0 votes

America's future is NOT Mad Max

America's future is bright. Yes certainly a whopping Depression is at the doorstep, but our future is certainly NOT Mad Max either. I promise you, it will be bright, beautiful, and gloriously free country again, better in fact, than it ever was.

For those of us who think it will be, we need to read all we can about the before and after of crises in Argentina 2001. Life goes on. Certainly it goes on in a new way, a much tougher way for sure, but its not a Black n White thing with no grey areas.

Life in the Grey Zone, that is what we will have. Life in the Grey. Sure there is to be bouts of vandals, police state crackdowns, shortages, military curfew areas.... but that is not the worst of it, that is not the real danger to freedom in America. Sure, life will go on, people will adjust, people will downsize, cut back, trade in cars for mopeds and scooters, home grow veggies, and figure out other power sources. Yes we Americans will rise above this. We will overcome this because we know how life can and should be.

So just what is the "real danger" to us, if not that? Its the stories we hold in our minds as true, the stories we hold that are false. The story that was spun and accepted in 1929 ---from pool halls to the halls of academia ---was that Capitalism had failed. Not true! Government had failed. With that one Assumption unchallenged, we have suffered each year more and more government "help".

Think about that. Then realize that today, 2008, Government has Failed AGAIN. Government is the one Bankrupt, not 98% of us. Government cannot save anyone, but we sure can. Govt caused the Credit Bubble, caused the those of us in the real estate market to get the wrong price signals, cause mal investment, and caused our bad investments. But GOVERNMENT Failed.

This is the simple truth, GOVERNMENT FAILED.

As much as we struggle, we must Make that one Message Clear, GOVERNMENT FAILED. Government BOTH cause the problem and failed to save us from the result.

In our daily lives, we must never let any comment go un challenged that says or assumes otherwise.

This is HOW we will overcome this. We must make it "common wisdom" that Government is not the answer, government is the Problem.

That is the Military Battle Line that we all must Shoot our words across. From TV to Newspapers to the internet, we must NEVER allow there to be any other assumption.

GOVERNMENT FAILED. GOVERNMENT CAUSED THE PROBLEM, GOVERNMENT CAN ONLY MAKE IT WORSE.

Its time we give the Constitution, the free market, and ourselves the freedom to be as gloriously wonderful as we can be. We will find another energy power platform, other than oil. We will build and rise up to be the Great and Free Country on the Planet.

China is not the new light of Freedom, America is and for ever will be.

In Peace and Liberty,
Treg
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

PS: See, They do think Roosevelt's New Deal & govt saved the day....(that and war)

Read this News Story Just in....

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A 'Green New Deal' can save the world's economy, says UN

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 12 October 2008

Top economists and United Nations leaders are working on a "Green New Deal" to create millions of jobs, revive the world economy, slash poverty and avert environmental disaster, as the financial markets plunge into their deepest crisis since the Great Depression.

The ambitious plan – the start of which will be formally launched in London next week - will call on world leaders, including the new US President, to promote a massive redirection of investment away from the speculation that has caused the bursting “financial and housing bubbles” and into job-creating programmes to restore the natural systems that underpin the world economy.

It aims to convince them that, far from restricting growth, healing the global environment will be a desperately -needed driving force behind it.

The Green Economy Initiative - which will be spearheaded by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), headquartered here, and is already being backed by governments – draws its inspiration from Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, which ended the 1930s depression and helped set up the world economy for the unprecedented growth of the second half of the 20th century.

It, too, envisages basing recovery on providing work for the poor, as well as reform of financial practices, after a crash brought on by unregulated excesses of the free market and the banking system.

The new multimillion dollar initiative – which is being already funded by the German and Norwegian Governments and the European Commission – arises out of a study commissioned by world leaders at the 2006 G8 summit into the economic value of ecosystems. It argues that the world is caught up in not one, but three interlinked crises, with the food and fuel crunches accompanying and intensifying the financial one.

Soaring prices of grain and oil, it stresses, have stemmed from outdated economic priorities that have concentrated on short term exploitation of the world's resources, without considering how they can be used to sustain prosperity in the long term. Over the last quarter of a century, says UNEP, world growth has doubled, but 60 per cent of the natural resources that provide food, water, energy and clean air have been seriously degraded.

Achim Steiner, UNEP's Executive Director, adds that new research shows that every year, for example the felling of forests deprives the world of over $2.5 trillion worth of such services in supplying water, generating rainfall, stopping soil erosion, cleaning the air and reducing global warming . By comparison, he points out, the global financial crisis is so far estimated to have cost the world the smaller one-off sum of $1.5 trillion.

“We are pushing, if not pushing past, the limits of what the planet can sustain,” he says. “If we go on as we are today’s crisis will seem mild indeed compared to the crises of tomorrow”.

Switching direction and concentrating on 'green growth', he says, will not only prevent such catastrophes, but rescue the world's finances. “The new, green economy would provide a new engine of growth, putting the world on the road to prosperity again. This is about growing the world economy in a more intelligent, sustainable way.

