We have met the 1%, and he is us

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

In explanation of my title, I fear I’ll have to go on a bit of a digression. Let me tell three stories, about people in three different parts of our amazing planet.

STORY THE FIRST: In my early thirties, about forty years ago now, through a series of misunderstandings and coincidences I spent some time as the first mate on a sailboat in the Philippines. At one point we spent a couple months anchored up offshore from the Manila Yacht Club while we were getting some boat repairs done. As befits a young man with more testosterone than sagacity, I spent the evenings in the dives and nightclubs in the local red-light district. Not paying for the favors of the ladies of the evening, you understand, that always seemed creepy to me. Just drinking and having a good time. One of the bars had a piano. It also had what they euphemistically called “hostesses”, who I was told could be very welcoming and most hospitable in one of the upstairs rooms for a small donation to a good cause …

It became my habit that each evening after work, I would go ashore. I’d walk the six blocks or so over to the bar and play the piano for a few hours, and talk to the “hostesses” and the bartender, and watch the evening go by. After a while, I was just another fixture in the bar, I was the piano man. People coming in thought I was just part of the floor show, and I was. The management liked having me play, so they paid me … in free drinks and bar food, which was more than welcome.

And being the piano man in a “hospitality house”, isn’t that every musician’s dream of heaven?

In any case, I got to be friends with the bartenders, and with the “hostesses”, and they would tell me their stories. One of the women working there was a “hostess” named Helena. She and I got to be good friends. We were never lovers, although I wouldn’t have minded one bit. We just hung out together and had a good time in the bar, singing songs, telling stories. Sometimes on the weekends we would meet and wander around the city and she would explain to me the local customs, tell me what was going on. She taught me just enough Tagalog to get in trouble. It was great.

Figure 1. Slums in Manila

During this time, Helena kept telling me that I was rich. I always laughed and said no, no, in America I was a very poor man. And that was true—I was an itinerant sailor and fisherman and a boat bum. She just laughed back at me. But she never asked me for anything, not for one penny, not for one gift. Well, that’s not quite true. She asked me for cigarettes for her father. So I kept her old man in smokes. I figured it was the least I could do. She had her pride.

One other thing she wouldn’t do. I kept asking her to invite me over to the place where she lived. But she always refused. I wouldn’t like it, she said with her impish crooked smile. So one afternoon I decided I’d just go over there on my own. I got her address from one of the bartenders. He advised me against visiting there, saying it was in a bad section of town. I said okay. I was young. I was foolish. What did I know?

When I told the taxi driver where I was going, he turned around in his seat and looked at me. “Are you sure you want to go there”, he asked? “Yeah I’m sure”, I said with more certainty than I felt. “OK”, he said, “but you gotta pay me the money now, I’m not waiting around once we get there” … I gave him the money and off we went.

Helena’s place turned out to be located in a shantytown covering an entire city block. The buildings had been demolished at some point in the past and then abandoned. An entire community had sprung up there over the years. As soon as I got out of the taxi, the driver sped away. I turned around and was confronted by the most astounding warren of structures that I had ever seen.

Every possible building material was on display. Concrete blocks, short sticks of wood, old highway signs, flattened out tin cans, cardboard of every color and description, car doors and windows, random bits of glass, hunks of corrugated iron, shipping pallets, foam from appliance boxes. And this potpourri of materials was all strapped and held and cajoled into staying together by a motley assortment of rusty nails, bits of wire, rubber straps, pieces of leather, sections of vine, lengths of duct tape, strips of cloth, the variety of fasteners was endless. There were buildings on top of buildings added onto buildings built underneath buildings.

I asked the first person I came to where Helena lived. He gave me a series of instructions that, as near as I could understand, included obscure directives like “go over that direction except stay this side” and “don’t go under the third walkway, go where the man is selling balut” and “be careful to avoid the other opening”. All of these directions were delivered in what to a casual passerby would have passed for English, but on closer examination appeared to have been assembled from random phrases culled from instruction manuals.

I thanked the man and wandered off in the general direction he had indicated. I stopped at intervals to get new sets of partially intelligible instructions from random strangers. These led me through and over and into more of the 3-D maze. The way to her house went by means of a bizarre collection of passageways that were neither streets nor alleys. I could not tell public from private areas. Eyes looked out of every opening. I knew that I could not find my way back out without a guide. The passageway wandered over and around structures, at points seemingly going through people’s back yards with life in full swing. At other points, the way passed along a ditch running foul sewage, complete with a strange assortment of floating objects that did not bear close inspection. After accidentally looking at one particular piece of flotsam, I repented and quickly switched to carefully looking at the other side of the path, and I eschewed further reckless eyeballing until I left that ditch far behind.

Now, people mistake the Philippines for a nation. In reality, it is much more like a really big family with a bunch of kinda strange relatives. Not bad, just strange. And of course, on this city block of houses-in-wonderland, everybody knew everybody. The nature of communications in the area was such that by the time that the kindness of strangers had brought me to where Helena lived, she had heard the news already and had gotten spruced up and was prepared to meet me at the door. She invited me into what she explained was her aunt’s house. She had a room in the back. She offered to show it to me.

We stepped inside her room. Of course, we could not close the door, that was not proper … nor all that practical given the miniature size of the room. But it wouldn’t have made much difference, there was no privacy. You could hear everything everywhere, the walls were paper-thin. And I suppose that shouldn’t have been surprising, because one wall was actually made of paper, but I was surprised by that detail nonetheless. I noted in passing that the paper wall was made up of pasted together advertising posters for Hindi Bollywood movies, lending a pleasant, almost carnival atmosphere to the place.

Her room was tiny. A small sleeping pallet took up almost all of the available floor space. Inside the room were all of Helena’s worldly belongings. They consisted of a small wooden box which contained a few dresses and blouses and undergarments, and another smaller wooden box which contained a few items of makeup, a mirror, and some little trinkets and costume jewelry that obviously were precious to her. Other than that, there was one pair of shoes, and a cross and a picture of Jesus on the wall. Oh, there was the cloth pallet on which she slept, but that scrap of sewn-together rags likely belonged to her auntie. And that was the sum total of her possessions, all contained in a minuscule room with one wall made of paper …

That was it … that was all that she owned. A few dresses and a picture of Jesus. Now I understood why she thought I was rich. Because by her terms, I most assuredly was rich. I was incredibly wealthy in her world.

I talked with her a while there in the house, and with her aunt. Her uncle was out working. Her aunt had a small sewing business in her house. Life was not bad, life was not good, life was just life. Helena didn’t like her work, but that was the only job she could find, she had no education and no skills. And it paid the bills. Helena translated, her aunt spoke only Tagalog. We laughed some. They had a roof over their heads, albeit one of flattened tin cans laid as shingles. They had each other. We watched the almost-liquid warmth of the Manila gloaming slowly pouring over the city, and we soaked in the last rays of the day.

After while, Helena showed me how to get back to the street, and found me a taxi. I wouldn’t have been able to find the street without her, and no taxi would have stopped for me there at dusk, but they knew Helena. She left me there, she had to go back and get changed and get to work. I said I was going back to the ship, I’d see her later that evening, play some piano.

In the taxi, on my way back to the ship, I reflected on how incredibly wealthy I actually was. I finally realized, with some embarrassment, why she had laughed so heartily when I was so foolish and naive as to claim that I was poor. The only remaining mystery to me was how her laughter at my blindness had been so free of even the slightest hint of reproach for my colossal bumbling ignorance.

STORY THE SECOND: Fast forward five years. I’m working in sub-Saharan Africa, in Senegal. My workmate and I are in some godforsaken village out near the Kaolack salt flats. A 3-D relief map of the turf would look like a flat sheet of paper—it’s the land god stepped on. We get invited to dinner by some farmer, and by custom, we cannot refuse. He lives in the proverbial mud hut, with his wife, a scad of kids, a wooden planting stick, a wooden mortar and pestle for grinding grain, a three-rock firepit out back for cooking, a leaky roof, and not much else.

Having grown up on a ranch, I automatically note when we get there that he has two scrawny chickens wandering the yard. When we go into the house, he confers for a moment with his wife. She disappears. I hear squawking. I realize the man now has one scrawny chicken wandering the yard. The farmer and my associate and I drink sickly sweet tea and talk about the doings in the area. After a while, his wife brings in the chicken cooked up all nice, and offers it to us, the honored guests. The kids watch from the corners of the room.

But I can’t eat that damned bird. I can’t do it. I can’t bear the eyes of the kids. Don’t misunderstand me. It’s not like they are watching me with reproach in their eyes or anything, that wasn’t the problem at all. The thing I can’t bear is that the kids can’t take their eyes off of the chicken. Their eyes caress it. As the poet said, they watch that bird “as one who hath been stunned and is of sense forlorn”. They are blind to everything else. I can’t take it.

Plus I am shamed by the easy generosity of the man and his wife. They have nothing, and yet he offers us half of what they have without missing a beat. I am reminded of Rabelais’ will: “I have nothing, I owe a great deal, and the rest I leave to the poor”. The farmer’s wife has cooked and served the chicken, both of them temporarily appropriating the easy air of people who have hundreds of chickens, people who have chicken for dinner every night. My heart hangs, suspended. I hear the lone remaining chicken complaining outside.

