Gas prices

[Heracles 417]

$4.25 for diesel. 7 miles to the gallon. If this continues you can expect to pay out the nose for basic commodities. The thing that cracks me up is that a big portion of my fellow truckers loves them some Georgie Bush. It actually makes me want to puke. Can anyone say "Golden Parachute"?

He is responsible for gas prices as well? I thought this was a war about oil. When you steal something you usually sell it for less, not more.

It's illegal to pump your own gas in New Jersey.

#######?

You must be joking right.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

$4.25 for diesel. 7 miles to the gallon. If this continues you can expect to pay out the nose for basic commodities. The thing that cracks me up is that a big portion of my fellow truckers loves them some Georgie Bush. It actually makes me want to puke. Can anyone say "Golden Parachute"?

He is responsible for gas prices as well? I thought this was a war about oil. When you steal something you usually sell it for less, not more.

It's illegal to pump your own gas in New Jersey.

#######?

You must be joking right.

In some states you can't pump your own gas - I know Oregon is one, I guess NJ is another

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

3.49 for premium this morning

NJ gas stations.

The station attendant looked at my car and told me quite emphatically that the gas

tank was on the left side.

"No, it's not." "Yes, it is." "No, it isn't."

Finally he admitted that it was on the right side of my car and asked me what kind of gas I wanted.

"V Power, please. Premium. 93. Full tank, please."

He nodded and pushed the "Regular 87" button.

I yelled "No!!!!"

He asked, "You don't want Regular?"

I was so enraged, I wanted to beat the ever living ####### out of him.

It's illegal to pump your own gas in New Jersey.

#######?

Yeah that is a bit weird. They do that in a couple of other states - Oregon springs to mind offhand.

I don't like that they top off the tank when you fill it up.

In some states you can't pump your own gas - I know Oregon is one, I guess NJ is another

I don't know if this is true - but I heard its part of some sort of government job creation programme.

[Heracles 417]

In some states you can't pump your own gas - I know Oregon is one, I guess NJ is another

That explains the looks I got last time I was there and filled up myself. I had a Mexican guy saying something to me but just ignored him. No Speaka Inglezo.

[Teacher Mark 53]

$4.25 for diesel. 7 miles to the gallon. If this continues you can expect to pay out the nose for basic commodities. The thing that cracks me up is that a big portion of my fellow truckers loves them some Georgie Bush. It actually makes me want to puke. Can anyone say "Golden Parachute"?

He is responsible for gas prices as well? I thought this was a war about oil. When you steal something you usually sell it for less, not more.

It's on the internet, so I'll assume it's true!

How Bush Pushed Gasoline Prices Sky High

By Katherine Yurica

On March 5, 2003, Senator Carl Levin, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, released a report prepared by the minority staff that reveals why gasoline prices soared under the Bush administration. It has to do with the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and some odd decisions by the Department of Energy (DOE) after consulting with White House officials.

According to the Senate Report, the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002. That wouldn’t be a problem in and of it self. But the purchases represented an extreme change in energy policy; they were made in a strong market, with a tight supply of oil, which increased demand, which in turn pushed up the gasoline prices to their highest levels in twelve years.

The Senate report said in a one-month period in mid 2002 the Bush administration purchases caused crude oil prices to soar, raising the cost of heating oil by 13%, jet fuel by 10% and diesel fuel by 8%. The bottom line was the Bush policy change cost citizens between $500 million and $1 billion.

When crude oil jumps from $20 a barrel to $30, the Senate report says, the costs to U.S. taxpayers are an additional $1 million per day. “Over three months, the additional cost of filling the SPR approached $100 million,†which will ultimately be borne by U.S. taxpayers.

Why did Bush do it? For one thing, he was advised to do it. It has to do with the secret National Energy Policy advisory group headed by Vice President ####### Cheney. Cheney has steadfastly refused to release the names of those who advised the administration on energy matters. However, according to an article published in the Sunday Herald in Scotland (October 6, 2002), by Neil Mackay, it was former Secretary of State, James Baker who personally carried an advisory report to Cheney in April of 2001. Assembled at the James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy of Rice University, the task force consisted of oil and energy executives. The report, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century is referred to simply as the “Baker Report†or “report†below.

