Obama Nixes Keystone Pipeline, Jobs Too?

News Head Liner: “Obama Nixes Job-Creating Pipeline….”

Underlining Message: Obama nixes jobs.  Implied meaning: He’s a horrible insensitive, uncaring president for not thinking of jobs for working people.

We know people need to and want to work so as to have a good living.  We know that a good economy is one that sustains maximum employment, not low-employment or under-employment but full employment with well-paying jobs that allow middle-class families to grow and thrive.

But does that de-facto mean that any industry having the potential for creating jobs should be given a green light, no matter what other negative side effects that particular industry may have on society, the environment, and other things?

Jobs!  Is that THE deciding factor, no matter what?  Is that the only measuring-stick that should be used to determine the acceptability of an industry’s growth plan?   Is job-creation the default standard by which an industry should be measured as to its necessity or usefulness or acceptability to society?  Are we not to concern ourselves with an industry’s long-term effect, not only in terms of its means and methods but with respect to its very product?

For example, the tobacco industry creates jobs.  Hence, so as to ensure the tobacco industry can continue to provide jobs, are we to ignore the fact that smoking or chewing tobacco is addictive and is a source of cancer and is therefore generally bad for public consumption?  We need more jobs.  Yes.  The porn industry creates jobs as well.  So, should we have no laws restricting or monitoring pornography for fear of causing job loss in that industry?

We know that we need more and more energy to power our modern day lifestyle, our digital and electronic devices, our homes and vehicles, and more.  We also know that there are so-called “clean” energy sources and that there are so-called “dirty” energy sources.  So, why wouldn’t we choose clean energy sources over dirty ones?  Why, because some industries have too much to lose or are too vested in the old traditional “dirty” sources—and so, they use the fear of job-losses as a weapon to avoid change.

It is always cheaper, easier, more convenient, and short-term more profitable to keep the status quo and avoid change.  But we need to shift our focus as a society and begin to seriously invest in clean renewable energy sources and move away from “dirty” sources—despite the initial expense.  It seems to me that the real unwillingness to sustain job creation is in the oil industries that refuse to envision, and invest in new clean energy sources.

Yes, it may be more costly and more difficult or challenging to create or tap into clean energy sources, in the short run; but we must think long term.  In the long run it may very well pay off great dividends for all of society.  Thus, real job growth should be created and sustained by companies and industries that effectively have long-term clean energy strategies who are thinking of more than quick profitable turnover and who are thinking of what is overall best for the present and future of society, community, and nation.