by Windmills » Wed 23 May 2012, 01:18:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seenmostofit', 'A')nd if we can drop our demand faster than the natural decline of supplies? Presto....no different than the appearance of abundance, the discrepancy between supply and demand from whence all things good flow. Price wise anyway.
It's quite different than the appearance of abundance. It's rather like saying, "it doesn't matter that we're running out of food, so long as we continuously reduce our caloric intake to match the declining food supply, we'll be fine price-wise."
What matters is the rate at which we can substitute for the decline of various resources, and whether the economy, culture, and political systems can withstand that rate of change. It's possible that the market signals most people are awaiting will come too late and the required changes will have to happen too quickly. A massive chunk of the global economic system will be difficult to change overnight. The changes will come, but at what cost in life, environment, health, and political stability? Can all these solutions be ramped up rapidly enough at a point in the future in which we're likely to be in another recession? Who's going to pay for all the new infrastructure when the government and the consumer have nothing to spare? Who's going to invest in a declining economy when there are profits to be made in other parts of the world that might still be growing? It's easy to dream; it's much harder to finance a dream.