Issue: Foreign Policy: Oil Security for the US and our flawed foreign policy

[Captain Shays]

Hi Eric,

It was never published unfortunatly. Well, on the other hand I'm sort of glad it wasn't because the real hard core anti-oil guys were just off the charts with stuff they would have insisted we include. One of them from the Sierra Club even tried to include political campaign money in some (til this day I still don't understand it) kind of quid pro quo conntection between the campaign contributions and the resulting grants, tax braks and other subsidies. On one hand it sort fo made sense, and I know where he was coming from but there was no way to objectively conclude in real verifiable numbers. But, I'm also from New Jersey and anyone out here can tell you that you don't give $1 million to somebody's campaign and not expect something in return. Maybe its different in other parts of the country.

No matter where you're from though with just a little reading you'll understand after awhile that the free market would have set us free from (hostile) foreign oil probablly 10-20 years ago.

 

[Eric B]

Just to be clear, I am in no way an anti-oil guy. I am a pro-market guy. I believe we need to let the free market decide what's best for the country not politicians. I don't think you could describe RP as an anti-oil guy either.

Someone mentioned the disparity in prices to the EU - most of that is due to the ridiculus fuel tax imposed in most of Europe.

My other thought is that we (the taxpayers) are getting a pretty bad deal at the pump and then again on tax day. Government involvement in subsidising and warring for oil is without a doubt stupidously inefficient and we, the taxpayers and our children are going to pay that bill. I can say without doubt that we would be far better off to pay the free market cost of gasoline (even if alternatives did not come into play) than pay the tax bill.

Also, if we hadn't made such a mess of the middle east, it is quite possible that the area would be more peaceful, more friendly to US and have developed more oil reserves. Thus driving the price down. The problem is we really can't know.

The US govt is now sponsoring specific alternative fuels - as if they can predict the winner (ethanol). Prepare yourself for another disaster (have you seen the price of corn lately?).

Thanks for all of the information. This has been a very good conversation.

 

[Captain Shays]

Is this conversation over? I guess it is when we all agree with eachother so much. I agree with you on the ethanol issue and I'm luterally terrified about the government sponsered emergence of "the hydrogen economy".
Oh God help us.

 

[Captain Shays]

Helium of hydrogenor electricity let the market determine what technologies we use not the government.

Though with that said, I do believe that the governemnt should take steps to become energy independent themselves. I personally do not feel comfortable with our government having to rely on any other country for their operational necessities especially energy.

If the government made purchases of say solar panels for their lighting requirements they would break up the supply-demand log jams and we would see prices come down dramatically to the point where you and I could easily afford them for our own purposes. Just a thought.

 

[Eric B]

The conversatin need not be over. I guess it sounded like I thought it was.

I read a very good article put out by the CATO institute today. It's a bit of a long read but helped me understand very specifically how our foreign policy has failed us and the middle east. It was written just after the first invasion of Iraq and we haven't done any better since. If you don't already know the link between oil and foreign policy, this will article will expose it very clearly.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

 

[Gary]

Well I think the alternative fuels are still much more expensive.

Why do you suppose even with high taxes Europe has not made any moves towards alternate fuel sources?

One interesting thought: wind energy appears to be approaching other sources for electricity, so it does look like some alternative fuel sources can get to be economical.


So here is a question to continue the dialogue:
If we all agree to let the free market sort it out. How should we go from here to there? Do we go cold turkey and say drop all government incentives say in 2009? Or is there a more pragmatic approach to moving gradually into free markets? What should the US military policy be in terms of insuring sufficient fuel for the military in the case of say an attack on the USA?

 

[Captain Shays]

Well I think the alternative fuels are still much more expensive.

Why do you suppose even with high taxes Europe has not made any moves towards alternate fuel sources?

One interesting thought: wind energy appears to be approaching other sources for electricity, so it does look like some alternative fuel sources can get to be economical.


So here is a question to continue the dialogue:
If we all agree to let the free market sort it out. How should we go from here to there? Do we go cold turkey and say drop all government incentives say in 2009? Or is there a more pragmatic approach to moving gradually into free markets? What should the US military policy be in terms of insuring sufficient fuel for the military in the case of say an attack on the USA?

Hi Gary.

I outlined my plan that can get us from here to there. Some people want the government to take the first steps so they advocate for subsidies, grants and tax breaks. Others like myself also want the govenrment to take the first steps by declaring energy independence for themselves.

Remember that its very difficult to come to a true cost benefit analysis when comparing the real cost comparisons between oil and wind, or nuclear and solar.
You first need to consider the difference between centralizaton and decentralization. Jefferson was a strong advocate of decentralization in farming, and government. Its works best in energy production and water distribution as well.
The more locations we can produce energy, the more decentralized the grid will be and the higher the protection level against terrorist attacks and natural disasters. Also, the more we decentralize we will become more efficient and the costs overall will come down dramatically.

When making thos comarisons we also need to consider that normally the relative up front costs associated with fossil fuels or nuclear seem cheaper while the upfron costs associated with wind or solar seem higher.
In the long run however, the running costs for solar and wind are much less expensive. Espcially when you consider the military costs associated with nuclear or hydro. We don't want to leave them unprotected now do we? Those costs are non existent with wind or solar.

Consider that in a cenralized paradigm, we watse 53.2% of all the energy we produce in America. Decentralization has no waste. In other words, a solar array on your own roof only need to produce a fraction of the energy a nuclear power plant does many miles away to accomplish the same amount of work.

Check out my plan and help me revise it so that we can send it to Ron Paul because I think if he incorporated this plan it would help him win the election.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=1001

 

[angelatc]

Well I think the alternative fuels are still much more expensive.

Why do you suppose even with high taxes Europe has not made any moves towards alternate fuel sources?

My guess is that it's because they're socialist countries, trying to prop up their entitlement structures.

 

[Captain Shays]

The conversatin need not be over. I guess it sounded like I thought it was.

I read a very good article put out by the CATO institute today. It's a bit of a long read but helped me understand very specifically how our foreign policy has failed us and the middle east. It was written just after the first invasion of Iraq and we haven't done any better since. If you don't already know the link between oil and foreign policy, this will article will expose it very clearly.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

Eric,

I only got part way through the article bu so far its really spot on man. We should use this as a campaign tool for our more intelligent Republican leaning friends.