Topics

A mountain of corn, destined to be ethanol
The Associated Press

A transport truck is buried under a mountain of corn headed for the ethanol production plant.

Featured Topic | Posted 30 weeks 5 days ago

With food prices soaring, should the U.S. keep subsidizing farmers?

Washington's love affair with corn-based ethanol may be cooling, but President Bush and Congress are heatedly clashing over who is to blame for delays in responding to skyrocketing gas and food prices. Bush on Tuesday defended ethanol production, saying "it's in our national interest that our farmers grow energy, as opposed to us purchasing energy from parts of the world that are unstable or may not like us."

Read More

Ben likes: Big Corn and the ethanol hoax

Walter Williams/Townhall.com

Ethanol production has driven up the prices of corn-fed livestock, such as beef, chicken and dairy products, and products made from corn, such as cereals. As a result of higher demand for corn, other grain prices, such as soybean and wheat, have risen dramatically. The fact that the U.S. is the world's largest grain producer and exporter means that the ethanol-induced higher grain prices will have a worldwide impact on food prices.

It's easy to understand how the public, looking for cheaper gasoline, can be taken in by the call for increased ethanol usage. But politicians, corn farmers and ethanol producers know they are running a cruel hoax on the American consumer. They are in it for the money. The top leader in the ethanol hoax is Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), the country's largest producer of ethanol. Ethanol producers and the farm lobby have pressured farm state congressmen into believing that it would be political suicide if they didn't support subsidized ethanol production. That's the stick. Campaign contributions play the role of the carrot.

Read More

Joel likes: Making America fat and polluted, one subsidy at a time

Christopher D. Cook/Christian Science Monitor

If the current measure passes Americans will shell out billions of dollars for farm subsidies that wreak havoc on our land and diets. These payments irresponsibly promote the consumption of cheap fatty foods, the depletion of soil and air through overuse of pesticides, and destructive farming practices.

Like farm bills past, this one also advances the removal of small farms, eroding the spirit and finances of rural communities across the U.S.

Instead of upholding these mega-farm subsidies, let's invest the public's money in sustainable growing practices, organic foods, and small and mid-sized farms that form the bedrock -- both economically and socially -- of communities throughout America's heartland.

Hardly a romantic nod to the past, such an overhaul is a practical investment in the future. As global warming heats up, we can't afford a system that guzzles 100 billion gallons of oil each year in pesticides and the long-distance transit of packaged foods. 

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
The Associated Press

Even the wealthy are feeling the pinch of $4 a gallon gas.

Featured Topic | Posted 30 weeks 6 days ago

High gas prices top U.S. voters' fears: Any relief in sight?

Paying for gasoline easily tops the list of economic woes facing families in the United States, according to a survey on how changes in the economy have affected people's lives.

Read More

Ben likes: Peak oil panic

Irwin Stelzer/Weekly Standard

In America, drivers are fuming and politicians are demanding explanations because gasoline has hit about $3.50 per gallon. That's less than half the price being paid by motorists in most industrialized countries. High to us is low to them. Then there are the oil refiners. Relative to the $120 price of crude, $3.50 for gasoline is so cheap that their margins have virtually disappeared. So "high" in Cambridge, Massachusetts and Oxford, Mississippi is "low" in similarly named cities in the UK, and "high" for motorists is "low" for refiners. It depends where you live, and at which point in the supply chain you find yourself.

But assume that prices are "high", which indeed they are by historic standards. We are mistaken when we think these "high" prices are causing inflation. High oil prices can force consumers to spend more on gasoline and heating oil, at the expense of other purchases. Ask any suffering restaurateur or clothes retailer if you doubt that. But high oil prices can't trigger a rise in the general price level -- inflation -- unless someone pumps money into the economy so that, to use an oldie but goodie from the economists' lexicon, there is more money chasing the same amount of goods.

If you want something to blame for inflation, don't look at oil prices, look at the billions the Federal Reserve Board's monetary policy gurus and their confederates at the U.S. Treasury are pouring into the economic system. The cost to taxpayers of saving the financial services sector from ruin is not only making good any collateral the Fed has accepted that might prove worthless, but the run-up in the rate of inflation.

Read More

Joel likes: No gasoline and no solutions

Tim Haab/Environmental Economics

High gas prices are not an economic or political problem.  They are the result of the natural workings of markets. There is nothing wrong with the market -- and no reason, other than self-preservation and the false appearance of being able to do something, for politicians to intervene.  Supplies are decreasing -- both temporarily through unexpected refinery shut-downs and permanently through stock depletion. 

Demand is increasing -- both in the U.S. and worldwide.  Both of these will cause gas prices to rise and that's good.  If gas prices don't rise, we will consume gas even faster and run out sooner.  Higher gas prices encourage conservation and encourage investment in alternatives.  High gas prices might be uncomfortable while we search for viable long-term solutions, but they're more comfortable than the alternative:  no gas and no solutions. 

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
Climate change
The Associated Press

Bad for the environment?

Featured Topic | Posted 38 weeks 12 hours ago

Is it time to wean ourselves from fossil fuels?

New studies suggest both industrialized and developing nations must wean themselves off fossil fuels by 2050 -- or global warming could dry up water sources across the planet.

"The question is, what if we don't want the Earth to warm anymore?" asked Carnegie Institution senior scientist Ken Caldeira, co-author of a paper published last week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. "The answer implies a much more radical change to our energy system than people are thinking about."

Read More

Ben likes: Completely objective journalism

Jim Manzi/The American Scene

Naturally, The Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin has a “narrative” for why the world seems to resist the manifestly correct course of action so stubbornly. She says that “some climate researchers who back major greenhouse gas reductions said it is unrealistic to expect policymakers to think in terms of such vast time scales.” She then quotes two climate researchers who say nothing about this subject. Finally, we get to a philosophy professor who gives her what she wants, when he says that global warming “is a classic inter-generational debate, where the short-term benefits of emitting carbon accrue mainly to us and where the dangers of them are largely put off until future generations.”

How can we be so selfish? I guess American democracy just can’t handle the complexity of the issue. We need a Leader who can get us past this petty squabbling and Take Action.

Read More

Joel likes: First, step up

Bill McKibben/Yes!

Here’s the political reality check, just as sobering as the data about sea ice and drought: China last year passed the United States as the biggest emitter of carbon on Earth. Now, that doesn’t mean the Chinese are as much to blame as we are -- per capita, we pour four times more CO2 into the atmosphere. And we’ve been doing it for a hundred years, which means it will be decades before they match us as a source of the problem. But they are growing so fast that there’s no way to head off this crisis without their participation. And yet they don’t want to participate, because they’re using all that cheap coal not to pimp out an already lavish lifestyle, but to pull people straight out of deep poverty.

Which means that if we want them not to burn their coal, we’re going to need to help them -- we’re going to need to supply the windmills, efficient boilers, and so on that let them build decent lives without building coal-fired power plants.

Which means, in turn, we’re going to need to be generous, on a scale that passes even the Marshall Plan that helped rebuild post-World War II Europe. And it’s not clear if we’re capable of that any more -- so far our politicians have preferred to scapegoat China, not come to its aid.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
AP Photo/David Zalubowski

Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. said last week its December U.S. sales fell, but it still overtook Ford Motor Co. as No. 2 in U.S. sales for both the month and the full year.

Featured Topic | Posted 47 weeks 3 days ago

Made in the USA? Ford slips, Toyota rises

Ford Motor had been in second place in the American car market since the Great Depression. But it lost its grip last year. Toyota beat Ford in 2007 in United States auto sales, putting it behind General Motors, industry statistics showed Thursday. Ford had held the No. 2 spot since 1931, according to the company’s historian.

Read More

Job one

Investor's Business Daily

Unionized auto workers in this country average nearly $65 an hour, Toyota workers about $45 an hour. While that might sound like a recommendation for unions, remember which automakers are losing billions of dollars, closing plants and laying off tens of thousands of workers. That's right, nonunion Toyota — which is not laying off its nearly 40,000 American workers and is, in fact, increasing its sales in this country as overall U.S. car sales decline — is not among them.

Read More

Ford (like Hillary) can't even boast about being #2

Michelle Cottle/The New Republic

I'm sorry, but it so far past time for Detroit to start seriously focusing American ingenuity on producing the next generation of fuel-efficient vehicles. Discovering a way to slash not just this nation's but the entire world's dependence on oil would be a feat worthy of several dozen Nobel Prizes.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
AP/Matt Rourke

Gas prices are seen along with the skyline in Philadelphia. Oil prices soared to $100 a barrel on Wednesday for the first time ever.

Featured Topic | Posted 47 weeks 5 days ago

Oil's $100 milestone: Catalyst for consumer revolt?

Soaring demand, a falling dollar, recent declines in domestic reserves and global political unrest combined to briefly push the price of a barrel of oil past the long-dreaded $100 threshold yesterday.

Read More

The economy can withstand $100 oil

U.S. News and World Report

High oil prices, as unhappy as they make us, are doing God's work, by curbing our appetite for carbon fuel, pointing us to greater energy security and limiting the impact of human activity on the environment. The decline in gasoline demand in response to rising energy costs is proof that markets work and that market mechanisms are our best energy policy.

Read More

What’s your consumption factor?

New York Times

Whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption rates, because our present rates are unsustainable.
Real sacrifice wouldn’t be required, however, because living standards are not tightly coupled to consumption rates. Much American consumption is wasteful and contributes little or nothing to quality of life. For example, per capita oil consumption in Western Europe is about half of ours, yet Western Europe’s standard of living is higher by any reasonable criterion, including life expectancy, health, infant mortality, access to medical care, financial security after retirement, vacation time, quality of public schools and support for the arts. Ask yourself whether Americans’ wasteful use of gasoline contributes positively to any of those measures.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote

Join the Debate

Start your own blog, comment on topics, and let your voice be heard. Start your free account now!

User login

login

Ads by Google