Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
63 Miles Per Gallon?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 806298" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>Sober,</p><p> </p><p>You say the free market wouldn't work and in the current framework of what is called free market, you have a point. However, a real free market wouldn't have a 3rd party in the mix who holds certain monopoly status granting such privilege as tax breaks and other govt privileges that act as price supports, profit supports and market entry barriers for others. Also the 3rd party holds a stake in the current business model becuase it's a major tax revenue stream so for starters what are the odds an alternative energy source will actually get a fair shake, be allowed to enter the makeplace but also allowed to enter at the same regulatory level as the current market players enjoyed when they started? This is where regulation becomes regulatory capture and is used as market protectionism to protect the current status to the damage of not only new market innovations but also to consumers. Copyright, trademark and IP play into this but that's another story for another time. </p><p> </p><p>This regime also acts as a price support in that as new innovations would lessen the value of the older models eg think the value now of a 486 PC verses when they were the newest thing because new innovations and new players entered the market and thus discounting those older models down in price. By protecting the status quo, technological stagnation has set in and thus misallocation of resources is encouraged and ramifications throughout society are seen. And then we calmour to the very people to fix the mess that they created in the first place. It's like asking the fox to fix the dying chicken problem.</p><p> </p><p>Just for the sake of discussion, if for example someone entered the market with some form of biodiesel, would this supply added to the marketplace put pressure on petro diesel to increase or decrease in price? Who benefits and who doesn't and in the current regime in the case of price, who benefits and who doesn't? The fact that certain industries, oil being one, holds a special privilege status of not only regulatory benefits but also subsidy benefits damages any actions of a free market. Oil also enjoys passing the costs of transport lane protections and international business environment protections off onto the taxpayer or consumer and even if the one wanted to make the oil companies pay this privilege cost in the form of some tax, this cost itself is passed right off to the consumer/taxpayer and thus no real effect to the oil company profit stream to begin with. If one wanted to see oil as part of the commons and eliminate a 3rd party rent seeker in the middle, the true costs are still there to begin with and I still believe that domestic and even local alternatives would/should win the day if true freedom in the marketplace really did exist.</p><p> </p><p>As for oil being finite? I use to believe that as well until I learned that oil is not fossil in origin but is rather <a href="http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">Abiotic</span></a> in origin and actually replenishes itself over and over again. But like a water aquifer, if you pull more oil than nature is able to produce, it would seem finite and in order to maintain an ever upward price, if you could have a customer base who believes a consumer product is at ever smaller and smaller supply, upward constant pricing seems justified among other things. Truth is, better management of consumption to equalize to what is being produced and problem would stablize but then what happens to your pricing model and what happens to the trendline on profits for the sake of Wall Street? The link to abiotic oil above is just a extremely small tip on the research and data and I've posted more in other posts here so I won't rehash but search Abiotic for yourself and see what you learn about it.</p><p> </p><p>Buses and other modes of mass transit. At one time, many towns across America had trolley systems and may of those were even privately owned but the good folks at GM who were in bed with the govt convinced enough folks to eliminate trollies and convert to buses. Now it goes without saying that the oil companies were in on this gig as well but the rest as they say is history. Mass transit presents both positive and negatives to all and just infrastructure costs alone are pretty big to say the least. Several month ago after some ongoing debate about the issue, American Conservative Magazine formed the <a href="http://www.amconmag.com/cpt/" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">Center for Public Transportation</span> </a>and before you see the words conservative and public transportation and assume, be careful and I'll quote the opening page from the center's website:</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 806298, member: 2189"] Sober, You say the free market wouldn't work and in the current framework of what is called free market, you have a point. However, a real free market wouldn't have a 3rd party in the mix who holds certain monopoly status granting such privilege as tax breaks and other govt privileges that act as price supports, profit supports and market entry barriers for others. Also the 3rd party holds a stake in the current business model becuase it's a major tax revenue stream so for starters what are the odds an alternative energy source will actually get a fair shake, be allowed to enter the makeplace but also allowed to enter at the same regulatory level as the current market players enjoyed when they started? This is where regulation becomes regulatory capture and is used as market protectionism to protect the current status to the damage of not only new market innovations but also to consumers. Copyright, trademark and IP play into this but that's another story for another time. This regime also acts as a price support in that as new innovations would lessen the value of the older models eg think the value now of a 486 PC verses when they were the newest thing because new innovations and new players entered the market and thus discounting those older models down in price. By protecting the status quo, technological stagnation has set in and thus misallocation of resources is encouraged and ramifications throughout society are seen. And then we calmour to the very people to fix the mess that they created in the first place. It's like asking the fox to fix the dying chicken problem. Just for the sake of discussion, if for example someone entered the market with some form of biodiesel, would this supply added to the marketplace put pressure on petro diesel to increase or decrease in price? Who benefits and who doesn't and in the current regime in the case of price, who benefits and who doesn't? The fact that certain industries, oil being one, holds a special privilege status of not only regulatory benefits but also subsidy benefits damages any actions of a free market. Oil also enjoys passing the costs of transport lane protections and international business environment protections off onto the taxpayer or consumer and even if the one wanted to make the oil companies pay this privilege cost in the form of some tax, this cost itself is passed right off to the consumer/taxpayer and thus no real effect to the oil company profit stream to begin with. If one wanted to see oil as part of the commons and eliminate a 3rd party rent seeker in the middle, the true costs are still there to begin with and I still believe that domestic and even local alternatives would/should win the day if true freedom in the marketplace really did exist. As for oil being finite? I use to believe that as well until I learned that oil is not fossil in origin but is rather [URL="http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/"][COLOR=red]Abiotic[/COLOR][/URL] in origin and actually replenishes itself over and over again. But like a water aquifer, if you pull more oil than nature is able to produce, it would seem finite and in order to maintain an ever upward price, if you could have a customer base who believes a consumer product is at ever smaller and smaller supply, upward constant pricing seems justified among other things. Truth is, better management of consumption to equalize to what is being produced and problem would stablize but then what happens to your pricing model and what happens to the trendline on profits for the sake of Wall Street? The link to abiotic oil above is just a extremely small tip on the research and data and I've posted more in other posts here so I won't rehash but search Abiotic for yourself and see what you learn about it. Buses and other modes of mass transit. At one time, many towns across America had trolley systems and may of those were even privately owned but the good folks at GM who were in bed with the govt convinced enough folks to eliminate trollies and convert to buses. Now it goes without saying that the oil companies were in on this gig as well but the rest as they say is history. Mass transit presents both positive and negatives to all and just infrastructure costs alone are pretty big to say the least. Several month ago after some ongoing debate about the issue, American Conservative Magazine formed the [URL="http://www.amconmag.com/cpt/"][COLOR=red]Center for Public Transportation[/COLOR] [/URL]and before you see the words conservative and public transportation and assume, be careful and I'll quote the opening page from the center's website: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
63 Miles Per Gallon?
Top