I want to warn you about all these gloom and doom predictions.
If you would have followed these doomsday preachers you would have missed out on the huge rise in the markets and you would have bought gold at its peak. There are still people saying "buy gold and run from the stock market". These people are screwing you over. Gold is going down to $1000.
I love Max Keiser's show, but don't follow his advice.
Yes, we are in dire straights. Yes the numbers are ALL bad. We are in for a volatile year. But this paper game goes on because no one can pull the plug. You panic - you are personally doomed.
Topic: The end is near - page 9. (Read 17362 times)
For that matter, one solution is to build caissons on the ocean floor and use power during the day to pump water out and air in to these giant caissons. When you later need that power back out, you start letting water in which pumps air out at very high pressure, driving a generator. Voila, constant power as needed.
Another solution would be to build huge culverts to funnel the Pacific Ocean from San Diego to the Salt Flats, which happens to be about 200' below sea level and was an inland sea itself that finally dried up a few thousand years ago. A few water turbines near the Salt Flats, and with the evaporation rate of the area, easily 100 Megawatts or more for as long as we like. More, if we decide that an inland sea would be a good thing to have there. It would alter the immediate environment, increasing humidity, cloud cover, and rainfall for several hundred miles around.
Not that the NIMBY crowd would let something like that happen either.
I didn't read all the comments here. But it is pretty damn obvious things are getting ready to happen especially here in America.
Even the blind and sleeping are waking up and opening their eyes.
My mom cursed me out for saying this, but my opinion is capitalism sucks a big one.
Not only does it make it so the heads of big corporations super rich while paying the people who actually produce the product very crappy wages,
but it also spams the day to day environment with ad after ad. Does anyone step back and realize how many advertisements for worthless crap is crammed down your throat every day? thousands.
I don't think socialism is the way to go, but maybe it is best in a world where we are all lazy asses who like robots to do things for us.
Someone said new technology is gonna save us. I just read an interesting article about this in a magazine (Not on the internet? Wow).
It said that everyone thought that at the turn or the century. The economy would be saved by the internet because of online shopping and all that stuff.
I think things are gonna get really bad. I've seen too many YT videos about the FEMA camps and how China got pissed at us, and rescinded their rule of no first strike.
I will just barricade myself inside as if there was a zombie apocalypse and hunker down with my canned veggies.
I am gonna be super depressed when the internet goes out though.
Even the blind and sleeping are waking up and opening their eyes.
My mom cursed me out for saying this, but my opinion is capitalism sucks a big one.
Not only does it make it so the heads of big corporations super rich while paying the people who actually produce the product very crappy wages,
but it also spams the day to day environment with ad after ad. Does anyone step back and realize how many advertisements for worthless crap is crammed down your throat every day? thousands.
I don't think socialism is the way to go, but maybe it is best in a world where we are all lazy asses who like robots to do things for us.
Someone said new technology is gonna save us. I just read an interesting article about this in a magazine (Not on the internet? Wow).
It said that everyone thought that at the turn or the century. The economy would be saved by the internet because of online shopping and all that stuff.
I think things are gonna get really bad. I've seen too many YT videos about the FEMA camps and how China got pissed at us, and rescinded their rule of no first strike.
I will just barricade myself inside as if there was a zombie apocalypse and hunker down with my canned veggies.
I am gonna be super depressed when the internet goes out though.
Solar may offer some energy but takes up a lot of surface we aren't necessarily willing to give.
I think we have plenty of space on the ocean's surface, we're not even using it.And power system requires that in each moment power generation equals consumption.
Yes, a problem, but a solvable one.Solvable technically? Of course. Solvable economically? I doubt very much.
Therefore, energy market values coal and nuclear, whose generation can be foretold a year in advance easily, unlike solar, for which even a day is a long time to forecast. The problem would be perhaps solved if techology would be found to store energy efficiently and cheaply. That technology isn't there.
