
The recesson that never was
[Read the article: Is the American consumer finally giving up?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I’ve been fortunate enough to receive some feedback on my post. Regrettably, I’m left with a rather unpleasant aftertaste from it all. There is a general theme here on HTWW that suggests its ok to disregard data that does not conform to a preconceived expectation. For example, to dismiss yesterday’s GDP number merely because it’s positive.
I see two camps here on HTWW. When confronted with an unexpected data point, the first group dismisses it, on the grounds that “the books must be cooked”. The second group, perhaps a little more sophisticated, suggests future revisions will prove them correct. Ok. But to suggest GDP must be revised down to conform to a preexisting expectation isn’t analysis, its cheerleading. Believe it or not, revisions can also go up. For example, an upward revision to exports has merit.
Is there anyone else out there who thinks analyze one, conclusion two?
-
communist party members like nice rides
[Read the article: Gas-guzzling China]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Great post. I’m not sure what to think of it myself. On one hand, we shouldn’t be surprised that a growing middle and upper class in China has similar consumer impulses. Perverse progress, I guess. On the other hand, given that the Chinese government is deeply concerned about its own energy security, I’m very surprised that the government even permits SUV ownership. In conjunction with subsidized gasoline, this is a very expensive and dangerous habit. Perhaps the Communist Party is giving away free Escalade’s (with spinners) to their most loyal –why else join the party these days?
-
Prime Directive - Star Trek
[Read the article: Peak oil explains lack of UFOs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Star Trek solved this problem for us decades ago.
-
The recession that never was
[Read the article: Are we in a recession or not?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here we go again! Several months ago Mr. Leonard and the HTWW Salonistas had no doubt that we were in recession. Per Mr. Leonard, the real question was if the US was in a depression, given how terrible things were around Berkeley. Now the data is coming in, and recession doesn't look so certain anymore. Even the lefts favorite economist Brad DeLong is hedging his bets. My advice? Get ahead of this Mr. Leonard. Acknowledge that certain segments of the economy are depressed, admit overall growth is slowing, but we are not in a classic two quarter neg GDP recession.
-
A right turn after election
[Read the article: Economics 101: Obama vs. McCain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If Obama follows the advice of his economic counsel, his policies will not find appeal with the HTWW populist crowd. Austan Goolsbee, Jeff Liebman and David Cutler have more moderate, sensible views. Take Mr. Goolsbee's word on his pro-NAFTA commentary. My advice, ignore what candidates say on the stump. Research their advisors.