Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another,
and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. As EA says, it's time to bend over: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...anted=all&_r=0 -- Ed Huntress |
#2
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote:
So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. As EA says, it's time to bend over: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...anted=all&_r=0 I read the article with great attention and, while it is intelligently written, I do not "get it". I do not see why an industrial consumer of aluminum needs to buy it from those warehouses. They can go straight to any aluminum producer or wholesalers. My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. i |
#3
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648
wrote: On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote: So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. As EA says, it's time to bend over: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...anted=all&_r=0 I read the article with great attention and, while it is intelligently written, I do not "get it". I do not see why an industrial consumer of aluminum needs to buy it from those warehouses. They can go straight to any aluminum producer or wholesalers. Two points: Golden Sacks now controls 25% of the aluminum in the US, and that's enough power to drive up the spot price for everyone else. If you ignore G-S's stock, that would mean 100% of the market was chasing 75% of the supply -- kaBOOM! go prices. My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. They're running a scam, Iggy. They're exploiting a London Metals Exchange rule that allows them to lard billions of dollars on top of the commodity price, for "warehousing" it. They're not allowed to keep it in a warehouse for very long under those rules, so they load up a truck and cart it off to *another* of their warehouses. Then the truck returns to the first warehouse with aluminum from the second warehouse. They're skimming off billions of dollars, and it's all legal. Isn't it great when you set the rules that control your own business? g -- Ed Huntress |
#4
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648
wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress |
#5
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Best Regards Tom. |
#6
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:53:55 -0700, "Howard Beal"
wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Best Regards Tom. I don't think it will blow up. The only thing that will get in its way is new regulations. What do you think the chances are of that, with his Congress? Maybe the London Metal Exchange will step in. They can do so if they want to. The set the warehousing rules for companies that trade on the LME. -- Ed Huntress |
#7
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Whether this cost is consumers' cost, is exactly what is not so obvious to me. I think that this weird warehousing scam costs the speculators who pay for warehousing services, as opposed to aluminum producers or direct (off exchange) buyers of aluminum, or to the end users of aluminum that was never sold on exchanges. These costs are real, and Goldman is running a scam, but they are speculators' costs, not consumer costs. I am quite convinced that I am right. I have a MBA degree from the University of Chicago, and I studied quantitative finance, and when they discuss pricing of commodity futures, the futures price depends on 1) interest rate and 2) storage costs. This is true of any commodity and affects no-arbitrage pricing. Storage costs is what Goldman is jacking up. But that only affects futures pricing and settlement. It has no effect on off-exchange aluminum trading. i |
#8
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On 2013-07-20, Howard Beal wrote:
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Goldman does not own that aluminum. Goldman only invented a way to rip-off LME futures speculators, who "own" aluminum, but pay Goldman to store it. i Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Best Regards Tom. |
#9
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:53:55 -0700, "Howard Beal"
wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? If I were king, they'd be beheaded, not bailed out. Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Yeah, with our taxpayer money. -- The Road to Success...is always under construction. --anon |
#10
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 21:37:23 -0500, Ignoramus8648
