[AgentR]

It's obvious to anyone (and by this I mean the governments of other countries) that the US is in bad shape economically, politically and socially. To pretend otherwise, AgentR, is wishful thinking to the n-th degree (where n--->infinity !).

Ummm... find where I have said the US is in good shape?

[AgentR]

No. There is nothing hair splitting about the difference between the amount of water moved by those two storms.

So what were the volumes of water moved by those two storms?

I thought I had what I needed to give you a rough calc if you asked, but I don't.

There are two points to consider, and if you wish to ignore them, I can't help you.

Katrina was LARGER, and as you noted created a somewhat higher surge as well. Somewhat larger * larger * same = much larger. (numbers would have been so much better, but it is what it is.)

Camille forced water upstream away from some high value areas; Katrina drove water from the inland lakes INTO some very high value areas. Just a slight difference in the path was all that took.

Katrina was vastly more destructive than Camille; thats all there is to it.

Yes, so you keep saying... and saying... never actually establishing, but yes, saying...

Camille: 259 direct deaths, $8.3 bill(US 2008)
Katrina: 1836 deaths, $90 bill( US 2008)

I don't know what else I can do to help you understand. They were both terribly powerful storms, Camille was smaller, and slightly missed the path to completely drown NO. Katrina was larger, and nailed the path.

And, again, it's not the point. The lack of response relative to past events is. Want to talk about that? Or just how far inland knees got wet in one particular event?

We both agree there was an anemic response to Katrina. You however seem to believe that past responses were examples of glorious success; while I believe they were every bit as anemic.

[btu2012]

So let's see AgentR:

How are dollars made? Looks to me like we owe something that costs about 10 gallons of ink, and 3 trees. We are, after all, on PO.com; the premise of which is that sooner, rather than later, this little industrial nightmare we have running right now is about to go... splat. Inflation from cranking the presses is likely to be irrelevant.[...]

Long before the lifetime of those notes are a problem; the printing of the money to moot them will be a non-issue.

Does this count as denial or what ?

Man, out of control inflation can put most citizens of a country into deep poverty in a jiffy. Take a look at the history of Germany, and stop assuming that others will keep financing American irresponsibility.

[AgentR]

Does this count as denial or what ?

Man, out of control inflation can put most citizens of a country into deep poverty in a jiffy. Take a look at the history of Germany, and stop assuming that others will keep financing American irresponsibility.

Thats exactly what I am saying WILL happen. It is not avoidable at this point. I'm not saying its a good thing, or will lead to ease and prosperity.

Not at all.

The path we are locked to leads to starvation, war, totalitarianism, and die-off. Its a done deal. Pretending that we can have an "enlightening moment" at this stage and save ourselves from the coming darkness is pure fantasy.

Given the nature of the world economy, and the disappearance of cheap oil; I think its a fair bet that we won't be alone on the trip.

[btu2012]

Ok AgentR. It seem that I misunderstood you.

Yeah, we are all in a pickle, and headed towards war most likely.

The window for stopping that is getting smaller and smaller, courtesy of Bush, Putin and their ilk. Not that Europe doesn't have its own morons.

[Kaj]

Well, there are signs of relative decline in some areas, but I think the American era will be here for a long time, much as I loathe it.

Firstly, by projecting the threat of irrationality with the doctrine of pre-emption America has acahieved a remarkable psychological victory. If you've ever played a much Risk, you'll know that that the player who threatens to do the most irrational kamizake revenge strikes that ends up winning, as no-one risks crossing him/her. Totally ruins the game.

Secondly, US planners have had the foresight to secure major strategic oil supply in Iraq. Even if it cannot get production up, it can do something far more important: deny those resources at will to Europe and China. Its all about the leverage at the negotiation table that will keep America ahead of its partners.

Thirdly, although capitalism has ceased to be progressive and is now becoming increasingly barbaric, its ideological alternatives are in serious disarray, especially in the United States, where it matters the most.

Fourthly, the US continues to play from the high slope of the pitch. It has exempted itself from treaties whilst imposing them on other, it has exceptional positions in the IMF and World Bank, and as the printer of the worldwide currency. It can therefore write the rules. Countries like China and Russia are making a huge mistake in their attempt to integrate themselves into this uneven playing field. Their fiscal policies can only end up benefiting the dominating core.

