Stop high gas prices - Be Heard!

United States
June 18, 2008 9:43pm CST
We have all heard all the reasons/excuses for the high prices at the pump; low supply/high demand, price gouging by the oil companies, gouging OPEC, oil speculators etc. etc. The truth is probably that all of that plays a role in varying degrees. But what I can't understand is why we are not drilling for oil in this country, the U.S. There are estimates of 38 BILLION barrels of oil and 1 TRILLION barrels from shale currently available on US land that we cannot access due to legislative regulation. THIS IS ABSURD. We import approximately 1.6 trillion barrels annually. So here is the argument, even if we had access to all of our oil, it would not solve our problem. Not by itself it won't but let's think this through. If we had access to that oil and only used 10% of it, that would be 160 BILLION barrels of oil that OPEC is NOT selling to us. That will have a huge impact on the market. that will drive demand down by increasing supply. That will make oil no longer a hot commodity for speculators. It will remove the ability for anyone in the supply chain to gouge the prices since there are now multiple avenues for the supply. Is it a long term solution? No! But it will provide for the short term while we continue to develop and improve on alternative sources of energy. Look around. There are been huge improvements in the alternative energy industries in the last several years. With 10+ years to continue that work we can achieve oil independence in that time. The other argument is that it will take 10 years to get to that oil. Not true! We can access the oil shale in 12 months. The fact that we are aggressively pursuing our own source of oil will force OPEC to act to increase the supply and drive the market price of oil down as speculators move away from oil investments and look to invest in these domestic oil producing industries and alternative energy companies. But what about the environment? The caribou herds near the Alaskan oil pipeline have increased over the last few years. There has not been a major environmental crisis caused by oil drilling in 40 years. Even hurricane Katrina passed over the existing off-shore oil platforms with no significant oil released into the water. Current technologies for oil drilling is more environmentally safe than many other industries. And in case you didn't know, Cuba, in cooperation with Hugo Chavez from Venezuela, Spain, India, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brazil and Canada are all now or have plans to drill for oil in the gulf of Mexico! They are already drilling there but we are not. Who do you think will drill in an environmentally responsible way? India? Vietnam? Malaysia? of the U.S.? It is now longer a question of the environment. The drilling is already happening, we are just not participating in it. We are just paying for it at the pump. If you want this to change, sign the petition at www.americansolutions.com Add you voice to the nearly 1 million Americans who think it is time to act.
3 people like this
11 responses
@dangnabit67 (2021)
• United States
19 Jun 08
whoooo Guardian is posting again. Bout time. Where you been hiding-lol I think someone has alot of stock in the food and gas market(isnt me) that is gettting their pockets full of money. And of course who cares about the little pee'ons of the world that work hard. I tell ya I'm scared to vote for president. Things will not get better I'm affraid. I'll sign it but will it help?
2 people like this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Here I'll post a non-biased answer: one side says no, and another side says yes. They both could be wrong. They both have very persuasive and convincing argumeents, and who the heck understands the economy anyway?
2 people like this
• United States
20 Jun 08
Hey dangnabit! How have you been? I've been swamped at work. They good news is that we are having an impact and financial professionals are lining up to work with us. Changing the world one family at a time! I agree. Neither candidate represents my positions on just about anything. I am afraid it will be a choice between the lesser of two evils. I don't now if signing the petition will help, but I always support making your voice heard. If you read some of the posts to this discussion you will get a pretty good view of both sides of the argument. Everyone involved has posted polite, well thought out arguments. You just have to see which of them rings true for you. Of course I think my view is right. Lol. But so does each of the others. Here is how I see it. Obama is all sizzle and no steak. He hasn't done anything but he speaks very well and makes you feel good. McCain is all steak and no sizzle. He has done a lot but he doesn't present himself well.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Jun 08
Ive been through alot lately. My dad is very ill, has been for over a month now. And my mother is driving me nuts. Other than that life is just peachy I can understand the working hard. I been working 2 jobs for 3 months. My daughter is 16-joy joy-NOT-lol Well who ever we get stuck with for pres. we are all going to be hurting. Hugs-I've missed you
1 person likes this
@newtondak (3950)
• United States
19 Jun 08
I believe that there are any number of things that our leaders could be doing to help the gas price situation - including opening our countries oil wells and beginning production in our own country. I also believe that there is currently technology available to convert current vehicles (the ones we're driving now - not the expensive hybrids) so that they don't consume as much fuel. It is, however, in the best interest of the oil companies and the auto manufacturers to leave those secrets tucked away in a file folder somewhere. As far as the food vs. fuel debate, where certain legislators want to do away with subsidies to corn producers and ethanol manufacturers, we would have ample corn for both food and the production of ethanol if our country halted the massive exports to foreign countries. This is especially true now that approximately 5 million acres of farmland in the mid-west has been taken out of production by flooding. In those areas, there has also been a loss of yet to be determined amounts of stored grain from last year's growing season due to flooded storage facilities. It is concerning, however, that despite the ever rising cost of fuel, the demand for fuel in our country decreased only 1.5% last month. Everyone is complaining about it, but very few are cutting back on their fuel consumption.
• United States
20 Jun 08
Good points newtondak. Farm subsidies have been messing up our agriculture industry for years. It's time for the government to get out of that industry and let market determine what is grown. And I also agree that hybrids are too expensive and there should be someway to convert our cars to other fuel sources. I saw that somewhere on the west coast some people have converted their diesel cars to run on discarded fryer oil from restaurants. It may smell funny but it is cheap and available. If they can do that, I am sure that there are many other solutions as well.
@newtondak (3950)
• United States
20 Jun 08
The way I look at farm subsidies basically is that the government is paying the farmer subsidies to make up for the fact that he can't make a decent living with market prices what they are. Market prices are what they are because our country is exporting so much to foreign countries because they will pay more for it than what can be made with it here in this country. Many of the subsidies are payments to the farmer for NOT producing a certain crop - another effort of the government to control the market price. If he were to plant and harvest that crop, he would make at least a small profit, so if the government wants him to not raise that crop - they should be definitely paying him something - he still has to pay taxes and insurance on that property whether he raises anything on it or not.
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Kudos to you on a great post. I like debating like this where the involvees can be civil and disagree. It doesn't happen too much anymore. Anyway, I dont believe the economy will collapse. The government will never allow it. Most of the personal money problems stem from poor choices, advice, etc when the housing market was pushing and pushing. Basically it was a repeat of the dotcom era of the late 90's except with real estate now. The prices were pushed beyond their worth and the bottom fell out. I have friends that bought and sold at the right time and was able to erase all his debt. I also have heard the stories of people trying to buy as many properties as they could to flip quickly for a profit. A ton held on too long and are now getting the consequences of very shoddy thinking and/or advice. Its a learning process. I would hope that these people would never try to "get rich quick" through this type of risky behavior again. To me, this is not an excuse to destroy our environment to get a short term solution. It wouldn't solve the problem as you suggest, it would only delay it. And probably let companies get complacent in regards to alternative fuel solutions. Again now is the time to lead. These types of crisis can always be looked upon to encourage change. If we can show the world a better way, all those countries that you list will follow suit (Brazil, by the way, has been self sufficient in their energy needs for years. They decided not to be reliant on foreign oil and use sugar ethanol to power themselves. My brother-in-law is from Brazil. :)) I think we really need to look at who is at fault for these gas prices. Exxon has posted record profits this year. Perhaps they should be more aware of the times and pass some of that back to the consumer. Obviously they wont, but it is very hard to believe that they are posting records when the economy and gas prices are in such a crisis state.
2 people like this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Absolutely! I love a good "give and take" on an issue. I think it makes everyone involved stronger and more educated on a subject. I would agree with much of what you said concerning the mortgage "crisis". It was poor choice for the most part but it was also naivety. First time home buyers had an opportunity to get into a home where in the past they would not qualify. they were chasing the American Dream without the hard work and financial diligence that is normally required. I also think that there is some blame on the mortgage industry for making money too easy to get. But this is off topic. On January 31, 2006, the average cost of a gallon of gas in the US was $2.13. Today it is over $4.00. That is almost a 100% increase. So the cost of transporting goods has gone up. The cost of farming crops has gone up. The cost of personal transportation has gone up. And they have all gone up significantly. People who spent $50 per week on gas or $200 per month. When gas prices doubled they are now paying $400 per month to get back and forth to work etc. Truckers who spent $1800 per month on fuel are now paying $3600. Airlines that spent $10,000 per trip are now spending $20,000 per trip. Those costs are passed on to the consumer. Already air travel is down, retail spending is down. Travel/vacation spending is down. And we are really just now feeling the pressure of increased fuel costs. As I mentioned in the post above, the mere suggestion that we begin drilling has caused the oil markets to respond. the average cost of a gallon of fuel has come down a bit and the July delivery of oil has moved down as well. And this was simply because of President Bush's support of drilling mentioned the other day. If we let the oil companies spend their profits on oil exploration and drilling, we will see significant improvement at the pump and in the economy before even one drop of oil hits the streets.
