Actually, it's 100% accurate. Pretty sure you've now offered three different prices for 2013 YTD in this thread alone. But, that's hardly surprising from someone who doesn't have the slightest clue what futures prices refer to.

In any event, at multiple points in this thread, you haven't provided a link to data you've obviously cut and pasted or asserted. Standard message board fare, in my view. Shouldn't be such a burden for you to actually source your work, you unrivaled fraud.

Wrong. The link was provided to show that, going back three years, price was $71. You then scrambled to shave off 2010 from your criteria in a laughable ploy to pretend prices have settled in 2.5 years. Even more laughable, you're basically implying that $96 oil is really no big deal. Tool.

You know, you can't declare "going on three years," then try to dismiss anything beyond 2.5 years back, then ignore that the price currently is STILL RISING past your "flat" point!! You're clearly trying to fit data to suit your agenda. It's currently $11 higher than your "flat for 3 years" price point, which was already an enormous drag on the world economy.

Also, the link was provided to show unassailable real and nominal price increase SINCE global production hit peak in 05-06, as was mentioned. Your ******ed ploy to counter the longer trend of rising prices with the "going on 3 years" song and dance, while amusing, is not doing your argument any good.

Or, the data that you choose to acknowledge, at least. The stuff that seems to fit your work-backward-from-conclusion narrative.

No, it's not really down from 2008, liar. In fact it's already $3 MORE than the 2008 average. While the EIA data (in your own link, mind you) is only current through July 9, with price well over $100 (and rising) for three weeks, it's probably averaging up over $96 YTD by now. We'll see Aug. 9, won't we?

At which point, you'll probably punt to something equally genius like: "So? Prices have been flat on odd numbered weekends!"

So, in the mind of a sideline troll like you, I have to hold your hand and provide a predicted 2013 average oil price or you're gonna keep your fingers in your ears? LOL... OK, I'll sayyyyyy ... $99. Just a guess, based on current trends and expected demand growth. Good? It's not binding, despite your infantile quest to find something I could possibly be wrong about in the future.

Doesn't change the fact that anything sustained over around $50-$60 begins to slow global growth.

You don't seem to have an answer for that fact. You probably live in a gated community also, and have no idea what the word empathy actually means.

Sounds like more projection. The only one wrong and ignorant here would be you. I'm not the one who doesn't actually understand spot vs. futures price. That would be you. I'm not the one claiming oil prices have "settled." That would be you. I'm not the one who cowered from providing the "break even" point for tight oil production. That would be you.

Best, I'm not the one claiming $96 ave. oil is anything but a bad thing for global growth. That would be you. ... Oh, it's now $107.

And while I wouldn't advocate you set yourself on fire, you are in fact obsessed with saving your sinking argument at any cost. It's just making you look like more and more of a jackass.

$96 ave. < $107 current ... but somehow that's "settling" and "no problem."

LOL!!!! You being the expert on that tactic, as this thread has bared out. Why don't you go fetch us some more futures prices from Bloomberg. Scramble to "teh Googles" and learn as you go. ... Run along, now, boy.

This coming from a "learn-as-you-go-along" chump who actually wrote this bit of sarcasm just last year:

That's why there is such a strong negative correlation between oil prices and the US unemployment rate and why every election campaign competing politicians battle it out to see who can promise higher gas prices. Because higher gas prices are good for the economy and for job growth.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=1058

Holy ****, dude. So prices ARE a drag on growth? Just not when Jiggs says so. .... Sure thing, dip***t.

I mean, don't engulf yourself in flames for being so transparently horrible. ... Just post better. Maybe read a book first.

Lol I'm not reading that whole wall of fail Jiggs. You were wrong, got caught, end of story.

EDIT: I read the last paragraph, of course higher energy prices are bad for growth. I've said that multiple times to you dude, that's no new.

There's a large gap between rising energy prices being a drag on growth and, zommmmmgggg peeaaaaaakkk oiiiiiiilll end of growth and capitalism as we know it everything is caused by a fight over teh reamining peaaaaakk oiiill1!!

Lol at you spending an hour writing that post and searching through my post history to find something that's not close to a gotcha. Looooooooooooool, Jiggs, keep being you.

LOL... can always tell when an economics cultist is out of ammo and just wants to hit the escape hatch.

Sure thing. You didn't read it... Just the end part.

Back here in reality, despite your documented difficulty with retention, you read every word. You're not fooling anyone. You're too self-important not to check out what people are saying about you.

Holy projection! Nope, wasn't wrong about a thing, despite your perpetual strategy of keeping goal-posts moving and ignoring what you're out of ammo for. But, by all means, whatever you need to keep telling yourself. All righty!!

But your team is constantly complaining that I don't say anything about the ramifications of peak. Which is it?

So for all your trolling, you agree with the premise (even though you tard up every thread with semantics)... it's just degree of effect that you oppose me on. Got it.

Meanwhile, growth as we've known it most certainly is over and capitalism is slowly failing all over the planet amid HIGH energy prices. Awwwww.

Ah well, don't let that stop you from making a jack*** of yourself. Afterall, it hasn't reached your privileged community yet, so it must not be happening.

That took about 20 minutes. The material you provide is endless, and it wasn't but a few hundred words.

Well, in a quick ascending search for the word "oil" and your goofy handle, I believe it was the first one to come up. Didn't have to go far. And it most certainly was a "gotcha," because for all your AIDS generating, you freely admit high energy prices are awful for global growth.

Kinda makes you look pretty ridiculous after fanning your peacock feathers over "stable" $96 oil prices. The illusion of "stable" for a very short time frame you conveniently set, anyway. Nevermind that it's still rising. .... So, yeah, it's official: You have surpassed Keed as the absolute worst poster on this subject matter. Didn't think it was possible.

Run along, troll.

Jiggs, buddy, call it a day. You call flat prices over multiple years an increasing price trend, we get it. It's the weekend, go have a drink or get laid or something bro

My weekend starts Sunday...

and you're no "bro", you fraud.

LolJiggs, you mad bro. This is politics unchained. No one actually gives a **** what you have to say, lighten up.

Not mad, troll. Just acknowledging that you're a complete fraud who backed himself into such a corner, you wound up unwittingly arguing against your own dumb premise.

And you clearly care to some degree, else you wouldn't attempt to show price points (even though you don't understand what you're actually posting).

Jiggs, in my very first post to you I agreed higher energy prices were a drag on growth. I vehemently disagree that peak oil is here, that it's the biggest factor in recent economic problems, or that the end of growth is here. I also don't think three years of flat oil prices indicate a rising price trend and I don't think random electrical fires are evidence of JP Morgan shenanigans.

Hope this helps, but somehow I think you'll screw it up

Enjoy the weekend

Well no, in your first post to me you tried to suggest that an essential element to survival - water - adhered to the laws of supply and demand, just like everything else.

Three things I've shown causation, correlation and corroboration for. You can "disagree" all you like. But it's not really resonating if you don't actually flesh out why.

So it's back to three years again? Not "going on" three years? LOL... In any event, you patted yourself on the back for $96 ave. oil over TWO years. It's now $107. It's also up 500-600% in 12 years. Yes, that's a trend, no matter how painfully you AIDS up the thread with semantics.

Where "screw it up" refers to exposing how horrible your overall "no problem" argument is up against known data and testimony. Got it.

GFY

Lol didnt read Jiggs

lol I mean of course water adheres to supply and demand, insane to think it doesn't

Loooool that's what the wall of text was complaining about? Trivially obvious that what I said is true.

Jiggs definitely one of those guys that overrates his own intelligence and probably gets pissed of all the time at work when he gets passed over by smarter people that he deems idiots and fools.

You read it, narcissist. You're not fooling anyone.

So, if price got high enough, people wouldn't use water? In my view, they'll just say "f*** your price" and take it. It's not very different for oil. You may successfully curtail their consumption by force for a while (at your own great cost), but they're gonna fight for it and it's gonna get violent.

Well, no. But you're definitely one of those guys who doesn't know what he's actually linking to, and has been learning as he's gone along on this discussion from the start. I don't need to make trollish guesses about your personal life to know that is true. You revealed yourself many pages ago.

Go trot out some more futures prices so you can compare them to 2011 spot prices. Tool.

Jiggz U seem kind of mad bro

Loldidntread.gif

Mad?

The economy isn't coming back. Certainly not the way we knew it. Its silly to think it would. The world has been going through a transition for the last twenty or thirty years. Economies are moving away from commodities capital towards intellectual capital, and its only going to continue. We can make machines to do jobs people once held. Its cheaper and far more efficient. Manufacturing isn't coming back either, there's no reason for it to. We can mass produce nearly any commodity. In a world with mass production, there is really just one thing that can't be mass produced, and is the reason that intellectual capital is taking over... the brain.

As the world completes the transition from commodities based economic growth to intellectual capital based economic growth, you will only see more and more economies crashing as their commodities base crumbles and pick themselves back up intellectually.

I'll let Michio Kaku explain.

http://gulfnews.com/business/economy...nence-1.155809

There is a video an hour long of Mr Kaku speaking in Boston about the next 100 years, physics, etc. That is definitely worth the watch. Its part of the transition from being a type 0 civilization to a type 1 civilization. There are more videos and information you can find from him on that as well that go into more detail. The gulfnews article isn't as detailed as I'd like, but it can get someone started.

Also, we already passed peak oil in the US. Long time ago. The world is getting very close to peak oil. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvsFWUo2iIw More Michio Kaku for you.

The man is a wealth of good information, all verifiable and documentable.