So I managed to scare up an MBA to comment on the Petroleum Bonanza of Riches. Phil quotes this article and writes:
"With oil futures above $60 a barrel for much of the
third quarter, Exxon's profits from petroleum
exploration and production increased by $1.8 billion
to $5.7 billion. Soaring prices for gasoline, diesel
and jet fuel lifted refining and marketing profits by
$727 million to $2.13 billion."
So, my take on this is that Exxon has a lot of fixed
costs associated with production, such that when
prices rise per barrel their E&P business makes a
killing.
Their downstream businesses are also making money. I
suspect this is because there are a lot of fixed costs
(e.g., real estate) associated with gas stations.
Yeah, there are a lot of variable costs (namely the
gasoline and it's distribution), but there is still
room for more profits based on the fixed component of
the costs.
In the same article it describes about $100k that they
expect to lose as a result of the hurricane though
some of this may be offset by insurance claims).
Clearly, this is not enough to offset the gains.
Clearly.
So, while I still don't understand the fundamentals of the business, I'm getting closer. It looks like the majority of the profit came from increases in their own exploration and production, where oil is selling for twice what it sold for back in the day. So here's my question, how much of the total crude oil that ExxonMobil eventually sells comes from their own wells compared with what they have to buy.
Wish I knew an accountant that was familiar with the financial statements of oil and gas companies...
Monday, October 31, 2005
Atomic Musings
I'm currently reading A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson which does chapter length surveys on all aspects of science. One of the initial chapters goes into all things atomic and quantum...of which I know next to nothing. I ran across two things that needed further exploration: 1) E=mc2, and 2) The notion that Newtonian physics doesn't apply at the nuclear level.
Well, I'm still completely buffaloed by #2, but I'm smarter about Einstein thanks to a recent Nova called Einstein's Big Idea. I'm still not ready to be empaneled on a blue-ribbon committee of leading theoretical physicists, but the most simple and salient thing I learned was that "time" is not the universal constant I thought it was. Einstein turned things around by theorizing that the speed of light (c) is the real universal constant and time is a function of the speed of light.
Another key revelation was, obviously, the relationship between Energy and mass. When you multiply just about any amount of mass by a gigantic number like the speed of light squared, you realize that there's a tremendous amount of energy at the atomic level, a la nuclear (or nucular in Bushese) weapons. A small amount of something incredibly dense like uranium (lots of mass despite limited size) can provide a ton of energy...in the form of a mushroom cloud.
Hopefully it will be replayed or available with other PBS documentaries on Netflix.
By the way, Bryson's on of my favorite non-fiction authors whose oeuvre includes everything from the aforementioned scientific survey, to British travelogues, to an insightful study of language, to a hiking trip up the Appalachian trail.
Well, I'm still completely buffaloed by #2, but I'm smarter about Einstein thanks to a recent Nova called Einstein's Big Idea. I'm still not ready to be empaneled on a blue-ribbon committee of leading theoretical physicists, but the most simple and salient thing I learned was that "time" is not the universal constant I thought it was. Einstein turned things around by theorizing that the speed of light (c) is the real universal constant and time is a function of the speed of light.
Another key revelation was, obviously, the relationship between Energy and mass. When you multiply just about any amount of mass by a gigantic number like the speed of light squared, you realize that there's a tremendous amount of energy at the atomic level, a la nuclear (or nucular in Bushese) weapons. A small amount of something incredibly dense like uranium (lots of mass despite limited size) can provide a ton of energy...in the form of a mushroom cloud.
Hopefully it will be replayed or available with other PBS documentaries on Netflix.
By the way, Bryson's on of my favorite non-fiction authors whose oeuvre includes everything from the aforementioned scientific survey, to British travelogues, to an insightful study of language, to a hiking trip up the Appalachian trail.
Welcome to Lee
Lee has joined as a new contributor to the site to provide some different perspectives. Hopefully we'll hear from him soon.
He's promised to provide us an abstract from his current research on the connection between Quantum Theory and the "deja vu". I'm certainly looking forward to that.
He's promised to provide us an abstract from his current research on the connection between Quantum Theory and the "deja vu". I'm certainly looking forward to that.
Friday, October 28, 2005
Embarassment of Riches
I need some help from my astute readership (all two or three of you). Why are the oil companies making out like bandits? If the price of a barrel of oil from a foreign supplier goes up, aren't they paying the higher price too? Their internal cost to refine and distribute that oil hasn't changed. If a refinery gets beat to hell by a hurricane, I see how basic supply and demand would cause the price to increase. However I don't understand how this loss in refining capacity equals windfall profits? Anyone have any ideas about what's going on here?
