Well before you get all excited about tearing down the energy industry, stop and think for a moment about what makes your comfortable life possible. Your heat and most of your electricity are provided through the burning of oil and natural gas. The thousands of plastic items in your home, car and office are all made from crude oil. Much of your clothing is woven of fibers made from petroleum..
Without the hard work and ingenuity of the men and women who work for the energy companies, we would be living in the 17th century - no electricity, running water, cars, trucks, airplanes, ships, factories, waterproof clothing, soda bottles, safety glass, sterile food and medical containers, air conditioners, televisions, microwave ovens, X-Boxes, I-Pods, or any of the millions of other products made using power generated from the burning of fossil fuels.
You would have to grow your own food, or ride your donkey to a nearby market, where there would be no refrigerators or electric lights. You'd have to kill and clean your own meat and cook it over an open fire. You'd have to chop down the trees for your home, and provide your own light by making candles from the fat of animals. Every single thing in your modern life is utterly and completely dependent upon a steady supply of oil. Without it, the entire Western world would collapse completely in a matter of weeks; tens of millions would perish from starvation, exposure, and disease
Monday, June 16, 2008
Is Big Oil To Blame?
This is a great article on the cause of higher gas prices. From American Thinker.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"Every single thing in your modern life is utterly and completely dependent upon..."
This is a scary thing to be able to say about anything, especially a finite resource. But very true.
Deciding who deserves the enormous profits from this worldwide addiction is difficult since some of it is earned by human thought and effort, but most is simply sucked from a God given endowment.
Is the decision to be made by the rule of "finders keepers", or should somebody intervene and try to share the wealth fairly?
The problem with the idea of somebody intervening to try to share the wealth fairly is that it doesn't work. Inevitably you end up with bribes and favoritism and prejudice being used to decide who gets more or less. That's the idea behind communism and socialism, which have been proven to lead to massive oppression and squelching of freedom and prosperity of any kind.
It's a great idea to be able to share and share alike, but human nature gets in the way.
By the by, the profits aren't that enormous. They sound like it, but the profit margin is extremely low compared to most other businesses, and the R&D is astronomically expensive.
Post a Comment