Saudi Arabia has Taken Its Ball and Gone Home

[Mister_Che]

http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstocks/archive/2008/09/11/the-death-of-opec.aspx

Wow. Saudi Arabia has left OPEC.

[Already_Taken]

that's good for us. thanks saudi arabia!

[mph4ever]

that's good for us. thanks saudi arabia!


why is that good?

[JohnXDoe]

yeah if i got enough from my skim of the article it sounds as if certain a holes were trying to dictate about oil production and what not in opec. and in this case it wasn't the saudi's doing the dictating. for once. so they left

which is good for us. because it sounds like some countries want to play politics with oil production. and i understand saudi arabia does that, too. but it seems their first priority is still to get enough oil out and as much as they can reason to. and sell it to us

bastards

no but seriously let the others have opec. like the article said its now an organization with no teeth. lots of countries produce lots of oil now. and if this new discovery off the coast of Brazil is as big as they think it will be great for us.

so open can do whatever it is they think they do. but they will always have to follow whatever it is saudi arabia does regardless

[Already_Taken]

why is that good?

they are by far the biggest oil producing country in the world. The US is by far the biggest oil consumer in the world. Other countries wanted to cut supply, which would raise prices. Saudi says "no", which is essentially saying they are willing to support us.

[mph4ever]

this should all drive oil prices down, right?

[stevensonmat2]

yay for good relations with the saudis :smoke:

[mph4ever]

yay for good relations with the saudis :smoke:


but couldn't this mean that saudi arabia and its hated regime come under fire from all of their regional neighbours? you know they are hated today for the way they treat their people, how a few filthy rich despots control everything? so it may be good for american gas prices but its not good for the wider world.

[Reaganista]

good short term move at least

[Iscariot]

doesn't this mean saudi arabia can charge whatever they want for their crude now? as in, inflation++

[Mister_Che]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/business/worldbusiness/11oil.html?_r=2&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Ok, so they didn't leave OPEC, but they just decided to ignore the decision to cut production. Still good.

[guitrguy]

Saudi Arabia is not all bad. :)

[spitfirejunky]

Would this "oversupply" have anything to do with those retarded leases for undrilled oil? Or are we actually starting to reduce our dependence on oil?

[AyatollahKhomeini]

um wait

how does this help saudi arabia? do they think lower prices will encourage our sustained consumption?

[Det_Nosnip]

Saudi Arabia is not all bad. :)

I actually can't think of a single redeeming quality that Saudi Arabia possesses, beyond giving us oil which is not necessarily a good thing in of itself. Even if we treat that as a good thing, it doesn't even begin to counterbalance the legendary list of human rights abuses+violations, the massively uneven distribution of resources, and the faithful, diligent state support of terror organizations that the country has done. For God's sake, the Saud family was put into power by radical Wahabist fundamentalists who put any+all men, women, and children to the sword whose beliefs differed even slightly from theirs...and their descendents formed a fun little community support group called "Al Qaeda."

[Already_Taken]

I actually can't think of a single redeeming quality that Saudi Arabia possesses, beyond giving us oil which is not necessarily a good thing in of itself. Even if we treat that as a good thing, it doesn't even begin to counterbalance the legendary list of human rights abuses+violations, the massively uneven distribution of resources, and the faithful, diligent state support of terror organizations that the country has done. For God's sake, the Saud family was put into power by radical Wahabist fundamentalists who put any+all men, women, and children to the sword whose beliefs differed even slightly from theirs...and their descendents formed a fun little community support group called "Al Qaeda."

go protest in front of city hall, i'm sure you might find someone who cares.

oil is the blood that runs through this countries veins whether you like it or not. if they stopped supplying it to us it would be a very bad thing, so the fact that they do supply us with oil is a good thing.

[StreetlightRock]

He probably would find someone that cares. Say, oh I dunno, the 3000+ people killed on 9/11 by predominantly Saudi citizens and everyone else who was outraged at the act, the families of the soldiers who've gone off to fight a war on terrorism, a terrorism the US supported in the first place and the hundreds of thousands of Saudis who are oppressed within their own country each day by their own government.

Oil is certainly a lifeblood, but if you think any Saudi ruler would be so idiotic to stop the supply of the biggest cash cow the country has and the one of the only things keeping the world's largest consumer there in support in the first place (say, if the royals were no longer in power), you have no idea how powerful the economic role of Oil actually is for BOTH sides. The Oil will not stop.

