This is fairly strange and unexplained, magically the New York Mercantile Exchange opened early for trading on Sunday to have trades dated on Tuesday in energy futures?
From the CME Group who owns NYMEX:
We wanted to provide our customers with the opportunity to respond to the storm's potential impact to energy markets as quickly as possible," said CME Group Chief Operating Officer Bryan Durkin. "The ability to trade both our exchange-listed and over-the-counter energy products during this period will be a significant benefit for global energy market participants.
Background on NYMEX and CME Group.
Anybody wondering how they can just change the rules like that and precisely how many little Joe Average investors were notified?
Oh, they are regulated by the CFTC, so that explains it. There is no real oversight.
Please comment to explain why I'm wrong in finding this sudden opening of the exchange on a Sunday very smelly.
The Smell of Money - CFTC Regs by Gramm & Company
Phil Gramm and his spouse created the current absence of regs at CFTC. His spouse is our hard working Secretary of Labor - Chau - who has worked so diligently to help businesses secure H1/H2B Visas.
Meantime, McCain and the Darth Vader Veep replacement in Go-Go Boots - Palin are on 'Watch' in the Alabama Command Center for FEMA. C. Matthews reminded Bush-Chaney & Company that all of this is happening on their watch for a second time.
It appears that at least some of the levees will not hold. They have had 3 years of work, $14 Billion appropriated and only $2 Billion spent on the levee reconstruction effort.
Yer Still Doin a Heckova Job, Brownie.
Burton Leed
If one were a hedger
The fact that they opened this early would be a good thing.
yeah but
isn't that a little bending the rules to suddenly decide to create a special trading time on a Sunday? How many regular folks were even aware of it? It seems very unfair.
The Historical Question: Why Reform Matters
Chicago School Boys and Ne-Cons will tell you that the bottom scale of society does not matter and there is no risk in forgetting the bottom strata of society. They will say that there is no risk in shredding the scraps of the safety net. At the time of the crumbling of the Berlin Wall, two sides argued whether destruction of communism, plus deconstruction of welfare states, and loss of labor union was benign. The Bush I, Chicago School, argued that the loss of all forms of slimy socialism was good, necessary and to be pursued. But how much history did they forget?
The comments about the top of the income pyramid are correct. The top of the pyramid - 1 percentile earn 50 percent of all income. The the bottom 50 percent that is 150 million income recipients, earn the other half of all income.
Whether that is a relaxed place depends on whether we are discussing a business owner or a worker bee with high income. There is nothing relaxing about a worker bee with a high income who works day and night. But the top one percent essentially do no have to work. What used to be called the 'Bourgoisie'.
Now to evoke A. Smith "Wealth of Nations" is to forget the rest of the economists who followed Smith from Ricardo, Marx, Keynes and the quantitative econs of the 20th Century.
Starting with Germany under Bismark/Metternick, advanced industrial states figured that reform was better than social upheaval, remembering the times of the French Revolution through the Paris Commune in 1870. These same Conservative German Reformers were copied by Lloyd George in Britain, and TR/FDR in the U.S. Again, reform sure beats social upheaval.
We are coming back to this argument again, due to statistically provable income inequality. Ignore income maldistribution only at great peril to the stability of society as a whole (see Anatomy of Revolution, Harvard Press, Crane Brinton), so says 400 years of history.
Internationally, critics of our form of government see the U.S. election as a discussion between 2 wings of the same party. I believe they forget that it is the people in the U.S. that really matters. Call me a sentimental democrat, just keep the 'd' in democrat small.
See : http://www.marxist.com/usa-socialism-change-we-can-actually-believe-in.htm
Burton Leed
on EP
That's why we're trying to get the focus on specifics. It's all about the money and this election cycle has been talking about anything but the money. They don't want to talk about policy because it exposes the corporate agenda, both sides.
Hey, format your links! Over in the user guide is the example.
Hedging the wrong way
oil futures dropped $6 bucks. So I suspect that this opening of the markets to place bets that Gustav was going to be a category 3,4,5 just burned these people.
We waned them not to speculate and Bush repated SPR
We told our readers to be wary of speculating on Gustav.
Specifically, we mentioned the SPR. I saw the same actions
with Nixon in 1971 when he closed the Gold Window. I was holding AMEX Travelers Checks and was caught penniless. Except for my time and mercy of a London Hotel reminiscent of John Lennon's 'We're only trying to get us some Peace'.
Maybe we can get us some Peace.
Burton Leed