OTEC or ocean-current generation could perhaps supplement for night-time, as well as the further development of supercapacitors or molten-salt power storage. It's not insurmountable.For that matter, one solution is to build caissons on the ocean floor and use power during the day to pump water out and air in to these giant caissons. When you later need that power back out, you start letting water in which pumps air out at very high pressure, driving a generator. Voila, constant power as needed.
You are talking about some very big complexes that cannot be as economically efficient as a simple nuclear (think thorium, perhaps even polywell...) plant that produces power when it is needed and can strike a deal for a period of time a year ahead. Those things are higly valued on the power market. Market value of todays wind and solar power is therefore practically zero, lifted only by state interventions that limit on communism...
Solar offers more power than we can use. We can even move to harvesting solar in space for literally the foreseeable future.
It will begin to be used when it's cost-effective against other forms of electricity. Which won't likely be very long now. We already have perfect solar antennas that pickup solar energy like an antenna rather than like photosynthesis, and can thereby capture a large percent of the energy efficiently, like 99.5%. What we lack are transistors that can switch fast enough to turn light's AC current into DC current.
So, by roundabout method, the microchip industry will ultimately solve our power problems
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
Solar may offer some energy but takes up a lot of surface we aren't necessarily willing to give.
And power system requires that in each moment power generation equals consumption.
Yes, a problem, but a solvable one. Therefore, energy market values coal and nuclear, whose generation can be foretold a year in advance easily, unlike solar, for which even a day is a long time to forecast. The problem would be perhaps solved if techology would be found to store energy efficiently and cheaply. That technology isn't there.
OTEC or ocean-current generation could perhaps supplement for night-time, as well as the further development of supercapacitors or molten-salt power storage. It's not insurmountable.For that matter, one solution is to build caissons on the ocean floor and use power during the day to pump water out and air in to these giant caissons. When you later need that power back out, you start letting water in which pumps air out at very high pressure, driving a generator. Voila, constant power as needed.
We will also be able to significantly reverse environmental degradation (including, as a minor aside, powering bitcoin on equipment that is no longer coal-fired).
We've had the technology to do this for forty years. It's just not being developed, and it won't in the current geopolitical environment. It's wishful thinking to believe that wind, water and solar are ever going to be able to run our modern industrial economies. Nuclear power is simply required if we really desire to move away from using coal.
It will begin to be used when it's cost-effective against other forms of electricity. Which won't likely be very long now. We already have perfect solar antennas that pickup solar energy like an antenna rather than like photosynthesis, and can thereby capture a large percent of the energy efficiently, like 99.5%. What we lack are transistors that can switch fast enough to turn light's AC current into DC current.
Wow. You're response is to cite a theoretical method, and present it as a near term viable solution. Solar antennas might one day power nanites, but even then the tech might be a bit out of reach.
Quote
So, by roundabout method, the microchip industry will ultimately solve our power problems
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
You're dreaming. TAbletop fusion is closer to a productive stage than solar antenna tech.
Solar offers more power than we can use. We can even move to harvesting solar in space for literally the foreseeable future.
It will begin to be used when it's cost-effective against other forms of electricity. Which won't likely be very long now. We already have perfect solar antennas that pickup solar energy like an antenna rather than like photosynthesis, and can thereby capture a large percent of the energy efficiently, like 99.5%. What we lack are transistors that can switch fast enough to turn light's AC current into DC current.
So, by roundabout method, the microchip industry will ultimately solve our power problems
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
Solar may offer some energy but takes up a lot of surface we aren't necessarily willing to give. And power system requires that in each moment power generation equals consumption. Therefore, energy market values coal and nuclear, whose generation can be foretold a year in advance easily, unlike solar, for which even a day is a long time to forecast. The problem would be perhaps solved if techology would be found to store energy efficiently and cheaply. That technology isn't there.
We will also be able to significantly reverse environmental degradation (including, as a minor aside, powering bitcoin on equipment that is no longer coal-fired).
