|
Post by looter on Aug 18, 2011 22:02:33 GMT -5
I believe the crop size is going to come in less than expected. B. H. Obama will take over the ethanol plants via executive order and "manage" their output to help reduce food prices to American consumers. Corn growers will get screwed in the process if they haven't already contracted their 2011 corn crop. When will Obama figure out the corn crop will be too small? During harvest? That would create some wild volatility! Just think.... Crop is coming in small, sending futures skyrocketing, when ethanol plants are Nationalized, corn crashes immediately. I expect something similar, only around Valentine Day. I expect oil to have a "5" handle by then, so consumers will blow up when ethanol is dear and pushing pump prices higher. On the subject of Nationalization, I expect all commerce to get Nationalized. When you look at what happened to Liberty during the dasterdly 20th Century, its the natural outcome to cap it all off.
|
|
|
Post by looter on Aug 19, 2011 4:45:50 GMT -5
KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) -U.S. ethanol production slipped in the last week as profit margins narrowed and domestic demand waned, snapping a four-week rise in output. The Energy Information Administration said on Wednesday that U.S. ethanol production totaled 899,000 barrels per day, down about 1 percent from 908,000 barrels per day (bpd) the previous week.
The weekly production of 6.293 million barrels is still the third-highest weekly output level over the last two months. U.S. ethanol stocks dropped to 17.58 million barrels, down more than 3 percent from the previous week, the EIA said in its weekly petroleum report. Domestic demand could be waning due to tight margins for blenders, though cooler weather that improves plant efficiency should have helped promote more production in the last week, according to Linn Group analyst Jerrod Kitt.
Profit margins for producers remained in the black, but were narrower, continuing a tightening trend seen over the last month. Ethanol futures on the Chicago Board of Trade were flat to slightly higher on Wednesday, with the spot month up 0.012 cents to $2.813 per gallon. (Reporting by Carey Gillam;editing by Sofina Mirza-Reid and Bob Burgdorfer)
|
|
|
Post by linsal on Aug 19, 2011 5:27:56 GMT -5
I believe the crop size is going to come in less than expected. B. H. Obama will take over the ethanol plants via executive order and "manage" their output to help reduce food prices to American consumers. Corn growers will get screwed in the process if they haven't already contracted their 2011 corn crop. When will Obama figure out the corn crop will be too small? During harvest? That would create some wild volatility! Just think.... Crop is coming in small, sending futures skyrocketing, when ethanol plants are Nationalized, corn crashes immediately. I expect something similar, only around Valentine Day. I expect oil to have a "5" handle by then, so consumers will blow up when ethanol is dear and pushing pump prices higher. On the subject of Nationalization, I expect all commerce to get Nationalized. When you look at what happened to Liberty during the dasterdly 20th Century, its the natural outcome to cap it all off. I think you are correct regarding a Valentine's Day massacre...the USDA will recognize the problems with the crop in the Dec/Jan time frame, it will take about a month for USDA officials to walk over to the White House, and for the administration and Obama re-election committee to come up with a plan (which will include the take over of ethanol plants). It will be touted as a means to bring down food prices by the Obama re-election machine...and Obama will be able to pound on the evil's of capitalism a little more...bad bad ethanol plants and "man, did GW Bush ever screw up letting things get this bad but I'm fixing it now."
|
|
|
Post by glowplug on Aug 19, 2011 8:45:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Aug 20, 2011 10:59:38 GMT -5
Grainbelt: Thanx for your response to Beaner. He obviously misread my post. Beaner is one of the most intelligent people I know and so are you. I fully understand your point re Singapore etc., but I also know that Germany lost WWII for one reason...crude oil. It was bad enough that they had a syphillitic moron who sacrificed the German army in Russia. I've been studying the time period over the last two years for several reasons, one out of personal interest (WWII is a fun read), but the main reason is because it is clear that the whole conflict from start to finish (1914-1945) had malthusian undertones which seem over the head of most of the spoonfed bullshit I have now come to expect from 'historical' experts. The germans ran out of oil (and everything else) even before the war started, thats why they went to war to begin with! When Versailles stripped them of their best farmland (Poland) they had a destiny with demography, a population pyramid that assured them mass starvation within two decades. Big Five, Seven Sisters, all letters of credit out of New York or London, anybody who understands that business is just war by another means can apply it to what happened there in central europe and it makes a lot more sense than how the 'history' books tell it. A slow purposeful siege. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Commercial_Agreement_(1939)In a Spiegel Magazine interview from 1992, Secretary of State James Baker called WWII an economic preventive measure.
