From: John W Burgeson (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Oct 25 2002 - 11:32:49 EDT
I had several off line notes about my post on the gas e-mail. People said
they were unable to see the problem with the proposed solution. Even
after I pointed it out to them they still really didn't see it.
Glenn and I had a couple of back and forth notes about it. He sent me the
which he agreed I could post to the list.
His note, of course, addresses only the first of the three fallacies in
original post. The other two are equally depressing. To me, at least.
"The replies are a bit depressing. It shows how we don't think
The world uses about 77 million barrels of oil per day. The US uses 20
million barrels per day. Now, the Muddle East (plus Libya whose Gadaffi
isn't a nice guy either) produce 23 million barrels per day. Let us
that we cut off the Muddle East and refuse to buy their oil. That won't
anyone. The US produces 7 million per day, Russia 8 million, Mexico and
Venezuela about 3.5 million each. From these three sources we can get all
the oil we need to power the good ol' USA. But Russia, Mexico, and
Venezuela also need oil for their economies. Where would they get it if
sold us all of theirs? Why they would buy from the Muddle East. The only
thing this crazy boycott idea would do is change who buys what oil.
you all are willing to walk to work and your wives are content to walk to
the grocery store and bring home groceries daily (like they do in the
and your kids happy to walk to school uphill both ways in the snow, like
their dads did, refusing to buy Muddle East oil won't alter much or hurt
them. All they will notice is other customers buying at the same price.
Someone should teach economics somewhere."
John Burgeson (Burgy)
(an eclectic site about science/theology, quantum mechanics,
ethics, baseball, humor, cars, philosophy, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 18:51:09 EDT