wrote: On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Whether this cost is consumers' cost, is exactly what is not so obvious to me. I think that this weird warehousing scam costs the speculators who pay for warehousing services, as opposed to aluminum producers or direct (off exchange) buyers of aluminum, or to the end users of aluminum that was never sold on exchanges. These costs are real, and Goldman is running a scam, but they are speculators' costs, not consumer costs. I am quite convinced that I am right. I have a MBA degree from the University of Chicago, and I studied quantitative finance, and when they discuss pricing of commodity futures, the futures price depends on 1) interest rate and 2) storage costs. This is true of any commodity and affects no-arbitrage pricing. Storage costs is what Goldman is jacking up. But that only affects futures pricing and settlement. It has no effect on off-exchange aluminum trading. i 'Dunno, Iggy. You may want to look into it further. If I was still covering materials I'd call some friends at _American Metal Market_ for an explanation, but I'm not, so all I can do is repeat what the consultants are saying. But it parallels things that were happening in wheat markets a decade or so ago, where the financial controllers of the futures markets, and of grain storage, were indirectly setting the actual prices for red wheat. Golden Sacks apparently is using their control and inside knowledge to trade on their own behalf in the open market, so there are a lot of pieces to that puzzle. We'll see if any other parts of the financial press pick up on it, and what they say. -- Ed Huntress |
#11
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
"Ignoramus8648" wrote in message ... On 2013-07-20, Howard Beal wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Goldman does not own that aluminum. Goldman only invented a way to rip-off LME futures speculators, who "own" aluminum, but pay Goldman to store it. i I would think the speculators are smart enough to see that kind scam comming. Something else going on here. What would happen if Goldman decided to get out of the moving/storage bussines? Panic selling? Goldman has bets that prices will drop like gold did? Many lawsuits would result, thats what forced bunky to file for BK. Best Regards Tom. |
#12
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:53:55 -0700, "Howard Beal" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Best Regards Tom. I don't think it will blow up. The only thing that will get in its way is new regulations. What do you think the chances are of that, with his Congress? Maybe the London Metal Exchange will step in. They can do so if they want to. The set the warehousing rules for companies that trade on the LME. -- Ed Huntress Maybe Goldman wants new regulations ? It might make it easier to cover up how they scewed the speculators. Hell they might even pay for new regulations. Best Regards Tom. |
#13
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 08:18:31 -0700, "Howard Beal"
wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:53:55 -0700, "Howard Beal" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. -- Ed Huntress Bunky Hunt redux with different metals. Think they will get a bailout when it blows up? Will Bernanke buy up those troubled assets? Best Regards Tom. I don't think it will blow up. The only thing that will get in its way is new regulations. What do you think the chances are of that, with his Congress? Maybe the London Metal Exchange will step in. They can do so if they want to. The set the warehousing rules for companies that trade on the LME. -- Ed Huntress Maybe Goldman wants new regulations ? It might make it easier to cover up how they scewed the speculators. Hell they might even pay for new regulations. Best Regards Tom. I'm not inclined to expect collusion and conspiracies in general, but when it comes to Golden Sacks and JP Morgan, I assume it's true. -- Ed Huntress |
#14
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:37:23 PM UTC-4, Ignoramus8648 wrote:
Storage costs is what Goldman is jacking up. But that only affects futures pricing and settlement. It has no effect on off-exchange aluminum trading. i Nice to see that someone understands what is happening. Actually as I see it the storage cost per month of storage is not increasing. It is just that the length of time that one can store aluminum is increased. Dan |
#15
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. As EA says, it's time to bend over: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...anted=all&_r=0 ======================= Aluminum is only part of the story. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...it_work.ht ml http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...omplaints.html http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...SBRE96J0AS2013 http://moneymorning.com/2013/07/19/b...ions-in-fines/ [Enron lives!!!!!] Commodity trade speculation/bubbles] appears to be in large part driven by the existence of "phantom." assets, analogous to bank credit and/or the ability of a physical asset to operationally exist in several locations at the same time through "hypothecation" of collateral. In too many cases there are NO PHYSICAL ASSETS, only IOUs or markers. This is a far more important story than it appears, for example, speculation/market manipulation in food appears to have been a far more substantial factor in the "Arab Spring" and the collapse of a number of Mid-East governments than any sudden desire for freedom. Indeed, the continuing turmoil in Egypt can be almost entirely traced to unstable and rising food prices. In short, the vaunted "free market" appears to be collapsing at the macro scale in everything from the cost of capital [LIBOR/QE] to energy, largely due to the actions of the major players such as "Golden Sacks," the mega banks, the hedge funds, with the collusion of the politicians and regulators. FWIW G/S is now a bank. http://www.goldmansachs.com/what-we-...nding/banking/ |
#16
