Collab with @grandoldmemes pic.twitter.com/f3miqnXhdC

— Dumbass Photoshop (@DumbassPhotoshp) July 30, 2022

I was told this is Putin's price hike. It all depends on Putin.

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Did the Johns Hopkins study say that lockdowns caused inflation? Can you link me to your source?

I'm not playing dumb. I understand that there can be harms from lockdowns. I don't understand why they would cause INFLATION. If anything it's coming OUT of lockdown that might drive inflation: a sudden spike in demand when suppliers aren't ready for it, so the prices go up. When everyone is staying home all the time then demand should be low.

---

Have you been to the grocery store at all? Do you notice a lot of goods missing or really expensive? Well when you can't produce enough goods for the overprinted amount of money...you have inflation.

Example: Imagine the only good in the economy is corn and corn costs $1 a pound, and imagine you and all others earn $100 a month. Each month you buy 100 lbs of corn exchanging $1 for 1 lb of corn; so the real value of $1 is 1 lb of corn. Now suppose the government simply prints more dollar bills and gives you (and imagine everyone else) an additional hundred dollars. If you want to eat more than 100 lbs of corn a month, now you can do so but presumably, since others like you also want to do the same, the demand for corn in the economy would go up and very likely its price as well. Now you would have to give up, say $1.50 for each lb of corn. This, roughly speaking, is inflation, and it is eroding the real value of your dollars -- you are getting less corn for every dollar that you used to.

edit: Hopkins study is included in here. https://brownstone.org/articles/lockdowns-did-not-save-lives-concludes-meta-analysis/

---

1. This Hopkins study seems to be about COVID mortality, not inflation.

2. This discussion was originally about the causes of oil/gasoline inflation, not corn. It seems pretty likely to me that demand for oil would be way down during a lockdown, but much higher once you're out of lockdown.

3. This still looks to me like it's coming OUT of lockdown (which has people going out and spending more money) that would actually drive inflation, not STAYING in lockdown. My reason for thinking so? The government basically "printed money" during the Trump administration (direct payments to citizens) and the initial phase of the pandemic too, and this did not cause inflation. Why not? Because a lot of places were still locked down; people stayed home in the time before vaccines were available. The round of stimulus payments under Biden coincided with the vaccines rolling out and places starting to open up. That seems like the key scenario that would create inflation: more natural demand for products and more money injected into the system, but the supply chain hasn't had time to rev itself up to meet that demand yet.

I'm fine if people want to criticize Biden for actions that may have driven the current inflationary problems. There probably is stuff to criticize. But your original point about "lockdowns = inflation" was dumb.

---

There is no Johns Hopkiins study. There is a working paper by 3 professors, 1 of whom happens to teach at Johns Hopkins.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

---

You literally sound like a pundit on FAUX NEWS repeating the same thing over and over again as if it is true, when I have presented data here that has repeatedly proven you wrong.

Over 1.2 million barrels per day of processing capacity at Gulf Coast REFINERIES went off-line for MAINTENANCE in early 2021. That's why gas prices were heading up well before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That's a Fact that you just refuse to accept.
Your knowledge base when it comes to the energy markets is extremely poor.

---

You have proven nothing wrong that I have written. You continue wishing to make excuses for the current administration in your reference to refineries as "the" cause. I choose to believe that the implied progressive policy intent of the Biden administration has been to move to complete green energy too quickly and away from fossil fuels much too rapidly such that the reduced output has been responsible for increased pricing.

From the start none of my information was from Fox News as I find there bias one way is similar to the other networks bias in the opposite. My info from the start came from the US Energy Information (eia) charts.
Let me repeat:

Jan 2021 $2.42
Jun 2022 $5.032
Jul 2022 $4.668.......This demonstrating the last month drop per dajo.

