Ban Petrol Subsidies & make Petrol repay subsidies and other costs back to 1950

Discussion in 'General' started by 101101, Apr 29, 2018.

To remove this ad click here.

  1. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Petrol likely couldn't survive a single quarter without its massive state subsidies. Still, go back to 1950 because that is roughly the point where petro fuel energy became indefensible and should have ended with subsidies being cut to 0 with a quick ramp down.

    In the US the bill could be as follows for repayment:

    Figure petrol subsidies back to 1950 at .5 to .25% of the Federal Budget per year- pay in adjusted dollars. Probably with interest in today's dollars is 64 trillion.

    Also make them pay for all the bailouts defacto or otherwise and lost opportunity costs.

    Patent suppression law - aimed at stopping tech that could disrupt petrol bilking
    Korean War
    Mosaedgh Coup in Iran
    Vietnam War
    Pegging dollar to petrol or petrol dollar creation
    Oil Embargo- a coup against the US
    Ouster of Carter (learning of the embargo coup he nationalized US oil profit for a decade- hence his ouster)
    Chrysler bailout
    Iran Contra
    Iraq 1
    Bush/Cheny Selection and secret energy policy meetings
    Theft of 2 trillon from treasury also missing DOD monies
    Iran II
    Liquidation of private pensions and attack on social security
    Holding hostage public pensions with stranded petrol assets and derivatives- blind insurance of that junk debt.
    Petrol derivative induced financial collapse and 20 trillion in TARP
    Budget Sequestration process
    Bailout of GM & FCA
    Additional 500 billion a year added to US defense budget- just more petrol subsidy welfare
    Trump selection
    Attempts to gut EPA standards and restart Key Stone disaster
    Trump Tariffs

    Minimum this would be another 64 trillion but the loss of life means maximum guesses need to be used because each life has incalculable costs.

    Also need to make them to pay for externality costs including parts of NY and NJ underwater, and for huge spike in national crime from lead in the gas (lead largely US specific and strongest social impact known) the costs include a reasonable estimate of the forward externalities 70 years into the future.

    Rough guess might be double the above or 128 trillion trillion.

    Also need to make them pay the interest on these funds since 1950, but figure that's already included- say its a 264 trillion dollar bill.

    But there is another way to look at this. Let us say that the economy back to 1950 was steady state. Let us also use today's dollars which in repayment would be inflation adjusted upward but due immediately.

    My guess is petrol took up about 14% of the global economy whereas it should have taken up less than 1%. So say 13% of a global economy that in real money currently is about 100 trillion dollars a year. So 13 trillion a year times 70 years so about 910 trillion due immediately globally. US would be about .25% of that (letting the US industry off easy) or about 227 trillion for the US industry. But take the higher of the two estimates because of loss of life. That bill should be assessed immediately in a way that cuts through corporate veils, and breaches trusts and other protections but is aimed entirely at the top 1% because these choices were unnecessary and were about killing the America Democracy and power sharing globally and to benefit this group. Also the global petrol immediate repayment would be 1000 trillion. I'd be in favor of immediate confiscation and using it to switch to green energy and repair damage, they don't have this much money but let it be undischargeable for the next 70 years against any of these entities.

    This isn't like Versailles 2 this is corrective and dissuasive and a means to recover the resources needed for the challenge. Also, it addresses one of the most disgusting things about petrol fuel energy which was that even after 1950 where the economics of petrol could only get increasingly negative and destabilizing we never nationalized it and this held despite its imaginary profit as pure subsidy always being a pure redistribution of wealth from the bottom from the top. We should have run this at cost and not used it to allow the useless rich to tax everyone. We did say some stuff was a reserves but we never said here's a nickel's finder's fee now go away like we should have.
  2. To remove this ad click here.

Share This Page