Politics, News & Issues >
Energy Issues
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould oil subsidies be eliminated in the US?
Results so far:
| Yes | 69% | 11 votes | Total: 16 votes | |
| No | 31% | 5 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesChange is always a difficult proposition. The maintenance of the status quo is akin to the path of least resistance. Far easier is it to grasp at straws to uphold the relics of the past than it is to embrace the unknown. For that is the real problem the United States faces today with regards to energy policy. Unbridled fear of the unknown. Natural resources are the life blood of any nation state and petroleum courses through more veins in this nation than anyone would care to admit. The standard energy policy in the United States over the past century, when the switch from animal oils to petroleum was made, has lead to rapid economic growth; that much is true. But, for every action, there is a corresponding opposite reaction. The United States' rapid growth has sewn the seeds of tyranny, imperialism, global warming, human rights violations, wanton nationalism and wars of choice, just to name a few negative scenarios. So why have the actions of the citizens of the United States not matched the ascendant rhetoric about freedom, liberty, justice and opportunity? Why have the words spoken so much louder than the actions? Why has the beacon of liberty the world over been eclipsed by the din of unfulfilled political promises?
The obvious reason is that the standard of living in the United States, the economy and the dollar have been propped up by subsides. Tax dollars of hard working Americans being directly funneled into satiating a doomed system. Profits at oil companies remain high and prices the consumer pays at the pump remain low. On the surface everyone wins, the system may continue.
The truth of the matter is that everyone, the corporations, the government and the common citizen alike are in fact losing. When subsides are in effect which vitiate the free market system the harsh reality the nation is capable of overcoming is shrouded in a fantasy. The problem is not presented to rational adults as it really exists. The citizenry is presented with a sugar coated version that prompts no real action. The corporation is not forced to innovate as their profits remain high and their shareholders do not demand it. Shareholder's do not demand anything of the corporations they are invested in because the profits remain high. This type of circular reasoning merely shifts wealth around while the nation pretends nothing is wrong and stagnates.
When the nation stagnates, everyone is effected and every sector cannot escape the rot. The infrastructure is failing, the foreign policy is an expensive boondoggle, the citizenry is not inspired and has disengaged from the process and by nearly all accounts liberty is being subverted by promises of safety. Nearly all of the most pressing issues being discussed in run up to the 2008 presidential election are the result of a failed energy policy. A new energy policy need not begin with spending billions of more dollars. The government must trust it's people enough to know that any new national energy policy must begin, not with investment, but with the truth. The nation must know the depths of the problem at hand.
Oil subsides as a policy should be immediately rolled back. To spur innovation in the energy sector is to create wealth again. Yes, the market will suffer in the short term, but as rational adults, we will overcome as those who came before us did. If the nation wants to end its wars of choice, stop hemorrhaging capital and influence around the world then a sound national energy policy is necessary. The people must demand that oil subsides be removed, that the problem faced by every citizen be exposed to the light of day and that the nation trust its people, not its government, to solve the problem. That is the way to lead into the twenty first century, not with force and spin, but with truth and innovation. Repeal these market shadows immediately and let us walk confidently into the unknown.
Learn more about this author, James Griffin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Subsidies are not simply a product of needless government largess. Subsidies generally are used to make certain needed products either cheaper than the market would traditionally allow. This can be used in the case of things like renewable energy, to help the technology mature to the point where it can stand without subsidies, or can be used, as is the case with agricultural goods, to keep farmers in business. Oil subsidies, while certainly not something that should be maintained in the long term, are essential to the US Economy until a viable, economical and environmentally sound alternative presents itself.
Everything in the US Economy relies on transportation. The shoes your wearing? They were shipped on some vehicle that used gas, be it the container transport from China or the truck on the interstate from the warehouse, the cost of transportation is reflected in the cost of your shoes. The same is true of food, of computers and electronics and anything physical and tangible that is sold in stores. It affects things like the prices charged by UPS, or the Post Office or any other ship company. It, in essence, makes the economy work.
All aspects of transportation, be they plane, boat, train or truck, require oil. Different types of refined oil true, but oil none the less. Subsidies provided by the US government keep oil relatively inexpensive. Though there are many who complain about the reality of $3 gas, it is a far cry for what is charged in other oil consuming nations. Imagine the US economy functioning on $7 gas such as they have in Britian. It could not be done, at least, no without the price of everything else rising to reflect this.
But, subsidies are an artificial control on the market and the market is famous for punishing artificial controls if they are left for too long. A subsidy should generally, unless situations do not allow it, be temporary. Such is the case with oil. As economical alternatives (ethanol is not a good example as it require BIGGER subsidies than oil) become available, the subsidies on oil can be eased as less of the US economy relies on it.
Eliminating the subsidies is a very long term goal, perhaps gradually lessening them can increase the speed that alternatives can be found. Until those alternatives come into existence however, the subsidies must remain, for the economic well being of America's already hurting economy.
Learn more about this author, Bryan Jennings.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Energy Issues
- Should the government stop providing subsidies to all energy sources, eg, coal, oil, solar and wind?
- Should the federal government repeal tax breaks to oil and gas industry?
- With gas prices at an all-time high, should the United States lift the ban on offshore drilling for oil?
- Assuming we can capture and store emissions, should we continue to rely on coal as a primary energy source?
- Does protecting the environment have to come at the expense of jobs?
