Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Potential competition for Ballard?
https://phys.org/news/2018-01-fuel-cell-technology-solid-carbon.html#jCp
Walk With Me While I Age
I hope this poem has the same effect on you as it did on me; then my forwarding it will be worth the effort.
Walk with me while I age - worth the read.
A BEAUTIFUL POEM ABOUT GROWING OLDER
SHIT ........
I forgot the words.
Same problem here.
If a transgender person gets lost does their picture go on a milk carton or a carton of half & half?
Gee, but they have such nice ads on TV.
Subject: Reunions
Jan, Sue and Mary haven't seen each other since high school. They rediscover each other via a reunion website and arrange to meet for lunch in a wine bar.
Jan arrives first, wearing beige Versace. She orders a bottle of Pinot Grigio.
Sue arrives shortly afterward, in gray Chanel. After the required ritualized kisses, she joins Jan in a glass of wine.
Then Mary walks in, wearing a faded old tee-shirt, blue jeans and boots. She too, shares the wine.
Jan explains that after leaving high school and graduating from Princeton in Classics, she met and married Timothy, with whom she has a beautiful daughter. Timothy is a partner in one of New York's leading law firms. They live in a 4,000 sq. ft. co-op on Fifth Avenue, where Susanna, the daughter, attends drama school. They have a second home in Phoenix.
Sue relates that she graduated from Harvard Med School and became a surgeon. Her husband, Clive, is a leading Wall Street investment banker. They live in Southampton on Long Island and have a second home in Naples, Florida.
Mary explains that she left school at 17 and ran off with her boyfriend, Jim. They run a tropical bird park in Colorado and grow their own vegetables and marijuana. Jim can stand five parrots, side by side, on his dick.
Halfway down the third bottle of wine and several hours later, Jan blurts out that her husband is really a cashier at Wal-Mart. They live in a small apartment in Brooklyn and have a travel trailer parked at a nearby storage facility.
Sue, chastened and encouraged by her old friend's honesty, explains that she and Clive are both nurses' aides in a retirement home. They live in Jersey City and take vacation camping trips to Alabama .
Mary says the fifth parrot has to stand on one leg.
Old timers:
Maybe we could just stop subsidizing those "welfare ranchers"
Animal agriculture is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all manner of transportation (13%). That includes cars, trucks, trains, airplanes and marine transport.
See that and a lot more at: http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/
nwsailor
Radiation from Fukushima is reaching the West Coast — but you don’t need to freak out
By Chris Mooney December 29, 2014
A worker walks past first storage tanks of radioactive contaminated water at tsunami-crippled Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. (EPA/Kimimasa Mayama)
The 2011 Fukushima Daiichi crisis was the worst nuclear disaster in decades, and people in Japan are still living with its consequences. One team of scientists estimated in 2012 that the radiation released from Fukushima's four reactors may ultimately claim 130 lives and cause 180 additional cases of cancer (in addition to the exposures suffered by workers on site). Radiation releases into the ocean near the Fukushima plant also led to fisheries closures and bans, and a tightening of acceptable limits for radiation in Japanese seafood.
Naturally, in light of all this, many Americans have been concerned -- sometimes overly so -- that radiation from Fukushima, traveling through the vast Pacific ocean, would eventually make its way to the waters off the West Coast of the United States and Canada. And according to a new scientific paper just out in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that has indeed happened.
The paper, by John N. Smith of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (a government agency) and several colleagues, is the "first systematic study...of the transport of the Fukushima marine radioactivity signal to the eastern North Pacific," and concludes that radiation reached the continental shelf of Canada by June of last year, and has increased somewhat since.
But-- and here's the good news -- the levels of radiation are very low, well below levels that public health authorities cite as grounds for concern. The radiation "does not represent a threat to human health or the environment," reports the paper.
The new study is not the first to reach that conclusion. "We came up with something like 500 to 1000 times less of a dose, the hazard of the radiation of swimming in the Pacific, as a dental X Ray," says senior scientist Ken Buesseler of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who was not involved in the current study. Buesseler heads a crowd-funded, citizen research project, Our Radioactive Oceans, which first reported the presence of small quantities of Fukushima radiation in a sample taken in August 2014 100 miles off the coast of Eureka, Calif. The radiation was at low levels, similar to that reported in the current research.
In fact, what's truly amazing about the work is that scientists are able to actually measure these very low levels of radiation at all -- as well as to chemically fingerprint them and thereby prove that certain radioisotopes of the chemical element Cesium, which arise as a by-product of nuclear fission, actually arrived off of North American waters after traveling all the way from Fukushima.
In the current paper, the researchers accomplished this by taking a series of measurements, from 2011-2014, on ocean vessels which traveled 1,500 kilometers out from Canadian coastal waters into the Pacific. Water samples were taken to look for two radioisotopes, Cesium-134 and Cesium-137, both of which were released as part of the radioactivity from Fukushima.
Cesium-134 has a two-year half-life (meaning half of it will have decayed within 2 years), whereas Cesium-137 has a 30 year half life. What that means is that the presence of Cesium-134 allows scientists to conclusively separate out Fukushima-generated radiation from the other major human source of radiation in the Pacific -- nuclear weapons testing, which happened decades ago (there would be no more Cesium-134 detectable from this source). This simple fact allows for "unequivocal" detection of radiation originating from Fukushima, even thousands of miles away, noted the new study.
In light of this, the paper found that radiation from Fukushima was definitely detectable in waters of the Canadian continental shelf by June 2013, and had apparently increased somewhat by February of 2014. However, the levels of radiation are quite low. For nuclear power nerds, the Fukushima radiation levels were under 1 Becquerel per cubic meter of ocean water, where a Becquerel refers to one nuclear decay per second and a cubic meter of ocean is 1000 liters (or 260 gallons).
"A Becquerel per cubic meter is not a lot of radioactivity," says Stony Brook University's Nicholas Fisher, another researcher who has published on Fukushima radioactivity's contamination of the oceans, but was not involved in the current study. For reference, the background levels of Cesium-137 in many parts of the world ocean is actually higher than that:
Credit: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
Indeed, the number underscores just how much the Fukushima radiation has been diluted and dispersed in its three-year journey across the Pacific. In the waters right off the Fukushima plant, just after the accident, radiation levels were 50 million Becquerels per cubic meter -- extremely dangerous -- explains Woods Hole's Ken Buesseler. A few months later, levels were in the low thousands, he adds -- still worrisome if you are consuming seafood.
But now that the radiation has reached the waters of the West Coast, levels of 1 or 2 Becquerels per cubic meter are pretty tiny and dilute. "It’s tens of millions of degrees on the sun, versus the temperature on the Earth," says Buesseler. "So that’s the difference in having 1 or 2 of these Becquerels, versus what was off Japan."
The radiation levels on the West Coast from Fukushima may still grow a tad higher, and actually reach the beaches. But they are not expected to approach levels that would worry public health authorities or scientists, who are constantly mindful of the fact that there is radiation all around us.
"Most of the radioactivity in the oceans is natural radioactivity, and it has nothing to do with nuclear power plants or atomic weapons or anything like that," explains Stony Brook's Nicholas Fisher,. "Something on the order of 99 percent of all the radioactivity in the oceans is natural."
Here's a helpful figure from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution showing as much:
Credit: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
Nonetheless, there has long been public concern about risks from low level radiation, which is understandable in light of the fact that you may be exposed and yet never know it. And there has often been overblown concern about radiation from Fukushima in particular, including the circulation of numerous scary (and often misleading) images purporting to show radiation flowing across the Pacific.
Scientists actually studying the matter have a very different outlook on the Fukushima radiation and its long range travels. "My take home is always, don’t trivialize it or dismiss it, but also don’t exaggerate what the effects might be," says Woods Hole's Ken Buesseler. "Some people are adamantly anti-nuclear, and that’s fine, but don’t scare people from swimming in the Pacific."
Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/29/radiation-from-fukushima-is-reaching-the-west-coast-but-you-dont-need-to-freak-out/
Yep, and the same goes for the last wars we have been involved in.
Why is diesel more expensive than gasoline?
If you read a lot of blogs it is because the taxes are higher, the cost of low sulphur refining is expensive, refinery space is marginal, blah, blah, blah.
The real reason is because we are exporting diesel around the world. It does not have the same restrictions as gasoline regarding export.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100943620
If Keystone is passed, there will be a stronger demand for the Canadian oil we now get relatively cheap. The price will be bid up due to world demand, especially from China (who has bought up some tar sands companies). US consumers will end up paying more for gasoline at home.
We in essence will be puting our environment at risk, the jobs created are much lower than proclaimed, and we will end up paying more at the pump.
Such a deal.
Global Energy Demand and Supply
http://www.yardeni.com/pub/globdemsup.pdf
China -- like the United States -- needs to import oil and natural gas to meet its country's energy needs. Also, like the U.S., China recognizes that importing oil from Canada would be a lot more reliable and create a lot less foreign policy issues than, for example, importing oil from the Middle East. But, unlike the Unites States, the Chinese do not currently have a cost effective means of getting Canadian oil to China.
Building the Keystone KXL pipeline would change that.
Building the pipeline would make it possible for the Chinese to transport their Canadian oil across the United States to Texas where they could put it on tankers for shipment to China.
Making it possible for the Chinese government to ship Canadian oil to China wouldn't just mean that the United States would be giving up its exclusive access to Canadian tar sands oil or that U.S. families and businesses would have to pay more for oil and gasoline or that the United States would have to import oil from countries less friendly to our foreign policy than Canada. Building the KXL pipeline would also mean that we would be helping our county's biggest global competitor -- China -- meet its energy import needs at the expense of our own. Sounds like a great deal for China, but not such a good deal for the United States.
Fact Check: Keystone XL Would Ship Foreign Oil To Foreign Lands
BY GUEST CONTRIBUTOR POSTED ON DECEMBER 20, 2011 AT 2:24 PM
facebook icon 1,338Share This twitter icon 120Tweet This "Fact Check: Keystone XL Would Ship Foreign Oil To Foreign Lands" Share: facebook icon twitter icon
Our guest blogger is Anthony Swift, policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
One of the most important facts that is missing in the national debate surrounding the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is this — Keystone XL will not bring any more oil into the United State for decades to come. Canada doesn’t have nearly enough oil to fill existing pipelines going to the United States. However, existing Canadian oil pipelines all go to the Midwest, where the only buyer for their crude is the United States. Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in free trade zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL’s oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.
The fact that Canada has excess pipeline capacity is well known. In a Department of Energy report evaluating Keystone XL’s impacts on U.S. energy supply over the next twenty years, the agency found that it will take decades for Canada to produce enough oil to fill existing pipelines. On page 90, the report concludes that the United States will import the same amount of crude from Canada through 2030 whether or not Keystone XL is built.
From Canada’s perspective, the problem with existing pipelines is they all end in the U.S. Midwest and only allow one buyer – the United States. As Canada’s Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver recently said, “we export 97 percent of our energy to the U.S. and we would like to diversify that.” However, the Canadian government has put the brakes on the two pipeline proposals to export tar sands through its provinces due to the need to take more time to listen to its own public’s concerns about water and safety.
Keystone XL would be Canada’s first step in diversifying its energy market. The pipeline would divert large volumes of Canadian oil from the Midwest to the Gulf Coast, where it would be available for the first time to buyers on the world market. To sweeten the deal, many of the refineries on the Gulf Coast happen to be located in foreign trade zones, where they can export Canadian oil to the world market without paying U.S. taxes. Oil Change International investigated this issue in a report that found the Keystone XL pipeline was part of a larger strategy to sell increasing volumes of Canadian crude on the international diesel market.
When Canadian regulators at the National Energy Board (NEB) considered the Keystone XL proposal in 2008, they asked TransCanada to justify another pipeline when there was already so much spare capacity. TransCanada conceded that Keystone XL would take oil from existing pipelines, increasing shipping costs. However, TransCanada argued that this cost would be more than offset as shifting Canadian oil from the Midwest to the Gulf would increase the price that Americans paid for Canadian oil by $3.9 billion.