America has supplied the Saudis with all sorts of arms and has constantly supported the Royal family, who are corrupt in every possible way, and are destroying their image within the Middle-East with every passing second of support. Look around you, you going to tell me, giving the violence of the world's situation right now, you going to tell me that no one cares?

[Already_Taken]

the difference between when you look around and when i look around, is that you live in australia and i live in the usa. the slightest minority of people will give up their cars, their computers, their air conditioning even if they don't have to. this country simply relies on oil, and survival comes first and foremost in any successful species.

[griftadan]

doesn't this mean saudi arabia can charge whatever they want for their crude now? as in, inflation++

no they can sell it for whatever oil is selling for on the global market, and given as everyone was expecting them to lower production then prices will probably fall.

um wait

how does this help saudi arabia? do they think lower prices will encourage our sustained consumption?

probably, or they figured they could make more money in the short term this way

[UmphreysHead]

I actually can't think of a single redeeming quality that Saudi Arabia possesses, beyond giving us oil which is not necessarily a good thing in of itself. Even if we treat that as a good thing, it doesn't even begin to counterbalance the legendary list of human rights abuses+violations, the massively uneven distribution of resources, and the faithful, diligent state support of terror organizations that the country has done. For God's sake, the Saud family was put into power by radical Wahabist fundamentalists who put any+all men, women, and children to the sword whose beliefs differed even slightly from theirs...and their descendents formed a fun little community support group called "Al Qaeda."
Do you not drive a car and live in the woods by chance?

[siva_chair]

I actually can't think of a single redeeming quality that Saudi Arabia possesses, beyond giving us oil which is not necessarily a good thing in of itself. Even if we treat that as a good thing, it doesn't even begin to counterbalance the legendary list of human rights abuses+violations, the massively uneven distribution of resources, and the faithful, diligent state support of terror organizations that the country has done. For God's sake, the Saud family was put into power by radical Wahabist fundamentalists who put any+all men, women, and children to the sword whose beliefs differed even slightly from theirs...and their descendents formed a fun little community support group called "Al Qaeda."

That guy that helped Jamie Foxx in the movie The Kingdom, tbh

[thunderzstruck]

Do you not drive a car and live in the woods by chance?

whats that have to do with anything

[McP3000]

People act like Det Nosnip being against Saudi Arabia means he shouldnt be able to use oil
what idiocy

[Iscariot]

no they can sell it for whatever oil is selling for on the global market, and given as everyone was expecting them to lower production then prices will probably fall.

yeah i was thinking about that too it seems more likely to be sure

[Iscariot]

the difference between when you look around and when i look around, is that you live in australia and i live in the usa. the slightest minority of people will give up their cars, their computers, their air conditioning even if they don't have to. this country simply relies on oil, and survival comes first and foremost in any successful species.

i was going to say that i don't rely on oil at all (no car, gas furnace, etc) but then i realized that natural gas is harvested from oil wells so hmm

[siva_chair]

That and you use plastic products that utilize petrol products in their development, ect.

[Iscariot]

oh true

i never really think about how many things are made with oil imports

[siva_chair]

Too damn many that's for sure.

[mph4ever]

the difference between when you look around and when i look around, is that you live in australia and i live in the usa. the slightest minority of people will give up their cars, their computers, their air conditioning even if they don't have to. this country simply relies on oil, and survival comes first and foremost in any successful species.

successful species? are you suggesting that americans are a seperate species to the rest of the planet?

[Iscariot]

well we are pretty superior

[mph4ever]

well we are pretty superior

at what?

[Iscariot]

everything duh

we're like the ancient greeks of the modern world

we set the standard and everyone else tries to keep up

[mph4ever]

everything duh

we're like the ancient greeks of the modern world

we set the standard and everyone else tries to keep up

hahahahahaha, nice, one, i didn't think i'd laugh so much today, thanks

[StreetlightRock]

the difference between when you look around and when i look around, is that you live in australia and i live in the usa. the slightest minority of people will give up their cars, their computers, their air conditioning even if they don't have to. this country simply relies on oil, and survival comes first and foremost in any successful species.

What in the world are you on about? You just completely missed my point didn't you? Aside from the fact that Australia is just as much reliant on oil as America, I'm not arguing that oil isn't important. I'm arguing against the stupidity of people like you thinking that supporting a corrupt, violent regime is actually good for security. Did you miss where I said the oil will not stop? My god, people like you are a brick wall of idiocy.

[Iscariot]

hahahahahaha, nice, one, i didn't think i'd laugh so much today, thanks

i don't see what's funny unless you find humor in the truth but ok

[mph4ever]

i don't see what's funny unless you find humor in the truth but ok

man, stop with the gags will you? its just too much

[Det_Nosnip]

Do you not drive a car and live in the woods by chance?

Actually, I ride a bike and life in the city. That being said, your whole premise is a non-sequitor.

In advanced stages of addiction, a heroin addict needs the drug in order to survive...but does that mean that heroin is GOOD for him?

[Already_Taken]

What in the world are you on about? You just completely missed my point didn't you? Aside from the fact that Australia is just as much reliant on oil as America, I'm not arguing that oil isn't important. I'm arguing against the stupidity of people like you thinking that supporting a corrupt, violent regime is actually good for security. Did you miss where I said the oil will not stop? My god, people like you are a brick wall of idiocy.

oh i was arguing that saudi arabia is a place filled with great people, thanks for clearing up my argument for me. :rolleyes:

or maybe i was arguing that whether we like it or not, to sustain ourselves in the same way we do now we need saudi arabia, just as they need us. you can
complain about their government and their "bad" people, but that just makes you an idiot. what do you suggest we do, go in and impose our will on another middle eastern country? or maybe you'll notice that saudi arabia is one of the last countries in the middle-east that we haven't completely ruined our relations with.

If you think i was saying Americans are a different species than the rest of the world, learn to read.

Det nosip i would argue yes to your question. if the goal is to stay alive, then whatever does the trick will be "good".

[StreetlightRock]

what do you suggest we do, go in and impose our will on another middle eastern country? or maybe you'll notice that saudi arabia is one of the last countries in the middle-east that we haven't completely ruined our relations with.

Saudi Arabia is not the same thing as the Saudi Monarchy. You realize that right?

Oil production will not stop if the US stops rigorously supporting the Saudi regime. You realize that right?

And I'm far from suggesting any sort of 'imposing' of American will, thats probably about the worst thing that could happen.

[Reaganista]

the saudi people themselves arent all that endearing either

[Det_Nosnip]

Det nosip i would argue yes to your question. if the goal is to stay alive, then whatever does the trick will be "good".

*sigh* Right, but the heroin ultimately kills you. :lol:

I guess some people just don't get short term v. long term.

[Smokey D]

The analogy fails because the cheap energy represented by oil is essential for humanity while heroin addiction is always bad.

It is distressing that so much of our energy comes from places with governments like Saudi Arabia, but I don't see that as a reason in itself to condemn the use of oil. To the contrary, rebuffing the Saudis in the absence of alternatives to oil solely for political reasons or opposition to their human rights record. I am quite confident in saying that the second most powerful group in Saudi Arabia behind the monarchy are the Wahabbi clerics. In the absence of western support, the monarchy will probably at some stage fall but I don't see it being replaced by an enlightened liberal Arab intelligensia. If the clerics take control, I don't see them letting up in human rights abuses. And at the same time, the clerics are much more likely to restrict oil flows to the United States (and the west more generally). that would be catastrophic, and produce massive hardship for pretty much everyone. So until the US can develop an alternative energy strategy to oil, it should continue to support the Saudi monarchy.

Which is not to say it cannot use its influence to prompt the monarchy into abandoning some of its harsher practices.

[Det_Nosnip]

*sigh* love of God. :rolleyes:

Ok.

The cheap energy we get from oil was not essential to humanity before the invention of the combustion engine.

...like...the heroin was not necessary for the addict before he became addicted. ...Nevermind the presumptuous assignment of the hypothetical person as "addict." Carrying on.

We got a little taste before it was dangerous and liked what we tried...so we kept using.
(metaphor obvious here)

Our society built itself around oil...like the addict's body starts to restructure itself around the chemical heroin addiction. Eventually, in both instances, the subject becomes dependent upon the substance for existence.

This isn't much of a problem when the supply is easily able to meet the demand. We feel some benefits (plastics, automobiles, warm homes during the winter; intense euphoria and pleasure).

Unfortunately, demand starts to outstrip supply (in both cases). We also have to get our resources from slightly less reputable sources (drug dealers for the heroin user, oil dealers for the...well, you get the point). These relationships have pronounced negative effects (plains crashing into buildings, life of crime, etc), making us begin to question whether our dependence on said subject is a bad idea.

The problem: we are fully dependent on said subject. If the heroin user stops taking heroin cold turkey, he will die. Likewise, if we as a society suddenly decide to stop using oil overnight, we will also die/collapse.

...leading to: rehab. The heroin addict is given alternative fuels...er...drugs to treat his addiction so that he can slowly ween (sic?) his way off of his overdependence.

[Smokey D]

The cheap energy we get from oil was not essential to humanity before the invention of the combustion engine.

Yeah, but now that we invented it we realise how important it is.

I mean, I suppose it's not essential strictly speaking in the sense that some of us would survive the the catastrophic collapse of society if we abandoned oil, the internal combustion engine and oil products. But I don't think that's a very productive way to look at things.


Our society built itself around oil...like the addict's body starts to restructure itself around the chemical heroin addiction. Eventually, in both instances, the subject becomes dependent upon the substance for existence.

Yes. Our society is founded on (relatively) cheap energy.


Unfortunately, demand starts to outstrip supply (in both cases). We also have to get our resources from slightly less reputable sources (drug dealers for the heroin user, oil dealers for the...well, you get the point). These relationships have pronounced negative effects (plains crashing into buildings, life of crime, etc), making us begin to question whether our dependence on said subject is a bad idea.

Okay but you haven't shown that the 'negative effects' of oil consumption are sufficient to justify the cluster**** that would arise from abandoning oil.


The problem: we are fully dependent on said subject. If the heroin user stops taking heroin cold turkey, he will die. Likewise, if we as a society suddenly decide to stop using oil overnight, we will also die/collapse.

...leading to: rehab. The heroin addict is given alternative fuels...er...drugs to treat his addiction so that he can slowly ween (sic?) his way off of his overdependence.

So solar power is methadone?

[StreetlightRock]

M, fair enough. I still think that a policy of unwavering public support, making it overly known that 'We are friends of Saudi Arabia and will do whatever it takes and we will make it known to the rest of the world' is detrimental. Largely, this isn't happening as much as it was in the 80s and 90s at least. The emphasis should be on your last sentence there and it should be made known. (Referring to Smokey two posts above)

[Smokey D]

Assuming that was directed at me, I would have thought the decision of the Saudi go against OPEC, its (sometimes ambivalent) commitment to actually fighting terrorism and the recent expansion of the franchise regarding low level local government elections are all indicative that the US message is slowly getting through.

[Already_Taken]

M, fair enough. I still think that a policy of unwavering public support, making it overly known that 'We are friends of Saudi Arabia and will do whatever it takes and we will make it known to the rest of the world' is detrimental. Largely, this isn't happening as much as it was in the 80s and 90s at least. The emphasis should be on your last sentence there and it should be made known. (Referring to Smokey two posts above)

then you get into imperialism. why can't you let other cultures do what they do, and still trade with them? isn't that the ultimate respect of another culture? seeing something you blatantly disagree with, but respecting the fact that it's none of your ****ing business!!!

i don't agree with the indian guy at the gas station i always buy stuff from, but i can tolerate him because i like buying stuff there.

[Smokey D]

why can't you let other cultures do what they do, and still trade with them? isn't that the ultimate respect of another culture? seeing something you blatantly disagree with, but respecting the fact that it's none of your ****ing business!!!

Because what some cultures do is unacceptable. There is no obligation to respect things which do not warrant respect. The idea that things deserve respect simply because they are different is logically absurd and incompatible with the fundamental meaning of respect.

[Det_Nosnip]

Well yeah because, ironically, it is disrespectful to assume that other cultures cannot be viewed and judged according to universal moral values...it is implying that "they don't know any better."

Yeah, but now that we invented it we realise how important it is.
Do I have to bring up the fact that heroin was basically discovered as a means for countering morphine addiction? :p

Either way, something that was completely worthless to us as a civilization became black gold over night once a need was established.


I mean, I suppose it's not essential strictly speaking in the sense that some of us would survive the the catastrophic collapse of society if we abandoned oil, the internal combustion engine and oil products. But I don't think that's a very productive way to look at things.
No...my point was that oil was a nonessential BEFORE we became dependent on it with the combustion engine...just like heroin was a nonessential BEFORE the heroin addict started using.