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Original Intent?
Miers has bitten the dust. Fair minded people should prepare themselves, for Justice Jesus is in the wings.
This is so appetizing a development for the right because they will now get to frame the debate the way they like. Screw what really matters, we'll have wedge issues on the front page every day. The dems will have no choice but to filibuster Judge Jesus which will likely lead to the so called nuclear option where the Republican led Senate changes the rules of the game and fundamentally changes the nature of one branch of government.
Concurrently we will have corruption trials of Republicans everywhere. The Plamegate probe will likely widen to include the Italian forgeries. If possible, we're going to be much more divided as Republicans, under fire, go to the mattresses and Dems amp up the red meat as the 2006 election cycle gets under way.
The next year will be fucking chaos. While I admit being a limited fan of political anarchy, I'm feeling a pretty good dose of Weltschmerz. Why can't movements spring up from the Center? Pragmatism will go the way of the dodo bird taking with it any hope of sensible debate. Cindy Sheehan will likely end up self-immolating on the White House lawn, while James Dobson will hold the "Million-Fetus" march on the mall.
This is so appetizing a development for the right because they will now get to frame the debate the way they like. Screw what really matters, we'll have wedge issues on the front page every day. The dems will have no choice but to filibuster Judge Jesus which will likely lead to the so called nuclear option where the Republican led Senate changes the rules of the game and fundamentally changes the nature of one branch of government.
Concurrently we will have corruption trials of Republicans everywhere. The Plamegate probe will likely widen to include the Italian forgeries. If possible, we're going to be much more divided as Republicans, under fire, go to the mattresses and Dems amp up the red meat as the 2006 election cycle gets under way.
The next year will be fucking chaos. While I admit being a limited fan of political anarchy, I'm feeling a pretty good dose of Weltschmerz. Why can't movements spring up from the Center? Pragmatism will go the way of the dodo bird taking with it any hope of sensible debate. Cindy Sheehan will likely end up self-immolating on the White House lawn, while James Dobson will hold the "Million-Fetus" march on the mall.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Miers' Qualifications
I'd love to see an attorney's take on the following article questioning whether being president of the Texas bar and managing partner of a firm are really all that significant achievements...
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
The fish rots from the head first
The net needs to be cast far and wide on this Plame thing. Every day seems to peel back another layer of the onion, and today has been an especially juicy layer. To wit: The NYT reveals that Cheney and Libby had spoken about Plame long before Libby testified that he found out about her from a reporter and Cheney claimed he didn't know who Joe Wilson was.
Now comes this morsel out of La Repubblica in Italy...home of the original Niger yellowcake forgery. Pollari is Italy's chief of intelligence:
Today's exclusive report in La Repubblica reveals that Pollari met secretly in Washington on September 9, 2002, with then–Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Their secret meeting came at a critical moment in the White House campaign to convince Congress and the American public that war in Iraq was necessary to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons. National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones confirmed the meeting to the Prospect on Tuesday
So our new National Security Advisor is potentially complicit, then:
The forged documents were cabled from the U.S. embassy in Rome to Washington after being delivered to embassy officials by Elisabetta Burba, a reporter for Panorama. She had received the papers from an Italian middleman named Rocco Martino. Burba never wrote a story about those documents. Instead her editor, Berlusconi favorite Carlo Rossella, ordered her to bring them immediately to the U.S. embassy.
So it now appears that not only was Cheney controlling what was getting into the US press by manipulating Judy Miller, his noted "coalition ally," Italian President, and Media Tycoon Silvio Berlusconi was manipulating his own media to build the case for the Iraq invasion.
Never mind that it was all based on a forgery. From the same article as quoted above:
Nicolo Pollari, chief of Italy's military intelligence service, known as Sismi, brought the Niger yellowcake story directly to the White House after his insistent overtures had been rejected by the Central Intelligence Agency in 2001 and 2002. Sismi had reported to the CIA on October 15, 2001, that Iraq had sought yellowcake in Niger, a report it also plied on British intelligence, creating an echo that the Niger forgeries themselves purported to amplify before they were exposed as a hoax.
