Substitutions …




 

Figure 1: Brent crude weekly futures chart by TFC Charts (click on for big): Fuel prices decline because there is less credit available to support the price, yadda, yadda, yadda …

Estimable Gregor Macdonald had an interesting bit the other day regarding the last TED circus. For those unfamiliar The TED, here is their webpage:

 

“TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. Since then its scope has become ever broader. Along with two annual conferences — the TED Conference in Long Beach and Palm Springs each spring, and the TEDGlobal conference in Edinburgh UK each summer — TED includes the award-winning TEDTalks video site, the Open Translation Project and TED Conversations, the inspiring TED Fellows and TEDx programs, and the annual TED Prize.

 

The prize being a shiny new car no doubt. Basically the TED is ignorable waste of time due to self-congratulation-without-limit and its hammer-meets-nail fixation on computers. It is a launch pad for tomorrow’s crop of wannabe technology oligarchs who have no real products but highly developed marketing skills. The TED events give pilgrims a chance to hone their skills on defenseless victims: each other.

Gregor introduced a new kid on the Economic Undertow block: Paul Gilding:

 

… it was perhaps surprising but also encouraging that the January 2012 TED conference finally addressed the subject of Collapse, by inviting Paul Gilding to give his talk The Earth is Full (opens to video).

I’d actually seen a version of Gilding’s talk at the Ilhahee Lecture Series here in Portland last fall. Gilding’s view is that we’ve reached a relationship between global population and available natural resources, that makes it inevitable that the economy—a converter of natural resources into goods—will sharply slow down, if it has not started to slow down already. Gilding can be thought of not as a neo-Malthusian, or a doomer, but rather as an ecological economist. (As most readers know, I share this same view.) Gilding looks at trailing historical growth rates — again, the rate at which natural resources are converted to industrial and population growth — and concludes that the future size of the economy at these growth rates would create a machine that the earth simply cannot sustain. Again, I agree.

 

Gilding’s observations regards limits and are familiar to readers here, at the same time he doesn’t scare the horses:

 

There are two key issues to making this the case. Ecosystem lags – the delay between action e.g. emitting CO2 pollution and response e.g. the climate changing – and the inherent risks in a highly integrated global economy i.e. the low margin for error when a globally impactful crisis hits.

We learnt the latter in 2007/8, which many now believe was triggered by record oil prices sucking money out of the US economy, causing sub-prime mortgages to default and almost bringing down the global financial system. This is a good example of systemic risk vs theoretical markets. In theory higher oil prices just reduce demand and encourage alternatives but in reality change happens fast and markets can’t respond, leading to complicated impacts. As we saw, our now tightly wound and integrated global economy can thus be easily shaken to the core by a relatively normal event such as high oil prices.

 

This argument is not idle, having been similarly made by James Hamilton and Jeff Rubin. What happens on the crude and related markets matters.

It’s semantics whether the current price run up/mini-spike in Brent futures prices is/was a ‘shock’ or equivalent to the 2008 spike: I say ‘tomayto’ you say ‘tomahto’. There have been a series mini-spikes and retreats, of smaller price run ups and consequent declines; this post-2008 interval has been punctuated by firm- then market- now sovereign bankruptcies. These bankruptcies appear to be closely coupled to rising fuel prices: demand destruction is more serious now than it was in 2008 which primarily effected firms and households. The bolt to $128 two months ago might have been sufficient to unhinge the Chinese economy and send it over the edge.

There are two opposing forces at work: China is dependent upon external sources of credit and foreign exchange. Its economy is an integral part of the overseas supply chain, its trade — the bulk of its economy — almost entirely takes place using euros and dollars rather than in its own currency. Difficulties among China’s customers reduces capital flows to China. Europe is in a recession, China feels pain because she can’t sell as many goods nor can it gain as many euros.

China like Greece must pay increasing amounts of hard (overseas) currency for fuel and other inputs. Its bid moves the price: here is the First Law of economics in action: the costs associated with China’s existing euro surplus are greater than the euros’ worth … and are increasing. China must diminish its surplus by spending euros but its overall currency position — like that of JP Morgan-Chase’ London Whale — is too large to liquidate.

