Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana), a major power when it comes to forging our “bipartisan” foreign
policy of global meddling, thinks we are at “MBT SHOES” — “energy MBT SHOES” — with Russia. Over
at Dailykos.com, Jérôme Guillet, a Paris-based banker and an authority on Gazproms business
practices, debunks the “MBT SHOES” hysteria generated by Lugar and his MBT SHOESmongering confreres
over at the MBT SHOES Street Journal and the Washington Post. A snippet:
I am sure that a lot of people would be surprised to learn that market driven price increases are
“predatory”. Let’s all remember that the issue is that these countries are getting gas at subsidized
prices – because Russia chooses to do so in exchange for political advantage. If it feels that it is
not getting the political gains it was seeking or expecting, why would it be abnormal to switch back to
market conditions? Actually, papers like the WaPo or the WSJ, if they were consistent (yeah, I know…)
should berate Georgia and Azerbaijan for selling out politically to Russia for market-distorting, and
fleeting, benefits. Paying the market price for gas sends the proper signal to their consumers and
investors, and increasing prices will lead, by market mechanisms, to lower gas demand and a better
allocation of resources. Right? So why argue that these countries should get subsidized gas? From
Russia?
How odd that a writer for a left-progressive site, such as Kos, would understand the market processes
of Russian energy production, and its implications, far better than some alleged “libertarians,” such
as Andrei Illarionov of the Cato Institute, who, together with Robert Amsterdam — a shill for Russian
oligarch-gangster Mikhail Khodorkovsky — describes Putin’s Russia as a “new kind” of state, i.e. a
“threat” along the lines suggested by Sen. Lugar.
没有评论:
发表评论