Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 13:28:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', 'A')re you a far left liberal? In my experience, only a far left liberal with nary a clue about economics would make such an argument and expect to be taken at all seriously.
I think this is what it comes down to with you. You hate the environmentalists always have, for prescribing restraint in using the planet. We said stop polluting. You said that will hurt the economy. We said stop ruinng the rivers and oceans it will kill fish. You said that's impossible. We said no more clearcutting, the forests are not endless. You said they grow back. We said be careful with big cars and trucks. You said the earth is endless. WRONG. Get over it outcast and join the winner/doomers :lol:

Who do you mean by "you"? If you mean the far right GOP "consume everything and pretend there are no consequences" people -- then fine -- for that group I agree with you.

However, that has nothing to do with me -- so if you are addressing me personally, you have no idea what you're talking about. I am a moderate (deciding each issue on its own merits and not identifying with any political party to any great extent), and I do try to live with a relatively small energy footprint -- especially light on the consumer cr*p.

BTW, WHAT does your rant about environmental issues have to do with my point that saying a government program is a basic need because people "WANT" it is typical of far left economic babblespeak (and therefore I find it amusing)?

Hint -- did you notice I criticized both a far left and far right position in this post?
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 10142
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
Location: Central KY

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Subjectivist » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 14:26:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ho trusted God was love indeed
And love Creation's final law
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed


Nature does not care what you want or what you need, only what you do. Many want to live, but nature doesn't care, live or die and nature goes on. Overpopulate and have your population crash from starvation and nature doesn't care, control your population at some arbitrary level that can prevent ecologically damage and nature doesn't care. If we manage to last a billion years or die off completely in 2015 nature doesn't care.

Sorry guess I am in a foul mood today. Cornucopians are wrong because they assume God's bounty is endless. They ignore the fact that we were created to be Stewards, not just users of the Earth.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Subjectivist
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4705
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 15:47:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I')f you didn't notice, I toned down my rant. Just for you outcast. :)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')TW, WHAT does your rant about environmental issues have to do with my point that saying a government program is a basic need because people "WANT" it is typical of far left economic babblespeak (and therefore I find it amusing)?

Looks like we still have something to argue about. It is not babblespeak, its commonsense and christian generosity.

What you call "commonsense" (sic), I call emotional thinking, based on wishes instead of economic constraints (AKA) reality -- and therefore nonsense.

What do I want? I want (over the long term) balanced budgets, supporting sustainable long term programs. That means the adults in the room (not the far left on economics) need to actually prioritize the programs and the amount we spend. Naturally this includes programs the right favors like the military (which is an expensive disaster -- for what we get, in my opinion).

Unfortunately from your ilk, we get more complaining about Christian values (when it suits your agenda) than viable decision points on things like education for people willing to do acceptable work vs. endless food stamps for morbidly obese people. Always whining for more does NOT equate to a sustainable set of government programs.

And as a taxpayer who is expected to pay for many of the endless programs the far left wants because they claim it is "Christian" and "common sense" as long as someone else is paying for it -- yes, I think there need to be adults (who can do arithmetic) in the room.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 10142
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
Location: Central KY
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Subjectivist » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 16:45:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'Y')ou know Sub, I mostly believe in the christian message of Love (I just don't like the antiquated angry components. Are they all from the old testament?). Science and the bible agree that love binds us; social status-seeking hominids bound by tribal affiliation and displaced motherly love.

Let's hold hands and sing kumbaya now. :)


The New Testement has a few harsh spots as well, the time when Jesus whipped the money changers out of the Temple is probably the most used example.

The Old Testement has plenty of love in it, if you read carefully and think of it in terms of a Father relating to his favorite children. God is saddened by our failings, but like the Prodigal's father He always welcomes his children back home when they ask.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Subjectivist
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4705
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 23:00:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'I') didn't say Health Care is not a need, clearly everyone needs it. I am talking about from the POV of a society, not the individual. From the point of view of a society having the elderly and the people with lousy immune systems like myself quietly die off and be replaced by healthier and younger worker drones is a big plus. Sucks to be one of us who needs medication to remain on the sunny side of the sod, but them's the breaks after Peak when resources become restricted.

