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.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (17084)	4/19/2010 5:38:39 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

OT we can reduce our usage, increase our production, work towards shifting to fuels we can produce, trade more with friendlier places so we are less beholden and vulnerable to unfriendly places, and try to do what we can to make the unfriendly places friendly or, if not friendly, then hobbled. What steps would you actually take to reduce usage? Many possible steps would be easy to object to. If by "increasing our production" you mean remove blocks to US production, than I'm all for it, but while the idea has a lot of support its not without controversy, and also won't leave us independent by just about any definition of the term. If we move from producing a third of our oil to a half (which is unlikely, at least from this step alone, the change would probably be smaller even if we removed all drilling restrictions). If you mean subsidizing domestic production than I would be opposed (but I suspect that's not what you mean and that you would be opposed as well). Shifting to other fuels would also be reasonably easy to object to. We use oil based fuels because they make the most sense to use them. Other fuels all have their problems and generally are not cost effective at this time. Pilot projects and research efforts to improve the situation with other fuels won't protect us from the shock if we have an interruption in the supply of our main fuel. Trying to make unfriendly places friendly or hobbled is complex; and would involve different, even directly opposing steps, according to different visions about how it should be done. And almost no one would call either invading a dictator ruled oil producing country, or schmoozing with the dictators, or supporting internal opposition to the dictator, "oil independence", or even a step towards it. As for buying more from friendly places, well we get a lot of our oil from friendly places, but if unfriendly places cut production, or have it cut off for them by war or internal strife, than the friendly places will charge more (including such friendly places as Texas and Alaska)