[Pops]

I don't know Kub, you seem intent on telling me I'm wrong.

OK, I'm wrong.

Now that we have that out of the way, how about you instruct me on what we will have after oil?

[Plantagenet]

capitalism cannot survive in a no growth scenario.... we have no choice but to bring average global growth to a halt........ and grind along in a sort of stasis ....we’ve been treated to a preview of what a no-growth stasis economy would look like under capitalism. It’s not a pretty sight: capital destruction, mass unemployment, devastated communities, foreclosures, spreading poverty and homelessness, school closures, and environmental considerations shunted aside in the all-out effort to restore growth. That is “stasis” under capitalism....there is no public support out there for a capitalist steady-state economy.... a steady-state capitalist economy....“no growth” just means no jobs.. limits to growth ... if there is no growth

You are missing the crux of the peak oil problem.

The "no-growth" scenario you are so concerned with will probably only last a few years, while oil production is on a plateau. Once oil production starts to drop we will have DECREASING global oil production and most countries will have to deal with SHRINKING economies for decades to come.

The period of "no-growth" we are in now will seem like a picnic compared to what is likely to come as countries try to cope with shrinking economies

[Pops]

]No, his point was that capitalism cannot survive in a no growth scenario. Not that growth is a choice:

He is arguing with the proponents of no-growth who DO see it as an option, Kub. Right in the first para of section 1 he says:

For Jackson, Simms and Johnson as for Daly, growth is seen to be entirely subjective, optional, not built into capitalist economies.

I agree that opting out of capitalistic consumerism is not an option while energy is cheap because no one would choose it - we are greedy.

The author also mentions energy and states that even if we replaced all of those oil slaves with clean renewable energy, we would still have a problem:

But the problem is that we can not replace FFs, Kub, that's the whole point. Any scenario with anything close to todays energy use will not be valid in 30 years for sure and I believe much less.

You missed the flipside of the coin to all of that monkey greed. Sure, you can take tell the shareholders to piss off, the consumers they can't have anymore toys. But in the same breath, you are also advocating all of the associated ills that occur when a capitalist economy goes into stasis or reverse:

Ah ha, I see the hang up, you think I'm advocating for voluntary no-growth capitalism!

I'm not advocating it, I'm saying negative growth is inevitable!

So, now that we have that clarified, after PO and the end of growth obviously some other system will prevail - I'm saying private ownership and free markets will still be possible and no one in all these discussions has shown why they would not. All that is ever offered is "growth is required for capital accumulation".

I'm saying we won't give a rip about "acumulation" because we'll be trying to keep a roof over our heads!

Not playing the stock market, not running up the card via fractional reserve banking, not taking our dividends and buying a place on Martha's Vineyard, just individuals profiting from their own labor and assets.

I think you misread what that author was saying there. He wasn't listing those things as a viable alternative to growth capitalism.

Ditto above, I don't care about growth capitalism, it's over or soon to be over due to the end of cheap energy. One more time, I'm not advocating for no-growth capitalism in a cheap energy environment.

If all of a sudden we have legions of unemployed because the growth sector of capitalism is shrinking and laying off workers, do you expect all of them to start or work for mom & pop shops?

We will have legions, Kub, they are growing as we speak and the economy is already shrinking (except for the Fed's jiggering that makes GDP appear to grow).

And yes the "structurally unemployed" will of necessity find a way to earn a living because they will have no alternative.

Remember the earlier quote that for every job opening there were seven applicants? These guys don't have the capital to start their own business. And even if they did, if all of a sudden there was suddenly six new competitors springing up for existing mom & pop shops, how long would they stay in business?

Yeah, it's a problem huh?

Why do you think I've been tapping out Make a Plan & Work It like a fool on this website for over 7 years now?


ETA: not yelling, just emphasizing really a lot!

[Pops]

Once oil production starts to drop we will have DECREASING global oil production and most countries will have to deal with SHRINKING economies for decades to come.

IOWs, what Plant said.

[kublikhan]

Once oil production starts to drop we will have DECREASING global oil production and most countries will have to deal with SHRINKING economies for decades to come.

IOWs, what Plant said.

You guys have a point, it is silly to argue about the fate of capitalism in steady state when fossil fuel depletion will force economies into contraction. Besides, I have gone off on a tangent here from the original topic of this thread. My bad

[Pops]

[furrybill]

I'm being a bit contrary, of course we've learned how to be more efficient and that makes things cheaper. On the macro level and as far as conservation and PO go it doesn't matter since we just turned around and wasted the proceeds on beanbag chairs and exurban commutes.
But on the micro level, if a person chooses not to waste the efficiency gains - Don't Buy all the stuff - then jeavons is no paradox, it's the key to living the low life (or prepping for what's next) because everything is cheaper than it otherwise would have been!

Couldn't agree more. One could even fantasize that the crash will be slow, followed by a Dark Ages. Then those who learned to live with less might provide an example for a new age to be based on. This is why I really like the Transition movement - entire communities living this way may form the basis for a new civilization - if they don't get wiped out by the zombies.

I also think this is a great discussion to have because we're going to need new ideas for how we organize ourselves. Can capitalism survive? Will democracy survive? Talking about this stuff now may seem meaningless as the collapse happens but is another important use of our leisure time and hopefully sews the seeds that our grandchildren will reap.