Economic malaise and shooting yourself in the foot

Howard has been watching (and commenting, sometimes profanely, on) the economic impact of our present regressive.inflation and the falling dollar, but for a post that ties it all together read this Round-Up from "MaxedOutMama."  "The Whole Thing," as they say, but for me these sentences jumped out:

Energy costs are far and away the largest contributor to inflation, no matter how adamantly it is officially ignored....

The strategy of a weakened dollar accelerating US manufacturing will only work well if we can boost internal energy production, especially electricity. The renaissance of the 80's was really due to a massive shift in energy consumption and production which boosted our oil production greatly. Until we correct our energy imbalances, the domestic economy will continue to suffer and consumers will take the brunt of it. Basically, we are being politically correct at the expense of the lower 40% of our society. A more regressive, vicious set of policies can not be imagined.

We urgently need to expand domestic production of all sources of energy, but oil, coal and nuclear power are the most important. Manufacturing is energy-intensive, and unless you have internal production to meet the demand rise in manufacturing, you don't really get much of the benefit from the weakened currency.

So to relieve our economic problems, we need more energy.  But not just energy, we need more domestic energy. Given the present state of the technology that means: Oil/gas, coal, and nuclear.^[1]  Each is unpopular with various noisy factions of the Luddite crowd (and their enablers in the press).  But despite the unpopularity, somebody needs to lay out the choices and point out the consequences.  Maybe create some consequences for those whose obstructionism blocks benefits for everyone else.

But again, we've found yet another issue on which our two political parties are hopeless.  The Republicans (probably out of fear of being attacked by the media or of angering their off-shore patrons) are asleep, as usual.  And any prospective Democratic administration would do no better:  For the Democrats to encourage energy  development, they would first have to overcome their internal  greenie/socialist/anti-business/ NIMBY/BANANA constituencies.  Not likely. 

Instead of development, look for new taxes, rationing (except for "essential" industries like the television networks, Hollywood, and the New York Times), "conservation" programs (except for Al Gore), and mandates.  These will do what socialists always do:  Spread the misery-- to everyone but the nomenklatura.

The rest of us will get to freeze in the dark because we can't afford the Dem's taxes and Saudis' oil.  Better start praying for warm winters. 

UPDATE 071019 14:26:  Here we go!

------
^[1] The agribusiness driven ethanol boondoggle is a net energy loser, and it raises food prices!

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 00:34:19 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 453 words, total size 5 kb.