But the remainder of the data confirms the monstrous rise in gas prices as felt by all consumers. With three months left till November I suggest perception will win out unless there is a monstrous change. You can get causal with whomever, but I suggest the man at the gas pump is not looking at blaming refineries. My concern is the fact of the matter (Biden policy intent) and the result (doubled plus gas prices) together with proximity to election.

Along with your fellow libs, your personal attacks are laughable. Always attack the messenger when not liking the message. Additionally you put one in a position of arguing against alt energy when I agree with it, but until it can satisfy our energy needs other sources must be used. Fossil fuels, nuclear. Then as alt comes up to realistic speed bring it on.

Meantime what I don't accept is your rational to society's perception. There has been expression by Biden's Transportation Secretary that high gas prices will help the electric automobile industry. Intent?

Might I suggest your taking look at XLE CVX XOM OXY in this era of inflation. Some health care and utilities might be good at this time too.

---

GDP was way below its run rate in January 2021. That is why gas was abnormally low at the time. It's not a good thing when the economy is so defunct, gas prices are abnormally low.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

---

You literally sound like a pundit on FAUX NEWS repeating the same thing over and over again as if it is true, when I have presented data here that has repeatedly proven you wrong.

Over 1.2 million barrels per day of processing capacity at Gulf Coast REFINERIES went off-line for MAINTENANCE in early 2021. That's why gas prices were heading up well before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That's a Fact that you just refuse to accept.
Your knowledge base when it comes to the energy markets is extremely poor.

---

You have proven nothing wrong that I have written. You continue wishing to make excuses for the current administration in your reference to refineries as "the" cause. I choose to believe that the implied progressive policy intent of the Biden administration has been to move to complete green energy too

Along with your fellow libs, your personal attacks are laughable. Always attack the messenger when not liking the message.

---

Nonsense.

You continue to act as though the U.S. is not pumping the same 11.6 million barrels per day of crude oil that was being produced under Trump before Covid hit. You continue to ignore FACTS because FACTS dont support your ridiculous narrative.

You've posted previously about how gasoline prices (the refined product of a global commodity) have increased under Biden before Putin invaded Russia. - - - Yet, you were terribly ignorant about REFINERY CAPACITY data and how maintenance that had been deferred during Covid (and again during the Omicron surge) lead to a dramatic drop in the ability for this country to refine crude oil into gasoline. In fact, you never even mentioned this. Not once.

Why didnt you mention that 1.2 million barrels of refining capacity went OFF LINE in early 2022?

Was it because you had no idea of the FACTS?

Was it because you have very little knowledge about the ENERGY MARKETS?

Was it because you dont understand that refineries get shut down for MAINTENANCE?

Was it because you have no idea that the U.S. is still pumping 12.0 million barrels of oil each day?

Or was it because it didnt fit with your silly PARTISAN FAUX NEWS NARRATIVE?

- - - - - - - - - - -

And for what it's worth, how many LIBERALS do you know voted for Ronald Reagan as an undergrad at Cal?

Wrong again Sir.

I was one of them and I'm clearly not a liberal.
But again, you couldnt care any less about the FACTS.

That's quite evident.


U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

dajo9 said:

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

---

True.

It's the kind of silliness that would appeal to a gullible teenager.

Never mind that this country is producing 11.6 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF CRUDE OIL.
Same as when Trump was in office.

I've repeatedly provided links to the FACTS, but OdontoBear conveniently ignores them.

U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

---

True.
It's the kind of silliness that would appeal to a gullible teenager.
Never mind that this country is producing 11.6 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF CRUDE OIL.
Same as when Trump was in office.

I've repeatedly provided links to the FACTS, but OdontoBear conveniently ignores them.

U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

---

Shorter version.

Like I've said on previous occasions, OT makes me feel as though my Cal degree from the Haas Business School is worthless.

To think that the President of the United States has control over REFINERY MAINTENANCE is about as ridiculous as it gets.

DiabloWags said:

---

Like I've said on previous occasions, OT makes me feel as though my Cal degree from the Haas Business School is worthless.

To think that the President of the United States has control over REFINERY MAINTENANCE is about as ridiculous as it gets.

---

Pepperdine offers an online business degree. I am not sure about their off-topic forums though. Might want to check them out before applying.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

---

True.
It's the kind of silliness that would appeal to a gullible teenager.
Never mind that this country is producing 11.6 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF CRUDE OIL.
Same as when Trump was in office.

I've repeatedly provided links to the FACTS, but OdontoBear conveniently ignores them.

U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

---

Shorter version.

---

Kind of goes both ways, does it not? When the price was going up, Biden took no accountability, but as soon as it started going down, his administration took full credit.

Just the way it goes in politics.

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

---

True.
It's the kind of silliness that would appeal to a gullible teenager.
Never mind that this country is producing 11.6 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF CRUDE OIL.
Same as when Trump was in office.

I've repeatedly provided links to the FACTS, but OdontoBear conveniently ignores them.

U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

---

Shorter version.

---

Kind of goes both ways, does it not? When the price was going up, Biden took no accountability, but as soon as it started going down, his administration took full credit.

Just the way it goes in politics.

---

Not sure it would have made sense for Biden to release from the strategic oil reserve before there was a gas affordability crisis. I don't think it's inconsistent to acknowledge that the crisis was largely created by external factors but that Biden's actions had an impact on the reduction in prices of late. You are free to argue that Biden played a role in the crisis and that his actions had a small or no impact, I think that's fair game as well.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

---

True.
It's the kind of silliness that would appeal to a gullible teenager.
Never mind that this country is producing 11.6 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF CRUDE OIL.
Same as when Trump was in office.

I've repeatedly provided links to the FACTS, but OdontoBear conveniently ignores them.

U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil (Thousand Barrels per Day) (eia.gov)

Weekly U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent) (eia.gov)

---

Shorter version.

---

Kind of goes both ways, does it not? When the price was going up, Biden took no accountability, but as soon as it started going down, his administration took full credit.

Just the way it goes in politics.

---

Not sure it would have made sense for Biden to release from the strategic oil reserve before there was a gas affordability crisis. I don't think it's inconsistent to acknowledge that the crisis was largely created by external factors but that Biden's actions had an impact on the reduction in prices of late. You are free to argue that Biden played a role in the crisis and that his actions had a small or no impact, I think that's fair game as well.

---

I think the Fed, existing regulation, refinery limitations, anti-competitive OPEC behaviors, built up demand from an extraordinary comparison point as a result of shutdowns, and war in Ukraine had more to do with both the up and the down. It is not the reserves but the decrease in expectation of the future economy that is more responsible for the decrease.

I mean, we all know that natural gas price will skyrocket in the winter time. We will see how the politicians on both sides play that when it goes up and then goes down.

Nat Gas peaked on June 8th near $9.60 and proceeded to go straight down the tubes to a close of $5.39 just three weeks later. That's nearly a decline of a whopping 44%.

It then rallied straight back up to a high of $9.49 on July 26th, given the Summer "Heat Wave" across much of America.

The September contract traded as low as $7.75 today, but has rebounded to $8.12 as I type.

Natural Gas (Globex) Daily Commodity Futures Price Chart : NYMEX (tradingcharts.com)

NG is one of the most volatile commodity futures contracts you can ever imagine.
Back in my previous life in the World Trade Center, a good friend of mine was one fo the "Kings" in NG.

Back in the late 90's, Commercials and Trading Houses would call down to the floor asking their clerks, "What's Fitzy doing?"

It was unbelievable.

This was a guy that did my taxes in 1987 and was nothing other than a "monkey" in the stock-index futures pit that I was trading in; who got into the pit through his brother in law. But such was the trading floor. Most of the guys never made it to college. They hailed from Staten Island, the Bronx, and Brooklyn. They started out as phone order clerks and some eventually made it into the trading pits. Fitzy did have a college education. But still. The gravy train that these NYMEX members rode from the Gulf War on was simply incredible. Volume went through the roof and it was almost impossible to lose money if you were a "monkey".

And then came the NYMEX IPO in 2006.

Fitzy made MILLIONS being a Monkey.
One of many Horatio Alger stories from the trading pits.

A good article on the blocking of fracking and land leases on federal land.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/settlement-blocks-planned-federal-fracking-leases-in-california

Gas Prices now down $1.10 from the prak.
Paid $5.49 for Chevron Premium in Walnut Xreek this week.

https://t.co/ctpA1t7iSo pic.twitter.com/D6eefmURNO

— Matt Darling 🌐🏗️ (@besttrousers) August 6, 2022

DiabloWags said:

---

Gas Prices now down $1.10 from the prak.
Paid $5.49 for Chevron Premium in Walnut Xreek this week.

---

under $5 at Costco

4.99 concord
4.79 crow canyon

Add in 4% back on Costco card and that'll get you another 19 cents off.

There, I just saved you another 90 cents.

That's down $2 total from your stated peak.


You'll get 4% back on eligible gasoline purchases for the first $7,000 per year and then 1% thereafter.

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Gas Prices now down $1.10 from the prak.
Paid $5.49 for Chevron Premium in Walnut Xreek this week.

---

under $5 at Costco

4.99 concord
4.79 crow canyon

---

You're mistaken.
PREMIUM (as I mentioned in my post) is also at $5.49 at Costco. The prices you posted are for regular.

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8% less gasoline in the week ended July 30th compared with the same time last year.

And the four week average of U.S. consumption is now more than 1 million barrels a day below pre-Covid seasonal norms according to the EIA.

Gasoline demand in U.S. falls below 2020 lockdown summer | Autoblog

https://www.wsj.com/articles/lower-gas-prices-threatened-by-fuel-makers-limitations-11659706686?st=847a37r5h4k72uf&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

calbear93 said:

---

I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

Who's spiking the football?
Can you be specific?

By the way, I dont think that it's a mystery what the FED's response to +528,000 NFP jobs will be.
They will continue to increase rates in an aggressive front-loaded manner.
Talk of recession and a monetary policy pivot is very premature.
Hence the +6% increase in the yield on Friday in the 10 year.

The consensus forecast for July CPI is 8.7%

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

Who's spiking the football?
Can you be specific?

By the way, I dont think that it's a mystery what the FED's response to +528,000 NFP jobs will be.
They will continue to increase rates in an aggressive front-loaded manner.
Talk of recession and a monetary policy pivot is very premature.
Hence the +6% increase in the yield on Friday in the 10 year.

The consensus forecast for July CPI is 8.7%

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

Who's spiking the football?
Can you be specific?

By the way, I dont think that it's a mystery what the FED's response to +528,000 NFP jobs will be.
They will continue to increase rates in an aggressive front-loaded manner.
Talk of recession and a monetary policy pivot is very premature.
Hence the +6% increase in the yield on Friday in the 10 year.

The consensus forecast for July CPI is 8.7%

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

---

Politically, he has every right to "spike" the football.
Trump would have done the exact same thing, especially with mid-terms coming up.

As far as a Recession is concerned, that's still up to the FED in my book.
And as I have posted in the past, the last two quarters of GDP were highly impacted by the surge in inventories from Q4 of last year.

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Gas Prices now down $1.10 from the prak.
Paid $5.49 for Chevron Premium in Walnut Xreek this week.

---

under $5 at Costco

4.99 concord
4.79 crow canyon

---

You're mistaken.
PREMIUM (as I mentioned in my post) is also at $5.49 at Costco. The prices you posted are for regular.

---

Okay. My bad.
Missed that.

But I'll still take 20 cents more for using the Costco card.

concordtom said:

---

Okay. My bad.
Missed that.

But I'll still take 20 cents more for using the Costco card.

---

No worries.

I gas up my Daily Driver (Accura) once a month at Safeway Gas.
I receive a $1.00 discount per gallon from my Safeway gas rewards

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

What would you want the WH to do?

