Peak Oil News and Message Boards

ralfy wrote:Several fast crashes, as seen during the last few years, and part of a global slow crash.

Quick question for anyone, is there anything in the CoC that allows for bans for just being ignorant? Sort of a like, "bring up the local forum IQ average by getting rid of those who have no relationship with reality"?

Subjectivist wrote:The Slow Crash has been going on for 50 years but some people denand fast crash or nothing, so they can't even see it.

And the slow crash might go on for another 500, depending on nothing other than the metrics used. What Happy McDoomsters are left with nowadays, hoping for a crash off in the future that maybe SOMEONE will recognize. Why not just stick with the sun running out of hydrogen, that crash will be based in physics, and at least no one will notice the break from reality generally needed for fall for one Happy McDoomster rapture fantasy or another.

AdamB wrote:

Subjectivist wrote:The Slow Crash has been going on for 50 years but some people denand fast crash or nothing, so they can't even see it.

And the slow crash might go on for another 500, depending on nothing other than the metrics used. What Happy McDoomsters are left with nowadays, hoping for a crash off in the future that maybe SOMEONE will recognize. Why not just stick with the sun running out of hydrogen, that crash will be based in physics, and at least no one will notice the break from reality generally needed for fall for one Happy McDoomster rapture fantasy or another.

And of course, with overall progress, including technology, global GDP, etc. continuing apace, until one clearly defines "crash", how much credibility can "slow crash" have outside the land of constant prediction of doom?

It's one thing to say BAU has LOTS of problems and "challenges", and name the litany of population, debt, depletion, etc. issues. And to point out that BAU growth can't continue unabated forever, and that many serious problems, including AGW, can cause a crash at some point. I'm one of the people who say that.

But really, are we going to call all of the written history of humans, or even the chaos of the entire evolution of the earth, the solar system, or even the known universe a "crash"?

If reality has shown us anything, the Goldilocks scenario, including no pain isn't the normal condition.

Do I live better than any other previous generation? Well yes I do. Is that crash conditions? Well you could have fooled me.

Cog wrote:Do I live better than any other previous generation? Well yes I do. Is that crash conditions? Well you could have fooled me.

If the question is ^I^ then the answer is personal and not universal . Just because ^you^ live better does not mean ^all^ live better . My suggestion take a trip to Greece,Spain,Portugal(devolped world) or to India ,and ask this question of the guy who graduated from college in 2008 and is still looking for a job . Your personal situation is unimportant .

dirtyharry wrote:

Cog wrote:Do I live better than any other previous generation? Well yes I do. Is that crash conditions? Well you could have fooled me.

If the question is ^I^ then the answer is personal and not universal . Just because ^you^ live better does not mean ^all^ live better . My suggestion take a trip to Greece,Spain,Portugal(devolped world) or to India ,and ask this question of the guy who graduated from college in 2008 and is still looking for a job . Your personal situation is unimportant .

OTOH, in the US, the median household income is about $60,000. So it's not exactly like Cog is the only one doing just fine, is it?

Outcast_Searcher wrote:

dirtyharry wrote:

Cog wrote:Do I live better than any other previous generation? Well yes I do. Is that crash conditions? Well you could have fooled me.

If the question is ^I^ then the answer is personal and not universal . Just because ^you^ live better does not mean ^all^ live better . My suggestion take a trip to Greece,Spain,Portugal(devolped world) or to India ,and ask this question of the guy who graduated from college in 2008 and is still looking for a job . Your personal situation is unimportant .

OTOH, in the US, the median household income is about $60,000. So it's not exactly like Cog is the only one doing just fine, is it?

A story for you . 10 scouts went hiking . They had to cross a river 7 ft deep . The height of the 10 boys was 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 ft respectively . The median was 5.5 ft . Guess how many crossed the river ? Answer only 3 ,the rest drowned . Median income is a bogey ,inequality is reality . I am not blaming anyone for the situation ,just clearing the muddy waters .

dirtyharry wrote:A story for you . 10 scouts went hiking . They had to cross a river 7 ft deep . The height of the 10 boys was 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 ft respectively . The median was 5.5 ft . Guess how many crossed the river ? Answer only 3 ,the rest drowned . Median income is a bogey ,inequality is reality . I am not blaming anyone for the situation ,just clearing the muddy waters .

When clearing is distracting, you're not helping. But I know, it's all doom, all the time, even though the vast majority of the time, it's not.

