|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Home | News | Commentary | Forum | The Loft | Online Activist | State News | Resources | Cartoons | Classifieds | Contact Us |
By Henry Lamb July 21, 2008 Page 2 of 2 This scenario is an example of socialism at work. Ms. Waters obviously thinks this is great -- and she is not alone. Congress is full of representatives who campaign on the promise that they will enact programs that take money from those who have it and redistribute it to those who need it. This is pure socialism. This system inevitably destroys the society that practices it. Socialism destroys incentive, kills initiative, minimizes risk-taking, and diminishes productivity. Why should worker "A" work harder to produce more than worker "B," if the extra proceeds from his labor is taken by government and given to others? Imagine the consequences of Ms Waters' proposal. What would happen when the vast oil industry infrastructure needed updating? Government-controlled prices would be increased arbitrarily --without competitive pressure, or taxes would increase, or the infrastructure would not be updated. Politicians, dependent upon votes for their power, would be most reluctant to increase prices, or taxes, so the infrastructure would be the likely victim. The current system is far from perfect. But it is vastly superior to any form of socialized system. The government already has its hands around the throat of the industry so tightly that the industry has not been able to meet the growing demand for oil. It is government that has prevented the construction of a new refinery for more than thirty years. It is government that prevents the oil industry from drilling offshore, or in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or in the oil sands of North Dakota and Minnesota, or anywhere else. When government even thinks about taking control of the source of production -- as in "socialized" oil industry, it reeks of socialism -- which is still a dirty word. --- Henry Lamb is the Chairman of Sovereignty International , and founder of the Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO). -------------------- Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA. >> Back -- Page 1 2
Current rating:
|
|
5.0 out of 5.0 (19 total votes)
|
|
|
| |||
 | |||
| |||
|
