InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 9
Posts 3907
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/07/2002

Re: Zeev Hed post# 338200

Sunday, 12/26/2004 11:41:35 PM

Sunday, December 26, 2004 11:41:35 PM

Post# of 704019
Just a couple of questions/comments.

1. A major question is if a Government owned oil industry can indeed be vibrant and raise current Russian production levels. I doubt it, one reason I don’t think that crude will get much under $40/barrel (increased Russian supply could put pressure on prices).

You used to talk about huge oil supply available (from shale?) if oil got above $40-45/barrel (not sure what that is equivalent to in current dollars, though it was only a couple of years ago, it seems to me, and inflation hasn't been a big factor since then). So is someone going after this supply, with oil prices in the 40s and no end in sight? Should this not pretty much cap oil here?

2. On SS. When Social Security was first enacted, life expectancy was around 61 or so (cf http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html for a life expectancy table). Wouldn't SS be made whole if we simply raised the age at which people begin to receive benefits to something closer to an equivalent age, relative to life expectancy (e.g., 75 or so--that wouldn't even really be quite equivalent, but would likely be enough given increased productivity)? Especially so if we either increased the caps on which people pay SS or eliminated them altogether, and made a maximum payout, combined these with a means test for payouts. I'd need an actuary to do the actual math, but it just seems like simple common sense to me. If so, this also would have the virtue of reassuring the markets, I think, in that it would show them that we can be serious about addressing the deficit and our future liabilities.


Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.