[wisconsin_cur]

During my time here I have noticed something about perspective.

I am from and in the midwest. the product of 5-6 generations of midwest farmers. Both families hit their peak in the era before tractors. My grandfather was met by the bank president when he went to open his first bank account after getting married to grandma, "congradulations on marrying the daughter of our largest depositor" he was told. The other side of the family was not as financially successful but hit a cultural apex. G-gpa could play many musical instruments. The dairy barn he built still stands and is, thanks to the current owners, a cathedrial.

The last half of the 20th century (when we burnt most of the oil) has not been that good to us. I'm not all that lovey-dovey to how the world is. I see plenty of opportunity for social advancement. I see plenty of opportunity to be more happy and better able to pass on my values to my children in a world with more expensive liquid fuel. It effects my perspective. I am always tempted to universalize it. Sometimes I succumb to that temptation.

*the following are my articulation of examples, they may be in error. If some of the individuals mentioned object to my characterization, let me know I will change it in the op if you like or you can just respond and tell me that I am a dolt.

PMS, Zardoz, Roccman and other individuals who are in the southwest. Another set of perspectives which seem to me to find come commonalities in their experience in the southwest and Cali. The threats seem more ominous to them. They see sociological, political and cultural reasons why we should fear oil decline.

LoneSnark, apparent training in orthodox economics, friend to mega farmers driving BMW's. I believe he is in N. Carolina. A place that has experienced a lot of benefit over the last few decades. I would say that it colors his view. The threats do not seem so ominous, he articulates a economic reasons on why it should not be so bad.

JD, has lived a signifigant period in Japan, sees how they deal with problems and so their seems to be a lot of room for those of us in America to tighten our belts. The problem is not that bad because we can drive less, conserve more and between conservation and alternatives we can manage the decline.

What makes this a problem is when we assume that our concerns are:
1. applicable in the same way everywhere
2. that these experiences do not interact with each other (we do not live in a world where only economics matter or only politics or only culture). The market "works" in a political world and impacts people who respond in a cultural manner etc...
3. Sometimes we talk out of our rear ends, assuming we know something about something that we do not (yes myself included).

What is needed is an interdisplinary approach where the political and sociological problems of southern cal are figured into lonesnark's economics (and vice versa). Where the costs of our energy intensive lifestyle (felt often in the midwest) are accounted for the prosperity experienced by those centers of power (if you had a housing bubble you are a center of power).

Then we need to realize that the impacts will not be the same everywhere. Japan has a different culture. The southwest has unique problems. Those who have been on the loosing end of the age of cheap oil may not feel the same way as those who have benefited. The hillbilly will have a different perspective than the technocrat.
-----------------------
Who are you? What events, experiences, history affects your perspective? What alternative perspective have you benefitted the most from.

I have benefited from lots of different perspectives. It is hard to pick just a few.

Mr. Bill- he has street cred in my book not just for his professional experience but also his origins. If I have any doubt about my position on an issue and he makes a good argument, I am very likely to trust him more than myself.

The desert southwest-iners- my parents ran back to the midwest in the 1970's and we never looked back. I have gained an appreciation for the problems you may face. You have affected my politics. For whatever it is worth, my thoughts and prayers are with you.

JD, even though there are a lot of things that I think that he discounts that he should take more seriously, his practical suggestions are... practical.

Snarky reminds me why so many people will not get it and that I need to check my frustration at the door. I will leave any other comments to myself.

[LoneSnark]

You got me (I suspect I have mentioned my state of residence before). And you are absolutely right, we should expect where we live to have shaded our expectations. Those in the midwest have suffered for decades from resource price declines (cheap oil meant low agricultural prices, which meant relative-poverty for you and your neighbors) without the ability to move on. The mid-west, I suspect, is still heavily dependent upon agriculture, growing it, shipping it, processing it, etc.

My state has moved on. Our economy used to be like yours; all agriculture dependent. That has changed. Thanks to cheap electricity from hydro, easy access to national and international markets, and business friendly policies, North Carolina became an industrial center in the 1970s. And industry during that time paid, so North Carolinians prospered. Then, in the 1990s North Carolina jumped on the technology bankwaggon, and we prospered again. My city's population grows 10+% every year, most are from other states such as yours. But it was always change. My generation works in high tech, the previous worked in factories; the previous worked on the farm. Compare this to where you live where resource extraction is still king, and perhaps we can understand why you believe society cannot change: where you live it never has. But where I live it has changed three times just in my parents lifetime, so I think change is easy.

There is no doubt a lot will need to change, but it will change. I see it changing every time I go to work. My city more than doubles in population every decade, so at any given time more than half the city is less than 10 years old. If we need to change the shape of it by going denser or reducing automobile use we can, as after two decades only 1/4th of the old city remains.

[Gerben]

Many people from around the globe visit this website and can contribute experiences from their own history. In the Netherlands and much of Europe we have experienced a real World Without Oil during WWII. That also meant having to eat local produce. As there was nothing else to eat, in the Netherlands that meant eating Tulip bulbs. (You can't eat windmills or wooden shoes and we ran out of cheese.)

[wisconsin_cur]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat alternative perspective have you benefited the most from.

[Narz]

Subscribed.

[Nicholai]

Before the age of oil (although largely due to the age of aviation) Canada had a fairly interesting identity.



We had Ukrainians in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. This was the world's bread basket and helped to feed much of the allied forces during WWII. We had a slight difference in accent from province to province and the premise of a Ukrainian-speaking quarter of Canada wasn't out of the question (such as a 'new' Quebec). The West was still looked at (from Ontario's perspective) as wild and untamed, although, after looking at pictures of my grandparents' homestead, I would have to agree.

Alberta was always looked at as Canada's dumb little brother. We have had a Conservative government in power for over 35 years, and previous to that, a social credit government (even more right wing) for 35 years before that! It was only until the discovery of the Athabasca tar sands has Alberta ever climbed out of poverty. One famous Senator summed Albert up like this, '100 years ago you were all a bunch of poor farmers and that's exactly where you will be in another 100 years' (we have saved very little money from the tar sands btw) Despite Alberta's right wing history, Alberta's Rocky Mountains are one of the most pristine places in the world. We are a province blessed with enormous resources and for that I'm grateful. (An old Ukrainian joke: Why does Alberta have all the Ukrainians and Saskatchewan all the rats? Saskatchewan got to pick first!)

Saskatchewan was (sort of) the federalist heartland of Western Canada. Albertans always detested the federal government (Alberta is sometimes considered the Texas of Canada) but Saskatchewan was different. Some of the greatest social activists draw their origins back to this province. Tommy Douglas (founder of Canada's Medicare system) and various other intellectuals found their feet in this portion of Canada. Saskatchewan is largely flat and unexciting in geography but remains vital in Canada's farming sector. Because of Saskatchewan's small population, and enormous amount of fresh water, Saskatchewan has a ratio of 3 people for every lake (that means over 300,000 lakes!)! Most lakes haven't even been named! (Johnny Cash had a summer cabin in southern Saskatchewan) Despite its proximity to Alberta, Saskatchewan possessed the first socialist government in North America and continues to elect socialist-democratic governments on a regular basis.

Manitoba was FILLED with Ukrainians and possesses the famed 'Pirogi Line' in which a vast majority of the population north of this line were Ukrainian. Ukrainian was the mother-tung and families would gather in the Church basements to celebrate Ukrainian Christmas and life wasn't much different from life in Ukraine. Manitoba was filled with lakes and beautiful soil and remained the cross roads between Western and Eastern Canada. Again, Manitoba has been a very liberal minded province, electing various socialist-democratic governments on a regular basis.

The North West Territories were harsh and inhospitable, with scattered huts of hermit-trappers and Inuit families dotting the tundra. Many stories have come out of the North and even a distant family friend of ours took part in a police expedition in the Territories to catch the infamous 'Mad Trapper of Rat River'. The Territories have always been misunderstood due to the majority Native/Inuit population in the region and Canada's general condescending and borderline racist outlook on Canada's Natives.

British Columbia was full of a different kind of people. They were relaxed and very...very liberal. (British Columbia's largest export is marijuana) The province was made up, largely, of pulp mill towns and mining villages. This was, and still is, one of the most beautiful provinces in all of Canada. It has also been noted that many communist revolutionaries would move from town to town and receive food from local families sympathetic to their cause. It was a peaceful place and most locals retained a strong attachment to the provinces natural landscape.

