Re: Samuelson on OIl Drilling

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:33:13 +0530, John Galt wrote:

> 
> <vjp2.at@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:fv9eie$rsa$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> It's in our interest to use up everybody else's oil before our own.
> 
> It's not in our best interest to lower our standard of living in the 
> process, which is what the result will be.

Why do you think it is not in our best interest to lower our "standard of
living"?  That phrase seems like parrot talk that is simply repeated ad
vomit.  A change in our life styles is not necessarily a reduction in
"standard of living" when those words are correctly parsed and examined.
There are many things that can be done to dramatically decrease our oil
consumption that would, in the opinion of many, actually improve our true
standard of living and most certainly our quality of life.  People move to
damned fast anymore.  Too much expected instant gratification that results
in very shallow thinking and a lack of any serious contemplation.  Let us
actually PLAN our home life for a week in advance or maybe two like we did
in the 1950s and 1960s.  We go to the grocery store and we lay in a supply
of the stuff we need for the next two weeks.  This as opposed to no
planning at all and jumping into the car every day to go get the stuff for
dinner.  And it is the same throughout the system.  I remember when "Just
in Time" was all the rage in manufacturing and distribution.  That was
good in that it forced us to look ahead and project when certain
commodities would actually be needed and it reduced storage costs.  But
now we just take all that for granted as being efficient and we dismiss
the local warehouses as nothing but sorting centers.  Wall-MArt shows that
actual storage on at least a regional basis makes good business sense.

The reason this is very im****tant is because of the much more efficient
use of rail in moving commodities.  Go take a drive on the interstate and
count the trucks.  Those trucks are sucking up a gallon of diesel fuel for
every 5 or 6 miles.  I am a long hauler that detests loads of less than
1500 miles but those days should be over because of the fuel costs. 
Manufactures would do well to consolidate and install rails but even
absent that, lengthy loads should be trucked to a rail yard, trans****ted
mostly by rail and delivered to a regional warehouse. The same
observation holds at regional warehouses in that the delivery could be
straight from the rail car. And we don't do this because people have
become so used to instant gratification and NO PLANNING.  We use Amazon
and UPS as opposed to a book store.  Only half of that is a good idea.  It
takes time to move physical stuff efficiently.

We need to develop our rail infrastructure not so much for passengers but
for freight.  We are currently entering a phase of what will be high
unemployment and a descending standard of living that can be avoided by
progressive actions.  Why do people drive to work each day? When they get
there many of them sit at a desk and mess with a keyboard.  There is
absolutely no reason why they can't mess with a keyboard in a home office.
Video conferencing has reached the point where very good quality can be
had for a very low price for the sake of mass meetings and the like. 
There simply is no reason to drive into the city yet we do it.  My living
standards will not be adversely effected by a huge increase in
telecommuting nor will anyone else's.

But this stuff takes leader****p and with Republican conservatives we don't
have that.  They are not economists.  Many are not even finance people. 
Most are simply bean counters.  If you assume that the economy will not
grow (that means an increase in aggregate wages boys and girls) then the
Social Security system is in trouble.  If you assume a decent share of
productivity gains being realized as wages then we have no problem with
Social Security. The Republicans are simply the architects of a self
fulfilling prophecy.

-- 
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend