If we were talking about blue jeans, I would say no. But, we're talking about oil exploration that would create thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Someone explain it to the coonass, please. I don't have the patience.
"You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)
It seems this discussion has taken a turn of which I had not intended. I did not call for the government to subsidize oil, nor manipulate the market. I simply intended that the goverment purchase rights to drill in these areas, of which in time of energy crisis or energy inflation to levels seen last year, the government could sell these rights to private oil companies who could then pump the oil under economical viable conditions. This is neither manipulation or subsidization, it is simply buying rights to drill and selling those rights at a future market value when said necessity determines.
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_sands]Oil sands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]As a result of the development of Canadian oil sands reserves, 44% of Canadian oil production in 2007 was from oil sands, with an additional 18% being heavy oil, while light oil and condensate had declined to 38% of the total. Because growth of oil sands production has exceeded declines in conventional crude oil production, Canada has become the largest supplier of oil and refined products to the United States, ahead of Saudi Arabia and Mexico.
Sounds like the technology is already developed, more so than wind and solar... the real problem is the hold the Environmental movement has on this country.
Why is it that those that see a subsidy for oil as bad, don't complain one bit about subsidies for wind, solar, or Bio-fuels?