“The 20th century economy, now in such crisis, was driven by financial capital. The 21st century one is going to have to be based on developing the world's natural capital to provide the lasting jobs and wealth that are needed, particularly for the poorest people on the planet”

He says for example, that it makes more sense to invest in preserving forests, peatlands and soils, which naturally absorb carbon dioxide, than destroying them and then developing expensive technology to do the job.

He points out that the world market for environmental goods and service already stands at $1.3 trillion and is expected to double over the next 12 years even on present trends, and adds. “There is an enormous opportunity to ride on this increasing global demand for environmental improvement and turn it into the driver of economic growth, job creation and poverty reduction that is now so desperately needed. And in some places it is already beginning to happen.”

Mr Steiner will launch the initiative in London a week on Wednesday, October 22nd, with the announcement of three projects, concentrating on how investing in the world's natural systems, in renewable energy and in other green technologies would stimulate growth and provide jobs, and giving examples of where it is already taking place.

He will describe, for example, how Mexico is now employing 1.5 million people to plant and manage forests, how China has created the world's biggest solar energy industries from scratch in just a few years, and how Germany has leapt from being a laggard to a leader in renewable energy by giving people attractive incentives to install it in their home.

Pavan Sukhdev, the chair of Deutschbank's Global Market Centre, who is leading the initiative, says: “. Hundreds of millions of jobs can be created, there is no question that traditional industries like steel and cars cannot provide them. But this is a really huge business opportunity.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

GW Bush, ""Bank buyout needed to preserve free market".

In what may be the most Orwellian comment in history, President Bush just stated: "Bank buyout needed to preserve free market".
One Does Not Take Over Free Markets To Save Them

President Bush just proven without a doubt he does not understand free markets. Of course he has long since proven he does not understand anything else either.

One does not take over free markets to save them. It was and still is government intervention in the first place that is destroying the free markets. The root cause of the mess we are in is fractional reserve lending, an unsound currency, and interest rate micro-mismanagement by the Fed.
Brave New World To "Preserve" Free Markets http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039663&Fr...

In peace and liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Tata Motors...

Anyone care to comment?

An engine that runs on air. Now that changes the game.

http://www.google.com/search?q=tata+motors&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8...

Tata Motors, the largest automobile company in India, seems to be the innovative, cost containing, massive worldwide sales giant that Ford, GM and Toyota all used to be.

Yea, I bought the stock.

In Peace & Liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Treg,

Our future may not be Mad Max or Thunderdome...but it's starting to look more like Red Dawn, Brave New World and 1984 each day. I wish it were more like "V for Vendetta" in which the people rise up en mass against the Masters. Our nation has become an Ohliarchy (sp.) and is degenerating into a Fascist/Communist-Socialist dictatorship while we all sit here and type our grievances. The Europeans, for the most-part, have become brainwashed socialized idiots who are Obama-crazy. They have welcomed every immigrant from every sesspool country on earth and are paying a hefty social/economic price. Those that speak up against this are branded Racists, Anti-Semites, etc. Jorg Haider, for example. Like Dr. Paul, he only wanted the best for his country and told the un-popular truth of things. Sadly, another honest politician (what I know of him, anyway) has been rubbed-out in an "auto accident". I wonder if the Clintons were somehow involved in his death, too?...there's been so many!
I do not share your optimism, Treg. I'm still waiting for the same a-holes that pulled off 9/11 to do a bio attack before the "elections" and declare Marshal Law. If I'm wrong,..I'm branded a whacko by friends, family and you good people here on DP....I've been ridiculed before, and I'm a big boy and can take it. If I'm right, I'll end up with a house-full of friends/family wanting to come live in the country with a garden and animals.
I hope I'm wrong.

------------------
BC
As for me and my home, we will be buying ammo!

------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

Great point: The Government Failed

If you look at the bailout bill, they took many steps to keep us from thinking that the government failed.

Most pretended to fight the bill...some probably actually did, but this whole thing was planned ahead of time.

Next, they supposedly "sneaked it through via attaching to another bill"...that allows the government to say "Hey, that bill is still overall good."

After the bill, the MSM launched a bunch of polls "Who's to blame?" Usually, the polls did not include the government. They included, lenders or borrowers.

They actually often outright said it was our own fault...as if Joe Citizen getting a car loan equated to the government making lenders give bad loans. When they weren't saying that, they said it was the banks fault.

But that wasn't specific enough...so they looked for a way to blame a single bank. And ta da, AIG's retreat suddenly became the top story. Further, bank folk suddenly appeared on SNL saying the most horrible things. Thus, people had someone to blame...AIG!

All to prevent us from blaming the government. Especially, Obama and McCain!

Someone actually asked me, "Who do you blame? The lender or the borrower." I said, "I blame the government for making banks give out bad loans. And I especially blame the government for the bailout bill...who else should I blame except those that made the bill, passed the bill, and enforced the bill." She was stunned. Logic conflicted with all the MSM brainwashing.

I further said "You do know that both Obama and McCain fought for this bill." She's black and thus proudly supports Obama...simply because he's black. She didn't seem to really care that Obama supported a bill that she really hated.

This is a PRIME example of how illogical people are. They do choose a side, but then merely reguritate their side's rhetoric. Frankly, a lot of that is going on with the Ron Paul supporters, but I won't go into that.

Anyway, because of the lack of reasoning and emotional attachment to one party or another, it is really hard to crack them.

Some say keep hitting them with the truth, but I think a multi-pronged attack will be needed to match the multi-pronged cage they are in.

We need a moral, an immoral, a rational, an irrational, a serious, a comedic, a musical, a peaceful, a dangerous, etc. prongs of attack.

We need to study not only Gandhi and the Civil RIghts movement, but also the liberal and neo-con movement/organizations.

more like Demolition Man

Demolition Man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPrTP7vEH2E
----------------------------------------
Ron Paul Supporter Since 1997
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
#standwithrand

everyone keeps saying

the GOVERNMENT, the GOVERNMENT, the GOVERNMENT..............

um, aren't "we the people" supposed to BE the governement??????

we dropped the ball people and let them run with it..shame on us!

No, we are not the government. Does that answer your question?

Who are "we"?

We are the ones who pay taxes, some 30% or more.

We are the ones who follow the rules and laws, or go to prison.

Who is the "Government"?

The government is a collection of institutions that gets our tax money.

The government is the institution that makes the laws and if not followed, puts you in jail.

So there you go, "We" are not the "Government". There are two classes of people, those who pay and those who collect. Those who collect also vote, more and more, and more and more they never pay.

Its real simple, We are not the Government.

May I continue? Perhaps you have heard about the "3 equal branches of government"? There is the judicial, the legislative, and the executive branch, all supposedly "balancing" the other, "sharing power equally".

That is a delusion.

On bottom is the Legislative Branches, the lowest is the House, then on top of that is the Senate.

Next is the Judicial Branch, only because in specific and particular court cases, they can throw your ass in jail. That is something the House and the Senate cannot do.

On top of all of that sits the Executive branch. The senior executive, the President, is the Commander and Chief of the Arm Forces. He gives the orders. He presides over the military. Not only that, the president has a super secret spy and assassinate machine all at his beck n call. He can have world presidents around the world assassinated and his CIA will provide him with "plausible deny-ability" - an excuse, a way to say, "Not me, wasn't us". Further, if say the President wanted a bill passed that he liked, say the Patriot Act for example. And if say, certain key democrats, insulting newspapers, are in your way, then have some crazy suicidal scientist working in govt labs making, oh i don't know, anthrax and mail that straight to who the President does not like. If the President can order hits around the world, why not at home? Why not in Congress? Why not on the Judiciary. Lord knows Roosevelt was frustrated has all heck with the Supreme Court... but they soon found what was clearly UnConstitutional, constitutional and his New Deal "sailed through". So did the Patriot Act.

That said, the House may have the power of the Purse, the Senate the power to deliberate future laws, but the President has the power to get rid of your irritating ass when he dam well pleases. So it is not, Rock, Paper, Scissors, its more like sing and dance little puppets and compromise yourself to sign on to my Presidential agenda or you are next, get it?

Now, what if we had a President who wanted two things, one no more secret societies (such as the CIA) and two, he ordered that secret society to kill Fidel Castro. Indeed, what if that President ordered 48 hits against Castro, and the CIA even involved the Mafia to do the dirty work, and then if that is not interesting enough, that Playboy President sleeps with a Mafia bosses wife?

Question: Should we be shocked that who got "hit" was not Fidel Castro? Further, should we be shocked that the shooter was a "mixed up" exCIA man named Oswald?

Answer, "No we should not". Nor should we be surprised that the successor, VP Johnson, was a big supporter of the CIA mission and purpose. Nor should we be surprised that for 50 years since, the only candidate for president to come straight out and say "we don't need a CIA, I would abolish it", had no chance in hell of becoming president.

In Peace & Liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Two Kudos

Just want to add hemp was used during WW2. USDA film Hemp for Victory was used to get farmers to grow hemp to aid in the war effort. There are thousands of industrial uses for hemp, in fact free use and development of hemp would obsolete a major portion of the oil industry. You can make bio-degradable plastic, paper, cloth, paint, bio-Fuels (better source than corn in content and growth density,) food ( seeds are second in protein to the soybean, contains omega 3 and 6, and many other beneficial nutrients,) Hell Henry Ford made a car out of it! Other strains can be used as affordable medicine (over 17,000 medical studies done) It has a rapid growth/photosynthesis rate, anybody anywhere can grow it. If everyone was encouraged to grow it, even if only to donate to a cause, the recyclable material (stems, stalks, leaves, and even buds) as well as ecologic benefits would be astounding, not to mention jobs (rural and industrial) that would have a 100% secure and renewable resource to rely on. It grows in every climate type around the world!
I don't mean to rant about it, just do some research theres a lot about cannabis that leads me to believe its world wide acceptance would solve a lot of difficult problems. It really was put here for a reason, for us, and our federally oppressed public of 70 years past was more than eager to do away with it because the government had some scary things to say.

I say we take back our Freedom, our Prosperity, our right to the Pursuit of happiness, and our Pot!!

Great post, Treg. By the

Great post, Treg.

By the way, the answer to replacing petroleum is what is commonly called "bio-diesel". Despite the disinfo of media oil shills (and their unwitting eco-lackeys), the entire earth is covered with farmland that can grow fuel. It can be grown hydroponically as well.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

natural gas IS methane.

honest, look it up. natural gas is a "fossil" fuel. google "methane clouds" and then explain to me how it can possibly come from fossils.
I do understand that this news attacks some folks religion, I am not sure just how and why...
that we are going to run out anytime soon is a myth, fact is, it is the most likely thing to kill us all!

" the important thing is to never stop questioning, curiousity, has it's own reason for existing..
Albert Einstien

The Free Energy from the Sun

Is Mankinds future. Getting energy "for Free" is really a technology problem. Once solved, it will be "free". Now it may seem that growing energy from the sun is the way to go, but why grow grow plant cells when solar cells are more efficient? As our technology to grow better and better solar cells out paces our technology to grow efficient plant cells, solar in the end will win out. ( well thats my guess)

Kevin, check out "Singularity" by Ray Kurzwell. Let me know what you think.

In Peace & Liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

No free lunch

The sun may shine for free, but collecting the energy from it is not free. Again this ugly idea is raised, that there are costs and when those costs are almost as much as what is gained, the supposed solution is not a solution after all.

Solar is not yet the answer to generating electricity. It is marginal at best, and again, the wolf is at the door. We don't have 20 or 30 years to come up with pie in the sky. Ever heard of receding horizons? People look at something like solar panels and say that when energy prices increase to X that the panels will make economic sense, except that they forget that when energy prices increase to X, the cost of solar panels increase also and they still don't make economic sense.

There is not the energy or other resources to build all this wonderful new infrastructure that supposedly will replace oil. Tell me how anything that can possible even add a little to energy production can be built in an economy with half of the oil production we now have.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

freeish lunch.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html

--------------
if you build it he will come..........Ron Paul 2012.
digg http://digg.com/autos/First_Genuine_Chevy_Volt_to_be_Complet...

Not to be cynical

or anything but weren't you pushing Obama when all of us were doing anything in our power for Ron Paul? I do have a pretty good memory. So what do you think he is going to bring to the table in your "bright future for America" because after all it is all a matter of personal perception of what is considered bright?

Pushing Obama?

You may have memory but what about your comprehension? The question was, which presidency would be better FOR THE REVOLUTION. Further, super tuesday, February 2008 had passed, the handwritting was on the wall, hence the question, which would be better for us in the revolution 4 years hence? I suggest it is clearly the socialist - warfarest ideas of Obama.

Given that McSame champions tax cuts, the free market, and supposedly "less government", etc ....hence it would be better for us to have the next 4 years under Obama, so the socialist ideas of his will go down with the ship.

Four years from now, we in the Revolution can still be fighting for and advancing those ideas, perhaps with either Jesse Ventura and/or Gov Gary Johnson in the lead, and its better that these ideas do not get "soiled" with someone like McSame. Already Bloody-Hands Bush soiled the idea of private retirement accounts, just by him pushing the idea.

Case in point, there is another Forum Topic & link showing a film about the Argintina collapse of 2001. The film is very good, gets into a lot of the issues of debt, fiat banking, and international IMF type controls, the public being strattled with Private bank debt,....yet blames this all on "Privatization". Its very much like the "shock doctrine" which takes a direct attack on the Ron Paul school of thought of a fully privatized economy running on "free market in currencies", privatization, no central banking, no taxes, a constitutional government whose main job is Military Defense, Courts, and Police, and not much else. The lesson to be learned from Privatization is there in Argintina, Russia, and other countries. Do it wrong, the multi-nationals will stick the public with bad debt, paying for millions who get laid off, have no National interests in the Country itself, and so the public gets hosed. Thus how government sells off its MISSMANAGED assets is just as important to the success of privatization as privatization itself. One should not be surprized that the government cannot even do this job of selling its assets well. Cronyism, kickbacks, payoffs, lobbyists, & bribery still gets in the way. Perhaps the best solution is to simply put each govt asset, say like the US postal system and othes, into a lottery. The lucky citizen who "won" the govt asset would surely then do a much better job selling than the government, and the person selling would not be so stupid as to take on to him/herself the debt of the postal service and be on the hook for hundreds of thousand of laid off pensioners. For that kind of stupidity takes lots of lobbying, parties, payoffs, and bribes in Congress for that to occur.

My point above was to say, WATCH OUT, do not let them blame the 2008 Great Depression as caused by and the result of Free Market Capitalism (what little there is), rather than what did cause it: Centralized banking Fiat Currency inflation (Credit expansionary bubble) all made possible by massive Big Govt Spending worldwide== Govt created Debt.

Right now both Obama and McSame are running to Govt and saying Govt can fix it. Bush says, "we have the tools" and McSame right there behind him.

