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.]
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
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.
Well Joe, we had that already in our history, even less then 500 million, but am not sure that everybody lived like a king in those times?
A wonderful piece of writing but there are still so many who are beguiled by their preconceived notions. Think people, think.
When you can drive entirely across most European countries in the distance between Ottawa and Toronto, the gas pinch isn’t as bad for Europeans. Mind you when you add the rest of the pinches from socialist governments, it becomes considerable. So far I haven’t seen anything in Canadian news about elderly folk buying used books – particularly large tomes to use for heating fuel in the winter.
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2010/01/19/letter-burning-books-to-keep-warm/
If socialist governments are not looking after the poor and particularly the elderly poor, what is their constituency? I know they call themselves conservatives and social democrats but they are all socialist these days – kill the engines of the economy and then redistribute what? Arithmetic will catch up with them before too long I would hope.
AndyL says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:10 am
Thanks, Andy. Unfortunately, it is doubtful that if the US and Europe push for more expensive fuel through cutting off of the cheap sources domestically, and through influencing such organizations as the ADB and the World Bank to cut of funding for the cheap sources around the world will see anyone escaping. It is already hitting everyone around the planet, what makes you think that won’t continue and worsen?
Finally, the gold spaceship analogy. The main reason the US and other countries have “gold spaceships” is because they have cheap energy.
Your brilliant redistribution plan is to make their cheap energy expensive, so then it will be fair to all?
Sorry, not signing on. You haven’t thought that one through. You are back on the “cheap energy is bad” bandwagon, and I’m, not buying it.
w.
lowercase fred says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:16 am
“Archaeology shows”? Bzzzt! Citation alert! Citation cleanup needed on aisle three!
w.
Brilliant article, Willis. Like you I’ve travelled and seen the “other 99%” and we – even those camping in Times Square, outside the European Central Bank and elsewhere (on social security benefits) are the 1%. I fume with rage everytime someone like the Peabody Trust or the Guardian proclaim that “children in Britain are living in poverty” because they can’t afford Nike trainers, electronic games or some other luxury item. I’ve also been ashamed by hospitality in Africa, Indonesia, the Middle East (Yes, Christian families don’t get the best paid jobs) and in other “developing” nations.
You are absolutely right. Driving the cost of fuel upward will simply destroy any hope these folk have of improving their lives in any way. Worse, it will seriously damage the lives of those who are on low wages in our own societies. Only overpaid, over guilt-ridden politicians, activists (either funded by wealthy parents or the generosity of ‘social security’ or ‘charities’ milking fear and ignorance) could or would come up with moronic suggestions like these. Only they can’t seem to connect the dots – higher fuel and energy costs drive prices for basic commodities upward – and out of reach of the poorest – the same one’s they claim to be trying to help.
Excellent examples in your stories, sadly the bleeding heart mob will no doubt respond with their usual wail of “but we HAVE to do something! It will be hard for everyone …”
Yeah, right.
Obama’s world view does not reflect any of the lessons he might have gleaned from his exposure to third world conditions in Indonesia. He is what is known as, a “Red Diaper Baby”, period!
T. G. Brown says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:49 am
Thank you kindly for pointing out that the folks that I described are not the poorest of the poor. Helena had a job. The African farmer had a plot of land. The folks in the Solomons had their bush gardens and the bountiful ocean.
The true poor, the poorest of the poor, have none of those things.
Your reminder is both accurate and timely.
w.
This commentary should be an OpEd in all news papers.
Indeed energy costs (household and transportation) rank up there with food and health care as basic needs in a civilized society. The poor should be entitled to a basic level of each of these with government aid where necessary. A nation is judged by how its poorest live.
What Willis has gotten at here is the lack of perspective that comes with being born and raised in America. Unfortunately many of our liberal/leftist friends are the worst offenders in this respect, although admittedly some are aware of the level of poverty around the globe and mistakenly believe Western societies are responsible for it. The opposite is true of course. If it weren’t for prosperous, creative, dynamic Western societies the hellholes of the world would be even worse.
Several decades ago in San Francisco I met a woman artist who told me of a trip she had taken to the Middle East some years before. She had gone to Israel and then courageously went on into Egypt as an adventure. She met a wonderful family who took her in for a week or two, which was a surprise to her since she was Jewish. They were not a poverty stricken family, they must have been middle class, because eventually they scraped the money together to visit her years later in San Francisco.
The story she related about their visit that had really opened her eyes was their reaction to going into a large American supermarket for the first time. The Egyptians had a shopping list of basic items. They wanted cooking oil. She would ask them, do you want corn oil, peanut oil, olive oil, vegetable oil, Crisco oil, etc. Her guests were overwhelmed by the choices. Each item on the list presented the same long list of choices. She said their eyes were wide with wonderment and appreciation as she took them down each aisle in the store. It really brought home to her how good we have it here in America.
Willis has it right. If you are poor in America, your situation is infinitely better than middle class people in most countries around the world.
Story #2 reflects so much on my own experience and a question I have that I may never find an answer to.
Willis, I can’t write as well as you do, so I won’t try. But I can vouch for the utter generosity of people around the world – and it seems that the less they have the more generous they are. I’ve found it in the Mediterranean, in South America, in Latin America, in Europe, and in the USA. It bollixes my mind where the generosity comes from. “Is it in our DNA?” I wonder mostly. And there I get stuck. I cannot conceive of any other possible answer. Life is life, for all of us. When a stranger shows up on our doorstep, we reach out to help them, sometimes with food, sometimes with assistance – and sometimes the biggest gift of all is the gift of cameraderie/genial company.
Altruism is not – and never will be – dead. In a dog-eat-dog world some refuse to be that way. Maybe some others just discover it along the way. And, I suppose, even those who manage to become the 1% OF the 1% will find their generosity, in their time. Not everybody will, but some will. Even as we compete for and win great wealth (or not), I wonder if the gene inside us still looks for chances to offer some of what we have to someone we encounter who touches that generosity in us.
The times I’ve seen poor people offer so much of the little they have, I have been stunned into humility. Sometimes we don’t find ways like you did – to receive only a tiny bit – and we go away never forgetting how much was given. We come away feeling like we owe something now. And once that has taken hold, it never goes away. And when we do give, it is never enough to free ourselves from the memory. Maybe that is what altruism is about – trying to balance things in our memory, to give us peace of mind. So far I have not gotten there yet.
Steve Garcia
Pat Ravasio says:
January 13, 2013 at 6:59 am
My friend Pat, in theory I certainly could not agree with you more. In fact I have spent a good chunk of my life teaching people how to use renewable energy. I like clean. I like pure. I also like Mom, and apple pie.
The problem is, we don’t have one single renewable energy source that can run New York City. Or Phoenix. Or even Podunk. The economics for renewables, except hydroelectric, on the grid-scale are terrible.
You say I should be “pursuing greener, cleaner technologies for all the planet”. Thousands of people have put millions of man-hours into that chimera. You may not be old enough to remember Jimmy Carter’s solar push. We’re forty years down the line now, and we’re no closer to Jimmy’s dream. Which is also your dream, and my dream, but at present is still a wildly uneconomical dream.
See my post, “The Dark Future Of Solar Electricity” for a full discussion of the issues. I love renewable energy, Pat. I grew up with it, as I detailed in “Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t“. I’ve installed solar. I’ve installed wind. I’ve taught renewable energy for the Peace Corps, both in the US and overseas. I lived off of the grid for years at various times in my life. I built windmills in Paraguay. And as a result, I know much more and care much more about renewable energy than your average bear. Nothing I’d like better than reliable cheap clean renewable power. We’ll get there … but we’re not there yet.
So your accusation that I somehow don’t care is entirely misplaced. I do care, very much … and I am also a die-hard, rock-ribbed realist. At present, renewables do nothing but push up the price of electricity.
Which is where we came in. Once again, I have someone telling me that their brilliant plan to save the planet involves increasing the price of electricity … why am I not surprised? Did you miss the part where I just showed that your kind of plan is damaging to the poor?
All the best,
w.
Willis:
I worked in Nuclear Power for 20 years. Let’s go over some points as FAST as we can, and as COMPLETELY as we can. Can’t get rid of NUCLEAR WASTE? BULLSHIT! All the ‘cores’ of all the commercial power reactors run in this country would fit on the football field in the local “MetroDome”, with room to spare. These could easily be put in rock storage/disposal…or BEST YET, drop them the Marianus trench SUBDUCTION ZONE and send them to the center of the Earth!
MEANTIME, if we had had the WILL we could have had 500 reactors in this country supplying ALL our nuclear power!
WE ALSO could (by using the Liberty and Victory ships) have provided (Provisional) power to all the world during the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s.
AVAILABLE AND CHEAP INTENSE POWER is the answer to allow these “impoverished areas” to lift themselves. LOOK AT THE PROGRESS OF THE CHINESE (Albeit with FOSSIL FUELS).
So the real question is – HOW SHOULD THE OBSTRUCTIONISTS BE PUNISHED? (On your 1% side).
I say we should round them up and EXILE them to the 99% side you refer to and let them back, ONLY WHEN THEY APOLOGIZE for their obstruction! (And beg forgiveness.)
@Willis Eschenbach January 13, 2013 at 9:50 am
“Finally, the gold spaceship analogy. The main reason the US and other countries have “gold spaceships” is because they have cheap energy.”
Willis, I agree, but to cheap energy I would add easily available natural resources. The end of the “American Century” coincided with the end of our iron mines. Right or wrong, I see a cause and effect in that. Certainly other factors exist, too.
But I also see the rise of the BRIC countries as the rise of those who now have the capacity (in large part because of cheap energy) to dig into their large stores of natural resources. An argument can be made that Japan was not able to sustain its rise because of their lack of natural resources.
And I agree with not signing on to expensive energy as a field-leveler. Oh, it might level the field, but at a significantly lower level. The Liberals have long been floating some level of REALLY expensive gasoline as a cure for all sorts of economic woes – but it is really only a part of the underlying AGW agenda: to take the world back to some idyllic (imaginary) time before industrialization. Both that world and the idea that expensive will take is backward are misguided; if energy gets really expensive, we humans will not go backward – we will find another way to go forward. Short of a comet impact, there IS no backward.
Steve Garcia
Willis– Another great read. You’re on a roll.
Chu and Obama would do themselves and the world a great favor by understanding the lesson of Bastiat’s Broken Window Fallacy.
What Socialists and Keynesian aficionados don’t WANT to understand are the unintended consequences of idiotic social and economic policies. If $100’s of billions or $trillions of a country’s limited capital resources are needlessly and stupidly wasted to accomplish some failed philosophical preconception, that wasted capital is unable to be used by other entrepreneurs to: start new businesses, develop new technologies, improve production facilities, hire new staff, expand business, roll out new and improved products, etc.
Free markets are by far the most effective, efficient, moral and equitable way to allocate limited resources, as the best managed companies producing the best products at the highest quality at the lowest price survive and less capable companies with inferior products fail; as they should.
Free markets are based on mutual agreement, where both sides win, whereas government controlled economies are based on coercion, where both parties eventually lose, and lose big.
I often look across the city and imagine how vastly different our living standards and quality of life would would have improved had governments not tried to micromanage economies and hadn’t busted all those damned windows over the past 100 years…..
We’d be living like the Jetsons by now…. but alas….
Re: MamaLiberty says:
January 13, 2013 at 7:21 am
How did you know that my clock is stopped? Does it show?
Thanks for this story Willis. I live in Manila, and while things have somehow improved economically for many people, many are still very poor, like Helena. And our electricity prices are second to Japan most expensive in Asia, due to past problems in energy policies. Now we have a Renewable Energy (RE) law and it gives feed in tariff (FIT) for the renewables like solar and wind, so they plan to make our already expensive electricity to become even more expensive, to “save the planet.” I have challenged many of those planet saviors to a debate on climate and energy policy, including the main lobbyists for that law — Greenpeace, WWF, other environmentalists, they have only one answer, the sound of silence. They even block me from following and debating them on twitter. They’re nuts and yet they succeeded in making our electricity prices to become even more expensive.
One addendum to my writing on Nuclear – I hope folks can follow this train of thought.
