The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) today reported the U.S. natural gas stocks increased by 99 billion cubic feet last week, above the expected build of about 95 billion cubic feet anticipated by analysts. Natural gas futures prices were down nearly 1% in advance of the EIA's report, at around $4.03 per million BTUs, and slipped further to around $3.97 immediately following the EIA report.
The EIA reported that U.S. working stocks of natural gas totaled 1.96 trillion cubic feet, about 83 billion cubic feet lower than the five-year average of 2.05 trillion cubic feet. Working gas in storage totaled 2.66 trillion cubic feet for the same period a year ago. Natural gas inventories are roughly in the middle of the five-year range.
Recent mild weather over most of the country has diminished demand for natural gas in the past couple of weeks. The forecast for the next week calls for above-normal temperatures across most of the country, except along the Gulf Coast and the northern tier of stages from Washington to the Midwest. Natural gas futures dropped as low as $3.89 per million BTUs last week,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，专业玛瑙手镯批发, after reaching a peak of $4.44 on May 1.
Here's how stocks of the largest U.S,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，玛瑙手镯. natural gas producers are reacting to today's report:
Exxon Mobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM), the country's largest producer of natural gas,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，手镯批发, is down 0.4%, at $90.84 in a 52-week range of $77.13 to $93.67.
Chesapeake Energy Corp. (NYSE: CHK) is down 2.6%, at $20.11 in a 52-week range of $13.32 to $22.97. Chesapeake's share drop is largely due to a downgrade to Neutral from J.P. Morgan.
EOG Resources Inc. (NYSE: EOG) is down about 0.9%, at $133.53 in a 52-week range of $82.48 to $139.00.
The U.S. Natural Gas Fund (NYSEMKT: UNG) is down 2.9%, at $21.36 in a 52-week range of $15.18 to $24.09. The Market Vectors Oil Services ETF (NYSEMKT: OIH) is up fractionally, at $44.31 in a 52-week range of $32.54 to $45.12. The first fund tracks spot prices; the second includes major drillers and services companies.
Filed under: 24/7 Wall St. Wire, Commodities, Oil & Gas, Research Tagged: CHK, EOG, featured, OIH, UNG, XOM
Update: An earlier version of this article claimed that the entry level for the top 1% of households was $1.1 million. While the actual number is a matter of dispute, the Tax Policy Center places it at $532,613.
Political positions were, for a time, a matter of color: Republican were red, Democrats were blue, and nonpartisans and centrists -- when they could be found -- might claim purple. But since the Great Recession, percentages,专业玛瑙手镯零售，实惠的价格，超赞的品质。, not pigments, are becoming America's great dividers. With conservatives and liberals alike defining themselves and others as the 99%, the 1%, the 53%, the 47%, and various other percentages, it's time to ask just what these numbers mean -- and where the average American family fits in.
When it comes to dividing up our class structure, the middle is a good place to start -- namely, the 60% of households wedged between the poorest 20% and the richest 20%. These families $20,001 and $100,065 a year, and were the group hardest hit by the recession: In 2008, their average income fell by 3.6%, the in history. At the same time, they were also devastated by rising unemployment, mass foreclosures, soaring tuitions and frozen wages. By comparison, households below the 20% line often qualify for social welfare programs, were far less likely to own real estate, and were less affected by massive layoffs. In other words, they had less to lose, and ended up losing less.
On the other end of the spectrum,手镯批发, many of those above the 80% line were shielded from the harsher effects of economic downturns. And over the , the top 20% have done quite well: Their share of all wages paid in the U.S. has gone from 50% to 60%. Everyone else has lost ground.
The 99% vs. the 1%
Members of the Occupy Wall Street movement and their allies don't think this is the best way of looking at America's households: The big dividing line in their view is the 99th percentile. In this country, they assert, there are the top 1% of households, and everyone else.
There's something to be said for Occupy Wall Street's math. As President Obama discovered when he suggested lowering the qualification line for the top tax rate to $250,000, where we place the dividing line between "the rich" and "everyone else" is highly controversial. But moving the wealth line from $100,065 to $532,613 -- where the Tax Policy Center places the boundary for the top 1% -- avoids the argument about who exactly is middle class. No matter where your political sympathies lie, it's hard to call households that bring home half a million dollars middle class.
And the top 1% have done exceptionally well over the last 30 years: of all wages paid in the U.S -- more than twice the percentage they received 30 years ago. Meanwhile, the bottom 80% of households lost 9% of their income share in the same period, and now receive about 47% of all wages paid. Put simply, the richest 1% gained all the wages the rest of the country lost.
The 53% vs. the 47%
The dividing line between the 99% and the 1% is stark, but some argue there's a better one: The boundary between those who pay income taxes and those who don't. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, 53% of households pay federal income tax; the rest either break even or get back more in refunds than they pay.
