Gold has historically been the value of measurement of a currency. But you could add all commodities together and use that as a pretty good metric. You could measure it with a stable currency, like the Swiss Franc. You could measure it with past purchasing power of the dollar. By all these measurements, the dollar is falling.

I answered your question, now answer mine. Tell me more about futures.

FP:
When you say most every other commodity has a higher price, you most certainly are aware that futures for ;

Wheat
Soybeans
Corn
Natural Gas
Copper
Coffee
Lumber

....as well as the DJ-UBS Commodity Index are all lower than they were 1 year ago.

Milk prices are reflecting the demand for higher protein diets in developing nations, with a healthy export market currently, and when you say Milk is twice as much 'as it used to be', I guess I'd say it's around 2 times as expensive as it was in 1980............. at 2.16 per gallon then.

Average them all together, your dollar buys less than it used to. I used the word "most" and not "all" for a reason. Some commodities have less demand now, for example lumber is down because people aren't building houses right now. Other commodities have a less elastic demand, for example, oil.

In a declining economy with a stable currency, I'd expect that all commodities would decline because there is less demand. But we all know gas and groceries are costing more and more.

It's nice how you are manipulating statistics by setting an arbitrary starting date. That is cherry picking, which is a bogus statistical technique and the starting date can be adjusted to prove anything. Since markets go up and down, a single date point is not as illustrative as looking at multiple date points.

Sure in the last year the commodities index is 8% down, but in the last 3 months, it's up 4%. In the last 24 months it's up 13%. In the last 5 years it's up 23%. It's the long term trend that I'm concerned with, not cherry picking a certain date range just to prove a point.

Go back to mowing lawns, you know more about grass than you do about financial markets.

One can look to the dollar index to see that the value of the dollar bottomed in 2008. If your argument held true then you would be claiming very short periods of the dollar falling would cause a proportional rise in oil prices. For instance a 1% drop in the dollar causes oil to jump 1%. That simply hasn't held true.

Now your other question seems to be centered around your idea that markets in general cannot be manipulated which we all know is not true.

Here was a good 60 minutes segment on the subject from an insider who ought to know:

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-4707770.html

""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. "

Sometimes I think there's a kid mode switch on FP's back.

You would be wise to consider the lesson in your tag line.

It is directly applicable to you in this discussion.

It doesn't matter if the investors invest in futures, this doesn't raise the price. They might make a profit, they might take a loss. If oil goes up, they profit, if it goes down they take a loss. Futures contracts are economically neutral. The futures contracts are a reflection of the price, not a cause of it. If the futures contracts were too high of a price, those who were buying them would quit buying them and the futures market would fall.

I'm not worried about short term fluctuations in markets, but the long term trend. Long term trend is that the dollar has lost over 95% of it's value since 1913.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to think that the dollar isn't falling. Do you buy things? Have you noticed that prices in general are going up? Look at the consumer price index's long term trends. It isn't just oil that is going up in value.

Perhaps instead of pointing the finger at speculators in the futures market, whom we can't do anything about and it can't be established that they are contributing to the problem, we should look towards the politicians in Congress and the Federal Reserve, which are contributing to the problem and we can control by un-electing them.

You seem a little wound up today, FP.

I bet a run out to the river would help.

Too bad that, like Stlhead, the local rivers are too high. Bonking something repeatedly on the head sounds good about now.

Like Stinkingupthewaters is going to add anything to any debate. My tag line mentions losing not listening to losers.

FP obviously did not read the article and wishes to maintain an extremely simplistic view of the world and it's markets. There is no such thing as a free market.
The dollar is falling? Prices are rising? Relative to what? Here is a chart from the World Bank showing the last four years the US has fared better inflation wise than most other countries.

I don't need to.

FP is doing a fine job proving you're in WAY over your head all by himself.

Sweet, we are doing better than Zimbabwe and the Euro, with it's member states defaulting on debts.

Your articles are extremely light on facts, which is why they are dismissed so easily.

None of them explain how futures contracts can possibly raise prices. I'm still waiting for your explanation. I'm not asking you to paste another link from some garbage article made for morons to consume, but for you to explain in your own words, how a futures contract raises prices. Keep in mind that the futures market has two sides. The long side, those who think the price is going up and the short side, those who think the price is coming down. Explain how these two people betting against each other can influence the price for a third party set in the market.

Also, you will notice that the closer a futures contract comes to delivery date the closer the futures price mimics the spot price, in other words the future price moves towards the spot price, not the spot price moving towards the future price. The only reason that the spot price seems to follow the future price months out from the delivery date is that they are both influenced by the same factor: the actual future cost of oil. The future contract with a delivery date of tomorrow and the spot price of oil tomorrow are caused by the exact same factor, the future contract is not setting the spot price.

To an idiot like you, you see the future contract with a higher price and then months later see oil with a higher price and commit the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc, and don't even think there could be a factor influencing both prices. Yet you accuse me of having a simplistic world view. Quit posting stupid crap on the internet, learn some Latin, read some Aristotle and then get back to me.

"FP is doing a fine job proving you're in WAY over your head all by himself."

He's on your level that's for sure. If I were FP I'd be real worried about having you agree with his arguments.

"Your articles are extremely light on facts, which is why they are dismissed so easily."

As is 100% of everything you have said. All shot down. All worthless drivel having no basis in fact.
You have been shown that supply and demand could not be responsible for alot of these price fluctuations since neither supply nor demand changed. You're US dollar argument has been whole heartedly trashed. I've shown you two articles for your viewing pleasure that may be an explanation and there are plenty more out there. Some more homework for you and along the same lines...how can more shares be short sold in a single day than exist and what does that do to the stock price? Show your work dipsh!t!

I loved the Twat comment, true classic. This is exactly why I went from a full size truck to a 4 cylnder ranger..... isn't going to "Pull any wool" so to speak but I am not freaking out about gas anymore...

You haven't shot down anything Stlhead, if you think you have you are even dumber than you first appeared.

The dollar argument has not been trashed. The dollar has lost value against every currency that hasn't been inflated, like the swiss franc. It has lost against gold. It has lost against oil. It has lost value compared to the consumer price index. It has lost value compared to the commodities index. No matter how you measure it, the value of the dollar has declined over time, thanks to inflation.

Here is an inflation calculator from the federal reserve itself, right from the horse's mouth, it's on the right hand side of the page:

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/

Find out how well the dollar is doing. It is an indisputable fact that the dollar is declining. If you think this somehow is unconnected to the price of oil, you are insane.

Here is a chart of the dollar's value vs the price of oil:



Don't you think that if oil producers are getting less purchasing power from their dollar then they will jack up the price to keep getting the same value from their product?

Haven't answered my question. Answer the question.

More shares can be sold in a day than exist because each share can be traded more than one time in a day. Are you seriously ignorant of such a basic economic fact or just trolling?

I have asked you several questions with no answer. Most burning is:

Explain the mechanics on how a futures contract can change the spot price of oil.

If you won't answer this, you are just trolling and not worth responding to anymore. Don't evade the question, don't try and change the topic. Just answer it or STFU.

One more chart for snivelhead...



If you use gold as your measure of value, oil hasn't moved at all, just the dollar and euro have lost value.

"I don't want to derail the conversation."

That is all you do...derail the conversation. It's your modus operandi. Flip the kid switch to on and go into BS mode which probably works on followers like stinkingupthewaters. When called out switch the subject.

So tell me how trading is allowed on barrels of oil that don't exist much the same as it is on stocks? If you had read the articles that's what they are insinuating. That the spot price no longer reflects a physical barrel of oil that will be taken for delivery. It's not the price that supply and demand dictates it should be.

From the link:

" Last year, 27 barrels of crude were being traded every day on the New York Mercantile Exchange for every one barrel of oil that was actually being consumed in the United States."

If we required that actual delivery of barrels of oil had to be taken much the same as we should require that you actually have to borrow a stock in order to short sell it then the price would more truly reflect supply and demand. Enough for your simple brain to comprehend? I hope so because that's all I'm feeding it today.