[~Mark~M~]

Excuse me, from my point of view, experts give technical data that signals collapse of Civilization. However, it is actually dependent on decision makers (try to guess who?), to make the actual course of events. I study it more from the social position.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'E')cological footprint might also be helpful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... _footprint

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')The footprint has its uses but it too is pretty optimistic. A while ago someone put me onto a paper about how it is calculated. IIRC it does not include any resource depletion, or climate change effects. It essentially uses a healthy Earth ecosystem as a basis. But that ecosystem is far from healthy.

What it does do, apparently, is to capture the entire energy budget of a country. So the city dweller living in a efficiency apt., walking to work, and eating low on the food chain still rates high because off all the infrastructure which is shared evenly. Highways, airports, office buildings, malls, military, government, etc.

[Newfie]

That's why I'm so pessimistic about the future. I look at the various indicators, which are in themselves not good, but then see that they are optimistic. But then, none of them are complete, there predictions are eroded by other factors not considered.

In the end it is the convergence of issues that will bring us to some inflection point sufficiently severe that Americans will panic. THAT will be interesting.

[Ibon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('~Mark~M~', ' ')However, it is actually dependent on decision makers (try to guess who?), to make the actual course of events.

[Ibon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')In the end it is the convergence of issues that will bring us to some inflection point sufficiently severe that Americans will panic. THAT will be interesting.

[ralfy]

One can also consider this article in relation to the topic:

"On the cusp of collapse: complexity, energy, and the globalised economy"

http://fleeingvesuvius.org/2011/10/08/o ... d-economy/

[ROCKMAN]

Ibon - I don't point a finger at any one individual or party but at the political system. That's why, with respect to energy, I suspect little real change in policy will be made regardless of the party or politician running the show. The momentum of the system will drive our response IMHO.

[~Mark~M~]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', 'S')o who is or are the deciders.... excluding the ex president Bush

[Ibon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('~Mark~M~', ' ')The question I'm rising is the purpose of this process.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'O')ne can also consider this article in relation to the topic:

"On the cusp of collapse: complexity, energy, and the globalised economy"

http://fleeingvesuvius.org/2011/10/08/o ... d-economy/

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')In the end it is the convergence of issues that will bring us to some inflection point sufficiently severe that Americans will panic. THAT will be interesting.

[Timo]

It may be a bit too late to pose this question on this topic, but the word "collapse" means different things to different people. Fast or slow is relative the the extent of what that collapse actually is. If we're predicting a collapse, just what is it that we're predicting? What form will the collapse take? Mad Max? The Day After? Escape from NY? The form of a collapse is just as likely to have as many different viewpoints as its speed.

[~Mark~M~]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', 'F')eel free to continue to elaborate on the purpose as I suspect you have already arrived at your own conclusions. Let's hear them.

[ROCKMAN]

Mark – Are you referring to the US or the foreign NOC’s? I assume not the US. I have on occasion elbowed into those uppity situations you allude to. I also work for a self-made billionaire who owns an oil company. I’ve also worked for a number of other rather wealthy individuals.

But a couple of points. Oil itself isn’t very useful. OTOH products refined from oil are. About the only thing useful about oil to a rich fellow is selling it to a refiner. Second, add up all the oil controlled by those rich aristocrats you refer to and I’m pretty sure it ain’t that much. By far the single largest oil/NG owner in the US is the federal govt. The next largest group of oil/NG owners in this country are the small independents companies…many hundreds of them. Collectively large but individually small. Next down the list are the major integrated oil companies which are owned for the most part by middle income US shareholders. There is no Mr. ExxonMobil that gets a big fat check every month. Next down the list are the hundreds of thousands of small mineral owners that collect 15% to 25% of every $ of oil/NG produced in this country. And then at the bottom of the list of revenue earners from oil/NG sales in the US are those wealthy individuals you mention. I really can’t guess how small their share is but I would have to think it’s not that large.

How do the numbers break down: For 2012: Oil owned by the fed govt combined with the oil owned by hundreds of thousands of small mineral owners was 1.12 billion bo of the 2.37 billion bo produced in the US. For NG the numbers are 9.6 tcf of the total of 24 tcf. The bulk of the rest of the production was owned by Big Oil (the middle income shareholders) and the small independent companies. And whatever little bit is left belonged to your aristocrats.

[~Mark~M~]

ROCKMAN, the power comes not just from participation, but from an ability to control the system, its technologies, flows, collaboration, milestones. That's what differs the elite keeping the essential parts from the rest of the population. Not to mention that there is indirect ownership. So, Bush (or, those who really did it) can just start a war and siphon oil.

[Tanada]

Civilizations are growing, static or collapsing. We are not growing as a whole, just a few little green shoots here or there are popping up. We are not static because it requires hard work just to stay in place so in many places we are already shrinking or collapsing. Civilization is always the red queens race, if you stop to admire your accomplishments they start slipping away from you like the thief in the night. When a culture as a whole is no longer willing to do the hard work needed to keep progressing then the rot starts to set in. The USSR crumbled because they focused all their cultural energy on the military at the exclusion of everything else. They didn't have a strong enough culture to keep growing after World War II, their casualties were so large most modern people can not even comprehend them. They survived the war by orienting literally everything to the military, and after the war it effectively stayed that way until the collapse came in the 1990's.

In the USA in the 1800's many people wanted to be inventors and just about anyone could set up a little company to manufacture whatever they had invented. If people liked it they succeeded and the pace of manufacturing grew until the market was saturated. When World War I came along one of the inventions was poison gas warfare, and suddenly people realized some inventions were a bad thing because they hurt people. World War II gave us the invention of atomic weapons and people really feared what it could mean when the USSR followed suit just a few years later. Some of those people were government officials and suddenly inventions were frowned upon when done by private individuals because you might invent something dangerous without the government knowing it until you had released the idea into the world creating instability.

In the 21st century hardly anybody invents anything any more, the best you see are refinements of already existing items. The home phone became the bag phone became the hand held phone became the blue tooth earpiece. Printing became the telegraph became text messaging. Calculating machines became computers became pocket calculators became iPad's. Try and name inventions that are not just refinements of something else invented long ago. For the 1800's it was, telephone, telegraph, bicycle, dynamite, automobile, steam trains, submarines, mechanical reapers. Try and name anything new today that isn't a refinement.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ') Try and name anything new today that isn't a refinement.

[Newfie]

This is just a pondering, not a statement.

I have heard it said, and I believe it true, that large population loss in Europe due to plague enabled the enlightenment because the survivors became more wealthy, not as many people.

I wonder if something similar happened after WWI and WWII?

I wonder what will happen in the future?

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'T')his is just a pondering, not a statement.

I have heard it said, and I believe it true, that large population loss in Europe due to plague enabled the enlightenment because the survivors became more wealthy, not as many people.

I wonder if something similar happened after WWI and WWII?

I wonder what will happen in the future?