Point four: The intent of the "cap-and-trade" policies endorsed by all the presidential candidates is to make it more expensive to use energy that emits carbon into the atmosphere so that consumers will cut back. If implemented, these policies are expected to double electric bills. So here's my question: When market forces make Americans cut back on carbon emissions when they cut back on driving due to the high cost of oil, the oil companies (who have little control, since they are subject to the bigger market) are evil and greedy. But when politicians do the exact same thing, they are being noble?
Point five: By my rough calculations, if you cut oil-company profits to zero and totally destroyed their incentive to provide gas, this would only reduce gas prices (if you could find any gas) by about 20-30 cents.
Point six: Aren't these the same politicians who are restricting the supply of oil by limiting where oil companies can drill? They are also preventing the building of new refineries because they don't want them to be built in their voters' backyards. The number of American refineries has declined by more than 50 percent during the last 30 years. No new refineries have been built since the 1970s.
There are, of course, many more points to consider. My fear is that, much more than in the past, business seems to be one of the key targets to attack during this political season. Populism is defined as discourse that pits "the people" against "the elites." In my view, that's exactly what is happening here: The political elites are taking a populist approach in advocating measures that will actually hurt the very people whose electoral favor they seek. As Pogo once said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
I hope people will see through this anti-entrepreneurial discourse.