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:37:46 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. As EA says, it's time to bend over: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...anted=all&_r=0 ======================= Aluminum is only part of the story. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...it_work.ht ml Well, Matt Yglesias is asking in that piece essentially what Iggy is asking. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...omplaints.html This one does some explaining and concludes "Since 2010, the additional cost to aluminum users is about $3 billion annually, according to the Beer Institute, a Washington-based trade group that represents brewers." [talking about aluminum cans] "Buyers have to pay premiums over the LME benchmark prices even with a glut of aluminum being produced. Premiums in the U.S. surged to a record 12 cents to 13 cents a pound in June, almost doubling from 6.5 cents in summer 2010, according to the most recent data available from Austin, Texas-based researcher Harbor Intelligence. "Warehouses are creating logjams, said Chris Thorne, a Beer Institute spokesman. “Restrictive and outdated warehousing rules are interfering with normal supply-and-demand dynamics, creating supply-chain bottlenecks, and preventing brewers and other aluminum users from getting aluminum in time and at fair market prices,” Thorne said. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...SBRE96J0AS2013 [can't find] http://moneymorning.com/2013/07/19/b...ions-in-fines/ [Enron lives!!!!!] Ouch. Commodity trade speculation/bubbles] appears to be in large part driven by the existence of "phantom." assets, analogous to bank credit and/or the ability of a physical asset to operationally exist in several locations at the same time through "hypothecation" of collateral. In too many cases there are NO PHYSICAL ASSETS, only IOUs or markers. This is a far more important story than it appears, for example, speculation/market manipulation in food appears to have been a far more substantial factor in the "Arab Spring" and the collapse of a number of Mid-East governments than any sudden desire for freedom. Indeed, the continuing turmoil in Egypt can be almost entirely traced to unstable and rising food prices. In short, the vaunted "free market" appears to be collapsing at the macro scale in everything from the cost of capital [LIBOR/QE] to energy, largely due to the actions of the major players such as "Golden Sacks," the mega banks, the hedge funds, with the collusion of the politicians and regulators. FWIW G/S is now a bank. http://www.goldmansachs.com/what-we-...nding/banking/ This is ****ing me off. -- Ed Huntress |
#17
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
|
#18
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On 2013-07-21, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 21:37:23 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Whether this cost is consumers' cost, is exactly what is not so obvious to me. I think that this weird warehousing scam costs the speculators who pay for warehousing services, as opposed to aluminum producers or direct (off exchange) buyers of aluminum, or to the end users of aluminum that was never sold on exchanges. These costs are real, and Goldman is running a scam, but they are speculators' costs, not consumer costs. I am quite convinced that I am right. I have a MBA degree from the University of Chicago, and I studied quantitative finance, and when they discuss pricing of commodity futures, the futures price depends on 1) interest rate and 2) storage costs. This is true of any commodity and affects no-arbitrage pricing. Storage costs is what Goldman is jacking up. But that only affects futures pricing and settlement. It has no effect on off-exchange aluminum trading. i 'Dunno, Iggy. You may want to look into it further. If I was still covering materials I'd call some friends at _American Metal Market_ for an explanation, but I'm not, so all I can do is repeat what the consultants are saying. But it parallels things that were happening in wheat markets a decade or so ago, where the financial controllers of the futures markets, and of grain storage, were indirectly setting the actual prices for red wheat. Golden Sacks apparently is using their control and inside knowledge to trade on their own behalf in the open market, so there are a lot of pieces to that puzzle. We'll see if any other parts of the financial press pick up on it, and what they say. You do not have to call your friends, just think about that article, and you will arrive to the same conclusion. This is a cost charged to exchange participants and not to direct buyers. i |
#19
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:54:33 -0500, Ignoramus18103
