[malcomatic_51]

On MSNBC there is an article "10 things you need to know about gas prices". It has some shockingly bad rubbish in it:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Sa ... rices.aspx

I was particularly struck by the second question:

"Is there something consumers can do now to immediately drive prices down?"

First they say "no" and quote a fool economist called Levitt. Then they say that the answer is to consume less, without apparently being aware of the contradiction. They blame high gas prices on lack of refineries, with the problem to last until 2009 when new capacity will be brought on stream.

Well, then why are gas prices high ALL OVER THE WORLD" if it's just a US refinery problem? And if the market is so efficient, then why is the price not being brought down by imports from other countries?

No mention of Peak Oil of course, or lack of global spare capacity, or absence of increase in production for two years.

This hardens my conviction the MSM will just go on misleading people and will never admit PO has happened. People will get more and more confused and angry.

[emersonbiggins]

Scariest quote of the whole article: (emphasis mine)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')We're not talking about the production of yachts or diamonds," Slocum said. "We're talking about a commodity that is literally a fuel for our entire economy. To say that the government should not do anything to regulate this is suicide."

[strider3700]

They should totally regulate it. That will give me an extra what $20/week to put towards preps while everyone else spends it on plasma tv's or disney tips. It will also mean those preps will definitely be needed.

Remember boys and girls a fast crash is the best choice if you intend to survive and are wanting to have some semblance of an environment left when all is said and done.

[Waterthrush]

Strider, I probably missed a whole lotta threads on the fast vs slow crash issue - could you elaborate? Thanks!

[sameu]

my guess is that a fast crash will mean a bigger advantage for the ones who are prepared
when it's long and strecthy the advantage of let's say a food stockpile is less big

[Twilight]

The general theory here is that a fast crash results in minimal environmental damage. A quick burst of social annihilation, and we are left with the world as it is today. There is the added bonus of avoiding prolonged periods of tyranny, as no government would have the assets or time to respond to disorder in hostile fashion. The trick would be surviving the disaster, which in the West would comfortably exceed the situation in 1990s FSU due to a comparative lack of survival mechanisms.

The other possibility is a "long emergency" in which we destroy the environment through progressively more polluting and lower EROEI programmes, culminating in subsidy of functions deemed essential at a net energy loss elsewhere. I would guess the comparison would be the industrial zones of China. The advantage is those alive today would live in a manner to which they are accustomed a bit longer, the disadvantage is the human race having no future thereafter.

Tough choice there.

[strider3700]

Basically Yes a fast crash gives an advantage to those that are prepped and may be better for the environment. Of course the ultimate fast crash is full scale nuclear war and it's doubtful that the environment will be better off in that case.

A slow crash will allow the overshoot to continue even further and will allow us to continue to strip mine the planet in hunt of anything that will burn. It could last decades and noone can prep for that.

The difficulties involved with prepping for a slow crash and dealing with the results are why I'm a fast crash believer. Even the ultra rich elite can't really prepare completely for the next 20-50 years. They'd never be able to defend the horde and would eventually be overrun. Even if they do maintain their food/energy supply the world will be turning to crap around them and there won't be much left by the time the population is greatly decreased.

So I believe they will work towards a fast crash. A good solid bunker capable of supporting a family for a year is within the reach of most of the middle class if they set it as a priority. The ultra rich could spend a year or two in absolute luxury without much issue and at the end climb out to a mostly depopulated world.

[frankthetank]

The local newslady about a week back made the comment in her report that categorized gasoline with food. I can't recall the exact wording, but she pretty much said that gasoline is needed to live(along with food). I was yelling @ the tv

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frankthetank', 'T')he local newslady about a week back made the comment in her report that categorized gasoline with food. I can't recall the exact wording, but she pretty much said that gasoline is needed to live(along with food). I was yelling @ the tv