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.
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?
You're incorrectly assuming we won't find even more resources as our technology gets even better, and that we won't develop alternatives energy technologies. The point of the game is to keep putting off that 30 billion (or whatever amount possible) until it is worthless to the other guys... an economic war of attrition, so to speak.
As for the 'current economic needs', there will always be a current need for more money and cheaper gas.
The entire stock market has lost a good chunk of value since 1999, even outside of the dot-com bubble. Lower gas prices now becomes an investment for the future, since transportation costs reduce costs across the board. Your analogy of the man with the retirement account is apt... you're advocating letting the 'cash' (oil) sit idle, with no certainty of its value in the future. I'd suggest investing it in the capitalists in America, who have proven to be very good at wealth creation and growth.
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.
Agree and disagree... We aren't desperate... but there are plenty of capitalists out there trying to develop some alternative that will be more cost-effective than petroleum products, because the winner in that race will be worth more than all the Middle East dictators combined.
There is plenty of cheap oil around now. There is no shortage.
Agreed... but the point is independence and price reduction, and both of those require drilling everything possible. {Note: I could quibble here about you first asserting that the oil supplies are a finite commodity (a "scarce resource" from Econ 101) then turning around and saying there is no shortage, but I'll leave that for others}
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.
My point was that Sen. Daschle, who has seen the highly favorable polls, will not allow a vote to reach the Senate floor. They have now thwarted free-enterprise by buying the land with our money and passing laws that deny us the use of the lands... then they thwarted the democratic process by refusing a vote for change to be made.
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.
LOL. If you really thought for one second that there would be no profits, you wouldn't have to stand in the way of drilling. There wouldn't be anyone willing to drill if there were no hope of profits. As for who gets what, I really couldn't care less... I just want more independence, cheaper gas, more jobs, Liberty 'allowed', and the resulting improved economy.
Finally, once again, the citizens do NOT own the oil. The government took our money, bought the land from the owners, passed rules keeping us from using it or even snow-mobiling near it, and have done yeoman's work to prevent us from using the political system to open it back up. The citizens will not see equal shares of the profits or the proceeds. How on earth can you see it as "our" oil after all that (other than in the short-sighted Communist sense that we all equally share ownership of everything the government has chained up)?