Re: Oil Prices Hit $100 a Barrel

Jean Paul wrote:


"Alan Lichtenstein" <arl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:V7SdnU_1sPrYnuDanZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxx

Jean Paul wrote:


"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:eGZej.130$XP4.11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Rumpelstiltskin wrote:

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:39:16 -0600, "Jean Paul" <jobbahut@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


"Rumpelstiltskin" <PleaseDoNotReplyByEmail@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fltnn3137t869p243jgqe0ogapmmoc8umi@xxxxxxxxxx

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:34:56 -0500, Harry Hope <rivrvu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


From The Associated Press, 1/2/08:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-newsbrief,0,1411218.story


Oil Futures Hit $100 a Barrel

NEW YORK (AP) --

Crude oil futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange hit $100 a
barrel in intraday trading Wednesday.

Oil prices jumped sharply, setting a new trading record on supply
concerns sparked by renewed violence in Nigeria and a warning that
OPEC may not be able to meet its share of global oil demand by 2024.

_________________________________________

Harry




Ah, I wrote a few months back, when the price started
soaring, that I'd felt like predicting the price would hit a
hundred dollars before the end of 2007, but didn't want
to ruin my record by taking a shot at a prediction I
wasn't pretty sure of. I'm glad I resisted!

It's going to get a lot higher, of course, now that the
dollar has sunk so low.



What I want to know is what this is going to mean for the economy?

On the one hand, as long as the price of oil is high, there is probably
going to be plenty of it.
On the other hand, fewer will be able to afford to fill up their gas
guzzlers, and get to work. Which means they will be asking their employers
for a raise so they can support that Hummer they got for xmas.

What does it all mean?




In the general sense of "what does it all mean", I'd echo
what Charlie Chaplin is said to have answered to Albert
Einstein when they approached New York Harbour.
Einstein, standing near the rail and confused by the
adoring reception he saw waiting for him, asked Chaplin
that question, and Chaplin replied "Nothing, nothing at all."

In the more specific sense of the current woeful state of
the dollar and of the "real economy", it means things are
going to get worse for the American people. That's my
prediction, if it isn't too obvious to count as a "prediction".



This is really a non-sequitur response to your comment and I hope you'll bear with me. I used to think that Jimmy Carter's administration was hand's down the worst in my lifetime (up until the present one, but for different reasons) because of the runaway inflation rampant during his term. Yet, in retrospect, had we adopted his recommendations regarding energy usage, it very likely wouldn't matter today what the price of oil or gasoline are. Food for thought.

George Z.

PS - To his credit, his Habitat for Humanity project rehabilitated his tattered reputation and made him by far the best ex-president of my lifetime.

What was his energy policy? I was too young and busy when he was president and can't find it.


20/20 hindsight usually seems to work out best. Jimmy Carter did have a significantly forward looking energy policy, but he suffered from a general ineptness and consequently, the public didn't give his foresighted visions due consideration. Had Carter been a more effective leader( which he wasn't ), and had Carter understood that change needs to be both presented and implemented in small increments( which he didn't ), he MIGHT, just MIGHT have been successful in producing an energy policy which likely would have precluded the mess we now find ourselves in.

But for all Carter's good ideas, which WERE good, they were consigned to the circular file by the electorate, likely because the electorate could not possibly fathom that such an inept president( which he was ) could possibly have a good idea( which he did on energy ). And so we see that simply having good ideas is insufficient if one cannot implement those ideas. Failure to implement simply consigns those ideas to wishful thinking and good intentions. And the Country requires more than wishful thinking and good intentions. And Carter couldn't deliver, and we got 12 years of reaction of Regan/Bush as a consequence.


Ad hominem.

Ad hominem is an attack against the author of a particular position. I made no attack against you, or against George who wrote the piece which I references in my reply, hence, your assertion is unfounded and inaccurate. I post the definition of 'Ad hominem,' from the Nizkor Project, which has defined and provided examples of most common fallacies:

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting).

As you can see, the assertion I made was actually in agreement with what George wrote, but offered my opinion as to WHY Jimmy Carter's energy policy was not implemented.



What was his energy policy?

The above having been said, I post Jimmy Carter's Principles of his energy policy, first outlined in a speech given April 18, 1977, which you could have easily found by using any one of the search engines available to you. I trust this answers your question.

The first principle is that we can have an effective and comprehensive energy policy only if the government takes responsibility for it and if the people understand the seriousness of the challenge and are willing to make sacrifices.

The second principle is that healthy economic growth must continue. Only by saving energy can we maintain our standard of living and keep our people at work. An effective conservation program will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

The third principle is that we must protect the environment. Our energy problems have the same cause as our environmental problems -- wasteful use of resources. Conservation helps us solve both at once.

The fourth principle is that we must reduce our vulnerability to potentially devastating embargoes. We can protect ourselves from uncertain supplies by reducing our demand for oil, making the most of our abundant resources such as coal, and developing a strategic petroleum reserve.

The fifth principle is that we must be fair. Our solutions must ask equal sacrifices from every region, every class of people, every interest group. Industry will have to do its part to conserve, just as the consumers will. The energy producers deserve fair treatment, but we will not let the oil companies profiteer.

The sixth principle, and the cornerstone of our policy, is to reduce the demand through conservation. Our emphasis on conservation is a clear difference between this plan and others which merely encouraged crash production efforts. Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy. Conservation is the only way we can buy a barrel of oil for a few dollars. It costs about $13 to waste it.

The seventh principle is that prices should generally reflect the true replacement costs of energy. We are only cheating ourselves if we make energy artificially cheap and use more than we can really afford.

The eighth principle is that government policies must be predictable and certain. Both consumers and producers need policies they can count on so they can plan ahead. This is one reason I am working with the Congress to create a new Department of Energy, to replace more than 50 different agencies that now have some control over energy.

The ninth principle is that we must conserve the fuels that are scarcest and make the most of those that are more plentiful. We can't continue to use oil and gas for 75 percent of our consumption when they make up seven percent of our domestic reserves. We need to shift to plentiful coal while taking care to protect the environment, and to apply stricter safety standards to nuclear energy.

The tenth principle is that we must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century.

These ten principles have guided the development of the policy I would describe to you and the Congress on Wednesday.

Our energy plan will also include a number of specific goals, to measure our progress toward a stable energy system.

These are the goals we set for 1985:

--Reduce the annual growth rate in our energy demand to less than two percent.

--Reduce gasoline consumption by ten percent below its current level.

--Cut in half the portion of United States oil which is imported, from a potential level of 16 million barrels to six million barrels a day.

--Establish a strategic petroleum reserve of one billion barrels, more than six months' supply.

--Increase our coal production by about two thirds to more than 1 billion tons a year.

--Insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings.

--Use solar energy in more than two and one-half million houses.

We will monitor our progress toward these goals year by year. Our plan will call for stricter conservation measures if we fall behind.

I cant tell you that these measures will be easy, nor will they be popular. But I think most of you realize that a policy which does not ask for changes or sacrifices would not be an effective policy.

This plan is essential to protect our jobs, our environment, our standard of living, and our future.

Whether this plan truly makes a difference will be decided not here in Washington, but in every town and every factory, in every home an don every highway and every farm.

I believe this can be a positive challenge. There is something especially American in the kinds of changes we have to make. We have been proud, through our history of being efficient people.

We have been proud of our leadership in the world. Now we have a chance again to give the world a positive example.

And we have been proud of our vision of the future. We have always wanted to give our children and grandchildren a world richer in possibilities than we've had. They are the ones we must provide for now. They are the ones who will suffer most if we don't act.

I've given you some of the principles of the plan.

I am sure each of you will find something you don't like about the specifics of our proposal. It will demand that we make sacrifices and changes in our lives. To some degree, the sacrifices will be painful -- but so is any meaningful sacrifice. It will lead to some higher costs, and to some greater inconveniences for everyone.

But the sacrifices will be gradual, realistic and necessary. Above all, they will be fair. No one will gain an unfair advantage through this plan. No one will be asked to bear an unfair burden. We will monitor the accuracy of data from the oil and natural gas companies, so that we will know their true production, supplies, reserves, and profits.

The citizens who insist on driving large, unnecessarily powerful cars must expect to pay more for that luxury.

We can be sure that all the special interest groups in the country will attack the part of this plan that affects them directly. They will say that sacrifice is fine, as long as other people do it, but that their sacrifice is unreasonable, or unfair, or harmful to the country. If they succeed, then the burden on the ordinary citizen, who is not organized into an interest group, would be crushing.

There should be only one test for this program: whether it will help our country.

Other generation of Americans have faced and mastered great challenges. I have faith that meeting this challenge will make our own lives even richer. If you will join me so that we can work together with patriotism and courage, we will again prove that our great nation can lead the world into an age of peace, independence and freedom.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Oil Prices Hit $100 a Barrel
    ... Oil Futures Hit $100 a Barrel ... Yet, in retrospect, had we adopted his recommendations regarding energy usage, it very likely wouldn't matter today what the price of oil or gasoline are. ... Jimmy Carter did have a significantly forward looking energy policy, but he suffered from a general ineptness and consequently, the public didn't give his foresighted visions due consideration. ... The first principle is that we can have an effective and comprehensive energy policy only if the government takes responsibility for it and if the people understand the seriousness of the challenge and are willing to make sacrifices. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • ot: It was said before and better, then ignored
    ... We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking ... The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are ... we need the production of a new Texas every year, ... The second principle is that healthy economic growth must continue. ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Carters address to the nation on the Oil Crisis of that time - A must read
    ... The President's Proposed Energy Policy ... The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are ... domestic production has been dropping ... The second principle is that healthy economic growth must ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: PHIL BOYER: 40% OF AOPA MEMBERS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASING THEIR FLYING DUE TO FUEL PRICES
    ... The remaining large oil fields that aren't being ... Economics have little to do with our domestic energy policy, ... And what has the right done to switch our dependency on the finite oil ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: {OT} Gas boomeranged.
    ... conjunction with Energy Professionals. ... We must have an energy policy that is put together by the ... Nobody complained that "energy professionals" were involved. ... Cheney had an "energy summit" with oil company execs (energy ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)