Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 11:22Â*am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote: What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of the remaining oil? You're not serious, I hope. Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"? We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea: capitalism. :-) But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own economy?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and Indians from burning all the oil". I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled *on*. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote: What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of the remaining oil? You're not serious, I hope. Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"? We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea: capitalism. :-) But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own economy?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and Indians from burning all the oil". I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled *on*. Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for $100 per bbl. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 7:29Â*pm, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote: What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of the remaining oil? You're not serious, I hope. Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"? We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea: capitalism. :-) But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own economy?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and Indians from burning all the oil". I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled *on*. Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for $100 per bbl.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - If taking control of "all the oil" means invading and occupying a greater number of oil-producing countries I think that's simply a pipe dream. We've got our hands pretty well full with just one of those countries now. We don't have the troops, the budget, or the moral authority to conquer the world just so we can continue putting relatively cheap gas into decidedly inefficient personal transportation. If we ever do get any oil out of Iraq, it should sell for about $500 bbl. That would more closely approximate the actual cost of the occupation required to "secure" the oil fields there. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|