Energy Independence
I had never considered this, but John Stossel makes an excellent point:
Most every politician and pundit says “energy independence” is a great idea. Presidents have promised it for 35 years. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we were self-sufficient, protected from high prices, supply disruptions and political machinations?
The hitch is that even if the United States were energy independent, it would be protected from none of those things. To think otherwise is to misunderstand basic economics and the global marketplace.
To be for “energy independence” is to be against trade. But trade makes us as safe. Crop destruction from this summer’s floods in the Midwest should remind us of the folly of depending only on ourselves. Achieving “energy independence” would expose us to unnecessary risks — such as storms that knock out oil refineries or droughts that create corn — and ethanol — shortages.
August 22nd, 2008 at 9:47 am
I read this same article earlier and he does make a good point. I also just watched an episode of Bullshit and it was all about people who want world peace. And of course it was making fun of anti war activists and people like code pink. In the end Penn and Teller talked about the one and only way to have world peace and that being FREE TRADE. So becoming energy independent might lead us not to trade with certain countries in which we trade with now. = possible trouble.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
well i think what people mean by “energy independence” is “not dependent on the middle east” for massive amounts of oil. Trade isn’t going anywhere, but this is a strategic decision for our nation’s security. Plus, we could potentially be an exporter of new energy or tech.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:44 am
I think I agree with Michael on this point. We can still have free trade without supporting tyrannical government’s. Then again, only when a country has attained a certain amount of wealth does a middle class appear that is willing to fight for capitalistic property rights thats makes democracies possible.
This is a tough one which causes me waffle like John Kerry or Barack Obama. Good olde nuance.
August 22nd, 2008 at 1:31 pm
While it’s true that wealth and a middle class are important for a democratic/capitalist conversion, I don’t see oil as the path there. It concentrates too much wealth and power in the hands of too few. Governments of oil rich countries usually end up taking as much of this wealth as they can, leading to authoritarian states.
Top Oil Rich Countries:
1. Saudi Arabia
2. Canada
3. Iran
4. Iraq
5. Kuwait
6. United Arab Emirates
7. Venezuela
8. Russia
9. Libya
10. Nigeria
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:55 am
The thing is, the oil supply seems to be controlled by a relatively small number of people, making it more like a monopoly/cabal than free trade; and many of the people controlling it are government officials, also removing many benefits of free trade. Other sources of energy, such as nuclear power, migh not have such restricted supply lines, allowing for more of a free market interaction.