The railroads are unique in how the government regulates them. The fees they can charge are within strict guidelines and their emloyees are in a totally different and unique retirement system. They are not eligible for SSI. Does that make them communists? Or the system a COMMUNIST REGIME?
I think you overestimate the level of regulation by a considerable degree. Amtrack is the only nationalized rail operation it has and it suffers from the curse of subsidized operations and inefficiency just like the centrally operated business under the former Soviet Union.
By the mid-1990s, the ICC retained only limited regulatory authority. Under the ICC Termination Act of 1995, the commission was abolished at the end of the year. Some of its remaining responsibilities, including the power to set minimum rates and to pass on discontinuance of passenger train service, were eliminated entirely. Others, including the right to regulate rail mergers and rate discrimination, were assigned to the newly established Surface Transportation Board of the DOT.
I am still not as comfortable as you are with financing our enemies war against us.
Calling me a communist is a cheap shot and designed to gain favor from fellow o'club members. I am a US Army veteran and would die to defend our way of life. Nothing I have stated is communist in any way, but using the "C" word would certainly get less
educated people on your side. (lasersailer184)
I think you are suffering from McCarthyism
I'm not comfortable either with financing our enemies. But, the global oil market is what it is. And it operates the way it does, and OPEC has the power that it has (with definite free market limits) because it is cheaper for the American driver to take part in this market. We mainly have expensive oil left. They don't. We consume more oil than the next 4 countries below us combined. We can have the biggest bang for the buck by reducing demand. But, that would mean major changes to the American lifestyle. Most don't want to make those changes or you wouldn't see an SUV on the road, we would be dramatically expanding public transportation and encouraging telecommuting and doing a lot of fairly fundamental life changing things.
And, the last time I checked there was no MOS for economist in the Army. Your patriotism has nothing to do with economic realities. Your proposals are at best socialist, at worst communist and in either case are detrimental to our long term energy security and economy. In fact, pulling out of the world oil market and subsidizing unprofitable oil reserves are a lot closer to communism than socialism at this point in time. When the Saudis do it it makes sense. It's not communism or socialism for them since they hold such an abundant surplus of raw materials and have virtually nothing else to base their economy on. The countries that have had nationalized oil industries with more limited reserves have moved away from them ASAP in the 1990s except for those, like Saudi Arabia, where it makes a lot of sense (abundant cheap oil far beyond local demand).
If most of the difference between $5 bbl oil and $40 a bbl oil was labor, then you would be promoting a make work subsidy at the expense of American drivers (kinda socialist and in fact a cornerstone of many communist work programs in the USSR). If most of the cost involves things like energy (tar sands, for example) then in fact, you are spending a lot of money with nothing added in return. I was at a conference a few months back where a team from Imperial Oil in Canada provided an update on their efforts with Tar sands. The energy costs are so high they are considering local nuclear power to aid in processing (but, a lot of up front capital costs for that). Tar sands make sense at $50 or so.
Securing a supply of $40 to $50 or $50 bbl oil NOW only makes sense if we are never going back to cheaper prices. I'm not calling you a communist, or looking to insult you, but what you are proposing is in fact at best socialist. It is what it is. And, we already go there with Biofuels for much the same purpose and much the same "benefit." One thing to note is that investment is still soft in alternative energy even at $100 a bbl oil. Why? Because a lot of others are still wary we are here to stay at prices above $40. I though we might have crossed that threshold, but I have changed my mind. No one knows for sure, but a production cost of $10 is a real counter point to how far above that it can be sustained.
What type of car do you drive? If you really want to stick it to the man (at home or abroad) that's where to start. If you just want cheap gas for your full sized truck then nobody can help you there for 4-8 years.
Charon
