Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thackney

Our oil reserves should remain our oil reserves.

Depleting our oil reserves only to run out and have to depend on other nations again makes no sense whatsoever.


6 posted on 03/17/2015 10:45:35 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (The question is Jeb Bush. The answer is NO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne
The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones.

Neither did the bronze, iron ages, etc.

Funding our enemies while hoping the technology doesn't advance to others is foolish.

I'm also curious why you think you have ownership of someone else’s minerals. Do you believe other people should be able to tell you who you are allowed to sell your products and labor?

7 posted on 03/17/2015 10:48:28 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne; Rashputin

I prefer the government stay away. But an effective way of doing what you intend would be a tax on exported oil.
Of course, that would eventually be abused though.


17 posted on 03/17/2015 11:24:10 AM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne; thackney
Depleting our oil reserves only to run out and have to depend on other nations again makes no sense whatsoever.
Jimmy Carter, is that you? Carter’s theory was that US natural gas would, in some not distant future, suddenly be exhausted. Granted it took a generation to fully come into reality with horizontal drilling and shale fracking, but that theory was at direct odds with what sensible theory predicted. Price elicits supply. If a product is cheap, that is because it is and is expected by the smart money to remain plentiful.
Our oil reserves should remain our oil reserves.
You and that mouse in your pocket own the fuel deposits in the US?
If you believe in private property you don’t believe in that claptrap. It is socialism. thackney is exactly right.

It is much better to let the market mechanism sort out which oil gets shipped where. It makes more economic (and diplomatic) sense to ship some Alaskan oil to Japan, rather than forcing the Japanese to import oil at higher shipping cost from the Middle East.

Another possible consideration is the bruited possibility of an “intelligence singularity” in the foreseeable future. If computers - conceivably neural network programs running on quantum computers - suddenly get so smart that they dwarf human intelligence, possibilities ranging from ways to not need as much energy to practical controlled nuclear fusion power plants might very well suddenly transform the energy equation. That is a possible mechanism by which your far-fetched “peak oil” fantasy might be utterly mooted within a generation.

Even without such singularity, the cost of drilling and fracking has been declining with experience. That moves your “peak oil” schedule that much further into the future.

Things tend to be worth what people are willing to pay for them.

48 posted on 03/17/2015 2:30:56 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion ('Liberalism' is a conspiracy against the public by wire-service journalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson