[Anthrobus]

@ Montequest and Mr. Bill,

your arguments are both very good and convincing. I am still uncertain about my projection for the po future (hovering between your positions), but one thing is quite sure imho:

Our economic structures will have to adapt soft or hard, lots of assets will loose their value (depression) but since people will not just sit by idle, there will also be a frenzy of economic activities. Maybe there will be a race or a competition for getting into the best position for the changes. A lot of investment has to be done too. Of course, a lot of out of date economic structures (car factories, suburbs) will suffer "recession". Any regrets?

Example: If a (medium sized) asteroid drops and causes a lot of destruction in your country, people loose a lot of capital due to the damage, but economic activity will pick up too due to high priority reconstruction works. And the reconstruction of neccessary structures will be a safe investment because no surplus offices will be built, but power plants, schools, factories, that bring in a high real yield to the investment. People may be poorer but will work busy and confident.

(I remember the film "big impact", after the impact and the flood wave, the president of the usa announced, that everyting would be rebuilt the same as it had been before.

Such a openly displayed poverty of mind made me wring my hands in desperation. Not a little bit better, no, just the same damned boring shit as before, what a fool of a president i thought then ...)

So, somehow the cards will just be dealt out new with po. But as long as there is something new overgrowing the rubbles of the old, using tractor or ox, you can find confidence. Maybe our kids will call us old chickenheads. And they may be right because they will look forward to a far more sustainable way of living than we do.

This reminds me to some lines of "Julius Cesar" which go roughly like this ...

The bay-trees in our country are all wither'd
And meteors fright the fixed stars of heaven;
The pale-faced moon looks bloody on the earth
And lean-look'd prophets whisper fearful change;
Rich men look sad and ruffians dance and leap,
The one in fear to lose what they enjoy,
The other to enjoy by rage and war:

ok ok, it was in richard II,

so, maybe less growth but lots of activity ...

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'I')n this respect we would see a return to something similar to the beginnings of the era of steam and industrialization that started to compete with the age of sail and trade on major routes through central markets. Economic activity will radiate out from these centers until the cost of transport outweighs the benefits of trade, and then you will have smaller, self-contained communities with local and regional economies. Not likely either or.

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '
')Anywhere in the world, and in any historical period, economic growth of countries depended on those countries using more energy. If we study the history of fast economic growth in Asian Tiger economies, and focus their period of fastest growth and development, that was approximately 1975-1990, we find that Asian Tiger economies experienced very fast growth of oil demand at exactly the time of most-recent fastest increase of oil prices, that is in 1973-1974, and again at time of highest real price of oil, that is 1979-1981.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Concerned', '
')The full article is a good take on the oil and other commodity issue.

If the oil crisis was 1973-1974 and the tigers started to take off in 1975 then the first oil crisis was behind them.

It would be interesting to get a breakdown of energy prices (coal/oil/gas) and compare it year by year to economic growth.

Also interesting would be to see where the growth in the tigers was coming from? How much industry moved from say US or Europe to Asia based on labor cost savings? (Maintain profits in the face of higher energy costs.)

[Revi]

I think there may be economic activity in the big change that must take place. People will be buying new houses closer to their work, switching to smaller cars or motorcycles and retofitting their houses to capture solar energy if they are smart. This all costs money, and people will spend to rearrange their lives. It may come out of savings, or they may be trading down, but they are trading. It's an ill wind that blows no man good. There won't be many economic winners when peak oil really starts biting, but there will be a few.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'I') think there may be economic activity in the big change that must take place. People will be buying new houses closer to their work, switching to smaller cars or motorcycles and retofitting their houses to capture solar energy if they are smart. This all costs money.....

[bulldozer]

It is interesting.

It is obvious we cannot rely on having more energy, or as much energy, in the future.

Should we make preparations now? No. George Bush says significantly altering our consuming habits would hurt the economy.

But Wait!

Ireland uses much less energy per/person than us! They use 2/3rds the oil per person as us! We use 2.13 times as much electricity per person as Ireland!

But...Their unemployment is very low! Their GDP is growing much faster than ours! Their GDP per Capita is about 42,000 dollars(american), just like Ours!

There must be room to change our consuming habits and improve our economy at the same time. Their must be room to reduce our consumption of oil, gas, and electricity, and improve our quality of life at the same time.

Sure, Ireland is more comparable to Maine than to the Entire United States.

here is something else I noticed about Ireland! Trade with Japan, China, and third world nations was an insignificant fraction of their total imports and exports!

The evidence is mounting! Turbo Capitalism Globalism is incompatible with sound energy policies.

[Revi]

I agree, Maine is like Ireland. We can make the switch to low energy/green and growing economy with smart leadership. Let's hope we don't get Chandler Woodcock for Governor. He's a nice guy, but he won't take Maine in the right direction. If he gets in we'll go down with the ship (the Repubs in Washington). I say, go green and reap the rewards. We need to figure a way to use our "brand". When you think of Maine you think of a green place. Why not encourage green industries to move here and benefit from our brand as well. Make Maine the Ireland of the 21st century. That could lead to economic growth with declining energy.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bulldozer', 'I')t is interesting.

