promoted - cho

Big Oil tells us, as they plead to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, as Senator John McCain calls for drilling off the shores of the Lower 48, it can't happen again.

They promise.

Greg Palast

I've seen stupid, done stupid, actually got a kick out of watching stupid over the past few decades. But some of the things we Americans tend to believe take stupid to an entirely new level. Disconnect doesn't come close:

- AP/LAT: Exxon Mobil's second-quarter profit sets U.S. record
- Jane Kay/SFGate: 51% of Californians back offshore drilling

Drill a hole in the ocean floor, send money to Exxon, help elect John McCain. Lately there have been too many days when it's not worth chewing through the restraints.

Thursday, 24 April 2004, CNN Money ran an interesting article called Gouging myth out of gas¹ that further explained how the myth that gas stations participate in "price gouging" is unlikely, at best -- and it casts an eye toward the primary culprit through the use of some very interesting facts and figures.

^{Image created by GreyHawk using Microsoft Excel, based on the percentages provided in the article.2
Note: Excel automatically changed the 72% to 71% because the total of the figures provided added up to 101, not 100.}

According to the article, some people assumed that gas station owners get a bigger slice of the approximately $3.50 per gallon than they actually do -- but several suspected something much closer to the truth.

There's an interesting diary over on DailyKos right now -- it caught my interest, at least. It's Confused priorities: the scramble to exploit the Arctic sea bed by JohnnyRook.

Here's two of the comments -- one by NoBigGovernment, and my response. Both are, IMO, points worth keeping in mind while reading thru:

Unfortunately

Why are our leaders and the leaders of these other nations wasting time and money on seeing who can get access to the most underwater fossil fuels instead of investing in the renewable energy that might make it possible to keep New York, St. Petersburg, Vancouver, Copenhagen etc. above the waterline?

because they have to at this point. I think all reasonable nations are in fact investing in renewables, but in the meantime we need fuel to continue to make the world go round so to speak.

You just can't flip a switch and move from fossil fuels. Granted we could, and should, move faster but it's difficult to fault people for being somewhat prudent.

by NoBigGovernment on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 03:02:54 PM EST

_______________

"Prudent is as prudent does" so to speak...

...the BushCheney (CheneyBush?) Administration and Big Oil Republicans have done everything they can to force continued dependence on fossil fuels, when they should have been more prudent with the nation's resources and forward-thinking.

Instead, they essentially created a reality that is forcing us into greater, prolonged dependency but without any additional oversight, conservation, intelligent distribution or development of alternatives.

You are very correct that we need to be prudent with regard to a potentially untapped resource (vs. the relatively imprudent push by some to open the Arctic Refuge, which is a piddling amount in exchange for the potential damage/cost/impact).

However, we should eye any movement by BushCheney as an initial foray into yet another attempt to overfeed, gorge and run rampant instead of developing a sound policy for the securing, developing, use and distribution of energy and fuel sources.  

We must extricate BushCheney and their primary cheerleaders/benefactors from the process first, then put proper foundational structures into effect (rules, regs, laws and plans)...

Never, never brave me, nor my fury tempt:
  Downy wings, but wroth they beat;
Tempest even in reason's seat.

by GreyHawk on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 03:28:43 PM EST

I do believe a genuine plan is needed to ensure that our economy and nation can adequately operate while slowly weaning itself off of oil. I do not, however, believe that the Republicans, Big Oil, the Bush Administration or anyone currently embedded with any or all of the above should have anything to do with it.

There are also some major corporations and other political parties who need to either recommit to the nation's priorites -- which should include a proper degree of planning for current and future needs -- or be banned from participating in the work of the people.

What do you think?