On Nov 1, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Edmund Storms wrote:
You are exactly right Horace, we need to solve this problem as
quickly as possible. Drilling for oil or even building new reactors
will take many years, up to 10 years depending on who makes the
estimate. In contrast, putting up wind turbines is fast. The slow
part is hooking them to the grid in a massive way. If the country
can keep its focus while the price of energy goes back down, we
might make some progress. That is why the government is needed to
encourage the free enterprise system to keep investing in
alternative energy even though it is no longer profitable. Is this
socialism?
Regards,
Ed
I think it is infeasible to get people to invest in losing
propositions. OTOH, it is very feasible to stabilize short term
variations in a market at a point where it will inevitably converge
long term. Much criticism has been made regarding market
interventions because eventually the market will correct, and major
dislocations result. I think this criticism is invalid if the
intervention is made in such a way as to merely damp the market, not
change where it is headed longer term anyway. Such market controls
are not communism or socialism and arguably not even anti-free
market. The motivational and self-correcting aspects of a free
economy are preserved long term. I think a desirable form of market
intervention, other than purely economic, is to prevent the
production of unsafe and harmful products. That is neither socialist
nor communist nor anti-free market in my opinion. It doesn't stifle
individual creativity or productivity, and it increases economic
efficiency by avoiding the costs associated with damage to
individuals, society, the producing companies, and their investors.
Stabilizing a market makes investment increasingly attractive.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