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Aug 20, 2011 11:55:00 GMT -5
Jabber, I want to believe in egalitarian democracy and all that Hallmark card bullshit but its getting tougher and tougher. Show me a democracy without some semblance of slavery throughout history and I will show you the exception not the rule. Ancient Greece was not without slaves. The two 'democracies' that declared war on 'fascist' germany both had vast overseas colonies with loads of untermenschen extracting resources back to their 'motherlands' while their colonial masters stood ever present with whip in hand. Colonization was simply the effect after extension of the franchise to the masses back home. French Revolution = egalitarianism = not even a decade later Napolean invades all of Europe, seeking new inputs in order to fund the growth of entitlements. Denied in Europe, the european powers simply colonized the world not then fully known. America itself only extended the franchise fully while enjoying the bounty of a cornicopia of a high EROEI. It was the barrel of oil and ever increasing production of all resources that freed the masses, and it is the end of such which will see them back in chains. The cornicopia we have enjoyed the last 70-80 years skews our perspective, you can't drive a car just looking in the rearview mirror, not with a cliff ahead. Malthusian traps demand efficiency in everything, not just economics, but politics, social and racial relations. I don't think an egalitarian democracy lasts five minutes in a malthusian trap. The question is not what got us here, but how do 'we' move forward? In essence you get to point where it is between morality and survival...
|
|
|
Post by beaner on Aug 20, 2011 12:39:55 GMT -5
About the only people supportive of ethanol now are corn farmers and ethanol companies. The livestock sector, most environmental groups, and food companies are opposed. When a corn shortage develops the political pressure will be to waive the blending mandate. As it stands now it likely will be early 2012 when the price of chicken skyrockets and the mandate will become a big issue in Presidential campaign. That is when Obama will act.
|
|
|
Post by glowplug on Aug 20, 2011 15:37:28 GMT -5
Hmmmmm, so the fed. govt. (with Red China loaned money) just bought up a bunch of surplus chicken production.
Possible obamunist will campaign on a "chicken in every pot". (Ron Paul is campaigning on "pot for every chicken.")
So Big Chicken gets a govt. bailout "subsidy" while bashing a Blenders' Credit for compliance costs in meeting a govt. mandate. JAM probably got "Dick" Lugar to give him that bailout. Anyhooooo, I'm betting the Red obaBUS is a reefer so obamunist can hand out frozen chickens when he campaigns in 2012. No doubt the USDA will have acquired plenty of surplus watermelons to give out, too.
|
|
|
Post by beaner on Aug 20, 2011 17:54:26 GMT -5
That the government biught up surplus chicken to help address the critical problems in the chicken industry is a good thing for grain farmers. They have done so in the past for pork and beef and certainly cheese. The government effectively caused the major change in the operating environment for the chicken, pork, dairy, and beef cattle sectors by subsidizing and mandating ethanol made from corn. Therefore, it is only logical that the govvernment intervene to help those sectors deal with the changed environment. The last thin corn/soybean farmers need is for the domestic animal sectors to shrink and use less and less corn and soymeal. We do not need to become overly dependent on the ethanol sector and thereby the govvernment.
|
|
|
Post by jabber1 on Aug 21, 2011 7:12:52 GMT -5
That the government biught up surplus chicken to help address the critical problems in the chicken industry is a good thing for grain farmers. They have done so in the past for pork and beef and certainly cheese. The government effectively caused the major change in the operating environment for the chicken, pork, dairy, and beef cattle sectors by subsidizing and mandating ethanol made from corn. Therefore, it is only logical that the govvernment intervene to help those sectors deal with the changed environment. The last thin corn/soybean farmers need is for the domestic animal sectors to shrink and use less and less corn and soymeal. We do not need to become overly dependent on the ethanol sector and thereby the govvernment. When we consider the subsidies and preferences that support the oil industry using the same logic explains the rationale for ethanol mandates/ subsidies.
|
|
|
Post by glowplug on Aug 21, 2011 7:56:54 GMT -5
Beaner, I've been consistant in my support of the US livestock sector. You and I have even disagreed on imported meats, myself advocating for domestic preference.
