[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'I') stopped reading after the part where you denied having to prove causation because I was struck with uncontrollable laughter. You're not just against economics, you're against reason and science itself! There's absolutely no point debating with you.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'C')apitalism does not require growth

[jaws]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rogerhb', 'I') was wondering if you still hold this to be true?

1. We live on a finite earth.

2. Our population is increasing.

3. People work with the system because they believe one of the following:

i. they have no option
ii. they are working towards a better tomorrow.

So how can all have a better tomorrow, be more wealthy, if we live on a finite planet? Or is the goal to delude enough of the people so that they don't revolt?

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'A')s for population increases, only capitalism can provide the accomodation for the surplus population. During the period 1750-1930, England's population doubled. Mass poverty was the issue of the day. Traditional rural economy couldn't provide any employment for the surplus population. The capitalist reforms initiated the industrial revolution and provided employment to the masses previously outcast. Today capital accumulation has created so much security that populations are falling in the western world. If people are confident that their savings will support them in old age, they see no need to have many children. They have few and love them more.

[Drakn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f people are not satisfied, they revolt.

[jaws]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rogerhb', 'B')ut this only works if you don't accept Limits-to-Growth. People will have to get more satisfaction from a smaller allocation of resources. If the future is smaller and smaller houses, is that going to increase peoples satisfaction?

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Drakn', 'F')rom my understanding of history, it is only when there is an economic 'voltage', or potential difference.

[spudbuddy]

Capatalist and economic theories and ideologies and histories notwithstanding.....
what does rising energy cost do to Globalization?
-as it exists now.

It certainly existed before oil.
The slave trade (imported cheap labor)
Lots of examples of capital shopping for cheap labor pre-1900.

But in today's world:

The first thing we think about is all the off-shoring and outsourcing.
To a certain extent, this existed even back in the boom times of the 50's and 60's.
It took a huge upswing after our 70's oil shocks.
And escalated yet again in the 90's.

I wouldn't mind finding a little more discussion in here about all this.

Major capital around the planet...UK, Germany, Japan, US...pretty much the entire G8 club....shops ever more for international cheap labor.
Transnational corporations are not nationalistic at all. They look at the planet like we look across counties, states and regions.
They do this because an entire transportation infrastructure is there in place for them to utilize.
Anybody ponder the statistics of "business" travel?
How many execs, controllers, sales managers, production managers zip around the continents the way the rest of us zip around our suburban communities? That's a lot of jet fuel.
A Boeing is assembled in Seattle with parts from a dozen countries...or more.
The planet's an ever-shrinking checkerboard for the transnational game.

South Korea supposedly is a success story of this process. They have a manufacturing base of their own, that originally kick-started with cheap labor financed by foreign capital, quite some time ago.
But if they are doing so well...why are there so many Koreans in North America?

Globalization ripped the manufacturing base out of North America.
Energy and fuel costs were never factored into the equation.
Not the actual present cost...but the cost of future depletion.

If this cost was of prime importance...distances crossed would be a major consideration.
Transnational wealth combined with financial institutional manipulation produces ridiculous extravagance...while shirinking tax revenues leave society at large bankrupt. There is no social contract.
At least 80% of the North American population do not now, never did, and never will benefit from Globalization.
We share this with the majority of the rest of the planet.

This is all much bigger than just the issue of rising energy cost....but it is a major factor in oil depletion.

I don't know how this will all pan out as far as bouncing code off satellites (outsourced IT) but as far as transporting goods...ultimately it will have to bring things back closer to home.

[cheRand]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') don't know how this will all pan out as far as bouncing code off satellites (outsourced IT) but as far as transporting goods...ultimately it will have to bring things back closer to home.

[ehv_nl]

I can hardly believe I just read this in an Financial Times article: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')inance ministers and central bank governors of the world's leading industrial countries have warned of economic disruption from high oil prices and and vulnerabilities in financial markets.

The mood at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank annual meetings was downbeat, with senior politicians and officials airing their fears that global economic expansion may have peaked and that more challenging times lie ahead.

[Raxozanne]

Well its about time they read the writing on the wall.

[gg3]

Political & economic leaders have known this for at least two decades but have not admitted it in public.

Starting with Reaganomics, the clear understanding that continued growth is not possible, so the pie will not be getting bigger, so the goal becomes a question of distribution: how big a slice for each person at the table.

And we've seen the answer: the ruling elites go "mine all mine!" and try to grab as much as they can for themselves, while letting everything else go to hell on a sled.

Consider that Congress was still talking about more tax cuts for the rich during the very weeks that corpses were floating in the sewage-flood in Louisiana.

[syncline]

I read the article as saying that "expansion" has peaked. That's a long way from admitting that the world economy may face actual contraction.

[ohanian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('syncline', 'I') read the article as saying that "expansion" has peaked. That's a long way from admitting that the world economy may face actual contraction.

[FrankRichards]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('syncline', 'I') read the article as saying that "expansion" has peaked. That's a long way from admitting that the world economy may face actual contraction.

[BO]

Still, I have never heard the World Bank or the IMF admit limits to growth.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BO', 'S')till, I have never heard the World Bank or the IMF admit limits to growth.

[peaker_2005]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BO', 'S')till, I have never heard the World Bank or the IMF admit limits to growth.

[MrBill]

The IMF, World Bank, OECD, G8, etc. are not in denial. They have all pointed out the dangers of the US' record budget, current account and trade deficits. And, the dangers of having a record debt, but a negative public savings rate.

The US government and its citizens are in denial because they do not believe they have to make any sacrafices and everything will be okay? That Asian central banks will go on refinancing the US' budget deficit. That interest rates will not rise far or quickly. That housing prices will remain high. That energy will remain relatively cheap & plentiful.

Who is in denial?

[Doly]

WTF does "the global economy has peaked" mean?

I understand that oil production can peak, but what kind of economic measurement is peaking when they say something like that?