What the downside of prok barrel spending? Please use some logic and explain?
339429
The downside is that sometimes projects are funded that should not be funded.  In other words, Sen. Whatever knows that to get re-elected he needs to do something for his constitutes who are all pig farmers.  So, he convinces another Senator to team up with him and create a bill that will cut the taxes on pig production and in return he will support the other Senator's project.  The other Senator, Senator Whosit has a friend that is a chicken farmer.  The chicken farmer wants to pump his chickens full of hormones so that they will have plumper breasts.  So, Senator Whosit sponsors legislation that will relax FDA standards and let the chicken farmer have his way.  As a result, there are now 2 bills which do not help anyone other than pig farmers and chicken farmers.  How do these laws help the other 95% of the population?  They don't.  That is the problem with Pork Barrel...
1109609
You know the cost of gas/petrol isn't really made as high as it is by the cost per barrell. The oil companies like Exxon, Esso, Chevron, etc. charge a lot more for their gas then the price per barrell.  If you do some research into it you'll see that the oil companies are making a huge profit on their product. Oil/petrol doesn't have to be as expensive as it is and they can still make a profit.\n\nTo answer your question though, I would say yes:\n\n"To date there has not been an obvious negative impact on the economy because of the price of oil. It is partly for that reason that the Federal Reserve is continuing to raise interest rates to help tame inflation."\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Price_of_Oil_and_The_Economy\n\nIt's very strange. The cost of oil is raised to huge prices by Exxon, Chevron, etc. which raises interest rates, which hurts the economy. Why?
145786
that assumes that the cost of your inventory or manufactured goods is rising. if it were falling then the answer would be the opposite.
74863
If anyone knew in great detail the answer to that question they could make millions of dollars by purchasing futures contracts on the minimum margin requirnment. \n\nThey only way you can get an answer to that question is if you wait three months and check The NYMEX Crude Oil futures quote.\n\nOr refine your question to something that can be answered.
421568
If you are talking about Product Life Cycle and you are talking about projections (possibly a big stretch), then there really is no down side.  Its just a way to plan out what you will do when the time comes and estimate when milestones will occur.  The important thing is that you remain flexible so that when variants in the PLC show up, you can adapt.
401586
Wouldn't we all like to know the answer to this question? If indeed you had $10 million, there are a lot less risky ways to make lots of money, because you have quoted such a large sum. This is the fantasy that most people get caught in. They pose a valid question on an invalid premise.\n\nPeople with $10 million don't need to make more than 3-5% a year to get rich. They already are. You, on the other hand, will never get anywhere at the current interest rate on a CD of 3%.Thus the question concerning stocks.\n\nFirst, you would not put your entire investment into one basket. It was about this time seven years ago when I last owned Exxon stock. I'm a Petroleum Engineer, and know quite a bit about oil companies, and they had just discovered some big fields on the North Slope of Alaska. I woke up one morning, and found my IRA cut in half, when they spilled oil in the Port of Valdez.\n\nNow, I trade Index Futures on the stock market for a living. In my opinion, the Top in the stock market is already in, and direction is now down for several months. \n\nSome would tell you to diversify, but not by buying five different oil companies, you have to diversify across industries. But I would tell you that all ships rise and fall on the tide, unless you are an exceptional stock picker and fast enough to maneuver your boat to gain headway.\n\nThere are times when cash is King, and this is probably one of those times. If you're in a mutual fund, switch to the money market fund or a CD or Treasury Bill; just park it for now. The name of the game is preservation of capital.\n\nIf you really do have $10 million, lets start our own mutual fund. Write me at  dredude52@yahoo.com
710554
They are both commodities which do not directly affect each other.  Although, if the price of crude grows to a high dollar amount, it may stunt growth and slow spending in the market there by lowering stock prices (making gold a more attractive investment option).  Same goes for if oil drops, the economy will most likely prosper and gold won't be as attractive (i.e. the 90's).
414082
Uranium companies have been hot investments for the last year. I might be a little late to jump on the band wagon. \nCheck out this link.
589468
id say keep them money will come...  I'm in Louisville KY- by the end of this summer it will be almost $5 a gallon- its already $2.85+  don't loose it. we still have a untapped source in Alaska.  you know as well as i do that our politicians wont tap it until the rest of the world is dry.  then when they finally do it will be ridiculous. you will be rich.
962105
You should read http://oil-profits.org/ before you make any decisions.
508328
Nobody knows.  Nobody.  Anybody who says they do is full of crap.  But here's a handy formulat to figure out how much gas should be based on oil prices.  If it's more by you, your gas station is likely price gouging.\n\nA barrel of oil hold 42 gallons.  So Divide the prive of a barrel by 41, then add in $1.00 in refining costs to get your approximate price.  This number only works in the U.S., sorry, I don't know the processing costs for other countries.  And this is for regular unleaded, the premium octanes cost more of course.\n\nSo at $63/bartrel, gas should be $2.50 a gallon.\n\nAt $70, it should be about $2.67 a gallon.\n\nAnd at $50 a gallon, tit should be about $2.19 a gallon.\n\nSo if it ever goes up to $100/barrel like those morons at Goldman Sachs said last year, then you can expect to pay at least $3.38 a gallon!
733423
There are pros and cons.
971703
I wouldn't. An indictment could come out any day which would send the stock down. Haliburton should be OK for another year or so though because they have contracts to fill that cannot be transferred to anyone else, regardless of what sort of politicking goes on between now and then. As long as their accounting is correct the company is still solid even if the hold board is removed for wrong-doing. This stock is a "sell" in my book.
867611
I have to agree with the 1st responder.  Commodities are extremely risky.  The reason they are is because they are purchased as futures on very low margin requirements--10%.  And such events as a droubt or a freeze in Florida or Russia buying up the entire soy bean crop can cause prices to advance dramatically.  Or in the recent case of oil and natural gas, prices can fall dramatically.  In either case if one is caught on the wrong side of a position, the results can be catistropic, as a hedge fund recently discovered with their natural gas positions. Currency trading on the Forex falls also into that category as margin requirements are similar.  \n\nSimilarly commodities and currencies and also yield the highest returns.  Anyone who shorted oil back in June made a ton of money.  In fact could have easily become a millionaire overnight.  Similarly anyone who had shorted the dollar 3 years ago would also have done very well or bought gold contracts. \n\nSomeone mentioned selling naked calls as being very risky.  That is a common belief but is not supported by the facts.  There are instances, very few instances, where that strategy does yield large losses but in general it is a very rewarding strategy, yielding good returns about 85% of the time.\n\nT-bills yield about the least returns of the sophisticated investments.  Savings accounts by far yield the least returns of the un-sophisticated investments.  And perhaps whole life policies. And social security contributions.  ROI on social security contributions is about a negative 5 to 25%.
994051
Big money backs republicans. It's sad but true. GW is all for the oil tycoons getting rich while we slave away and pay for crazy gas prices.
784090
This question belongs to 'Economics'. \nThe answer is 'no' because it may lead to market failure.
915567
Damn good question, you forgot about the best part, weakness of the dollar. Gold is a fools bet at best, you have to be invested ahead of the crisis, and sell out during the crisis to profit, and vintage lever action Winchester rifles have given a better return over the last few decades than gold. Same thing with other collectables (easy to transport and perishable) that people want to replace what they once had or always desired. Bonds, especially municipal bonds tax-free, are another possibility but again low intrest, yet safe, safe as the dollar anyways. In all practicality, I would say invest in something that will allow you to gain wealth like  your education, real estate that will prosper in a niche market like waterfront or near new mass transit routes, or allow you to do a secondary line of work/at home business such as selling discount goods online, or the like. Put it to work generating more wealth for you. Or you can try stock picking and hope for a multi-national exposed stock or fund, but remember democrats like to punish the "rich", that is anyone who invests what they earn, with taxes on your payroll and your stock dividends/stock sales margins from stock you bought with your already taxed income. Remember even the best stock pickers only average success 50% of the time. Or be like millions of other sucker, myself included, and buy a lottery ticket now and then, that's why it exists, to give us "hope".