Yes. Our society is founded on (relatively) cheap energy.
But that energy source has evolved (and will continue to evolve) over the years.


Okay but you haven't shown that the 'negative effects' of oil consumption are sufficient to justify the cluster**** that would arise from abandoning oil.


I'm not saying we should abandon oil...that would be like the heroin addict going cold turkey.

I'm saying that we, as a society, are badly in need of oil rehab.


So solar power is methadone?

In a sense, yes. Let's pray that it has a better success rate than the latter, though.

[Smokey D]

Do I have to bring up the fact that heroin was basically discovered as a means for countering morphine addiction?

I'd rather you abandoned the analogy altogether since analogies are usually pretty limited in what they tell us and it's not like oil addiction is a difficult concept that needs to be reduced to analogies.


Either way, something that was completely worthless to us as a civilization became black gold over night once a need was established.

That need being the furtherance of human progress, I don't see the grounds for your displeasure. Oil more than anything has liberated us from the bonds of scarcity.

No...my point was that oil was a nonessential BEFORE we became dependent on it with the combustion engine...just like heroin was a nonessential BEFORE the heroin addict started using.

My point is that's a stupid comparison because the internal combustion engine and oil products are some of the most spectacular boons that human society has ever discovered but heroin to the addict is always evil.

But that energy source has evolved (and will continue to evolve) over the years.

Yes.

I'm not saying we should abandon oil...that would be like the heroin addict going cold turkey.

I'm saying that we, as a society, are badly in need of oil rehab.

We probably will move away from oil in the next half century. It is probably going to be essential, given the decline in supply vs the increase in demand. But I don't get what this has to do with Saudi.

[siva_chair]

Actually, I ride a bike and life in the city. That being said, your whole premise is a non-sequitor.

Ok, but you are obviously using a computer, which relies on petrol products. Not to mention the various other oil byproducts you use indirectly rely on in you day to day life. Use any plastic products? Do you eat food that is not locally produced?

Or are you saying we should abandon completely and utterly the standard of living we have developed over the past few centuries?

[StreetlightRock]

Assuming that was directed at me, I would have thought the decision of the Saudi go against OPEC, its (sometimes ambivalent) commitment to actually fighting terrorism and the recent expansion of the franchise regarding low level local government elections are all indicative that the US message is slowly getting through.

Definitely, since 9/11 things have been getting better, slowly, and I can't complain about that, except maybe urge them to continue along that path.

why can't you let other cultures do what they do, and still trade with them?

Aside from the brilliant point Smokey's made, it's equally absurd to consign the disgusting domestic actions of the Saudis to 'culture'. It is not ''culture' that legitimizes repressive political measures. There is no fixed Saudi 'culture', within which Saudi citizens embrace their lack of individual freedoms and explains the coercive nature of the state. Far from it, there has been plenty of internal domestic resistance and calls for political reform from the citizens of Saudi Arabia itself. No ones likes being oppressed and hurt and no amount of cultural relativism can throw that aside. This is politics at play, not culture.

[Already_Taken]

Because what some cultures do is unacceptable.
well that just cements my point. why do you think what is unacceptable to you is to people in a different country with different views and different culture? the fact is you just want to impose your will.

this is how the people in the middle east see it. "leave us alone, don't tell us how to live". pretty sure that's why we got attacked in the first place.

streetlight: it's actually religion that keeps them oppressed in their politics. but for you to say that nobody over there enjoys their life is idiotic. humans are the only animal that inhabits the entire world. you know why? Adaptability. we can adapt to an oppressive government, we can adapt to following the rules. if you are born there, then that is all you know, so what could possibly be wrong with it? that is the point of view you and smokey COMPLETELY fail to see.

[Reaganista]

they have no right to ask to be 'left alone' as long as they do morally repugnant things

actually i would say no one has a right to be 'left alone' period existing as a closed civilization is tantamount to theft from the rest of humanity but that's another argument imo

[Smokey D]

well that just cements my point. why do you think what is unacceptable to you is to people in a different country with different views and different culture? the fact is you just want to impose your will.

Assuming, hypothetically, that all cultures are essentially equal and that the practices of some cultures aren't worse than others, you still have to explain why we should accept the Saudi government's word that they represent their culture. As Streetlight has said, we have no reason to believe that the current model of Saudi culture propagated by the Saudi monarchy is the 'fixed Saudi culture'. In fact, if you look at the resentment directed towards the government in the country and across the region you might conclude that in fact it doesn't represent the culture desired by the population. What we see in Saudi is the naked expression of the political power of the dominant class. There may be crossovers with what is actually Saudi culture, but I suspect the vast majority of people do not like arbitrary punishment, no participation in their government etc.

this is how the people in the middle east see it. "leave us alone, don't tell us how to live". pretty sure that's why we got attacked in the first place.

No, this is how the Saudi government tells us people in the Middle East feel.

streetlight: it's actually religion that keeps them oppressed in their politics.

It's probably a lot of things.

but for you to say that nobody over there enjoys their life is idiotic.

Which is not to say it couldn't be better or even that most people like their government.

humans are the only animal that inhabits the entire world. you know why? Adaptability. we can adapt to an oppressive government, we can adapt to following the rules.

They shouldn't have to adapt to it.

if you are born there, then that is all you know, so what could possibly be wrong with it?p

The fact that it's objectively oppressive and dehumanizing.

that is the point of view you and smokey COMPLETELY fail to see.

No, I recognise people might have different views of right and wrong and what's acceptable in government etc based on where they live and their local culture. What I don't accept is that oppressive governments represent an authentic version of their country's culture in such a way that excludes our ability to judge that society for its moral failings.

[Aaron]

Woo, economics at work.

[StreetlightRock]

it's actually religion that keeps them oppressed in their politics. but for you to say that nobody over there enjoys their life is idiotic. humans are the only animal that inhabits the entire world. you know why? Adaptability. we can adapt to an oppressive government, we can adapt to following the rules. if you are born there, then that is all you know, so what could possibly be wrong with it? that is the point of view you and smokey COMPLETELY fail to see.

I'm sure lots of people enjoy their life there. The patriarchs and the clerics who rule with an Iron fist more than most, I suspect. Your first statement about religion being the arbiter of politics is completely wrong as well: First, politics has always used religion for its own ends, and religion has always been adapted to politics, never, ever the other way around. Secondly, if you honestly believe that Islam is an inherently oppressive religion, you're completely ignorant to its tenants and nature.

Thirdly, perhaps you might consider that our wonderful adaptability actually manifests itself in resistance and not acceptance of repression as demonstrated by large amounts of social unrest in the country. Lastly, your thinking that any one peoples, the Saudis specifically, 'know nothing better' is a complete underestimation of humanity and is near racist in its tone.

[Det_Nosnip]

Ok, but you are obviously using a computer, which relies on petrol products. Not to mention the various other oil byproducts you use indirectly rely on in you day to day life. Use any plastic products? Do you eat food that is not locally produced?

Or are you saying we should abandon completely and utterly the standard of living we have developed over the past few centuries?

You guys obviously don't understand the concept of "rehab."

Not once did I advocate immediately ceasing all oil use...in fact, I pointed out disasterous consequences of such an action through the analogy of a heroin addict going cold turkey and dying from the withdrawal.

[Det_Nosnip]

I'd rather you abandoned the analogy altogether since analogies are usually pretty limited in what they tell us and it's not like oil addiction is a difficult concept that needs to be reduced to analogies.
It's a perfect analogy! ...And analogies are useful tools for separating peoples' gut/instinctual/trained reactions from rational thoughts.

e.g: recognizing that, from any possible rational perspective, our dependence on oil is an inherently bad thing and we should work towards eliminating it by seeking alternative fuel sources.

It is easy to see how heroin is bad for an addict, but more difficult to see why oil is bad for us because we are the ones addicted.


That need being the furtherance of human progress, I don't see the grounds for your displeasure. Oil more than anything has liberated us from the bonds of scarcity.
Right, but it's a rapidly depleting resource controlled by people whose ties with us are causing us to be targetted for acts of terrorism in violence. The subsequent global policing that we have begun since 9/11 in order to respond to these attacks and to maintain our oil interests threatens our internal security and runs the possibility of provoking an even more catastrophic attack.


My point is that's a stupid comparison because the internal combustion engine and oil products are some of the most spectacular boons that human society has ever discovered but heroin to the addict is always evil.
I guess the reason why you aren't getting the metaphor is because you are ignorant of opiates. Have you never wondered WHY heroin addicts become addicted in the first place? The effects of heroin are said to be some of the most pleasurable, euphoric experiences a person can experience. It is NOT always evil...that is why people succumb to it.


We probably will move away from oil in the next half century. It is probably going to be essential, given the decline in supply vs the increase in demand. But I don't get what this has to do with Saudi.

You've got me...all that I said was that the Saudis had no redeeming qualities and people jumped me because I rejected "they give us oil" as a positive point.

[Reaganista]

it would only be a perfect analogy if heroin use improved every aspect of the heroin user's life to an immeasurable degree

[Smokey D]

It's a perfect analogy! ...And analogies are useful tools for separating peoples' gut/instinctual/trained reactions from rational thoughts.

it would only be a perfect analogy if heroin use improved every aspect of the heroin user's life to an immeasurable degree


e.g: recognizing that, from any possible rational perspective, our dependence on oil is an inherently bad thing and we should work towards eliminating it by seeking alternative fuel sources.

They're also ways to obfuscate and obscure important differences and details.



It is easy to see how heroin is bad for an addict, but more difficult to see why oil is bad for us because we are the ones addicted.

Or it might just be that heroin is much worse than oil.

Right, but it's a rapidly depleting resource controlled by people whose ties with us are causing us to be targetted for acts of terrorism in violence. The subsequent global policing that we have begun since 9/11 in order to respond to these attacks and to maintain our oil interests threatens our internal security and runs the possibility of provoking an even more catastrophic attack.

I think you overstate the threat and the alternative.

I guess the reason why you aren't getting the metaphor is because you are ignorant of opiates. Have you never wondered WHY heroin addicts become addicted in the first place? The effects of heroin are said to be some of the most pleasurable, euphoric experiences a person can experience. It is NOT always evil...that is why people succumb to it.

Right but oil produces manifest, lasting and objective benefit but heroin causes subjective, internal and fleeting pleasure. They're completely different.


You've got me...all that I said was that the Saudis had no redeeming qualities and people jumped me because I rejected "they give us oil" as a positive point.

Them giving us oil is probably the only reason to keep them around.

[Det_Nosnip]

it would only be a perfect analogy if heroin use improved every aspect of the heroin user's life to an immeasurable degree
Way to steal Reaganista's reply! :p

Oil does not improve every aspect of our lives to an immeasurable degree...come on, now.

This perhaps perfectly illustrates how the analogy works, as heroin tricks the body into feeling immeasurably better than it felt before and creates the illusion of improved health. No pain, no symptoms, right?


They're also ways to obfuscate and obscure important differences and details.
Nice vocabulary, but...care to name some important differences and details?


Or it might just be that heroin is much worse than oil.
Well, have you tried shooting THAT through your veins? :p


I think you overstate the threat and the alternative.
Actually, I've barely scratched the surface.

Just about all of our current foreign crises (and those that will continue to plague us in the years to come) stem from our overdependence on oil...and the problem is only getting worse.


Right but oil produces manifest, lasting and objective benefit but heroin causes subjective, internal and fleeting pleasure. They're completely different.
How so?


Them giving us oil is probably the only reason to keep them around.

It's not a good enough reason...particularly during this age of nuclear proliferation.

[Charlie Daniels]

Just about all of our current foreign crises (and those that will continue to plague us in the years to come) stem from our overdependence on oil...and the problem is only getting worse.

I would say that the current foreign crises are well and truly worth it when you consider how beneficial oil has been (and still is) in improving our quality of life.

The way I see it is though there are a number of drawbacks from using oil, oil's widespread usage was needed and can be justified and ALL the energy alternatives of oil just becoming availible now could not have been developed without using oil and it's by products.

It's a means to an end, peoples, and if it means a few foreign crises then so be it.

[Smokey D]

Oil does not improve every aspect of our lives to an immeasurable degree...come on, now.

Yes it does. The glories of industry and industrial agriculture say you're wrong.


This perhaps perfectly illustrates how the analogy works, as heroin tricks the body into feeling immeasurably better than it felt before and creates the illusion of improved health. No pain, no symptoms, right?

Or it might illustrate how you're relying on non-falsifiable pseudoscience, highlighting the inadequacies of your analogy.

Nice vocabulary, but...care to name some important differences and details?

it would only be a perfect analogy if heroin use improved every aspect of the heroin user's life to an immeasurable degree

Actually, I've barely scratched the surface.

Okay.

Just about all of our current foreign crises (and those that will continue to plague us in the years to come) stem from our overdependence on oil...and the problem is only getting worse.

You overstate the pernicious effect of oil on the economy, you fail to provide meaningful alternatives and you overstate the importance of so called recent crises.

How so

How are they different or what are the benefits of oil?

It's not a good enough reason...particularly during this age of nuclear proliferation.

Yes it is. The end of cheap energy would probably be about as bad as some rogue nation detonating a nukd in Manhatten.

[Det_Nosnip]

Yes it does. The glories of industry and industrial agriculture say you're wrong.
You mean the "glories" that are stripping the land and poisoning our air+water supplies?



Or it might illustrate how you're relying on non-falsifiable pseudoscience, highlighting the inadequacies of your analogy.
How are my reliances even pseudo science?


it would only be a perfect analogy if heroin use improved every aspect of the heroin user's life to an immeasurable degree
Well, if the degree is immeasurable, then it's also incomparable, making it useless in an analogy.

You also greatly overestimate the positive effects of oil.


Okay.



You overstate the pernicious effect of oil on the economy, I don't remember talking about the economy, but it's getting late here.

you fail to provide meaningful alternatives
Mmm that's a fair critique but then I'm not exactly a chemical engineer.

and you overstate the importance of so called recent crises.
I don't think that's possible. I can't remember...are you Australian, British, Canadian, or American?


How are they different or what are the benefits of oil?
How are the benefits of oil objective where the benefits of heroin are subjective? The benefits of oil are equally fleeting...it's just more difficult to recognize their transient nature when it takes longer than a lifetime for them to run their course.


Yes it is. The end of cheap energy would probably be about as bad as some rogue nation detonating a nukd in Manhatten.

Not even close. Society functioned well before the aforementioned cheap energy...it would just be the transition that would be bad.

With the weapons we have today, global annhilation is pretty much inevitable in the case of any protracted nuclear exchange.

I wouldn't be worried so much about the nuking of Manhatten as the swift retaliation that would follow.

[Orange Piggy]

Er, oil is pretty awesome stuff. What its done for transportation should be enough. It allows goods to be transported relatively cheaply and quickly via land, air and sea. You don't get electric or coal powered vehicles delivering food to your local supermarket. The cost of shipping goods overseas is a lot cheaper with oil, allowing goods to arrive in large quantities and before food goes off. It allows flight to be affordable. People can go anywhere they want in the world and go home a day later. How would we have satellites without rockets to put them up there? Oil is used to power massive machines in construction. Its used to power agricultural machinery to cut, thresh, and separate grain far more quickly than any other method, feeding more people. Clearly, this **** be glorious.

We also get plastic from oil. Plastic. Do you realize how much of our stuff uses plastic? Everything from paperclips to clothing to spaceships! The stuff insulates wires; electronics becomes a danger without plastic. I wonder whether we'd have computers.

And yes, it pollutes. For that reason you might not want to use it in power plants, but regions without rivers to dam, the land for wind farms, or the funds for a nuclear plant would need to rely on coal instead. Oil is more friendly than coal.

My list isn't exhaustive, and you need to be aware of cumulative effects. We'd be a long way back without oil. Maybe society 'worked' without it, but life was a lot harder, expensive and there was less leisure to it. Whats more, cities are built around the assumption that cheap energy will always be available. How are firemen supposed to respond before fire demolishes a city block? Shall they hop on their pushbikes and carry the hose in a long single file? Oh, wait, the hose is made out of plastic. Worse, you can't even rebuild the massive buildings. Maybe we'll just shoot heroin for the rest of our lives while modernity burns, it'll make a fine substitute since oil and heroin are effectively the same.

O wait, what happened to those hygenic throw-away needles? Plastic? ****!

[Det_Nosnip]

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/09/26/bacteria-plastic.html

Looks like your "oh no we can't give up oil what will we do without spandex?" arguement is officially moot. :p

[Smokey D]

I can't see how you think 'the current crisis' (ie western governments being beholden to extremists and hostile governments) is worse than what would result from discontinuing oil.

[Det_Nosnip]

How many times do I have to say that I'm not in favor of "discontinuing" oil but instead in favor of pouring resources into alternative energy sources in order to remove our dependence from it? What are you, Smokey...a Republican pundit? Stop repeating a moot, invalid point and find something else to talk about. I AM NOT SAYING WE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUE OIL.

[Smokey D]

Okay that's fine. But why do you keep on saying that 'society existed before oil' and thereby imply that it would be acceptable to go pre-oil again?