1 person likes this
@suspenseful (40316)
• Canada
19 Jun 08
We listened to Bush's speech this morning, and I would love to sign, but unfortunately I live in Canada and cannot. I do hope all the Americans on myLot go ahead and sign. America is a wonderful country and I do not want to see it suffer and the people get a lower standard of living, because of the selfishness of those horrible environmentalists.
• United States
19 Jun 08
Thank you suspenseful. I appreciate your kind words about our country and your kind hopes for us. Your country is one of the wise countries that is benefiting from a responsible oil policy. Good for Canada!
1 person likes this
@bfarrier1 (2082)
• United States
19 Jun 08
This is very informational and yes I will sign the petition.You have a great night.
2 people like this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Thank you bfarrier1. You have a great night as well.
1 person likes this
@xParanoiax (6999)
• United States
19 Jun 08
I'm sorry, all the information I've seen contradicts you. And at this point I'd rather put my faith in alternative fuels than oil or the government. "Safer" is the key word here, I've seen the math. It would take a margin of the environment to drill in say...Anwar for example. And yes compared to the whole thing it's small...though if someone were to step foot in it, it's huge. I think that comparison is irrelevant. It's still too much to ask from an area that's been untouched by man for years. And who's to say there isn't some species on that bit of land where they will drill that CAN'T move? Like a plant or microbe for example? Unlike the caribou or wolves. _ it seems to me the wanton waste of our resources, up to this point, has brought us here, so you'll have to forgive my paranoia. We KNEW oil was a finite resource for a long time. This government, in fact knew the that they'd be dealing with issues concerning this around this time. But all they did was made it worse. We might as well deal with the problem responsibly. I care about the people and the environment in equal shares. And if all this wasn't enough, the estimated amount of oil wouldn't last longer than maybe a year or so. And if your math is right, it'd take about a year to get it. So much effort for so little, and we'd have to suffer through a whole year til then of gas prices, and HOPEFULLY by that point we'd have another solution. (My personal favorite right now, as probably half of mylot knows, is algae fuel. Who already has the process down pat and has been approved for use, and in fact has been tested in different forms on cars, planes, construction machines. Now they just need places to grow the algae and make it into fuel at. And btw, it doesn't take them nearly as long to make their fuel...so as soon as they get on the market, the solution will be both long term and immediate. And I can see no ill consequences with this solution. I have no idea when it will get on the market, all I can hope is that more people get interested in it so that they can progress more quickly). Besides who isn't to say that if this goes ahead, and all the well-meaning people get them to do this that our government won't screw us around and sell it to someone else other than us?
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Well said and I agree with you. Postponing the problem is not fixing it. Alternative fuels are the solution.
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jun 08
We can't wait that long for a maybe. My informaion is that the oil that's there, is not significant enough to ease our worries, especially since we have no gaurentee that our government will sell solely to our country which would probably be the only way it might help in any way. It's MAYBE enough for a single year of consumption. But of course we don't really know. Speculation, as far as I can see, has much less to do with things, than traders and the people who sell oil do. They're responsible for the prices, they claim that THAT is based on supply and demand. They have plenty of supply and ever-growing demand, yet they raise the prices steadily higher...because they can. I've watched the math as this all goes on, and yes, many reasons presented are illogical...and that's because alot of reasons presented are lies as well. You're assuming that this would all be dealt with honestly. Both Bush and McCain wants this. Bush...everything he's done...in terms of this economy has been for the profit of companies and not for our benefit. McCain flipflops, and everyone knows he's been infested by lobbyists since this whole thing began. That alone should say enough. REGARDLESS; the more remote an area the more it costs, individual states...besides Alaska could ban our government from doing it, regardless of what they say, or they could charge extra fees or tax them over it. Equipment might be more costly depending on the challenges of the area -- there are more drawbacks th benefits. And by time we got the oil, it remains, ignoring all the ecological reasons, prices are likely to be even more insane and by that point it probably won't help a thing. If it's somewhere between five and six dollars -- which is optimistic, according to some, then a few cents lower isn't exactly what I'd call financialy relief when people are getting desperate NOW. Also, several economic experts, who've written things on Bloomberg -- people with a good reputation and should know what the heck they're talking about have stated that all the math says that it won't help the prices. From what I hear, all your info comes from all the hype coming out of the government and the media. They're selling this idea like it's the best thing since white bread. Like some miracle solution...or at least a miracle short term one. And I really don't think it is.
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jun 08
*winces* Sorry, I'm pretty big on numbers and temperance. You can't conserve and drill, and everything I've seen says it's not gonna work. I'm a betting girl though. I'm willing to see some drilling in another state other than Alaska, maybe with a bigger oil source, and see what that does. And if it does like either of us expect, then that'd be settled. I'm not sure what's going to happen, anyway. I'm usually pretty right about this stuff, I'm told I have a good business sense even though I've no desire to go into economics ^_^' But I can't say if they're going to actually go through with it. Some peple say, "Pfft, it'll never happen"...but I fear that most people are just desperate for an immediate solution, anything, SOMETHING. The more hype there is, the more people make themselves believe in it... Economics is easy because it all depends on the sellers and the consumers. If you can understand them both,then you can predict anything. The numbers just reinforce it. These days, most corporations, companies, you can trust to be greedy. If you've read some of their plans for the future of oil, you see them continuing to raise it BECAUSE the world is in turmoil. Because raising the price is their way of compensating when demand falls in certain areas BECAUSE the prices are high -- this only makes sense in economics, and not any GOOD kind of sense. Yes, oil is a natural thing. But it was never meant to be above ground...it's the leftovers of ancient creatures which no longer exist. But it is finite, we knew this for ages...we had every opportnity to save ourselves from this by working on alternative fuels at our liesure, but instead we didn't do anything. I'm not saying we should wallow in is crap. If our government put those millions we'd spend on drilling into alternative energy, we could probably see it as a reality before 2008 ends. I mean why not? If you look into everything else our government has invested in, and you factor in the fact that there are alot of brilliant underpaid scientists, and that money could speed up the entire process...then alternative fuels could easily be in beta and go to the public. THEN our biggest worry would be keeping the greedy guts from controlling our new fuel and putting safeguards there to keep the business profittable for the businesses and good for the American people as well. On the oil front, we could simply tell all our American oil people to stop selling elsewhere, or choose where we sell...or at least put a temporary price freeze on things with promises of compensation. These have drawbacks as well, but it wouldn't be based on, what quite a few of us believe to be false hope...or at the least something which benefits do not outweigh the costs. There's plenty of things we could be doing to work with this, to, as you say, buy us time. I just don't think energy should be left up in the air when our country's livelihood is completely dependant on it. There's too many things which both of us could be wrong on with this "temporary solution". We need something more tangible. SUCKY as it may be for the businesses themselves, the people are the priorities. If companies can be tried for swindling people out of their lives earnings, then by Goddess more can be done to reign them back under control until we can figure more solutions out so that they can get their freedom again and we can get our security again as well.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
19 Jun 08
Hello Guardian, Woo-hooo!!! Nicely penned, my friend! Jimmy Carter did one really great thing during his term in office; he openned the national dialogue on alternative energy. He even got the Democratic controlled House to legislate tax incentives for solar and wind (geothermal was a veritable unknown at the time). Then, that same Democratic controlled House withdrew those tax incentives. Grrr!!! Had they kept their eye on the ball, we would be much further along in alternatives today. According to Sandia National Laboratories, a preeminent researcher for alternative energy storage solutions, we are fully 25-30 years away from being able to effectively store solar and wind generated energy EFFICIENTLY for even 24 hours. A storage solution must be achieved before alternatives can become viable. So, you're 'spot on', my friend. We must commit ourselves to viable alternatives, continuing research into plutonium non-toxicity and inertia capabilities, assign research grants wisely toward sincere fission/fusion advancements, as well as remain open to new technological advancements, ... And, in the interim -- DRILL IN OUR OWN TERRITORY! I would urge all to sign the petition, AND contact their congressional representatives to insist that Congress retract the 35 year old restrictions to extracting our own oil! As for American Solutions, Hubby and I already signed, about 900,000 signatures ago.
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jun 08
Hello Ladyluna, Good to hear from you so quickly. I'm glad you mentioned the tax credit issue. It's a prefect example of a political party pandering to different interest groups. They were trying to keep their special interests happy while also trying to break out with a far-sighted vision. It is really a shame that it happened that way. I am impressed that you signed the petition so early! I saw two cool things this last weekend. I car that runs on compressed air and another than runs on a combination of electricity and gas. Both looked very promising. I also recently heard that someone is working on a generator that is driven by fans embedded into the body of the vehicle. The movement of the car spins the fans and generates electricity that recharges the batteries of an electric car. Sounds like we are making some real progress.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
19 Jun 08
Hello Guardian, As you know, I haven't been here very much lately. And I know that you have not had much time to spend here lately either. So, I consider it 'synchronicity' that I happened to be logged-on when you posted this important, and well-thought out discussion. Just a quick side-note to those who might shy away from signing the petition, so as to protect their personal identity while online: the petition does not make the prior signatories names available. I was pleased to see that when I signed it. Guardian, yes I did see the info on the compressed air car. I couldn't help but think of the old, toy, rubber-band cars and motorcycles that we used to play with when I was a kid. It was just a funny visual that I had when I tried to dimensionally imagine the car. The chuckle was fun, though it doesn't discount the credit that thinking entrepreneurs deserve for 'creating outside of the box'. I only read the briefest snippet about the heat/fan-powered generator. I think it may have been from you, though don't hold me to that. These past couple of weeks have been insanely busy. Anyway, in consideration of my ignorance of the specifics, I'm imagining that the concept is not so unlike the heat-powered fans that are used on woodstoves to better distribute the heat. Am I in the ballpark on the concept?
1 person likes this
@theprogamer (10539)
• United States
20 Jun 08
Eternally skeptical on this one. On one hand the oil crisis has been around since the 70s and was only quelled when alternatives to oil started surfacing (one type of electric, then a synthetic oil). Prices came down "coincidently"; the alternatives no longer looked viable on the investment and production side of the equation. And its not just the government and big oil responsible for the drive of oil consumption and prices... its people -_-. Nearly everyone has blame in the situation. The lifestyle choice and preference was to build bigger, further away and have it accessible by car only. Now that gasoline is $4... that lifestyle and choice has "Jenius" written all over it. Sad part about it is the government is already using this for its own benefit and once again not caring about the people. On one hand, yes you have the oil reserves and oil shale waiting to be tapped. It can be accessed but people are concerned about the environment. But on the other hand, if this solution is taken, I would prefer a serious effort on alternative fuels and energy. I always ask, where is the space race for alternative fuels, energy and transportation? Though I respect the private developers and the minds (including myself ^^) at work, its just pockets here and there. Barely a concerted effort, unremarkable encouragement from the government and society. Even worse than that, with both of these the government can impose itself and impede the efforts. Taxes for the product, fines for the production, overregulation to make sure things are a-okay (and to waste time of course). Speaking of different alternatives, yes transit is needed and I'd be in support of it, but I've also seen the blunderful efforts of the current transportation departments (the SAME departments that had a hand in current road building and how development went over the past several decades). I can see government porking itself on this issue, same as other facets. Private investment does occur, but that is very rare, and financially unsound given continued outer ring, bigger, wider, crappier type "community" development. Other than this, what about the habits of the people? Its good to see considerations in biking and walking and yes $4+ gas helped cause this. I can imagine a significant reduction in these if gas/fuel is reduced to former prices. More importantly, it'll remain easy to continue to outward, bigger, spread 'em type development we've all seen these past decades. Its not efficient, it takes more time and energy to get places, it discourages walking and biking, it adds to the growing health and obesity epidemic - particularly in youth. Shouldn't any of this be considered? Its late, and I'm sure I put plenty to sleep. Don't mind me, remember I put: eternally skeptical. Have a nice night.
1 person likes this
• United States
24 Jun 08
Thanks for the response theprogrammer. Sorry I have been away from my computer and did not get back to you sooner. You are absolutely right. We run the danger of "forgetting" the situation are reverting back to our old lifestyles as we have done in recent years. Those of us that have been around a few years have seen the swing you mentioned. Remember the Chevette. The American car industries answer to our last fuel crisis. No sooner was the pressure eased, we all went flocked back to buy SUVs. I think that McCain's incentive of $30 million to whoever can break the fuel cell barrier is a move in the right direction.
