Agree.

"Resources are not scarce."

That's technically true, if we want to look at raw materials and primary resources, as the Universe is damn near infinite and IS infinite as far as our resource consumption is concerned. Constraining ourselves to the pantry dish of the Earth (more to the point, the surface area of the Earth) is, at best, inconsistent if we're attempting to make any long or medium term predictions. What some call the Malthus Mistake... but Malthus not including space really isn't a mistake. During his time it wasn't even a consideration or realistic possibility that we'd be able to harvest the resources of near-space. (The advantages are the null-g and the ability to more easily access the core of an asteroid, for instance. You can blow it up and pick up the pieces).

That being said...

Not all resources are physical. No matter what access to raw materials we have, and no matter how abundant one might claim them to be, we also have the cost-factor of the most important resource of all: time. That IS scarce. You only have so many hours in your life.

Resources don't just exist, pop into a product, and poof - are on the market for consumption. They must be extracted, refined, and generally there are multiple manipulations that take place from a refined product to a final product - like the rare earth metals in the gyroscope of most modern cell phones. So enters supply and demand. That's the scarcity - the costs of extraction, refinement, transportation, etc., and how much people are willing to sacrifice in exchange for what they want and whether or not that cost-factor makes all the effort worth your time.

Time is the ultimate scarcity because, in the end, we all die.

Now in regards to oil, fossil fuel arguments, etc... the Russians, not so long ago, claimed that there is an abiotic process that can produce crude between the crust and the mantel and it gets filtered upward via the centrifugal force of the Earth's rotation. Whether or not that has any merit, the planet Uranus has oceans greater in size than the entirety of the Earth that is a near chemical equivalent of crude oil. So, in either case, it doesn't really matter. A moot point. Whether they're dead organisms or not, we'll just switch over to using a near equivalent which will minimize the costs of changing equipment; and we have more than enough "oil reserves" as they say - to get us there during this development stage of our space ambitions.

So even if they are lying to artificially inflate the prices and are inducing climate alarmism to feed into their racket - in the end, the private market will win. It always does. The only way the power-players can keep this in check is if they stop us from getting into space. I really see that as the answer. The infinitely expanding frontier line. Liberty will prevail if we can get there.