The report advised the new president, “At a minimum the government should aim to fill all of the nearly 700 million barrels of [reserve] capacity it currently has available.†Later, the National Energy Policy report recommended that the President wait until exchanged SPR barrels were returned and then he should determine whether offshore Gulf of Mexico royalty oil deposits to the SPR should be resumed. So after September 11, 2001, George W. Bush vowed to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) to capacity.

The Baker report was not irresponsible, it also warned the president, “One problem with trying to refill the reserve at this time when markets are strong is that any purchases made by the U.S. government would add to the current tight supply.†In other words, prices would go up!

At one point, the Baker report recommended that purchases of reserve additions be accomplished through direct “budgetary allocations.â€

Trying to teach a new president the facts on SPR oil rights and wrongs must have been a heady proposition. There were many object lessons in which to point. The Baker report singled President Bill Clinton’s use of his “discretionary authority to lease oil to the market on a time-swap or exchange basis†as an example of a no-no. First, according to the Baker experts, Clinton’s exchanges reduced the size of the SPR at a time when more oil might have been needed. Next, the report chided, a president must not earn “far less in interest†than he could have, by using better methods. Perhaps Clinton’s biggest faux pas according to the Baker experts is that he used the drain-down of the reserves “to address winter heating-oil inventory concerns,†which indeed reduced heating oil from $37 to $31 per barrel. That was a big no-no. The Baker report advises a president must not use the SPR as “a market buffer stock to damp prices and price volatility.†(Translation: A president must not help the poor to heat their homes at a reasonable price at the expense of oil company profit taking.)

Hence in the National Energy Policy report, the NEPD Group “recommends that the President reaffirm that the SPR is designed for addressing an imminent or actual disruption in oil supplies, and not for managing prices.†(At page 8-17.)

That recommendation signaled a significant policy change: it denied the president the right to withdraw oil at times when prices are unusually high due to manipulation of the market.

What were the superior choices left for the President? The report advises taking advantage of “the market’s forward price structure…if the market structure were backwardated, with future prices lower than current prices, the government would be able to replenish the reserve with more oil than it had leased on an auction basis. If the market structure were in contango, with future prices higher than prompt prices, the government could lease its cheaper spare storage capacity to industry, thereby also providing revenue to build government-owned reserves at a later time.â€

But the method the Bush administration chose was to fill the SPR without regard to crude oil prices at all but simply at a constant rate of speed. The result was extremely high prices for gasoline and increased charges to be born by the taxpayers. The Bush administration denies this. But the method they chose did not add any additional reserve oil to the nation’s strategic supply. So why do it? Oil companies were happy, after all oilmen contributed $26.7 million to Bush’s campaign in 2000 and another $18 million for the 2002 election.

Another possible reason is this: The only way to get oil companies willing to make investments in drilling new sources of oil is to keep oil prices high. The nice thing about this methodology is that criticism can be so easily deflected as a White House spokesman did in a recent interview, by claiming the “purchases were for national security reasons.â€

Whatever the motivation, this much is clear: American citizens had to pay and are still paying a hefty price for gasoline and home heating oil. In the end, regardless of the lip service Mr. Bush may offer to the American people on how he is benefiting all citizens, the facts show he benefits those corporations who made large contributions to his campaigns.

P.S. THANK GOD the reign of ineptitude is almost over.

Edited April 22, 2008 by WideAwakeInTheUSA

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

$4.25 for diesel. 7 miles to the gallon. If this continues you can expect to pay out the nose for basic commodities. The thing that cracks me up is that a big portion of my fellow truckers loves them some Georgie Bush. It actually makes me want to puke. Can anyone say "Golden Parachute"?

He is responsible for gas prices as well? I thought this was a war about oil. When you steal something you usually sell it for less, not more.

It's on the internet, so I'll assume it's true!

How Bush Pushed Gasoline Prices Sky High

By Katherine Yurica

On March 5, 2003, Senator Carl Levin, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, released a report prepared by the minority staff that reveals why gasoline prices soared under the Bush administration. It has to do with the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and some odd decisions by the Department of Energy (DOE) after consulting with White House officials.

According to the Senate Report, the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002. That wouldn’t be a problem in and of it self. But the purchases represented an extreme change in energy policy; they were made in a strong market, with a tight supply of oil, which increased demand, which in turn pushed up the gasoline prices to their highest levels in twelve years.

The Senate report said in a one-month period in mid 2002 the Bush administration purchases caused crude oil prices to soar, raising the cost of heating oil by 13%, jet fuel by 10% and diesel fuel by 8%. The bottom line was the Bush policy change cost citizens between $500 million and $1 billion.

When crude oil jumps from $20 a barrel to $30, the Senate report says, the costs to U.S. taxpayers are an additional $1 million per day. “Over three months, the additional cost of filling the SPR approached $100 million,” which will ultimately be borne by U.S. taxpayers.

Why did Bush do it? For one thing, he was advised to do it. It has to do with the secret National Energy Policy advisory group headed by Vice President ####### Cheney. Cheney has steadfastly refused to release the names of those who advised the administration on energy matters. However, according to an article published in the Sunday Herald in Scotland (October 6, 2002), by Neil Mackay, it was former Secretary of State, James Baker who personally carried an advisory report to Cheney in April of 2001. Assembled at the James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy of Rice University, the task force consisted of oil and energy executives. The report, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century is referred to simply as the “Baker Report” or “report” below.

The report advised the new president, “At a minimum the government should aim to fill all of the nearly 700 million barrels of [reserve] capacity it currently has available.” Later, the National Energy Policy report recommended that the President wait until exchanged SPR barrels were returned and then he should determine whether offshore Gulf of Mexico royalty oil deposits to the SPR should be resumed. So after September 11, 2001, George W. Bush vowed to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) to capacity.

The Baker report was not irresponsible, it also warned the president, “One problem with trying to refill the reserve at this time when markets are strong is that any purchases made by the U.S. government would add to the current tight supply.” In other words, prices would go up!

At one point, the Baker report recommended that purchases of reserve additions be accomplished through direct “budgetary allocations.”

Trying to teach a new president the facts on SPR oil rights and wrongs must have been a heady proposition. There were many object lessons in which to point. The Baker report singled President Bill Clinton’s use of his “discretionary authority to lease oil to the market on a time-swap or exchange basis” as an example of a no-no. First, according to the Baker experts, Clinton’s exchanges reduced the size of the SPR at a time when more oil might have been needed. Next, the report chided, a president must not earn “far less in interest” than he could have, by using better methods. Perhaps Clinton’s biggest faux pas according to the Baker experts is that he used the drain-down of the reserves “to address winter heating-oil inventory concerns,” which indeed reduced heating oil from $37 to $31 per barrel. That was a big no-no. The Baker report advises a president must not use the SPR as “a market buffer stock to damp prices and price volatility.” (Translation: A president must not help the poor to heat their homes at a reasonable price at the expense of oil company profit taking.)

Hence in the National Energy Policy report, the NEPD Group “recommends that the President reaffirm that the SPR is designed for addressing an imminent or actual disruption in oil supplies, and not for managing prices.” (At page 8-17.)

That recommendation signaled a significant policy change: it denied the president the right to withdraw oil at times when prices are unusually high due to manipulation of the market.

What were the superior choices left for the President? The report advises taking advantage of “the market’s forward price structure…if the market structure were backwardated, with future prices lower than current prices, the government would be able to replenish the reserve with more oil than it had leased on an auction basis. If the market structure were in contango, with future prices higher than prompt prices, the government could lease its cheaper spare storage capacity to industry, thereby also providing revenue to build government-owned reserves at a later time.”

But the method the Bush administration chose was to fill the SPR without regard to crude oil prices at all but simply at a constant rate of speed. The result was extremely high prices for gasoline and increased charges to be born by the taxpayers. The Bush administration denies this. But the method they chose did not add any additional reserve oil to the nation’s strategic supply. So why do it? Oil companies were happy, after all oilmen contributed $26.7 million to Bush’s campaign in 2000 and another $18 million for the 2002 election.

Another possible reason is this: The only way to get oil companies willing to make investments in drilling new sources of oil is to keep oil prices high. The nice thing about this methodology is that criticism can be so easily deflected as a White House spokesman did in a recent interview, by claiming the “purchases were for national security reasons.”

Whatever the motivation, this much is clear: American citizens had to pay and are still paying a hefty price for gasoline and home heating oil. In the end, regardless of the lip service Mr. Bush may offer to the American people on how he is benefiting all citizens, the facts show he benefits those corporations who made large contributions to his campaigns.

Ouch.

[Heracles 417]

It's on the internet, so I'll assume it's true!

How Bush Pushed Gasoline Prices Sky High

I am still stuck on the years of it is a war about oil.

The oil price is usually set by OPEC and not Exxon.

OPEC MEMBERS:

• Angola
• Libya
• Nigeria
• Algeria
• Iran
• Iraq
• Kuwait
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• United Arab Emirates
• Ecuador
• Venezuela
• Indonesia

[PlatyPius 5]

I paid 3.56 yesterday.

$3.659 today. Was $3.349 yesterday.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Whoa! I guess here we can expect a jump by tomorrow, then.

[Heracles 417]

You have to ask who is preventing companies from building new refineries in the US. Who is blocking it. Why have oil companies been prevented from drilling off the coast of the US or in Alaska.

Who is to blame for the no drilling zones below?

China does not have an issue drilling in our own backyard..

[Niels Bohr 72]

OPEC is very tough. No one member country may output more oil than what the commitee set. If so, serious consequence will be brought upon them. OPEC is a Cartel. A big one!

[Heracles 417]

OPEC is very tough. No one member country may output more oil than what the commitee set. If so, serious consequence will be brought upon them. OPEC is a Cartel. A big one!

I cannot wait for the day when our reliance on oil ends. Until then we need to start drilling what we have.

People hate on Exxon yet it is the OPEC members who are making hundreds and billions from oil..

Edited April 22, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[palilover 1]

ah....Americans cant get enough of cars:)

I am unable to drive and I have been begging for more adequaate public transportation in this country. In a big city such as NYC yes you have it. But if you get out of the city, you are hosed. You have sketchy commuter rails or have to rely on cab (expensive even more).

There was no way for me to live in the midwest and have a stable life due to not having a car. You have to move every few years across town to be closer to work. I've lost count of the apartments I've been in.

It's about time for more public transportation. It will save on gas and it serves everyone-rich or poor, disabled or not disabled....

the high gas prices that drivers pay are paybacks from me who has had to endure people driving in mud puddles and splashing me with water as I walked the sidewalks. lol

But gas prices affect everyone th;ough whether you drive or not. The can of tuna does not fly on your plate. Tuna has to be driven to the store too. So cost of oil going up is going to make everything go up as well.

[mawilson 2,133]

It's on the internet, so I'll assume it's true!

How Bush Pushed Gasoline Prices Sky High

I am still stuck on the years of it is a war about oil.

The oil price is usually set by OPEC and not Exxon.

OPEC MEMBERS:

• Angola
• Libya
• Nigeria
• Algeria
• Iran
• Iraq
• Kuwait
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• United Arab Emirates
• Ecuador
• Venezuela
• Indonesia

Are you sure it's OPEC and not the Axis of Evil?

[Teacher Mark 53]

SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA WARNING

The author does raise some interesting points though.

The reason for our mess

London - 24 May, 2006

The Voice (issue 264 - 11th May) ran an article beginning,'Iran has

really gone and done it now. No, they haven't sent their first nuclear

sub in to the Persian Gulf. They are about to launch something much

more deadly -- next week the Iran Bourse will open to trade oil, not

in dollars but in Euros' This apparently insignificant event has

consequences far greater for the US people, indeed all for us all,

than is imaginable.

Currently almost all oil buying and selling is in US-dollars through

exchanges in London and New York. It is not accidental they are both

US-owned.

The Wall Street crash in 1929 sparked off global depression and World

War II. During that war the US supplied provisions and munitions to

all its allies, refusing currency and demanding gold payments in

exchange.

By 1945, 80% of the world's gold was sitting in US vaults. The dollar

became the one undisputed global reserve currency -- it was treated

world-wide as `safer than gold'. The Bretton Woods agreement was

established.

