Commodities, Finance, & Central Planning

Note the following Financial Times article about the price of oil & the recession:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e5c33c42-84c8-11de-9a64-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

Pay particular attention to the following items:

1) ¶2: Goldman Sachs' call for a "co-ordinated policy" in response to rising oil prices (why must the "private" sector call for government intervention). But why should I be surprised by such a call from Goldman Sachs?

2) ¶4: The casual mention of central banks in the developed world & equally nonchalant statement that they have a choice between two interventionist alternatives. (Should they have a choice -- i.e., inordinate power -- in the economies, where they can only wreak havoc?)

3) ¶5: The mention of Britain expanding "quantitative easing". Am I the only one concerned that they have to use such a nebulous term for "printing money"?

More on quantitative easing: I note that Britain started w/ £50bn -- apparently such intervention was a given in recession, just as we Americans now just assume the feds must act likewise in recession. How come no one seems to care to point out that unfettered gov't spending (regardsless of actual tax revenues) makes printing money "necessary" in the first place (because actually taking the bad medicine is unthinkable anyway).