Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.
This just crossed my desk this morning so I asked the writer if we could post it as him being today’s guest editor.
He goes by speeddcpa, I’ve known him since high school, he’s a recovering CPA and currently and options trader making the big bucks in retirement.
When I have a question about taxes or money, he is the guy I ask to help me sort things out.
Thanks amigo and welcome to the show.
Before reading this month-old post on the Business Insider blog (which I follow with a grain of salt), I leaned toward the theory that OPEC was influenced by President Obama to not cut oil production (and thereby pressure oil prices to the downside) to punish Russia.
Secondarily, my thought (and hope) was that the oil cartel was finally failing because they couldn’t control enough of the world’s oil producers to make it work.
The primary benefit provided by price fixing is it creates a windfall to the first participant to violate the fix.
I discounted (without much conviction) the theory that OPEC’s motive was to destroy or hurt the US shale oil industry, because they (OPEC) hadn’t done that in the past 40 years.
As the BI post I refer to above indicates, OPEC claims they failed to cut production because they couldn’t get Russia and Mexico (non-members) to join in the cuts (ie the oil price fix).
That appears to support my second favorite cause (that the cartel was finally failing).
However, their stated reason would in fact punish Russia (and Mexico and US shale production) and be consistent with Saudi following BHO orders or simply putting the squeeze on its competitors.
Now that I’ve read the Saudi explanation, my conclusion is that the jury is still out, and all theories remain on the table.