I went to a lecture on a “round the world” cruise a local retired Engineer went on, a few years ago. He was disappointed when he missed the “Entry of the Kings”, i.e. the Politburo coming into the meeting hall in Shanghai. But he noted, “12 of the 14 members of the Politburo were trained as Engineers. I got a good laugh out of the audience, when I said rather loudly.. “Maybe we should re-evaluate this ‘communist’ thing?” (Said firmly tongue in cheek.)
Polentario says:
January 13, 2013 at 7:35 am
I fear I haven’t a clue what that means. I can’t even tell if it is praise or criticism, although I suspect the latter. Writing fail.
I am sorry for my lack of clarity. I never meant that cheap energy is enough to solve all of the worlds problems, from corruption to marital infidelity and the international scourge of dandruff. Nor can I find anywhere that I seem to have implied that.
This is why I always ask people to quote my words that they disagree with. It helps greatly because then we all know which of my ideas or claims is under discussion.
Cheap energy is what is called a “necessary but not sufficient” requirement for the poor to climb out of poverty. And agreed, there are a host of other things that are also needed for a country to flourish—a system of law, a system of land ownership and clear provable title, an education system, a government with minimum corruption, the list is very long and that is by no means the end of it.
Hope that clears it up.
w.
Joe Grappa says:
January 13, 2013 at 5:02 am
“Too many people. Get the population down to … ” Pick a number, any number.
Not “Too many people..” Too many greedy people, maybe. Too many uneducated people? Definitely. Amongst them, those who believe stupid shit that others have spouted at them and they mindlessly regurgitate – such as your statements from seemingly fundamentalist, willful ignorance.
‘Allowing’ those stupids to breed is a basic human right that I will fight tooth and nail for, so that it may remain a classless privilege that even cretins such as you can take advantage of.
Sorry mods. Angrified but accepting of snippage am I. Nearly didn’t press the post button.
Thanks Willis. Once again you show humanity … well, humanity.
You pro-crowders are a sad bunch. All you can do is appeal to some
vague stuff about how ‘history shows…’ and ‘more people = more
ideas’ and ‘lack of understanding about how humans behave’, and how
we need to go into space, and on and on, including the old standby
‘fascism!’.
It should not be hard to realize that if you are going to feed and
clothe and house all these billions you love so much, you have to
build more factories. The end result is to turn open spaces into
termataries, while forcing people to live cramped and crabbed lives
in order to avoid the pollution that would go with such an obscenely
large population.
Why in the name of Malthus would anybody be so stupid as to want
that to happen?
I think a combination of economic incentives, and forced
sterilization via engineered viruses would do the job.
Willis, as usual, wonderful.
But fuel and food prices no longer matter, at least in the US. It must be so because they’re ignored in the (US) government’s core inflation numbers.
And stay tuned. The “let them eat cake” US elite are about to bring us “chained CPI” to help “control costs” for the US Social Security Ponzi scheme, where reductions in value of consumed goods don’t count as a price increase (e.g. — when beef steak gets too expensive consumers downgrade to hamburger, when hamburger too expensive, beans and rice, when beans and rice too expensive, dog/cat food, etc.). Problem solved magically, prices no longer increasing, no need to increase cost-of-living adjustments.
And to G.P. Hanner, don’t believe that Obama and company are doing it without malice.
Seems that only economists and climate “scientists” get to redefine the rules and pretend it represents reality.
If you haven’t already, John Williams’ wwwDOTshadowstatsDOTcom for US CPI, core inflation, unemployment and other real values before the US royalty redefined them.
Joe Grappa says:
January 13, 2013 at 10:46 am
Good solution. Have you bred yet, or do we have to start with you and your family’s enforced sterilization and death?
/sarchasm – That gaping whole between a liberal and reality.
@Willis in response to Pat
January 13, 2013 at 10:26 am
Pat obviously doesn’t have a clue as to how horrifying life would be in the third-world oil-producing nations if it were not for oil revenues from the advanced nations. The Middle East would be a charnel house. While there is little chance that demand for oil will abate much in the future, think of what would happen to those countries if it did. They talk about the West’s dependence on foreign oil. They never talk about the developing nation’s dependence on revenue from the advanced countries.