So I trot out my old threadbare excuse from Mexico, and I blame my much-maligned liver. In Mexico, they blame their liver for everything. I have found it’s quite a useful excuse—over the years my liver has cheerfully soaked up the blame for a host of my idiosyncrasies. So I take one small bite for form’s sake, and then (in French, it being Senegal) I compliment the woman and the man on the chicken. I tell them the doctor has said that chicken is bad for my liver,  le médecin has said that le poulet is downright mauvais for my greatly-abused old foie, so as much as I liked the delicious flavor, and as much as I was deeply grateful for the honor they were offering me, I say I’m terribly sorry but I can’t possibly eat any more, they’ll just have to finish it off for me. And I tuck into the rest of the meal, the part that my liver doesn’t mind, to prove my bonafides.

They make the appropriate noises of disappointment that I’m not eating, and they have the grace not to look overjoyed. The children’s eyes are full of expectation. They look at that poor scrawny little representative of the great avian nation with unconcealed longing. The wife takes the plate into the back. In contrast to their earlier raucous play, the children vanish soundlessly on bare feet along with her. It seems that none of them dare to make a sound in case the mirage all disappears, like Cinderella after midnight. Not the time to get mom mad …

I avert my eyes from the disappearing chicken and the children. I look at the man and my workmate. We lapse into small-talk with no reference at all to poultry, or to children, chatting light-heartedly as though nothing meaningful had just occurred.

Thinking on it now, I consider how many times I’ve bought some random chicken in the supermarket on a whim, and how little it represents to me. I could buy fifty chickens if I chose, five hundred if need be. And I think about what that one scrawny chicken meant to that family.

STORY THE THIRD: Fast forward another five years, to when I lived on an atoll in the Solomon Islands, a remote bunch of tropical islands in the South Pacific north of Australia. Because I ran a shipyard, I met lots of yachties who were on boats sailing through the Solomons. Often they would complain to me about the high prices being asked by the islanders for their beautiful wood carvings. After the first few complaints, I developed the following analogy which I used over and over.

I told the yachties, imagine that one day an alien spaceship lands in your front yard. It is made out of solid gold, and it is encrusted with rubies, diamonds, sapphires, and emeralds. The alien steps out of the spaceship. He is dressed in cloth picked out in gold and silver threads, and his shoes have platinum buckles and diamonds everywhere, including on the soles … he comes up to you, and through his universal vocoder he says, “I say, old fellow, I rather fancy that old pickup truck of yours. How much money would it take to convince you to part with it?”. 

Now, you know the old truck is worth maybe a hundred dollars, and that’s on a good day with a following wind. And no one can predict the future, but you are kinda sure that this opportunity will never come again … which means the real question is, would you tell the diamond-studded alien “Oh, I could be persuaded to let it go for a million dollars, it’s kinda precious to me”, or would you only say “a hundred thousand dollars”?

Seriously, I’d tell the yachties, you get a one-time chance like that, you have to take your shot. You have to ask for the moon. Might not get it, but why not ask?

Next, consider the average Solomon Islander, I would tell the yachties. The average guy in some outer island village might only see a hundred Solomon dollars in cash all year, that’s thirty bucks US. I said to the yachtie, your watch is worth thirty dollars US. Your yachting shorts set you back forty-five, the cool sunglasses were seventy-five dollars, the Izod polo shirt was fifty-five, the belt was thirty bucks. Your stylish yachting cap was sixty bucks. The nice Sperry Topsider boat shoes were seventy-five dollars. Not counting your socks or your skivvies or your jewelry,  just what you are wearing alone is worth about what cash the average outer islander might make in ten or twelve years. It’s worth a decade of his labor, and that’s merely what you are wearing as you pass through his world.  That doesn’t count the cash in your pocket, or the credit cards in your pocket. It doesn’t count the value of the rest of your wardrobe. And we haven’t even gotten to the money you might have in the bank or your other assets …

So yes, when you sail up to the village in a yacht and ask how much something costs, they will ask a hundred dollars Solomon, or three hundred dollars, who knows? Because to them, you’re an alien wearing gold cloth, with diamonds on the soles of your shoes. They’d be mad not to ask top dollar for their carvings.

And I told the yachties, you know what? Given both that huge disparity in net worth between you and the woodcarver, and the world-class quality of the woodcarving in the Solomons, you’d be mad not to pay top dollar for whatever carvings catch your fancy.

============ END OF THE THREE STORIES =============

Now, I have told these three tales in order to provide a context for a couple of quotes. The context that I am providing is that there is an almost inconceivable distance from the top of the heap to the bottom of the heap. The top of the heap is the 1%, not of the US, but of the global population. That 1% is made up of the people like you and me and the folks who read this, folks who live in the western world, the top few percent of the global population who enjoy the full benefits of development, the winners on the planet. It’s a long, long way from where we stand down to the bottom of the heap, that dark and somewhat mysterious place we don’t like to think about where far too many of the planet’s people eke out a living on a dollar or three a day, and we wonder how on earth they can do so. To them, we are as unknown and distant as aliens in golden jeweled spaceships with diamonds on the soles of our shoes. I offer the stories to give you some idea of the constraints on those people’s lives, and the contrasts between their lives and ours.

Those people have no slack. They have no extra room in their budgets. They have no ability to absorb increases in their cost of living, particularly their energy spending. They have no credit cards, no credit, and almost no assets. They have no health insurance. They are not prepared for emergencies. They have no money in the bank. They have no reserve, no cushion, no extra clothing, no stored food in the basement, no basement for that matter, no fat around their waist, no backups, no extras of any description. They are not ready for a hike in the price of energy or anything else. They have damn well nothing—a wooden digging stick, a spare dress, a picture of Jesus, a paper wall, a scrawny chicken, a bowl of millet.

It is in that context, the context that acknowledges that about half the world, three billion people, live on less than three dollars a day (2005 PPP),  that I bring up the following two quotes:

 “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the [US] price of gasoline to the levels in Europe”

and

“Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Here’s my problem with these brilliant plans. Regardless of whatever hypothetical possible future benefit they might or might not bring in fifty years, right here and now in the present they are absolutely devastating to the poor.

The US Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu, the author of the first quote, wouldn’t have his commute to work imperiled if US gasoline prices were to rise to $8/gallon and thus reach the levels in Europe. He can buy all the gasoline he wants for any purpose. But if you are a poor single mom with a couple of kids and a clapped-out car that gets you to work and back and drinks gasoline faster than your good-for-nothing ex-husband drank whiskey before he left, for you a doubling of the gas prices means the kids eat less or something else goes by the board, because you have to get to work. It’s not optional.

And if the cost of electricity for the US and the White House “skyrockets”, Obama won’t be sleeping cold in the winter. Nor will I, for that matter. That would be the poor renter in upstate New York who can’t afford to turn on the electric heater.

The difference between rich and poor, between developed and developing, is the availability of inexpensive energy. A kilowatt-hour of electricity is the same amount of energy as a hard day’s labor by an adult. We can buy that for fifteen cents. We’re rich because we have (or at least had) access to the hardworking servants of inexpensive energy. We have inexpensive electrical and mechanical slaves to do our work for us.

This is particularly important for the poor. The poorer you are, the larger a percentage of your budget goes to energy-intensive things like transportation and heat and electricity. If you double the price of energy, everyone is poorer, but the poor take it the hardest. Causing an increase in energy prices for any reason is the most regressive tax imaginable. At the bottom of the pile people make a buck a day and pay fifty cents a kilowatt-hour for electricity … there’s no give down there at the bottom of the heap, no room for doubling the price of gasoline to European levels, no space for electric prices to skyrocket.

So I find it both reprehensible and incomprehensible when those of us who actually are in the 1% of the global 1%, like President Obama and Secretary Chu, blithely talk of doubling the price of gasoline and sending the cost of electricity skyrocketing as though there were no negative results from that; as though it wouldn’t cause widespread suffering; as though cheap energy weren’t the best friend of the poor.

What Chu and Obama propose are crazy plans. They are ivory-tower fantasies of people who are totally out of touch with the realities faced by the poor of the world, whether inside the US or out. Now please, I’m not making this political. There are people on both sides of the aisle who have signed on to the crazy idea that we should raise energy prices.

When I was a kid, everyone was quite clear that inexpensive energy was the key to a fairly boundless future. Our schoolbooks told of the Tennessee Valley project, and how it lit up the whole region, to everyone’s benefit. In particular, electricity was seen, and rightly so, as the savior of the rural poor. How did we lose that? Just how and when did deliberately making energy more and more expensive become a good thing?

I don’t buy that line of talk, not for one minute. Expensive energy is not a good thing for anyone, wealthy or poor. And in particular, more expensive energy condemns the poor to lives of increased misery and privation.

As far as I know, other than the completely overblown “peak oil” fears, about the only argument raised against the manifold benefits of inexpensive energy is the claim that increasing CO2 will lead to some fancied future Thermageddon™ fifty years from now. I have seen no actual evidence that such might be the case, just shonky computer model results. And even if CO2 were to lead to a temperature rise, we have no evidence that it will be harmful overall. According to the Berkeley Earth data, we’ve seen a 2°C land temperature rise in the last two centuries with absolutely no major temperature-related ill effects that I am aware of, and in fact, generally beneficial outcomes. Longer growing seasons. More ice-free days in the northern ports. I don’t see any catastrophes in that historical warming. Despite the historical warming, there is no sign of any historical increase in weather extremes of any kind. Given two degrees C of historical warming with no increase in extreme events or catastrophes, why should I expect such an increase in some hypothetical future warming?

So I’m sorry, but I am totally unwilling to trade inexpensive energy today, which is the real actual salvation of the poor today, for some imagined possible slight reduction in the temperature fifty years from now. That is one of the worst trades that I can imagine, exchanging current suffering for a promise of a slight reduction in temperatures in the year 2050.

Finally, for those who think that these quotes and ideas of Chu and Obama only affect the US, nothing could be further from the truth. Sadly, the policies are being exported and imposed, both by force and by persuasion, on the poorer countries of the world. To take just one example, pressure on the World Bank from the western countries and NGOs is denying financing to coal-fired plants in countries like India with coal resources. So the poor of India are denied inexpensive coal-fired electricity, they end up paying the price for the western one-percenters’ guilt and fear ridden fantasies about what might happen fifty years in the misty future.

Heck, even if the dreaded carbon menace were real, raising the price on fossil fuels would be the last way on earth I’d choose to fight it. Like I said … big current pain for small future maybes, that’s a lousy trade. Now, I don’t think CO2 is worth fighting. But if you do, I implore you, first do no harm—any rise in energy prices harms the poor. If you want to fight CO2, there are other ways.

w.

[UPDATE: a reader has pointed out that I am not describing the poorest of the poor, and he is quite correct. Helena had her job. The African farmer had a house and land, and not to mention originally two, but lately only one, chicken. The people in the Solomons had their bush gardens and the bountiful ocean.

The poorest of the poor have none of these things. They are a whole level below the people I talk about. You don’t want to consider where they sleep or what they eat. And yes, they are hit by rising energy prices like everyone else. -w.]

5 19 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

454 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 13, 2013 6:59 am

The poor people you describe so beautifully would be greatly advantaged by a clean energy world. The oil and chemicals putrifying their waters would be gone. They would be able to access the same sun, wind and electromagnetic wave power as everyone else, once whatever energy harvesting technologies were in place. If you really wanted to level the playing field on this planet, you would be pursuing greener, cleaner technologies for all the planet. As it is now, all 100% of us are forced to slave away at least some percentage of our time, the poor much greater, to buy our paltry share of oil and gas, extracted from the ground at increasingly enormous costs. I cannot fathom thatt you cannot see this. I sadly conclude that you do, but secretly harbor fears that the transition to clean energy will somehow disadvantage you personally. I hope I am wrong, that instead you are in transition and will come to see that what is right for the world in the long run is what’s right for all of us, right now. We simply must all start heading in the right direction!

John West
January 13, 2013 7:01 am

Growing up spending summers at my grandmother’s house in East Tennessee where many of my extended family members had outdoor “facilities” and TVA was synonymous with progress even if it meant flooding a town (Butler, TN), I thought I knew what poor was. Then I was sent to Nogales, Mexico to setup and train the locals on a plating operation and its associated wastewater treatment system. Prior to that the only country outside the US I had been to was Canada, essentially the same as the US. Nogales exposed me to a poor I had never seen. Don’t get me wrong, I loved Nogales and would go back in a heartbeat, the people were friendly and the food was extraordinary. The shanty slums were probably a little better than those Willis is describing as at least Nogales has the benefit of bordering the US and access to our refuse. Nevertheless, I came back with a whole new perspective and appreciation for being in the 1%.
Willis: You’ve been on quite a roll here lately and this one in particular resonates with my soul, thank you.

bobbyv
January 13, 2013 7:03 am

Re Joe Grappa on too many people:
Any economist worth his salt will tell you the more minds working to create solutions, the better off the world will be. Lack of resources do not create poverty, lack of freedom does.

Editor
January 13, 2013 7:05 am

Masterfully done–once again, Willis.

Peter Miller
January 13, 2013 7:06 am

I have two comments:
1. I am lucky – if that is right word word to have had similar experiences in far flung parts of the world, and
2. Sarc on – it is clear from their ‘research’ that Gore, Hansen and Mann are sure to have had similar experiences in just how the real world works – Sarc off.

Barry Sheridan
January 13, 2013 7:08 am

Excellent points. The whole of the world’s population needs access to affordable electricity sourced from methods that contribute as little as possible to the our global footprint. That is nuclear, if not via current Light Water Reactors then via internationally developed techniques such as the Pebble Bed Reactor or the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. Why are we hesitating?

