Don’t worry, just a little bump - $70 is just around the corner. Short traders just keep making those margin calls, mortgage the house if you have to. Fortunes await you! PO is for pansies and doomers. At $70 short some more ..... it is going back to $22 .... the world is awash with oil ........ reality has nothing to do with it, its all in those charts!!!!!!!!!!
Joined: Jun 26, 2004 Posts: 1189 Location: Madison,Wisconsin
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:04 am Post subject:
Denny, I would agree that it can be just as much the american way of life to adapt and live in a sustainable way. However, the american s who ignore living like this tend to have a Far larger and more noticeable effect than those who do not. For ever sustainable community barely noticed tucked away off in the wilds, there is someone living it large in a energy bleeding appartment in the down town of some city.
Don t get me wrong, currently I am one of those down town dwellers. But unlike perhaps 90 percent of them, I do not use a car on a regular basis. That is Not an easy thing. I think it will be a very very painful adjustment for alot of them. Honestly, I think america will do ok. It will not be however because we out produced people. It will be because the people hardest hit by this are the people who are being the most idiotic. Hopefully they will learn. _________________ Azreal60
Joined: Aug 13, 2004 Posts: 115 Location: United Kingdom
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 9:04 am Post subject:
Leanan wrote:
Quote:
I think it has little to do with Americans being obsessed with consumption, any more or less than any other group of people. The US is simply the most economically successful in a field crowded with wannabe consuming giants. So we stick out as mass consumers.
I disagree. Oh, no doubt a lot of other people in the world wanna be us, but it's not just our economic success that's to blame. .
As an American living in Europe (for 9 years now), I would say don't generalize too much and certainly don't put halos on Europeans. People are generally people. National labels and national stereotypes are so innaccurate as to be generally worthless. European governments have huge deficits in their current and future accounts and in most of them the entire pension account is "unfunded" meaning it will have to be paid out of the next generation's taxes. Their houses are not in good order.
I'm not putting halos on anyone. And I like the American way of life.
But I do think it will put us at a disadvantage when it comes to peak oil. I think the countries with a strong central government will do better. Whether that's due to socialist tendencies, or because a brutal dictator rules with an iron fist.
We will certainly never change our ways when even peakniks like yourself fail to at least try.
re: ANWR. I have to concede your point, hopefully it will be used wisely (as part of the bridge) and not wasted trying to prop up this futile and obsolete system.
Denny, with all due respect, it seems to me that your perspective of Americans is somewhat "clouded" by being in Canada.
What's really frustrating to me is that given that we live in a democracy, in theory the people should be able to choose whatever system they see fit. And given that poor people far outnumber rich people, we have the votes to make a system that serves us primarily not the rich. But the PTB have been too skilled in "conquering and dividing" and we remain subservient and dependent upon our overlords.
Joined: Jul 17, 2004 Posts: 481 Location: Amerika (most of the time)
Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 12:43 pm Post subject:
tkn317071 wrote:
Philbiker,
What's really frustrating to me is that given that we live in a democracy, in theory the people should be able to choose whatever system they see fit. And given that poor people far outnumber rich people, we have the votes to make a system that serves us primarily not the rich. But the PTB have been too skilled in "conquering and dividing" and we remain subservient and dependent upon our overlords.
Poor people by and large don't vote and the system is more than happy to keep it that way. If poor and lower middle class people voted, american society would probably look alot more like Europe with higher taxes, more welfare and incredibly long amounts of vacation. Remember only about 50% of Americans vote give or take 5%. Also, like you said, it's easy to divide up the poor that do vote by using a host of techniques like racebaiting, religiosity or jingoism.
Poor people by and large don't vote and the system is more than happy to keep it that way. If poor and lower middle class people voted, american society would probably look alot more like Europe with higher taxes, more welfare and incredibly long amounts of vacation. Remember only about 50% of Americans vote give or take 5%. Also, like you said, it's easy to divide up the poor that do vote by using a host of techniques like racebaiting, religiosity or jingoism.
The poor don't vote because there are never any significant issues on the table. The two-party system is predicated on an "elite consensus" -- certain basics that are tacitly understood by the power centers of both parties. Chief of these is to continue policies that promote the widening chasm between haves and have-nots, regardless of election rhetoric. The rich didn't get poorer during the Clinton error, nor did the working man get a more accomodating world. _________________ http://www.openspeech.org - please visit and post!
Joined: Jul 21, 2004 Posts: 1242 Location: Suburban tar sands
Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:11 pm Post subject:
Leanan wrote:
Both Dick Cheney and Dubya's daddy, George H.W. Bush, have said that "the American way of life is not negotiable."
Ironically, these types have been vigorously selling the American Way of consumer-driven free markets to the rest of the world for decades.
So now China, India, Eastern Europe and the FSU have bought it.
Americans are very aware of trade competition from these low cost countries. If these economies continue to grow, Americans will soon become aware of competition in the world markets for oil and other resources. And the prices will not be negotiable.
I'm not putting halos on anyone. And I like the American way of life.
But I do think it will put us at a disadvantage when it comes to peak oil. I think the countries with a strong central government will do better. Whether that's due to socialist tendencies, or because a brutal dictator rules with an iron fist.
The USA has a stronger central gov't than most European parlimentary gov'ts. European gov'ts are much more unstable by virtue of the ability of minority coalition partners to withdraw on a whim. See Italy. They have averaged a new gov't every 2 years since WW2.
In the USA, the central gov't is fairly stable for a minimum of 4 years, good or bad.
Some would argue that the European Union has made most of the countries of Europe very indecisive and/or powerless. Neither the EU nor the individual member states have real control at this point. There is no real support for the EU among the populations of the member states. In the last EU elections, representatives that were mostly anti-EU won control.
Some would argue that the European Union has made most of the countries of Europe very indecisive and/or powerless. Neither the EU nor the individual member states have real control at this point.
You're right about that. We like to joke that the greatest virtue of our governing system is that they won't make very bad decisions (in fact they make almost no decisions)
But Europe has got some things going for them.
They have a clear headstart when it comes to preparing for peakoil.
As you say, the diversity of the different parties can be a burden and lead to instability. However, since every group of the population is well represented in the governing bodies they tend to look more to the common interest. In the US the government is made up of people who are the least affected by peakoil. In fact most people in the current administration benefit from oil scarcity. This makes it unlikely that they will take adequate measures to prevent this scarcity.
They have a clear headstart when it comes to preparing for peakoil.
That I agree with completely. The steps that I read about in Germany and Denmark regarding Wind and Solar are very encouraging. I lived in West Germany (pre Wall) as a foreign exchange student and loved it.
The example set by Germany and Denmark should go a long way to convincing utilities that Wind and Solar are economical on a large scale. Screw the demo projects and the dead birds. Let's get those wind turbines spinning.
They have a clear headstart when it comes to preparing for peakoil.
That I agree with completely. The steps that I read about in Germany and Denmark regarding Wind and Solar are very encouraging. I lived in West Germany (pre Wall) as a foreign exchange student and loved it.
The example set by Germany and Denmark should go a long way to convincing utilities that Wind and Solar are economical on a large scale. Screw the demo projects and the dead birds. Let's get those wind turbines spinning.
I think the countries with a strong central government will do better.
Hi Leanan,
The pessimist in me says you are probably right. As the crisis develops, democracies will face severe challenges. "Problem, reaction, solution". It is the "solution" that you have to worry about.
But the dreamer in me sees an exciting opportunity for democracy as we know it to evolve. The world's oldest surviving democracy was constructed in the 1700's. One of the biggest challenges to the new Republic was the slowness of communications between the constituency and their representitives. There was no way to provide direct voting or immediate feedback, or to have a national dialog in a timely manner. All these factors were taken in to account in constructing our democratic institutions. Alas, so much has changed since then.
The dreamer in me occasionally catches glimpses of how a more advanced form of democracy would effect things: like national energy policy, armements, foriegn policy, etc. For lack of a better term I'll call it hyper-democracy.
Yes, I am aware that such a concept is fraught with problems, but they are problems waiting for solutions. Imagine how history would have been different if the delegates that were in Philadelphia in July of 1776 had just thrown up their hands and said it was too difficult. But no, they would not give up. They would argue, compromise, get mad and walk out. But then they would cool off and walk back in, because they had a dream that they were not willing to give up on.
I think the American people, if given unwashed, honest, even brutal information about peak oil and what it could mean, then given access to channels to express, challenge, and discuss the options, would come up with an adequate and humane solution for our people. The alternative is to trust the oligarchs and corporations.
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:10 pm Post subject: Adaptation does not have to be by government decree
There weems to be a perceptin in everything here that adaptatin to tighter enregy supplies wil inolve changing peoples lifestyles by the strong hand of the law.
But the "invisible hand" of the market place as Adam Smith would say, can work even more effectively and fairly.
There was a time when most heat supply was from wood. That changed to coal, not so much because coal was a nice fuel, but because wood supplies for fuel became scarce. The price went up. Then the use of coal was substituted. And then insulation became a more refined form of artisanship in building. And so on and so on.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 3 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