It is obvious we cannot rely on having more energy, or as much energy, in the future.

Should we make preparations now? No. George Bush says significantly altering our consuming habits would hurt the economy.

But Wait!

Ireland uses much less energy per/person than us! They use 2/3rds the oil per person as us! We use 2.13 times as much electricity per person as Ireland!

But...Their unemployment is very low! Their GDP is growing much faster than ours! Their GDP per Capita is about 42,000 dollars(american), just like Ours!

There must be room to change our consuming habits and improve our economy at the same time. Their must be room to reduce our consumption of oil, gas, and electricity, and improve our quality of life at the same time.

Sure, Ireland is more comparable to Maine than to the Entire United States.

here is something else I noticed about Ireland! Trade with Japan, China, and third world nations was an insignificant fraction of their total imports and exports!

The evidence is mounting! Turbo Capitalism Globalism is incompatible with sound energy policies.

[kokoda]

Capitalists want you to buy ... and continue to buy until it hurts. They want you to buy the biggest and most expensive cars available ... in fact more then one ... they want you to buy several new cars. Not just cars but every consumer good under the sun.

They want you to spend money you haven't got on stuff you don't need.

In the ideal capitalist society industry grows by producing more and more. Making stuff is useless unless people also buy more and more. Since consumers are unlikely to have the money to sustain this spending frenzy they must borrow against their future earnings. Consumers then find themselves in debt to the banks and totally dependant on the continual growth of the economy to earn the money to pay off their current borrowings.

You throw peak oil into that mix and the whole thing comes crashing down like a house of cards.

Oil prices go up and so does everything else. People stop buying because they are uncomfortable with their level of debt. Factories slow down or close as a result. People lose jobs, loans are defaulted on, no more money is avaiable for growth and then you have a depression.

Peak oil won't destroy capitalism. Eventually after the economy freefalls long enough, and the population sustainability level is met, capitalism will crank up again, albiet at a much lower level.

This is the cyclic nature of capitalism. Every now and then when the market overheats or something goes wrong then the economy will go bad and then recover when sustainability is reached.

After peak oil we may never see the sort of rapid growth rates we are seeing today. People will be more concerned with the basics of keeping their families fed and giving them a roof over their heads.

Owning 42 inch plasma televisions and SUVs will be a somewhat lower priority.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '
')Peak oil won't destroy capitalism. Eventually after the economy freefalls long enough, and the population sustainability level is met, capitalism will crank up again, albiet at a much lower level.

[kokoda]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '
')Peak oil won't destroy capitalism. Eventually after the economy freefalls long enough, and the population sustainability level is met, capitalism will crank up again, albiet at a much lower level.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '
')Peak oil won't destroy capitalism. Eventually after the economy freefalls long enough, and the population sustainability level is met, capitalism will crank up again, albiet at a much lower level.

[kokoda]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '
')Peak oil won't destroy capitalism. Eventually after the economy freefalls long enough, and the population sustainability level is met, capitalism will crank up again, albiet at a much lower level.

[MrBill]

Kokoda wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hy do so many people see issues in such black and white terms.

[kokoda]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '
')Sorry when you frame your argument as follows:

"Capitalists want you to buy ... and continue to buy until it hurts. They want you to buy the biggest and most expensive cars available ... in fact more then one ... they want you to buy several new cars. Not just cars but every consumer good under the sun.

They want you to spend money you haven't got on stuff you don't need. "

You are not seeking the middle ground. You are making a definite statement.

[Revi]

I don't know about the society in general, but an individual person can get ahead by saving money and not buying as much fossil fuel. Fossil fuel is a waste. You pay and it gets burned up. It isn't like a capital improvement that keeps paying and paying. They just eat your money. We save over $2550 a year from the changes we've made in our household. We use half the fossil fuel we used 5 years ago. Click on the pics for more info:

http://www.msad54.org/sahs/appliedarts/ ... /index.htm

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'I') don't know about the society in general, but an individual person can get ahead by saving money and not buying as much fossil fuel. Fossil fuel is a waste. You pay and it gets burned up. It isn't like a capital improvement that keeps paying and paying. They just eat your money. We save over $2550 a year from the changes we've made in our household. We use half the fossil fuel we used 5 years ago. Click on the pics for more info:

http://www.msad54.org/sahs/appliedarts/ ... /index.htm

[JustWatch]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', 'C')apitalism is self serving. Capitalism is also self destructive.

[mididoctors]

How about if consumerism was sublimated into a virtual realm.. identity expressed through consumption and material ownership could be replaced by a low energy virtual consumer society where ones bling is virtual...

ok that is extremely thin

if one wanted to create economic growth through people buying things and services that do not consume INCREASINGLY DISPROPORTIONATE amounts of energy perhaps virtual shopping is a possibility?

people want to complement their sense of identity through ownership... thats how all that consumerism works is it not?

Boris
London