We've had the technology to do this for forty years. It's just not being developed, and it won't in the current geopolitical environment. It's wishful thinking to believe that wind, water and solar are ever going to be able to run our modern industrial economies. Nuclear power is simply required if we really desire to move away from using coal.
It will begin to be used when it's cost-effective against other forms of electricity. Which won't likely be very long now. We already have perfect solar antennas that pickup solar energy like an antenna rather than like photosynthesis, and can thereby capture a large percent of the energy efficiently, like 99.5%. What we lack are transistors that can switch fast enough to turn light's AC current into DC current.
So, by roundabout method, the microchip industry will ultimately solve our power problems
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
What you really need is to change the frequency of the AC current. Most homes and transmission lines use around 60Hz AC, not DC.
Also, thorium is far more realistic than a power generating fusion process on Earth.
We will also be able to significantly reverse environmental degradation (including, as a minor aside, powering bitcoin on equipment that is no longer coal-fired).
We've had the technology to do this for forty years. It's just not being developed, and it won't in the current geopolitical environment. It's wishful thinking to believe that wind, water and solar are ever going to be able to run our modern industrial economies. Nuclear power is simply required if we really desire to move away from using coal.
It will begin to be used when it's cost-effective against other forms of electricity. Which won't likely be very long now. We already have perfect solar antennas that pickup solar energy like an antenna rather than like photosynthesis, and can thereby capture a large percent of the energy efficiently, like 99.5%. What we lack are transistors that can switch fast enough to turn light's AC current into DC current.
So, by roundabout method, the microchip industry will ultimately solve our power problems
Long term, fusion may pan out also. But I think solar will bridge the gap.
. The austrian anarchocapitalists believe, that we will produce even more without the state. That's the greatest economic joke I ever heard.
I don't know where you got this idea, but that's not true. I know of no argument to imply that a free market would produce more than the current market.
Quote
It might, or it might not; depending on the desires and needs of the people. The difference would be that productivity would not be siphoned off by an ever more needy state, and those who are dependent upon the state would have to learn how to produce something of value as well.
Yes, and it's those people who will fight tooth and nail to continue the system until it crashes irrevocably, and why political change in the US prior to a major economic disaster is not likely to happen. Capitalism has been the driving mechanism for human society, progress and prosperity in modern history. It is this driving engine that is now about to fail completely.
Capitalism, as in free trade and voluntary interaction, is not going to fail. Much of the establishment of corporatist inefficiency will be in turmoil and the collateral damage for everyone may be severe, but eventually the natural order will recover better and stronger than before.
Yes, without the state, inefficiency will be eliminated. That means, that nearly nothing will be produced, as it was the case within stateless communities in the whole history of mankind. But that wasn't Capitalism. The austrian anarchocapitalists believe, that we will produce even more without the state. That's the greatest economic joke I ever heard.
To be more exact, you're conflating property and rights protection (law and police) and dispute resolution (courts) with the state.
But you don't need the state to provide any of those things. Law can be crowd-source or agreement based, ie: polycentric-law. No societal entity needs to have a monopoly on law production, that's just the way things have been largely until now. There's no reason for it to stay that way, and an alternative may (and probably will) be far better.
Similarly, courts and police can be privately provided on the market and due to changed incentives of the market will probably be far better.
Stateless communities often also had no rights protection, law, or courts. But it's possible to create not a state nor a stateless community, but rather the ideal is a self-governed community, and by that I mean one where each individual rules himself and himself alone. Not a community which uses a collective body to govern the whole--no, I mean a community where each individual has sovereign control of himself and no one else. A truly individualist society. This has never existed because we never had the ideas explicit to try it until modern time.
I suspect we have at least a decade before any coming crash truly hits, and possibly more like 30 years before the crisis is unavoidable entirely.
if this is true then most of the leaders of the world today couldn't give a crap... nobody will blame them ( at least not while they are still alive...)
All Patriarchy, which is the collectivist opposite of the non-collectivist Anarchy.
Patriarchal, federalist chiefdoms are not stateless.
I wholely reject your absurd distortion of the terms in use.
But even then, I can lay one down for you...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois
Yes they were a matrilineal society (and a matriarchial one, IMHO) and yes they did trade internally and externally.
They were stateless, both by the true defintion of the term, and your's as well.
Each expression of archy is by definition the opposite of Anarchy. That's an 'absurd' definition to collectivists, I know that.
"After becoming united in the League, the Iroquois invaded the Ohio River Valley in present-day Kentucky to seek additional hunting grounds."
Being united means being collectivised, governed.
Another is that particular classes of investments are forever; such as alcohol, guns, ammo and uncontaminated land. And strange as it may seem, common table salt if you live more than 100 miles from a shoreline.
Gold, on the other hand, is pretty much useless unless you already have at least one of the first four things above. It's also wise to stock up on gardening books, and perhaps take up beekeeping as a hobby.
Personally, I've already done all of these things.
Gold, on the other hand, is pretty much useless unless you already have at least one of the first four things above. It's also wise to stock up on gardening books, and perhaps take up beekeeping as a hobby.
Personally, I've already done all of these things.
Man, you forgot about THIS:
All Patriarchy, which is the collectivist opposite of the non-collectivist Anarchy.
Patriarchal, federalist chiefdoms are not stateless.
I wholely reject your absurd distortion of the terms in use.
But even then, I can lay one down for you...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois
Yes they were a matrilineal society (and a matriarchial one, IMHO) and yes they did trade internally and externally.
They were stateless, both by the true defintion of the term, and your's as well.
Capitalism has been the driving mechanism for human society, progress and prosperity in modern history. It is this driving engine that is now about to fail completely.
Capitalism, as in free trade and voluntary interaction, is not going to fail. Much of the establishment of corporatist inefficiency will be in turmoil and the collateral damage for everyone may be severe, but eventually the natural order will recover better and stronger than before.
Yes, without the state, inefficiency will be eliminated. That means, that nearly nothing will be produced, as it was the case within stateless communities in the whole history of mankind. But that wasn't Capitalism. The austrian anarchocapitalists believe, that we will produce even more without the state. That's the greatest economic joke I ever heard.
Your reply is a textbook example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Your are telling ahistoric stories. There has never been a capitalist free trade in stateless, self-sufficient communities. Self-sufficient communities are called self-sufficient because there is no need to trade on a market with strangers beyond themselves.
So this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
And this http://mises.org/daily/1121
Or this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_anarchism#Religious_Jewish_anarchism
or this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallstatt_culture#Culture_and_trade
Are not both capitalisitic and stateless socieites? A note on that last one, since it's not widely known. Not much is known about the Hallstatt culture, mostly due to the combined effects there being now known written language associated with the culture and that history, while not really written by them, is heavily edited by the victors. The Hallstatt were not victors. But two thinkgs are known to be hard facts about the Hallstatt culture, 1) they honored no rulers and thus were leaderless, and during the age that also made them stateless by the dominat definition (they respected no king, paid no taxes and fought no wars) and 2) they traded with their neighbors, particularly mined salt.
All Patriarchy, which is the collectivist opposite of the non-collectivist Anarchy.
Patriarchal, federalist chiefdoms are not stateless.
Kowloon: Ruled by patriarchalic chiefdoms under chieftains:
"From the 1950s to the 1970s, it was controlled by Triads and had high rates of prostitution, gambling, and drug use"
Iceland: Ruled by patriarchalic (hierarchic) chiefdoms under chieftains:
"Iceland did not have an executive branch of government. Instead of a king they had local chieftains."
"Then there was the National Assembly or the Althing. Each quarter was represented by their own Althing. If a dispute was not settled by the private courts, the dispute would go up the ladder to the next highest court until the dispute was resolved."
The Jews: (thats the best joke)
Ruled by patriarchal gods and their patriarchal representatives.
In contrast of that the anarchist slogan: no gods, no masters!
