I have called it a sting because I am convinced that is what it is.
We haven't seen the real increases yet because the hike mostly affected oil for September delivery, so watch what happens next week onwards.
But the reason? Nearly every report blames the situation in Iraq reducing supplies. This doesn't ring true because the export of Iraqi oil has been almost non-existant for years.
So, what is the truth? All I can think of is a scheme to punish and eventually remove George Dubya (no bad aim!) as Americans see their cheap petrol become more expensive.
However, that could just be a spin-off from the real reason. Any ideas?
|
The biggest sting comes from the Exchequer and the tax they put on the stuff. It would be acceptable if the revenue provided more hospital beds and doctors instead of pen-pushing bureaucrats, better roads and transport instead of being wasted on anti car schemes, and better local services instead of more Outreach Workers and Gender Awareness Councillors.
Every time the price of oil goes up, so does government revenue in the form of extra taxes. Suits gordon to a Tee, he gets the cash and the oil companies get the blame. We get the bill.
|
Wither the oil price?
Well if we could answer that one we would be billionaires.
Market is reacting to instability in the Middle East generally not just Iraq. Big question over the future of the House of Saud. Historically protected by the US government but as 15 of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi maybe the US won't protect it any more. Most significant development was when Al Queda broke in to a foreign oil workers housing complex, killed a number of foreigners and then 'escaped' from a building that was ringed by Saudi special forces... tells you who elements of the army support.
China is sucking in oil like there's no tomorrow. Plus all the Tiger economies are reviving.
Putin is threatening to shut down Yukos and by extension making the whole Russian supply situation questionable.
Venezualan oil industry strikes over but market still nervous over future strikes.
Whole mix of issues none of them good.
As to your question, who do you think is powerful enough to control the world oil supply AND wants to punish Bush? and if there is such a person can I have their phone number, I'll ask them for a job.
|
There is nothing wrong with George W. Bush (if we are talking politics - no motoring link?)
Any road (motoring link!) up just look at the creepy alternative!
Roger. (in the UK for 2 more weeks and then back to the sun! )
|
Oil prices are already easing anyway, much of it has less to do with supply and demand than market and government-inspired hysteria. US election politics are in there somewhere as well, otherwise I'll eat my headgear. Russia produces a measly % of world demand anyway, so what, and Iraq has yet to come on line fully. There's tons of the stuff in central Asia which hasn't even been tapped. Stop worrying. Your bigger problem is a flint-faced puritan of a Chancellor who wants to take more of your hard-earned off of you at the pumps so he can fritter it away on the illusions perpetrated by New Labour that your life is actually getting better.
Roger's point: Dubya comes in the front door, what you see is what you get. Like it or not. Nobody knows where his opponent seems to come from or what he stands for, apart from the fact he served in Nam, as did a number of my retired US friends, who seem to have a sharper recollection of what they did there than he does. Please not let this be Jimmy Carter - the sequel. Lord help the oil proce then.
|
Would that be peanut oil?
Charmed as I am by the eloquence displayed in this thread, I can't see how this will be anything other than a political / economic discussion.
I'm locking this one.
No Dosh - Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
|
|
![2024 Audi Q3 35 TFSI Black Edition 5dr S Tronic [20" Alloy]](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/a030f8d99a0a99bee880fa91138e28a8/a2950d2c64fa9ef6451ee615d6fc56f3.jpg)
