Wednesday, October 17, 2012

The second debate--oil

Enough people have made fun of the "binders full of women" comment in the second Presidential debate that I don't see the need to join in.  (Personally, my favorite moment was when the moderators backed up Obama's version of history surrounding the reporting of the Libya embassy bombing--but no one else noticed.)
I'd like to talk about oil.
Former Gov. Romney (why address him by an honorific he no longer holds?) mentioned that Obama has decreased the amount of domestic drilling for oil.  He then blames rising gas prices on this shortfall.
OK, any first-semester, (or even high school) economics student knows that a decrease in supply causes a rise in prices.  However, let's look at the "why" for a moment.
Oil drilling is not good for the environment.  Yes, going after oil domestically would solve a lot of problems (including decreasing the funding currently going to countries like Iran).  However, drilling can cause runoff, which destroys arable land.  Pipelines can leak.  And, let's not forget about the tanker explosion a couple of years ago that killed off wildlife and nearly destroyed the local economy of the Gulf Coast.  Oil is not something to fool around with.  And the "drill, baby, drill" philosophy may be good for our economy in the short-term, but has the potential to create more problems than it solves.


  1. There is always a balance. If you want an ecologically friendly country then get prepared for economic collapse. America needs oil and it needs lots and it can't afford to be a hostage to the world market.

    > why address him by an honorific he no longer holds

    I believe it's American tradition that you always get referred to by such a title for the rest of your life.

  2. Actually, both Denmark and Israel are creating infrastructures not based on oil.
    More to the point, I would rather not have oil seeping into the same land that grows the wheat, corn and vegetables I eat.


I'm not Monty Python. I hate SPAM.