I am a regular reader of your blog, and also the Development Director for TEQs (Tradable Energy Quotas) – the tradable system advocated by Monbiot and many others.

I just wanted to thank you for your insightful discussion of this topic, and will certainly take many of your points on board.

Best wishes,
Shaun

It’s interesting that after WWI, Hoover was effective in leading the efforts to feed Europe, which, of course, is why Truman asked him to lead the effort after WWII. His failure in this second effort speaks to an interesting change in the American culture, or at least a change in the dynamics of consumerism. Hoover’s tragic belief that the people would do the right thing because it was the right thing to do made sense somehow during WWI, but failed miserably during the depression and onwards. While not conservative myself by any means, I can sympathize with a point of view suggesting good should not be mandated by a dubiously trustworthy government. It’s a very interesting point you made in your answering comment, of wondering what can be learned from the WWI model. Similarly, with government controlling a rationing effort, the temptation to use rationing as a political tool in our system would be simply irresistable to those seeking power. Self rationing, similar to your 90% effort, seems a more pure, wholesome approach.

I’ve blathered on quiet enough, I’m sure, but one item I do not see us address enough in the effort to curb consumerism is the need to attack free and easy credit. Easy credit, beginning with the Diner’s Club card in the ’50′s, has been the hand maiden for the Madison Avenue driven commerciality, becoming the substitute for the “company store” to keep people in servitude. Why self ration when we can have what we want when we want, as long as we can keep ourselves from thinking about the future hours labored to work off the debt. Preaching to the choir here, I know. Thanks for another thought provoking piece – I very much appreciate the scholarship behind this essay.

cheers,
Dave

I too have read the Bentley book and numerous documents on U.S. and U.K. during WWII. Your article is a very good summary, and makes very good points about how to proceed with fairness and equity. And I would like to see rationing happen sooner rather than later (especially with energy), before the shortages appear, and to have them equally distributed on a per-person basis to be fair to rich and poor alike. I’m still not sure how a tradeable enery rationing plan would work, but would prefer to see something in place so that those who do conserve can possible “trade” their savings for things they do need. And I agree that price controls only will not do it and unfair to the poor.

Keep up your quality writing.

Kevin in Iowa

One of the most important factors used by the OPA was that members of its board existed to represent business and consumers seperately – that is, the board was fairly evenly balanced between consumer advocates and business advocates, rather like having Ralph Nader and Lee Iacocca negotiating. And I ought to have said that I think *that* part is simply unlikely to happen again. So yes, you are right. Now the thing about the ODP, is that it might well sell to big oil once they start experiencing serious shortages. So I can imagine circumstances in which businesses can be persuaded, but it is worth noting that sheer corporate power we’re up against is a real problem.

Ares, that’s a really interesting analysis. I wonder if you could manage shortages – certainly, the sheer number of consumer goods we see influences our buying patterns.

Sharon