MikeR
January 13, 2013 7:10 am

Great article

DirkH
January 13, 2013 7:15 am

Joe Grappa says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:02 am
“Too many people. Get the population down to 500 million or a billion or so and everyone would live like a king.”
It is funny that Malthusians like you don’t give any logical explanation why that should increase the wealth of the poor.
Since 1984 the population of Ethiopia has doubled while the GDP per capita has halfed. The West uses Ethiopia as dumping ground for excess harvests to avoid another famine on Western TV screens.
The Ethiopian government regulates the price that local farmers can take for selling excess harvest. The farmers have therefore no economic incentive to produce more than their families need.
Reducing the Ethiopian population back to where it was in 1984 would not make the politicians smarter. But Malthusians continue maintaining that everything would become better if only people died.
A reduction in population would do nothing to turn Malthusians into intelligent people.

January 13, 2013 7:15 am

In a similar vein, a couple of years back I spent some time in Romania, building bits of things for a local clinic. I was originally meant to be building or repairing houses for the local Roma but that never happened (no idea why) so instead it was building a fence at a clinic that provided charitable healthcare to Roma who’d had their identity documents seized by the state. Without ID they couldn’t get healthcare, and being Roma (and thus poor as dirt) they couldn’t afford to buy any, nor could they get work without their ID. And they couldn’t get their ID back without proof of income.
What I remember more than anything isn’t the poverty or even the way they welcomed us into their lives and fed us like kings. It was the aftermath. The reaction I had when I got home. I looked at my little apartment that I’d considered to be a tiny cage and I think I broke down crying. I was emotionally wrecked for week afterwards (you might remember, Willis, I had a bit of a yell at you over something. I’m sorry for that), and very angry – particularly at the way so many people in the west consider themselves to be oppressed and in the worst possible situation even though they have everything. My particular bug-bear at the time was the hijacking of anti-bullying campaigns by special-interest groups and I got really, really upset when homosexuals in the US were claimed to be in a worse position than the Roma in Romania. Or the Guarani in Paraguay and Brazil.
So many who “fight” for their latest trendy cause simply have no idea what the world is like. They pay lip-service to saving the world and improving the lives of others and make blog posts about their radical act of wearing purple or not talking for a day or wearing some damn ribbon to show “solidarity” with people on the other side of the planet who won’t see any benefit whatsoever from their “sacrifice”. Then they go off to “save the world” from the scourge of cheap energy and reliable food sources.
See, I’m getting angry again now just thinking about it, years later. Maybe I should cut back on the caffeine.

aharris
January 13, 2013 7:16 am

Here in the US, you won’t see the impacts on the poor as much because the government will attempt to increase spending on assistance programs to cover up and cushion the impacts their increase in energy costs would otherwise have on the poor as much as possible. The people who will really feel it are the ones who are barely hanging on to financial independence as it is. The middle class will shrink because they’ll be hit on all sides by the rising costs and by increasing taxes.
Eventually, the government won’t be able to hide the impacts from theAmerican “poor,” but those days haven’t quite gotten here yet.

Bruce Cobb
January 13, 2013 7:18 am

AndyL says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:10 am
on the price of fuel in US and Europe.
Most of the price of fuel in Europe is tax (roughly 70%). If there is higher tax on fuel in US, it will be the rich part of the world that pays, not the poor in your stories. As a result global demand would go down, as would probably the price of fuel in the rest of the world.
By your ‘gold encrusted space ship’ analogy, shouldn’t the rich world pay more for this asset?
There’s lots more to this debate than that, but the idea that the price of fuel in the US should go up is not necessarily wrong purely on the basis of the impact on the world’s poorest people.

I don’t believe that you’ve thought that through, Andy. Aside from the fact that what you suggest borders on some type of world communism, the unintended consequences are numerous, and actually wouldn’t even have the effect you suggest. The overall result of raising fuel costs is that you hurt businesses, forcing them to either shut down or move operations elsewhere. So, you’ve lowered demand in the “rich” country, but raised it elsewhere, probably someplace like China or any number of developing countries. In addition, by injuring the rich economy, you lower living standards there, particularly those in the middle class who’ve been badly battered already, as well as the poor. It has been shown countless times that the richer a country is, the better able they are to attend to (real) environmental concerns, as well as to be able to offer financial aid to poor countries, perhaps so that they can afford to have inexpensive electricity.
No, raising fuel prices is never a good idea, for whatever reason.

January 13, 2013 7:20 am

Quoting Willis:
“The difference between rich and poor, between developed and developing, is the availability of inexpensive energy. A kilowatt-hour is the same amount of work as a hard days labor by an adult. We’re rich because we have (or at least had) access to the hardworking servants of inexpensive energy. We have inexpensive electrical and mechanical slaves to do our work for us.”
When I first visited Camigin Island and stayed a week in one of the tiny one room cottages by the ocean shore where it was HOT and HUMID ohh it was something to bear for a man who lives in Eastern Washington dry desert heat back at home where it is bearable.
The electric supply in Leyte province is jerry rigged and erratic where it can vanish for a while and come back when you least expect it because there is no one telling anyone when it will come back on because it is a way of life there and they just go on about their business as if it was normal.
Several times I have visited the Philippines and each time I am expected to pay the cost for a party as I woo a nice Leyte woman there because I am “Rich” and they want to be around me for that reason but they are always nice about it and prove to be pleasant company.They cooked all the food and discovered that they cook darn good pizza,chicken and of course crab and they see that I like eating them and they are so happy about it which is quite visible in front of me.
I recall riding around the Island of Camiguin for a day with the three of us on a small motor bike that is NOT designed for the weight it carried but the driver/owner still did it because he wanted me to see his Island and was willing to tolerate the damaging effects to his motorbike which he makes his living on.I paid for the ride and the fuel for the trip and he was happy to spend that day carrying this big American man and his girlfriend around.He even lent me the bike to carry around my future wife and climbed up the main Volcano slopes to get a wonderful view of the region but the bike takes a beating the whole time since it is really small and designed for the weight of a single Filipino running it.Fankly I wondered why it held up in all those miles as the tires made it clear there was a lot of weight on them.
A year later the owner of the bike asked if I could help pay for the repairs that was needed to sustain his meager living and of course I gladly paid it because he was very generously using his bike and time to entertain an American man who enjoyed the hospitable hosts support for my stay on the Island.
That was in 2003 and the photo’s I have of that trip will always remind me how generous the philipino people can be with strangers walking around in their world and I never felt unwanted at anytime depite being the “Rich” man around who was not asked for money or favors,for themselves.It is a sobering experience to realize how lucky I am to be in a part of the world where I can have reliable electricity all year long and my Filipino wife now knows that I am not “Rich” here as I was there because she has lived in both worlds yet prefers mine over hers when it comes to comfort and reliability.

January 13, 2013 7:21 am

papiertigre, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I’m glad to hear of those things, naturally, but beg to insist that Obummercare and the war on people everywhere – including drone murder of anyone he pleases to kill… stuff like that somehow seems more immediate and damaging to us all.
The only answer to poverty, or any of the other pressing problems of the world, is liberty and a truly free market. As long as some people have power over other people against their will, tyranny, poverty and death are the inevitable outcome.

G. P. Hanner
January 13, 2013 7:22 am

Damn, Willis. You did lived on the edge when you were a young man. My own recollections of the Philippines are not so daring. And I never even considered venturing into the shanty towns, although a scant few colleagues kinda sorta explored the Filipino outback around Angeles City. My closest brush with the low down of the Philippines came when the USAF sent me to Snake School.
I agree with you completely regarding the willful ignorance — and arrogance — of those who consider themselves to be the intellectually superior elite of our society. Your quotes from Chu and Obama brought back recollections of the Great Depression and the misguided efforts to raise prices in the face of economic collapse. One thing that has always stuck in my mind is the destruction of food and commodities ordered by then Secretary of Agriculture, Henry Wallace, while a substantial segment of the US population was going hungry and barely clothed. All this was done with the aim of raising the prices of food and commodities. It was all well-intentioned, of course, so it was OK. The only thing that distinguishes it from the actions of Stalin in places like Ukraine is that Stalin did it with malice.
I blame our education system first and foremost. Over the past 50 years it has morphed from education to indoctrination. And since it is the Left that dominates the education system the indoctrination inevitably consists of Leftist ideals. At least two generations have been contaminated with that kind of nonsense. Not all, of course, but enough to disrupt society and make significant contributions to the economic and cultural decline of the USA.
How do we overcome the corruption of the two youngest generations?