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

Who's spiking the football?
Can you be specific?

By the way, I dont think that it's a mystery what the FED's response to +528,000 NFP jobs will be.
They will continue to increase rates in an aggressive front-loaded manner.
Talk of recession and a monetary policy pivot is very premature.
Hence the +6% increase in the yield on Friday in the 10 year.

The consensus forecast for July CPI is 8.7%

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

---

Politically, he has every right to "spike" the football.
Trump would have done the exact same thing, especially with mid-terms coming up.

As far as a Recession is concerned, that's still up to the FED in my book.
And as I have posted in the past, the last two quarters of GDP were highly impacted by the surge in inventories from Q4 of last year.

---

That's my point. And that is why I limited my take to those in government and the press. It is too early to spike the football since I have been hearing from industry leaders that they are planning as if recession is a certainty and pricing power to pass on cost is going away. As such, they will have to reduce costs to protect some of the margin, which has a chain reaction. Not sure if the government leaders are ignoring all that or they would rather mislead the public for political win.

And Trump should not be the bar or the role model. The fact that I voted for Biden and Clinton over him despite my conservative leanings should tell you what I think of Trump.

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

A week ago you were saying we already were in recession. What happened?

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

Who's spiking the football?
Can you be specific?

By the way, I dont think that it's a mystery what the FED's response to +528,000 NFP jobs will be.
They will continue to increase rates in an aggressive front-loaded manner.
Talk of recession and a monetary policy pivot is very premature.
Hence the +6% increase in the yield on Friday in the 10 year.

The consensus forecast for July CPI is 8.7%

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

---

Foxnews and GOP on the Hill are hell bent on convincing Americans that the US economy is in the crapper (back to 2015/16, even though not really - then suddenly it was the best - now it's the worst again).

It works, because most people are weak minded and quite subject to influence.

So, forgive the President for trying to stay alive by doing the same.

And the thing is, in the battle over exaggerated facts, I'll side with the Dems every single day. The GOP lost credibility the moment they let that Orange POS compete in the Republican primary.

He should have been disqualified and kicked out on Day 1.



And that was just the start of the worst, most outrageous….

concordtom said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

What would you want the WH to do?

---

Be an actual leader, and say that they still have a lot of work to do to invest in expediting what it can expedite on supply chain, that the interest rate will have to go up and macroeconomic conditions still need to chill a bit more because they need to still fight inflation but that they will do everything in their power to make this as painless as possible. Credibility matters, and I don't want to default into thinking that the President is just another talking head.

Both sides are doing that. No, raising personal income taxes on consumers is not increasing inflation (just the opposite) and no increasing taxes on suppliers is not fighting inflation (just the opposite when you increase the expenses of suppliers).

calbear93 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

What would you want the WH to do?

---

Be an actual leader, and say that they still have a lot of work to do to invest in expediting what it can expedite on supply chain, that the interest rate will have to go up and macroeconomic conditions still need to chill a bit more because they need to still fight inflation but that they will do everything in their power to make this as painless as possible. Credibility matters, and I don't want to default into thinking that the President is just another talking head.

Both sides are doing that. No, raising personal income taxes on consumers is not increasing inflation (just the opposite) and no increasing taxes on suppliers is not fighting inflation (just the opposite when you increase the expenses of suppliers).

---

That all sounds reasonable.
However, it's very dangerous to make any statement of admitted weakness that Foxnews and BF2 plays on an endless loop.

Voters are poorly informed of facts, don't have a framework to make sense of it, nor the time, and will just go with their knee jerk subconscious bias. Not you, you're breaking that norm by being here and working through the issues. But most.

The GOP (Jim Jordan et al) did a great job of killing Hillary Clinton's future chances when they faced off in the endless Benghazi hearings.

The key to win elections is to win the subconscious bias.

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

---

Politically, he has every right to "spike" the football.
Trump would have done the exact same thing, especially with mid-terms coming up.