Now comes this morsel out of La Repubblica in Italy...home of the original Niger yellowcake forgery. Pollari is Italy's chief of intelligence:
Today's exclusive report in La Repubblica reveals that Pollari met secretly in Washington on September 9, 2002, with then–Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Their secret meeting came at a critical moment in the White House campaign to convince Congress and the American public that war in Iraq was necessary to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons. National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones confirmed the meeting to the Prospect on Tuesday
So our new National Security Advisor is potentially complicit, then:
The forged documents were cabled from the U.S. embassy in Rome to Washington after being delivered to embassy officials by Elisabetta Burba, a reporter for Panorama. She had received the papers from an Italian middleman named Rocco Martino. Burba never wrote a story about those documents. Instead her editor, Berlusconi favorite Carlo Rossella, ordered her to bring them immediately to the U.S. embassy.
So it now appears that not only was Cheney controlling what was getting into the US press by manipulating Judy Miller, his noted "coalition ally," Italian President, and Media Tycoon Silvio Berlusconi was manipulating his own media to build the case for the Iraq invasion.
Never mind that it was all based on a forgery. From the same article as quoted above:
Nicolo Pollari, chief of Italy's military intelligence service, known as Sismi, brought the Niger yellowcake story directly to the White House after his insistent overtures had been rejected by the Central Intelligence Agency in 2001 and 2002. Sismi had reported to the CIA on October 15, 2001, that Iraq had sought yellowcake in Niger, a report it also plied on British intelligence, creating an echo that the Niger forgeries themselves purported to amplify before they were exposed as a hoax.
This is starting to smell really, really suspicious (and conspiratorial). Remember, the fish rots from the head down.
We love Helen Thomas...
Her questioning of Bush and McLellan is always a must read, I thought yesterday's briefing as written up on the White House site was great:
(McLellan) We mourn the loss of each and every one of our men and women in uniform ...They have given their life in defense of freedom, and the best way to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice is to prevail in the war on terrorism. And that's --
Q (Thomas) And kill more people?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that's exactly what we will do.
(McLellan) We mourn the loss of each and every one of our men and women in uniform ...They have given their life in defense of freedom, and the best way to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice is to prevail in the war on terrorism. And that's --
Q (Thomas) And kill more people?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that's exactly what we will do.
Monday, October 24, 2005
More Consistency Issues...
Major consistency issues for our girl Kay from ABC:
Hutchison hopes that if there is an indictment, "it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
When President Clinton was going through his little adventure, Sen. Hutchison said that perjury and obstruction of justice were pretty serious charges. Each, she said, "is calculated to prevent a court and the public from discovering the truth and achieving justice in our judicial system." This comes from her remarks in the Senate's closed deliberations on the articles of impeachment against President Clinton. She submitted them for the record on February 12, 1999.
Alternate titles, "I'm an unabashed shill." or "What little credibility I ever had is now gone."
Hutchison hopes that if there is an indictment, "it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
When President Clinton was going through his little adventure, Sen. Hutchison said that perjury and obstruction of justice were pretty serious charges. Each, she said, "is calculated to prevent a court and the public from discovering the truth and achieving justice in our judicial system." This comes from her remarks in the Senate's closed deliberations on the articles of impeachment against President Clinton. She submitted them for the record on February 12, 1999.
Alternate titles, "I'm an unabashed shill." or "What little credibility I ever had is now gone."
Speaking of Freedom
Mark Cuban paraphrased on Slate in an article worth reading:
(Cuban) argues that movies should be made available simultaneously on cable television, DVD, and in movie theaters, letting consumers decide whether they prefer to see it at home (even if it means paying a premium for a new release) or in the theater.
Well, duh. But it ain't happenin' because of more anti-consumerism from Wal-Mart. If our society wasn't so controlled by mega-corporations that call the tune we all follow, it would be a much better place. (Update: Upon rereading this last line, I think I came off a little more lefty than I really am. It's true that I think many of the giant corporations that run the country don't have what's best for the consumer at heart...like oil companies...but there are true innovators out there that DO have customer focus and are making the rest of the world stand up and take notice...Apple, Google, hybrid manufacturers like Toyota).
Seems like we're just creeping down the adoption curve for truly transformational technologies and until we hit critical mass, we'll be spoonfed the same ol' crap. Not only is Blockbuster already a relic, so is Netflix. They're all on borrowed time and better think about a "harvesting" strategy.
So speaking of transformational technologies, I firmly believe DVR/Tivo is at the head of the list. But not far behind will be the small device that combines all the little devices we now carry around. Phone, MP3, Email, Camera, GameBoy, Radio w/RadioTivo, and probably Video. The hybrids that I've seen so far are pretty clunky.