The US took full advantage over the next decades and printed dollars

like there was no tomorrow. The US exported many mountains of

dollars, paying for ever-increasing amounts of commodities, tax cuts

for the rich, many wars abroad, mercenaries, spies and politicians the

world over. You see, this did not affect inflation at home! The US got

it all for free! Well, maybe for a forest or two.

Over subsequent decades the world's vaults bulged at the seams and

more and more vaults were built, just for US dollars. Each year, the

US spends many more dollars abroad that at home. Analysts pretty much

agree that outside the US , of the savings, or reserves, of all other

countries, in gold and all currencies -- that a massive 66% of this

total wealth is in US dollars!

In 1971 several countries simultaneously tried to sell a small portion

of their dollars to the US for gold. Krassimir Petrov,(Ph. D. in

Economics at Ohio University) recently wrote,'The US Government

defaulted on its payment on August 15, 1971 . While popular spin told

the story of `severing the link between the dollar and gold', in

reality the denial to pay back in gold was an act of bankruptcy by the

US Government.'(1) The 1945 Bretton Woods agreement was unilaterally

smashed.

The dollar and US economy were on a precipice resembling Germany in

1929. The US now had to find a way for the rest of the world to

believe and have faith in the paper dollar. The solution was in oil,

in the petrodollar. The US viciously bullied first Saudi Arabia and

then OPEC to sell oil for dollars only -- it worked, the dollar was

saved. Now countries had to keep dollars to buy much needed oil. And

the US could buy oil all over the world, free of charge. What a

Houdini for the US! Oil replaced gold as the new foundation to stop

the paper dollar sinking.

Since 1971, the US printed even more mountains of dollars to spend

abroad. The trade deficit grew and grew. The US sucked-in much of the

world's products for next to nothing. More vaults were built.

Expert, Cóilínn Nunan, wrote in 2003,'The dollar is the de facto

world reserve currency: the US currency accounts for approximately two

thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all

foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are

denominated in dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in

dollars.'(2)

Dr Bulent Gukay of Keele University recently wrote,'This system of

the US dollar acting as global reserve currency in oil trade keeps the

demand for the dollar `artificially' high. This enables the US to

carry out printing dollars at the price of next to nothing to fund

increased military spending and consumer spending on imports. There is

no theoretical limit to the amount of dollars that can be printed. As

long as the US has no serious challengers, and the other states have

confidence in the US dollar, the system functions.'(3)

Until recently, the US-dollar has been safe. However, since 1990

Western Europe has been busy growing, swallowing up central and

Eastern Europe . French and German bosses were jealous of the US

ability to buy goods and people the world over for nothing. They

wanted a slice of the free cake too. Further, they now had the power

and established the euro in late 1999 against massive US-inspired

opposition across Europe , especially from Britain - paid for in

dollars of course. But the euro succeeded.

Only months after the euro-launch, Saddam's Iraq announced it was

switching from selling oil in dollars only, to euros only -- breaking

the OPEC agreement. Iran , Russia , Venezuela , Libya , all began

talking openly of switching too -- were the floodgates about to be

opened?

Then aeroplanes flew into the twin-towers in September 2001. Was this

another Houdini chance to save the US (petro)dollar and the biggest

financial/economic crash in history? War preparations began in the US

. But first war-fever had to be created -- and truth was the first

casualty. Other oil producing countries watched-on. In 2000 Iraq began

selling oil in euros. In 2002, Iraq changed all their petro-dollars in

their vaults into euros. A few months later, the US began their

invasion of Iraq .

The whole world was watching: very few aware that the US was engaging

in the first oil currency, or petrodollar war. After the invasion of

Iraq in March 2003, remember, the US secured oil areas first. Their

first sales in August were, of course, in dollars, again. The only

government building in Baghdad not bombed was the Oil Ministry! It

does not matter how many people are murdered -- for the US , the

petrodollar must be saved as the only way to buy and sell oil --

otherwise the US economy will crash, and much more besides.

In early 2003, Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela talked openly of

selling half of its oil in euros (the other half is bought by the US).

On 12 April 2003, the US-supported business leaders and some generals

in Venezuela kidnapped Chavez and attempted a coup. The masses rose

against this and the Army followed suit. The coup failed. This was bad

for the US .

