John Damgard’s letter campaigning against the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's proposed position limits on speculative energy trading contains the familiar arguments against controls on speculation.
FIA president John Damgard’s letter campaigning
against the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's proposed
position limits on speculative energy trading contains the
usual fallacies and fudges common to those who oppose controls
1. The claim that "evidence" is needed before one can
conclude that "speculation caused energy price distortions" is
It is very difficult in any financial market, or economic
situation of any kind, to prove precisely what caused what.
But what serious person would contend for a moment that
speculation did not affect share prices? Or housing prices? Of
course it does. Anyone who denied it would be laughed at as
Yet Damgard would have us believe that commodity markets are
somehow more virtuous and special than any other investable
market in the entire world. Only here, he claims, does
speculation not affect prices.
This article is available to subscribers and registered users
Please log in to continue reading.
Not yet registered? Take a free trial.
If you have already taken a free trial you
have ongoing access to the analysis section of FOW.com including this story.
Log in using your details below to read.
Already have an account? |