Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Looking for Diogenes
I haven't a clue, actually... but it's only a minor side point to our discussion.

Again, assuming your assertions, that all present/future benefits would be equal, and ignoring my assertions the "current economic needs" and "dependence from foreign dictators" issues... with Alaskans AND the American people AND the majority of their representatives wanting to drill... do you now agree that drilling should begin?

The only way I can see you saying "no" to that point is on the "ethics" argument ("If the majorities wanted slavery, it would still be wrong")... but I don't see what the ethical argument is here, if 99.98% of the land remains untouched for the use of future generations, and the fact that we produce MUCH more cleanly that the Middle East dictatorships. Otherwise, you would simply be against petroleum altogether, and the Industrial Age and the Computer Age have simply passed you by. (I address these arguments to anyone who might be lurking on our conversation, not just you, LfD)

But just to bite on the minor side-point of post #80 I just can't resist! Send help! =^): How should the $$ be divided? America is still a capitalist society, so the drilling rights should go to the highest bidder, the treasury getting the proceeds (and cutting my taxes) and the bidder would keep 100% of the proceeds. Period.

(Finally, ya gotta like the second half of this thread... days long, no disruptors, and some clean communication on both sides... not too many FR threads make it this many days without some black marks! Way to go, us!)

81 posted on 11/25/2001 12:24:07 PM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: Teacher317
Let's not ignore that 'dependence on foreign dictators.' Once we have used up the 30 billion barrels in ANWAR, the foreign dictators will still have an extra 30 billion barrels that we didn't buy from them, sitting in the ground. What kind of position will we be in then?

As for the 'current economic needs', there will always be a current need for more money and cheaper gas. Viewed historically, the U.S. economy is quite strong. This arguement reminds me of what a 35 year old guy in a bad job might think. 'If only I tap into my retirement account, I can take care of current economic needs and get more independence from my clients.' Yes, he would gain all those things, but only temporarily.

If we are so desperate for petroleum that we have to start drilling in our nature preserves, we should be paying a lot more attention to conservation and alternative energy source. But we aren't, because we are not that desperate. There is plenty of cheap oil around now. There is no shortage.

Have the Alaskan people or the American people taken a vote on ANWAR? If we voted affirmatively, then we can do whatever we like. But to base public policy on opinion polls is another matter.

As for the payment scheme, the owners of the oil, the citizens of the U.S., sell the lease to the highest bidder and also get a royalty on every barrel pumped. Any profits above and beyond the costs of production go to the drilling companies. Unless oil prices are high enough, there will be no profits.

82 posted on 11/26/2001 10:14:23 AM PST by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson