????趁美國民眾還沒被大選之年政客們吵吵嚷嚷的高油價(jià)理論弄暈之前，我們先來看看幾個(gè)關(guān)于油價(jià)的真相吧。迄今為止，不管是民主黨人，還是共和黨人，華盛頓的政客們還是很少愿意承認(rèn)這些事實(shí)。

????一個(gè)鮮為人知的事實(shí)是：2008年上次美國總統(tǒng)換屆選舉期間，油價(jià)首次突破100美元/桶其實(shí)是價(jià)格操縱的結(jié)果。

????沒錯(cuò)，就是這么回事。全球主要的原油交易市場、紐約商交所（New York Mercantile Exchange）交易池的電話記錄顯示，那位將油價(jià)推至歷史高點(diǎn)的交易員在當(dāng)天交易日開始時(shí)曾告訴同事們，他準(zhǔn)備“瘋狂”一把。完成100美元/桶（與當(dāng)日其他油價(jià)走勢截然相反）的交易后，他又夸口稱： “我們不會(huì)放過這個(gè)機(jī)會(huì)……有人收集藝術(shù)品，我們創(chuàng)造價(jià)格紀(jì)錄。”

????我們是怎么知道這些的？這筆交易發(fā)生近三年后，美國監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)悄無聲息地通報(bào)了對這項(xiàng)“不真實(shí)交易”的處罰結(jié)果。原油在煉油廠加工制成汽油，原油一漲價(jià)，汽油價(jià)格自然也水漲船高。為什么美國監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)要這么拗口地稱該項(xiàng)交易為“不真實(shí)交易”？原因是即便當(dāng)時(shí)汽油價(jià)格已經(jīng)超過了4美元/加侖，政府仍然擔(dān)心將這項(xiàng)交易稱為“價(jià)格操縱”可能引發(fā)強(qiáng)烈的反應(yīng)。接下來的事情就眾所周知了。從那時(shí)開始，100美元/桶的油價(jià)便經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)，可謂司空見慣。

????華盛頓負(fù)責(zé)監(jiān)管能源市場的美國商品期貨交易委員會(huì)（Commodity Futures Trading Commission，CFTC）現(xiàn)在辦事可真是越來越拖拉。直到2010年底，它才起訴上述交易員所在的公司ConAgra Trade Group（后來售予Ospraie Special Opportunities基金和其他投資者）。ConAgra 繳納了1,200萬美元的民事罰款，涉事交易員卻安然無恙。CFTC至今也未解釋為何沒有公開這名交易員的名字。

????那么，最近油價(jià)再次躍升至100美元之上又是怎么回事呢？它是另一種市場操縱行為的結(jié)果，雖然它是合法的。去年，康菲石油（ConocoPhillips）安排原油通過其海路石油管道（Seaway Pipeline）流入（而非流出）俄克拉荷馬州庫欣的美國石油儲(chǔ)運(yùn)樞紐，一下就賺了幾十億美元。隨著石油供應(yīng)量飆升至歷史新高，美國原油價(jià)格承受了巨大的壓力，水平遠(yuǎn)低于世界其他地方。

?

????Before Americans are subjected to more election-year caterwauling over high gasoline prices, several truths about the price of oil need to be considered – few of them acknowledged so far by the deep thinkers in Washington, whether Democrat or Republican.

????A little-known fact: When oil prices hit $100 a barrel for the first time during the last changing of the presidential guard in 2008, it was the result of price-meddling.

????That's right. In the trading pits of the New York Mercantile Exchange, the world's dominant oil market, phone transcripts showed that the trader who pushed the price to its historic high started the day telling his colleagues he was going to be a "madman" and, after concluding the $100 trade – which ran counter to the session's other price movements – he ended the day bragging, "We weren't gonna' let that one get away from us…some people collect art prints; we collect price prints."

????How do we know all this? The "non-bona fide trade" was quietly reported by our government almost three years after the fact. Oil is processed by refineries to make gasoline, so when oil prices go up, gas prices go up too. Why did the government use such awkward Latinate language in describing the trade as a "non-bona fide" transaction? Because, even as gas prices topped $4 a gallon around the same time, it feared the backlash of calling the oil trade a "manipulation." We all know the rest of the story. From then on, $100 oil would be so common as to become cliché.

????In Washington, the watchdog agency that's responsible for policing the energy market, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has become more known for dragging its feet. It did not charge the offending trader's employer, ConAgra Trade Group (later sold to the Ospraie Special Opportunities fund and other investors) until late 2010. ConAgra paid a civil monetary penalty of $12 million. The trader walked. The CFTC has never explained why it did not name the trader publicly.

????So what about oil's latest leap to over $100? That was the result of another market game, albeit a legal one. ConocoPhillips (COP) made billions last year when it allowed allow oil barrels to enter – but not exit – the nation's key oil hub of Cushing, Oklahoma, through its portion of the Seaway Pipeline. As oil supplies soared to record levels, the price of oil was pressured far below levels seen elsewhere in the world.