Right now Paulsen head of the Treasury, is the Czar, single handedly adding more and more Private Debt to become our Public debt. This is a Govt official, its his crime, its our "govt problem".

The clear fact that the privately created Derivitate market was privately created, and the clear fact that many (not all) but many banks worldwide will be wipped out because of it, does not mean that Capitalism Failed. Capitalism only fails if we do not allow it to work. Citibank and all the rest should be allowed to fail, be wipped out. Moving that derivative debt over onto the Public Balance sheet is truly criminal. The public did not Gain from that Debt in the first place, so why should we pay? Because all those depositors will be wipped out? Its a delema for sure that strains one's heart, hence the sooner we suffer this pain and get on with a free market created and produced currency such as gold & silver, the better.

And btw, just so you know, I never ever gave up supporting Ron Paul. Still have our meet up too. Nevertheless, I will be holding my nose & voting Barr in the upcoming election in Arizona. I want my Protest Vote counted as a vote for No Government.

In Peace & Liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Uh --whatever

Hold your nose and vote for Obama or Barr. Neither one of them is remotely close to anything about Ron Paul, nor would either one of them bring us closer to a brighter future no matter how you try to justify all of it. Our bright future will come about when the nefarious plans of the Illuminati are made crystal clear to the general populace and the greed they created implodes upon itself as is happening now. Then none of their obvious puppets will get a chance to do further harm. That is a bright future that no one has to hold their nose about. Do whatever you want because like I said everyone has a different perspective of a "bright future". If it is allowed to continue it will be a NWO in which Obama or McCain and perhaps Barr would fit seamlessly. Four years??? You honestly think the Revolution has four years? LOL. If you haven't noticed they just consolidated half of the power and wealth of the world in the last 2 weeks. This is pretty clearcut uncomplicated stuff happening. It sounds like to me you are going off on a lot of different tangents and making it more confusing to understand than it is.

Awesome post. Why did you

Awesome post. Why did you have to put that depressing article at the end though?

“Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.” -George Bernard Shaw

Manufacturing vs. No Manufacturing

I keep remembering what Dr. Paul has said ...... in recovering from the previous depression, we still had manufacturing. Now all our manufacturing has left the country. We are a service oriented society now. It will be much harder for us to recover.

But knowing that, here is your chance to start Manufacturing.

The question is, what do you wish to manufacture?

Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Treg -- This Was A Great Post

Thanks for the encouraging words. You are right that the more the existing structures crumble more personal and community initiatives will constructively fill the void.

Mad Max is not the nightmare. The NWO RAW DEAL promised in the article you attached is the dystopia to dread.

But what of the peon public who have been conditioned to welcome their Brave New World ?

You correctly identify the real challenge is one of consciousness. I hope we are up to the task of aiding in a swift transition. Those who will oppose us, have other designs.

Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

you fail to notice the masterfully orchestrated process of dismanteling our middle class. Since the end of WW II, when the GI bill was introduced, the children of those enabled individuals were more able to compete with the scions of the manipulators and they have had enough of such sacrilage. Make no mistake...they mean to enslave us and ours. A guilded cage is still none the less a cage. If they can convince the masses that we are still a free nation while we must labor to pay for the excesses of the ruling elite they have truely won. We now have a system of sometimes Socialism to bail out the excessively wealthy while endebting the middle class. How you can put a spin on the success of the nightmare we have seen these traitors perpetrate on Capitalism is an answer I wholeheartedly await.

There are no politicians or bankers in foxholes.

if the monetary system

if the monetary system collapses everything else collapses// that is the problem.. food at the grocery? gas at the pump?

"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain

luke 25-21.... "When

luke 25-21....

"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain

I think the future will be far worse than Mad Max

True, the collapse of the debt based monetary system is something that we could recover from, and would not necessarily put us in third world conditions, were it not for a much more massive underlying problem.

That problem is energy and the underlying math that describes it. In 1930 the amount of energy that was expended to get one barrel of oil was equal to 1% of that barrel. That cost can not exceed 100% because it would make acquiring oil meaningless. So what has been the history of this cost? It has been increasing at about the rate of 3.5% per year. This doesn't sound like all that much does it! At 3.5% growth, something doubles every 20 years, so by 1950 that 1% cost rate had doubled to 2%, an inperceptable difference. So the progression was 1970 4%, 1990 8%, and will be 16% in 2010. Have not you heard the oil companies telling you that the era of cheap oil is over? Extending this growth curve to its end and you see that the oil business is dead shortly after 2060 when it takes more energy to get a barrel of oil that is in that barrel.

Growth curves like described above apply to all fossil fuels, so coal and natural gas are also doomed.

So you think that is bad enough, but then there is the problem of how much oil can even be pumped at these increasing costs. It turns out that this is also mathematically known. The history of oil production indicates that it also follows a curve, knows as the Hubbard curve after the man who discovered it. The indications are that we are approaching or at the highest production of oil that we will ever achieve, even though there is plenty of oil still in the ground. You can only suck up oil so fast, and existing fields are declining as fast as new ones can be put online. It is expected that production will begin to fall very soon, and that it will fall at some rate that will producing a halving period. If the rate of fall is 3%, which is a conservative estimate, then in 23.3 years after peak production, it will be coming out of the ground at 1/2 the production we have today.

So here are two problems stacked upon one another. Cost are doubling every 20 years and production will be halving every 23.3 years, so net, in just a couple of decades the world looks to have only 1/4 of the net energy from oil available to fuel the industrial age.

So that sounds bad, but add in this third factor. The USA imports 60% of the oil it uses. The experience of the past is that when an exporter reaches peak production and production begins to decline, it eliminates exports over the next 9 to 15 years, depending upon the type of oil deposits it has. Mexico is one of our significant suppliers and they just went over the top in the last two years, and their exports to us decreased faster than their production declines. In just 15 years oil imports into the USA could fall to near zero.

Now if you look at the population history of the world, it should be clear that population exploded as a result of the increased food production driven by fossil fuels and the related mechanization of farming. At the time oil was discovered in the mid 1800's, the world population was barely over 1 billion. It has grown to 6.5 billion now and still is growing.

So here is how I think the future will unfold. The economic conditions we are experiencing today will result in reduced maintenance of the already fragile electric grid. Expansion plans will be shelved. Depending upon the severity of the economic contraction, heavily leveraged utilities may go into bankruptcy like the did in the 1930's. Once the economic storm subsidies, and the economy begins to expand, the constraints from the oil patch will limit the expansion, and the electric grid will become more fragile, finally collapsing, the first casualty of the energy shortages. The economic contraction from the failure of the energy systems will dwarf the present economic contraction from the collapse of the debt based money system.

The food production, distribution system will collapse without adequate energy (not to mention the current shortage of phosphorus). The industrial age will abruptly end and world population will fall rapidly to levels that can be supported by an agrarian economy, similar to the 1850's. Civil war and/or world war is highly likely.

In the USA I think that the next decade or two will bring us to civil war, and by mid century 5 out of 6 people will be dead from the four horsemen, as nature brings us into balance with the ability of the earth to sustain us. Not Mad Max, but far worse. It is all in the math.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

Henry, You make the Chris Martenson Arguement Well

For those that have not seen his Crash Course, I suggest you watch it.

But I have news for Chris Martenson, his name is Julian Simon. Find his book here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0691003815/ref=sib_dp_pt#rea... and lots of info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Lincoln_Simon

Julian Simon made a famous bet, one that many of my generation cannot forget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon-Ehrlich_wager

Simon knows two fundamental things. 1) Necessity is the mother of Invention and 2) only the free market through its price system allows man to adjust his wants and needs, and over time, brings prices down.

I believe a dialog between Dr. Martenson and Dr. Simon, two economists by the way, would go something like this.

Dr. Martenson-- "Surely you cannot deny the fact of Peak Oil?"

Dr. Simon, --"No i do not deny that Peak Oil may be at our doorstep. What I deny is that the cost of energy will increase over the long run"

Dr. Martenson -- "Have you seen the rising price of barrels of oil? That is a long running increase for sure."

Dr. Simon, --"Relative to what? I submit to you that the cost of oil energy has been fairly flat. I submit to you that if and when it does rise, that other energy sources will lower the cost of energy used. I submit to you, that if we allow the free market price system to work, the magic will be that ten years from today oil will be cheaper than it is now, in relative terms."

Dr. Martenson -- "In relative terms?"

Dr. Simon, -- "Yes in relative terms. Surely as an economist you know what I mean but for the listeners, I shall explain. The average nationwide cost of a brand new house in 1973 was $33,000. The average cost of a chevy truck was $2,500, and the average cost of a gallon of gasoline, after the oil shock and the OPEC Cartel took its actions to restrict supply, was about $.40 cents a gallon, So in real 2007 dollars, thats about $60 per barrel."

Dr. Martenson -- "Yes, but today, 2008, the cost of a barrel of oil is $79 a barrel"

Dr. Simon, -- "Yes it sure is, today, but I am taking the long view. What I am saying is that the market place, through the magic of the price system, will lower energy costs over time. First the "four sisters" restricted the supply in in the USA, then that power switched to Opec in 1973 http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm"

D. Martenson -- "Well there you have it. By your own admission in 1973 oil cost was $60 per barrell and now today it is $79 a barrell. It has gone up, not down. So your statement that the cost of energy will go down over the long run is false".

Dr. Simon -- "Not so fast. The U.S. petroleum industry's price has been heavily regulated through production or price controls throughout much of the twentieth century. In the post World War II era U.S. oil prices at the wellhead averaged $24.98 per barrel adjusted for inflation to 2007 dollars. In the absence of price controls the U.S. price would have tracked the world price averaging $27.00. Over the same post war period the median for the domestic and the adjusted world price of crude oil was $19.04 in 2007 prices. That means that only fifty percent of the time from 1947 to 2007 have oil prices exceeded $19.04 per barrel. Until the March 28, 2000 adoption of the $22-$28 price band for the OPEC basket of crude, oil prices only exceeded $24.00 per barrel in response to war or conflict in the Middle East. With limited spare production capacity OPEC abandoned its price band in 2005 and was powerless to stem a surge in oil prices to over $100 per barrell."

Dr. Martenson -- "So your point is?"

Dr. Simon, --- "My point is that the free market has rarely been allowed to work. With the Texas oil commission restrictions on oil production via the 3 sisters of Texas, Lousiana, Oklahoma, then OPEC copies them and restricts to maintain a higher price, the free market has not been allowed to work its magic."

Dr. Martenson -- Are you claiming that Peak Oil is not real and that there is more oil to be had?"

Dr. Simon -- No, I am claiming that the free market in oil production and world prices has been restricted, sending poor signals. But if allowed to work, the overall cost of energy would go down, weather that is oil, solar, nuclear, the cost of each unit of energy will go down over the long run".

Dr Martenson -- "I wouldn't bet on it"

Dr. Simon -- "I would. I will bet you or anyone to prove me wrong. I will put up $10,000 dollars and I bet you that the cost of energy will be cheaper ten years from today. You see, I take a long view, and I take the view that the free market is a dynamical feedback system, capable to adjusting to things such as the Texas Railroad commission, the 3 Sisters, Opec, and even, yes even, Peak Oil"

Dr. Martenson -- "Well I spent all my money on the Economic Crash Course, warning everyone about these things such as the housing crises, Peak Oi, Over population, etc."

Dr. Simon "Well you don't have to put up the $10,000. I have already, and its there for the taking should anyone actually prove me and the market wrong. I first had a bet with a fellow whose 1960's books scared the daylights out of people. He said that the known amount of the world's food supply is this, thus by 1980 there would be food shortages and more and more starving people. He wrote a book called, The Population Bomb"

Dr. Martenson --- "And what did you bet him. I bet him that the 'know world's food supply' would actually double and that the population would double as well and that we woudl have LESS poor people (% wise) than we had before. I said the world needs MORE people, not less. "

Dr. Martenson -- "Surely you don't believe that now do you?"

Dr. SImon -- "Believe what?"

Dr. Martenson -- "Believe we the world's food supply will increase and we should have more people, not less?"

Dr. Simon, -- "Sure do. The world in 2008 may look to your eyes which see recources as fixed, as over populated. But the world's resources are not fixed, they are untapped."

Dr. Martensen... --"Incredible! You want the world's population to increase! What about the world's wildlife and wild habitates? They are disappearing at a fast rate, by the time we double our population again, they might be gone!"

Dr. Simon --- "True, they might be gone, but not because world population doubled. It will be because mankind failed to privatize them and bring them under the protective fold of private property and private property law. Indeed, if it was not for the privatization of the Alligator, Florida would have none at all. I believe you have heard of the Tradgety of the Commons? Well the tradgety is that the commons is owned by noone, thus protected by nobody. Once private breading and sale of Alligators was allowed on just a few farms, soon the power of the market took over and provided us with plenty. Today's exploited commons in the everglads is replenised by the productivity found on private alligator farms".

Dr Martenson -- "So we need private Tiger Farms too?"

Dr. Simon, -- "Yes, but why not go further? Allow for whole ecosystems to be privatized. Indeed they have done this in Panama, with good results. There is such a thing as Free Market environmentalism you know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-market_environmentalism"

Dr. Martenson '--"You say the world's resources are not fixed, just untapped. What do you mean by this? Do you deny that there is a fixed finite amount of earthly stuff that our planet holds?

Dr. Simon, -- "No I do not deny that there is a fixed amount of earthly stuff. I just deny that there are a fixed amount of ways we can UNTAPP these resources. Let me give you an example. Suppose you were a Greek citizen living at the time of Plato and Aristotle. Athens is estimated to have a population of 100,000 people. Further, lets suppose that I came along and said we need to have 700,000 people living there! They would suggest that its impossible. Yet there are over that many people living there today. What changed? Indeed, the world's population was perhaps 10 million back then, with 90% of them, very poor indeed. Average Human Life span is believed to have been short, to the age of 35 or so. Today the world's population is 9 billion, with less than 20% of themvery poor and human average life spand above 50. What changed?"

Dr Martenson--" I still don't get what you are saying"

Dr. Simon -- "You have seen the TV series Star Trek? Can you not envision advanced technologies? Can you not imagine cleaner brighter cities, a larger society, a more prosporous society, a richer society in every way, a society that is more numerous yet has a smaller environmental impact? A human society that spans Earth, Venus and Mars and is 2 trillion strong? That is our future."

Dr. Martenson -- "Well what I see is several big crises all impacting us at the same time. There is the huge credit bubble, the currency crises, the Oil production wall, the population bomb, the aging bomb, etc" We are in deep trouble"

Dr. Simon --- "I agree these are tough times, but you sound like my old nemisis Paul Ehrlich http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich. What I wish to add to the dialog is a Way Out. I want to point out to us and remind us what has worked, and that is the free market price system. It has allowed Mankind to make all kinds of adjustments. The Centralized systems of govt control and currency control is breaking down. What we need is the freedom to adjust to the troubles ahead that you point out. Costs, prices, allow us to make these adjustments. And prices are dependant upon the soundness of property. Perfect property law, perfect this technology, and we pave the way for trillions of tiny adjustments to be made, for our situation to improve. The collapse of the fiat currency system can be seen as a collapse in a hollow property. Replacing the national fiat currency with a worldwide fiat currency may work, but its not the same as a freely created currency, one that would naturally arise in the marketplace. You and I can fight by simply creating and using our own currency amoung ourselves. Each of us can expand that circle, reporting on it, much like the days of the early internet. Gee I am so old I can actually remember exploring the whole internet. It will be much like that. Privately minted AND TRADE currency for goods is the begining of the end of the NWO. It ensures there will be a bright future for Mankind".

++++++++++++++++++++++++

** Ok, the above is all fiction and neither Dr Martenson or Dr Simon wrote or said those words. I just hope I lived up to the task of representing their ideas correctly.

In Peace & Liberty,
Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Nuclear power

I am as doomsdayish as anyone, but so what if fossil fuel runs out? Known reserves of uranium can provide 100% of current energy use for a 1000 years if used in the most inefficient type of reaction. If used in efficient breeder type reactions, the supply is virtually infinite and CERTAINLY far longer than will be needed to perfect fusion. And fusion is the end to our energy problems.

The big obstacles to our future happiness are all in the insitutions of man, not natural limitations.

If it were only so

In order to build these nuclear plants we would need energy and other resources. When oil production was expanding every year, there was more and more energy to build all the things that replaced the obsolete. Gas tractors replaced steam tractors. Once oil production is contracting, there will be a deficit of energy and supplies to build new things.

Imagine a individual living at a subsistence level, spending all his income to survive, and with no excesses even elsewhere to borrow. He can't invest in infrastructure, and this is the position we will face increasingly as there is less and less oil and even that is more costly. Assume all the best about nuclear power and tell me where the energy and resources will come from in a contracting economy to replace oil with nuclear generated electricity. You don't only need to build the plants, but you need to replace all the vehicles on the road with electric engines, plus you need to develop batteries that will last for more than a 40 mile trip, and you need to build a network of recharging stations.

And when you realize that nuclear power has more problems than the parents of a teenager, you are stretching to think that we will be saved. The wolf is at the door and realistically, how soon do you think just one new nuclear power plant could go online in the USA? And add on top the current economic problems which were triggered by high energy costs coupled with a faulty monetary system, then who is going to risk building this plant?

Your assertion that natural limitations are of no consequence seems to me to be a very bold statement. How is it that animal populations in the wild, and yeast in a wine vat reach natural limitations, but the human animal is exempt. If you are relying on technology, you need to consider that technology is knowledge applied to resources. Without one or the other, you do not have technology.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

Tata Motors...

Your thoughts...?

Treg

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Not easy

I never said it would be cheap or easy.

Your claim seems to be that without oil, human life cannot exist at its current level. I disagree. The technology exists to replace every watt produced by burning oil with another source. It may be more expensive and it may require massive overhaul of infrastructure, but the technology exists currently and it WILL be implemented if the choice is starvation or freezing to death. The only force that would stop that conversion is the intervention of government preventing people from acting efficiently and effectively.

You assumption is that one day oil will just stop. It doesn't work that way. It will gradually become more difficult to get. As the resource dwindles, it will get more expensive. Supply and demand, right? (Unless government messes with the prices). As it gets more expensive, alternatives that were not economically feasible suddenly make sense and are adopted. Also, as oil prices rise, the market will direct more resources toward alternatives. That is how markets work. There will be a transition period where resources are drained away from less important uses and move into more important uses - like developing alternatives for the more expensive oil. And one day the remaining supply of oil will be used only for its highest purposes - as a source of organic chemical prrcursors probably.

You also assume that you must have electric cars. I don't happen to think so. You can burn hydrogen in an internal combustion engine with some modification. So batteries aren't an obstacle. Heck, you can run a car on steam if you want.

There are MANY alternatives to oil that already exist. They have not been exploited simply because the availability of oil has made it uneconomical. When they become economical, they will be put in place. Look how fast cell phones and their infrastructure were deployed. And they are just a convenience, not a necessity.

A free market faced with a real crisis in energy would respond swiftly and efficiently. There is no insurmountable natural obstacle to moving beyond oil. There is only the probability that we will look to government for the answer and starve to death that way.

Will somebody please read Thomas Gold, please????

Petroleum does not come from fossils, for the love of God!!!!!!!!!!!

Petroleum results from ongoing processes in Earth's deep, deep, deep biosphere, people. That's why oil wells refill themselves--from the bottom up. That's why the Russians are finding more oil than they know what to do with--they read Thomas Gold---an American scientist who spent years teaching at Cornell--when Cornell was worth something!!!

"Fossil fuels"!!!!!!!!!! Come on, people!!!!