Wait a second, are you saying that there just isn't enough reason not to use oil? So the fact that it's a non-renewable resource, it causes incredible amounts of pollution and destruction to the environment and wars are fought over it just aren't good enough reasons? Seems to me like any one of those reasons alone would be enough to strongly deter us from depending on oil. However, when you put "$$$$" on the other end of the scale, there's just no contest any more. We have plenty of reason, but the reason HAS to include "rich people will get richer" in order for it to become an option.This isthe current rationality, which is why that "rationality" has to be changed if we're going to fix this.
It's not just money, you need to understand that. Money is a symbol for inherent value, it's not the evil you make it out to be. Think of the MASSIVE quality of life improvement oil has brought us. You're attempting to reduce it down to it's bad environmental qualities. But you don't realize how much good comes from it, it's
overwhelmingin our society. If you ever need to go the hospital during a real, critical, emergency, think about the fact that oil is transporting you there by fueling the engine, it's allowed for an enormous amount of precious medical resources to be available by being in shatter proof, flexible containers, it's probably involved in almost every fundamental piece of construction in the very equipment keeping you alive. And it's allowed this all to be purchased far cheaper than any other material available currently, so there are MORE medications, more ambulances and more of everything ready for YOU and your needs.
Part of the reason our quality of life is so high is BECAUSE of oil. If you take it away because of the environment, you may kill millions who depend on all of its many forms--and really, what does that get you? In the end it's an overall net negative in human suffering. And that's what we have to judge all of these systems upon. (Unless you're a nutball who says we need to help the earth for the earth's sake--as if the earth cares about us. Even if we exist for 10 million more years, we'll have existed for no more than a brief blink of the Earth's eye.)
Now, before you say "but there are alternatives!"!!! Yes, yes there are Tan. But not as cheap, nor as ubiquitous in terms of usage. If we had a hard swap to alternatives now, millions would be left out due to price increases--and no Tan, those price increases wouldn't be because of evil greedy men (Well, not ALL of it, some of it yes), it would be because every alternative to oil is far more expensive. Now,
over a period of time, as technology increases and synthesizing/production advances on those alternatives, due to the negatives you mentioned increasing the price of oil, you'll see a
slowswap. And that's what's great about a fluid economy, Tan. As oil becomes more difficult to use, due to prices from environmental laws, stabilization in the middle east, and the fact that it's finite, you'll see a
STEADY,
gradual, stream of innovation in other fields that will bring those prices
down.
This takes time, and it's one thing Capitalism is usually pretty decent at. However, stropping something just because you're failing to asses the good with the bad? Is a prime example of why centralized authority in Economics tends to fail. Because people are so BAD at taking in the big picture--even economists. That's why having billions of people assessing each problem and reacting
andcreating fluid price fluctuations, which will rise in response to the very issues you mention (Finite resource, Environmental damage), is a system that works VERY well (Current instability caused by derivatives not withstanding but read more on perspective below--the current derivative flux is a recent event). Does it have it's problems? Sure. The "spill over" costs from environmental damage isn't included in the price of things unless a government steps in, for example--but that's another piece of the picture, the government is a
PARTof the system. It plays it's role, and the market adapts (Read about the tragedy of the commons, for example.).
(And I hate to sound preachy, the market is far from perfect, as you can see from the environmental example, but combined with super actors, like the government, it works. What doesn't work is having one person who can say "OIL IS BAD!" and then screw billions of people because he didn't account for big picture. This is one of the reasons Hodj points to a society run by AI as being something that could actually pull of a "planned" economy--because an advanced enough computer can process the billions of variables in ways that a human, or even an institution of humans could not--not to mention it wouldn't be susceptible to all the vices humans are, like greed.)
Isn't this what I've been saying the problem is for days now?
Yes, but you believe "individuals with power" is only nameless, evil CEO's out for profit. It's not. They may have disproportionate power, sure. But the real power comes from the Western Consumer. That means you, and I Tan. WE are the people that ultimately are the rationality behind change.
I love measurable data! Like the data that shows how many ailments medical marijuana can help. It's incredible! An easily grown weed can make several expensive and harmful drugs obsolete overnight! The quality of life of millions and millions of people would be significantly improved! I'm also a fan of that light bulb that's been burning for over a hundred years. It was created before our grandparents were born and it's still burning. That's an observable fact. So when I talk about what we're capable of, even if I include exclusively only include things we've already accomplished, we're behind. Or, to be more specific, we're being held back. I'm sorry, I can't give Capitalism a free pass on that just because it works better than feudal lords and emperors.
And you shouldn't give Capitalism a pass. The wonderful thing about Capitalism is the Fuedal Lord, Albert Speer, Stalin, or any number of "economic controllers" won't come to
killyou because you question
WHYthose irregularities in the market are allowed to be sustained. It's kind of poignant though that you bring up verifiable evidence on marijuana in an age when we're having large scale legalization. Doesn't that prove the system is working? What's that you say? Not fast enough? Again, this goes back to what I said a few days ago, we, as humans, tend to be VERY relativistic in terms of time scales when looking at the effects of things. But if Weed is made legal in 50 years, then guess what? The span of time since it was illegal will be no more than a blink in western culture.
Again, Tan, Get perspective on things. You judge everything by YOUR view, in YOUR time. And while it's fair to work for change, it's not fair to judge a system from such a narrow perspective when there are BILLIONS of other people working within the same system. Again, looking at your marijuana example--your view is based merely on your perception within your very young life. Capitalism is a system that's been going on for CENTURIES, and evolving, changing--it's measured against systems that were in place for THOUSANDS of years in some cases. Your judgements are probably one of the most apt reasons for the phrase "can't see the forest through the trees".
Just try to think from a perspective outside your own. Really take a bird's eye view in both terms of time, and space (Space being accounting for OTHER people who do not share your views.). That is how most of us here, who are telling you that you are a bit naive, view things. And really, if you want to pass judgement on the world? That's the LEAST you have to do in order to be able to sound somewhat cogent.
