Our withdrawal from the ME would make null the terrorist threat.
It might lessen its focus on us but it might make it grow overall. Also it would show people that terrorist attacks against the US "work", so it might increase the terrorist threat to the US in the long run.
You don't tax oil, you tax devices that use oil inefficiently
Considering that our car companies compete better with the big SUVs and trucks you probably hurt them a lot. You also cause people to buy goods that they are less satisfied with. While this doesn't directly effect measured economic activity much, it does in a real sense make society poorer, and might indirectly also reduce even measured economic activity. There are also normally a lot of unforeseeable indirect results from intervening for some goods or services and against others.
And those were the cheapest cars on the road.
And the smallest and least safe, and often not particularly popular despite their fuel economy and relatively low cost.
3 - If prices are lower we will increase consumption not decrease it.
Not if we tax devices on their efficiency.
The lower prices would counteract any benefit from the lowered demand from more efficient machinery. You would be reducing incentives to economize both in the use of the more efficient machinery and in the purchase and use of any types of machinery that are not covered by the scheme.
Even if we do manage to cut oil imports by 60% the Middle East will still be a strategically important region to the US.
Yeah, about as strategically important as Madagascar.
No it will still be an area of great strategic importance. If we import 60% of our oil now, and then cut 60% of our oil use, we would wind up still importing oil because marginal American production would be taken off line. Also our trading partners and allies would still be importing oil. Furthermore our oil supplies would run down, the biggest reserves are in the Middle East. This is even a greater factor if environmental regulation prevents us from exploiting important or potentially important oil reserves on US soil or in our waters. Also the existing problems in the Middle East would not go away if US involvement went away. Poverty would increase if we stopped importing oil. Suddenly leaving Iraq and reducing or eliminating our presence elsewhere in the area could have severe negative consequences. A lot of the problems in the Middle East are not of the "ignore them and they will go away" type, or even the "ignore them and they will ignore you" type.
re: 5. New technology businesses with high paying jobs creating new solutions, with potential export opportunities.
***
5 - Lots of things create new jobs. The problem is you would be destroying other jobs in the process.
OK... new technology jobs for what?
One likely are for job losses would be in US auto manufacturing, but it probably wouldn't be the only area.
Its not like your plan would turn a bunch of unskilled Americans into advanced engineers and researchers. Its also not like these new cars and engines ect. would be created in addition to all the existing goods and services that we would have otherwise created. You would be taking consumer demand away from some things and moving it to others. You would be taking skilled Americans from some areas and moving them in to others. The net result, or at least the net direct result, is to move jobs around not create new jobs. This "new jobs" argument is made all the time by people supporting more environmental controls, or new sports stadiums. And yes they both create new jobs, but they also move demand and resources away from other areas reducing some of the old jobs. I suppose its possible that the net effect could be slightly positive, but it is more likely to be either a wash or slightly negative, and it can even be strongly negative.
I can't fathom why you would be against efficiency
Being for efficiency is not the same thing as being for any program that is supposed to increase efficiency, or even any program that will increase efficiency.
Tim |
