Gasoline Expected to Rise to $5.00 to $6.00 a gallon

[thereisnospoon]

It's about state rights. Here in Florida for example we should have the right to either allow, or deny oil drilling off of our shores. The constitution doesn't grant the federal government-or any body to either allow, or restrict oil drilling. Therefore it's up to the states individually.

We don't want drilling because it'll greatly hinder our economy. Our tourism would get hit really hard-let alone if something like the BP spill happened again, which would then hit our fishing, boating, ports, etc.. We have too much to risk just to slightly lower gas prices for the nation as a whole. Floridians shouldn't be subjected to unconstitutional risks to our economy just for people in the other 49 states (talk about big government).

The majority of Floridians are against off-shore drilling here. It's against our state law not to drill here. If you can point out an area of the US constitution that states the federal government has the right to overstep that law-by all means show it. If you can't (which you can't)-too bad, so sad-get over it.

The majority of Floridians aren't even Floridians. They live half the year in New York or New Jersey.
You go ahead and keep buying into the enviro-nazi propaganda. If there were oil rigs off the FL coast, you would not have a clue their presence. The entire story behind FL's off shore ban was based on the California spills of the 1970's. Oil production technology is far more advanced. The BP explosion was an accident.
If anything, FL taxpayers would benefit from off shore oil production in the form of royalties from said production.
Look, it's either we here in the US start realizing that with economic freedom comes a little risk or we remain under the thumb of people who don't like us very much.
BTW, to a certain distance off the shoreline ,yes the State has jurisdiction. Beyond that , I believe it is three miles, offshore waters come under federal jurisdiction. It is through cooperation between the federal government and states that offshore drilling is limted.
However, if push came to shove and the country needed the oil, we'd get it. and of course the respective state would receive ample compensation.
This is not about "slightly lower gas prices"..This is about doing the right thing and harvesting our own natural resources. You complain about risk. You mention fisheries and tourism twice. Sounds like you have an agenda. an agenda that is somewhat self centered.
Newsflash...we're all in this together. Last time I checked Florida was still part of the United States of America.
This is about economic independence and economic security. Do not ever forget that.
We don't get to that point without a little risk.
If we used your theory about avoiding risk, there would be no air travel and no cars.

The States Rights clause in the Constitution does not apply here.

-How does the States Right clause in the Constitution not apply here? Explain.
-Again I ask you where in the Constitution does it give the rights for the federal government to have federal waters past the 3 miles, and where does it allow the federal government to allow off shore drilling off the shore of other states


-For the record, I'm a "real" Floridian
-It's not about the environment-it's about our economy here in Florida. I don't care whether there's drilling in Alaska, or off California shores-it's not my state. I wouldn't be the one at risk. If those states want to do it-more power to them. For me it's not about being an "enviro-nazi".

-Oil is not a normal commodity that follows a typical supply and demand curve. The demand is intricate in virtually everything (shipping, plastic, travel, etc.). It's the demand that makes oil so expensive-not the supply. The sooner people realize this-the better..
-I agree you don't get much if you don't risk. That's fine. People should risk their own state. The people of this state doesn't want off shore drilling. Period. Florida doesn't tell other states what to do-others shouldn't tell ours what to do.

-Yes you're right 3 miles off the coast and you're in federal waters (about 9 miles into the gulf-as low tides hit parts of land out there). However federal waters themselves aren't constitutional. Point out where in the constitution it gives the federal government the constitutional power of such. Also the federal government shouldn't subject Florida to the risk if Florida doesn't want it (we don't). Again if other states do-fine drill there.

And maybe us in Florida wouldn't notice the rigs off shore. Maybe you're right. But tourists still wont come anywhere near as much. People from other places would look at Florida and say...oh look they have drilling-let's go somewhere else for vacation. And that doesn't affect the other states-it affects ours. All things the same-are people going to go to a place with beaches that has offshore drilling, or no offshore drilling? They're going to go to the one without drilling.

in all of your pontificating you exposed yourself for what you really are....A NIMBY.....Not In My Back Yard.
You stated very clearly that you do not care about other states. You are just fine with the harvesting of natural resources just as long as YOU don't have to deal with it.
It is at this point your argument loses all credibility....You are on the losing side here. Discussion terminated. You have made your agenda clear. No further discussion with you is necessary.
You Floridians are the last people who should talk about exploiting your state for every dime you can get. So don't go there. Yer done. OUT.
You may now have the last word.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What makes anyone think that Obama, or any other President, has sway over world oil pricing?[/QUOTE

Do you deny that the gulf oil drilling ban has had no effect on prices?

It didn't even when the disaster was taking place. You DO know, I hope, that all oil drilled in the United States doesn't stay in the United States. That, and the deep sea drilling moratorium was lifted last October. You might begin by keeping current, then move to any one of hundreds of articles that will tell you that oil is a speculative commodity, it's price depending on betting how high it will go.

The moratorium was lifted because legally Obama had no leg to stand on. Obama's cock block on the oil business was going to be squashed by the courts.
Obama basically screwed the pooch because many of the deep water rigs were relocated and will not be coming back. That was the goal. Obama wanted to weaken US oil production and he succeeded.
Meanwhile foreign countires such as China, Brazil and Viet Nam are going to be drilling in the Gulf beyond the reach of US Territorial waters and there's nothing we can do about it.

 

[Mr. H.]

Can you fix that broken quote?
It looks as if I'm making both statements- which I'm not.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

The majority of Floridians aren't even Floridians. They live half the year in New York or New Jersey.
You go ahead and keep buying into the enviro-nazi propaganda. If there were oil rigs off the FL coast, you would not have a clue their presence. The entire story behind FL's off shore ban was based on the California spills of the 1970's. Oil production technology is far more advanced. The BP explosion was an accident.
If anything, FL taxpayers would benefit from off shore oil production in the form of royalties from said production.
Look, it's either we here in the US start realizing that with economic freedom comes a little risk or we remain under the thumb of people who don't like us very much.
BTW, to a certain distance off the shoreline ,yes the State has jurisdiction. Beyond that , I believe it is three miles, offshore waters come under federal jurisdiction. It is through cooperation between the federal government and states that offshore drilling is limted.
However, if push came to shove and the country needed the oil, we'd get it. and of course the respective state would receive ample compensation.
This is not about "slightly lower gas prices"..This is about doing the right thing and harvesting our own natural resources. You complain about risk. You mention fisheries and tourism twice. Sounds like you have an agenda. an agenda that is somewhat self centered.
Newsflash...we're all in this together. Last time I checked Florida was still part of the United States of America.
This is about economic independence and economic security. Do not ever forget that.
We don't get to that point without a little risk.
If we used your theory about avoiding risk, there would be no air travel and no cars.

The States Rights clause in the Constitution does not apply here.

-How does the States Right clause in the Constitution not apply here? Explain.
-Again I ask you where in the Constitution does it give the rights for the federal government to have federal waters past the 3 miles, and where does it allow the federal government to allow off shore drilling off the shore of other states


-For the record, I'm a "real" Floridian
-It's not about the environment-it's about our economy here in Florida. I don't care whether there's drilling in Alaska, or off California shores-it's not my state. I wouldn't be the one at risk. If those states want to do it-more power to them. For me it's not about being an "enviro-nazi".

-Oil is not a normal commodity that follows a typical supply and demand curve. The demand is intricate in virtually everything (shipping, plastic, travel, etc.). It's the demand that makes oil so expensive-not the supply. The sooner people realize this-the better..
-I agree you don't get much if you don't risk. That's fine. People should risk their own state. The people of this state doesn't want off shore drilling. Period. Florida doesn't tell other states what to do-others shouldn't tell ours what to do.

-Yes you're right 3 miles off the coast and you're in federal waters (about 9 miles into the gulf-as low tides hit parts of land out there). However federal waters themselves aren't constitutional. Point out where in the constitution it gives the federal government the constitutional power of such. Also the federal government shouldn't subject Florida to the risk if Florida doesn't want it (we don't). Again if other states do-fine drill there.

And maybe us in Florida wouldn't notice the rigs off shore. Maybe you're right. But tourists still wont come anywhere near as much. People from other places would look at Florida and say...oh look they have drilling-let's go somewhere else for vacation. And that doesn't affect the other states-it affects ours. All things the same-are people going to go to a place with beaches that has offshore drilling, or no offshore drilling? They're going to go to the one without drilling.

in all of your pontificating you exposed yourself for what you really are....A NIMBY.....Not In My Back Yard.
You stated very clearly that you do not care about other states. You are just fine with the harvesting of natural resources just as long as YOU don't have to deal with it.
It is at this point your argument loses all credibility....You are on the losing side here. Discussion terminated. You have made your agenda clear. No further discussion with you is necessary.
You Floridians are the last people who should talk about exploiting your state for every dime you can get. So don't go there. Yer done. OUT.
You may now have the last word.

