BCT Editorial – 3/14/06

This page was last updated on March 19, 2006.

The enemy within; Editorial; Beaver County Times; March 14, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Americans’ addiction to oil and foreign goods is the real security threat

“The irony was delicious.

“On the day an Arab-owned company’s deal to run six U.S. ports went down in flames after an outburst of nativist/populist hatred and fear against it, the U.S. trade deficit set another record.”

[RWC] The author would like us to forget a previous editorial practically begged Democrats to kill the deal because it claimed Republicans couldn’t be trusted to put national security before politics. How stupid do these editorial authors think we are?

“The Associated Press reported the Commerce Department announced on Thursday that the deficit jumped to $68.5 billion in January, 5.3 percent more than in December. The main reasons for the increase, which was much higher than experts had predicted, were increasing oil prices and higher domestic demand for foreign-made consumer goods.

“Analysts said that unless demand for imported goods slows, the U.S. could produce a record annual deficit for the fifth year in a row, topping last year’s imbalance of $723.6 billion, according to The AP report.

“The massive trade deficit the United States is piling up is not some abstract number that has no relevance to our daily lives. It does. Because of our refusal to pursue alternative energy sources and to undertake meaningful energy conservation, such as increasing gasoline mileage on the vehicles we drive, Americans are sending billions of dollars overseas and getting nothing in return. Because of our spending spree on consumer goods, billions of dollars are pouring into China, Japan, India and other nations, giving them more money to invest, at home and abroad.”

[RWC] “Getting nothing in return?” The author must be confusing welfare and trade. For those billions of dollars we’re sending overseas, we’re getting energy and consumer goods.

Regarding comment about “refusal to pursue alternative energy sources and to undertake meaningful energy conservation,” I’ve noted in previous critiques this is BS. There are plenty of alternative sources of energy, but most are too expensive to displace oil and natural gas. Notable exceptions are coal and nuclear power, but the man-made global warming gang along with the rest of the “green” movement is trying to kill coal use. Regarding nuclear power, so many hurdles have been thrown up, no nuclear plants have been built in the U.S. for nearly 20 years. In the meantime, other countries are loading up on nuclear power plants.

Notably absent from the list of “alternative energy sources” were domestic oil and gas. Indeed, previous editorials have opined that increasing domestic production is a waste of time.

“One thing keeping the wolves at bay is that foreign central banks are buying up U.S. securities as a way of keeping their currencies value against the dollar to their advantage. Basically what that means is that Americans can get more bang for their buck - and Americans can’t resist a bargain, even as they go broke saving all that money.”

[RWC] Huh?

“The downside of this bargain, though, is that we are trading away our nation’s wealth and not getting much of real value in return. Eventually, the central banks that are buying up our securities are going to be able to start calling the shots. That is a real threat to national security, not some Dubai-based company running six U.S. ports.”

[RWC] People like the author seem to believe there is a finite amount of wealth, hence the “trading away our nation’s wealth” line. If we’re “trading away our nation’s wealth,” why does our gross domestic product continue to increase at a rate greater than the vast majority of the industrialized world?

This is the second editorial in three days claiming the Dubai Ports World was not “a real threat to national security.” As I noted in a previous critique, that sure wasn’t the tone of at least one previous editorial (The high road). That editorial practically begged Democrats to kill the deal.

“Nativists/populists require enemies to thrive, and they’re going after the usual suspects - unfair trade practices, especially on the part of the Chinese, and Arab oil barons - this time around.

“But the real enemy lies within. Americans are spending money to accommodate their lifestyles instead of investing it. Given the choice between buying a Chinese import or an American-made good that costs a few bucks more because the manufacturer pays its workers a decent wage, they’ll opt for the import. Attempts to increase gasoline mileage or to promote energy conservation go nowhere.”

[RWC] Here’s the translation of “decent wage:” A wage that will allow a person with absolutely no skills of economic value to support a family of four in reasonable comfort (clothing, food, housing, cell phones, two cars, cable TV, multiple TVs, et cetera).

“Attempts to increase gasoline mileage or to promote energy conservation go nowhere?” Where has the author been for the last 30+ years?

“Enjoy it while you can. The money isn’t going to last forever.”

[RWC] Remember, this is the editorial board that constantly accuses its opposition of fear mongering and employing scare tactics.