jordanz

Actually, I wouldn't say I'm convinced. I've encountered the War For Oil position a lot and have never heard a good argument for it.

You make it sound like oil is the only commodity in the world. The person buying my dollar may have no interest in oil whatsoever.

I read the energy bulletin article. The only point that it convincingly makes is that a devaluation of the dollar would be bad. It does not provide any evidence that Iraq switching to Euros would cause a devaluation. Nothing. I buy stuff from around the world all the time, I never need to consider what currency is ultimately making it to the seller. That's what markets are for. That doesn't follow. The party buying my Dollar and selling me a Euro obviously values my Dollar. That person will use the Dollar for another trade. By this argument, every time I buy any product the value of that product should sink. Now, of course, if no one in the world accepted dollars for anything the dollar would sink. But, we're talking about only 1 commodity here. That's not how I'd put it. The dollar declined because traders could get a better return on their investments elsewhere.

Your implication is that he can control the price. He can no more control the price than OPEC can. OPEC has been able to control prices over very short periods but not over the long term. Oil is traded on a global, open market. The price is set by supply/demand.

I'm very dubious of this link. In one of the first paragraphs it states "Now that The United States of America has taken both Iraq and Afghanistan and owns those country's natural resources". This is ludicrous. The US doesn't own any of those country's resources. The idea that the US would go to war because a country wants to trade in Euros vs the Dollar seems far-fetched to me. I'd need to seem some compelling proof before I accepted this. In my view, as a layman, I can't conceive of the need for this. Who cares if a commodity is traded in Euros, Dollars or Lira? If I sell something for $10 or 15 Pounds I'm asking for the same amount in the abstract. I don't see how it will affect the market value of the currency. The only thing that affects the value of a currency is the interest rates offered for that currency. The Dollar's decline is directly related to the drop in US interest rates.

But, this is not what is happening. "We" are not taking the oil. Nor is any American Corporation. The oil is staying in the hands of the Iraqis. Where is the evidence for this?

That's the part that doesn't make sense. I can't imagine a scenario where Saddam would not develop and sell oil.

Well, even if it was "about oil" that's a very good reason. The economy of the world would be terribly harmed if oil became hard to get.

This argument doesn't make sense to me. If Saddam controls the oil, all he's going to do is sell it into the global oil market.

I don't understand how it is about oil. Can someone explain this position?

I, too, am deeply saddened. He is my favorite singer of all time. I know his voice so well that I can know it's him within a few bars. I will treasure his artistry forever. Here's a great clip of him singing a famous aria from The Elixir of Love: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxyrphGgLH4

I used to write software for the movie industry and know that 1 page of script translates to 1 minute of screen time. I can't imagine a 127 minute Atlas Shrugged movie. Even 250 minutes doesn't seem enough.

I beg to differ. I think that the LOtR trilogy is the ideal in novel to screen translation. I can't imagine a better interpretation.

Bravo Neil. Excellent work.

Will do! Looking forward to it.

Just registered ;)

I had an excellent time at the Summer Seminar. In particular, I enjoyed William Kline's three part series on Business Ethics. I'll try to write a more detailed report when I get some time.

Huh? In what way are we "losing" the war? The regime that we battled has been removed from power. A democratically elected government has been put in place. Yes, the battles continue but that does not constitute losing.

Wow - I just found this: La Stupenda and Pav together. I have a bunch of albums of them together. Notice, that they aren't using microphones (other than whatever the film crew has). In real opera, the singer must fill the room with their voice alone - no amplification.

Put my mark in the dislike column for Potts. Here's Pavarotti on a not particularly good day. Can you imagine what he was like, live, in his prime?

Are you talking about the book or the musical? My comments refer to the musical. In the movie Wizard of Oz, the evilness of the Wicked Witch came from her choices/actions. In the musical, Elphaba's choices aren't particularly good or bad. The corresponding thing can be said about Glinda. The Wizard and Madame Morrible are more scheming than evil. It was such a thin veneer for multi-culturalism. Didn't it make you sick?

;) Also, you are 78 at the greatest time in human history to be 78.

Michael, you make some good points about Wicked. The things you mention were definitely present but completely overshadowed by the main story and music, in my opinion. BTW - I agree that Little Miss Sunshine was awful. I'll take a look at your review.

Yes. It just opened, actually. It's at the Hilton Theater on 42nd between 7th and 8th. Rita and I bought Saturday matinee tix the day before the show and got great seats.

FYI - we also saw The Pirate Queen and it was wonderful. The music/book is by the same team that made Les Miserable and the production is by the Riverdance people. Great music, incredible heroic story and great dancing and production.