Pops you have stated you are T1D, insulin dependent. If things go to heck in a handbasket you are going to have to figure out how to get more insulin to fill your absolute need, or you will cease to live. From the POV of society when food is in short supply and gas is restricted to 'vital services' how much importance will the authorities place on getting you insulin in a timely manner? I am on medication for blood pressure, gall bladder, kidneys, other issues as well. If things go completely to pieces when my current prescriptions run out that will be the end of the line. I might be able to survive a week/month, maybe even a few years, but then again I might not. I very much WANT health care to continue on cheap enough for me to afford it, but from the POV of society I am just a useless eater who posts opinions online a lot.


Your second paragraph, though, shows that it is a need. It's just that it will have to be set aside given a lack of resources, and that supports my point.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 23:05:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'O')n a world wide basis there is no "Need" for health care. There are about two billion people on the planet that are under thirty and have never had any health care and probably never will. They can ,have, and will ,reproduce at rates that more then balance infant and young adult death rates which are the only ones that matter as all us old plodders will die eventually and once your children are independent from you, how long you hang on is immaterial.
So to get back to what your minimum needs are I go to: food , water, shelter, clothing and somewhere there has to be the tools and energy to keep supplying the above as you consume them. You can either grow or make them yourself or exchange some useful skill, labor or property for them.
Food 2500 calories /day to allow physical activity and for some waste.
Shelter 150 square feet per person, weather tight and capable of being heated in winter. (A yurt would do.). Water: the average American uses 100 gallons per day. the average Bedouin in Iraq about five. We could probably get by with 25/ day plus two acre feet per year to grow our food.
Energy: grow & cook your food and heat your shelter.? A couple of barrels of diesel or gas and a cord of wood or equivalent/ person for heat.
That is it for necessities, then you get into optional or luxury items.
First would be electricity for lighting and then for food preservation. Then some energy for transport to save walking to work and carrying things home from the store by backpack. Soap to keep everything clean and healthy.
That all sounds pretty spartan but a lot of the world is already getting by on a lot less.


Don't confuse the need to stay alive with the need to make sure that population levels remain thanks to high birth rates.

Also, all of the numbers have to be seen in light of a far larger global population plus environmental damage plus the effects of global warming.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 23:07:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('basil_hayden', 'I') don't think Tanada is referring to "society" where health care is indeed necessary to stability, but ironically to this thing called "humanity" where our species improves as the weak or unfortunate get pruned.

In any case, this thread atill hasn't presented any evidence for cornies being wrong or doomers being right; I wish it would get pruned to nonexistence.


When populations prune themselves, that's not an example of improvement but the opposite. It's also an example that shows that cornies are wrong.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 23:27:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')Universal health care is a want, not a need...


I think health care, especially universal health care (as most people are poor) is a need because most people want to live as long as they can and keep their loved ones (especially infants and children) healthy.


(Font of "want" changed by me, for emphasis.)

From the poster who claims universal healthcare is a basic need vs. a want. And how does he defend that premise? Well, because people "WANT" it, of course!



A basic need is something that people want in order to keep infant mortality rates down and life expectancy rates up. A "want" is something that's not needed to ensure the two. Read this wiki entry for more details:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_needs

What I offered is similar to what is given in modern lists, as mentioned in the second paragraph.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Do you know what irony is? Are you familiar with groups like Monty Python, or modern adult cartoons which use sarcasm to point out how thoughtless people are? (Like "The Simpsons" or "Futurama")?


What I offered is not ironic as basic needs and "wants" are things that people want. The question is which ones allow allows for long-term health. See the first paragraph of the wiki entry for details and my previous post on the matter.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Are you a far left liberal? In my experience, only a far left liberal with nary a clue about economics would make such an argument and expect to be taken at all seriously.



I'm a realist.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
But please do go on. Watching your side of such economic "arguments" is just as amusing as watching doomers insist, every week, that NOW is the time the economic end times begin -- and that moderates or cornies are constantly wrong (despite the ongoing data), because doomers don't like any good news.

Disclosure: I continue to be a moderate. Year after year, the overall data seems to be that global society continues to muddle onward, making some progress and doing many stupid and short sighted things -- and that trend appears FAR more likely than being able to accurately predict either the nature or the timing of the alternative with any accuracy.

Here's an article about a study that compares various trends with forecasts from Limits to Growth:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... g-collapse

Given your point, food out, services, and industrial output per capita should continue rising together with population indefinitely. How is that possible given peak oil, global warming, environmental damage, and a limited biocapacity?
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 09 Feb 2015, 23:41:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I')f you didn't notice, I toned down my rant. Just for you outcast. :)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')TW, WHAT does your rant about environmental issues have to do with my point that saying a government program is a basic need because people "WANT" it is typical of far left economic babblespeak (and therefore I find it amusing)?

