ExxonMobil Quarterly Earnings...Again

[evmori]

Gern,

I was never expecting us to get out of the area soon. We are fighting terrorism. That's a lot different than WWII or even Korea. It's gonna take time. And I feel, to make this a safer world, it's worth it.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[scoutingagain]

Well, certainly the idea of nationalizing the oil companies could hardly be described a conservative idea.

 

But a national effort to retool our energy infrastructure, similar to the effort to build the interstate highway system started by Ike, seems like a legitamate government interest. At least to this right of center, independant libertarian, Massachusetts conservative.

 

SA

[GernBlansten]

Yes, I do contradict myself on my call to nationalize big oil and fund alternative energy while still considering myself a paleoconservative. But they say the exception makes the rule. Well this situation has reached a point that drastic measures are called for. I think a paleoconservative understands that sometimes you need to take 2 steps back to make 3 steps forward. A neo-con on the other hand won't conceed that. Its their way or the highway.

[TheScout]

True, but Conservatism would ask, is the government the best agent to do the job? It is a slipperly slope. First the government steps in to build energy infrastructure, what is next? And where does it stop?

 

"They also knew those Founding Fathers did, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does no thing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy." -Ronald Reagan

[GernBlansten]

Same could be said for the military. Is the government the best resource to supply this need? Clearly its inefficient and could be delivered by private industry much cheaper. But the military is critical to our national security and should not be outsourced to the lowest bidder. Its a valid role for government to play. Energy has become just as critical to our national security too. Conservatives don't have any problem with the government having a monopoly on the military. Why not the energy industry?

One of the biggest problems America faces with big oil is that they have become too big. Mergers and acquisitions have reduce the number of players to a few giant corps. This has driven out competition and created a monster. Throughout the 90s and this century, anti-trust has gone to the wayside in favor of these mega-corps. Regulations against these mega-corps have been reduced in the name of free-market economics. We have faced this before. Congress reacted with breaking up Standard Oil into several smaller, competing companies. It was a temporary fix. Those companies have congealed into their former state.

[OldGreyEagle]

I am not sure of what I am about to suggest, but I will run it up the flag pole.

 

From what I understand the country has a number of abandoned "ghost" military installations across the country. Many consisting of a goodly amount of land. What if the goverment loaned the use of the land expressly for building new refineries. The new building could be built away from public view so the NIMBY factor would be less. The land would stay the governments, just leased for a dollar a year.

[GernBlansten]

While I agree that limited refining capacity causes the price spikes we see at the pump, it is not the core problem. Our problem is dependance on foriegn oil. Our ship is sinking. We have a hull breach. Building more refineries is just like getting a bigger bucket to bail. Someone needs to go down below and fix the hole. Its time to get wet and dirty and fix the root cause before we loose the boat. The past three presidents have promised to do this, but we haven't seen any commitment to get it done.

[TheScout]

My feeling is that we should trust the private market which has treating us so well in the past. When the day comes that we need other energy sources American ingenuity and private funding will combine to come up with the best possible solution. Until then the government will continue to pour billions of dollars into inefficient research.

[scoutingagain]

I don't believe the government should be in the energy business, but providing funding for basic research and technology development is a legitamate role. Many new industries, technologies and businesses have grown out of basic research performed under govenment funding.

 

However, Factoid of the Day, NOTED: Overall federal spending on research and development in energy efficiency has dropped 14 percent since 2002, adjusted for inflation. (The New York Times)

 

Funny, that little fact didn't come up when the President was talking about controlling the deficit. What was that about walking the walk?

 

SA