Saudi Prince: US Shale Threatening Our Economy
show comments
  • rheddles

    The Sauds problem is not economic rebalancing, it is cultural rebalancing. Until they develop something better than the Inshallah Work Ethic, they are in trouble. Nonetheless, either way step 1 would be to stop subsidizing terrorism.

    • Philopoemen

      They aren’t lazy or stupid, just complacent. Why bother working harder than you have to when 92% of your revenue comes from oil?

      • rheddles

        “Why bother working harder than you have to when 92% of your revenue comes from oil?”

        Ask the Norwegians. Or the Alaskans.

        • Philopoemen

          Alaska isn’t a country, and Norway’s position in the EU allows it more trade leeway than Saudi Arabia has. Furthermore, oil production is nowhere near 92% of its revenue.

        • Thirdsyphon

          The Alaskans haven’t really branched out into much more than fisheries, which when you think about it is just another kind of resource extraction. The picture in Norway is more complicated, but they were never a fully extraction-based economy to begin with. A better example might be Iceland. Their economy has historically been based on fishing, but since the 1960s they’ve made massive investments in developing their geothermal energy resources and their largest export now is refined aluminum.

          • rheddles

            I haven’t noticed lots of foreigners rushing to Iceland to fish for them. Nor smelt.

          • Thirdsyphon

            Well, there’s not a *lot* of anybody in Iceland, including Icelanders, but they actually do bring in a lot of foreign labor, relative to their population, to help with big industrial projects (including the construction of aluminum foundries) to the point where the immigrant population has become a topic of public debate. See, e.g., http://www.grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Immigrants-Pandoras-Box-in-Iceland

          • rheddles

            Makes my point. The Icelanders want the jobs.

      • Steve Gregg

        Texans bothered to work harder when oil was discovered there. Texas did not outsource the hard work to foreigners.

        • Philopoemen

          Merely a different way of approaching things, like the ant and the grasshopper.

    • Once extraction becomes less viable, KSA will have to move to more knowledge-based economics. At the moment, the only nontrivial bit of the economy outside oil is Hajj-related tourism. This shift will be enormously hard for them culturally, and the Wahhabis in particular will be a big problem.

      In many ways, much of the ME has been spared the wrenching cultural changes that East Asia has been going through for the past 150 years because of oil. These changes won’t be pretty.

      • rheddles

        Just as oil deprived Egypt has moved aggressively into knowledge-based economics. Or Yemen.

      • Corlyss

        I agree with you. It will be ugly. The usual trick of an endangered government is to export trouble. As if the Saudi’s, principal exporters of Wahhabism, are not already doing their level best to destabilize the rest of the wolrd with that tireless export.

  • Corlyss

    Boo hoo. They can always sell it to China.

  • Fat_Man

    How much will they spend to fund the anti-fracking campaign?

  • cubanbob

    Saudi’s don’t like working. They hire foreigners to do the work. Rebalancing is something they aren’t looking forward to. But that is not our problem. Lets stop wasting time and get on with domestic energy production.

  • Steve Gregg

    The Saudi moment has come and is now going. I look forward to the day when Riyadh lies in ruins and the Saudis are driven back into the desert to preach their Wahhabism to the camel spiders.

  • Laka

    OSOPEC: Organization of Shale Oil Producing and Exporting Countries.

    Chew on that, Prince. And go tend some sheep.

  • ChuckFinley

    “Still, the importance of Saudi oil to the US and to the world market is not diminishing.”

    The importance of Saudi oil to the US would diminish pretty quickly if the EPA were to end its regulations that make it uneconomical to convert existing gasoline engine vehicles to run on compressed natural gas. It costs about $1000 to convert a vehicle to run on CNG and then by flipping a switch run on gasoline but EPA regulations raise the cost to $25,000 for a conversion that complies with EPA requirements.

    If the EPA regulations were made more rational and reasonable, millions of Americans would spend their own money to convert their cars and trucks to run on natural gas and demand for gasoline would fall, causing the price of gasoline to fall as well. The extra money that Americans would have available to spend would do a long way towards reviving the American economy.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.