D. C. Bear said:
FLBear5630 said:
whiterock said:
FLBear5630 said:
whiterock said:
boognish_bear said:
correct.
Economics 101:
-when government inflates the currency via deficit spending, prices plateau jump and stay there.
-when imbalances in supply and demand drive prices up, imbalances in supply and demand drive prices down.
Just look at oil prices the last 60 days. 20-30% swings due to perceptions of looming supply/demand imbalances. That is not inflation. That is a market responding to events to balance supply and demand. It's a completely different dynamic than the government arbitrarily increasing the supply of money without any corresponding increase in the production of goods.
And when that situation becomes the new normal, as Moody's is reporting oil prices will be? You guys getting into EVs? All of a sudden, Tesla is very happy.
Doomscrolling again?
You want lower oil prices, then drill baby drill and get a stable government in place in Iran.
And you still copying your Freshman Econ books?
I don't want the infatuation on trying to recreate some mythic American Golden Age that only came about because of the unique circumstances on WW2. Drilling oil until dry is not the path forward, energy demand is too high for that. We need to be thinking about 2065, not 1965.
You guys are stuck in a 20th century CEO bonus driven model that is not rewarding moving toward 2065, but recreating 1965. Until the reward structure matches the goal of moving into the future, we are stuck in this cycle. That is not in your economic books, you still think that increasing efficiency by 1/4% is the way forward rather than increasing revenue by 10% which requires risk.
I sit in the meetings with Moody's, Contractors, and Corporations reducing risk is the mantra, but you don't break into new ground by relying on Macroeconomic books from 1970 and constantly reducing risk. All you end up with is more of the same with a stressed out overworked staff...
Prognosticators in the early 1900s looking forward to the 1950s predicted mass starvation as food supplies ran out.
You would be amazed at what innovation can accomplish.
Ah! The real crux of the matter - innovation.
So, let's talk about that. How is drill baby drill spurring innovation in a world that every indicator shows that the fatal flaw to all this new tech is energy. You saying that there is enough oil to supply the world for the next 100 years with fossil fuels? That it is a good bet to rely on that. Because that is what our current policies and actions are indicating. Deregulation, Venezuela, and Iran are all about oil.
Also, did you know that 2055 is in our current planning horizon for infrastructure? You are acting like 2065 is a lifetime away. In order to build out the electric grid, we plan 30-40 years. For P3's (public private partnerships) we are doing 75 year contracts, which puts us at 2100.
Finally, 1900 was a blank slate. As tech came on, virgin land for the most part, we were able to put the first layer. Ever see growth rates for Greenfield projects vs Brownfield? Greenfield are much higher as there is nothing there. We can grow where and how we want. Brownfield is low, because it is already occupied and the cost and time go up for development. We are in a Brownfield situation, you need MORE lead time not less. The innovation miracle you talked about was in a Greenfiedl situation, we are not there anymore. ( I think this is the biggest point the current cheerleaders and administration is missing. We are not at the point you are comparing us. That time has gone. Look at Asia, that is the new model)
I know this is more than this Board likes to discuss. I will get some 12th grade macro economic lesson rather than looking at an aerial (showing what needs to be rebuild and revised to the new). There is a reason Texas is growing, there is space. Until there isn't.
