Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (8598)	4/12/2002 4:41:53 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I agree with the first two paragraphs. The third one I might agree with or might not. I'm not sure I agree that oil drilling or gold mining need to be managed to control the rate of extraction. Fish will replenish themselves, or in other words produce more fish if the extraction is controled, and they would also fall under the "shared commons" unless you are talking about farmed fish. Gold in public lands could just be sold, and if we ever run low it will be more valuable, and the old gold items could be melted down for new uses if there is enough demand. Oil would similarly become more expensive as it gets used up, but of course you cant reuse the oil. I think that even with oil we should just leave it to the market as much as possible. You can auction off drilling rights, and as new drilling areas become scarce the auction price would be higher. I could see an idea that the government might not accept the highest bid at an auction if it is below a certain price under the theory that if demand for new oil and new drilling areas is that low then this particualr drilling area doesn't need to be used yet. Eventually as the price goes up oil will be used less as a fuel, its main use would probably just be for petrochemicals. Tim