Oil Speculation

[INdemo]

All this talk about OPEC,world supply,etc,etc..is just a smoke screen.Congress has these hearings with the oil execs,another smoke screen.
Interesting article..Link below



President Bush could order the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to regulate U.S. investments in those markets with a snap of his fingers, said Michael Greenberger, a law professor at the University of Maryland and a former director of trading for the commission.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-bz.energy11jun11,0,7607933.story

[Andy823]

1. Yep

Bush has been helping his buddies, or his "base", the super rich, since he took office. The housing bust was one of their "get rich" quick ideas that didn't work, now they are taking the same tactics to the oil industry trying to get back what they lost on housing, plus make million more. Bush is a joke, and he should have been impeached years ago.

[Terry in Austin]

3. Impeachment: it's the right thing to do

Even if it's on January 19!

The declining supply of oil doesn't have much to do with him, though, other than a missed opportunity to get us off the stuff.

[Terry in Austin]

2. You mean there could be a quick fix!?

Yeah, those darn oil execs and that pesky world supply, etc, etc.

Here's an even better idea: we should all get that gizmo from the guy in the email that lets you run your car on water.

That'll show those greedy speculators/regulators/bloviators/oilguys! Don't they know we have a god-given right to Happy Motoring?

[Bob Dobbs]

4. Your continued apologism for energy profiteers is troubling.

Other than continuing to allow the power elite to consolidate capital in these speculative scams what public energy policies do you support?

[Terry in Austin]

6. You don't agree with me, so you must be suspect

Yeah, real compelling line of argument there, my friend.

I think you can do better than that, actually.

I've apparently hit a nerve, suggesting that world oil production has hit geological limits. You insist that financial and political elites are entirely to blame for the high price. The scammers are indefensible -- screw 'em. That's worth a whole other conversation. But for this one, "blame the speculators" amounts to a form of denial very popular these days.

Americans are hooked on the stuff and are terrified at the thought of losing it. Denial is just the first stage. People in denial just don't want to hear about it, and will quickly change the subject to anything else, even attack.

So far, it seems that you fit the profile. Maybe not. I hope not. You've asked a serious question, and if you're actually serious about engaging on the subject, I'll take your question seriously.

First, it looks like you've framed the question as "What government policies will fix the energy crisis?" If so, I'll overlook some of the restrictive assumptions behind that, and generalize it to "What efforts should humans make to adapt to a low-energy future?" I think that's the most meaningful way to address the question.

For starters:

- Reduce. Change expectations about energy "needs."
- Make railroads and urban rail ubiquitous
- Make cars unnecessary and quaint
- Phase out the highway system. Roads and streets will be fine.
- Change urban land use policies to curtail sprawl and encourage local self-sufficiency
- Reform factory farming in favor of local farming
- Avoid using food for fuel
- Avoid energy-wasteful industries and technologies (air travel, for example)
- Expand use of solar and wind power
- Curtail nuclear power
- Meet the neighbors. Get out of debt. Ride a bike. Grow vegetables. Don't have so many kids.

This is far from a "recipe for a solution." If we do all of these things, at a minimum, we just might have a chance at coming through with some sort of civilization worthy of the term. It's way too late to think there's anything we can do that will maintain "business as usual."

We need to face up to it: the party's over -- smell the coffee, deal with the hangover.

I look forward to your serious response.

[INdemo]

5. Republicans always have the defensive answer don't they?