Orion_Zorn |
May 8 2008, 07:59 AM
Post
#16
|
General Group: Silver VIP Member Posts: 4,173 Submissions: None Joined: 28-December 03 From: Upstate NY Member No.: 2,212 |
QUOTE The "peak" will not consist of wells suddenly running dry, our oil prospectors are too good for that. This will be a methodical rise in prices to accompany a methodical strain on supply and increase in demand. You are making an assumption here. No the wells will not just run dry, but production can drop very quickly, causing shortages. What happens when people can't drive to work? Now I am not saying this will happen, I am just saying it COULD happen. This is my only issue with free market ideas, what happens when things change quickly, and 'retooling' to produce another product takes a long time? I recently read a book on economics, which I found out after I bought is considered a 'primer to Free Market Economics' but I can't remember the details on subsidies. So is the better option to increase the gas tax to push people to find other options? It would seem by what you are saying, that we should tax ethanol and gasoline, and any other fossil fuel based energy, instead of subsidizing solar or wind power. As for Sweden. Will they be laughing at us when heating oil is $15 a gallon? $20? And we are all freezing to death? What will the cost be to US taxpayers to become 'energy independent'? I can't think that the high tax rate is only due to the cost of using wind power... don't they have government health care? |
Roark |
May 8 2008, 08:23 AM
Post
#17
|
Lieutenant-General Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 3,182 Submissions: None Joined: 31-January 05 From: Fairfax, VA, USA Member No.: 13,816 |
QUOTE I recently read a book on economics, which I found out after I bought is considered a 'primer to Free Market Economics' but I can't remember the details on subsidies. So is the better option to increase the gas tax to push people to find other options? The point of the tax is NOT punitive. It's not intended to push people to do anything (and it is that type of thinking and policy that generally tends to fruit things up), but rather to reflect the actual costs of consumption, that is the cost to the environment that isn't part of the price. It isn't as much of an interference in the market, because you are still allowing consumers and producers to make choices dependent on the relative prices of the options. |
bridarshy |
May 8 2008, 08:59 AM
Post
#18
|
Colonel Group: Members Posts: 1,943 Submissions: None Joined: 4-April 07 Member No.: 53,594 |
The ethanol kick is terrible... Now commodity prices for corn are sky-rocking as farmers are conveniently "replanting" crops, and can't keep up with the demand. (Perfect timing, I say they planed it. Certainly they benefit when the price goes up in the futures markets. :)) The high price for corn not only makes it less cost effective than it already is, (ethanol - something that reduces your gas mileage by about 10% @ 10% concentration,) but it adds inflationary pressure to our food supply. There is enough inflation caused by the energy markets, and the weak dollar already! We also use sugar from corn, i.e., high fructose corn syrup, for just about everything, and it is a plainly bad idea to be so reliant on a single crop. (Ofc, we could use sugar beats.) Theoretically, everything with any corn products will go up in price. Our mandated use of ethanol makes it worse. This post has been edited by bridarshy: May 8 2008, 03:52 PM |
sKiLLfrEE |
May 10 2008, 05:46 AM
Post
#19
|
Field-Marshal Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 6,487 Submissions: None Joined: 4-May 04 From: Germany Member No.: 5,674 |
I wonder if this will have an impact on the way how people think about genfood. MOst people (talking about europe) are against it but when corn gets fewer (and prizes go up) they probably reconsider....which doesnt exactly contradicts the wishes of the genfood lobby. Coinicidence? :whistling: |
bridarshy |
May 10 2008, 11:39 PM
Post
#20
|
Colonel Group: Members Posts: 1,943 Submissions: None Joined: 4-April 07 Member No.: 53,594 |
QUOTE(sKiLLfrEE @ May 10 2008, 03:46 AM) I wonder if this will have an impact on the way how people think about genfood. MOst people (talking about europe) are against it but when corn gets fewer (and prizes go up) they probably reconsider....which doesnt exactly contradicts the wishes of the genfood lobby. Coinicidence? :whistling: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=43...gOawf2jCQ&hl=en It is almost 2 hours long, but it got deleted - I cannot seem to find the full length film. (But 32 min. here.^^) The link I have placed above is to a fascinating documentary on Monsanto... I saw it in its entirety about a month ago, and prior, I had never thought twice about modified food. (Another whole topic of course!) This post has been edited by bridarshy: May 11 2008, 12:47 AM |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 07:13 AM |
Site Designed and Coded Originally by Robo.
© MasterOfFreedom Sanctuary Networks LLC . All Rights Reserved.
© MasterOfFreedom Sanctuary Networks LLC . All Rights Reserved.