Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (121824)	12/18/2003 3:24:56 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Long term, we obviously need to find alternative resources, and we'll do that when this society is so financially impacted that it finally forces the politicians to do something. One could argue that if we were energy-independent, the ME mess would be a lot less significant since our interests would not be as severely impacted. No one argues that the Afghani and Iraqi wars were cheap, or that the costs of fighting terror are inconsequential. If we were not dependent on ME oil, some of these costs would conceivably not have been incurred. As a result, our surplus would not have disappeared I would argue that we are suffering the costs of ME energy dependence every day. Since these costs are not perceived by most voters as being direct pocket-book expenses, the politicians do not hear hue and cry for energy independence very loudly. It won't be until gasoline prices go up significantly that the voters will wake up from their apathy and demand that "something" be done. The time for it was 15-20 years ago, however, but since we are hooked on cheap oil, the necessary but politically unapetizing steps were not taken.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next