Fuel boycotts are utterly useless.
Here’s the premise: fuel (petrol, gasoline) is too expensive, what can we do? Boycott fuel for a day (or a week, or, as the French enjoy so much, block all the fuel trucks in with tractors/wagons)! Then they’ll surely reduce the price. Cash back for all!
Except the issue just isn’t that simple, now, is it?
- Not buying your fuel for one day, or one week, or even a month, does not reduce the reliance we, as a society, and as individuals, have on petrol and other oil based fuel;
- Oil is a dwindling resource, basic economics would dictate that an ever increasing demand (more and more people requiring more and more fuel) will lead to an increase in price whether you wait until Tuesday to buy your gas or not;
- The burning of fossil fuels is a leading contributory factor in climate change (global warming) - this is scientifically proven FACT, despite what some people still try to argue - making fuel cheaper would not help the situation improve (and, no, simply pointing the finger at China, or America, does not absolve YOU from responsibility).
If all the people who get so indignant every time the fuel price increases by a marginal, affordable, amount actually put their heads together to lobby, in some way, for a viable alternative to fossil fuels, perhaps human society could develop in a more sustainable fashion.
Instead, we make knee-jerk reactions and attempt to fight an impossible battle: against time, and market forces.
Am I the only one who sees this as crazy behaviour?
It is precisely the same people who moan and groan the loudest about the price of fuel who will say things like “well the Chinese are the worst greenhouse gas emitters, and they’ll never stop, so I don’t see why I should have to pay £1 per litre.”
A hideous argument, that smacks of the type of selfishness which has seen the world hold back development in the name of profit and the bottom line. Think about it.
Do these people really think we could not have developed a carbon neutral car if we’d put any real effort or thought into it? We have split the atom. We have developed nuclear weapons that have the capability of destroying the Earth, and probably the rest of the solar system too. We have the technology and skill to clone human beings. Do you really believe that we could not have developed a simple electric car?
So this is an open message to anyone who is still suggesting a fuel boycott in order to reduce the price of petrol (gasoline / any other type of fossil fuel):
Shut your mouths. Get some perspective.
(12 votes, average: 4.5 out of 5)
Loading ...
Related Articles
21 users responded in this post
I’m not Al Gore, I promise… but watch out for that manbearpig, he’ll get you, one day, he’ll get you…
I’m super-doopa serial! Excelsior!
This article is weak. You have obviously been brainwashed by the nu Marxist green lobby. Fuel is so expensive in the UK due to the money grabbing government’s massive taxes.
I’m totally cereal.
If “this article is weak” it would be helpful if you pointed out the flaws in my argument, but in any case, I’ll point out yours:
1) Fuel boycotts do not only take place in the UK (and yet they never achieve their primary goal of a long term (or even short term) reduction in the price of fuel - they are therefore pointless);
2) I have not been “brainwashed by the nu Marxist Green Lobby,” in fact, I am about as far from Marxist as you’re likely to find. I simply fail to see how a (short-term) reduction in fuel levies taken by ANY government will prevent the long-term increase in the price of a non-renewable and dwindling commodity.
Imagine this analagous situation…
Pete, the middle management genious, is in his local wine-bar.
“How much is your house champagne?” he asks the barman.
“Why its £40 my good man!” is the reply.
“WHAT!” Pete exclaims “bloody daylight robbery! I’ll have a bottle of WKD thanks…” and storms off.
Later, Pete asks the landlord why champagne is so expensive.
“well you see,” the bar’s owner explains “champagne costs a lot to produce and transport, and the Government taxes us on each bottle we sell, so really our margin is very low. Also, champagne gets people where they want to be, and there isn’t enough to go around, hence the price is always going to be high, based on how much people want to have some champagne, and the fact that there simply isn’t enough left to go around.”
That evening, Pete boils with anger at the expense of champagne. “Bloody bastard French charging rip-off prices!” He exclaims to his mates “fucking Government raising alcohol tax all the time!!” he rants to the disinterested girl from his office.
But Pete ‘thinks outside the box’ so he hatches as infallible plan, that night when he gets home, he wastes no time in creating a group on Facebook - all in capital letters - to get everyone to “BOYCOTT CHAMPAGNE ON TUESDAY 16 JULY!!!!!!”
He tells all his friends to tell their friends.
Pretty soon, he has a huge following, and the evening of the 16 July rolls around. Pete goes back to the wine bar, and is happy to see that no-one is buying champagne.
Later that evening, a celebrity walks in and orders a bottle of Moet.
“HEY! YOU!” Screams Pete, “don’t you know we are boycotting champagne.”
“No. I didn’t.” says the celebrity, “and anyway, I like champagne. Fuck off.” as he continues to purchase and drink the bottle.
Pete is furious, but his battle is mostly won, he feels, that was the only purchase that took place in the country, for sure.
The next day, Pete is back in the bar, “I’ll have a bottle of house champagne please Barkeep!” he says merrily at the bar.
“I thought you’d boycotted champagne???!!?” Said the bemused barman.
“oh no,” Pete explains, “that was yesterday. And anyway, I just won £50 out of the gambler.”
In the UK I don’t know of any coherent Boycott Fuel day, although my American (jokes e-mail) contact did send on one of those round robin letters aimed at getting everyone in the USA to boycott gasoline one day last summer.
I was interested in the theory, but agree with Jumbo’s arguments. And his illustration above of the Champagne case was masterly.
Today the doctors in UK are telling the Government to put the price of alcoholic beverages UP to stop us all drinking too much. But the argument was countered by a recovering alcoholic interviewed who said he would have (when at his worst) paid ANY amount for his drink.
As for fuel, now that the oil price per barrel has gone skyhigh, it means that in the UK even more tax is being gathered. Yet if we are to get anywhere in the countryside, we have no choice. A boycott would only hurt us.
That’s true! I agree with you. Here, in the Argentina, people act like that…or worst!!!!!!
I agree with most of the points here but that Champagne analogy is ridiculous. If one does not buy fuel on a certain day, one will require fuel within x number of days afterwards. Champagne, however, is a luxury item which is purchased entirely by choice. A boycott on Champagne would work because it could be sustained for months, maybe even years, but the problem with a fuel boycott is that, realistically, it cannot last any longer than a week.
The champagne analogy is not ridiculous! Everyone needs champagne in X days. For sure.
The original article is right - in that fuel boycotts do not do anything apart from cause chaos and disruption if done on a massive scale such as the last national UK fuel “blockade” which was a much more significant event. It did not achieve its aim as fuel is now £1.05 per litre (that’s 7.91 US dollars per gallon).
Tax is high in the UK and we might have a right to be unhappy about it, but in the long run this is irrelevant. Face it all of you who still have their heads in the sand…. Oil will run out, petrol (gas) will continue to rise in price until it is unaffordable, hopefully by which time we will be doing two things 1) driving less 2) have an alternative vehicle fuel.
We all had Champagne on Saturday night, but saved fuel by travelling to a party in one vehicle, not five. The Champagne was an essential. And the night was great!
sorry had to say this total guff jumbo
First of all boycott is the only form of protest you can legaly aply in this situation the only way to get your point across to goverment
true we need fuel to live our day to day lives so not buying it will only hurt us but boycoting a company texico for instance for a few months across the country will get the desired effect profits will go down palms will get greased and questions will be asked it is not the tax im against its the amount of tax we pay 50% more tax for fuel than france 15% more than germany
Second point global warming FACT how dare you! records have been kept for a few hundred years a snap shot in the life of the planet it is a living breathing organism you cant just guess what is happining two ice ages volcanic eruptions metors tidal waves tsunami earthquakes extinction of species left right and center and not a 4×4 to be seen!green house gasses ok but the planet can deal with it if we stop killing the f*ing trees do you remeber the hole in the ozone layer that could not be repaired it is now! global warming at best it’s an educated guess worst political propagander like terrorists all around us. KEEP EM SCARED THEY WILL BEG YOU TO PROTECT THEM AT A COST OF COURSE
Big Ging,
A boycott is impracticable at best, achieves little in the longer term (not everyone has a choice over where they buy fuel, or any viable alternative to driving - have you ever been to a rural area??), and does not solve the main problem the post drives at: that oil is going to run out (which you completely gloss over in your comment).
You state that it is “true, we need oil to live our day to day lives” - this is my major concern: we shouldn’t. No amount of whining about the relative price of fuel from country to country will stop this over-reliance now will it?
I also doubt your credibility as an expert in the natural sciences given your rudimentary “hole in the ozone layer” example.
Here’s a quote someone sent me, ” We’ve talked with representatives of the oil industry who say that a one-day boycott of gas stations would not really accomplish much because those who decided not to buy gas on that day would still presumably need gas within several days. The sales for a given week or month would probably end up being the same.
University of Michigan economics professor Stephen Salant told Detroit Free Press columnist Matt Helms that it was hard to think of anything less effective than the suggested one-day boycott.
“
it is proven FACT that ice core records covering 650,000 years shows temp increases preceded not resulted from co2 increases.180 billion tonnes of co2 is generated by the worlds ocens and rotting plant matter compaired to six billion generated by humans the IPCC (intergovermental panel for climate change)is being investagated for alterations it made without consent of the worlds scientifc experts who contrabuted to it the document that started this GLOBAL WARMING fasion at the g8 meeting former president of the national academy of scicences is quoted “it is a disturbing corruption of the peer review process” which could “deceive policymakers and the public into believing that the scientific evidence shows human activities are causing global warming.”the bits altered basically stated “we dont know” that enough CREDIBILITY for ya
Not really.
There were people, I’m told, who would shout until they were blue in the face about how “the world is flat, I tell you”. Doesn’t mean its correct, now does it.
And as for taking the champagne analogy seriously, well shame on you.
affordable maybe for private useage but not for haulage firms, if the retailers have to pay thousand a year on hauling goods from warehouses to shops then they increase prices for goods. I think the easiest option is for the goverment to reduce the amount of tax they impose as this can help businesses survive.
admin shame on you “world is flat” are you on about columbus vs the spanish goverment in 1492? in the 1400s it was widly known the world was round The shape of the world had been pretty much settled since the orb theory was first proposed by the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras long before columbus.It was just propagander to get support to finance his trip. Shouldn’t belive all you hear. look into it you just proved my point about misguided public opinion though
Adeel I agree but how to make goverment give us a tax break? we got to force them with a show of public diaproval. haulage firms can still get fuel just not from the chosen firm to be boycotted that month. if we all worked together it could and would work.I just dont trust goverments tax me for fuel, bags ,emision zones congestion charges all because of global warming “inconvenient truth”its all spin designed to scare and tax us honest look into it for yourself. my local council just got instructions to increase journey times through town by ten min’s how the hell is that helping co2 levels i just spend longer with my car running.do you really thing the goverments of the western world have not got a plan for when the oil runs out there just squeezing us till its gone
Do me a favour and stop editing your comments posthumously. It makes everything else a nonsense.
Leave A Reply
Please Note: Comment moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comments