$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dorlomin', '
')Compare the lifestyle of the median British income today to that of the 1930s when they were citizens of a state that ruled 1/4 of the world......
PeakOil is You
Ramifications Of The Collapse of the Worlds Policeman
Re: Ramifications Of The Collapse of the Worlds Policeman
by ReverseEngineer » Sun 22 Feb 2009, 15:43:45
The typical Welfare recipient with a TV and running water in Goobermint housing has a higher standard of living than Kings in the heydey of the British Empire, but that is just an artifact of Oil energy. In relative terms of one economy to the other, I don't see how you can say an economy that is broke is wealthier than one which was successfully raping the world of all its resources back in the 18th century.
Reverse Engineer
-
ReverseEngineer - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3352
- Joined: Wed 16 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Re: Ramifications Of The Collapse of the Worlds Policeman
by dorlomin » Sun 22 Feb 2009, 16:26:50
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dorlomin', '
')Compare the lifestyle of the median British income today to that of the 1930s when they were citizens of a state that ruled 1/4 of the world......
')Compare the lifestyle of the median British income today to that of the 1930s when they were citizens of a state that ruled 1/4 of the world......
The typical Welfare recipient with a TV and running water in Goobermint housing has a higher standard of living than Kings in the heydey of the British Empire, but that is just an artifact of Oil energy. In relative terms of one economy to the other, I don't see how you can say an economy that is broke is wealthier than one which was successfully raping the world of all its resources back in the 18th century.
Reverse Engineer
We are less wealthy in terms of our position relative to other countries. But other than over the past few months, for the past 30 years we have been financially very healthy.
Also it was no so much the Empire that made the UK in the 1800s so much wealthier than other states, it was our early industrialization. By 1850 the UK accounted for almost 50% of global industrial output. This was never going to remain for long as follower states caught up technologically (Im a huge fan of David Landes The Wealth and Poverty of Nations for a description of this period). Part of the reason for the decline was in education styles. The UK invented industrialisation and it did so in factories where methods and techniques were passed on from master artisan to aprentice. In Europe the need to catch up meant they institutionalized this learning process in polythecs and industrial schools. This created a better system for the diffusion of new technologies and a more centralized system for research. The pay off for Europe was the chemical industries where the Brits were slow to get involved and the 'second industrial revolution' of electricity and ICE's (and none more so than diesel). The British system of inventing in the factory and slow growth was an outmoded paradigm. The Germans, yanks and Dutch exceeded the UKs capacity to innovate and create new industries. But the British held on until the 80s when its heavy industry collapsed.
The UK however responded with a lot of success in light industries, software and especialy finance. Changes in the education system in the 60s and the financial disaster of the 70s lead to widespread changes that meant when the bonanza of North Sea came online the UK was reshaping its entire society to be competitive in other sectors. Hence the economic rebound that Thatcher both helped and benefited from. But she done irreparable damage to our manufacturing sector. Malice aforethought. The aim was the destruction of labour power in the UK. Economic treachery for political gain.
Our current impasse has come about because we overdid the financial sector revival that served us so well. We became blinded by the house as a wealth creation factory.
IMHO in a world of growing energy supply it would have been a blip, a recoverable mistake. Se la vie. As James V said "It cam wi' a lass, it'll gang wi' a lass", so Britain can say of its revival "it came with oil its shall leave with oil"
Seriously folks apologies for rambling on here, not what you want to hear. But the point is that in history there are inflection points. Like the arrival of the internal combustion engine and electric motors in the 1900s that lead to the decline of the coal and steam economic dominance of the UK, or its revival by finding new ways of running its society and creating wealth. This is worth a quick run through as we face peak oil and perhaps soon gas. You all don’t need to be told this is a huge change and that societies need to change. But change has happened in the past and yet old empires have found new tricks.
People and states can adapt to new ways of doing things..... history will not end with dropping oil volumes. The nations that are the most innovative and flexible are the ones who will find their standards of living the least affected.
The economic collapse of the UK looked inevitable in the 60s and 70s and yet the nation changed itself top to bottom. The same can be said for the modern US. Change and adapt and it need not be scooping your neighbors brains out for nourishment.
-
dorlomin - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 5193
- Joined: Sun 05 Aug 2007, 03:00:00
Re: Ramifications Of The Collapse of the Worlds Policeman
by deMolay » Sun 22 Feb 2009, 17:46:33
The power of Great Britain fell as the cost of projecting power around the world became too much for the tax burden at home and the diminishing returns of projecting that power. When Britain ruled the seas and could send a flotilla into the nearest port in some 3rd world country and pound the city with cannon fire until the local poopah submitted to Britain's will it was profitable. But when the Poopah eventually got his own gunpowder and cannon. It became much more expensive to take him on. There have been certain inventions in history which changed the world. The old saying "All Men Were Created Equal But Samuel Colt Made Us More Equal" is actually true. When a farm boy with a musket could take down a knight in armour the age of the knight passed into history the same with the Japanese Samurai. The USA was recently given this lesson by Osama Bin Laden. A man on a donkey in the hills of Pakistan has basically bankrupted a nuclear superpower and he is still free. "Lesson is you can not use a Nuclear Flyswatter to kill a man on a donkey" The high tech super power is basically rendered useless in this scenario. It was great when super power went mano on mano with another superpower. Useless for guerilla warfare in the cyberage.
"We Are All Travellers, From The Sweet Grass To The Packing House, From Birth To Death, We Wander Between The Two Eternities". An Old Cowboy.
-
deMolay - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2671
- Joined: Sun 04 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Ramifications Of The Collapse of the Worlds Policeman
by dorlomin » Sun 22 Feb 2009, 19:25:00
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('deMolay', 'W')hen Britain ruled the seas and could send a flotilla into the nearest port in some 3rd world country and pound the city with cannon fire until the local poopah submitted to Britain's will it was profitable. But when the Poopah eventually got his own gunpowder and cannon. It became much more expensive to take him on. There
The RN was largely to keep other Europeans out than to force local power brokers into submission. The second Anglo Boer war is a good example of the limitations of naval artillary on regional conflicts (i.e nothing happened close enough for a naval bombardment).$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('deMolay', 'T')he USA was recently given this lesson by Osama Bin Laden. A man on a donkey in the hills of Pakistan has basically bankrupted a nuclear superpower and he is still free. "Lesson is you can not use a Nuclear Flyswatter to kill a man on a donkey" The high tech super power is basically rendered useless in this scenario. It was great when super power went mano on mano with another superpower. Useless for guerilla warfare in the cyberage.
I am of the opinion that it was the US's choice of response that has caused it the most harm. Had they shrugged and said "bugger it 3000 people is sod all" and treated Osama for what he was.... a lucky renegade play boy with a mission, they could have shut down is Afgahn operation and gone after him with minimal troop comitment. But by ideoticaly including the liberation of the arabian peninsula and the grabbing of Iraqi oil into the mission they (the neocons) created an unwinable stupid war that will continue to cost America.
The neocons created Americas own Tuetoborg Walt or Dien Bien Phu. No one was clever enough to screw America but itself.
-
dorlomin - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 5193
- Joined: Sun 05 Aug 2007, 03:00:00