But to hear the livestock folks whine (I raise steers) about the Blenders' Credit when govt. buys surplus meats, cheese, milk powder, etc. is hypocritical. The Blenders' Credit is an allowance for the added blending costs to comply with a govt. mandate. It ain't a subsidy.
And the oil companies don't get "subsidies". Tax law allows them to deduct costs, depreciation, etc. If there is a so called subsidy, it is taxpayer costs of having a military to babysit Middle East oil nations so world oil flows freely. The more USA can develop multiple other sources of energy, the less importance the Islamic nutcase ragheads are.
I've said before, ethanol isn't my premier choice. I prefer a focus on diesel. But I don't call the shots.
|
|
|
Post by looter on Aug 21, 2011 8:06:45 GMT -5
Beaner, I've been consistant in my support of the US livestock sector. You and I have even disagreed on imported meats, myself advocating for domestic preference. But to hear the livestock folks whine (I raise steers) about the Blenders' Credit when govt. buys surplus meats, cheese, milk powder, etc. is hypocritical. The Blenders' Credit is an allowance for the added blending costs to comply with a govt. mandate. It ain't a subsidy. And the oil companies don't get "subsidies". Tax law allows them to deduct costs, depreciation, etc. If there is a so called subsidy, it is taxpayer costs of having a military to babysit Middle East oil nations so world oil flows freely. The more USA can develop multiple other sources of energy, the less importance the Islamic nutcase ragheads are. I've said before, ethanol isn't my premier choice. I prefer a focus on diesel. But I don't call the shots. You are factually incorrect on two things here; 1) You claim the BTC is not a subsidy. Who, prey tell, pays for it? 2) You claim the oil industry does not get subsidies. Care to back that up? What exactly do you call taking money from the taxpayer and giving to a private company? Do you have some new name for that practice? Corporate Welfare perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by jrtheoriginal on Aug 21, 2011 12:47:39 GMT -5
Been out chopping in the corn fields of Iowa some of the best dirt in the world and there is NO 200 bu. corn out there! The only thing we do not know is what the body count is but the wreck is a done deal!
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Aug 21, 2011 16:13:44 GMT -5
Ethanol mandate is win-win. a) It helps reduce costs at the pump (ethanol supply) b) Its a lot easier making points on seven dollar corn than two dollar corn (closer to the truth - see footnote) c) Its a food weapon pointed directly at OPEC's oil weapon and it is the trump card. You need fuel, they for the most part need grain, implying that you can turn most of the exportable crop in the world into fuel is the Anglo-American cabal's way of saying, "Make my day." Footnote - Lobbyists control washington. The largest ag exporters in the world are multi-nationals based in the US. From ADM, to Cargill what they want your politicians give them. In a true free-market even modern day command and control govts are bought and paid for. www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jun/01/argentina-accuses-grain-traders-tax-evasionwww.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/jun/02/abcd-food-giants-dominate-trade
|
|
|
Post by 48 on Aug 24, 2011 11:43:37 GMT -5
Beaner: There is too much chicken production. Simple as that. For years pork over produced, and still do...but strong exports bailed them out.
The price of beef, pork, and milk have all moved up cuz they are not over producing with burdensome inventories. Chicken has not cut production. Somebody should tell them that the Russians are cutting back.
The price of crude oil...which is a double whammy cuz it's embedded into the price of everything, gold, corn, wheat, copper, beef, milk, pork, etc. have gone up...not cuz of ethanol...but cuz of inflation. When chicken doesn't similarly go up due to inflation, it's cuz they have onerous overproduction.
And...if $7 corn is the culprit, why is there so much chicken production??? Where is the demand rationing???
|
|