I suggest we are seeing the the effects produced by a society and its
technical problems becoming too complex for the average person to properly
comprehend. The energy problem is one example of an issue that is only
properly understood by people having either technical training or the
intelligence and interest to understand the complex relationships. ...
But please understand that there is also political disagreement. To some of
us who consider ourselves capitalists, it's not proper to try to change
market behavior through legislation. Also, I've spent a great deal of time
studying market economics, and it appears to me that free markets are
excellent at handling scarcity. As a resource becomes more scarce, prices
rise due to the economic law of supply and demand. As prices rise,
alternatives to the scarce resource become more economically feasible. The
market is self-correcting, and as such, it doesn't look to me like any
energy policy based on resource scarcity can, or should be, modified through
legislation. The only exception to this rule that I can think of, would be
an exception based on national security. In other words, if we believe that
other nations can threaten our oil supply, and drastically change resource
scarcity in a short period of time, which would interfere with the natural
law of supply and demand, then legislation to reduce our dependence on
imported oil could be necessary, not because of market failure, but because
of market intervention by foreign, aggressive, nations.
So I don't think it's fair to say: a) that there's an energy problem; and b)
that it's only properly understood through education. This totally
disregards the political disagreements which may exist.
Sincerely,
Craig Haynie (Houston)
