R-Squared Energy Blog

Pure Energy

Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.

The following is an essay I wrote by request for another website. Regular readers won’t see anything they haven’t seen before, but I figured I would go ahead and post here as well. It is a condensed version of some of the topics I have hit here several times.

————————-

Every president since Nixon has promised to make the U.S. energy independent. Yet each successive administration has seen us become ever more dependent upon fossil fuels extracted from foreign lands. Why does a noble goal such as energy independence elude the U.S.? Let’s investigate.

Money Talks

The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil. We consume on average double the amount of oil of the average European, and six times the amount of oil of the average Brazilian. I will get to Brazil in a moment, but why should we consume so much more oil than Europeans? Are they simply that much more enlightened than we Americans? One could make that argument, but as someone who has lived in Europe on multiple occasions, I don’t think that’s it. I think it’s simply that people respond to price.

European governments have placed very high taxes on gasoline for many years. And in order to favor more efficient diesel engines, they provided favorable tax treatment for diesel fuel. These policies have had the effect of causing people to demand mass transit, it caused them to drive more efficient vehicles (with far more diesels operating than in the U.S.), and it caused them to live close to where they work. The overall impact is that Europeans use less oil, which also means their economies aren’t quite as sensitive to spiraling oil prices. They are not immune to higher prices, but if gasoline prices increase by $1/gallon, the impact on the average European is far less than on the average American.

Biofuel Myths

One thing high gas taxes in Europe didn’t do was to enable biofuels to gain solid footing as an alternative fuel source. Only mandates have boosted the market share for biofuels. Why? When gasoline prices reached $10/gallon this summer in parts of Europe, why didn’t we see biofuels ride to the rescue? Two reasons. First, the energy inputs into most biofuels amount to a large fraction of their overall energy content. Thus, when oil prices rise, the cost to produce biofuels rises in tandem. Second, the true cost to produce biofuels in most locations is substantially greater than it is to produce oil. Of course many producers and hypesters will claim otherwise. But the truth is that we have directly subsidized corn ethanol for 30 years. It is no closer to being able to stand on its own, subsidy and mandate-free, than it was 30 years ago. We have been working on cellulosic ethanol for 40 years. But the cost of production is too closely tied to the cost of fossil fuels like oil and natural gas because the energy inputs are so substantial.

Brazil Did It

Sugarcane ethanol can be produced efficiently and sustainably. I have been to a sugarcane ethanol plant in India, and I quizzed them intensely on their energy inputs into the process. Their energy inputs consist mainly of bagasse (sugarcane residue) that is burned for boiler fuel. Sugarcane is removed from the field during harvesting, and the bagasse is waste left at the factory after processing. The bagasse is burned for fuel, and the ash is mixed with compost from the process and returned to the soil.

Some claim that this is how Brazil reached energy independence, and the U.S. should follow Brazil’s lead. This is a myth. While Brazil is the #2 producer of ethanol in the world (the U.S. is already the #1 producer of ethanol), fossil fuels still provide 90% of their energy requirements. Brazil did recently declare energy independence – but not because of ethanol. Brazilian President Luiz da Silva made the announcement of energy independence in 2006 on the P-50 oil rig in the Albacora Leste field in the Atlantic Ocean.

So what of it? Ethanol still played a vital role in helping Brazil achieve energy independence. But the U.S. is a different ballgame entirely. The biggest problem is that in the U.S., each person uses 25 barrels of oil each year, but we produce only 6. In Brazil, each person uses 4, but they produce 3. They produce 75% of the oil they use, and in the U.S. we produce 25% of what we use. So sugarcane ethanol – which is produced with much lower fossil fuel inputs than corn ethanol – has a very small gap to fill in Brazil. In the U.S., we have a huge gap between what we use and what we produce. There is no proven biofuel technology that can economically bridge that gap.

Tax Fossil Fuels

If we can’t bridge the gap, perhaps we can make the gap smaller. How? There are many things we need to do, but I will focus on one. This summer when gasoline prices were setting new records, Americans began to conserve. They drove fewer miles. They bought more efficient cars. They embraced mass transit. As a result of high prices, we finally responded. Thus, I would argue that we need to keep fossil fuel prices high. I have proposed that we increase taxes on fossil fuels, and at the same time reduce income tax rates to prevent the taxes from being regressive. I would strive to make the fossil fuel tax revenue neutral, while providing an incentive to conserve.

There are two major advantages. First, people will know that fossil fuels are going to continue to be more expensive, and they can begin to plan accordingly. People who have been holding out for lower gas prices can finally join the people who have already begun major conservation efforts. Second, it levels the playing field for alternatives and for mass transit. Alternative energy is currently expensive relative to fossil fuels, but I would argue that this is partly because we don’t pay the true price for fossil fuels. For instance, we pay no price for carbon emissions. By raising fossil fuel taxes, those alternatives with low fossil fuel inputs will gain an advantage.

Conclusion

Why does energy independence elude us? In a nutshell, because we are unwilling to pay the price. The political parties make energy independence promises, because 1). We love to hear them; and 2). They (and we) are naïve about the difficulty of achieving the goal. Republicans tend to think we can drill our way to independence, and Democrats overrate the ease at which alternative energy can displace fossil fuels. The fact is, we love our cheap fossil fuels (and ironically loathe the companies that bring them to us).

But if we are to achieve energy independence we will need to use less. We will need to sacrifice. We will most importantly require bold leadership, because there is no easy way to get there. This is clear, given the inability of one administration after another to make headway in that direction. The thing that these administrations lacked was a serious policy designed to cut into our fossil fuel consumption. And the only proven method of getting us to collectively use less gasoline is by making it more expensive.

Advertisements

October 7, 2008 - Posted by | Brazilian ethanol, energy independence, energy policy, ethanol

380 Comments

  1. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  2. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  3. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  4. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  5. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  6. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  7. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  8. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  9. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  10. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell. If Americans wanted to continue their torrid love affair with gas guzzlers,there’s always the used car market.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  11. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  12. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  13. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  14. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  15. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  16. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  17. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  18. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  19. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment.

    I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.

    I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  20. Maury, I agree with 100 percent on your last comment. I just get so disgusted with our “leadership” in this country. I want to be optimistic and I know we can achieve what needs to happen with regards to energy. But, every day that passes, I have a little less optimism than before. Washington is a complete joke.I don’t know who to vote for because I think both of them are scrubs. I know energy is the single most important issue facing our country today, even more so than the economy but I have absolutely no clue which one is going take this energy situation serious.

    Comment by DAC | October 7, 2008

  21. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  22. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  23. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  24. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  25. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  26. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  27. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  28. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  29. Robert:

    Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  30. Robert:Thanks for writing you thoughts in such a concise manner again.

    Comment by Jerry Unruh | October 7, 2008

  31. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  32. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  33. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  34. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  35. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  36. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  37. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  38. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  39. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles.
    I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.
    Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted.
    Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.
    A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security.
    The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive.
    I suspect lithium battery costs will come down.
    It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives.
    The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.
    As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says.
    Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.
    We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs.
    The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.
    Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  40. The advances in EVs are truly remarkable. Evidently, a 200-mile range is feasible, and rapid recharge at 220v. Obviously, an onboard ICE extends range by several hundred miles. I would prefer, as a national policy, to use the price mechanism, rather than mandates.Right now we do not pay the full cost of a gallon of gasoline. The roads are subsidized, the military is totally subsidized, and the air is polluted. Under conservative economic principles, we should pay a stiff gasoline tax. I suggest $3 increase per gallon, implemented over the next several years.A tax credit for buying an EV is a good idea too — every EV is worth more than a tank and fighter jet to our national security. The good news is that pure EVs (no onboard ICE) will likely become cheaper to produce than ICEs at some point. Brushless induction motors are not very expensive. I suspect lithium battery costs will come down. It may be that people will use an pure EV daily, and then rent an ICE-EV for weekend jaunts or cross country drives. The EV looks like it will crush the oil business, by the way. It is much, much cheaper to plug in than fill up.As for RR’s post today, as usual I agree with everything he says. Unfortunately, between “no new energy development” Dems, and the “I Want my Baby Bottle and No Taxes” Repubs, we likwly will end up with the worst of both worlds — constrained new energy supply, but demand not dampened by gasoline taxes.We will continue to transfer hundreds of billions daily to backwards petro-thugs. The day may come when cities ban ICEs, at least from the central cores. There is no right to pollute the air other people breath — on the contrary, one might assume to opposite, that people have a right to fresh air. As a matter of practicality, we have endured ICEs in cities — but that day may be coming to a close.Frankly, I think the best day yet for cities is ahead — imagine urban living in fresh air, with quiet streets. Not so bad.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  41. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  42. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  43. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  44. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  45. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  46. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  47. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  48. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  49. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.

    Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  50. Unfortunately, there will be no “energy independence” in this country until fusion power becomes a reality.Fusion power should be the real top priority and crash project ~ the Manhattan and Apollo Project rolled into one.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  51. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  52. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  53. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  54. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  55. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  56. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  57. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  58. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  59. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.
    In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.

    Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  60. The U.S. is an energy hog. We are 5% of the world’s population, and we consume 25% of the world’s oil.In fairness, though, the US produces about 25% of the world’s GDP – so from that perspective the US is not such an energy hog. Obviously, much can (and should) be done to make America more energy efficient. But it seems America puts much of that energy to good use.Sadly, as recent events have shown, the US economy is still the power behind much of the global economy. That may eventually change, the way the US seems to be squandering that leadership. But not just yet…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  61. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  62. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  63. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  64. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  65. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  66. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  67. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  68. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  69. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.
    Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.

    Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!

    Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.

    As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  70. Or,we could just ban internal combustion. Trust me,automakers would come up with something else to sell.Now there’s the dumbest comment I’ve heard in a while, and in this political season there’s no shortage of those.Maury, what if you had a heart attack, but the ambulance couldn’t get to you, because it’s battery’s depleted? Or the cost of groceries tripled due to higher transportation cost? Are you suggesting we give up air travel all together? Why wait for Peak Oil, let’s get to the caves early, and get the best ones before the crowd arrives!Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes). In case you haven’t noticed, those don’t tend to work out well. Part of human nature: power corrupts and all that. Also, governement officials tend to be pretty bad at predicting what comes next, and how to prepare for it.As the authors of Freakonomics indicated, people respond to incentives (such as high gas prices). So RR is right, there is no need to ban anything, just create the right incentives. That way you leave it open to human ingenuity to come up with better solutions than those government officials would have thought of…

    Comment by Optimist | October 7, 2008

  71. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  72. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  73. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  74. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  75. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  76. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  77. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  78. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  79. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”

    Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  80. “Banning stuff happens in communist countries (and other repressive regimes)”Only,this is a case of national security optimist. Oil is half of our massive trade deficit. But,if the economy isn’t reason enough,what about Iran? We can’t bomb their nuclear facilities,because they’ve threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf. Even if they failed,taking their 4 million bpd of oil off the market could derail the world economy. Is the right to foreign oil worth armageddon? We banned automatic weapons from American streets,and they don’t present a fraction of the danger oil does.

    Comment by Maury | October 7, 2008

  81. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  82. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  83. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  84. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  85. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  86. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  87. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  88. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  89. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously.

    Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  90. I agree that we need to tax gasoline more, but the very thought is foreign to most people. What’s incredibly frustrating is that the maintstream in this country isn’t even discussing the real problem. There is so much misinformation out there that the truth isn’t taken seriously. Robert, how can the message in this article be delivered in a way that people will accept as legitimate? I don’t think a blog is going to work.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  91. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  92. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  93. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  94. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  95. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  96. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  97. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  98. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  99. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  100. I’m a teacher and I am starting to get my students to realize how a higher gasoline tax is great for America. They are starting to come along which is very promising. Just thought I would throw that out there.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 7, 2008

  101. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  102. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  103. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  104. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  105. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  106. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  107. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  108. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  109. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  110. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  111. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  112. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  113. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  114. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  115. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  116. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  117. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”

    Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  118. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.
    Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation.
    Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too.
    If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job.
    Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.
    As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  119. Maury said: “Oil is half of our massive trade deficit.”Right Maury. That’s why ethanol from corn makes so little sense. Why burn and waste fossil fuels to grow corn and convert it to ethanol? It only adds to the trade deficit.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 7, 2008

  120. Oh, it’s ugly time on Wall Street. This is uglier than a Cubs playoff performance.Crude oil futures up today, but that has to be speculator manipulation. Man, oh man. Get ready for your house to be worth half of two years ago, and your stocks too. If you rent and own no stocks, try to hold on to your job. Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead. Even the TOD crowd is suggesting demand will fall faster than depletion, which is their way fo saying oil is dead for years and years, and Peak Oil drama is pushed off again. It is ever future tense for the doom crowd.As if the price mechanism could not limit demand even more quickly then a recession….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  121. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  122. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  123. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  124. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  125. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  126. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  127. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  128. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  129. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).

    Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  130. Apart from the incentives created, the other big benefit of a gasoline tax would obviously be the tax revenues generated. At a recent rates of 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline produced per day, plus another 1,000,000 barrels imported per day, a tax of say $2 per gallon would yield (if I did the math right) about $300 billion per year. This would of course be offset by reduced demand the new tax would cause and any corresponding income tax reductions. But we could end up with some big numbers (whether the big numbers would be spent wisely is another issue).Additionally, reduced gasoline demand generated in this way in the US would have a dampening effect on global oil prices.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 7, 2008

  131. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  132. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  133. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  134. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  135. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  136. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  137. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  138. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  139. Armchair-

    Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury.
    We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.
    It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe.
    Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit.
    You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  140. Armchair-Yes, you are right. Demand would be dampened, crushing the price. We can transfer money to thug states, or to the US Treasury. We could stipulate the gas tax revenues be used only to pay down debt.It is a remarkable testament to the stupidity of our two parties that this policy option is not even on the table — despite the fact that it is already a reality, and working, in Europe. Imagine the reaction of oil markets to the news that a $3 gas tax was coming in America — and that EVs would get a $10,000 tax credit. You may wish to look at living in Australia, Thailand, Sweden, German, France. They have real governments. We are turning into El Bananarama States of Norte Americano.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 7, 2008

  141. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  142. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  143. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  144. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  145. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  146. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  147. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  148. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  149. Benny,

    I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.

    I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.

    Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  150. Benny,I have lived in Europe before (Scotland) and I didn’t hear so much complaining about prices. Then again, a lot of people there were not so kind to their government. There is a bit of “grass is greener” going on here.I also lived in a “thug state” if you want to call Qatar a thug state. I thought it was actually very well run and very pro-western in terms of its views on economic development. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Oman also seemed to me to be very well managed countries/emirates.Best of luck to the politician who puts higher gasoline taxes on his platform.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  151. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  152. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  153. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  154. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  155. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  156. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  157. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  158. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  159. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.

    Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.

    Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  160. I appreciate the additional details on Brazil. It added some additional perspective on what I heard from Khosla’s presentation.Perhaps a good use of Algae is not Biofuels but as fertilizers. Have you worked any of the Energy ROI’s with fertilizers that take less energy to produce? Perhaps this is where we should be putting our efforts in the fertilizer sciences.Also efforts in the renewable swithgrass (or algae?) pellets burning than trying to make forms of oil out of them.

    Comment by takchess | October 8, 2008

  161. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  162. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  163. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  164. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  165. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  166. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  167. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  168. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  169. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”

    Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  170. “Oil is dead, dead, dead, dead.”Not a chance Benny. It wasn’t a shortage that caused the spike to $147. The world had spare capacity,but OPEC chose not to use it. They’re already jabbering about cutting production. If it was a free market,I’d have to agree with you. But it ain’t.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  171. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  172. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  173. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  174. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  175. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  176. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  177. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  178. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  179. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  180. Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.B} Input costs are down 45%.C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  181. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  182. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  183. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  184. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  185. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  186. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  187. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  188. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  189. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  190. I think something got lost here: “The fact is, we love our cheap fossil f[uel]”. However, I don’t know how much more gap there is.

    Comment by P.M.Lawrence | October 8, 2008

  191. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  192. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  193. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  194. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  195. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  196. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  197. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  198. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  199. I think something got lost here

    Fixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.

    RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  200. I think something got lost hereFixed, thanks. I had seen that error in an earlier version, but thought I had gotten it fixed.RR

    Comment by Robert Rapier | October 8, 2008

  201. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  202. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  203. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  204. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  205. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  206. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  207. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  208. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  209. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  210. Is it just me, or is Obama tooling up to be “The Energy President”? It appears he thinks that’s the best way to tackle both the energy situation as well as the economic one. Robert, he could use your advice, and I hope someone from the campaign is paying attention. All McCain wants to do (with Palin as his energy czar) is drill baby, drill.

    Comment by ek | October 8, 2008

  211. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  212. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  213. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  214. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  215. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  216. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  217. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  218. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  219. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road.

    Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  220. I hope Obama is tooling up to be the "Energy President." If we don't have an energy President now, we may be in deep $&@# a few years down the road. Robert, are you supporting Obama?

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  221. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  222. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  223. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  224. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  225. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  226. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  227. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  228. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  229. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.

    I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  230. Obama’s energy plans aren’t encouraging, though they’re better than nothing. My bet is that following Obama’s course means increased reliance on nat gas for both electric power and vehicles, because he won’t want to drill for more oil, won’t want to increase the use of coal, and will stiff-arm nuclear power.I agree with the gas tax, Robert. In fairness to the USA, I would make the point about 25% of GDP as well. I would also point out that we are a large country with relatively low population density. A fairer comparison would be to other large, developed countries with low population densities, e.g. Canada, Australia. We don’t look as bad versus those examples.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 8, 2008

  231. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  232. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  233. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  234. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  235. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  236. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  237. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  238. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  239. Maury-
    Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide.
    Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day.
    OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years.
    On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent.
    The oil bull market is dead.
    Armchair:
    I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?
    Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?
    Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?
    Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners?
    Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  240. Maury-Brent spot price down to $80 today, and some futures prices, out a few years, are trading in the $70s on the NYMEX. Crude oil demand is waning, while biofuels output skyrocketing. Meanwhile, refineries are coming online that handle the heavy and sour crudes, which have been piling up worldwide. Oil is dead, until the next “story” can be hatched. The speculative price of oil is the market price, sometimes for years on end. Then, the correction. We are seeing the correction. Remember, when oil crossed over $40(going up) the price became high enough to stimulate new production. At more than $60, conservation and alternative fuels look great. At $100? It can’t hold. It can for years, but not forever. The speculators had a field day, as demand for oil is short-term inelastic. Scare-mongering was the order of the day. OPEC? Now, they crumble. To make more money, they have to pump more, unlike the last few years. On TOD, they are mealy-mouthing that demand will fall faster than depletion, thanks to the recession. The price mechanism is even more potent. The oil bull market is dead.Armchair:I have never been the Emirates, which are widely regarded as a bright spot. Still, what are the rights of women in those states? Free press? Do they have democratic elections? Are there newspapers in which columnists write “Time to end monarchy and start democracy.”?Are there two or more political parties? TV stations which condemn the king and his actions?Do the mass of foreign workers have labor unions?Do house servants from the Philipppines became unwilling sex workers for house owners? Yeah, and the Emirates are the bright spot of the Islamic Mideast.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  241. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  242. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  243. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  244. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  245. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  246. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  247. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  248. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  249. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.

    There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?

    Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil.

    Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  250. Robert — since you are saying things you have said before, let me add something that I have said before.There is a fairness issue buried in high consumer taxes on oil products. Who should get the major share of the economic rent? A developing country using up its finite natural endowment, or greedy politicians in western countries?Beware the unintended (but eminently forseeable) consequences of demanding high taxes on oil. Instead of increasing taxes, we should be looking for a supply-side solution — promote serious research into a wide spectrum of other large-scale dependable energy sources. Let's find new energy sources which are cheaper & better than fossil fuels.

    Comment by Kinuachdrach | October 8, 2008

  251. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  252. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  253. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  254. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  255. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  256. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  257. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  258. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  259. Kine:
    I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  260. Kine:I will give my opinion: I would rather my money go to the US Treasury, then some creepy thug state petro-dictator.

