View Single Post
Old 12-19-2007, 04:26 PM   #12
margoaroyo

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
443
Senior Member
Default
Mike.

For starters, a nation controlling an asset is not "free market". It is actually the antithesis of free market. THEY control the market. Our dependence on this resource has made it so that if a guy like Chavez decides to up the price to, what is it $100 a barrel?, that we stop buying SUV's (sales for the larger ones have been down the past few years. FORD is suffering a lot).

That is not free. That is a reaction driven industry based on someone elses choice of management of a limited resource.

You make it mandatory for cars to get better milage and you ease this control. You might even say it gives people more of a choice of what they want since everything is on teh same playing field. You want a truck? Fine! It is not going to cost you $2000 more a year because OPEC decided to reduce oil shipments to the West.

Second, "people started buying small cars from our old enemy"?

WT@ is that? WWII had VERY LITTLE to do with people's opinions of what was coming over. The fact that they were little plastic vehicles had more to do with what people thought of them. The oil embargo was enough to allow Japan to sell cars to a previously American dominated market to the point where their industrial base stripped that title away from us.

GJ!!!

So in this whole "free market" we can have a third party institute a policy that makes an industrial base shift out of the US and go to another country. That is not exatly "free". I don't remember having any say in it.
margoaroyo is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:42 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity