talkpolitics | I have seen the future, and I doesn't like it.

Entry tags:

peak oil

I have seen the future, and I doesn't like it.

Life after the oil crash.
Ok, last time, I went and pinned it on a vid that most people cannot read at work.
So I am letting y'all boot up something you can read quitely when you oght to be working :)

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

In case you have trouble reading graphs, this one has a Blue Peter style 'talk you through the implications' - complete with original sources, for those who wanna check.

It might seem like I am doom mongering , but I just want to say -
Let's put more into Planned Parenthood, make it optional, but make it a damned sight easier at home and abroad.

Let's have oil rationing, sooner rather than later. Let's also have everything rationed if it's made with oil.

let's try to be civilised about the few resources left and share them out among ourselves.

Let's start reducing consumption , reusing things and recycling more.

let's remember that civilisation as we know it will be over by 2050, if it lasts that long.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

As jerseycajun said, driving less won't do it, and is not all that is advocated. Government intervention is advocated and that will distort the way the market allocates scarce resources such that we won't be able to respond correctly and it will all crash apart.

Well, that is what we in the UK did in WW", it is what happened in the Blackouts of the Three Day Week of ted Heath's Government.

What happened then wa that power workers went on strike, and there were frequent blackouts.
Factories were only allowed to operate for 3 days per week.

in spite of this, production rose, as efficiency was held at a premium and people watched the meters more.

Reationing did not cause Englan collapse. Whether Americans could cope with being weaned off of Oil Sauce remains to be seen, but supply shortages in the past caused massive price surges in the past. We can expect more of them as we hit the downside of the bell curve.

Giving rich people everything and letting poor people starve is hardly what I would call ' responding correctly'.

Greens advocate grants to allow people to install solar panels on domestic homes, as well as installling similar devices in government and L.A. premises like schools and hospitals. this will slow down , but not stop oil consumption. It may not even stop it rising, but simply slow the rate of growth.

Rationing worked under the Heath government, when factories were only open 3 days a week, and also during WW2 when there was a war on. there is no reason why it could not work today when we start getting faced with major shortages.

America is already using more oil than it produces. It has not been able to rely on sunshine to make up the shortfall, it has imported oil from the Middle East. In future, it will have to compete, not just with Japan , but China and India too.

Giving rich people everything and letting poor people starve is hardly what I would call ' responding correctly'.

Good thing that isn't what's advocated then.

Ok, here is the Green Party in America, telling us what they stand for.

http://www.gp.org/common_ground.shtml

What is there that is not to like, never mind potentially fatal to human life?

We believe that all people have a right to food, housing, education, medical care, a living wage job and support in times of hardship.

This sounds good on the surface, except that it requires others to provide it, and those policies end up hurting more than they help.

We advocate the use of "true cost pricing", which reflects the total cost of production based on its impact on the ecosystem.

This is crap, as there's not way to measure it, and trying to do so will again cause more problems than it will fix.

In general, platform statements always sound better than the actual policies they support as a result of them. For example, saying "we want more environmental energy" is nice, but then they fight against nuclear power, which is the best alternative to coal and oil at the moment. They often want to shut down what we're doing now whether or not there's an equivalent alternative, which will end up killing people if they actually could get any of it passed.

It may suprise you to know, but large swathes of Europe ( France, Germany, Sweden, to name a few) have ben doing exactly this sort of thing for decades. And their IRMs are lower than the USAs.

Sure, it requires others to provide it, and in Christian countries, there is no shortage of young men and women wanting to leave school and become Doctors , nurses, teachers, carpenters and bricklayes as well as architects, in ordr thatt they may serve society and give people the things that they need.

As to whether giving people housing, education a living wage job and help in times of hardship is harming people or not - I wanna see some stats on that please.

I am a uk citizen, and my country provides a lotta those things, and I have lived to be 54. it does not seem to have killed me, giving me housing , education, medical care and support. I have also seen times when I had really crap wages - but I notice that things have got better when I had good money. i don't think a living wage does people as much harm as poverty.

No - if you want to see a government where policies are killing people, go to the USA.
How many people are on Death Row right now?
How many people have died as a result of the wars they were dragged into?
Vietnam, Iraq? Iran ? Afghanistan?
How many people will die younger b/coz they don't have medical care?

And remember , these are actual deaths already occurred- not deaths that might happen if your calculations are correct.
in short,people are not dropping like flies all over Canada, Australia, Europe, just because we are doing henious things like providing people with education on peoples taxes.

As to 'true cost pricing' - well obviously, "it ain't never gonna work" - listen , we put a man on the moon , because we wanted to go there. We may never get an actual cost, but we slap a tax on things that are environmentally damaging. Wanna drive an SUV? Well, it will cost you more to buy one that a Ford Focus, or similar compact car.

where there is a will , there is a way. and it is already beginning to go like that in the UK. And I don't see ppl dead in the street as a result.
We need an OP on what Socialism looks like, i think. Obama is not a socialist - he is a centerist/ liberal. he just looks like one to many in the USA coz they never met the real thing.

No - if you want to see a government where policies are killing people, go to the USA.

Seriously? ok, I think we're done discussing rationally here. Good day.

For reference, you're comparing apples to ants, not even oranges.

You quite discussing things rationally the minute you decided that Green policies were already causing peoples deaths. So no great loss, I'm afraid.

I didn't say already. But I'm not surprised you heard what you wanted to hear.

"Kiilling pople" - present tense , I think you'll find.

even to suggest that what we would do when in power would lead to people dying as a result of our policies is going a bit far - let's be honest , a lot of countries have gone a lot further towards a scoialised health system , and no one is dying in the streets.

To suggest that some form of rationing would lead to riots and panicking - well, it would depend on how we did it.

The rioting was specific to your example where rationing was extreme and immediate.

I never said anything about people dying in the streets.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I have seen the future, and I doesn't like it.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject