Bush's Energy and Eco-Idiocy

Bush,Energy

            

Debates about energy on Fox News, the Republican Party’s megaphone, reflect just how far Bush and his supporters have strayed from a priori economic truths, in adopting the Democratic agenda.

The two ubiquitous interlocutors typically invited to “debate” energy—one a Democrat; the other a Republican—have no real disagreement about policy or the facts undergirding it. Their only quarrel concerns the degree to which Bush is carrying out the Democrats’ plank; Democrat pinkos say not fast enough; Republican pinkos give him full marks.

Democrats don’t even have to argue their case for the repugnant Marxist theory of environmentalism; Bush has accepted and acted on it–its fallacies inform his policies. As I’ve written:

“The theory used to be that capitalism was going to cause the impoverishment of the worker. The exact opposite transpired. Greater economic freedom, especially in developed nations, has enabled those who, in previous centuries would have lived short, nasty and brutish lives, to afford the accoutrements of modernity. The theory now is that the capitalist has taken a slight detour—the worker’s demise will indeed follow as soon as the capitalist is through despoiling the environment.”

Republicans have been converted: they are now “watermelons”—green on the outside, red on the inside.

Duly, they ignore that supply and demand determine the price of gas—and that, other than taking care in future not to reduce supply by pulverizing a country that was once a major oil producer—supply has to be increased to reduce prices.

Furthermore, the price system is the best way to conserve. Americans are already adjusting consumption because of prices. Dare to meddle with these, as Bill O’Reilly advocates, and shortages or surpluses will follow in short succession. If you cap prices (or profits, as Comrade Bill advocates), people will conserve less because prices will have been artificially lowered, and suppliers will have no incentive to drill for crude and bring it to market. If the eco-idiots don’t want lines at the pump the likes Iraqis are now enduring, let the price system work to conserve—and to secure supply.

Any impending scarcity is the responsibility of the powerful environmental lobby’s opposition to oil exploration—and the governments that have heeded it. This lobby has seen to it that a domestic moratorium and thousands of regulations and restrictions have been foisted over the years on industry in a bungling attempt at conservation. The prices at the pump are their handiwork. Absent legislative barriers to exploration, courtesy of ignorant environmentalists, high prices would, ordinarily, signal to oil companies that there are profits to be made, and that they should intensify drilling, refining, etc. In short, get more product to market.

As to the “commie cars” Bush is pushing, much to the delight of Democrats: Don’t expect Bush (who recently spoke of reducing “greenhouse admissions“), the Fox fillies, affiliated fops, or any other ignoramus on the networks, to tell you what they apparently don’t understand—also the only thing you need to know about electric, hydrogen, and hybrid gas-and-electric vehicles—these are only as good as the original source of energy that powers them.

Take the Hydrogen vehicle: energy is released when water (H2O) is separated into Hydrogen and Oxygen. Notwithstanding that this process is not economically viable, and thus far more wasteful than oil extraction, to bring about this reaction, coal, natural gas, nuclear power, or a hydroelectric dam are required first. Dah!

America’s “People’s Car”—engineered due to the same central planning that brought into being the lowly Russian Lada (it was decreed by USSR’s Ministries Council)—is only as clean as “the original source of energy that generated the vim that powers it.”

Further reading: “Commie Cars”, “Mutant Marxists in the ‘Heart of Darkness'”