An article at time.com discusses the downsides to falling oil prices. The downsides? Really?
When did the popular press start siding with the fatcats? I loves me some capitalism, but I take no truck with pure exploitation. I honestly believe that free markets produce the most desirable outcomes.
Why should we worry that the oil-rich countries are losing some revenue? BOO HOO. Economics is the science of scarcity and trade-offs. OPEC may not make as much this year as they expected, but some number of the 300 million americans(not to mention the billions abroad also buying gas at cheaper prices[Chinese and Indian middle-class, I’m looking at you]) who buy gas every week will find themselves suddenly with a lot more money to spend on other things.
Let us not forget that OPEC is a cartel. Their very existence is forbidden by US law(which is why they have to hold their meetings in other countries). Some readers may point out that since I disagree with most laws regulating business, I probably disagree with our anti-trust laws. I do, but that’s not the point. Just because I personally think that cartels should be permitted to exist doesn’t mean that A) I think they are necessarily good or B) Time magazine should be calling for sympathy for them.
Regarding the environmental concerns. I have already stated my stance on the popular view of global warming. Cheaper gas means more people buying it(the law of demand) means more emissions. What’s the trade-off here? A global mean surface temperature perhaps 4-9 degrees Fahrenheit warmer in 2100 in exchange for millions of people able to pay their bills from now till then. Even if CO2 emissions are bad, and global warming is a dire consequence, perhaps artificially raising oil prices is not the answer. (anybody heard a’ deadweight loss say “YEAYAH!”)
One Response to You’ve gotta be effing kidding me.