by Shadizar » Tue 09 May 2006, 21:29:52
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'I') think the point is that to a large extent, short of the collapse theory, he can ignore all of those things you listed with impunity. I'm not sure he's wrong. In the 70's we had pretty intense inflation, and it made the news, but no one I knew starved to death, there was a bit of car pooling, but in general, it was a nuthin.
So until we have sustained, multiyear inflation exceeding 20% annually, I think a lot of people may very well be able to ignore the issue completely. No one really cares, when they flip the light switch, whether the electricity in question was generated by solar, by nuke, or by coal.
Its this side of the argument that leans me, personally, towards the side of non-event status. All that said, regardless of my opinion at the moment, I ain't buying anybodies book on the subject.
Take a look at the world "holistically." I think you'll find the U.S. and most western countries are doing O.K. Sooner or later the price of oil will hit the western countries. Now, it is only a nuisance.
If oil is abundant (as it was historically) why can't the third world markets afford it? Cheap and plentiful oil would fuel the growth of third world countries. That is not the case.
Also, consider world events in your evaluation. Politics are tied to energy as much as anything else. Hint: Russia. Do you really think their recent actions (and their being able to get away with them) speak of an abundance of energy?
-Shadizar