Quote:
Originally Posted by jviehe
I figured thats where you would go, however your comment was that Cambodia has a good economy because it sells oil. My point simply was, we have oil too, only we arent allowed to sell it. So if you want us to have the same potential, perhaps we should likewise sell some oil, go back to an agrarian economy, get millions of dollars in aid and put it in politicians accts, like Cambodia does.
|
No, Cambodia's oil revenue is yet to come. Their current economic growth is based on manufacturing (garments), other natural resources not consumed domestically and tourism.
Sure we sell our oil. There just isn't enough left to make any difference in imports due to our highest in the world consumption rate. Do you understand that even if ANWR (6B/barrels) and the Caribbean Coast (10B/barrels) were pumped dry it would supply the current rate of US consumption for only two years? There's still far cheaper production oil available than those areas. Even if more oil was pumped it would only benefit publicly subsidized oil interests and a tiny number of citizens as pricing is determined by global commodity markets. You could always favor the Chavez method, nationalize it and provide cheap gas for the public until, like Venezuela, it's gone. Then what?
We already put billions of taxpayer dollars into politicians pockets through special interests. What's the difference in that instance between Cambodia and the US? That Cambodia bypasses the lobbyists?