[OilChick]

Many peak oil enthusiasts believe that we are currently repeating the 1970s and we will soon experience expensive-oil induced stagflation. The thinking goes that the stagflation will eventually lead to a 1980 Volker decision to either kill the economy or let the dollar collapse.

I don't believe that the economy can repeat the 1970s. With the amount of debt in the US and the size of the US current account deficit, a steady rise in inflation over the course of years is impossible. That is why inflation is so under reported now. If everyone knew that inflation was running at 6%, the game would be over.

The moment that federal inflation statistics become laughably unrealistic to the markets, we will skip ahead directly to the Volker decision. I'm not sure what the government and the Fed will decide, but I think the decision will be forced upon it very suddenly. There will be no decade of slowly escalating inflation.

If you disagree with me, then imagine the Fed trying to reassure the markets that the core rate is 2% when oil surpasses $100 a barrel. When this temporary drop in oil prices is finished, I think the Fed will decide.

[mattduke]

The course is set even without peak oil. The US has been producing less and less of the things we want for a long time and the CPI price-level understatement is already laughably unrealisitic. Sure, we busy ourselves in competition for dollars sitting on seats in air conditioned offices, but only so that we may then ship them overseas for the things we actually need. The US lengthens this process by drawing down the capital accumulated by our grandparents' thrift and drawing down the reputation of the dollar by printing more and more of them to ship them overseas. There is a limit to the willingness of foreigners to accept them as payment and when the limit is reached everything will change. Financial crises tend to happen quickly and unpredictably. There is no saving the dollar at this point, the question is whether a replacement currency (North American Amero?) will be installed before hyperinflation or after. Merging the US, Canada, and Mexico will result in lower net imports for the new region as a whole, creating a more-balanced trade to lend credence to the new the currency of the "North American Union".

[neocone]

It would be all nice and dandy if for the US's size being 10 times that of Canada and 30 times that of Mexico. A merging of the 3 economies wouldn't be welcomed by Canada.

People think it is funny but Canada can put up resistance: Within months it can produce 20-50 nuclear warheads from its nuclear power plants. It can ally itself to Europe and call it for help, and France has 800 nuclear weapons, enough to wipe out the US from the map.

[Turlox]

Except I am thinking you are not remembering one important factor. That is the U.S. is Rome with enough Nuclear Weapons to blow up the Planet Several Times. I can't remember the exact statistic but I believe Helen Caldicott said something about the fact that the U.S. and Russia are the only ones capable of planetary destruction.

Unfortunately, we have Nero at the controls and Caligula right behind him. Imagine the football is in the hands of someone who is a born again christian chosen by god, and also thinks the end of the world is coming. This man also unless cheney is really running things is capable of First Strike.

[kjmclark]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')eople think it is funny but Canada can put up resistance: Within months it can produce 20-50 nuclear warheads from its nuclear power plants. It can ally itself to Europe and call it for help, and France has 800 nuclear weapons, enough to wipe out the US from the map.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('neocone', '
')People think it is funny but Canada can put up resistance: Within months it can produce 20-50 nuclear warheads from its nuclear power plants. It can ally itself to Europe and call it for help, and France has 800 nuclear weapons, enough to wipe out the US from the map.

[Tyler_JC]

I highly doubt that the United States will ever face a serious military threat from Canada or any combination of Canada's allies.

The Canadian economy is simply too dependent on the United States to break off from NAFTA.

There might be trade disputs over energy, but all out war? I wouldn't take that bet.

[lateralus]

If we are to draw new borders in North America....

[AgentR]

New borders would be nice, but not really possible.

Besides, the USC imposed its ethics and politics on Jesusland for decades, yall ought to be able to tolerate a little turnabout.

Granted, if we'd stuck to real federalism, CA,OR,WA would not care what the folks in DC or Texas were going to do. But no, they felt the need to impose low volume shower heads on people who live in the swamps, and 55 mph speed limits on peope with 250+ miles between cities; the turnabout being increased logging in unreplaceable forests, drilling in the wilderness, and interference with a state's preference with regard to legality of recreational drugs.

[PenultimateManStanding]

Canada and France? bah! Al Qaeda takes over in Mexico. Asymetrical Warfare breaks out with random carbombs in every major American city, machine guns show up in malls accross the country, police are swamped, panic breaks out. Power lines, transformer stations and dams are targeted. The FBI and NSA are paralysed by bureaucratic infighting and indecision. The political parties are more focused on each other and the politicians all prove to be stooges and fools helpless to do anything. Americans take things into their own hands but they just wind up shooting each other in a hysterical outbreak of rabid paranoia. Commerce breaks down. Trucking and transport collapse. Famine grips the land. Disease follows.

[JustinFrankl]

In order for the 70s to return, I assumed that there would have to be some way out of such stagflation/inflation/recession/depression. Some way to keep moving onward and upward. There isn't. I voted no.