Hint for the mathematically impaired. Median is LESS than the average, since the really big numbers outweigh the really small ones. So pretending like "median income is a bogey" is typical for the usual fast crash doomer misinformation campaign about economics, but in fact, the median income says a lot about the typical income levels, whether you like it or not.

And in the mean time, let's remember that annually, the US is spending about $1 trillion on about 100 anti-poverty programs. Plus you have all the state and local programs. Plus you have all the efforts like charity.

So please, enough with the implications that America is the land of economic doom.

How many Americans are starving to death dirtyharry? Ever been in a checkout line behind someone using an EBT card? LOL

What is inequality exactly? Do others have more than me and less than me? Of course there are. Does that bother me? Nope.

Outcast_Searcher wrote:

dirtyharry wrote:A story for you . 10 scouts went hiking . They had to cross a river 7 ft deep . The height of the 10 boys was 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 ft respectively . The median was 5.5 ft . Guess how many crossed the river ? Answer only 3 ,the rest drowned . Median income is a bogey ,inequality is reality . I am not blaming anyone for the situation ,just clearing the muddy waters .

When clearing is distracting, you're not helping. But I know, it's all doom, all the time, even though the vast majority of the time, it's not.

Hint for the mathematically impaired. Median is LESS than the average, since the really big numbers outweigh the really small ones. So pretending like "median income is a bogey" is typical for the usual fast crash doomer misinformation campaign about economics, but in fact, the median income says a lot about the typical income levels, whether you like it or not.

And in the mean time, let's remember that annually, the US is spending about $1 trillion on about 100 anti-poverty programs. Plus you have all the state and local programs. Plus you have all the efforts like charity.

So please, enough with the implications that America is the land of economic doom.

The word ^Median^ is derivative of two words ^Medium^ + ^Middle^ just as the word ^Angst^ is a derivative of the two words ^Anger^ and ^Stress^ . Understand your vocabulary . My like or dislike is not important ,but the math has to be correct .
The $1Trillion spending ? If you give me the printing presses I will make it 10 Trillion . Don^t you guys in the USA ever think why the debt is now $20 Trillion . Last months trade deficit was itself $ 750 billion . The USA is using the ^credit card^ of the world .Please keep giving with the helping hand and drive yourself into
bankruptcy .
As to the USA being the land of economic doom : This is irrelevant for me since I do not live there . It is for the Americans to decide what it is and in which direction it is headed . Just a disclaimer ,I am not a doomer ,in case of a crash there are more losers than winners and that includes my wife,son,daughter,grandson,granddaughter etc (and I suppose it is the same for all here).I want the good times to go on but as Churchill said ^If you want peace ,prepare for war^. Be well

Cog wrote:How many Americans are starving to death dirtyharry? Ever been in a checkout line behind someone using an EBT card? LOL

What is inequality exactly? Do others have more than me and less than me? Of course there are. Does that bother me? Nope.

I do not live in the USA . Your question is irrelevant from my POV . As to what is inequality please read Thomas Picketty ,he will enlighten you more than I can . Be well .

I'm sorry you live in a poor country dirtyharry. Perhaps you should elect someone who cares about such things instead of lecturing Americans about things you know nothing about.

Cog wrote:I'm sorry you live in a poor country dirtyharry. Perhaps you should elect someone who cares about such things instead of lecturing Americans about things you know nothing about.

Maybe you should elect somebody who can at least keep his pant zipper and his lips locked . What a choice in the USA ? Hitlary or the Orangutan . Look who^s talking . By the way just for your info I live in a country that ranks way above the USA in all fields of livability index . The problem with you is that you are so used to living in shit that it smells like Chanel too you .The problem is that shit is just shit . Keep smelling .

dirtyharry wrote:

Cog wrote:I'm sorry you live in a poor country dirtyharry. Perhaps you should elect someone who cares about such things instead of lecturing Americans about things you know nothing about.

Maybe you should elect somebody who can at least keep his pant zipper and his lips locked . What a choice in the USA ? Hitlary or the Orangutan .

Agreed on that. Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them as I considered both of them dishonest to the point of being unqualified, given their past statements and actions.

As for inequality, though I'm a capitalist and believe very much in rewarding productivity and risk, I'm not insensitive to the risks of extreme inequality on the downside.

That coupled with the problems with coming machine intelligence coupled with automation, is why I've decided to be for the "socialistic" ideas of a BMI (basic minimum income) and some sort of a "robot" (robot including job replacing automation) tax in the US.

I'd balance that with dismantling almost all the current US social spending apparatus (to help fund it, and make it more fair/practical), and the BMI would be to prevent true poverty, not to make everyone comfortably middle class.

No solution is great OR easy, but continuing to do nothing as technology continues to generate a feedback loop leading to greater inequality seems like insanity at some point, re social instability -- if the lower end is deprived of a reasonable standard of living.

First world countries have the wealth to deal with this (if we don't allow too much immigration). If third world countries can't limit population growth, I don't generally see good answers for them longer term.

Since the energy cost to produce petroleum is rising exponentially and the net energy is falling off a cliff, a fast crash is inevitable.

On the economy side the debt to GDP ratio is rising exponentially as well. The question is just which side will crash first?

The central banks have been printing trillions and kept the interest rate close to zero to expand the credit/debt bubble since the financial crisis and are now hitting the brakes as the debt ratio has become unsustainable.

A global financial crisis today will hit the lower economic segments of the societies hard and might lead to riots and civil wars particularly in multicultural societies. A Syrianization of nations is a likely scenario when nations and economies fall apart.

Yoshua wrote:Since the energy cost to produce petroleum is rising exponentially and the net energy is falling off a cliff, a fast crash is inevitable.

So I take it with Short and PStarr gone, you're going to be the resident fast-crash prophet? You want this post to mark the start of you racking up a series of bad short-term predictions?

but in fact, the median income says a lot about the typical income levels, whether you like it or not.

If the numbers are not cooked. Large amount of underemployment, increasing amount of homeless and retail apocalypse do not a good picture paint.

Amazon only accounts for a small portion of lost retail sales, the massive loss of retail sales indicate consumers just don't have the cash even for simple purchases.

Yoshua wrote:Since the energy cost to produce petroleum is rising exponentially and the net energy is falling off a cliff, a fast crash is inevitable.

It's not outside the claims of ETP nonsense.

Relax.

Darian S wrote:

but in fact, the median income says a lot about the typical income levels, whether you like it or not.

If the numbers are not cooked. Large amount of underemployment, increasing amount of homeless and retail apocalypse do not a good picture paint.

Amazon only accounts for a small portion of lost retail sales, the massive loss of retail sales indicate consumers just don't have the cash even for simple purchases.

You seem completely confused.

Or relying on the usual "books are cooked" nonsense doomers must rely on, since they're always wrong.

Just like in science, trying to come up with meaningful data for huge datasets (like, say, counting retail sales for a massive economy for many years) via your intuition instead of careful measurement produces nonsense. That's why there are big organizations which do lots of work (and math) to do the measuring.

There IS no "massive loss of retail sales". Only a switch from inefficient brick and mortar stores, like expensive mom & pop stores with high prices and small selection, or hapless chains like Radio Shack, JC Penney, K-mart, Sears, etc, to cheaper, more convenient, more efficient internet sales (and prior to that, to big box sales).

Overall retail sales have grown every year recently except during the big recession, along with the GDP. More people with more income overall, buying MORE stuff.

Of course you won't believe me. But I looked it up. Every year the economy expands, total US retail sales are increasing, and projected to continue increasing.

For example:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/443 ... ail-sales/

Another look, from 1992.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/retail-sales

There is this thing called "Google", which lets you search for things.

Try "total US retail sales by year", for example.

dirtyharry wrote:

Cog wrote:Do I live better than any other previous generation? Well yes I do. Is that crash conditions? Well you could have fooled me.

If the question is ^I^ then the answer is personal and not universal . Just because ^you^ live better does not mean ^all^ live better .

Name any government in the world that requires not only that its people do better, but commits to doing the same for everyone else as well. Just one, to see how your logical fallacy holds up in real words of real people, and how well they did.

There is no such requirement within the systems humans have built that all live better. None. There are hopes and dreams and strawmen such as you assemble to refute someone else who is being completely reasonable in their perspective. You can pretend it must be so, but any first semester stats student understands that probability density functions exist for a reason...and 10 seconds later can apply that knowledge to the human condition. And presto...we ain't all gonna live the same, let alone better.

What's up sock puppet? Did the ShortonOil persona get banned or something, or did you keep getting too many questions about being a welsher?

dirtyharry wrote:Your personal situation is unimportant .

Not to him/her, you halfwit.