(Cuban) argues that movies should be made available simultaneously on cable television, DVD, and in movie theaters, letting consumers decide whether they prefer to see it at home (even if it means paying a premium for a new release) or in the theater.
Well, duh. But it ain't happenin' because of more anti-consumerism from Wal-Mart. If our society wasn't so controlled by mega-corporations that call the tune we all follow, it would be a much better place. (Update: Upon rereading this last line, I think I came off a little more lefty than I really am. It's true that I think many of the giant corporations that run the country don't have what's best for the consumer at heart...like oil companies...but there are true innovators out there that DO have customer focus and are making the rest of the world stand up and take notice...Apple, Google, hybrid manufacturers like Toyota).
Seems like we're just creeping down the adoption curve for truly transformational technologies and until we hit critical mass, we'll be spoonfed the same ol' crap. Not only is Blockbuster already a relic, so is Netflix. They're all on borrowed time and better think about a "harvesting" strategy.
So speaking of transformational technologies, I firmly believe DVR/Tivo is at the head of the list. But not far behind will be the small device that combines all the little devices we now carry around. Phone, MP3, Email, Camera, GameBoy, Radio w/RadioTivo, and probably Video. The hybrids that I've seen so far are pretty clunky.
Friday, October 21, 2005
Intellectual Consistency
Bruce commented:
OK, so lets say the prohibition on drugs is lifted. Then what? Do you buy a pack of columbian gold at the 7-11? Who will be the big pot growers? Phizer? Marlboro? How will our weed compare to the world's weed? Will a pot smoker be able to buy it on Sundays? How does this impact the immigration problem, or does it?I would like to hear your "and this is how it plays out" rrhea.
Those are all good questions, and I'm sure it would be heavily regulated like you suggest.
But I don't think we're ever likely to be faced with the implementation specifics.
The religious community is too powerful when it comes to imposing on personal freedom. You think social security is a third rail!
I think it's all about intellectual consistency. I'm by no means always a consistent thinker, but the bar should be higher in this country for consistency. We hate abortion but we love the death penalty. The right wants freedom for guns but wants to restrict freedom of thought or ideas...i.e. censorship. It's all about how we deal with dangerous things. I think we should be consistent and we should consistently support personal freedom in all cases.
I'm sure I'll say something inconsistent pretty soon and that I'll be revealed as a hypocrite. This is an ideal. In reality, I'd support more of a "pragmatic libertarianism".
Kool-Aid Republicans
This TNR article investigates the division among conservatives because of Miers and Bush's liberal spending ways. He hits the nail on the head here:
In other words, the real split over Miers is between conservatives who worship Bush and those who worship conservatism. One camp believes in the infallibility of the president. The other camp believes the evidence before them.
I've experienced both kinds and I'll take the latter. I'd much rather deal with a thinkin' man than a cult captive. These people that refuse to criticize the president for anything have taken leave of their senses. What's in it for them? Is it just easier? Is it because carrying water for Bush just requires no intellectual rigor? Being in Texas you meet a lot of people that love Bush just 'cuz and any attempt at critical thinking is slander. I understand a lot of people choose not to think and resign themselves to herd politics. But thinking people...real thinking people...are part of the cult. I don't get it.
Just about everything Bush has ever touched has turned to shit and these people can't see it. They've drunk the Kool-Aid.
In other words, the real split over Miers is between conservatives who worship Bush and those who worship conservatism. One camp believes in the infallibility of the president. The other camp believes the evidence before them.
I've experienced both kinds and I'll take the latter. I'd much rather deal with a thinkin' man than a cult captive. These people that refuse to criticize the president for anything have taken leave of their senses. What's in it for them? Is it just easier? Is it because carrying water for Bush just requires no intellectual rigor? Being in Texas you meet a lot of people that love Bush just 'cuz and any attempt at critical thinking is slander. I understand a lot of people choose not to think and resign themselves to herd politics. But thinking people...real thinking people...are part of the cult. I don't get it.
Just about everything Bush has ever touched has turned to shit and these people can't see it. They've drunk the Kool-Aid.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Wilma Schadenfreude
Looks like Wilma might level a pretty heavy blow on the Mayan Riviera. This is a place for which I have no love. I hope the nice doctor and his nice nurse who treated me for my Montezuma's Revenge have escaped inland for safety. The hell with the rest of it...
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Why are guns more ethical than weed?
In arguing against gun control, John Stossel writes:
The Centers for Disease Control did an extensive review of various types of gun control... It found that the idea that gun control laws have reduced violent crime is simply a myth.
I think I could substitute "Drug Policies" for "Gun Control" and that statement would be just as accurate.