As far as a Recession is concerned, that's still up to the FED in my book.
And as I have posted in the past, the last two quarters of GDP were highly impacted by the surge in inventories from Q4 of last year.

---

That's my point. And that is why I limited my take to those in government and the press. It is too early to spike the football since I have been hearing from industry leaders that they are planning as if recession is a certainty and pricing power to pass on cost is going away. As such, they will have to reduce costs to protect some of the margin, which has a chain reaction. Not sure if the government leaders are ignoring all that or they would rather mislead the public for political win.

And Trump should not be the bar or the role model. The fact that I voted for Biden and Clinton over him despite my conservative leanings should tell you what I think of Trump.

---

I think that there is a difference between a Corporate Earnings Recession which is what you have described (which will eventually lead to some kind of decrease in capital investment and potential layoffs) as opposed to an economic contraction that sends the unemployment rate back up in dramatic fashion.

Thus far, the capital spending has not gone away.
In fact, it's done the opposite.

In fact, it has remained strong and such expenditures are growing faster than stock repurchases for the first time since Q1 of 2021. If CEO's were truly battening down the hatches, they would not be spending like this.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-from-google-to-pepsi-are-boosting-capital-spending-11659584015?st=ldi57bgfidcna23&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

A week ago you were saying we already were in recession. What happened?

---

I think I explained why it is a recession under the standard rule of thumb but I know all this is confusing for you since you wrote so confidently that this inflation is transitory, massive government giveaway and increasing money supply do not create inflation, and that best time to invest in long-term treasury was right when people were predicting that yield was going to go up. You are the same expert who called the top of the market in 2017 and bragged that he rotated to long term bonds and deflected that he made money by investing in bonds. Wow, making money when every asset class was going up but missing out on the biggest bull market for equity and losing out on exponential gains in high growth I mentioned then is some brilliant save. So, let's talk about your brilliant record vs mine on even what we posted here. What do I know? I wrote about inflation concerns here in early 2021, wrote that monetary policies were creating the wealth disparity and was called a monetarist when people like you were focused on tax rate as the cause of wealth disparity, and wrote that I was rotating out of high growth stocks to cyclicals like energy in early 2021. But you are the IT consultant proudly owning an MBA. Only in your mind and some of the total amateurs' minds are you in any way knowledgeable about any of this. I will give props to folks I disagree with on politics (e.g. Unit2) for having actual knowledge and intelligence on financial markets and private industry. You are just a poser who is an expert only at deflection.

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Umm… Biden. He's spiking the football a bit, is he not?

https://time.com/6204141/biden-jobs-report-july-economy/

---

Politically, he has every right to "spike" the football.
Trump would have done the exact same thing, especially with mid-terms coming up.

As far as a Recession is concerned, that's still up to the FED in my book.
And as I have posted in the past, the last two quarters of GDP were highly impacted by the surge in inventories from Q4 of last year.

---

That's my point. And that is why I limited my take to those in government and the press. It is too early to spike the football since I have been hearing from industry leaders that they are planning as if recession is a certainty and pricing power to pass on cost is going away. As such, they will have to reduce costs to protect some of the margin, which has a chain reaction. Not sure if the government leaders are ignoring all that or they would rather mislead the public for political win.

And Trump should not be the bar or the role model. The fact that I voted for Biden and Clinton over him despite my conservative leanings should tell you what I think of Trump.

---

I think that there is a difference between a Corporate Earnings Recession which is what you have described (which will eventually lead to some kind of decrease in capital investment and potential layoffs) as opposed to an economic contraction that sends the unemployment rate back up in dramatic fashion.

Thus far, the capital spending has not gone away.
In fact, it's done the opposite.

