Comment: I think you miss the whole point.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: You said, (see in situ)

I think you miss the whole point.

First of all, let me say that the quote from theautomaticearth was part of what I posted because I thought it eloquently striped away all complexity and revealed just what our economy is. It sounds fairly self evident to me. What part of that quote do you find offensive to your sensibilities?

The point of my post is that it is the cost to acquire what we use that controls our economic present and future, and that the acquisition cost for each of these resources is increasing at a compound rate. Judging from your response where you claim we will have plenty of energy from natural gas tells me that you don't understand that this is a cost (energy expended) problem, not a matter of the quantity of resources (supply) in the ground, although on the supply side, there is also a major "rate of extraction" problem.

It is true that natural gas at the well head has a better return than oil. It is also true that the sources of natural gas you reference have a much higher acquisition cost than conventional natural gas. This is the "low hanging fruit" principle in action; the cheaper source is used first, and the expensive source is left for later. And that shale gas that is in abundance in the ground has a an additional high environmental cost. What you must not realize, or you would not have staked your future on natural gas, is that by the time it gets to the final user, the return is small, even for conventional gas, worse than oil and worse than coal.

What you call fear mongering, I call a realistic assessment of reality. It is shocking to think that we face a bleak future, and I certainly understand your wanting to deny that reality.

As for you disdain for the current distribution of wealth (your 1% reference) I share it. But this is not the problem that I addressed. The problem of wealth distribution has much to do with the current dishonest monetary system and government interference in the markets that favor the few at the expense of the many. But if you solved the distribution of wealth issue by returning to honest money and eliminating government interference in the economy, you still face the problem of little wealth to be had by anyone because of the end of the industrial age for want of sufficient net energy to fuel the fires (net energy = energy acquired - energy expended to acquire it).

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