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  261. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  262. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  263. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  264. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  265. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  266. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  267. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  268. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  269. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  270. Now that oil is down 50% and gasoline is down 10%,maybe it is a good time to slap a bigger tax on gasoline. Porsche built a hybrid AWD car in 1902,but not a single European carmaker has a hybrid in showrooms today. Maybe they need more gas taxes too.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  271. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  272. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  273. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  274. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  275. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  276. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  277. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  278. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  279. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid

    All we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  280. The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was one of the earliest hybrid vehicles, developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid, with four electric motors mounted in the wheel hubs and electricity delivered by batteries and a small generator. In concept and general layout, it presaged the Volvo ReCharge Concept, the Chevrolet Volt, the Opel Flextreme, and other modern series hybrids.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_HybridAll we need is higher taxes and a few hundred more years of “innovation” to slay the oil dragon. Or,we could make automakers stop draggin’ their feet and do away with internal combustion altogether.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  281. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  282. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  283. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  284. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  285. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  286. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  287. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  288. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  289. Benny,

    True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.

    The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.

    The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.

    Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  290. Benny,True, these “bright spots” aren’t democratic by western standards. But they are making slow progress. There is some voting for local elections. There is some free-ish press, like “Al Jazeera”. It’s not just the political structure, there is also a heavy cultural influence in their way of life.The natives in these countries are prosperous. The immigrants are not so well off or well treated. But the fact that they keep coming says something about relative conditions in their home countries.The point I made is not that these places are beacons of western style democracy. It’s that, as opposed to a lot of countries with dictators and their cronies that drain their countries’ wealth, these “bright spot” countries are well managed, and have seen huge increases in standards of living over the last, say, 30 years. Petroleum wealth has trickled down to the natives. If you want to see true oil thug states, look to places where the people have not really benefited from oil wealth. Nigeria is the poster child.Also, I wouldn’t say oil is dead. It’s back where it was a year ago, when everyone was loudly complaining it was too high. I’d say more that oil has had its day in the sun, like expensive housing, and will now go back to a more reasonable equilibrium. At $80 the industry can still be healthy. I think the same supply/demand issues that led to $150 oil will happen again down the road, when economies start to emerge from the current crisis.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 8, 2008

  291. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  292. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  293. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  294. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  295. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  296. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  297. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  298. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  299. Armchair-

    I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”
    Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..

    And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  300. Armchair-I wonder what would be world reaction is a country somewhere announced that “blacks can not have a driver’s license or vote.”Yet women cannot vote or drive in Mideast thug states, and the situation may be going backwards, not liberalizing…..And we finance this through oil imports….

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  301. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  302. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  303. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  304. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  305. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  306. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  307. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  308. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  309. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  310. A Saudi caught with a cross will have his nails pulled Benny. They use our oil dollars to spread their deadly cult around the world. Thanks to Saudi Arabia,80% of American mosques are Wahhabi,the poisonous cult bin Laden subscribes to. Doesn’t stop Bush from smooching with their king though.

    Comment by Maury | October 8, 2008

  311. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  312. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  313. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  314. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  315. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  316. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  317. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  318. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  319. BTW-
    A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  320. BTW-A $3 a gallong new federal gas tax would raise $400 billion a year…depress demand for crude, reduce imports, nearly balance the budget (maybe not a good idea this year, but in general…)

    Comment by benny "peak demand" cole | October 8, 2008

  321. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  322. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  323. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  324. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  325. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  326. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  327. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  328. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  329. Benny,

    I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.

    This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.

    Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  330. Benny,I think you’re stereotyping a bit here. True, some Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are very strict and repressive. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal. Women can, for example, drive in these places, and wear pretty much whatever they want. They can go to college and hold professional jobs. Some of the countries have local elections. Mostly though it’s true that they don’t have equal status with men.This was an ongoing source of debate when I lived there, whether western women should speak out to local women about their relative lack of rights. A lot of local women resented this kind of heavy-handed western intrusion, in their minds, of foreigners lecturing them on what the proper way to live should be. A lot of women (especially the older ones) were I think comfortable with the status quo, because as I said there is a strong cultural component here. But increasingly I saw (particularly younger) women adopting more western lifestyles, and I think these women did feel that they were being held back, just as I’m sure some older women feel repressed.Bottom line, from my experience there, I think the blanket accusation that all Middle Eastern countries are thug states is unfair, because there are a variety of approaches from country to country, and also because the status quo has deep cultural roots. So I think the definition of thug state is pretty imprecise and is laced with western political and cultural expectations. I can just imagine the reaction I’d get, speaking to a roomful of Qatari women, calling their nation a thug state! I would say Nigeria is a thug state, but I would not say that Qatar or Oman are thug states.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  331. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  332. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  333. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  334. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  335. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  336. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  337. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  338. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  339. Maury asked:

    Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…

    A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.
    B} Input costs are down 45%.
    C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.

    None of the above Maury.

    It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.

    The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.

    Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  340. Maury asked: Pop quiz time. Corn is down 45% because…A] Congress threw out the ethanol mandates.B} Input costs are down 45%.C) Cows and chickens changed their eating habits.None of the above Maury.It’s because the corn speculation commodity bubble has burst, and because more and more corn-to-ethanol stills are finding they aren’t making any money ~ even with local and Federal tax credits, rebates, and subsidies.The fact is that corn ethanol does not have a sound thermodynamic foundation and now those chickens are coming home to roost.Even “Big Corn,” “Big Ethanol,” their lobbyists, and Corn Belt politicians can’t repeal the Laws of Thermodynamics.

    Comment by Hawkshaw | October 9, 2008

  341. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  342. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  343. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  344. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  345. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  346. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  347. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  348. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  349. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy

    Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions.

    I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy.

    We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US.

    But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out.

    In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  350. Gateway Ethanol bites the dust, more to follow: Ethanol Plants in Deep Jeopardy Another instance where subsidies and bad gov’t policies led to unwise business decisions. I think we could move towards energy independence if we would reduce the coporate income tax and capital gains on companies that produce domestic energy. We were doing a litle thought experiment, we found that rather than build a plant in the US, we could export the US (40% effective state/federal income tax) raw materials to Ireland (11.5% effective tax rate), turn it into gasoline, then reimport it to the US markets, and make more money than just building the facility in the US. But it seems that our politicians would rather just smack the oil companies like a pinata until no more candy falls out. In reality, they would rather keep the marginal tax rates high and get nothing than reduce rates and get some tax revenues from domestic production.

    Comment by KingofKaty | October 9, 2008

  351. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  352. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  353. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  354. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  355. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  356. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  357. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  358. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  359. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.
    Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:
    1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:56
    2. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  360. Others, like Egypt, Qatar, and Dubai, are much more liberal.Egypt more liberal? Wow, that’s setting the bar pretty low:1. Human rights groups say police brutality is widespread in Egypt. BBC, Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:562. Despite the bitter setbacks faced by journalists across different formats trying to expose injustice and improbity at the heart of the Arab world’s largest country, the government’s suffocating grip on the media here is slowly weakening. There is nothing linear about this process: writers and activists whose work is channelled through the net are routinely rounded up; the explosion of foreign satellite channels in recent years has been accompanied by police raids on programme-makers; the rise of independent ownership within the Egyptian newspaper industry is undermined by court cases against non-compliant editors. The Guardian, Thursday October 09 2008 17:30 BST

    Comment by Optimist | October 9, 2008

  361. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  362. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  363. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  364. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  365. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  366. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  367. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  368. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  369. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.

    I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  370. More liberal than Saudi Arabia…. was my point. But definitely not liberal by western standards.I’m not really trying to defend these countries, just pointing out that, after spending 5+ years living and traveling in the region, in my opinion western perceptions that these are all brutal dictatorial regimes populated by unhappy and repressed people are not really accurate. There are lots of shades of gray.

    Comment by armchair261 | October 9, 2008

  371. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  372. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  373. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  374. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  375. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  376. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  377. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  378. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  379. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”

    Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008

  380. “Why Energy Independence Eludes the U.S.”Nancy Pelosi.

    Comment by Anonymous | October 11, 2008


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: