Front Page News
150,000 people dead as a result of a tsunami-causing earthquake December 26. The front page of newyorktimes.com links to more than 40 articles, not one of them about the relief efforts. To be honest I am amazed that the press coverage lasted as long as it did. It's just sad that the press treats mad cow disease the same as natural disasters or civil wars (there was yet another article today about a possible "mad cow" in Canada. I'm sure this is important but mad cow killed less than 200 people worldwide, a mere 149,800 less than the Tsunami.
Also not in the news is the news out of Iraq that the country will not join OPEC and will price their oil at 20% below market prices (still way above production costs). Before the war, Iraq produced 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, which was good for 10th worldwide, even though UN sanctions limited the selling options. The impact would be tremendous both domestically and internationally. Internationally, other countries would have no choice but to reduce their prices (Iraq has plenty of oil for everyone). The new Iraqi government would be a quick influx of cash. Negatively, cheap oil might slow down development of alternate fuels. Domestically, reduced oil prices will hurt our own domestic oil production (the US is the world's third biggest oil producer (if you include natural gas). This would be a tough break, but oil production doesn't create a lot of jobs, is not geographically diverse, and hurts the environment. Overall, this would be a great thing for the consumers of the world. Economists would also argue that if a capitalistic system for oil supply and demand took over, it would lead to more efficient production, higher standards, and more innovations. If there is one thing I would like the US to push in Iraq is a market approach to oil supply.
Also not in the news is the news out of Iraq that the country will not join OPEC and will price their oil at 20% below market prices (still way above production costs). Before the war, Iraq produced 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, which was good for 10th worldwide, even though UN sanctions limited the selling options. The impact would be tremendous both domestically and internationally. Internationally, other countries would have no choice but to reduce their prices (Iraq has plenty of oil for everyone). The new Iraqi government would be a quick influx of cash. Negatively, cheap oil might slow down development of alternate fuels. Domestically, reduced oil prices will hurt our own domestic oil production (the US is the world's third biggest oil producer (if you include natural gas). This would be a tough break, but oil production doesn't create a lot of jobs, is not geographically diverse, and hurts the environment. Overall, this would be a great thing for the consumers of the world. Economists would also argue that if a capitalistic system for oil supply and demand took over, it would lead to more efficient production, higher standards, and more innovations. If there is one thing I would like the US to push in Iraq is a market approach to oil supply.
Comments