It seems that his main point is that gun control doesn't work and that gun control is a kind of modern day Prohibition. There's a quote in his article that says:
"There's guns everywhere," said another inmate. "If you got money, you can get a gun."
I don't doubt this or aim to argue his conclusions. But it seems an exact parallel to the so called War on Drugs. In the quote above, replace "guns" with "drugs" and it's just as salient. I think the statistics that support the failures of the drug war are probably more compelling than anything the CDC has on guns. So stop the prohibition of drugs! It was ineffective for booze and guns, so lets stop fighting it.
So where does this argument break down? I know the libertarians are down with me, but what about social conservatives...beyond just 2nd Amendment talk. Why are guns more ethical than weed?
The Centers for Disease Control did an extensive review of various types of gun control... It found that the idea that gun control laws have reduced violent crime is simply a myth.
I think I could substitute "Drug Policies" for "Gun Control" and that statement would be just as accurate.
It seems that his main point is that gun control doesn't work and that gun control is a kind of modern day Prohibition. There's a quote in his article that says:
"There's guns everywhere," said another inmate. "If you got money, you can get a gun."
I don't doubt this or aim to argue his conclusions. But it seems an exact parallel to the so called War on Drugs. In the quote above, replace "guns" with "drugs" and it's just as salient. I think the statistics that support the failures of the drug war are probably more compelling than anything the CDC has on guns. So stop the prohibition of drugs! It was ineffective for booze and guns, so lets stop fighting it.
So where does this argument break down? I know the libertarians are down with me, but what about social conservatives...beyond just 2nd Amendment talk. Why are guns more ethical than weed?
Plamegate + Steve learns a new feature...
Excellent writeup on the hot water the Bush administration is in on the CIA Leak investigation. This guy continues to be a step ahead of most reporters.
And I'm a step ahead of where I was yesterday because I can include links in blogs.
And I'm a step ahead of where I was yesterday because I can include links in blogs.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Blog Goals
The goals of this blog are a general forum for short-form writing. I want thinking people to have the opportunity to share thoughts. This includes, but is not limited to:
General Criticism and Comment: politics, culture, music, movies, food
Creative Writing, Essays, Poetry, Diatribes, Humor: about anything
Comments: Enabled for all posts. Conversation and community is what it's all about.
Distribution: Feel free to distribute to all civilized people. If this becomes a problem, we'll worry about it then.
Politics: The more ideas the better. I do not intent to have a bias, although the population of posters may indicate such. I will delete explicitly racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory posts.
Cursing and scatology are not discouraged.
Because I'm overly pedantic, spellchecking is encouraged (exept for my wife).
Diaries are discouraged. Hopefully none of our readers or contributors want to know what I had for breakfast today.
General Criticism and Comment: politics, culture, music, movies, food
Creative Writing, Essays, Poetry, Diatribes, Humor: about anything
Comments: Enabled for all posts. Conversation and community is what it's all about.
Distribution: Feel free to distribute to all civilized people. If this becomes a problem, we'll worry about it then.
Politics: The more ideas the better. I do not intent to have a bias, although the population of posters may indicate such. I will delete explicitly racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory posts.
Cursing and scatology are not discouraged.
Because I'm overly pedantic, spellchecking is encouraged (exept for my wife).
Diaries are discouraged. Hopefully none of our readers or contributors want to know what I had for breakfast today.
Crickets
One of the good things about the Underground Garage is that they span the gamut of RnR. Now I'm listening to the Crickets.
I'm just testing out how I include other posters...
I'm just testing out how I include other posters...
Logorrhea Definition
I don't care what Webster says. In my book, Logorrhea is "diarrhea of the mouth". Not sure what the exact meaning of the suffix "rrhea" means in latin or greek...but you know what I think.
So...
So it's started. I have to give props to Sirius Channel 25. This is Stevie Van Zandt's Underground Radio. It makes for good listening while smoking a big Patron and drinking Chivas. Right now I'm listening to "Heart of a Rat" by Rocket from the Crypt...which rocks.
Next steps:
1. Figure out something interesting to write about other than liquor and cigars.
2. Get some other people to join
3. Figure out how the fuck to work this shit. Maybe this should be number 2.
The Dictators sound like a pretty rockin' band as well.
Next steps:
1. Figure out something interesting to write about other than liquor and cigars.
2. Get some other people to join
3. Figure out how the fuck to work this shit. Maybe this should be number 2.
The Dictators sound like a pretty rockin' band as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)