Apr
16
Post #15- Nick Djamalidinov
April 16, 2015 | Leave a Comment
I found myself pretty angry at these articles. They both took the idea of fracking creating wealth too far. They talk about it as if there is absolutely no downside. After seeing the movie in class, I cannot ever support fracking. And on top of that, one of the articles conceded that it contributes to income inequality. But the author’s smug way of saying income inequality should be welcomed and that it is not unfortunate completely lost me. He sounds like one of those people who wants to give up our country to the rich because they know better.
Fracking has created wealth and unprecedented economic mobility in the places with natural gas deposits. In fact, Williston, North Dakota has the highest rate of economic mobility. I think the number may be a bit skewed because the people there, prior to fracking, were poor farmers so when fracking moved in, the new wealth vastly overshadowed the wealth of the earlier generations. This makes for some great numbers and makes fracking look so amazing. And so, I do not think the this economic mobility is as good as it looks. I think this phase will blow over and then the real problems with fracking, which we saw in the movie, will manifest.
The American Enterprise Article was one of those articles that I just cannot take very seriously. First of all, acting like America is better than other countries does not make it any better. He said that America is the only country with the entrepreneurial culture and ample incentives for trial and error necessary for shale breakthroughs. I think that other countries are just smart enough to know that contaminating our water supply and creating more pollution is not worth more energy. But America would be the type to disregard those things just to make a quick buck. We obsess over making so much money that hurting the environment or ourselves never even enters the picture.
The third article talked about the inequality caused by hurricane sandy. The people who needed help the most were not getting it even though DiBlasio was speeding up the rebuilding process. I do not know too much about this and my home was not affected but the information is disappointing. The problem is two-fold: 34% of people complained of mold before sandy and 45% complained after Sandy. Hurricane Sandy exacerbated the problems already present, all the way up the structural problems of income inequality. I do not know how the government allocates the money for rebuilding, but I would think the dire situations and most needy people should be taken care of first. It is not a matter of favoritism, it is because there are people who desperately need repairs and there are people who have minor issues to take care of.
The articles, to me, all seemed to deal with the inequality caused by natural elements. Natural elements have no regard for our incomes or our wealth and hit indiscriminately. The shale deposits have been there for centuries before America was even a country and Hurricane Sandy did not think to hit the poor. But they create inequality nonetheless and we need to deal with these problems. Fracking, while lucrative, is not worth the environmental fallout, health concerns, or income inequality.
