Stupid NYT. Think everything is static, a zero-sum game.
Actually, they want everything to be static, because that leads to helplessness and discontent, which leads to unrest, which creates lots of story possibilities for the scribblers of the NYT.
More energy production will decrease the cost of energy, which will lead to the growth of the economy. In a growing economy people spend less time naval gazing and looking for a handout; such people have little need for the NYT.
The NYT belongs to an intellectual movement that believes that inexpensive energy is among the worst things that can happen to the world.
There’s something to be said for that theory, since coal and natural gas DO compete for the same customers. However, what the author doesn’t recognize is that many utilities have different power plants on their grid that use different types of fuel, depending on fuel prices, export markets, etc. And coal is used for steel production, while gas is not.
Stupid NYT. Think everything is static, a zero-sum game.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My exact thought as soon as I read their dumass analogy.
An absurd, zero-sum editorial.
These people couldn’t understand economics on the second try...
More energy production will decrease the cost of energy,True. But don't kid yourself, energy producers love environmental restrictions that raise the cost to the consumer. They can charge more, make more profit and produce less. Name any other industry that asks you to restrict your use of their product
The NYT belongs to an intellectual movement that believes that inexpensive energy is among the worst things that can happen to the world.And Fox news etc. is loaded with them too. They all panic when the price of oil drops...It's all about their own investments.