@cynddvs (2950)
• United States
20 Jun 08
While I can understand Americans need for gas prices to go down as soon as possible I don't think drilling is going to be the answer. And like someone else mentioned by the time we do get to the oil and get it in the market gas prices will have gone up significantly and the drop just won't be enough to make the money spent drilling worth it. The thing is our "sudden" energy crisis has been going on for the past three decades. We have just always been so willing to find a quick fix then we're right back to our gas guzzling ways. Not that I was around to remember this but back in the 70's there was an oil crisis. Some people on here may remember even-odd days when the last digit on your license plate number dictated whether or not you could buy fuel. That's when the national speed limit was set to 55 mph to cut back on fuel consumption. And this is also what led to a greater interest in alternative energy and fuel sources. Basically OPEC failed to hold on to its preeminent position due to its production was surpassed by that of other countries and because of the move away from oil consumption to alternate energy sources. If we had continued then to spend our money and resources towards alternative fuel sources we might be in a much better situation today. I just think with the money and energy we would spend to drill for oil and not to mention the environmental effects it might have the money could be better spent working on alternatives resources. I also think we need to look way beyond energy. For example, do you know how many barrels of oil it takes to make diapers for 1 baby or tighten MPG requirements - offer more incentives for buying hybrids, etc. The industry is already starting to respond with consumer demand, but they can do a lot better, even though they say they can't meet high standards proposed by democrats. Too many people focus on the vehicle aspect and never consider the other ways they are using up oil.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Jun 08
Good points cynddvs. I had read something recently that supports your points. There are a LOT of things that we use that take enormous amounts of oil to make. Roads, roofing shingles, diapers, tires, anything made of rubber etc etc. You are right that we need to look at all of those things. I am sure there are alternative for shingles and diapers etc.
• United States
19 Jun 08
I have to disagree with you. What we should be doing is increasing funding for alternative energy solutions. The only way change happens is when the market forces it to. Right now with gas prices so high, we are seeing the consumer finally start to act responsible in their vehicle choices. Thousands of gas guzzling SUV's and trucks are sitting unsold in dealer lots. Cars with good gas mileage are flying off the showroom floors. The drilling you speak of is a temporary solution. Its time for the USA to be a leader and show the world that they can come up with reasonable and cost effective alternative to oil and fossil fuels. Its time to set up our children and grandchildren and show them a better way to get fuel.
• United States
19 Jun 08
Hello schneiderman, Thanks for your reply. It is encouraging to see more energy efficient cars on the road. And I absolutely support the development of alternative energy technologies. Give me post another read. I clearly stated that this is not a long term plan, but it will help us get through this period while we develop alternative sources of energy. I also agree that it is market forces that will drive the alternative energy technologies. It always has in this country. And it always will. I think investors have had a wakeup call and they will be jumping on viable businesses that have credible solutions. But, if our gas prices do not come under control soon, our economy will not survive long enough for us to develop those technologies. I don't want to sound the "Doom and Gloom" alarm, but we are beginning to see the price of all our goods that require long distance transport to rise. That is food, clothing, etc. etc. If people can not afford to live and get to work, our economy will collapse. Let me give you an example. I am a financial adviser. I work with people all day trying to map out a financial plan for their future. Often times I encounter people who have these "investment" properties. Now, they call them investment properties, I call them liabilities. Unless something is creating income for you, it is a liability. It is NOT an asset. Assets make you money. Liabilities cost you money. These clients own these homes that are losing them money every month. I am often told that they don't want to sell the house because they want to have it as an asset when they retire. What they don't realize is that the sacrifices that they are making now to retain ownership of that home, is destroying their ability to live comfortably now and also the equity in that home is not earning any interest. If they sold it and reinvested that money into a real investment, one that is going to earn them compounding interest, they would be much better off in the long run. I see that same mentality here. "If we make the sacrifices now, we can force ourselves to make the changes needed for long term oil independence." That sounds good but we are like the clients I jut described. We are simultaneously destroying our current quality of life and also eroding our ability to thrive financially in the future. The answer, in my mind is to get the oil now. Solve the current crisis. But also map out a path to oil independence. I agree completely that we should be a leader in this effort. We have always led and we should now. But if we destroy our economy to do so, we will not be leading anyone, we will be struggling only to survive.
1 person likes this
@subha12 (18453)
• India
19 Jun 08
actually we common peopel are thinking in a way. but there are many poilitical cases,they do not consider how we are sufferring. we need the time has come to press the panic button. In my country its that there are something the government could have done to ease the load on us.