In fact, it has remained strong and such expenditures are growing faster than stock repurchases for the first time since Q1 of 2021. If CEO's were truly battening down the hatches, they would not be spending like this.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-from-google-to-pepsi-are-boosting-capital-spending-11659584015?st=ldi57bgfidcna23&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

---

I only know what I am hearing from CFOs and also during networking during directors' college events at some of the top universities. CFOs are already cutting back on capital
expenditures, protecting free cash flow (especially with both public and syndicated debt markets in a flux), and already doing discrete restructuring and cutting work force. Yes, companies were purchasing stock since they believed that their stock was undervalued and stock repurchase was the best way to return capital under those circumstances. That does not mean they are not preparing for decrease in expenditures. Were there no stock repurchase during 2008? Of course there were a lot. Most data is lagging and you only can see around the corner by hearing what concerns about the future key decision makers have. If you are hearing something different from CFOs l, I will stand corrected.

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

FYI: Refining capacity data shows that it peaked at 95% in late June. It was 91% last week. This is the lowest level since May.

Refiner's like Marathon will be conducting $400 million in Maintenance in the coming months. Phillips 66 has also scheduled maintenance in the second half. And then of course, there is the upcoming Hurricane Season that causes refiners to go "off-line".

On another note, Americans purchased 8%

---

I am assuming there will be a recession in 2023. Oil prices will go down even more as summer ends, global economy cools even further and global demand goes down. Also assuming that the global shortage in natural gas will hurt the poor quite a bit this winter. How is it that the government, especially the WH, with so many resources, is so divorced from what leaders in the private sector are predicting and preparing? There is a reason investors are focused on companies who will weather downturn better (resilient with greater recurring revenue, participation in industries in secular trends indifferent to macroeconomic conditions, cutting costs and reducing headcount - there are already heavy discussion in many c-suites on pros and cons of cutting hours, furloughing or terminations - not everyone is in leisure and food service industries that are hiring). I don't expect a very damaging or long recession but why are so many folks spiking the football as if this is the first time they are following economic trends? Shouldn't our government and our press be more curious about what companies and consumers are predicting, what may be a self-fulfilling prophesy by the private sector and what the FED will do in response to a strong jobs report?

---

A week ago you were saying we already were in recession. What happened?

---

I think I explained why it is a recession under the standard rule of thumb but I know all this is confusing for you since you wrote so confidently that this inflation is transitory, massive government giveaway and increasing money supply do not create inflation, and that best time to invest in long-term treasury was right when people were predicting that yield was going to go up. You are the same expert who called the top of the market in 2017 and bragged that he rotated to long term bonds and deflected that he made money by investing in bonds. Wow, making money when every asset class was going up but missing out on the biggest bull market for equity and losing out on exponential gains in high growth I mentioned then is some brilliant save. So, let's talk about your brilliant record vs mine on even what we posted here. What do I know? I wrote about inflation concerns here in early 2021, wrote that monetary policies were creating the wealth disparity and was called a monetarist when people like you were focused on tax rate as the cause of wealth disparity, and wrote that I was rotating out of high growth stocks to cyclicals like energy in early 2021. But you are the IT consultant proudly owning an MBA. Only in your mind and some of the total amateurs' minds are you in any way knowledgeable about any of this. I will give props to folks I disagree with on politics (e.g. Unit2) for having actual knowledge and intelligence on financial markets and private industry. You are just a poser who is an expert only at deflection.

---

Wow, 7 stars in less that 16 minutes?? That's gotta be a new OT record!

(Disclaimer: it did not earn mine. I am subconsciously biased toward dajo for various reasons. Plus, he didn't threaten to beat me up.
Dajo shall be vindicated!!)

concordtom said:

---

Wow, 7 stars in less that 16 minutes?? That's gotta be a new OT record!

---

He now has 8 stars in less than 20 minutes.
That looks like a new ALL TIME RECORD!

I included a current link from the WSJ dated August 4th with examples of capital spending increases from the likes of Alphabet, Pepsi, and General Motors that substantiated my claim and I got zero stars.

This is why Bearinsider is such a waste of time.

What do I know?
Apparently nothing.