In fact, TransCanada refused to support a requirement that oil on Keystone XL be used in the United States in a recent Congressional hearing. Earlier this month, Representative Edward Markey asked TransCanada’s President Alex Pourbaix to support a condition that would require the oil on Keystone XL to be used in the United States. Mr. Pourbaix refused, saying that a requirement to keep oil on Keystone XL in the United States would cause refineries to back out of their contracts. That very well may be the case as Valero, one of the largest prospective purchasers of Keystone XL’s crude, has already told its investors the its future business is in international export.
Simply stated, Keystone XL is a way to get Canadian oil out of the United States, not into it.
My understanding is that Coleman's degree is in Journalism not Climatology. He has not done any scientific studies himself.
Republicans Vote Against Increased VA Funding
Posted by General on November 30 1999
Two billion to rescue our ailing VA system as new vets flood the system? Not necessary. apparently.
From the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 />Washington Post: (with thanks to jmarshall on our comment board)
"Republicans beat back a Democratic attempt to provide almost $2 billion in additional health care funding for veterans. rejecting claims that Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals are in crisis."
VA hospitals are doing just fine. huh? Tell that to Jeremy Lewis or Denver Jones - just two of the thousands of Iraq vets who came home to months of bureaucracy and delayed treatment. But it's not just Iraq vets who think the VA needs some help.
As the VFW Commander-in-Chief Edward S. Banas has commented:
"The DVA [Department of Veterans Affairs] has been chronically under-funded for decades."
Or maybe these Senators could take the word of the White House's Office of Management and Budget.
"more veterans are seeking VA medical care services... This increased demand has put pressure on VA's ability to care for its core-mission veteran population."
Want to know more about the underfunded VA? Click here.
The vote (46/54 against) followed party lines. with the exception of Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA). How did your senator vote? Check it out here.
VA funding should not be a partisan issue. Providing war vets with the care they need is not about politics. it's about patriotism. civic duty. or -- oh yeah. basic decency. I'm going to email my reps and tell them so. And so can you -- through our site.
By: Vanessa Williamson
http://iava.org/blog/republicans-vote-against-increased-va-funding
China Poised to Grab the Gold (Bar)
The Wall Street Journal By Matt Day
11 hours ago
China is poised to snag the title of the world's biggest gold buyer, a feat that could support prices of the precious metal as well as accelerate the global bullion market's shift eastward.
Related Stories
Gold Demand in China Seen at Record as Bear Market Spurs Sales Bloomberg
China's gold demand tops 1,000 tonnes for first time Reuters
World Gold Council: 2013 Review And 2014 Outlook Seeking Alpha
China gold demand strong after holiday; Indian premiums fall Reuters
China Goes On Vacation And The Gold Rally Stalls Seeking Alpha
Gold purchases by Chinese consumers jumped 41% last year to a record, according to data released Monday by the China Gold Association. China has long had a cultural affinity for precious metals, and the increasing affluence of consumers there, along with more relaxed investment restrictions, has boosted the country's demand for gold bars and jewelry alike.
The increase was enough to overtake India, which for decades, if not centuries, held the No. 1 spot, according to estimates from several analysts.
Many investors are turning their attention to China following last year's gold-price rout. Gold plunged 28% in 2013, its biggest decline in 32 years, as money managers in the U.S. and Europe dumped gold and bought assets, such as stocks, that were poised to benefit from a pickup in growth.
But that swoon has paused after a raft of bad news out of emerging markets cast doubt on growth prospects around the world. On Monday, front-month gold for February delivery rose 0.9%, to $1,274.80 a troy ounce, a settlement high for the year. The metal is up 6.1% year to date, while the S&P 500 has fallen 2.6% in 2014.
Last year's losses in gold were blunted by soaring demand in the world's second-biggest economy, which only in the past decade has eased restrictions on purchases of the metal. Many Chinese buyers saw declining prices as a buying opportunity. A spurt in trading activity is helping to reshape the inner workings of the gold market.
"The physical center of gravity is moving more toward Asia," said William Purpura, a member of New York's Comex exchange, home to the global benchmark gold futures contract, since 1981. With business at New York trading floors in decline and more trading moving to computer screens, he is looking to profit from China's increasing appetite for gold.
Last summer, he moved the Asian-based traders at his trading firm, Northport Commodities Pte. Ltd., from Singapore to Shanghai.
Mr. Purpura isn't alone. In the past year, Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd., UBS AG, Deutsche Bank AG and Barclays PLC all opened gold vaults in Singapore or Shanghai in an effort to tap rising interest in gold. Gold refiner Metalor Technologies SA in 2013 opened its first refinery in Singapore.
Chinese bourses accounted for 22% of gold trades conducted on exchanges last year, compared with 10% in 2012, according to precious-metals consulting firm Thomson Reuters GFMS, which co-produces quarterly reports on the world gold market with mining-industry group the World Gold Council.
The council is scheduled to release its quarterly update next week, and many analysts expect the report to confirm China in the top spot among gold consumers. The China Gold Association pegged Chinese demand at 1,176.4 metric tons last year. GFMS estimates Chinese demand at 1,190 tons, compared with demand from India at 987 tons.
Gold once attracted legions of fans, such as hedge-fund managers John Paulson and George Soros, but it lost its allure as many Western fund managers have abandoned investments perceived as safe amid signs of economic stability. After the financial crisis, the metal was bolstered by the belief that central-bank monetary stimulus would stoke runaway inflation. Gold in the past has been bought to protect against such broad-based price increases.
The amount of gold held by the SPDR Gold Trust, the largest gold-backed exchange-traded fund, is down slightly this year.
To be sure, hedge funds aren't the only ones that can be fickle gold investors, market observers said. The financial liberalization that helped fuel Chinese gold demand in recent years may ultimately limit the country's appetite for the precious metal, they said.
Moreover, skeptics said lessons from India could also eventually apply to China. Gold investors have long relied on Indian demand to steady prices, but this traditional bastion of support showed cracks last year when the government took measures to discourage imports to close a trade deficit. Those measures helped limit the increase in Indian gold demand to 4.8%, according to GFMS.
Write to Chuin-Wei Yap at chuin-wei.yap@wsj.com
I'm not sure how much gold would be produced at $800 per oz.
I for one am surprised the current move has been so strong. As a long holder of this stock and having been burned badly I view their releases with a good deal of skepticism. I'm sure I am not alone. Fool me once etc etc.
IF all the financing is in place for the next year and IF they can beginning turning a profit then the improvement in stock price should continue. If this is just short covering I doubt it will last much past the first of the year.
Nice to see a little action on this board.
nwsailor
Is this drop below 2 a sweep of the stops or is it sustained and we are going even lower? We should know soon.
Silver Wheaton reports record 2012 operating and financial results
03/21/2013
TSX: SLW
NYSE: SLW
VANCOUVER, March 21, 2013 /CNW/ - Silver Wheaton Corp. ("Silver Wheaton" or the "Company") (TSX:SLW) (NYSE:SLW) is pleased to announce its audited results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2012. All figures are presented in United States dollars unless otherwise noted.
FULL YEAR HIGHLIGHTS
Fourth consecutive year of record attributable silver equivalent production of 29.6 million ounces compared to 25.4 million ounces in 2011, representing an increase of 17%.
Record silver equivalent sales of 27.3 million ounces compared to 21.1 million ounces in 2011, representing an increase of 30%.
Record revenues of $849.6 million compared to $730.0 million in 2011, representing a 16% increase.
Record net earnings of $586.0 million ($1.66 per share) compared to $550.0 million ($1.56 per share) in 2011, representing a 7% increase.
Record operating cash flows of $719.4 million ($2.03 per share1) compared to $626.4 million ($1.77 per share1) in 2011, representing a 15% increase.
Cash operating margin1 of $26.79 per silver equivalent ounce, compared to $30.56 in 2011, representing a 12% decrease.
Average cash costs1 rose to $4.30 per silver equivalent ounce, compared to $4.09 in 2011, representing a 5% increase.
In August 2012, acquired from Hudbay Minerals Inc. ("Hudbay") a precious metals stream from its currently producing 777 mine ("777") and a silver stream from its cornerstone development project, Constancia.
During 2012, Silver Wheaton paid $123.9 million in dividends ($0.35 per share) compared to $63.6 million in 2011 ($0.18 per share), representing a 95% increase.
FOURTH QUARTER HIGHLIGHTS
Record attributable silver equivalent production of 8.5 million ounces compared to 6.9 million ounces in Q4 2011 and 7.7 million ounces in Q3 2012, representing an increase of 22% and 10%, respectively.
Record silver equivalent sales of 9.1 million ounces compared to 6.0 million ounces in Q4 2011 and 5.1 million ounces in Q3 2012, representing an increase of 53% and 78%, respectively.
Record revenues of $287.2 million compared to $191.9 million in Q4 2011, representing a 50% increase.
Record net earnings of $177.7 million ($0.50 per share) compared to $144.7 million ($0.41 per share) in Q4 2011, representing a 23% increase.
Record operating cash flows of $254.0 million ($0.72 per share1) compared to $163.7 million ($0.46 per share1) in Q4 2011, representing a 55% increase.
Cash operating margin1 of $26.76 per silver equivalent ounce, compared to $28.06 in Q4 2011, representing a 5% decrease.
Average cash costs1 rose to $4.70 per silver equivalent ounce, compared to $4.06 per silver equivalent ounce in Q4 2011, representing a 16% increase, driven primarily by higher costs associated with silver and gold from the Hudbay 777 mine ($5.90 and $400 per ounce of silver and gold, respectively).
Declared quarterly dividend of $0.14 per common share, representing 20% of the cash generated by operating activities during the three months ended December 31, 2012.
2013 OUTLOOK
Silver Wheaton anticipates a 13% year over year increase in its 2013 attributable production to approximately 33.5 million silver equivalent ounces, including 145 thousand ounces of gold.
In 2017, the Company forecasts 53 million ounces of silver equivalent production (including 180 thousand ounces of gold), which represents an increase of 79% from 2012.
The acquisition of the Salobo and Sudbury gold streams from Vale S.A. ("Vale") subsequent to December 31, 2012, is expected to double Silver Wheaton's attributable gold production over the next five years. Coupled with a full year of attributable production from Hudbay's 777 mine, acquired in August 2012, these cornerstone assets will drive the company's production growth in 2013.
As per the Company's news release dated March 19, 2013, attributable silver and gold reserves increased to 851.4 million ounces and 4.96 million ounces, respectively, as a result of organic and acquisition growth, inclusive of the acquisition of gold streams from Vale's Salobo and Sudbury mines. Based on reserve estimates as at December 31, 20121, following the Vale transaction, silver equivalent reserves attributable to Silver Wheaton have grown to 1.12 billion ounces2.
___________________________
Silver Wheaton reports record 2012 operating and financial results
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/silver-wheaton-reports-record-2012-224900860.html
$2.52 held. Nice call
Bond Market and Gold
At some point in the future the Fed is going to stop QE3 or it's equivalent. There will be a rush to exit the bond market, prices will drop and interest rates rise. Will there be a flight to safety (gold) or will the rising interest rates cause gold to decline further? I would appreciate anyone's thoughts.
Is it that common for companies like Raymond James to come out with a rating so close to earnings reports? Why don't they wait until after the report?
Hopefully the bottom is in for now. This is the point where Total bought last December. $2.98. Will they defend it here?
The rights showed in my account today. I tried to exercise them and the broker said it might take a day or two.
From this am's job report:
Mining lost 9,000 jobs in October, with most of the decline occurring in support activities for mining. Since May of this year, employment in mining has decreased by 17,000.
Drilling more oil doesn't reduce gas prices.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/03/analysis-more-drilling-doesnt-lower-gasoline-prices/1
Short volume ratio rising
http://www.shortvolume.com/
It's certainly an improvement over the past. Maybe the knife has ceased dropping.
Question: If "they" can crash gold like that why don't "they" do it to oil?
Gold up $26.70 HUI -.25 XAU -.83
Looks like another set up where they buy the ETF's and short the miners. It would sure be nice to see the miners participate in these rallys.
Does that include all the Boomers who retired?
Does 53.98 count?
Please define "currency reset". Does that mean going back to a gold standard?
Still reading. Amazing stuff! Thanks for the post.