In fact, the 20% of the country -- households making between $20,001 and $38,043 -- get back about 0.4% more income tax than they pay; for families who make less than $20,000, it's about 6.8%.
Some conservatives -- notably on the Tumblr blog -- have taken these numbers to heart, arguing that this means the bottom 47% is getting a free ride. But the 53%/47% division is a bit misleading.
To begin with, almost all households pay state taxes, Medicare tax, Social Security tax, excise taxes, sales taxes, and a raft of other government fees. When this broader, and more accurate, assessment of taxation is used, the 47% doesn't look to be getting off so easy: The -- the ones that got 0.4% of their income tax back -- still paid more 10% of their incomes in various federal taxes.
In fact, when everything is factored in, 86% of the country pays more than it gets back in federal taxes. , it's not the split you might expect: More than half (8% of Americans) are senior citizens receiving Social Security.
And that last 6% -- the ones who really pay nothing to the federal government? They are unemployed, disabled,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，专业手镯零售, in school, or making very low incomes. But even this small group pays state and local taxes, sales taxes, and other government fees.
Where the Poor Pay More
When it comes to percentage of income, the line is even clearer: For some taxes, the bottom 20% of the Americans pay more than the top 20%. For example, a household on the bottom pays almost 54% more of its income into Social Security than a household on the top. The same goes for excise taxes -- fees attached to certain commodities like gasoline and alcohol: As a percentage of income, the poorest 20% pays more than four times as much as the richest 20%.
So where is the ultimate dividing line? The answer might have less to do with money than with the way we perceive it: In a recent poll, found that 66% of likely voters believe that the middle class is shrinking, and 55% believe that income inequality has become a big problem for the country. Surprisingly, worries about income inequality were higher among those who are doing better: 65% of respondents in the top 20% felt that income inequality was a big or somewhat big problem.
In other words, when it comes to the economy, worrying about the future may be the one thing that cuts across all class lines.
Bruce Watson is a senior features writer for DailyFinance. You can reach him by e-mail at bruce.watson@teamaol.com, or follow him on Twitter at .
BOSTON () -- An abbreviated Biotech Stock Mailbag for this holiday week.
Aaron L. asks:
I'm interested in your outlook for Apricus BioSciences(). The new management seems to have a better handle on the company in that lots of the old drugs have been sold off and now they intend to focus on Vitaros and Femprox. Is this a good strategy for Apricus?
Apricus has done a good job cleaning up the mess left by departed CEO Bassam Damaj, who basically ran the company into the ground with a series of disastrous product acquisitions.
Damaj resigned on Nov. 7, 2012. Two months later, Apricus announced plans to focus on Vitaros for erectile dysfunction and Femprox for female sexual disorder.Investors seem to be responding positively to Apricus' new direction. The gains this year are modest but better than steady losses racked up in the past. data by Apricus' considerable challenge moving forward will be to turn Vitaros into a successful ED product. Vitaros is a cream containing alprostadil, which works by diluting blood vessels. Using Vitaros, however, is not as easy as smearing the cream on the penis and waiting for the erection to happen. To be effective,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，纯天然玛瑙手镯, Vitaros has to be applied inside the head of the penis, through the opening to the urethra. It's a five-step process according to Apricus' instruction sheet: 1. Wash hands. Ready Vitaros dispenser (which resembles a syringe without the needle.) 2. Grasp tip of penis and "gently manipulate" the opening,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，玛瑙手镯零售. 3. Apply as much Vitaros cream as possible to the opening of the penis by holding tip of dispenser above the opening and slowly depressing the plunger over 5-10 seconds,专业加工/制作/批发/零售玛瑙手镯/手环，专业加工制作手镯. [Apricus warns men not to insert the Vitaros dispenser into the penis.] 4. Hold the penis upright for approximately 30 seconds to allow the cream to penetrate. 5. Wash hands because the cream can be irritating to the eyes. Doesn't that sound like fun? I won't harp on it here, but Vitaros' main side effects are localized burning sensation and skin irritation -- neither of which are necessarily the nicest feelings to experience while trying to have sex.Apricus isn't stupid. The company knows Vitaros is not a convenient or desirable ED therapy compared to Pfizer's() Viagra or Eli Lilly's() Cialis. It's going to be a niche product used only by men cannot take the ED pills for medical reasons or for whom ED pills don't work. Apricus believes this slice of patients is financially significant, but it's up to the company to prove it.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) today reported the U.S. natural gas stocks increased by 99 billion cubic feet last week, above the expected build of about 95 billion cubic feet anticipated by analysts. Natural gas futures prices were down nearly 1% in advance of the EIA's report, at around $4.03 per million BTUs, and slipped further to around $3.97 immediately following the EIA report.
Update: An earlier version of this article claimed that the entry level for the top 1% of households was $1.1 million. While the actual number is a matter of dispute, the Tax Policy Center places it at $532,613.