Jim writes: >I'm saying that high prices of hydrocarbons -- from whatever source -- discourage the use of them (while their use causes global warming). I would rather have those high prices come from a carbon tax than from "normal" workings of supply and demand, since with the tax (in theory) the revenues could be used to compensate the poor for high gasoline prices, etc. rather than going into the pockets of Tony Hayward, Dick Cheney, and his ilk. Of course, where the revenues go depends on the fight-back. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am rejecting the claim that higher prices leads to reduced use. But even if we accept that, greater investment in commodity index funds and oil futures also drives up the price of hydrocarbons, as does monopoly or cartel control. Are these also things that we should cheer on and hope lead to a good fight-back? Sorry, but I fail to see how the politics of 'peak oil' are at all beneficial to the left. It only naturalizes what is a social problem and legitimize notions of supply and demand as constant and predictable tools we can use (they are not).
Brad _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