You're so full of it. I simply said I think if a state wants to allow harvesting their resources (at great risks)-it should be left up to the state, and not the federal government. That's my point-if you can't grasp that-you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

If California, Alaska, etc. want to drill, or if they don't want to drill (the people of the state)-then I don't mind either way if they do or not. But here in Florida the people don't want it. It's not a NIMBY, it's a whoever's backyard it is should be able to decide-because the federal government doesn't have the authority to do so under the constitution.

I don't expect a response, when you're going as far as to strawman my point. You also dodged my question several times: where in the US constitution does it give the federal government the rights to impose off-shore drilling availability on the states.

So keep on putting words in my mouth, while not backing up your own claims, and by starting the personal attack route (which in itself weakens your arguments-as you're obviously no longer able to argue the points).

PS-keep using that paintbrush over there, I hear it's really good for painting all sorts of things.

 

[thereisnospoon]

-How does the States Right clause in the Constitution not apply here? Explain.
-Again I ask you where in the Constitution does it give the rights for the federal government to have federal waters past the 3 miles, and where does it allow the federal government to allow off shore drilling off the shore of other states


-For the record, I'm a "real" Floridian
-It's not about the environment-it's about our economy here in Florida. I don't care whether there's drilling in Alaska, or off California shores-it's not my state. I wouldn't be the one at risk. If those states want to do it-more power to them. For me it's not about being an "enviro-nazi".

-Oil is not a normal commodity that follows a typical supply and demand curve. The demand is intricate in virtually everything (shipping, plastic, travel, etc.). It's the demand that makes oil so expensive-not the supply. The sooner people realize this-the better..
-I agree you don't get much if you don't risk. That's fine. People should risk their own state. The people of this state doesn't want off shore drilling. Period. Florida doesn't tell other states what to do-others shouldn't tell ours what to do.

-Yes you're right 3 miles off the coast and you're in federal waters (about 9 miles into the gulf-as low tides hit parts of land out there). However federal waters themselves aren't constitutional. Point out where in the constitution it gives the federal government the constitutional power of such. Also the federal government shouldn't subject Florida to the risk if Florida doesn't want it (we don't). Again if other states do-fine drill there.

And maybe us in Florida wouldn't notice the rigs off shore. Maybe you're right. But tourists still wont come anywhere near as much. People from other places would look at Florida and say...oh look they have drilling-let's go somewhere else for vacation. And that doesn't affect the other states-it affects ours. All things the same-are people going to go to a place with beaches that has offshore drilling, or no offshore drilling? They're going to go to the one without drilling.

in all of your pontificating you exposed yourself for what you really are....A NIMBY.....Not In My Back Yard.
You stated very clearly that you do not care about other states. You are just fine with the harvesting of natural resources just as long as YOU don't have to deal with it.
It is at this point your argument loses all credibility....You are on the losing side here. Discussion terminated. You have made your agenda clear. No further discussion with you is necessary.
You Floridians are the last people who should talk about exploiting your state for every dime you can get. So don't go there. Yer done. OUT.
You may now have the last word.

You're so full of it. I simply said I think if a state wants to allow harvesting their resources (at great risks)-it should be left up to the state, and not the federal government. That's my point-if you can't grasp that-you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

If California, Alaska, etc. want to drill, or if they don't want to drill (the people of the state)-then I don't mind either way if they do or not. But here in Florida the people don't want it. It's not a NIMBY, it's a whoever's backyard it is should be able to decide-because the federal government doesn't have the authority to do so under the constitution.

I don't expect a response, when you're going as far as to strawman my point. You also dodged my question several times: where in the US constitution does it give the federal government the rights to impose off-shore drilling availability on the states.

So keep on putting words in my mouth, while not backing up your own claims, and by starting the personal attack route (which in itself weakens your arguments-as you're obviously no longer able to argue the points).

PS-keep using that paintbrush over there, I hear it's really good for painting all sorts of things.

Couldn't help yourself could ya?.....LOL
since you opened the door, this is what YOU wrote......I don't care whether there's drilling in Alaska, or off California shores-it's not my state. I wouldn't be the one at risk. If those states want to do it-more power to them. For me it's not about being an "enviro-nazi".

That in and of itself is classic NIMBY.....Look, you cannot get up early enough to get anything past me. I see EVERYTHING....
Mess with the bull, you get the horns, pal.
Facts are facts. Beyond three miles there is little a state can do regarding offshore energy exploration. It is through mutual cooperation and federal mandate that certain areas until now that have been deemed off limits.
However, if the need arises, exploration and drilling could commence.
Again, yours and other states which are involved would receive royalty payments from oil and natural gas harvesting. The potential damage to tourism economy would be negated by the revenue from the fossil fuels. And I am willing to go way out on a limb that tourists would not suddenly stop going to Florida because oil rigs were working 50- 100 miles off shore.
NIMBY gets you a little reprieve. Then you get swept aside.
Get a grip on the facts at hand.

 

[MaggieMae]

Geo political events are driving commodities traders into a form of panic buying.
They have run up the price of crude oil( West Texas Intermediate crude) on the New York Mercantile Exchange( NYMEX) has run up from $84 per barrel three weeks ago to over $100 per barrel before settling today with a slight drop.
The price yesterday fell due to a news story alleging Libyan leader Kadhafi had been shot and killed.
Although Other OPEC nations have pledged ot make up for the roughly 1.5 million barrel daily output form Libya's wells, commodities traders continue to fear anti- government strife will spread to other Gulf Arab nations and most importantly, Saudi Arabia.
Unfortunately with the US and other economies on shaky ground, this does not bode well for any kind of economic recovery. In fact some analysts have stated that if the present spike in oil and gasoline prices continues, it could send the US and European economies into a second tail spin.
In any event, there is no end in sight of the current run up in prices.

So you agree that it isn't government policy that drives the price of oil but Wall Street. Good.

 

[MaggieMae]

What makes anyone think that Obama, or any other President, has sway over world oil pricing?

Yeah...Obama and his pie in the sky ideas about solar and wind energy and his idiotic drilling bans.
Clinton and his seizing of lands under which there are billions of barrels of unharvested oil and natural gas.

You can't even comprehend your own words in your previous post:

"Geo political events are driving commodities traders into a form of panic buying.
They have run up the price of crude oil( West Texas Intermediate crude) on the New York Mercantile Exchange( NYMEX) has run up from $84 per barrel three weeks ago to over $100 per barrel before settling today with a slight drop."

 

[MaggieMae]

I just find it interesting that the same people who were blaming Bush for the high gas prices three years ago are steadily mum over the current rapid increase. If it was Bush's fault then, is it not Obama's fault now?

I never blamed Bush. That's because I read the causes, which can't be blamed on American political maneuvering, but we all know not enough people seek out the actual truth about much of anything.

 

[MaggieMae]

Bush created much of the problems that drove the oil prices up with his incompetant and idiotic adventures in the Mideast. Today, the problems are created by the people in the Mideast that wish to have a say in their own government.

In both cases, there is also the background fact of rising demand and declining production.

I disagree. The Saudis never threatened to cut their oil supply, which would have had a devastating effect, and neither did the Canadians. The reasons the price of oil skyrocketed were the same as they are today. The only ones making money off the turmoil in the Mideast are the speculators.

Did Speculation Fuel Oil Price Swings? - 60 Minutes - CBS News

...And when oil doubled to more than $147 a barrel, no one was more suspicious than Dan Gilligan.

As the president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, he represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.

When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

"Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions," Gilligan explained.

Gilligan said these investors don't actually take delivery of the oil. "All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery."

"They're trying to make money on the market for oil?" Kroft asked.

"Absolutely," Gilligan replied. "On the volatility that exists in the market. They make it going up and down."

 

[MaggieMae]

Jimmy Carter put in place a plan that would by now have made us at least competitive with Germany in its development of solar technology which presently supplies over 25% of their electrical energy. Because we import only 20% of our energy (oil) from the Middle East we would by now be totally independent of that source.

But Ronald Reagan scrapped Carter's solar energy plan and he removed the solar panels that Carter had installed on the White House roof.

mediastudy.com

Cartier financed his pipe dreams on the backs of American industry and workers by confiscating billions of dollars of private capital in the guise of the "Windfall Profits Tax". Domestic oil production took a nose dive as a result. Imports skyrocketed.

No- he is the precise reason we are so fucked up today. He had his chance and blew it.

Imports are imports. We would be totally independent of Middle East oil today if we were to open the Outer Continental Shelf and the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, ANWR, and if we LIFT THE GODAMN MORATORIUM IN THE CENTRAL GULF.

Obama team lifts Gulf Coast oil drilling moratorium - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama's plan to get us off the use of oil is to get the price of gas up to $7 per gallon. He's well on his way to achieving that goal.

Obama Supporter: 'Obama Will Pay For My Gas And My Mortgage'

$8/gallon is the goal. That is the point of success for the Obama regime.

Break the nation.

Yeah, that's it.

 

[MaggieMae]

in all of your pontificating you exposed yourself for what you really are....A NIMBY.....Not In My Back Yard.
You stated very clearly that you do not care about other states. You are just fine with the harvesting of natural resources just as long as YOU don't have to deal with it.
It is at this point your argument loses all credibility....You are on the losing side here. Discussion terminated. You have made your agenda clear. No further discussion with you is necessary.
You Floridians are the last people who should talk about exploiting your state for every dime you can get. So don't go there. Yer done. OUT.
You may now have the last word.

Something tells me, if it ever came down to it, you would be rethinking your position if one of these was parked in your back yard ~~

And one of these plunked on those vacant lots nearby ~~

 

[MaggieMae]

It didn't even when the disaster was taking place. You DO know, I hope, that all oil drilled in the United States doesn't stay in the United States. That, and the deep sea drilling moratorium was lifted last October. You might begin by keeping current, then move to any one of hundreds of articles that will tell you that oil is a speculative commodity, it's price depending on betting how high it will go.

The moratorium was lifted because legally Obama had no leg to stand on. Obama's cock block on the oil business was going to be squashed by the courts.
Obama basically screwed the pooch because many of the deep water rigs were relocated and will not be coming back. That was the goal. Obama wanted to weaken US oil production and he succeeded.
Meanwhile foreign countires such as China, Brazil and Viet Nam are going to be drilling in the Gulf beyond the reach of US Territorial waters and there's nothing we can do about it.

Sure, and that's why he lifted the ban on offshore drilling just six months before the BP spill.

Obama lifts ban on offshore drilling - washingtonpost.com

 

[rightwinger]

I blame Reagan

He had the chance to take out Ghadaffi and blew it

 

[thereisnospoon]

Geo political events are driving commodities traders into a form of panic buying.
They have run up the price of crude oil( West Texas Intermediate crude) on the New York Mercantile Exchange( NYMEX) has run up from $84 per barrel three weeks ago to over $100 per barrel before settling today with a slight drop.
The price yesterday fell due to a news story alleging Libyan leader Kadhafi had been shot and killed.
Although Other OPEC nations have pledged ot make up for the roughly 1.5 million barrel daily output form Libya's wells, commodities traders continue to fear anti- government strife will spread to other Gulf Arab nations and most importantly, Saudi Arabia.
Unfortunately with the US and other economies on shaky ground, this does not bode well for any kind of economic recovery. In fact some analysts have stated that if the present spike in oil and gasoline prices continues, it could send the US and European economies into a second tail spin.
In any event, there is no end in sight of the current run up in prices.

So you agree that it isn't government policy that drives the price of oil but Wall Street. Good.

Oh your poor uninformed girl.
But for our government policy regarding the lack of vision on natural resources and kowtowing to the environmental lobby, we would be not only the largest exporter of oil but the largest producer. We could essentially ignore OPEC and the Middle East.
In the last 30 years no new oil refineries have been built in the US for one reason. Government policies enacted by left wing politicians. SO much land with eons of recoverable oil and gas reserves were snapped up by the federal government and placed off limits. This was done to appease the enviro-lobby and in deference to foreign interests. Particularly OPEC.
Now, every time someone in the Middle East farts, we have an oil and gas price spike.
ENOUGH!!!!!

 

[thereisnospoon]

What makes anyone think that Obama, or any other President, has sway over world oil pricing?

Yeah...Obama and his pie in the sky ideas about solar and wind energy and his idiotic drilling bans.
Clinton and his seizing of lands under which there are billions of barrels of unharvested oil and natural gas.

You can't even comprehend your own words in your previous post:

"Geo political events are driving commodities traders into a form of panic buying.
They have run up the price of crude oil( West Texas Intermediate crude) on the New York Mercantile Exchange( NYMEX) has run up from $84 per barrel three weeks ago to over $100 per barrel before settling today with a slight drop."

Moron......25% of the oil consumed in the US comes from the Gulf of Mexico.
Obama shut off oil drilling there.
That in and of itself jeopardizes supply. The markets react to the amount of available product vs the demand for said product.
The marketplace simply reacts to geopolitical policy and events.
Your feeble attempt to use oversimplification to make your point is actually quite amusing.
You work in 10 second soundbites and movie critic style blurbs.

 

[Flopper]

The 21 Arab oil billionaires whose assets are 2.6 trillion stand to benefit handsomely from the OPEC's plan to push oil prices even higher in anticipation increased demand. Doesn't that make you feel good all over, knowing capitalism is at work, producing the very best product at best possible price.

 

[dilloduck]

Yeah...Obama and his pie in the sky ideas about solar and wind energy and his idiotic drilling bans.
Clinton and his seizing of lands under which there are billions of barrels of unharvested oil and natural gas.

You can't even comprehend your own words in your previous post:

"Geo political events are driving commodities traders into a form of panic buying.
They have run up the price of crude oil( West Texas Intermediate crude) on the New York Mercantile Exchange( NYMEX) has run up from $84 per barrel three weeks ago to over $100 per barrel before settling today with a slight drop."

Moron......25% of the oil consumed in the US comes from the Gulf of Mexico.
Obama shut off oil drilling there.
That in and of itself jeopardizes supply. The markets react to the amount of available product vs the demand for said product.
The marketplace simply reacts to geopolitical policy and events.
Your feeble attempt to use oversimplification to make your point is actually quite amusing.
You work in 10 second soundbites and movie critic style blurbs.

It's quite clear we are paying more for fuel because of the markets reaction and not the actual price of the fuel.
If Obama cut loose and allowed drilling everywhere the markets would again react and that same gallon of fuel will magically cost us less.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Bush created much of the problems that drove the oil prices up with his incompetant and idiotic adventures in the Mideast. Today, the problems are created by the people in the Mideast that wish to have a say in their own government.

In both cases, there is also the background fact of rising demand and declining production.

I disagree. The Saudis never threatened to cut their oil supply, which would have had a devastating effect, and neither did the Canadians. The reasons the price of oil skyrocketed were the same as they are today. The only ones making money off the turmoil in the Mideast are the speculators.

Did Speculation Fuel Oil Price Swings? - 60 Minutes - CBS News

...And when oil doubled to more than $147 a barrel, no one was more suspicious than Dan Gilligan.

As the president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, he represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.

When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

"Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions," Gilligan explained.

Gilligan said these investors don't actually take delivery of the oil. "All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery."

"They're trying to make money on the market for oil?" Kroft asked.

"Absolutely," Gilligan replied. "On the volatility that exists in the market. They make it going up and down."

he is 100% correct. I saw that same 60 minutes segment. Add to that is commodity traders go where the best positions exist.
Traders in US currency were particularly keen on selling their positions in Dollars and moving over to oil and gasoline. Why? Because of US monetary and government policies which devalued the US Dollar. Quite simply put, when the federal government runs up debt, it simply prints more currency to cover the debt. The increase in supply of US Currency results in the Dollar being worth less. Because Crude oil prices are based on the US Dollar, when the US Dollar loses value the price of oil rises.
Now, with all the additional cash invested in energy futures volatility is not only expected, it is damned likely.
Here's the rub. When oil and gas prices rise far beyond the levels expected by market fundamentals, even more volatility occurs. Hence the reason why Crude oil fell from a record $147/barrel to $30 in just 6 months. But guess what? Traders made money on that too by betting that the price of energy futures would fall.
The market is disconnected from the consumer side of the equation.
When this most recent spike levels off, I predict prices to fall once again. Perhaps as low as $70 per barrel.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The 21 Arab oil billionaires whose assets are 2.6 trillion stand to benefit handsomely from the OPEC's plan to push oil prices even higher in anticipation increased demand. Doesn't that make you feel good all over, knowing capitalism is at work, producing the very best product at best possible price.

Holy shit....
Genius, OPEC nations are every bit as susceptible to oil price spikes and sudden drops.
That said, if the price rises too quickly and in violation of market fundamentals, OPEC will increase production to stem the rising prices. If they do not and allow the price to rise too high, the potential for a sudden collapse of the price can be devastating.
For example. About mid January read a statement from the Saudi OPEC oil minister stating he wanted crude prices to stay below $100 per barrel to protect against the potential for a 2009 type collapse.

If what you state is true then there would be no incentive for OPEC to raise production quotas. They could in fact decrease production to hold product off the market in order to let the price skyrocket.