rssNo Push From Bush on Conservation
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 12:30 pm
- 3 Comments
With gas prices eating deeper into family budgets, most experts agree that reducing demand through individual conservation would prove a much more immediate solution than increasing supply through increased drilling. Hell, even President George W. Bush said yesterday that conservation would remedy the current “imbalance” in energy supply and demand.
But if you think that means the president would call on Americans to be wise about their personal energy use, you’d be perfectly, 100-percent wrong. From the transcript of yesterday’s White House press conference:
REPORTER: [O]ne thing nobody debates is that if Americans use less energy the current supply/demand equation would improve. Why have you not sort of called on Americans to drive less and to turn down the thermostat?
BUSH: They’re smart enough to figure out whether they’re going to drive less or not. I mean, you know, it’s interesting what the price of gasoline has done, is it caused people to drive less. That’s why they want smaller cars, they want to conserve. But the consumer is plenty bright … The marketplace works.
[...]
REPORTER: But you don’t see the need to ask — you don’t see the value of your calling for a campaign –
BUSH: I think people ought to conserve and be wise about how they use gasoline and energy. Absolutely. And there’s some easy steps people can take. You know, if they’re not in their home, they don’t keep their air-conditioning running. There’s a lot of things people can do.
But … it’s a little presumptuous on my part to dictate to consumers how they live their lives. The American people are plenty capable and plenty smart people and they’ll make adjustments to their own pocketbooks.
Bush also pointed out how high gas prices are changing behavior, not only among consumers, but among Detroit’s automakers as well.
And as much as I regret that the gasoline prices are high — and they are — I also understand that people are going to make adjustments to meet their own needs … And as you notice, the automobile industry is beginning to adjust here at home as consumer demand changes.
As if on cue, General Motors yesterday announced a 20 percent pay reduction for salaried workers and the elimination of health care benefits for Medicare-eligible salaried retirees. That’s an adjustment all right, but few would argue it constitutes positive change. Wouldn’t it have been nice if Detroit had moved away from SUVs for reasons other than the threat of bankruptcy?
3 Comments
Comment posted July 18, 2008 @ 11:07 am
Two points, me2000: One, despite a consumer’s personal opinion of Bush, the president still commands the respect of the office and he still has access to the bully pulpit, from which his message is spread far and wide. Following the attacks of 9/11, he had no problem urging Americans to go shopping for the sake of the economy, but now he claims it “presumptuous” to suggest a little conservation for the same end (I guess he thinks our intelligence has evolved since seven years ago, when we weren’t “plenty bright” enough to know that our patriotism is best manifest by trips to Disneyland.) During WWII, FDR called on folks to sacrifice a bit for a legitimate cause, and Bush could easily do the same today. Not a mandate, mind you, just a suggestion that might bring down demand and ease fuel prices. There’s no good reason that every shoe shop in Georgetown keeps its doors open with the AC blaring in the middle of July.
Second point, on your suckers: If you’ve got a world-class product that everyone wants, sell away! No one’s stopping you. But if your suckers were a finite resource, largely imported from volatile plutocracies, and we’d fought two wars in the last two decades simply to preserve their low cost, and thousands of people had died in those wars, and on top of all that the suckers contributed to the deterioration of the earth’s atmosphere — then yes, perhaps the mayor at some point should step in to alter your business model, because at that point you’re a public nuisance. This need not be a radical move. It could happen gradually, over years. If you were innovative enough, perhaps the more innocuous product would even be tastier. But instead of being innovative, Detroit grew complacent, pumping out those 15 mpg Suburbans as if gas would forever cost $1/gallon. All the while, Congress watched idly by, never providing the nudge that would force production of better engines. (Recall that last December’s congressional move to higher fuel economy standards was the first such increase since 1975.) Perhaps such a nudge would have created the world’s first fleet of fuel efficient SUVs, saving Detroit and preserving consumer choice. Certainly it’s possible. Don’t tell me that a nation that got to the moon within a decade couldn’t make a 60-mpg Expedition within three.
Comment posted July 18, 2008 @ 12:23 am
I have another point to make too.
About the president saying something…
If you read this web page you most likely hate Bush…would you even care if he said something like be sure to turn off the lights in your house so you save energy would you listen and change your lifestyle? IF BUSH said that???
What else do you want him to do regulate how much gas you saved by not going to the lake this year?!? or ration gas? If you want to pay then pay. If you don’t then don’t…I’m glad I live in a country where the president doesn’t tell me what to do.
Comment posted July 18, 2008 @ 12:19 am
I wonder what reasons that the author wanted GM to move away from SUVs other than threat of bankruptcy? What if the government just forced them saying…”I know that the Japanese are killing you in the small car market, heck they are killing you in the medium car market and even the big car market…But you are rocking their world with your SUVs…but cut that out and make your crappy small cars…and let the Japanese and the Koreans run you into BANKRUPTCY.
What if the big wigs in Washington said you cut out making these SUVs or we will tax you…into BANKRUPTCY.
We live in a world or at least a country where everything is controlled by the market…if you could have convinced the world that driving a small US car was the thing to do then I guess we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Let me put it this way if I have a candy store and sell world famous suckers and the store down the block sells world famous gum…It would be dumb for me to switch to the gum business and stop with the suckers. Then let’s say maybe the mayor comes to me and tells me to sell only gum…I go out of business or BANKRUPTCY.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
