HERE'S A PUNCHING BAG -- -- -- OIL AT $200 A BARREL IS GOOD FOR U.S.A.

[APPLE314]

Thesis: Raising the price of oil is good for America

Since we don't manufacture products any more in America it stands to reason that anything we can do to make foreign products more expensive would be good for the American economy.

Part of any product's price is the "cost of shipping" component. Quadrupling the price of shipping would throw pricing completely out of whack. Those products currently on the competitive cusp would slow or stop shipping immediately and those that are marginal would eventually fall by the wayside as USA manufacturing stepped in to take their places.


Currently we are bringing in $9 worth of products and shipping out $1 worth of products. The products we ship are essentially 90% raw materials ( lumber-coal-metals ) to be made into products to ship back to us.

$200 oil would be the price for the whole world so there is no advantage to any one country but there would be a distinct disadvantage to anyone who has to ship their products to far away markets.

Remember.. those things like Gas Prices, etc which are commodity related are applied to all peoples around the world and therefore are outside the argument.


PUNCH AWAY!

[JohnnyCougar]

1. Uhhh.....

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Elwood P Dowd]

2. So now I spend $10.00 in gas driving to the supermarket

to buy a $12.00 loaf of bread?

[gizmo1979]

3. wow.

The thesis needs some work.We do stll make some products here you know.Air travel would cease.You can't have the price of a product more than your target customer can afford.It doesn't work.Interest rates on a inflation rate in your theory would have to be huge over 20%.

[Mountainman]

4. remember stag-flation? Prices went up but incomes declined

Do you remember the days of 12% inflation? Do you remember the misery index? I think you idea will bring them back.

[DamnYank]

5. One one level it makes sense

Read material on peak oil/conservation, etc. and a common thread is that $5.00 gas is a necessity before any real change will occur. More mass transit, adoption of small, fuel-efficient vehicles, research into alternative energy, etc. won't occur on the necessary emergency scale without this economic push.

Of couse, the downside would be severe. People couldn't afford to drive to work and many jobs would vanish. Cost of everything would skyrocket. Expensive energy would spell the end of the global economy. Food and products would need to be produced much closer to the end consumer. In the long run we would finally learn as a society to get by with less energy and fewer junk items from China that we don't really need anyway, but the process would be long painful.

I do think we'll see $5.00 a gallon within 3-5 years, earlier if * hits Iran. Peak oil is real.

[pitohui]

6. i guess you don't need air to breathe

when oil is $200 a barrel our mountains will be destroyed for our huge coal reserves because suddenly they become profitable

canada's mountains will also be destroyed for huge tar sands reserves that suddenly become profitable

you will destroy the health of everybody on the north american continent

there is a reason oil is the preferred fuel, a look back at lifespans and atmospheres of the early industrial period should be a part of every civilized person's education, sadly, this is apparently not the case these days

that punchy enough for you?

$200 a barrel is only good for people who don't need clean air to breathe and who don't need parks, green spaces, wildlife, landscapes, or mountains, but prefer to see their houses washed down the side of the mountain and into a ditch every time there is a good rain

$200 a barrel is good for coal and what is good for coal is not good for those of who us would like to live longer than age 40 w.out emphysema symptoms