[allenwrench]

When I question media / politicians about why they hide their head in the sand when it comes to PO most have no reply. It seems they think there is 'no upside' in this topic of peak oil since it can't be fixed.

The upside is in the preparation and a more manageable and orderly transition...less deaths. Then again, maybe the governments upside is in the deaths and having less mouths to have to feed?

[NeoPeasant]

Economic qrowth and full employment are seen as unquestioned, unqualified goods. Conservation is the enemy of economic growth.
Preaching conservation is going to make enemies of job seeking voters and profit seeking corporate contributors.
A politician cannot win by preaching conservation. Just ask Jimmy Carter.

[FoolYap]

I think your question supposes that most of them are aware of Peak Oil (probably true as of this year) and believe it is real.

Even if they believe it is real, their responses to that are as varied as we see anywhere else.

1. Thanks to [insert one of: Engineers, The Market, God], a miracle will occur just in the nick of time.

2. Thanks to [insert one of: Solar Power, The Market, Conservation], we will gradually and painlessly transition to the New Order.

3. I'm old, glad I don't have to worry about it.

4. I'm rich, glad I don't have to worry about it.

5. I'm worried, and I'm talking about it, but everyone looks at me like I was from Mars.

6. It's an election year, I'll worry about it later.

7. It's just to painful to think about, so I don't.

etc etc etc.

There's too much disagreement generally over how to respond to this, and in what time-frame, so why should we expect "the politicians", as a group, to agree on a response?

Personally, to the extent that people can respond to it meaningfully, I think current fuels prices are an "encouraging" thing.

--Steve

[Daniel_Plainview]

A politician cannot win by preaching conservation. Just ask Jimmy Carter.

One could also ask Al Gore .........