China instead swaps some of its currency surplus into slightly smaller but still large commodity surpluses. The surplus-related costs haven’t been eliminated, instead they has been spread around China’s economy. The effect of the increased costs is inflation inside China.

Meanwhile, China cannot spend euros it does not earn. Having spent on commodities as stores of wealth, China must spend more to support price. China now lacks the new euros to do so. China is trapped by her own mercantile dynamic: she must sell goods for euros at the same time she has too many euros!

What China should do is buy more EU and US finished goods but she cannot. China can buy commodities and store them but not finished goods as her workers cannot afford them: China is a selling machine, only.

China’s past euro earnings pushed commodity prices higher while China’s current euro non-earning undercuts the same prices. How this turns out is anyone’s guess but right now the process indicates lower bids for commodities in China: the bids strangled by diminished credit in Europe caused by high prices of crude, the slowdown in capital flows chokes the Chinese capital-dependent economy while it must manage the high costs of currency surpluses. As Gilding points out: “the inherent risks in a highly integrated global economy”.

This leaves out entirely the matter of whether the euro itself will vanish and what will become of China’s euro hoard under the circumstance. For China to save herself ahead of the onrushing debacle would mean dumping euros at the market and precipitating the cataclysm she seeks to postpone.

Here’s gold:

 

 

Figure 2: This is the cumulative weekly gold chart: in the short term, gold has been in a bearish market for the past ten months. This is something to watch as metal prices declined during the ‘crash’ phase in 2008: the bear market in gold remained intact with no new highs until late Autumn of 2009:

 

 

Figure 3: this is the gold monthly chart: this chart and others from TFC Charts (click on for big). The 2008 decline in gold began while fuel prices were sharply increasing. The current consolidation began in September, 2011, while petroleum prices were likewise increasing. While past performance does not assure future results, it is necessary to consider whether gold is sending the same sort of economic signal it offered during the Spring of 2008. Gold is a core asset for finance firms: unlike shares or mortgage-backed securities it is not generally offered unless margin calls must be met and other assets are either unavailable or not worth enough.

The indication is that there are margin stresses building up within establishments that leverage gold or gold- derivatives. There are arguments offered that there is paper selling against the buying of physical but the price speaks for itself: there are more sellers than buyers with funds. The same means of support for crude prices exist for the gold prices. While the high price of gold does not effect availability of credit — nobody burns their gold for fun — the high price of crude reduces the amount of credit available to bid for gold.

The implications are serious: the ongoing cheerleading efforts on the part of the establishment effects assets. This includes endless moral hazard, foreign-exchange rate manipulation, ZIRP and various ‘easing’ programs. Funds flow from finance toward assets for the purpose of finding speculative returns. Some of these assets are economically vital inputs. Economists airily suggests that one input will substitute for another at some price level: what is not understood by economists is that the required price level to effect the substitution is probably unaffordable. For instance, it is technically possible to have nuclear powered automobiles if for no other reason than we have already nuclear powered ships and submarines.

(Un)fortunately, nobody can afford a nuclear-powered car so there is no economic cause to build one. What remains is alternate substitutions: in place of cheap petroleum, autos, freeways, fly-overs, parking garages, suburbs, retail malls and office towers and all that go with these things … there is shoe leather.

37 thoughts on “Substitutions …

  1. Chartsit Friend From Pittsburgh

    Since we’re looking at a collapse of biblical proportions, I thought it might be interesting to see what the Bible had to say about leather. Turns out it has a lot to say about it. Leviticus 13 instructs followers what to do if their leather becomes contaminated with mildew, and chapter 15 of the same book has instructions for dealing with leather that has come into contact with semen. Those guys thought of everything.

  2. dolph

    Modern day economists, having grown up and trained in an era of endless growth in the human population and fossil fuel production, believe only in “substitution” that results in even more growth. They can’t understand substitution in a stagnant or declining economy.

