Energy consumption

Someone siad:
"Now, these days we are not nearly as oil dependent as we were in the 70's
and indeed, our economy has in many ways morphed from the Industrial Age
into the Information Age."

Now the facts:
In 1970 we consumed enough petroleum to produce 25.9 quadrillion btu.
In 2003 we consumed enough petroleum to produce 39.1 quadrillion btu.

I'm glad to see that we are not as dependant on energy.

In 1970, if you include petroleum, coke, coal, and natural gas we consumed
enough to produce 63.5 quadrillion btu. In 2003 we consumed 84.3 quadrillion
btu.

In 1970 we imported enough petroleum to produce 7.5 quadrillion btu.
In 2003 we imported enough petroleum to produce 26.2 quadrillion btu.

The above figures are from:

Re: Energy consumption

Ed,

I predict either the world will end soon or it will not. For a person who
can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no additional risk simply
by moving his money from fund to fund based on common sense, the world
should seem like an ATM.


"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
> Someone siad:
> "Now, these days we are not nearly as oil dependent as we were in the 70's
> and indeed, our economy has in many ways morphed from the Industrial Age
> into the Information Age."
>
> Now the facts:
> In 1970 we consumed enough petroleum to produce 25.9 quadrillion btu.
> In 2003 we consumed enough petroleum to produce 39.1 quadrillion btu.
>
> I'm glad to see that we are not as dependant on energy.
>
> In 1970, if you include petroleum, coke, coal, and natural gas we consumed
> enough to produce 63.5 quadrillion btu. In 2003 we consumed 84.3
> quadrillion btu.
>
> In 1970 we imported enough petroleum to produce 7.5 quadrillion btu.
> In 2003 we imported enough petroleum to produce 26.2 quadrillion btu.
>
> The above figures are from:
>
>

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote

> Ed,
>
> For a person who can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no
> additional risk simply by moving his money from fund to fund based on
> common sense, the world should seem like an ATM.

My current funds, ytd to 8/12:

PRWCX +4.98%
TBGVX +10.31%
TRMCX +4.26%
TRIGX +8.70%
OAKBX +4.98%
VGSTX +4.40%
PRNEX +23.22%
FLPSX +5.84%

Your S&P500 VFINX +2.58

It is possible that the S&P500 fund will beat me this year but it doesn't
look that way to me, not yet anyway. Yes, I have owned all of these funds
since 12/31/04.

Re: Energy consumption

what is the length of owner ship of each fund? what is aproximate
portfolio percentage of each...? In addition, how often do you add to
your positions?

Re: Energy consumption

"jIM" <> wrote

> what is the length of owner ship of each fund?

More than 1 year.

> what is aproximate
> portfolio percentage of each...?

Doesn't matter, they are all beating VFINX.

> In addition, how often do you add to
> your positions?

I don't always add, sometimes I subtract. I do this as often or as
infrequently as I feel is necessary. Don't be misled by NoEd, I don't beat
VFINX consistantly year in and year out but that is my goal. In a very
strong market VFINX would have the edge, in recent years I have tried to
maintain a lower risk portfolio without giving up much in the way of gains.
I would rather not lose money than make a killing in any given year. I'm too
close to retirement to risk a large setback.

VFINX just turned positive for 5 year AATR's. All of my funds did far better
than that. None of them had negative 5 year AATR's.

Re: Energy consumption

It is impossible to know if you are telling the truth.


"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> "NoEd" <> wrote
>
>> Ed,
>>
>> For a person who can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no
>> additional risk simply by moving his money from fund to fund based on
>> common sense, the world should seem like an ATM.
>
> My current funds, ytd to 8/12:
>
> PRWCX +4.98%
> TBGVX +10.31%
> TRMCX +4.26%
> TRIGX +8.70%
> OAKBX +4.98%
> VGSTX +4.40%
> PRNEX +23.22%
> FLPSX +5.84%
>
> Your S&P500 VFINX +2.58
>
> It is possible that the S&P500 fund will beat me this year but it doesn't
> look that way to me, not yet anyway. Yes, I have owned all of these funds
> since 12/31/04.
>
>
>

Re: Energy consumption

Jim,

Don't believe a word this guy says.


"jIM" <> wrote in message
news:
> what is the length of owner ship of each fund? what is aproximate
> portfolio percentage of each...? In addition, how often do you add to
> your positions?
>

Re: Energy consumption

By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim you're
telling the truth?


"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> "NoEd" <> wrote
>
>> Ed,
>>
>> For a person who can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no
>> additional risk simply by moving his money from fund to fund based on
>> common sense, the world should seem like an ATM.
>
> My current funds, ytd to 8/12:
>
> PRWCX +4.98%
> TBGVX +10.31%
> TRMCX +4.26%
> TRIGX +8.70%
> OAKBX +4.98%
> VGSTX +4.40%
> PRNEX +23.22%
> FLPSX +5.84%
>
> Your S&P500 VFINX +2.58
>
> It is possible that the S&P500 fund will beat me this year but it doesn't
> look that way to me, not yet anyway. Yes, I have owned all of these funds
> since 12/31/04.
>
>
>

Re: Energy consumption

NoEd wrote:
> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim you're
> telling the truth?
>
So what? I am older than Ed and own no bond funds. You will have to do
better than that if you want to disprove what he says.

