And although I can't tee-tee around work about it. I agree with him 100%. (Yes I know my milk and butter will cost more, but I'll pay for it)
----------------------------
On this morning's Today show, NY Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas Friedman repeated his astonishing wish that the price of crude oil . . . go to $100/barrel ASAP. This is apparently a favorite Friedman mantra, as NewsBusters/MRC's Tim Graham and Brian Boyd have
Friedman's theory is that extremely high oil prices are desirable because they would induce behavioral changes that would ultimately decrease demand and force oil prices way down. Here's how the exchange with host Matt Lauer unfolded:
Friedman: "I hope the Iranians get as crazy as they want. My attitude toward the president of Iran is 'you go, girl', because the faster we get to $100 a barrel, pal, the quicker we're going to get back to $20. Because when we go to $100/barrel, then you're going to see all these people change their behavior and their oil-buying habits and their car-buying habits in a fundamental way."
-------------------------------
why is this astonishing?
DataJunkie
04-26-06, 11:41 AM
It isn't IMHO.
I think the controversial part relates to accepting more pain and suffering to make it better. Well, pain and suffering may be overkill but *shrugs*
I keep hearing "conserve conserve". Yet, how many people are actually conserving? Not many in my opinion.
Perhaps this would bring conservation more towards the mainstream. God know $2-$3 a gallon doesn't seem to.
In the meantime I will try to determine how exactly I can do more with a wife who "requires" a car to get everywhere.
argh!
cerewa
04-26-06, 12:28 PM
While I agree with Mr. Friedman that gas prices rising a lot would be a good thing, I don't agree that they should come back down any time soon.
I would be thrilled heating my place weren't so expensive, but the best way to get everybody to conserve fossil fuels is to have the price go up and stay up. The comment that prices oughta go up to make people conserve and then come back down sounds a little bit like "well, if we all just 10% less and used economy cars wherever feasible, then shortages of gas would go away". I doubt that's true over the long term, because so much fuel is used for electricity, heating, etc.
Sounds a little bit like "I want gas to get expensive so it will get cheap again because then other people will sell their cars and I can drive as much as I want with the gas they're not buying."
mtnroads
04-26-06, 08:19 PM
I have a lot of respect for Tom Friedman - his book "Lexus and the Olive Tree" was classic, while "The World is Flat" is ok, and both reflect his unique perspective from years in the Middle East. He is an interesting character, and gets the whole globalization thing. He supported the war in Iraq, but for higher reasons, and has been disappointed with the execution. He also totally gets the need for higher oil costs to reduce our dependence on these volatile regions, and is one of the most outspoken proponents of a carbon tax (yay!) but I think he is mistaken when he talks of oil ever coming back down. Demand worldwide is growing so fast that I think that will never happen. I also believe that too rapid an increase hurts people - slow and steady up to $100/bbl over a couple more years would be fine, imho.
gwd
04-26-06, 08:41 PM
Sounds a little bit like "I want gas to get expensive so it will get cheap again because then other people will sell their cars and I can drive as much as I want with the gas they're not buying."
Seems that way to me too. If it works out that way, in the process, car-free people might receive better public accomodations. Lengthier crosswalk signals, sidewalks, bike parking, wider curb lanes, sheltered bus stops with schedules are all things that could happen if people stop driving so much due to high gas prices. Maybe no is the time to make suggestions along these lines. Some decision makers could be more receptive at this time. If some one could spin it as "doing something about high gas prices" who knows? Someone might listen. Would we be taking unfair advantage of the situation like the guy buying the port in the Arctic to take advantage of the melting sea ice?
spambait11
04-26-06, 08:44 PM
Iran, or any other country for that matter, will never be able to raise the prices that high even if they wanted to. If they did, we'd invade them. Remember the Persian Gulf War? It's our MO.
That's why they're working so hard on their nuclear technology! :D
Az B
04-27-06, 06:59 AM
I just want gas to get expensive so there will be fewer cars driving around getting in my way!
Az
AlanK
04-27-06, 03:49 PM
While I doubt oil will ever drop back below $50/gallon, higher oil prices would finally force the US to do what it needs to - develop an alternative. This can be renewable energy, better mass transit (see much of western Europe), more efficient cars (again, see Europe).
baomo
04-27-06, 08:42 PM
on NPR few weeks ago Friedman said he wanted Iran to be successful with its nuclear program so gas would rise. he's insane.
mtnroads
04-27-06, 11:35 PM
on NPR few weeks ago Friedman said he wanted Iran to be successful with its nuclear program so gas would rise. he's insane.
You are paraphrasing in a very sloppy manner. In any case, I don't believe he said that. What he has said repeatedly, and again in a recent editorial is:
"If these are our only choices, which would you rather have: a nuclear-armed Iran or an attack on Iran's nuclear sites that is carried out and sold to the world by the Bush national security team, with Don Rumsfeld at the Pentagon's helm? I'd rather live with a nuclear Iran.
While I know the right thing is to keep all our options open, I have zero confidence in this administration's ability to manage a complex military strike against Iran, let alone the military and diplomatic aftershocks."
Friedman has also stated frequently that he believes gas prices need to rise to $4/gal in order to encourage conservation and curtail wasteful energy use. He feels that $60-70/bbl oil is funneling too much money to these fanatical regimes, allowing them to thumb their noses at the rest of the world.
So as much as I hate to think of a nuclear Iran, I tend to agree with him that our current administration is too incompetent to do the job - look what a mess they made of Iraq - which is 1/3rd the size of Iran, had a demoralized military, and lack of technology from years of sanctions. Iran is way bigger and meaner, not to mention they are still adding 4Mil bbl of oil per day to the world oil market, which we are loath to do without.
Probably best to leave it to the Israeli military.
AlanK
05-01-06, 04:04 PM
mtnroads... That's just about the most reasonable assesment of the current situation. While a nuclear Iran is a freightening prospect, the prospect of another buggled military occupation by this administration of dumb-f u c ks is even more terrifying.
The times we live in are very disconcerting, but I have a morbid curiosity to see what will happen next.
freediver
05-02-06, 07:54 AM
I was listening to him on NPR last night and he said that right after 9/11 he called for a dollar a gallon "patriot tax". He said that this money could have raised the cash to beef up our defenses, instead of driving us into debt, and would have spurned people to think about conservation methods before gas actually did get that high- which, he pointed out, it now has but the money goes to other countries instead of our own IRS. He said that if we had a president with any guts, at the time, he would have done that and we all would have been better off. Now we are in a game of "catch up".
I have no problem with rising gas prices, but the whole heating oil thing about killed us last winter. We tried to add extra insulation, and dropping the temp, but there's only so much you can do with an exisiting house- especially one with small children inside.
Jon
adgrant
05-02-06, 02:33 PM
I have no problem with rising gas prices, but the whole heating oil thing about killed us last winter. We tried to add extra insulation, and dropping the temp, but there's only so much you can do with an exisiting house- especially one with small children inside.
Jon
You do have a few options:
1) move to a smaller house or an apartment (expensive in the short term though and you probably wouldn't want to.
2) Get an energy audit of your existing house to find the air leaks
3) A new furnace if the current one is fairly old.