Frances Chapman at SolveClimate has an interesting question: Why invest in losers? if you are in the nationalization business, why not go after a winner, and solve climate turmoil instead of financial turmoil? Why not nationalize Exxon-Mobil? She writes:
"But that's socialism, you object. That's what Hugo Chavez did. Some would say he was just putting "Country First," protecting his country's resources. We can debate that later, but until we do, keep in mind national oil companies manage over 90% of the world's oil, and 16 of the 20 largest oil companies in the world are state owned or controlled."
"The danger of global warming is as grave a threat to our country's and our world's future as the meltdown of its credit markets. What's more, the bill for the financial bailouts is likely to constrain new environmental programs and incentives in the next administration. Let's use this moment to intervene and punish the worst of the worst.
If we nationalized AIG, we can nationalize ExxonMobil. We don't have to create an entire command economy to take a big stick to a company that actively delayed a response to global warming by funding climate change deniers, that continues to fight payment of damages for despoiling the Prince William Sound after 20 years, and has proved again and again it can't be trusted to protect our environment. It persists in business as usual as people here and abroad move to a green economy. A take over will signal that the United States is serious about transitioning off of fossil fuel. More immediately, "take over Exxon" has the same shout-out-the-car-window ring to it as "drill, baby, drill," and makes more sense. It lets environmentalists stop playing defense and start making a winning demand. "
Great idea from Solve Climate
More Loving Stories About Exxon
Exxon Blocking Toy Safety Bill That Would Ban Phthalates in Toys
Exxon on Global Warming
Who Are They Kidding: Exxon Says Never Doubted Climate Change ...
Exxon to USA: Stop Trying, Resistance is Futile