>
> "Ed" <> wrote in message
> news:
>
>>"NoEd" <> wrote
>>
>>
>>>Ed,
>>>
>>>For a person who can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no
>>>additional risk simply by moving his money from fund to fund based on
>>>common sense, the world should seem like an ATM.
>>
>>My current funds, ytd to 8/12:
>>
>>PRWCX +4.98%
>>TBGVX +10.31%
>>TRMCX +4.26%
>>TRIGX +8.70%
>>OAKBX +4.98%
>>VGSTX +4.40%
>>PRNEX +23.22%
>>FLPSX +5.84%
>>
>>Your S&P500 VFINX +2.58
>>
>>It is possible that the S&P500 fund will beat me this year but it doesn't
>>look that way to me, not yet anyway. Yes, I have owned all of these funds
>>since 12/31/04.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote in message
news:
> Jim,
>
> Don't believe a word this guy says.

You're just amazed aren't you. I can see where, for you, my fund choices
would be impossible.

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote in message
news:
> It is impossible to know if you are telling the truth.

I'm not asking you to believe me, that's your choice and what you think
means nothing, it won't change the facts.

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote

> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim you're
> telling the truth?

Correct, I own no bond funds. However, PRWCX uses convertibles, OAKBX has a
bond component and so does VGSTX. If I owned bond funds they would be short
term, I own money markets instead, they are way ahead of short term bond
funds.

Re: Energy consumption

"David Wilkinson" <> wrote

> NoEd wrote:
>> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim
>> you're telling the truth?
>>
> So what? I am older than Ed and own no bond funds. You will have to do
> better than that if you want to disprove what he says.

I have posted my portfolio from time to time and he could go back and check
it if he really was interested but he isn't. If I were going to lie about
what I own I would have picked far more exciting funds.

Re: Energy consumption

There is nothing to disprove, and there is nothing I want to disprove. But
Ed has had a chance via the contest to support his claims.


"David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
news:dds079$j38$
> NoEd wrote:
>> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim
>> you're telling the truth?
>>
> So what? I am older than Ed and own no bond funds. You will have to do
> better than that if you want to disprove what he says.
>
>>
>> "Ed" <> wrote in message
>> news:
>>
>>>"NoEd" <> wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ed,
>>>>
>>>>For a person who can consistently beat the S&P 500 while absorbing no
>>>>additional risk simply by moving his money from fund to fund based on
>>>>common sense, the world should seem like an ATM.
>>>
>>>My current funds, ytd to 8/12:
>>>
>>>PRWCX +4.98%
>>>TBGVX +10.31%
>>>TRMCX +4.26%
>>>TRIGX +8.70%
>>>OAKBX +4.98%
>>>VGSTX +4.40%
>>>PRNEX +23.22%
>>>FLPSX +5.84%
>>>
>>>Your S&P500 VFINX +2.58
>>>
>>>It is possible that the S&P500 fund will beat me this year but it doesn't
>>>look that way to me, not yet anyway. Yes, I have owned all of these funds
>>>since 12/31/04.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

Re: Energy consumption

Whatever you have and how you invest is your business. Again, if you can
cover all your trading costs and absorb higher fund costs, but with still
with less risk than the S&P 500, and do this nearly every year using only
"common sense," more power to you. But you have not proven that you can do
this. I don't know of anyone else who claims something similar and has
proven it. Certainly if you are 70%+ cash/MM, you could say you have less
risk than being fully in invested.


"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> "NoEd" <> wrote
>
>> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim
>> you're telling the truth?
>
> Correct, I own no bond funds. However, PRWCX uses convertibles, OAKBX has
> a bond component and so does VGSTX. If I owned bond funds they would be
> short term, I own money markets instead, they are way ahead of short term
> bond funds.
>

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote in message
news:
> There is nothing to disprove, and there is nothing I want to disprove.
> But Ed has had a chance via the contest to support his claims.

I'm in a contest, just not yours. To tell you the truth I haven't been
paying too much attention to it but I'm in one. I don't actually own most of
what's in my contest portfolio. I won the last two, this year I was 5th out
of 7 last time I looked.

Re: Energy consumption

"NoEd" <> wrote

> Whatever you have and how you invest is your business. Again, if you can
> cover all your trading costs and absorb higher fund costs, but with still
> with less risk than the S&P 500, and do this nearly every year using only
> "common sense," more power to you. But you have not proven that you can
> do this. I don't know of anyone else who claims something similar and
> has proven it. Certainly if you are 70%+ cash/MM, you could say you have
> less risk than being fully in invested.

If I was 70% in cash I couldn't beat the S&P500, except for the last 5 years
or so :)




> "Ed" <> wrote in message
> news:
>>
>> "NoEd" <> wrote
>>
>>> By the way, you own no bond funds at your age? Still want to claim
>>> you're telling the truth?
>>
>> Correct, I own no bond funds. However, PRWCX uses convertibles, OAKBX has
>> a bond component and so does VGSTX. If I owned bond funds they would be
>> short term, I own money markets instead, they are way ahead of short term
>> bond funds.
>>
>
>