Kling’s question on oil speculation
Source: http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2008/06/klings_question.htmlPosted on Thursday, June 26th, 2008 | In Current Market News, Economics, Energy Markets
Arnold Kling poses a question for Paul Krugman. Here’s how I would answer.
Early in 2007, the price of oil was $60 a barrel. Recently, it has been above $130 a barrel. Which of the following does Paul Krugman believe:
(a) market fundamentals justified $60 a barrel then, and they justify $130 a barrel now; or
(b) market fundamentals justified a much higher price in 2007?
…We know that Krugman does not believe that today’s oil price is out of line with fundamentals. Krugman’s view, in effect, is that if speculators artificially boost the price of oil, then supply will exceed demand, and the excess has to go somewhere. Where are the inventories?
This view ought to hold in reverse. If speculators artificially kept the price of oil too low early in 2007, then demand should have exceeded supply and inventories should have vanished. Yet they did not. So is Krugman forced by his model to conclude that the price of oil of $60 also reflected fundamentals?
The “fundamentals” price of oil depends on a number of factors that cannot be perfectly foreseen. Among these are (1) will the world enter a deep and prolonged recession in 2007, and (2) will global oil production in 2007 be higher than it was in 2006? Today, we know that the answer to both questions is no, and conditional on knowing that answer, we can see that $60/barrel was too low a price. But a year ago, no one knew those answers.
Likewise, the price of oil today is very much dependent on the answer to questions such as (1) will the world enter a deep and prolonged recession in 2008, and (2) will global oil production in 2008 be higher than it was in 2007? Today, we do not know the answer to these questions. If the answer is yes, the price of oil today is much too high. If the answer is no, the price could still be too low.
As for the specific question of “where are the inventories”, let’s be a little more precise about the question being asked. The correct question is, Did the movement along the demand curve that resulted from the increased price show up as an increase in inventories? The correct answer is, no, it was offset by a shift in the demand curve for newly industrialized countries and the oil producing countries. For example, China may have consumed a half million more barrels of oil per day in 2007 compared with 2006.
Where are the inventories? China already burned them.
Technorati Tags: oil,
oil prices,
oil bubble,
oil price bubble,
oil speculation
Last 5 posts by James Hamilton
- Factors in local house price declines - November 22nd, 2009
- Receiver operating characteristics curve - November 18th, 2009
- Commodity inflation - November 15th, 2009
- Will rising oil prices derail the recovery? - November 10th, 2009
- Consequences of the Lehman failure - November 7th, 2009
Arnold Kling, Correct Question, Current Market News, Economics, Energy Markets, Global Oil Production, Inventories, Market Fundamentals, Oil Price, Oil Speculation, Paul Krugman, Price Of Oil, recession, Speculators
![]() About James Hamilton (http://www.econbrowser.com)
James Hamilton received his Ph.D. in Economics from the University of California at Berkeley in 1983. He has been a professor at the University of California, San Diego since 1990 and served as Chair of the Economics Department from 1999 to 2002. He is the author of Time Series Analysis, the leading text on forecasting and statistical analysis of dynamic economic relationships. He has done extensive research on business cycles, monetary policy, and oil shocks, and has been a research adviser and visiting scholar with the Federal Reserve System for 20 years. |