Hallstatt culture:
"The material culture of Western Hallstatt culture was apparently sufficient to provide a stable social and economic equilibrium. The founding of Marseille and the penetration by Greek and Etruscan culture after ca 600 BC, resulted in long-range trade relationships up the Rhone valley which triggered social and cultural transformations in the Hallstatt settlements north of the Alps. Powerful local chiefdoms emerged which controlled the redistribution of luxury goods from the Mediterranean world that is characteristic of the La Tène culture."
Capitalism has been the driving mechanism for human society, progress and prosperity in modern history. It is this driving engine that is now about to fail completely.
Capitalism, as in free trade and voluntary interaction, is not going to fail. Much of the establishment of corporatist inefficiency will be in turmoil and the collateral damage for everyone may be severe, but eventually the natural order will recover better and stronger than before.
Yes, without the state, inefficiency will be eliminated. That means, that nearly nothing will be produced, as it was the case within stateless communities in the whole history of mankind. But that wasn't Capitalism. The austrian anarchocapitalists believe, that we will produce even more without the state. That's the greatest economic joke I ever heard.
Your reply is a textbook example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Your are telling ahistoric stories. There has never been a capitalist free trade in stateless, self-sufficient communities. Self-sufficient communities are called self-sufficient because there is no need to trade on a market with strangers beyond themselves.
So this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
And this http://mises.org/daily/1121
Or this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_anarchism#Religious_Jewish_anarchism
or this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallstatt_culture#Culture_and_trade
Are not both capitalisitic and stateless socieites? A note on that last one, since it's not widely known. Not much is known about the Hallstatt culture, mostly due to the combined effects there being now known written language associated with the culture and that history, while not really written by them, is heavily edited by the victors. The Hallstatt were not victors. But two thinkgs are known to be hard facts about the Hallstatt culture, 1) they honored no rulers and thus were leaderless, and during the age that also made them stateless by the dominat definition (they respected no king, paid no taxes and fought no wars) and 2) they traded with their neighbors, particularly mined salt.
I don't believe the end is near.
There will soon be new cheap energy sources which will help a lot.
Computers will be smarter and we will come much more efficient.
Internet is empowering individuals more than even in the history of mankind.
I believe the future is going to be great. Of course there will also be problems to solve. Bitcoin might help with that.
There will soon be new cheap energy sources which will help a lot.
Computers will be smarter and we will come much more efficient.
Internet is empowering individuals more than even in the history of mankind.
I believe the future is going to be great. Of course there will also be problems to solve. Bitcoin might help with that.
You are right that we are seeing tremendous progress in many areas. But traditionally, going back at least to Adam Smith, economists have acknowledge that technological progress led to lower labor demand, increased production, and ultimately lower prices (deflation) in the short term. Sound familiar? After some time, things settle out, but the only lasting gains are funneled to landlords. Deflation makes sure any of the capitalist and the laborer's gains are erased. So remind me again how technological progress is going to break this historical trend and save the markets?
Capitalism has been the driving mechanism for human society, progress and prosperity in modern history. It is this driving engine that is now about to fail completely.
Capitalism, as in free trade and voluntary interaction, is not going to fail. Much of the establishment of corporatist inefficiency will be in turmoil and the collateral damage for everyone may be severe, but eventually the natural order will recover better and stronger than before.
Yes, without the state, inefficiency will be eliminated. That means, that nearly nothing will be produced, as it was the case within stateless communities in the whole history of mankind. But that wasn't Capitalism. The austrian anarchocapitalists believe, that we will produce even more without the state. That's the greatest economic joke I ever heard.
Your reply is a textbook example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Your are telling ahistoric stories. There has never been a capitalist free trade in stateless, self-sufficient communities. Self-sufficient communities are called self-sufficient because there is no need to trade on a market with strangers beyond themselves.
So is this the year bitcoin will see some action? Its seems the US is trying to give pressure to bitcoin.
Jump to: