Arjay and Jay123 the problem is you are only looking at money.
As I have said many times previously, money is a second level, it is
not the fundamental basis of everything we do.

Money is a tool to exchange energy and the products of energy.
Yes Jay123, 2008 was just a practice run.
It was predicted in detail in Kenneth Deffreyes book Beyond Oil.
He predicted that crude oil production peak would occur in December 2005. He was one week out.
He predicted that in the following two or three years the price of oil
would rise very high and cause a financial crash.
It would then crash to a low level.
He further predicted that the oil price would recover but remain at a
high price for a period on a bumpy plateau and then the peak and crash
cycle would repeat when supply got tight again.
This oscillation would probably repeat, perhaps several times, and
then finally stay crashed permanently.

You have probably heard of Hubbard's curve, well Deffreyes worked with
Hubbard and he did more work on the curve mathematics and changed the
shape of the curve somewhat.
He is a Professor of Geology at Princeton University and an oilfield engineer.

The advent of horizontal drilling and fracking in the source rock
has put a delay into the process but that is all it is, a delay of
about ten years until the relentless decline of the super giants
and giants overwhelms the high cost tight wells.

The world had a once only ten year opportunity to mitigate the effect
of the peaking of oil production.

We did not take it up.

[This person is a sock puppet who has been barred from the forum for offensive behaviour. If anyone notices someone like this turning-up again can you please notify me? Their previous persona was Jay123. Thanks, GrahamY]

Sorry what you just wrote is utter nonsense.
Deffreyes and others CALCULATED what happened.
It is arithmetic and not very complicated maths than that.
Coincidence has no part in it.
The age of the worlds wells is known, the decline rate is known, the
history of production is known, the rate of new wells coming on line is
known, the resources are known.
Why don't you gather the data and calculate it yourself ?
I checked the data to confirm the story that a new Saudi Arabia has to
be discovered every three years just to maintain current production.
I am no mathematician either, bit of a duffer there.

Coincidence is nowhere in sight.

Right; yes well likewise, but if you take what Arjay says then you are
out of the pot and into the kettle.

The problem with banks is the IMF/G20 Financial Stability Board.
If a bank gets into trouble they can take the depositors money to pay
the banks debts.
Perhaps when/if it happens it will not happen to all banks.
Spread it around a number of banks, you increase the risk of being hit,
but reduce the loss.

Buy land, that is probably the best and least risky investment.
Well hopefully none of this will happen, but I am afraid that there is
more then a grain of truth to what Arjay says.
I still have not got a grip on what the derivatives risk is that
Arjay has been telling us about.

Bazz

This link might help explain the derivative risk

http://cbn.uds.ak.o.brightcove.com/734546207001/734546207001_1418460539001_PST71v3-H.mp4

Good link on derivatives Snake. Bazz during the WW2 when oil was scarce,people here had coal burners on their cars to power them.Lots of pollution but no shortage of energy.

I don't think the diminishing oil supplies will have much influence. Energy is abundant and we just need the technology to access it.

Worth seeing ,Paul Craig Roberts latest interview with Greg Hunter.
http://usawatchdog.com/threat-of-nuclear-war-back-paul-craig-roberts/