Where'd you go dis? Did you lose interest in high oil prices or don't you care to debate the issue when the blame for them can be laid at the clay feet of your idols and ARE NOT Pres. Bush's fault?
Here's an article from the Rapid City Journal you would probably just as soon not read either:
High gas prices nothing to worry about
By Alan Aker, Journal columnist
PIEDMONT - The government shouldn't do anything about gas prices. They're a little high, and they could stay that way quite awhile, but most of the proposals for government action would either make matters worse, have no effect, have bad side effects, or would only have a short-term affect on gas prices many years in the future.
So far the national discussion about high gas prices has been one of the most disappointing spectacles of the entire decade. How hypocritical, short-sighted and economically illiterate have our leaders been? Let me count the ways.
First, the Democrats. If they had any shame or any prospect of hard questions from the antique media, Democrats would just shut up about gas prices. Generally, elected Democrats have stood in the way of every effort to drill for, transport and refine more oil in this country. Realize: the very same Democrat who attends a meeting on Monday in which he agrees that our high energy consumption is causing global warming might also attend a meeting on Tuesday in which he laments high gas prices. One body, two faces.
Just like clockwork, liberals trot out the same tired old answers they have for every problem: regulation, taxation and government spending. In this case, the Democrats' impulse to regulate takes the form of mandating higher fuel efficiency in cars.
If I understand their train of thought, it goes something like this: American car makers possess magic, secret technology that would make cars more fuel-efficient without sacrificing safety, utility or unduly inflating the cost of a car. American consumers would buy these cars, if they were available. American car manufacturers nevertheless refuse to make them.
Wait. Are our automakers really that stupid, or are they just evil? I'm not sure. After all, General Motors executives just announced, without smirking, that it's OK that they're losing money in the midst of an economic boom because they're losing less money than last year. That's a little like the captain of the Titanic announcing the good news that although the ship is still sinking, it won't be hitting nearly as many icebergs.
I have a better idea. Instead of prying that super-secret fuel economy technology out of the clutches of those GM executives, how about we just let all the automakers produce whatever kinds of cars they want and let consumers buy whatever kinds of cars they want? If GM won't make what buyers want, they'll go bankrupt, and good riddance. If people choose to buy gas-guzzlers, that would be a clue that the price of gas really isn't that big a problem.
But regulation isn't the only liberal reflex. They also want a tax increase. In this case, it's a new tax on oil profits. (I refuse to label these profits "windfalls." Profitable oil drilling involves years of careful capital accumulation, geologic research, enormous risk and real physical work. Somehow, the money made by the likes of Oprah, Bill Clinton and Britney Spears have always struck me more as "windfalls" than any money earned in an oil field.)
This oil profits tax will guarantee even higher gas prices. High oil profits serve two purposes: first, they put more money into the hands of people who know how to drill for, transport and refine oil, which allows them to do more of these things, which increases supply, which puts downward pressure on prices. Second, the existence of high profits will lure new investors into the oil business, which will also increase supply and lower prices. Take away some of those profits, and you take away some of these price-lowering resources and incentives.
Not satisfied with the economic vandalism of the oil profits tax, liberals also want to "rescue" us with increased government spending. They want our tax money to study, promote and subsidize alternative fuels, hybrid vehicles and mass transit. They needn't worry. If and when these things make economic sense, the greedy capitalists will invest in them. If they don't make economic sense, they won't lower gas prices any more efficiently than if the government just mailed all of us a rebate check based on how many gallons of gas we buy.
Another Democrat answer to high oil prices is to nag us to conserve energy. Until they and their Hollywood, big media and trial lawyer contributors stop riding in private jets and living in air-conditioned mansions, they should hush up about conserving energy. They should also quit yapping about how much money oil executives make, at least until they agree to income caps for those trial lawyers and big media celebrities. If the president of Exxon Mobile has too much money, maybe John Edwards, Dan Rather, Barbara Streisand and Ted Turner do, too.
Alan Aker is a Piedmont businessman. Write to [email protected] May 2, 2006
http://rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2006/05/02/news/opinion/opin02.txt