    The world is pretty much full up. Full of stuff, full of people, full of ideas, most of which are useless and are going to be discarded eventually.

    Except for the Arctic, there are very few new places left to explore, and those places are remarkably hostile to human life as it currently exists (space, the deep ocean), etc.

    We have finally reached the endpoint of economic growth which arguably has been going on since the birth of history, but was turbocharged in the 20th century.
    Which of course is the larger narrative taking place all across the world.

  3. Reverse Engineer

    How about substituting Bicycles, Cross Country Skis and Dogsleds?

    Seriously, the question here now has become for how long the Carz will keep rolling in the FSofA and China as various PIIGS are triaged out and forced into the Shoe Leather lifestyle?

    Also, what happens in the case of say a 50% reduction in Gas Consumption in the FSofA? There is so much waste that could be handled without a complete breakdown of JIT. If there is similar or greater Demand Destruction across all economies, even with depletion rates as they are we would be AWASH in Oil production for probably the next decade.

    What would the price of Oil be in such a situation, how long would it last, and how would the total economy react to this? Would OPEC countries be able to earn enough FOREX to service their own economies. What happens to the price of Food in such a scenario? With excess Oil not being used to drive willy nilly around suburbia, that should free up more energy to be used in the Industrial Ag process.

    How does the crash proceed from here? Is it a catastrophic collapse and Sudden Stop event, or is it a Long Emergency with a series of Plateaus?

    Inquiring Minds want to know.

    RE
    http://www.doomsteaddiner.org

  4. Pingback: Substitutions… | Doomstead Diner

  5. Mr. Roboto

    But unfortunately, shoes, like so many, many other things these days, are extremely poorly made. I wonder how many catastrophic foot-injuries there are these days because tenner-shoes have become more fashion-accessories for narcissistic teens and twenty-somethings than functional footwear?

  6. steve from virginia Post author

    Here’s an interesting reference for energy consumers, it’s relatively up to date, crammed with charts and good ‘number’ info:

    Sustainable Energy — without the hot air

    It’s written by David JC MacKay (2008)

    This is a balance sheet look at energy consumption/production with the end of making determinations about sustainability. Somewhat like Tom Murphy’s efforts @ ‘Do the math dot com.’

  7. Da55id

    A generation is rising that is comfortable with virtual travel at light speeds. Within 5 years it will be trivially easy to join in photorealistic shared virtual environments with other people without respect to where anyone is physically – where interactions are growingly realistic (haptics). A significant and growing part of the decline in petro use is from substitution of communications for transportation. How much of transportation is really about moving brains proximate to other brains rather than moving non-brain carrying stuff? The next stage of petro decline will be from 3d printing wherein communication of 3d cad designs will take the place of much of fedex/UPS box moving. This will be well along within 10 years. Airplanes will fall out of the sky due to lack of passengers before they fall due to lack of affordable fuel.

    1. cg

      I’m summing up the paragraph this way: Airplanes will fall out of the sky due to pie in the sky. In 5 years or 15 virtual travel will still be trivial. The substitution of petro use for communication over travel is unlikely to be significant except as the majority of today’s travelers are denied travel by car and plane (and they will be). Much of 3d printing uses petro feed stocks (post-peak oil = post-peak plastic). It has it’s appeal though, fanboys could print out Star Wars bobbleheads without leaving their photorealistic haptic gaming environments. When it can print out a vegetable garden, that will be impressive.

      1. steve from virginia Post author

        We’re stuck in a mindset and mislead ourselves with false labeling.

        We think, “A leads to B which results in C, therefore …” the progression is linear with fixed outcomes. We like because it is satisfying in and of itself as well as promising more of what we want.

        It’s not that we want more for others, we want more for ourselves, the others can go to hell.

        But the labels are wrong along with the associated linear thinking. Instead of A, B, C, (then D, E, F) we have, “G leads to -11.5 which leads to AAA which product is a negative, therefore …” We believe we are accomplishing something rather than the opposite, creating confusion. At the end of the day, what remains is belief and false hopes.

        Substitution for the un-connected billions in the so-called developing world is assumed to create more educated people, even scientists, “with something to say”. However, we refuse to listen to the educated folks and scientists we have now unless what they tell is agrees with the ‘A to B to C’ linearities.

        All the different ideas need to be given critical scrutiny without false labels. That should be the next step: more careful understanding of ideas and their consequences. We’re too uncritical: this is a defect in the species.

      2. cg

        There’s a large class of ‘things’ for which there is no good explanation: like being asked the cost of a yacht, you learn not to say “If I have to explain it you won’t understand.” Beyond that, one dodges around in dark corners while being accused of being obtuse and arcane. Agreed, there’s no a leads to b to c, it’s all a gestalt and one rarely knows what piece of information another person needs next.

        Everyone believes what they will to the extent circumstances and others will allow. Relatively few care to know anything about (a) peak resources or (b) the implications of Fukishima. Their response (c) is that it is too threatening to their way of life to be real (there are other threats that are scaling up nicely too). The more thought I give it the more unknowable (x), and very probably disagreeable, the future is, but I’m confident love, kindness, and humor will survive.

      3. Da55id

        Hi Steve, I can’t tell if you are speaking to my post or not. I was making a very simple observation of a factor contributing to growing change. If that is unwelcome I apologize. In any case, future events will illuminate accuracy of predictions.

      4. steve from virginia Post author

        I’m not picking on you, Da55id.

        🙂

        A fairly common internet theme is that there are still billions that aren’t online yet. Once these folks are connected they will ‘join the conversation’.

        We won’t listen to them unless they tell us what we want to hear.

        It strikes me that the Internet is culturally homogenizing the same way television is. That is just an impression of course, not a scientific observation.

      5. Reverse Engineer

        The internet is too diffuse to be very effective as a communication tool. Information Overload, too many writers reinventing the wheel all the time and a cacophany of differing “solutions” just about all of which will not work.

        There is little synergy on the net, and no way whatsoever to reach a consensus on anything but the smallest level of a single website, and even that is about impossible to do.

        RE
        http://www.doomsteaddiner.org

      6. Ellen Anderson

        I don’t know about that. Every now and then – not too often – when I have nothing much to do, I ask Google two questions; “What is the meaning of life?” and “Why is there something rather than nothing?” I find that the range of answers has gotten more interesting over the years. Has it has also become less diverse? I don’t really see that.
        If you are looking for specific information the Internet is amazing. If you are looking for answers to eternal questions, well, there probably aren’t any but the more people you speak to the merrier.

        Still, it is all an intellectual exercise and may well be a substitute for what I at least should be doing – which is more physical exercise.

        I don’t think virtual conversations substitute in any way for physical ones though. Yes, you can get some trivial items settled in an online setting but you have to deal with your neighbors in order to have a real political economy. I can talk to my grandchildren on the phone and even see them on Skype. But it isn’t the same as getting on a plane and flying to be with them or even getting in a car and driving 30 miles to a dinner. Those are things we are going to be unable to do very soon. No amount of digital conversation will replace them.

      7. Da55id

        yes, it’ll be many years before virtual hugs happen – which is more than fine by me 🙂

        But change can really sneak up on you…for instance, I used to love to go to Borders and Barnes and Noble to browse the shelves. Last night for the first time in my life, I felt no desire to go, because I could get anything I wanted from my iPad/kindle, knowing that in just about every way they are just vastly better than a book (as a technology). So, I went anyway to be with the wife and have a cuppa joe. I have a ton of physical books, but for me – as of last night, they are officially dead as a delivery/display technology.

      8. Da55id

        so virtual travel “will be trivial”…and yet here and now you and I communicate and I have no clue where you are physically. I used to be a 120k annual flyer. Now I’m at 12k max. I used to drive 20k miles per annum. Now I’m at 2.5k. Change happens at the margin…and then speeds up.

        I totally agree that petro-carbons are getting harder and more expensive to find/mine. When whale oil was THE key commodity it too was getting very expensive as whale populations were strip-mined/decimated. Somehow it didn’t matter how few whales were left when nobody bought whale oil anymore due to substitution with petro.

