Balta1701

Good read on the future of steroid testing. If I was a MLB Player, I might seriously consider asking my agent if I could take part in this type of program. End all doubt.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 23, 2008 -> 08:59 AM) I'm kind of losing you here, could you elaborate? OPEC for the last 5 years has seemingly constantly had their "Price goal", the price they want oil to be per barrel, $30 or so below what oil was actually costing. They set it at $30 or so around 2000, it was still at around $30 when it was pushing $50 and $60, it was up to $50 and $60 last year when it was pushing $75 and $80, etc. There are 2 possible conclusions from this. One, Opec has simply lost the ability to control the price of oil because there's just not enough available to pump to meet growing demand, or two, their actions are simply not matching their rhetoric.

Catorce!

Tres

Dos

QUOTE (rangercal @ May 23, 2008 -> 08:55 AM) 12? Uno

QUOTE (rangercal @ May 23, 2008 -> 08:54 AM) counting is fun I totally disagree.

QUOTE (shipps @ May 23, 2008 -> 09:29 AM) Some writer named Rosenbloom thinks he is on the juice. The Juice is loose!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 23, 2008 -> 08:23 AM) He is also getting large amounts from bigger donors more than anyone else in history from the looks of it. Can you back that up with data? I'll give you the Politico summary of his April donations, which seem to argue against that statement: I'm sure he has his fair share of max donors, but for the average donation he's receiving to come in so low, at $91, then there must be an overwhelming amount of money coming in from the small contributions.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ May 23, 2008 -> 07:04 AM) I don't see how. Explain? If you increase production of Saudi oil by 1 m bpd or you increase domestic production by 1 m bpd, then in theory the results on the price should be the same. But that makes lots of assumptions, like assuming there won't be a corresponding increase in demand or that the monopoly in the system won't cut production to keep the price high.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 23, 2008 -> 04:02 AM) The stories I read, and the one referenced above say 1 million per day, not 100,000 per day. The reason I put in only a couple hundred thousand barrels per day is that even if we'd started drilling when President Bush took office, we probably still would not be at the 1 million BPD level for several more years. The 1 million BPD level is hit somewhere in the area of 7-10 years after drilling commences in the area, according to standard production estimates. If we started drilling there today, it'd be 2015-2020 before we reached those levels. Via the EIA:

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 23, 2008 -> 05:06 AM) Same comment fits McCain, Clinton, and everyone else who campaigns for office. And the more money they raise, the more IOUs are out there. And knowing the process, he personally will make some calls everyday to the bigger contributors. And unfortunately, until we can develop a national public campaign financing system, this is how it's going to happen. The one positive thing with the Obama campaign is that a larger chunk of his money is coming from smaller donors like me, who aren't lobbying for anything really, than pretty much any candidate in recent memory. Whether that will make a difference in the long term is frankly anyone's guess at this point.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 23, 2008 -> 07:05 AM) All sports fans the past half dozen seasons have been very quick to accuse other team's players, while turning a blind eye to their own team. So I would agree many fans would be yapping if he was playing for the Twins. And I would disagree. I can't tell if this is sarcasm, but if it isn't, I totally disagree. I've been more than happy to go after specific guys on the Twins and Indians, like Rincon and Betancourt, who tested positive. There's another guy or two I'm suspicious of (pronk). But have you ever heard anyone here b*tching about Mauer or Morneau being on the juice? I certainly haven't. And these guys are players who, just like Quentin, came up, developed for a bit, and produced.

QUOTE (The Critic @ May 22, 2008 -> 08:53 PM) Beer is always good, unless it's a bad beer. Bad beer = whatever beer I don't like. Drink beer from stanley cup yay!

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 22, 2008 -> 07:29 PM) replied again, thanks. Balta, good points. The answer always seems to come back alternatives. And that is the one beneft to higher prices, we're finally willing to make changes. And that is what I keep saying. The longer we sit around with a pro-production and pro-consumption energy policy, the more we're going to pay. If you'd drilled in ANWR 10 years ago, you'd just be starting to get oil out now, it would be on the order of 100k barrels a day, and all it would be doing would be pushing the price down a little bit or pushing consumption worldwide up a bit

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 22, 2008 -> 07:20 PM) i think 31 might factor in her $11 million in personal loans. From what I recall reading, it is $21 million including those loans.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 22, 2008 -> 07:21 PM) If it costs $150 for the ANWR oil, it would be worse. I have never seen an estimate that had ANWR oil for less. It was always about reducing the dependency on foreign oil, but at an economic and environmental cost. BTW-- Landshark tonight, I think it must be a Budweiser product ~~ and~~ I sent an email to your work. No, the oil up there would not cost nearly that much to produce and extract. Here's the one issue that isn't being noted...well, actually 2...it's a market. And a monopolistic one at that. So, what's stopping OPEC from cutting their production by 100,000 barrels per day as ANWR ramps up? And secondly, what's to stop the energy demand of the rest of the world from just pushing upwards again to consume every last drop we put out?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2008 -> 07:20 PM) You also have to factor in the quality of the oil and the refining costs. The stuff from Saudi Arabia is some of the best for refining and its extremely easy to get to. You also don't have to transport it several thousand miles through a pipeline. There's an awful lot of factors that the author glosses over or is simply ignorant of. Actually, part of the problem is that the stuff SA has left really isn't the wonderful, Light sweet stuff that we've drunk for so long. Their extra capacity seems, from experience, to be mostly the bad, high sulfur stuff, because every time they say they'll actually increase production, that's the stuff that they release.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 22, 2008 -> 06:35 PM) I'm sitting here at my desk, playign poker, checking out Soxtalk and my fantasy baseball team and having a Miller beer. Am I living the High Life? You're able to type coherently. No. Give up the beer.

The White Sox have won 8 in a row.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 22, 2008 -> 06:19 PM) Is it a coincidence that the three guys they focus on in the Sox commercials all suck this season? Someone get to Boyer before they make a CQ commercial! Is it a coincidence that Uribe got hurt and we went on a major winning streak?

QUOTE (G&T @ May 22, 2008 -> 06:15 PM) How 'bout OC learn how to bunt again. I'm fairly certain he used to be able to put down a sac bunt. That has to be part of his game. He's only had 5 or more sacrifices 2x in his career. Most seasons he only puts down 2, 3, or 4 bunts at the most.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 22, 2008 -> 06:15 PM) the Mayor of Cincinnati Ok, the current mayor or Jerry Springer?

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ May 22, 2008 -> 06:13 PM) fantastic managing by the oz - jeez-uz, quentin is a freak Except he can't have OC bunt any more. Q = Omnipotent being.

So Orlando Cabrera can't bunt to save his life. Wouldn't have expected that.