Curious Washington Post headline: “Are we ready for the next oil shock?”

Could a mere 4 percent shortfall in daily oil supply propel the price of a barrel to more than $120 in a matter of days? That’s what some oil market experts are saying, and if they’re correct, we face the very real possibility of an oil shock wave that could send our economy reeling. Such a rapid rise in fuel costs would have profound effects that could severely threaten the foundation of America’s economic prosperity.

So far so good.  Sounds like a typical recognition of our dependance & how it’s probably going to screw us soon.  Nothing new, but also nothing unimportant.  Onwards…

Considering the potentially devastating impact of an oil crisis, the time has come for new voices, especially those of business leaders and retired national security officials, to join the call for meaningful government action to reduce projected U.S. oil consumption. (emphasis mine)

…and the house of cards comes crashing down.

You knew it was coming.  It is extremely rare for voices to be aired in the mainstream that realize our addiction to oil can’t go on forever that aren’t flacks for statism.   As if according to a plan, all issues are portrayed as binary — either you want the State to “DO SOMETHING!!” or you think it’s all a big crock whipped up by the mythical creature HippieMcLeftyMooreOnCommieGore in its spare time inbetween burning american flags & throwing christians to the lions.  If you were to go up to the average MSM type and say “the government is the problem” on this, their head would explode.
On with the begging…

Pure market economics will never solve this problem. Markets do not account for the hidden and indirect costs of oil dependence.

A lack of pure market economics is the real issue.  At numerous points during the emergence of oil, the government has acted to strong arm consumption to the sky, from less obvious things like making long distance travel (and thus suburbanization) artificially cheap, to handing off “rights” to land it had no legitimate title to, all the way to virtually contracting out the US military to guard oil wells out in what might as well be Timbuktu to the average US citizen.  Some countries export other stuff that can be used for fuel, do you see them w/ US troops providing security?  I think not.

Speaking of that security: where else do you think the “hidden” cost goes to?  Here’s a summary, listen close: the US government endorses unreasonable levels of oil consumption, which when combined with NIMBYism leads to having to get oil from foreign sources.  A substantial chunk of that oil is under the middle east.  To get it as cheap as people want it, we have to cozy up to elitist scum who blow the money on cocaine & whores during trips to Europe.  People that have to live with the aforementioned scum are PISSED that we have more influence on thier country than they do, and when people get desperate they start blowing shit up.  So what does that mean?  More occupation, of course!

You wanna get an idea of how much oil really costs, take a look at our military spending.  Then ask yourself: if that cost didn’t come out of taxes but instead were added to the price of oil (and by association, gasoline), how popular would oil be now?  I’d guess about as popular as a 90-year-old topless dancer.

Government leadership is absolutely necessary. Many of the most promising solutions on both the demand and supply sides will require decades to mature.

This is like blaming a kid for having stunted growth from malnutrition after seeing their parents weighing 300 pounds each.

Government proposals should align the interests of businesses and individuals with society’s goals; for example, tax credits and similar incentives must allow businesses to recover investments and engage in essential long-range planning, and they must account for the high implicit discount rates that consumers apply to future savings.

Basically, they must be paid to switch, just like they were paid to use it in the first place. Figures…

So, who do we thank for this post-all-you-can-eat-bad-mexican-food strength turd of an opinion column?  Why, Fred Smith, CEO of FedEx & his pal P.X. Kelley, a former Reaganite.  What’s next, an op-ed on immigration by David Duke?