        I’m just suggesting that it is useful to engage in lateral thinking.

      9. cg

        I apologize for being (harsh?), and I could well be happier if your predictions are closer to the mark. I certainly agree with you about change, margin, and speeding up. There’s a lot of margin to look at. Communication is much faster now, though perhaps there is an argument to be made that communications by letter and read by whale oil was qualitatively better, certainly their creation was more considered! For me travel entails a great deal more than communication.

      10. Da55id

        haha! I totally agree that communication by letter was qualitatively better! I also agree that face to face comm is usually (but not always) better.

        From a business perspective however, not moving bodies around the world when an email will do is a very compelling substitution indeed.

  8. steve from virginia Post author

    A better question regarding technology is whether it is possible to gain it separately from centralized, credit-dependent industrial processes that exist to benefit ‘entrepreneurs’ and punish everyone else.

    With a chip factory costing + $5 billion it is hard to see how. I can print and bind a book on my own without a computer with a few simple tools — assuming paper — but I can in no way make a Kindle.

    For a Kindle I have to make a Bezos into a billionaire and my (assumed) grandchildren have to pay the incurred multi-billion dollar debts. This is a mis-payment because Bezos cannot make a Kindle either. He is simply a highwayman on the road who positions himself between readers and knowledge then shakes them down. What happens when the libraries of the world are held hostage by a this person … or to grid electricity? What are the associated costs? I’m sure nobody wants to know.

    We don’t know how to measure and account for these costs because the industrialists/entrepreneurs have internalized them for hundreds of years while loudly promoting the so-called ‘benefits’ which are certain to arrive ‘tomorrow’. We’ve forgotten or never learned how to be critical. The few that have asked questions about costs vs. benefits were swept aside or murdered in their beds, discredited and ridiculed as ‘Luddites’. Now, we need to know how to ask and we don’t have the luxury of time to school ourselves.

    We need to know what the Luddites and the Chartists and the rest learned in their hard schools but all of this is invisible to us, lost to time, to industrial advertising, to pop-culture hegemony and never to be found on any Kindle … ever.

    This is the nature of hyper-wicked problems: they only reveal themselves by way of the very obvious annihilation of all possible solutions.

      1. Ellen Anderson

        The Chartists weren’t big defenders of the King’s English, I believe:)

      2. steve from virginia Post author

        Very important point you make:

        Gutenberg was the First Industrialist.

        Martin Luther was and is the Father of Modernity.

        Luther translated the Latin bible into the German dialect of his region and mass-printed thousands of these bibles. In doing so Luther blew apart the medieval consensus that had existed for over a thousand years. Mass produced bible provided the demand for mass education (which did not exist because there were few common reading materials), it standardized the German language over a wide area (unified distinct regional dialects) and it provided an alternative means for the new institution Lutheran Church to earn (by the sale of bibles, religious- and education services across the German-speaking region).

        Following the Luther example there were translation of Greek and Latin bibles into English, French, Spanish and other vernaculars. Along with language came the expanding sense of national identity: modern European countries tended be organized around- and follow linguistic boundaries.

      3. Ellen Anderson

        The other pillar of modernity was the Medici family who talked the church into sanctioning usury. We all love the Renaissance, n’est ce pas? Now you can borrow money to make machines to make books to make computers to make MY IPOD. I planted tomatoes last year listing to Greer’s Ecotechnic Future. Is that irony?

    1. Ellen Anderson

      Hyper-wicked problem. That is a great label. It does come down to appropriate technology and cost/benefit analysis, doesn’t it? What are you trying to do and why and for whom? The lowest-tech way to store and pass along information is word of mouth. But the slate gets wiped clean when the wrong people die or there is an epidemic. The written word requires education and tools for at least a few. Then we go from scribes to moveable print to kindles and ipads.
      I remember when they started shredding the paper card files in libraries. Everything is digital now. What a mess that will be when the lights go out. OTOH, there gets to be a point when there is so much information that the cost of maintaining all of that paper exceeds the benefit of having or the ability/desire of anyone to retrieve it.
      There is something to be said for just loving what you have while you have it Kindles, ipods, iphones, planes, whatever. There is also a lot to be said for giving it all up and living the simple life.

  9. enicar333

    I see the price of oil falling, the stock market falling, and Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown learning the lesson that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

    “California Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday asked state employees to work a four-day, 38-hour week as part of a package of massive spending cuts needed to help the state close an unexpected $15.7 billion budget deficit.

    In addition to the unusual four-day workweek — part of a mandated reduction in salaries and benefits to state workers of 5 percent — Brown’s proposed budget, which would take effect July 1, also would slash $1.2 billion from the state’s Medi-Cal program and more than $2 billion from education.”

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/14/11697542-california-governor-calls-for-higher-taxes-4-day-state-workweek-to-fill-16-billion-gap?lite

    Gov. Moonbeam’s solution – Raise taxes some more… LOL. Where is the money tree… a href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haZPPBJC8Ic”>YOU’RE NO GOOD! Gov. MOONBEAM!

    BOOMERS – The Party is almost over – remember this, IN the Future – Good Health will be PRICELESS, all others will be dead. Money to miraculously extend life after NOT taking care of yourself OR having a bad set of genes WON’T be available in the future…

    Meanwhile, while searching for work in the Bakken, I came across this GEM “A Fargo based Construction Company is looking to hire FOR FRAMING CREWS in the Fargo area… Will do criminal background check. Dont waist my time if your on drugs or alcoholic. This is a grown mans job and i’m NOT a baby sitter.”

    LULZ – I have first hand experience with the above – it speaks volumes about the Nation and Society we have built….. also, why the phrase I coined “Plumb, Level, Square – We Don’t Care” is often true – check your vinyl sided McMansion that is falling apart and built by drunks and stoners….

    IF you haven’t been checking a href=”http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/”>Daily Job Cuts – take a look – it’s positively scary what is happening around the Globe.

    Using ME, as a leading economic indicator, it should finally all fall apart later this Fall. Instead of going to the Bakken, I was accepted into the a href=”http://www.gtc.edu/page.asp?q=192″>CNC Bootcamp , and will be training for the jobs of the future!! Manufacturers in Racine County are seeking CNC operators, programmers, and welders. Their problem is in filling the jobs – the young don’t have a work ethic and public education has failed, while the old have been destroyed by alcohol, drugs and poor eating habits. OF course, television, Hollyweird and American pop-culture, a celebration of TRASH, has played a large part in this. School commences May 21 and ends Aug. 24 – so enjoy the Summer before all financial systems fail in the Fall.

    1. Mr. Roboto

      In the fall, huh? Hope your right, that way I might have time to get this thrombo-embolism (an obstructing blood clot that migrates from elsewhere in the body, basically) removed from my renal artery before the world falls apart. I would probably be rid of it by now if doctors weren’t so goddamned bigoted towards heavy-set folk and narcissistically capricious. I was one of those people who didn’t take care of myself as a young’un (let’s just say I had teh ishy00z), so I’m making my peace with the Spirit now knowing I won’t last long once it all goes kerplooey (I has teh diabeetus).

      I don’t blame public education for how {DUH!} everybody is so much as the mass-culture (way too much garbage in it *for* *sure*) that socializes people to neglect the opportunity that even a halfway decent publicly-provided education affords them.

  10. enicar333

    Here is a great article I picked off a link at Z-Hedge – the comment section is mostly a waste of time today….

    “The economic troubles of Greece are the result of nearly 30 years of destructive policies and reckless, unproductive government spending.

    Simply put, the development model that Greece has followed for several decades revolved mainly around obtaining money from abroad (European Union subsidies, growth funds, lending) and injecting it into the economy to fuel temporary growth, consumption and the illusion that we’re doing well. Where did the money go?

