My car pool companion put off buying gasoline on Tuesday so he could get home earlier. His local station had regular unleaded at $2.69.9. When he went to fill up on Wednesday morning, the price had risen to $2.89.9. When we left work on Wednesday, we passed two Mobil stations within a block of each other, one with regular unleaded at $2.99.9 and the other at $3.49.9. By the time my companion got to his neighborhood, his local station was charging $3.09.9. I better fill up this evening before the prices hit the $4.00 mark.
We pay about fifty cents a gallon in state and federal gasoline taxes in New York, so our retail price in the northern burbs is running about $2.50 to $3.00. The stations make about a dime a gallon, and I reckon wholesale prices are headed toward $3.00 as well.
My car pool companion and I live about 45 miles from work, and gas prices matter to us, so much so that we car pool. He has a brood of mewling children to feed, and petroleum product price increases really hit him hard.
Although I have regaled him with my libertarian rants during our commutes for 18 months and have seen him lose a lot of faith in government (he has gone from pro to anti on the war, for example), I have been appalled to hear him clamor for the government to "do something" about gas prices. Among his proposals: government run oil wells and refineries in wilderness areas, price controls, lifting all environmental rules on refineries, having government create fuel efficient hybrid vehicles, and nationalization of the oil industry.
I am apparently a miserable failure as an advocate of libertarianism. I point out that much of the problem has been created by government meddling, and while my companion agrees that this is so, he still thinks that the solution is more government! It is hard not to give up on the guy.
Now the chaos in New Orleans is used by my statist conspecifics as support for the necessity of government. This is what will happen to all of us if government is reduced or eliminated, they say. Looting and crime will be rampant. I point out that this has happened despite, and in a real sense because of, massive government, that private charities are responding well while the government agencies fiddle around, and that the situation is not at all normal. A lot of the "looting" is understandable foraging for supplies and subsistence, and a few real criminals seem to be taking advantage of the situation and vulnerable people. I wish people would stop using the word "anarchy" to describe the emergency.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You write: ... I have regaled him with my libertarian rants during our commutes for 18 months and have seen him lose a lot of faith in government ...
And leading the next paragraph after that, you say, I am apparently a miserable failure as an advocate of libertarianism. I point out that much of the problem has been created by government meddling, and while my companion agrees that this is so, he still thinks that the solution is more government!
Obviously you've had some positive impact upon the chap. I wouldn't call you a "miserable failure" at all. Rather, I think your conspecific is at a crossroads of sorts, and is unable or unwilling to let go of some sacred beliefs -- to wit, the idea that some "controlling hand" (viz., the state) is necessary to fix problems, especially really big ones. (I'd say that's the burr that hangs many minarchists on to the state as well.)
It's a very tough realization for many people -- especially those who never had anyone to help them think for themselves or be a positive role model during their youths -- that the current state system doesn't work. It can be terribly upsetting to even confront the idea that the state itself is the problem, rather than the particulars of the current slate of so-called rulers.
So, please don't be discouraged. And don't give up! It may require a more deft touch now that he's partway there, but you may yet help him create a fully-functioning human ...
>>Rather, I think your conspecific is at a crossroads of sorts, and is unable or unwilling to let go of some sacred beliefs...
...It can be terribly upsetting to even confront the idea that the state itself is the problem, rather than the particulars of the current slate of so-called rulers.<<
I never thought of it this way, but the Stockholm Syndrome is really more prevalent than we ever imagined!
Post a Comment