In November 2000 the euro/dollar was at $0.82 dollars, its lowest

ever, and still diving, but when Iraq started selling oil in euros,

the euro dive was halted. In April 2002 senior OPEC reps talked about

trading in euros and the euro shot up. In June 2003 the US occupiers

of Iraq switched trading back to dollars and the euro fell against the

dollar again. In August 2003 Iran starts to sell oil in euros to some

European countries and the euro rises sharply. In the winter of 2003-4

Russian and OPEC politicians talked seriously of switching oil/gas

sales to the euro and the euro rose. In February 2004 OPEC met and

made no decision to turn to the euro -- and yes, the euro fell against

the dollar. In June 2004 Iran announced it would build an oil bourse

to rival London and New York , and again, the euro rose. The euro

stands at $1.27 and has been climbing of late.

But matters this month became far, far worse for the US dollar. On 5th

May Iran registered its own Oil Bourse, the IOB. Not only are they now

selling oil in euros from abroad -- they have established an actual

Oil Bourse, a global trading centre for all countries to buy and sell

their oil!

In Chavez's recent visit to London ; he talked openly about supporting

the Iranian Oil Bourse, and selling oil in euros. When asked in London

about the new arms embargo imposed by the US against Venezuela, Chavez

prophetically dismissed the US as 'a paper tiger'.

Currently, almost all the world's oil is sold on either the NYMEX, New

York Mercantile Exchange, or the IPE, London's International Petroleum

Exchange. Both are owned by US citizens and both sell and buy only in

US dollars. The success of the Iran Oil Bourse makes sense to Europe ,

which buys 70% of Iran 's oil. It makes sense for Russia , which sells

66% of its oil to Europe . But worse for the US , China and India have

already stated they are very interested in the new Iranian Oil Bourse.

If there is a tactical-nuclear strike on - deja-vu -`weapons of mass

destruction' in Iran, who would bet against a certain Oil Exchange and

more, being bombed too?

And worse for Bush. It makes sense for Europe , China , India and

Japan-- as well as all the other countries mentioned above -- to buy

and sell oil in Euro's. They will certainly have to stock-up on euros

now, and they will sell dollars to do so. The euro is far more stable

than the debt-ridden dollar. The IMF has recently highlighted US

economic difficulties and the trade deficit strangling the US-- there

is no way out.

The problem for so many countries now is how to get rid of their

vaults full of dollars, before it crashes? And the US has bullied so

many countries for so many decades around the world, that many will

see a chance to kick the bully back. The US cannot accept even 5% of

the world's dollars -- it would crash the US economy dragging much of

the world with it, especially Britain .

To survive, as the Scottish Socialist Voice article stated,'the US ,

needs to generate a trade surplus to get out of this one. Problem is

it can't.' This is spot on. To do that they must force US workers into

near slavery, to get paid less than Chinese or Indian workers. We all

know that this will not happen.

What will happen in the US ? Chaos for sure. Maybe a workers

revolution, but looking at the situation as it is now, it is more

likely to be a re-run of Germany post-1929, and some form of

extreme-right mass movement will emerge

Does Europe and China/Asia have the economic independence and strength

to stop the whole world's economies collapsing with the US? Their

vaults are full to the brim with dollars.

The US has to find a way to pay for its dollar-imperialist

exploitation of the world since 1945. Somehow, eventually, it has to

account for every dollar in every vault in the world.

Bombing Iran could backfire tremendously. It would bring Iran openly

into the war in Iraq , behind the Shiite majority. The US cannot cope

even now with the much smaller Iraqi insurgency. Perhaps the US will

feed into the Sunni v Shiite conflict and turn it into a wider

Middle-East civil-war. However, this is so dangerous for global oil

supplies. Further, they know that this would be temporary, as some

country somewhere else, will establish a euro-oil-exchange, perhaps in

Brussels .

There is one `solution'-- scrap the dollar and print a whole new

currency for the US . This will destroy 66% of the rest of the world's

savings/reserves in one swoop. Imagine the implications? Such are the

desperate things now swimming around heads in the White House, Wall

Street and Pentagon.

Another is to do as Germany did, just before invading Poland in 1938.

The Nazis filmed a mock Polish Army attack on Germany , to win hearts

and minds at home. But again, this is a finger in the dam. So, how is

the US going to escape this time? The only global arena of total

superiority left is military. Who knows what horrors lie ahead. A new

world war is one tool by which the US could discipline its `allies'

into keeping the dollar in their vaults.

The task of socialists today is to explain to as many as possible,

especially our class, that the coming crisis belongs purely to

capitalism and (dollar) imperialism. Not people of other cultures, not

Islam, not the axis of evil or their so-called WMDs. Their system

alone is to blame.

The new Iranian Oil Bourse, the IOB, is situated in a new building on

the free-trade-zone island of Kish, in the Persian Gulf. It's

computers and software are all set to go. The IOB was supposed to be

up and running last March, but many pressures forced a postponement.

Where the pressure came from is obvious. It was internationally

registered on 5th May and supposed to open mid-May, but its opening

was put off, some saying the oil-mafia was involved, along with much

international pressure. Just google `pertroeuro', and the story lies

before you.

From now on, anyone in the know will wake up every morning and, even

before coffee, will check out the latest exchange rate between the

euro and dollar

In early 2003, Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela talked openly of

selling half of its oil in euros (the other half is bought by the US).

On 12 April 2003, the US-supported business leaders and some generals

in Venezuela kidnapped Chavez and attempted a coup. The masses rose

against this and the Army followed suit. The coup failed. This was bad

for the US .

In November 2000 the euro/dollar was at $0.82 dollars, its lowest

ever, and still diving, but when Iraq started selling oil in euros,

the euro dive was halted. In April 2002 senior OPEC reps talked about

trading in euros and the euro shot up. In June 2003 the US occupiers

of Iraq switched trading back to dollars and the euro fell against the

dollar again. In August 2003 Iran starts to sell oil in euros to some

European countries and the euro rises sharply. In the winter of 2003-4

Russian and OPEC politicians talked seriously of switching oil/gas

sales to the euro and the euro rose. In February 2004 OPEC met and

made no decision to turn to the euro -- and yes, the euro fell against

the dollar. In June 2004 Iran announced it would build an oil bourse

to rival London and New York , and again, the euro rose. The euro

stands at $1.27 and has been climbing of late.

But matters this month became far, far worse for the US dollar. On 5th

May Iran registered its own Oil Bourse, the IOB. Not only are they now

selling oil in euros from abroad -- they have established an actual

Oil Bourse, a global trading centre for all countries to buy and sell

their oil!

In Chavez's recent visit to London ; he talked openly about supporting

the Iranian Oil Bourse, and selling oil in euros. When asked in London

about the new arms embargo imposed by the US against Venezuela, Chavez

prophetically dismissed the US as 'a paper tiger'.

Currently, almost all the world's oil is sold on either the NYMEX, New

York Mercantile Exchange, or the IPE, London's International Petroleum

Exchange. Both are owned by US citizens and both sell and buy only in

US dollars. The success of the Iran Oil Bourse makes sense to Europe ,

which buys 70% of Iran 's oil. It makes sense for Russia , which sells

66% of its oil to Europe . But worse for the US , China and India have

already stated they are very interested in the new Iranian Oil Bourse.

If there is a tactical-nuclear strike on - deja-vu -`weapons of mass

destruction' in Iran, who would bet against a certain Oil Exchange and

more, being bombed too?

And worse for Bush. It makes sense for Europe , China , India and

Japan-- as well as all the other countries mentioned above -- to buy

and sell oil in Euro's. They will certainly have to stock-up on euros

now, and they will sell dollars to do so. The euro is far more stable

than the debt-ridden dollar. The IMF has recently highlighted US

economic difficulties and the trade deficit strangling the US-- there

is no way out.

The problem for so many countries now is how to get rid of their

vaults full of dollars, before it crashes? And the US has bullied so

many countries for so many decades around the world, that many will

see a chance to kick the bully back. The US cannot accept even 5% of

the world's dollars -- it would crash the US economy dragging much of

the world with it, especially Britain .

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TESPTLKEHK0L335TC