Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysis

LaLaLand · Tar Sands Joined: Dec 16, 2004 Posts: 82

The Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank, takes on peak oil and government regulations involved in the petroleum extraction, refining, and distribution industries.

Energy Alarmism: The Myths That Make Americans Worry about Oil
LINK

auscanman

Thats one of the most delusional analyses I've read for a while. No need to have troops in the Middle East to keep the oil flowing, or threaten anyone who dares to challenge the petrodollar.... The comment that really caught my attention is that peak oil is definitely not here, as past experience apparently shows that market forces have always ensured adequate supply. Unfortunately for them peak means a whole change to that state of affairs. Even though I was fervently against the war in Iraq, these misguided antiwar groups who think oil demand will just magically be met and that our way of life is non-negotiable almost piss me off more than honest pro-war crowd.

Another great example of how extrapolating from historical experience combined with blind faith in infinite growth economics leads to flawed conclusions.

pea-jay

They're idiots, but unfortunately some rightwingers spout their thinking from time to time, reinforcing their idiocy.

I'll read the main document a little later, but given their track record, Im not holding out much hope for them.
_________________
UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com

ALBY

idiots ? delusional ?

that is probably the most compelling (albeit left handed) indictment of us foreign policy of the last 50 years that i have ever read.

cato rarely produces crap. if you are looking for self reinforcing feedback for your pre-conceived ideological or geological notions, then im sure you were disappointed.

where i think cato has underestimated 'peak oil' is in the assumptions of world economic growth and the 'new' production needed to satisfy this demand. this is a non linear problem in that not meeting these economic goals by even a little bit will have a huge, asymetric impact on the world economy.

but, the main point of the piece is that US foreign policy is a Fark and counterproductive to the energy security it claims as it's central premis. pretty much undeniable, doncha think ?

Guest

I haven't read their argument yet, and I doubt the first two posters did either. I'm going to read it this weekend. I can say this, Cato will always approach any issue from the small government "keep your hands off my property" stand point. They will call out any type of central planning entity every time and blame its interference on whatever problems might arise. Most of the scholars/policy wonks/media personalities at Cato aren't "anti-war" per say, they simply see war as a means to an end in regards to state power, as well as an interference on people's personal lives. Natural law is what it is, 0 interference.

I would agree a lot of what they say, albeit sensible, is not very realistic when you look at how the modern capitalist state really works. As any Marxist would argue; Capitalism will consume until there is nothing left to consume. That's how Capitalism works. Combine that with a socially conservative culture that doesn't change very much and bam. I can see why some people are freaked out by oil depletion due to a unsustainable lifestyles that everyone and the mother wants. Now the Chinese and Indians want it too...

I guess it's time to go nuk-lear as G. Bush would say...

NWMossBack

Here's my favorite quote:

Concerned · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Sep 23, 2004 Posts: 1482

Vogelzang · Heavy Crude Joined: Jul 03, 2008 Posts: 110

Get Ready for the Oil-Price Drop

cube · Fusion Joined: Mar 12, 2005 Posts: 3262

dohboi · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Dec 05, 2005 Posts: 1115

That chart makes libertarianism look like it's the opposite of popular!

I know, I know, it's populist, not popular, but it does make libertarians look like some kind of elitists.

Libertarians mistrust government power, but they seem to have no problem with enormous concentrations of power in the hands of mega-corporations or enormously wealthy individuals. Why is the one kind of power so frightening while the other is seen as totally benign?

Cato is always blinkered by their narrow ideology, but they have sometimes come up with a clever analysis. This does not look like one of them.

Ibon · Last edited by Ibon on Sun Aug 03, 2008 5:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

wxman · Heavy Crude Joined: Aug 23, 2005 Posts: 170

Ibon

I actually thought it was April 2008. It would be interesting to follow up with the authors if they remain faithful to the main points of their study.
_________________
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape

ROCKMAN

Ibon,

It seems like we're back to the same repeated problem with the PO message: different parties trying to use PO to forward a seperate agenda. Like you, I don't brag on the results of US policies overseas. But you can bet, regardless of the date or subcontext, of reports like this one from the CI that it will be worked into the media circus and just confuse the angry viilagers all the more.

TommyJefferson