wrote: On 2013-07-21, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 21:37:23 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: On 2013-07-20, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:53:08 -0500, Ignoramus8648 wrote: snip My best understanding of the story is that the storage costs are imposed on commodity speculators who own metal and use it as collateral, but do not hold it themselves. My heart does not really hurt for them. One more thing: The bottom line on all of this is that it has cost us consumers over $5 billion over the past three years. Whether this cost is consumers' cost, is exactly what is not so obvious to me. I think that this weird warehousing scam costs the speculators who pay for warehousing services, as opposed to aluminum producers or direct (off exchange) buyers of aluminum, or to the end users of aluminum that was never sold on exchanges. These costs are real, and Goldman is running a scam, but they are speculators' costs, not consumer costs. I am quite convinced that I am right. I have a MBA degree from the University of Chicago, and I studied quantitative finance, and when they discuss pricing of commodity futures, the futures price depends on 1) interest rate and 2) storage costs. This is true of any commodity and affects no-arbitrage pricing. Storage costs is what Goldman is jacking up. But that only affects futures pricing and settlement. It has no effect on off-exchange aluminum trading. i 'Dunno, Iggy. You may want to look into it further. If I was still covering materials I'd call some friends at _American Metal Market_ for an explanation, but I'm not, so all I can do is repeat what the consultants are saying. But it parallels things that were happening in wheat markets a decade or so ago, where the financial controllers of the futures markets, and of grain storage, were indirectly setting the actual prices for red wheat. Golden Sacks apparently is using their control and inside knowledge to trade on their own behalf in the open market, so there are a lot of pieces to that puzzle. We'll see if any other parts of the financial press pick up on it, and what they say. You do not have to call your friends, just think about that article, and you will arrive to the same conclusion. This is a cost charged to exchange participants and not to direct buyers. I've read about four articles since. A couple seem to know what they're talking about. They say that the net result is higher prices to consumers, in the billions. Take a look at my comments on the links that Unka' George posted. There is no way, in a field like this, that I'd apply simple deductive logic to a situation I know little about, and decide that I've reached the correct conclusion, without hearing from multiple experts. That's how I work. Most things I write about for publication are things about which I'm not an expert. My task is to figure out where to get the information from experts. I'm waiting for more. There will be more, because the Fed is getting involved in the general issue of banking firms warehousing commodities (revisiting regulations enacted in 2003), and the financial press, at least, will pick up on it. -- Ed Huntress |
#20
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html |
#21
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html http://www.cnbc.com/id/100901931 -- ""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann Coulter) |
#22
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html |
#23
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Thanks for the links, George. I'll read them this evening. -- Ed Huntress |
#24
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Thanks for the links, George. I'll read them this evening. Aluminum prices are actually down. http://www.infomine.com/investment/m...uminum/1-year/ |
#25
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 00:04:37 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Thanks for the links, George. I'll read them this evening. Aluminum prices are actually down. http://www.infomine.com/investment/m...uminum/1-year/ I knew someone would bring that up. g Look at the longer term. That's what they're talking about. There's a glut of aluminum right now. That's why Golden Sacks is trying to manipulate the market by keeping as much as they can out of circulation. They have futures positions to protect, and the rest of us are paying for it. As I follow the links that have shown up here, and the stories that are showing up in the aggregators, it's becoming clear that this whole thing is all about rigging the market. -- Ed Huntress |
#26
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message news On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 00:04:37 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Thanks for the links, George. I'll read them this evening. Aluminum prices are actually down. http://www.infomine.com/investment/m...uminum/1-year/ I knew someone would bring that up. g Look at the longer term. That's what they're talking about. They're down on the one year, the five year and also on the 24 year charts; pray tell how long of a term should we be looking at here? There's a glut of aluminum right now. That's why Golden Sacks is trying to manipulate the market by keeping as much as they can out of circulation. They have futures positions to protect, and the rest of us are paying for it. As I follow the links that have shown up here, and the stories that are showing up in the aggregators, it's becoming clear that this whole thing is all about rigging the market. This "whole thing" is called "capitalism", and it's been "rigged" since it's very inception.. I do have to agree however, if not for Goldman Sachs, aluminum prices would probably be even lower than they are today. |
#27
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:06:45 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message news On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 00:04:37 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:15:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Thanks for the links, George. I'll read them this evening. Aluminum prices are actually down. http://www.infomine.com/investment/m...uminum/1-year/ I knew someone would bring that up. g Look at the longer term. That's what they're talking about. They're down on the one year, the five year and also on the 24 year charts; pray tell how long of a term should we be looking at here? The 20-year charts. g I'd have to know what the beer people were expecting prices to be. In any case, I'm going to have to keep following the stories. It's not a subject I report about, but it will be useful background. There's a glut of aluminum right now. That's why Golden Sacks is trying to manipulate the market by keeping as much as they can out of circulation. They have futures positions to protect, and the rest of us are paying for it. As I follow the links that have shown up here, and the stories that are showing up in the aggregators, it's becoming clear that this whole thing is all about rigging the market. This "whole thing" is called "capitalism", and it's been "rigged" since it's very inception.. Ah, no, I don't agree with that. Commodities have often been vulnerable to price manipulation, and that's what the stories are saying about aluminum now. Capitalism, when it's working right, is about free competition, not rigged prices. I do have to agree however, if not for Goldman Sachs, aluminum prices would probably be even lower than they are today. Well, I still don't know enough about it. I'll look into it more when I can. My free evening just disappeared as I have to get ready for a conference call in the morning. -- Ed Huntress |
#28
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
Att: Ed
The mills of the gods continue to grind [slowly]. My question "is there now *ANY* market, including labor that is not fixed or rigged at the macro level (and at the taxpayers' risk?" http://www.economist.com/news/financ...-finance-metal =============================== On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html |
#29
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 09:28:09 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: Att: Ed The mills of the gods continue to grind [slowly]. My question "is there now *ANY* market, including labor that is not fixed or rigged at the macro level (and at the taxpayers' risk?" http://www.economist.com/news/financ...-finance-metal =============================== On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:32:51 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: snip So, Golden Sacks is driving aluminum from one warehouse to another, and then back again, to drive up prices for "warehousing" it. Meantime, JPMorgan bought up more than half of the copper warehoused for the US market, planning to do the same thing. snip FYI http://www.cnbc.com/id/100902782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100905731 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...sner-says.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...3-billion.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...es-review.html Ooh, yeah, it's ugly. When this first came up, I recall that some folks questioned whether the banks were doing anything underhanded. By now they're probably getting the idea. Sitting on commodities, making consumers line up to get what they own and collecting rent on them while doing it is underhanded enough. But the banks are withholding metals from the market while trading in those metals on their own accounts. That ought to be worth a prison term. But they've really bought themselves trouble by taking on America's canned-beer drinkers. That's REAL trouble, even if those drinkers will be staggering and belching their way with pitchforks and torches. Which reminds me, I finally got a chance to do some metal-bending last evening! I popped the cap off of a bottle of Beck's. -- Ed Huntress |
#30
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Saturday, August 17, 2013 11:43:33 AM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:
.. But the banks are withholding metals from the market while trading in those metals on their own accounts. That ought to be worth a prison term. Ed Huntress So what laws are the banks violating? As far as I know commodity trading is legal. Owning aluminum had better be legal or I am in trouble by having some raw stock in my basement. Since Aluminum prices have been going down, it looks like the banks are losing money. I am looking forward to copper prices to follow the Aluminum prices and go down. Dan |
#31
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
|
#32
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 15:20:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: snip So what laws are the banks violating? snip This is the crux of the problem. It may well be that after two decades of "deregulation" no laws were indeed broken, but then again, up until about 1865, holding people as chattels [slaves] broke no US laws either. The fact that no laws seem to have been violated is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. The granting of Federal tax exemption on the interest paid on municipal bonds must also be closely regulated/monitored due to widespread and increasing abuse, although that particular horse has been long ago been stolen, it may not be too late to save the tractor, saddle, hay, oats, corn, etc. by locking the barn now. IMNSHO -- The rogue banksters and financial dons/capos are now a far greater threat to not only the American Republic [as we know it] but the capitalist/free market economic system, than Marx, Lenin, Stalin or Mao ever was. |
#33
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 15:20:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: On Saturday, August 17, 2013 11:43:33 AM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote: . But the banks are withholding metals from the market while trading in those metals on their own accounts. That ought to be worth a prison term. Ed Huntress So what laws are the banks violating? Section 9(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. As far as I know commodity trading is legal. Not if you're manipulating prices at the same time -- which they are. Owning aluminum had better be legal or I am in trouble by having some raw stock in my basement. Unless you control the distribution rate of something like 25% of the aluminum on the US market, you probably don't have anything to worry about. Since Aluminum prices have been going down, it looks like the banks are losing money. I am looking forward to copper prices to follow the Aluminum prices and go down. Good luck. I'm sure that Golden Sacks has the futures prices hedged; probably shorted. -- Ed Huntress Dan |
#34
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 17:27:13 -0500, Ignoramus31265
wrote: On 2013-08-17, wrote: On Saturday, August 17, 2013 11:43:33 AM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote: . But the banks are withholding metals from the market while trading in those metals on their own accounts. That ought to be worth a prison term. Ed Huntress So what laws are the banks violating? As far as I know commodity trading is legal. Owning aluminum had better be legal or I am in trouble by having some raw stock in my basement. Since Aluminum prices have been going down, it looks like the banks are losing money. I am looking forward to copper prices to follow the Aluminum prices and go down. They are ripping off their customers, who bought metal on exchanges and seek to get physical delivery, by holding on to the metal longer than necessary and charging storage fees. It is a ripoff. But its effect on aluminum prices is not big. It doesn't have to be. Currency traders make or lose tens or hundreds of millions on the price-shift of 0.1% in a currency's value. Trading commodities can be similar, if you're leveraged 100:1 or more...which they are, because they don't have to own the commodity at all. It affects futures pricing in a minor way, because a trader who is contemplating buying a futures contract, anticipates paying extra ripoff storage fees. Golden Sacks et al. are trading contracts on their own account -- and they're manipulating prices by controlling the distribution of 25% of the aluminum in the U.S. Other than that, there should not be much effect on the price of aluminum. i |
#35
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 17:54:28 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 15:20:46 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: snip So what laws are the banks violating? snip This is the crux of the problem. It may well be that after two decades of "deregulation" no laws were indeed broken, but then again, up until about 1865, holding people as chattels [slaves] broke no US laws either. The fact that no laws seem to have been violated... I don't think that's the case, George. It appears that the SEC has acquired some balls and is going to go after them on something like 15 USC § 78i. is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. The granting of Federal tax exemption on the interest paid on municipal bonds must also be closely regulated/monitored due to widespread and increasing abuse, although that particular horse has been long ago been stolen, it may not be too late to save the tractor, saddle, hay, oats, corn, etc. by locking the barn now. IMNSHO -- The rogue banksters and financial dons/capos are now a far greater threat to not only the American Republic [as we know it] but the capitalist/free market economic system, than Marx, Lenin, Stalin or Mao ever was. |
#36
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Saturday, August 17, 2013 6:54:28 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:
The fact that no laws seem to have been violated is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. I think letting states have lotteries is worse. It harms people that can little afford to be harmed. Dan |
#37
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:16:14 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: On Saturday, August 17, 2013 6:54:28 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote: The fact that no laws seem to have been violated is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. I think letting states have lotteries is worse. It harms people that can little afford to be harmed. Dan Indeed it is. Operationally this is a tax on stupidity, but then so are derivatives where, like jack in the beanstalk, you trade the cow [real cash money] for a bag of magic beans... |
#38
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:52:47 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote: On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:16:14 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: On Saturday, August 17, 2013 6:54:28 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote: The fact that no laws seem to have been violated is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. I think letting states have lotteries is worse. It harms people that can little afford to be harmed. Dan Indeed it is. Operationally this is a tax on stupidity, but then so are derivatives where, like jack in the beanstalk, you trade the cow [real cash money] for a bag of magic beans... No one forces one to buy a ticket. Never forget that. If one has "surplus" cash they want to **** down a rat hole...thats their choice. As for me...my "surplus" cash goes to other things...food, gasoline, taxes etc etc. -- ""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann Coulter) |
#39
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 01:26:07 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote: On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:52:47 -0500, F. George McDuffee wrote: On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:16:14 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: On Saturday, August 17, 2013 6:54:28 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote: The fact that no laws seem to have been violated is not a justification for continued unethical and counterproductive [in the aggregate] activity but rather a highly persuasive argument for the immediate re-enactment (and draconian enforcement) of new and improved versions of Glass-Steagall to reconstruct the firewalls and bulkheads between the financial services sectors and the reanimation of the CFTC with reimposed position limits in the commodity markets [among many other things] and the re-regulation, if not prohibition, of "derivatives" aka gambling contracts. I think letting states have lotteries is worse. It harms people that can little afford to be harmed. Dan Indeed it is. Operationally this is a tax on stupidity, but then so are derivatives where, like jack in the beanstalk, you trade the cow [real cash money] for a bag of magic beans... ==No one forces one to buy a ticket. Never forget that.== If one has "surplus" cash they want to **** down a rat hole...thats their choice. As for me...my "surplus" cash goes to other things...food, gasoline, taxes etc etc. ====================== "No one forces one to buy a ticket. Never forget that." Indeed, but be reminded this is the thickness of one EZ wider rolling paper from the ancient rationale "If god didn't want them sheared, s/he wouldn't have made them sheep." It is also a fine point, given the pervasive and increasingly effective propaganda/advertising, if the less educated/intelegent/critical thinkers among us can form the requisite intent to legally purchase lottery tickets [or derivatives]. Although laxely enforced, most states have prohibitions against minors, persons of diminished mental capacity, etc. from purchasing lottery tickets, and if they do win, the state will generally not pay (thus victimized them twice). Operationally, lotteries are Ponzi schemes in their most elemental form, without the fig leaf of an asymmetry in international postal reply coupon valuation [Ponzi], or the magic of split-strike conversions in the stock markets [Madoff]. Even the winners are hosed in that the big bucks pay offs aren't what they seem. These are generally paid in installments over 20 years or so, and if the winner elects to take the money and run (having noted the state bond ratings), the prize is calculated on a NPV [net present value basis at some fantastical rate of interest] and the winner gets less than half of the advertized prize, out of which s/he must then pay income taxes. Much of the lottery money is syphoned off in sales/G&A expenses, and very little is left to support "education," or what ever it was that the pols promised it would support when the lotteries were introduced. It is an interesting thought experiment to consider, at the macro/holistic economic level, what would happen if all state lotteries were abolished. |
#40
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Why aluminum prices are up; copper to follow
On Sunday, August 18, 2013 4:04:34 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:
Operationally, lotteries are Ponzi schemes in their most elemental form, without the fig leaf of an asymmetry in international postal reply coupon valuation [Ponzi], or the magic of split-strike conversions in the stock markets [Madoff]. Generally a Ponzi scheme pays out to the early investors using money from the later investors. A lottery only pays who ever wins regardless of whether they were an early or late buyer of a chance. Dan |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
All aluminum versus copper/aluminum coils for air conditioner? | Home Repair | |||
Copper Prices Down? | Home Repair | |||
Copper prices | UK diy | |||
Copper Prices going down | Home Repair | |||
Copper prices | Home Repair |