Fifthly, Peak Oil will hit the peripheral countries first. When it comes to the US, it will hit the poor and the middle-income people first. The last thing that will go will be the US military complex. Extraordinary technologies of death will continue to be at the disposal of the core for a long time, and will continue to advance exponentially.


The American Era is not likely to truly end until people over the world, and especially in the US begin to realise that the indefinite American Dream is unattainable, and organise themselves around other ideas based on community and sympathy. Peak Oil certainly may catalyze it, but even so we'll be in the American Era for at least 40 years, I would hazard.

[btu2012]

Firstly, by projecting the threat of irrationality with the doctrine of pre-emption America has achieved a remarkable psychological victory. If you've ever played a lot of Risk, you'll know that that is a very good psychological tactic you can use: threaten to have a tantrum and kamizaze all your forces into any players who frustrate your plans. After a few games people don't attack you anymore. Totally ruins the game.

Kaj, did you ever consider that, since you are well aware of that psychological strategy, so must be all governments in this world ? Do you really think that they don't take that into consideration ?

Secondly, US planners have had the foresight to secure major strategic oil supply in Iraq. Even if it cannot get production up, it can do something far more important: deny those resources at will to Europe and China. Its all about the leverage at the negotiation table that will keep America ahead of its partners.

What they secured for the time being is a major headache.

Thirdly, although capitalism has ceased to be progressive and is now becoming increasingly barbaric, its ideological alternatives are in serious disarray, especially in the United States, where it matters the most.

Capitalism has many alternatives, and Europe is doing quite OK by being less ideological than the US, thank you very much.

Fourthly, the US continues to play from the high slope of the pitch. It has exempted itself from treaties whilst imposing them on other, it has exceptional positions in the IMF and World Bank, and as the printer of the worldwide currency. It can therefore write the rules. Countries like China and Russia are making a huge mistake in their attempt to integrate themselves into this uneven playing field. Their fiscal policies can only end up benefiting the dominating core.

Not so. China and Russia are local powers, meanwhile the real alternative comes from the EU -- that of soft power and mutually respected agreements. Nobody likes a bully...think about that.

Fifthly, Peak Oil will hit the peripheral countries first. When it comes to the US, it will hit the poor and the middle-income people first. The last thing that will go will be the US military complex. Extraordinary technologies of death will continue to be at the disposal of the core for a long time, and will continue to advance exponentially.

That's true, but you assume that the US has a monopoly on that, which is false. Europe could arm itself very fast if needed, so could Japan. The ME is likely to get quite rich off PO, and they definitely have an incentive to arm themselves.

The American Era will not truly end until people over the world, and especially in the US begin to realise that the indefinite American Dream is unnattainable, and organise themselves around other ideas based on community and sympathy. I believe if this happens, it will take at least another 30 years to get rolling. Peak Oil certainly may catalyze it.

Well that depends on what level you are considering such reorganization. The geopolitical system is certainly undergoing a multi-polar reorganization as we speak, so in that sense the "American century" is already over, though many don't see it yet. Military power amounts to little without economic and soft power, and the US is loosing those two very fast. Things might change if the US gets capable leadership, but a lot of damage has already been done and only fixing that will take serious work.

[Kaj]

Kaj, did you ever consider that, since you are well aware of that psychological strategy, so must be all governments in this world ? Do you really think that they don't take that into consideration ?

Thanks for the suggestion, but yes I did think of it. That doesn't neutralize the psychological affects however.

What they secured for the time being is a major headache.

Yes, but it will have major strategic dividends in a decade. I do not think the Neocons are losing too much sleep over the ill and evil effects that their war is causing.

Capitalism has many alternatives, and Europe is doing quite OK by being less ideological than the US, thank you very much.

There's no such thing as 'less ideological'. Europe has a kind of mixture of ideologies/compromise between ideologies. Its sliding towards capitalist ideology though.

The real alternative comes from the EU -- that of soft power and mutually respected agreements. Nobody likes a bully...think about that.

Europe is a hope, but it is going down the wrong path. It has caught the neoliberal virus and the 'European Project' will end up being the 'American project' (as it was from its initiation) if it does not reassert the social values which distinguished it from the US--won by the struggles of the people.

Europe could arm itself very fast if needed, so could Japan.

Yes, but if they arm themselves they currently will do so as strong US allies, and will serve US objectives.

The geopolitical system is certainly undergoing a multi-polar reorganization as we speak, so in that sense the "American century" is already over, though many don't see it yet. Military power amounts to little without economic and soft power, and the US is loosing those two very fast. Things might change if the US gets capable leadership, but a lot of damage has already been done and only fixing that will take serious work.

I agree with this to a certain extent, but I believe the multipolar thing is currently overstated. As long as the economic institutions are loaded in the US' favour, Europe and China can't exercise their economic power to restrain the US' hegemonic project. What does this "soft power Instead, we see them increasingly integrate into the needs of US finance.

[btu2012]

Well, we'll see what happens in 5 years.

[TeamBridge]

Well, we'll see what happens in 5 years.

I'll second that. Haven't heard a discussion like this since the Germans set out to conquer the known world in the 30's - they thought theywere God's gift as well, and guaranteed a success hegemonic project.

Big big world. Turns so so fast these days.

[Nickel]

You however seem to believe that past responses were examples of glorious success; while I believe they were every bit as anemic.

Not just me, but people generally (hence the response from the Burmese military to US criticisms of it). And not "glorious", but capable.

[Nickel]

Yeah, we are all in a pickle, and headed towards war most likely.

I think the one thing that could stop the US if it's determined to start another war is for the countries paying the bills to shut the wickets. Certainly the US has a lot of forward motion and inertia, but if prices skyrocket at home and the US can't afford the oil, it's hard to see how the country could finance a war. Even domestic patriotic companies expect to be paid, and in money worth something. The only question is, do China, Japan, etc. care enough to put the brakes on? They'll have to, sooner or later. China is having to eat an awful lot of s**t, with the US sailing up and down the Strait of Taiwan waving its d*ck, just so it can keep the straw in California and keep sucking the economic and technological juice out of the States. But eventually, they'll have had enough. The question's just when, I think.

[Nickel]

If you've ever played a much Risk, you'll know that that the player who threatens to do the most irrational kamizake revenge strikes that ends up winning, as no-one risks crossing him/her. Totally ruins the game.

It depends on who you're playing against. There's a high burn-out rate to it and if you're playing against large enemies with deep pockets and plenty of fallback/regroup space (Japan vs. the States, Germany vs. Russia), it's a big gamble. All the king's horses and all the king's men haven't even been able to subdue Iraq and Afghanistan... the West is standing on feet of clay before the world these days.

Secondly, US planners have had the foresight to secure major strategic oil supply in Iraq. Even if it cannot get production up, it can do something far more important: deny those resources at will to Europe and China. Its all about the leverage at the negotiation table that will keep America ahead of its partners.

Denial of resources was unquestionably the intention, but if the US itself can't use the resource to the capacity it had in 2002, that's still a liability. The output to maintain a lesser capacity is hideous, and meanwhile, Europe and China have other means. It's not even a zero-sum game; it's a strategic disaster for the US and the UK.

the US continues to play from the high slope of the pitch. It has exempted itself from treaties whilst imposing them on other, it has exceptional positions in the IMF and World Bank, and as the printer of the worldwide currency.

I think this is increasingly irrelevant. A number of countries have openly broken with IMF/World Bank strictures, most notably Brazil, and Brazil's doing exceptionally well. The de facto shift to other currencies is already evident in spiraling cost of oil and the runaway inflation in US-pegged Gulf currency states... oil is already pegged to the stability of the euro -- this is why the price, denominated in US dollars, is soaring. People demand more of them as a hedge on their decreasing value. That won't go on forever. The power of the US dollar increasingly seems like that of a mortally-wounded man flailing forward on adrenalin and rage. I think many countries are simply waiting it out.

When it comes to the US, it will hit the poor and the middle-income people first. The last thing that will go will be the US military complex.

Possibly. Or, given its extravagant needs, it may actually be the first to succumb. What will decide the matter is how far the US military is prepared to go to preserve power simply for power's sake, and how much rope other countries, increasingly powerful and with deepening economic levers in the US, are prepared to lend it.

Extraordinary technologies of death will continue to be at the disposal of the core for a long time, and will continue to advance exponentially.

These have to be financed by someone, and not to put too fine a point on it, the US is currently blowing $700 billion a year of other people's money to do that, among other things.

The American Era is not likely to truly end until people over the world, and especially in the US begin to realise that the indefinite American Dream is unattainable, and organise themselves around other ideas based on community and sympathy.

Well, I think we're seeing that, actually. Russia's back on the board. China and Russia have the SCO, South America's growing more tightly unified financially and potentially militarily, the Gulf States are openly discussing abandoning the dollar... How many times in the past two or three years have you heard the phrase "basket of currencies" bantered about?

[Nickel]

Europe is a hope, but it is going down the wrong path. It has caught the neoliberal virus and the 'European Project' will end up being the 'American project' (as it was from its initiation) if it does not reassert the social values which distinguished it from the US--won by the struggles of the people.

How does sharing the values of the US equate to an automatic extension of US hegemony? The US pretty much picked up the threads of British imperialism after the war, but that didn't translate into continued prestige and global influence for Britain. What it amounted to was a passage of the torch.

As long as the economic institutions are loaded in the US' favour, Europe and China can't exercise their economic power to restrain the US' hegemonic project. What does this "soft power Instead, we see them increasingly integrate into the needs of US finance.

Again, on what basis do you insist this represents an advantage that will automatically accrue to the United States? It's entirely possible, even likely, that as the US declines, the levers of control of institutions now considered to be under US guidance will simply be transferred to other hands. It doesn't have to be a war or a revolution, just an increasing nod to the realities of the world.

[AgentR]

I think the one thing that could stop the US if it's determined to start another war is for the countries paying the bills to shut the wickets.

Ummm. not happening. You have such a huge list of "if only"'s running around.

A lot of times people lose sight of exactly how much domestic production we really have. Its huge. As gluttons, we've developed an appetite for more, of course; but there are very few countries that produce more oil than us; and the amount we produce is much more than is required to wage full throttle wars.

Even domestic patriotic companies expect to be paid, and in money worth something.

Their income and real estate taxes will be due in US dollars. Currency to pay taxes is more than "worth something"; it keeps the business or corporation alive. And guess what, both types of taxation scale with inflation. No, even at $1000 US to 1 EU, the dollar is going to be in adequate demand domestically.

China is having to eat an awful lot of s**t, with the US sailing up and down the Strait of Taiwan waving its d*ck, just so it can keep the straw in California

Umm; again, an unrealistic view of the world; we have enough domestic productivity to keep doing that for a century. I also don't get the genitalia reference... The US ideology of world trade embraces the freedom to traverse shipping lanes, even (or most especially) sensitive ones, like the Strait of Taiwan. That is not going to stop until the US no longer has the capability to launch nuclear weapons.

The Chinese know this, just as we know we aren't going to change their concept of "human rights". Of course, we're both politically required to whine... ALOT. But we aren't nuking China over forced abortions; and they aren't nuking the US for running speed boat races in the Straight of Taiwan.

The question's just when, I think.

All things are just a question of when. All countries disintegrate and reform from time to time. Nothing surprising or alarming about it.

[Nickel]

A lot of times people lose sight of exactly how much domestic production we really have. Its huge.

It's about 5 million barrels a day, a deficit of 15 million or so. And that 15 million only shows up as long as there's money to pay for it. You lose very much of it, say a third, and real questions arise about how food gets to the stores, and how does product A get from point B to point C, or Joe Six Pack get to his job, and what happens to the economy as a result? Having a quarter of what you need is better than nothing, but it hardly sets you up to take on the world. Can anybody else hear Ringo singing "I get by with a LOT of help from my friends?"

Their income and real estate taxes will be due in US dollars. Currency to pay taxes is more than "worth something"; it keeps the business or corporation alive. And guess what, both types of taxation scale with inflation. No, even at $1000 US to 1 EU, the dollar is going to be in adequate demand domestically.

Oh, yes... never in history have we seen a run on a currency destroy it as a store of value and sink an economy. Never have we seen the common people of a country turn away from the valueless scrip officially issued by their government in favour of something they actually have faith in. Now here you are, ready for the whole world to go down the toilet in some Robert Ardrey fantasy of bestial inhumanity... but hey, the dollar's going to be solid all the way down, is that what you're saying? Clearly national pride goeth before the fall.

Umm; again, an unrealistic view of the world; we have enough domestic productivity to keep doing that for a century.

No, you don't. Not by half. Certainly not facing others who DO, and whose economies ARE on a paying basis.

The US ideology of world trade embraces the freedom to traverse shipping lanes, even (or most especially) sensitive ones, like the Strait of Taiwan. That is not going to stop until the US no longer has the capability to launch nuclear weapons.

Oh, we'll see. I feel that VERY soon, we're going to look back at the idea that the US could just sail up and down what China CLEARLY considers an internal water (militarily speaking, if not economically) is going to be as unbelievable an idea as the British marching up to the White House and setting it on fire. It won't take anybody nuking anybody; it just won't be DONE anymore.

[arretium]

They're idiots, as rats often are, if they're too stupid to see that the Empire is not in those two countries to play nanny.

Sign me up for being an idiot. I don't see why we can't do a better job for $ 700 billion.

"Why it couldn't do so even for its own citizens post-Katrina."

Of course it could - it chose not to. Why is a different conversation. At the end of the day, the total death toll was a paltry 1,800. How many of the 1,800 could have been saved if the entire U.S. army arrived 10 minutes after the storm? Probably very few.

What made Katrina different was images of thousands of poor black people in the Superdome for a week. They didn't starve, they didn't die of thirst. The worst that can be said was that they lived in more-than-usual squalor for a few days.

Are you from the south? The attitude you have and the America you speak of is not the same as the America I live in. With attitudes like yours, who needs enemies?

In the end, I couldn't give a shit less about people who were . . .
1. Dumb enough to live below sea level on the coast in Hurricane Alley.

and

2. Dumb enough not to leave when the storm passed over Florida and was predicted to hit near New Orleans a full 2 days in advance of land fall.

What's already been said in response to this comment was said in a more civil manner than the words that come to my mind.

I do have to admit there is a certain logic to your view cashmere.

[AgentR]

Nickel, I think I've expressed all the points I intended to in this thread, no sense repeating them. Repeating them won't help you understand my point any better, so I am content that you take both the first and last comment.

[Egomancer]

What I think is funny is that people on this board (which are most of them US based) think that US has always have been a superpower. What they need to remember is that US became one of the 2 superpowers that divided the world after the second world war, and that was an "accident" (due to the fact that they won the war in pacific). Russia won the war in Europe and basically conquered half of it. The remaining half was an US dominion kept "independent" by the US nuclear arsenal.

However, after USSR collapsed all hell broke loose in Europe and half of the continent got their freedom. We are talking about like 150-200 million of educated people and more or less functional societies that went from a corrupt and idiotic system to a less corrupt and less idiotic system - meaning the EU. Reconstructing these countries is a very good business for the capitalist systems from the EU - as the system can expand itself as in the good old days.
You should consider the power of these 159 million people and how much the EU power increased because of them. US tried to insert itself into this area, but it is very hard as they do not have the money to do it. In the meantime Germany has reconstructed itself from ground-up and now they are preparing for the world domination - and I am not talking about military power, but economic and technological power.
Consequently EU power increased while US power remained the same, or advanced only a little. However this move only generated a power shift big enough to change the world.

Independently on this, ASIA became the worlds leaders in computers and other processor industries, and the most innovative societies from the world. Consequently Asia's standing vs US and EU increased. Relatively to that, the US power decreased.

And this is how we entered a multipolar world and how US global domination came to an end. Once again: the US domination was a result of the fact that her competitors exhausted themselves in the second world war, otherwise it would have never ever got to that level. Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).

In economics there are games where everybody wins from a deal (positive sum game I think is the english term) - and this is how we are educated to believe in school by the capitalist thinkers and writers that capitalism is. However I believe that in the current economic (capitalist) system the game is based on the quantity of energy available to the system. As long as the energy available is expanding, we are talking about a positive sum game (as depicted by the economic thinkers). However when we are evolving in a world with contracting energy available then the theory isn't valid anymore as we enter into a negative sum game ( a game where everyone looses from a deal). And this is where the capitalism ends, and some other economic systems start. IN other words in the future EVERYBODY will loose and the winner will be the one that looses less, at least until a new equilibrium is reached. That is NOT capitalism but something else...

Obviously, post PO the quantity of energy will decrease so we will see that the freedoms of companies and individuals will be decreased and organizations with greater economic and military power will be created to cope with the new situation (EU once more). You must be BIG to live in a world of giants.

Egomancer

[Scactha]

Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).

I have told people this for ages too. As an historian it´s not that hard to see the weak grasp and it´s reasons the US is in the current situation. In the simplest of terms the resources that matter are in Eurasia; the US is on the other side of the planet. To leave a "footprint" it has to spend resources like no other. Which is easy to see that it´s failing. Add to that a host of other reasons, but in the simplest terms the 2 gigantic moats it has to cross will suffice.