- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Goldman Sachs: Why $30 Oil is 'Too Much of a Good Thing' for the U.S. Economy
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:00 pm to Scrowe
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:00 pm to Scrowe
quote:in that case, the owner of these companies are enjoying an increased bottom line. not a bad thing at all.
I would love to see how many goods and services have dropped with gas after raising with the price of gas. My bet is that it's an extremely low percentage. Not seeing any significant change in my grocery bill that has me saying, "glad oil is down so I can save money!" Only thing that is down is fueling up my truck and boat, and it's not that big of a deal to where I couldn't partake in my hobbies with oil and gas up.
0
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:06 pm to Porker Face
quote:To be fair, it shouldn't have from a pure economic standpoint. The issue driving the low prices is the 3rd world economies that depend on the cash inflow from oil production. Even though they are hurting their overall profit making potential by remaining at full production during the price drop, they are willing to suffer that to get whatever money they can.
These are also the people who forecasted oil would never drop below $80, $60, or $40 an barrel
Similarly, Saudi, Russia, and other players aren't willing to lose market share (at least not until recently). So supply has stayed inelastic to price. This completely defies the economic basis that GS used in projecting oil price futures.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:27 pm to slackster
Well damn that's kinda a bummer.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:42 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Not trying to sound like a dick, but why would anyone else in the country care about people in South Louisiana losing jobs due to low oil when they are paying a lot less for gas? I doubt anyone in Louisiana gives two fricks when people in the Dakotas are out of a job.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 5:49 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Why is GDP the single variable of a better economy? I'm not looking for a weighted average optimization of industries in this country that leads to the greatest GDP. I want sustainable industries that create long-term economic benefits. Oil is part of the answer, but I am still skeptical that a higher Brent price means a better economy.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 6:24 pm to slackster
quote:Well I interpreted this as the short-term growth would be higher with higher prices, but the lower prices will lead to better long-term growth.
I don't see how they can make both claims. If the economy is better with higher oil prices, wouldn't that suggest the consumer is better in the long run as well?
In addition, the growth my more widely distributed (across sectors and consumers) with a lower price, and the higher price will more narrowly benefit certain sectors (energy is the obvious).
Posted on 4/4/16 at 6:56 pm to Forkbeard3777
quote:
Does the entire United States revolve around a sparse number of citizens?
It did in Detroit in 2008.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 7:42 pm to JumpingTheShark
quote:Exactly. People don't typically like to see others lose jobs; however, I think it's understandably hard for people where jobs are lost to realize that most everybody else is benefiting from it.
Not trying to sound like a dick, but why would anyone else in the country care about people in South Louisiana losing jobs due to low oil when they are paying a lot less for gas?
quote:I think if people have hard time understanding this view should apply it to a different commodity.
I doubt anyone in Louisiana gives two fricks when people in the Dakotas are out of a job.
For example, if the price of all agriculture commodities dropped (e.g., corn), some people in the Midwest would lose jobs, but the consumer would also benefit. Do you think people where the oil industry is more prevalent would be so upset then? I would suspect that most wouldn't be.
Posted on 4/4/16 at 8:17 pm to slackster
Since I live in BR, I care more about Louisiana than the Country as a whole. So yes, 50-60/ barrel helps the economy of my State so I'm all for it. It even trickles down to boosting the construction industry, the real estate industry, development...fricking everything that's worth a damn.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News