We should definitely nationalize petrochemical countries. The
taxpayers should get the benefits of natural resources' scarcity
rents. On top of that, we should raise the price of oil dramatically
($10 per gallon of regular gas?) to discourage its use, balanced with
refundable income-tax credits for the poor. The price should then be
ratcheted upward over time, to discourage its use.

The key problem is that most of the oil that these companies own is
outside the country. They could spin off their foreign operations. So
instead, large taxes should be imposed on petrochemicals (along with
tax credits for the poor). Of course, we don't need a Marxist to do
that. The social democrats and other smart people in W. Europe have
done that. The problem here is that instituting this kind of
enlightened policy requires having a much more leftward tilt in the
balance of political power than currently prevails.

The main benefit of nationalizing the petrochemical companies is
breaking their political power. Perhaps having the government control
the refineries is enough. That works if the people control the
government.

This is not very coherent, but I hope it helps.

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Should a president nationalize petrochemical and other major energy
> companies?

-- 
Jim Devine /  "Nobody told me there'd be days like these / Strange
days indeed -- most peculiar, mama." -- JL.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to