DirkH
January 13, 2013 7:24 am

Pat Ravasio says:
January 13, 2013 at 6:59 am
“They would be able to access the same sun, wind and electromagnetic wave power as everyone else, once whatever energy harvesting technologies were in place.”
What is “electromagnetic wave power” and how does one “harvest” it?
” If you really wanted to level the playing field on this planet, you would be pursuing greener, cleaner technologies for all the planet. As it is now, all 100% of us are forced to slave away at least some percentage of our time, the poor much greater, to buy our paltry share of oil and gas, extracted from the ground at increasingly enormous costs.”
Pat, I live in Germany at the very vanguard of new renewable technology that already produces 1.5% of our primary energy consumption. That means that I am forced to slave away for about 250 EUR/year MORE than without said renewable energy because it is WAY MORE EXPENSIVE than oil and gas. (Germany forces electricity ratepayers to cough up 20 bn EUR a year to subsidize wind + solar. 20 bn EUR, for you, is 26 bn USD)
There is obviously no way in hell the poorest could cough up that kind of dough. But green fanatics like you happily ignore economics. Do you think solar panels are NOT extremely energy intensive in their production? (and the electronics, and the transmission lines, and the batteries; you’ll want some if you remove fossil fuel power generators etc etc…)
Stop fantasizing about things of which you know nothing, absolutely nothing about.

S. Meyer
January 13, 2013 7:25 am

Willis, I am speechless. Who would expect to find such moving prose on a climate blog?

Polentario
January 13, 2013 7:35 am

While Wills essays have some literary quality, I agree with the critics here, e.g. Les Johnson, Papiertigre and AndyL
First his stand reminds me of Gottfrieds Benn Poem “Reisen” – about travel – you dont win new insights by mer traveling, you carry always your personal world with you.
Second: The poor need higher quality of administration, lower corruption and better infrastructure much more than cheap energy. If you look at what is going on in India at the moment with those rape cases, the poor and the middle class are profiting much more from reliable bus drivers, behaving copassengers, respect towards persons and property and secure ways to reach a work place than from lower energy cost. Les Johnsons brings it to the point – cleaning up a clinic ward is not a question of cheap energy in Nigeria, its the longing to live in a better world and respect for your fellow citizens that makes a difference.
With respect to countries with artificially high enrgy cost like Norway, Switzerland and nowadays Germany – they thrive and have made it out very decent starts relying on a working administraive bodies that delivers on promises. High energy taxes may allow to build up reliable infrastructrure but they need an atmosphere of low corruption, technical innovation and ideas being allowed into products and income.
Third if you want to see how globally the poor are making a better life, ask Roger Pielke and go for the Kaya equation. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/a_positive_path_for_meeting_the_global_climate_challenge/2329/ : The difference in public response to government actions illustrates the immutability of what Pielke calls the iron law of climate policy: <>
Calls for asceticism and sacrifice are a nonstarter. But calls for a working government to provide viable infrastructures and to foster new technologies are appropriate – and via comparing good and bad examples on the political market mankind moves forward. Eschenbach delivers a sort of political standpoint with a narrow perspective but leaves completely out that the world doesnt always share american positions on role of state, culture, sports and gun laws 😉

David Byrd
January 13, 2013 7:38 am

Some what along the same lines….George Carlin nails it here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4

John Gorter
January 13, 2013 7:39 am

Fantastic Willis!
Thanks
Ciao
John Gorter

Ed, 'Mister' Jones
January 13, 2013 7:42 am

I would love to shove this Essay up Al Gore’s Kiester.

Doug Huffman
January 13, 2013 7:43 am

Throwing away mature technology – PWR – chasing moonbeams is as foolish as alternative renewable energy.

andy hunter
January 13, 2013 7:44 am

passed to face book and twitter thank you so much and james wuwt

Polentario
January 13, 2013 7:44 am

HalloModerator – I tried to have the follwing quote of Pielke to be inserted in a different format
The difference in public response to these government actions illustrates the immutability of what I call the iron law of climate policy: When policies on emissions reductions collide with policies focused on economic growth, economic growth will win out every time. Climate policies should flow with the current of public opinion rather than against it, and efforts to sell the public on policies that will create short-term economic discomfort cannot People are willing to bear costs to reduce emissions, but they are only willing to go so far.succeed if that discomfort is perceived to be too great.

Bruce Cobb
January 13, 2013 7:48 am

Pat Ravasio says:
January 13, 2013 at 6:59 am
The poor people you describe so beautifully would be greatly advantaged by a clean energy world.
If by “greatly advantaged” you mean dead, then yes, I suppose. That is the ultimate goal of you Greenies, isn’t it? Your biggest problem seems to be that you don’t have a clue about economics, nor do you desire to even get a clue.

Doug Huffman
January 13, 2013 7:49 am

At a glance at current technology (contra science), there are no Pebble Bed Reactors or Liquid Fluoride/Molten Salt/Thorium Reactors producing power. i will be pleased to be contradicted. My good friend Rod Adams, of Adams’ Atomic Engines/Atomic Energy Insights, beat his head on the bureaucratic wall of ignorance until he could stand it no more.