The Eastern provinces (Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) were something unto themselves. They had bizzare accents and slangs that could be found in no other place in the world. Their history was largely influenced by Scottish, English and Irish immigrants and their economy was encompassed by the fishing industry. French influence can also be found in this sector of Canada, citing New Brunswick as Canada's only fully bilingual province. This part of Canada is beautiful and, considered by some, slightly backward...but always amusing. (Newfoundland is sometimes referred to as 'The Rock' and those in Atlantic Canada are famed for their friendliness, hospitality and good humor) The Atlantic Region had a music genre of its own as well (basically it sounds like Irish folk music but with a twist and is still used by one of their more famous bands 'Great Big Sea'.

Great Big Sea - Ordinary Day

Ontario and Quebec are the two feuding parents in Canada's dominion. Each (historically) vying for power and influence. Quebec was largely French and Catholic, with the Catholic Church wielding tremendous power within the region. Women were forced to have upwards of ten children and the political realm held close ties with the Church and business community. Les Quebecois (as they are called in French) are largely quite liberal and retain their own form of traditional music (French folk with a twist) and have various French accents within the province itself. Quebec is mocked by those in France because of their (to me) hilarious accent and attitudes. Ontario was largely English and Protestant with various Francophone communities scattered throughout. Ontario is looked at with an air of malice due to its federalist mentality and its contentious relations within Quebec. Despite the impression, Ontario and Quebec possessed beautiful scenery and customs.

(Some Quebecois music)
Les Cowboys Fringants - La Manifestation

Coming to my point :D . With the coming of the oil age, Canada has changed. Our relationship with nature has been taken aback, as our demographics have been smeared and lost. At our peak (during the 70's in my opinion) Canada had debates about culture and our political position in the world, we had artists and intellectuals at the helm. We had discussion and philosophy and a real sense of Canadiana. We believed we were unique...but then things changed. With a population of roughly 25 million, Canada was still quite small. But most recently, Canada has taken in roughly 250,000 immigrants each year (mostly from China and India).

Our provinces no longer look the same and the linguistic idiosyncrasies of each region have largely disappeared. Intellectuals no longer discuss of our culture or unique qualities. Canadiana is all but felt. We have become a lost country without roots or identity. It seems like a stop-over for those looking for a good job, not a place to feel attachment and relationship towards. It's too bad...to squander such a gift. We have the largest foreign business ownership in the entire world. Since 1984, over 13000 Canadian Corporations have been taken over by foreign companies. With so few people in the second largest country in the world with the most resources per capita (by far) and an 'educated' populous, I sometimes wonder how we managed to throw it all away. Maybe the saying is right...maybe nice guys do finish last.

(I'm not sure if this post fits the thread, but I just thought you might enjoy it anyway)

[DrBang]

W cur,

This is one of the more intelligent posts I have seen in a while.

I live in Brisbane Australia. I work in the Mining Industry. Mining is what seems to be kicking the Aussie economy along in a gang busters fashion. There will come a point though when all the minerals are dug up (peak minerals). At which point we would do well to learn some o he hard lessons that are about to go down in the middle east. What would happen when there is no more oil to be sold in SA? What will the Saudi's base their economy on? Wind the clock forward 50 years or so and hat is what we will be seeing.

I am in the thick of the pitched battle between the mining and environmental camps. While my pay packet comes from the mining camp, I believe heart and soul in the environmental cause. that being said I believe the climate change model they work with is incomplete (or wrong). Because everyone is making money, they pay only lip service to the environmental concerns.

The problems Australia faces are similar in some respects and quite different in others. We have a very small population spread over a wide area, thus are heavily dependent on transport. Our continent has a very fragile environment which cannot sustain large numbers of people (which is why we are only about 20 million in number after 200 odd years). The growing of agriculture which is one of our industries is a touchy business.

Around 1900 Australia had one of the highest standards of living in the world. Now less so. The forces of globalisation since the 1960's have not been that good for us in many respects. We are a minnow on the world stage and are heavily affected by the actions and attitudes of the larger political blocks.

In some ways we are isolated in a good way which has helped us in the past. In other ways we are far too susceptible to manipulation by external forces. How this will play out in the geopolitical strategic chess game over the next 5 years is anyones guess.

We are historically dominated by British manipulation though less so today. Today we are heavily manipulated by the US. This i not a situation I am happy with. As such I make a point of studying up on the US and its history. I don't believe the official party line that the US are the good guys.

I am learning a lot from coming in contact with the posters on this forum because they physically live all around the world.

Dr Bang