Looks like we still have something to argue about. It is not babblespeak, its commonsense and christian generosity.

What you call "commonsense" (sic), I call emotional thinking, based on wishes instead of economic constraints (AKA) reality -- and therefore nonsense.

What do I want? I want (over the long term) balanced budgets, supporting sustainable long term programs. That means the adults in the room (not the far left on economics) need to actually prioritize the programs and the amount we spend. Naturally this includes programs the right favors like the military (which is an expensive disaster -- for what we get, in my opinion).

Unfortunately from your ilk, we get more complaining about Christian values (when it suits your agenda) than viable decision points on things like education for people willing to do acceptable work vs. endless food stamps for morbidly obese people. Always whining for more does NOT equate to a sustainable set of government programs.

And as a taxpayer who is expected to pay for many of the endless programs the far left wants because they claim it is "Christian" and "common sense" as long as someone else is paying for it -- yes, I think there need to be adults (who can do arithmetic) in the room.


Economic constraints likely do not describe "reality" as they essentially involve numbers in hard drives.

If sustainability refers to ensuring that as many people remain as healthy as possible, then that is likely a "far left" view. The contrast is free market capitalism, which considers sustainability of economic growth.

As some become wealthier, they eventually influence the government, which controls military forces. That's why it is not coincidental that the U.S. military is used to prop up the petrodollar needed to support an economy dominated by consuming spending, using armaments from the defense industry, with multinational corporations poised to strike deals with newly installed authorities.

Finally, aren't the other points you raise also the result of the same type of economy? That is, consumer spending coupled with a welfare system to control a population which continues to vote for one pro-Wall Street administration after another?
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 09:23:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')Universal health care is a want, not a need...


I think health care, especially universal health care (as most people are poor) is a need because most people want to live as long as they can and keep their loved ones (especially infants and children) healthy.


(Font of "want" changed by me, for emphasis.)

From the poster who claims universal healthcare is a basic need vs. a want. And how does he defend that premise? Well, because people "WANT" it, of course!



A basic need is something that people want in order to keep infant mortality rates down and life expectancy rates up. A "want" is something that's not needed to ensure the two. Read this wiki entry for more details:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_needs

What I offered is similar to what is given in modern lists, as mentioned in the second paragraph.


Seems how my statement is what set this all off I will be blunt. What the world worker union or whomever says is irrelevant to my distinction between a want and a need. In order to be born and live long enough to have a child and raise that child until it can bring forth grandchildren to carry on your genetic line there are basic needs.
These are
1) adequate shelter to keep you from roasting/freezing/exposure to bad weather.
2) adequate food to have life and energy left over to reproduce successfully.
3) adequate potable water for drinking and cooking purposes.
4) adequate clothing so that when you are outside your shelter you are not exposed to conditions that will kill or maim you.

That is it for NEEDS. For wants
1) I prefer a nice warm in winter cool in summer private house, but if I have to I can live 20 people to a hut where body heat keeps us from freezing in the winter.
2) I prefer a wide variety of foods to choose from in all seasons and the fresher the better, but I can live on canned tuna and Ramen noodles if I have too. Been there, done that.
3) I prefer showers and baths and clean clothes and mopped floors. If I have too I can live in one set of clothes without bathing only hand washing before meals. That was how most Americans lived as recently as 1900 and as late as 1960 bathing once a week was considered perfectly normal.
4) I prefer having a closet full of clothing and a choice of outer wear to fit the conditions outside from barefoot to heavy winter boots. If I had too I could have one set of clothes that would be worn in layers depending on weather conditions just like people did in the past.

None of this is to say education and health care are unimportant, but the vast bulk of humans who have ever lived got their education from their parents/tribe/employer and you went to the Doctor if you were very ill or badly injured and just muddled on through otherwise. Needs are what you have to have to muddle on through, Wants make life more interesting and often longer. Following the basic hygiene rules put out in the old Testament book Deuteronomy or Leviticus greatly slows the spread of infectious disease. Part of the reason Jewish adherents were persecuted in the middle ages is they had much better hygiene so they had much lower disease rates and their Christian adherent neighbors blamed them for the illnesses they suffered from. Cleanliness is next to Godliness is just a catch phrase to us, but before modern antibiotics it was life saving advice.

I believe our civilization is at a fork in the road, either we work our way around Peak Oil and continue our current high technology lifestyle, or we fall back a very very long way. Civilizations have collapsed hundreds of times in the human history that we know of, usually leaving a remnant population of about ten percent who are good survivor types. We talk about the 'collapse' of the Soviet Union, but it really was not in any real sense of the term, it was just a political dissolution and a deep depression. The Hopi Indians, the Mayans, the Moche, Ancient Egypt several times, the Fertile Crescent several times, the Chinese several times, the cultures of India several times went through cycles where the population drop was extreme. People starved, or fled, or fought until most of them did not live there any more. Ancient ruins are RUINS because the people building and maintaining them stopped doing so. Sometimes the population decline took 100 years, like it did in Rome between 450-550 AD. Other times like the Mayan civilization it looks as if one day the people were working the fields and the next day they were gone.

We are either about to have our hour of greatest triumph, or deepest despair. If we fail as a civilization we could do it overnight like the Maya or over a century like Rome. For the city of Rome between a third and half the population was on public assistance right before the end, when they could no longer feed the poor they fled the city or starved.

If we do not navigate the peak well many of us will be facing the same dilemma of where does our next meal come from. Having grown up in the country I can tell you there is not a lot of food stored here any longer, it gets hauled away by truck and train as soon as it is harvested and sold away. Nobody stores food any longer, so if the distribution system fails we are all in very big trouble. The good news is 30% of Americans are now obese so they can last months without food. The bad news is in a total collapse like the dystopian books and movies scenario after those few months there are no new crops coming in to eat, and the wildlife and pet populations will have been devastated by desperate people looking for anything to eat. Smart animal husbandry will give you a sustainable yield of meat from range land, a desperate crowd of hungry people will slaughter and waste without thought for the next year. Eating the seeds will feed you for a few weeks, but then you have nothing to plant for the next years growing season.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Quinny » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 15:04:31

I agree with a lot of what you say Tanada, but also believe that a communist system is the only way to provide it.
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Pops » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 16:04:48

T,
You are taking lots of words to justify the idea that we shouldn't take care of each other.

Who knows, maybe. Most other countries disagree and have some type of societal system in place to achieve that while we here still calling each other names because we're afraid the next guy is getting a better deal and resent him for it.

When the ballon goes up it is entirely possible that the system will breakdown. The difference will be that other country's medical delivery system is already designed so everyone can get some, they'll ration based on efficacy. Here we'll just continue to ration based on income.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 17:27:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'T'),
You are taking lots of words to justify the idea that we shouldn't take care of each other.

Who knows, maybe. Most other countries disagree and have some type of societal system in place to achieve that while we here still calling each other names because we're afraid the next guy is getting a better deal and resent him for it.

When the balloon goes up it is entirely possible that the system will breakdown. The difference will be that other country's medical delivery system is already designed so everyone can get some, they'll ration based on efficacy. Here we'll just continue to ration based on income.


I classify this as attacking the messenger instead of the message, but thanks for playing.

Not once have I ever said we should throw our neighbors, or other fellow humans under the bus to benefit ourselves.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby Pops » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 18:01:59

Come on T, don't get all defensive. The idea you argued is "health is not a right," it's a common belief in the US - I'd say about the same as any conservative ideology, you aren't saying anything new.

Other countries think it is a right. And in the context of the Big Die-Off I think they will be better off for having a system in place to provide basic medicine while the majority of our docs specialists will experience Peak Boob Job (PBJ) and sit around waiting to do a facelift until they are forced to start collecting cans along the road.

US medicine it twice as expensive as anywhere else (and not as good) because we spend 3-6 times as much on specialists.

Image

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n business, bad problems call for plain talk. The data I found says the dominant problem with U.S. health care costs is a labor problem with medical professionals. Wages and work rules (i.e., referral decisions leading to over-utilization, staffing levels in hospitals) have driven costs to a level that is now unbearable


http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddhixon/2 ... s-so-high/
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Why Cornucopians are Wrong.

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 10 Feb 2015, 18:59:20

It is a bit disconcerting that we need to debate the difference between want and need. You need air. If you are deprived of it for more then three minutes you will die. You want high speed internet but if you are deprived of it you might have to read a book.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron