Biden, Psaki, and Friedman

 

 Biden, Psaki, and Friedman

Biden and Psaki have been chanting that there is nothing holding back the oil companies from drilling on lands with 9100 permits and that there are no government pressures against such drilling. This falls far short of saying they encourage drilling but such clear mendacity is hard to take, even in American politics. Uncertainty of the regulatory atmosphere--even in this energy wartime and scarcity--will be enough to discourage production. Getting access permits, workers, supply line limits, snail darters--these are just the obvious pressures provided by people who are more devoted to a scientific theory than the nation and people they are responsible for. Here is just a hint of their hostility to domestic production:

https://steeleydock.blogspot.com/2022/01/net-zero-banking-alliance.html

This all stems from a belief of many in the government that oil is bad for us, a thesis raised by climate modeling and aggressively argued and legislated by the current party in power. I think that is a legitimate--but difficult--scientific question. My concern is that this thesis is at least debatable and, if true, has no immediate technical solution whereas the importance of our national energy integrity is immediate and has an immediate, cheap, and convenient solution.

There's a big difference between "Go ahead and drill" and "We will help you go ahead and drill." Biden may not understand that. But Psaki does. When your job requires relentless mendacity, it's time to reconsider your job.

A recent question about oil prices included this article by Friedman from the NYT:
https://www.standardspeaker.com/lies-and-gas-prices/article_43355e03-7888-5451-af4e-11f5b3b6123c.html

I think this is a bit of a straw man argument. This was my response:

I don't have much of an argument against this and Krugman is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. But this is not actually what I was saying. Of course, commodity markets are as global as allowed. And of course, there are a lot of national and international factors. But my points are these. One, inflation is a function of the availability of the commodity and the currency exchanged for it. The deficit spending and the accommodating Fed have created the setting for inflation. In fairness, there are smart people who don't believe that but I do. Increasing availability cheapens. This is not a partisan position; democrats and republicans are both guilty. Two, Obama and Biden both have an apocalyptic vision for the earth with an agent different from Sunday morning pulpit-hammering preachers but no less heartfelt. They are devoted to saving the earth from this apocalypse and want to eliminate fossil fuels to do it. “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
People don't believe politicians, but I believe these guys. My concern is that I think the West has an immediate threat from predatory enemies--see Ukraine--and the safety of the West will depend, to some degree, upon the integrity of its energy supply. That will not be windmills. Now some, like Kerry, think that these military risks are less than the risk of the apocalypse--as such people will, and probably should. I don't.

We will not remember the Coronavirus in a month. But these people, guided by a model, shut down the economy of the Western world for eighteen months to save us. They are absolutely willing to do the same thing with their apocalyptic vision of the environment. My belief is that would be a humanitarian, strategic and military disaster. And they are being dishonest in their decision-making and their communication of it.