    Most of it was spent in creating an unsustainably large public sector whose main function was to provide lucrative and unaccountable job opportunities for voters. An entire nation became conditioned to aligning their political loyalties with direct monetary rewards (over 1 million public sector employees in a country of 3-4m workforce, earning more than they would in the private sector and enjoying life-long tenure and no link between salary and performance).
    The comparatively anemic private sector was also feeding off state money, which was the largest client for most business activities (e.g. construction companies were relying on state projects for the majority of their income) resulting in entire industries being reliant on the state’s ability to borrow money to spend it on the market). It was more profitable to sell crap products and services to the state by leveraging political loyalty than to build competitive products that could be exported. This is also the main reason why Greece exports very little of value despite having one the most hard-working and educated workforces in the EU (the myth of the lazy Greek is simply that, a myth).
    In cases where the state was not directly buying the services of a business sector, it imposed policies that favored that professional group in order to purchase its loyalty (e.g. the right/license to operate a pharmacy is personal and hereditary – yes, hereditary! – with fixed profit margins, a situation that of course makes business easy and profitable for those in the loop, but prevents innovation, investments and work opportunities in the field).
    Finally, the state distributed the majority of development/growth funds from EU and other sources without caring to make sure that the money goes into investments that will create competitive industries in the future (e.g. farmers sometimes prefer to abandon a viable crop in favor of the one that receives the best price-fixing benefits or subsidies, with no incentive to invest in technology that improves their yield and profitability).”

    http://nikosmoraitakis.com/2012/04/24/are-the-greeks-correct-in-their-complaints-about-their-nation-and-their-economy-being-exploited-by-the-eurozone/

    De
    Describes America also.

      1. Sandor

        Again.. These folks are not saying ‘I don’t think.’ They are saying ‘I don’t think that {such and such is true}.’ We are talking about a grammatical construction here. I get that you prefer that the board uses the positive rather than the negative construction. And granted that the particular construction you abhor – ‘I don’t think’ – is inherently contradictory in that by saying, one is thinking (even if not consciously)…

        You remind people to use language carefully. To think; but not just fire off neurons to process information; to think through concepts and consequences. Follow the thought through. This requires a lifetime of practice. It confuses the issue to police your pet grammatical mis-construction. Even if you manage to cleanse the board of ‘I don’t think…’ Then you will have to hammer on the ‘I am not…’ The game is endless. But I do appreciate your enthusiasm for careful language

  11. Sandor

    There’s a good article in the May 14, 2012 New Yorker Magazine on Daniel Nocera and his ‘artificial leaf.’ The basic concept is a low-cost solar panel that catalyzes hydrolisis in water. The hyrodgen is captured and used to power a small turbine that generates about 100W of electricity overnight. His theory is that the best approach to the energy problem is to give bare-bones de-centralized electricity supply to the poorest billions on the planet in order to raise standards of living so as to dampen growth rates, and thus resource depletion. It’s worth reading just to think about the peak oil problem from a slightly different angle. Raise up the bottom 50% of humanity.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/05/14/120514fa_fact_owen

    Getting the top 50% to consume less is another matter…

    1. steve from virginia Post author

      In one sense, the consumption ‘problem’ will solve itself. It doesn’t take a great analytical mind to come to this conclusion only the ability to suspend marketing for a minute every now and then.

      The consumption problem is at the same time self-creating: there is always the next cadre in line ready to take the place of any 50%er who falters for any reason.

      So … a thoughtful person thinks about this and despairs: our beautiful gift is turned into shit … our gift which also happens to be our space ship.

      The binary also represents a garden-variety wicked problem: If there is more suffering at the bottom of the socio-economic totem pole the greater the desire on the part of those there to escape it. Those who can enable an escape do so. Both alternatives = consumption and more demand.

      It’s one thing to pitch a ‘satisfaction index’ to comfortable bourgeois but this is a hard sell elsewhere.

  12. Randall

    “nobody can afford a nuclear-powered car so there is no economic cause to build one.”

    Nobody? You mean the grifters who will buy seats on private space missions can’t afford one?

    The underclass called “WORKERS” can’t afford anything due to the economic system being controlled by grifters. Retail access to credit is for suckers only.

Comments are closed.