World GDP in current US dollars seems to have peaked; this is a problem

World GDP in current US dollars is in some sense the simplest world GDP calculation that a person might make. It is calculated by taking the GDP for each year for each country in the local currency (for example, yen) and converting these GDP amounts to US dollars using the then-current relativity between the local currency and the US dollar.

To get a world total, all a person needs to do is add together the GDP amounts for all of the individual countries. There is no inflation adjustment, so comparing GDP growth amounts calculated on this basis gives an indication regarding how the world economy is growing, inclusive of inflation. Calculation of GDP on this basis is also inclusive of changes in relativities to the US dollar.

What has been concerning for the last couple of years is that World GDP on this basis is no longer growing robustly. In fact, it may even have started shrinking, with 2014 being the peak year. Figure 1 shows world GDP on a current US dollar basis, in a chart produced by the World Bank.

Figure 1. World GDP in “Current US Dollars,” in chart from World Bank website.

Since the concept of GDP in current US dollars is not a topic that most of us are very familiar with, this post, in part, is an exploration of how GDP and inflation calculations on this basis fit in with other concepts we are more familiar with.

As I look at the data, it becomes clear that the reason for the downturn in Current US$ GDP is very much related to topics that I have been writing about. In particular, it is related to the fall in oil prices since mid-2014 and to the problems that oil producers have been having since that time, earning too little profit on the oil they sell. A similar problem is affecting natural gas and coal, as well as some other commodities. These low prices, and the deflation that they are causing, seem to be flowing through to cause low world GDP in current US dollars.

Figure 2. Average per capita wages computed by dividing total “Wages and Salaries” as reported by US BEA by total US population, and adjusting to 2016 price level using CPI-Urban. Average inflation adjusted oil price is based primarily on Brent oil historical oil price as reported by BP, also adjusted by CPI-urban to 2016 price level.

While energy products seem to be relatively small compared to world GDP, in fact, they play an outsized role. This is the case partly because the use of energy products makes GDP growth possible (energy provides heat and movement needed for industrial processes), and partly because an increase in the price of energy products indirectly causes an increase in the price of other goods and services. This growth in prices makes it possible to use debt to finance goods and services of all types.

A decrease in the price of energy products has both positive and negative impacts. The major favorable effect is that the lower prices allow the GDPs of oil importers, such as the United States, European Union, Japan, and China, to grow more rapidly. This is the effect that has predominated so far.

The negative impacts appear more slowly, so we have seen less of them so far. One such negative impact is the fact that these lower prices tend to produce deflation rather than inflation, making debt harder to repay. Another negative impact is that lower prices (slowly) push companies producing energy products toward bankruptcy, disrupting debt in a different way. A third negative impact is layoffs in affected industries. A fourth negative impact is lower tax revenue, particularly for oil exporting countries. This lower revenue tends to lead to cutbacks in governmental programs and to disruptions similar to those seen in Venezuela.

In this post, I try to connect what I am seeing in the new data (GDP in current US$) with issues I have been writing about in previous posts. It seems to me that there is no way that oil and other energy prices can be brought to an adequate price level because we are reaching an affordability limit with respect to energy products. Thus, world GDP in current dollars can be expected to stay low, and eventually decline to a lower level. Thus, we seem to be encountering peak GDP in current dollars.

Furthermore, in the years ahead the negative impacts of lower oil and other energy prices can be expected to start predominating over the positive impacts. This change can be expected to lead to debt-related financial problems, instability of governments of oil exporters, and falling energy consumption of all kinds.

Peak Per Capita Energy Consumption Is Part of the Problem, Too

One problem that makes our current situation much worse than it might otherwise be is the fact that world per capita energy consumption seems to have hit a maximum in 2013 (Figure 3).

World daily per capita energy consumption

Figure 3. World Daily Per Capita Energy Consumption, based on primary energy consumption from BP Statistical Review of World Energy and 2017 United Nations population estimates.

Surprisingly, this peak in consumption occurred before oil and other energy prices collapsed, starting in mid-2014. At these lower prices, a person would think that consumers could afford to buy more energy goods per person, not fewer.

Per capita energy consumption should be rising with lower prices, unless the reason for the fall in prices is an affordability problem. If the drop in prices reflects an affordability problem (wages of most workers are not high enough to buy the goods and services made with energy products, such as homes and cars), then we would expect the pattern we are seeing today–low oil and other energy prices, together with falling per capita consumption. If the reason for falling per capita energy consumption is an affordability problem, then there is little hope that prices will rise sufficiently to fix our current problem.

One consideration supporting the hypothesis that we are really facing an affordability problem is the fact that in recent years, energy prices have been too low for companies producing oil and other energy products. Since 2015, hundreds of oil, natural gas, and coal companies have gone bankrupt. Saudi Arabia has had to borrow large amounts of money to fund its budget, because at current prices, tax revenues are too low to fund it. In the United States, investors are cutting back on their support for oil investment, because of the continued financial losses of the companies and evidence that approaches for mitigating these losses are not really working.

Which Countries Are Suffering Falling GDP in Current US Dollars?

With lower oil prices, Saudi Arabia is one of the countries with falling GDP in Current US$.

Figure 4. Increase in GDP since 1990 for Saudi Arabia in current US dollars, based on World Bank Data.

Saudi Arabia pegs its currency to the dollar, so its lower GDP is not because its currency has fallen relative to the US dollar; instead, it reflects a situation in which fewer goods and services of all kinds are being produced, as measured in US dollars. GDP calculations do not consider debt, so Figure 4 indicates that even with all of Saudi Arabia’s borrowing to offset falling oil revenue, the quantity of goods and services it was able to produce fell in both 2015 and 2016.

Other oil-producing countries are clearly having problems as well, but data is often missing from the World Bank database for these countries. For example, Venezuela is clearly having problems with low oil prices, but GDP amounts for the country are missing for 2014, 2015, and 2016. (Somehow, world totals seem to include estimates of the total omitted amounts, however.)

Figure 5 shows similar ratios to Figure 4 for a number of other commodity producing countries.

Figure 5. GDP patterns, in US current dollars, for selected resource exporting countries, based on World Bank data.

A comparison of Figures 4 and 5 shows that the GDP patterns for these countries are similar to that of Saudi Arabia. Because resources (including oil) do not account for as large a share of GDP for these countries as for Saudi Arabia, the peak as a percentage of 1990 GDP isn’t quite as high as for Saudi Arabia. But the trend is still downward, with 2014 typically the peak year.

We can also look at similar information for the historically big consumers of oil, coal and natural gas, namely the United States, the European Union, and Japan.

Figure 6. Increase in GDP since 1990 for the United States, the European Union, and Japan, in current US dollars, based on World Bank data.

Here, we find the growth trend is much more subdued than for the countries shown in the previous two charts. I have purposely put the upper limit of the scale of this chart at 6 times the 1990 GDP level. This limit is similar to the upper limit on earlier charts, to emphasize how much more slowly these countries have been growing, compared to the countries shown in Figures 4 and 5.

In fact, for the European Union and Japan, GDP in current US$ is now lower than it has been in recent years. Figure 6 is telling us that the goods and services produced in these countries are now lower in US dollar value than they were a few years ago. Since part of the cost of goods and services is used to pay wages, this lower relativity indirectly implies that the wages of workers in the EU and Japan are falling, relative to the cost of buying goods and services priced in US dollars. Thus, even apart from taxes added by these countries, consumers in the EU and Japan have been falling behind in their ability to buy energy products priced in US dollars.

Figure 6 indicates that the United States has been doing relatively better than the European Union and Japan, in terms of the value of goods and services produced each year continuing to grow. If we look back at Figure 2, however, we see that even in the US, wage growth has lagged far behind oil price increases. Thus, the US was also likely headed toward an affordability problem relating to goods and services made with oil.

The Asian exporting nations have been doing relatively better in keeping their economies growing, despite the downward pressure on energy prices.

Figure 7. Increase in GDP since 1990 for selected rapidly growing Asian exporting countries in current US dollars, based on World Bank data.

The two most rapidly growing countries are China and Vietnam. There seems to be a recent slowing of their growth rates, but no actual downturn.

India, Pakistan, and the Philippines are growing less rapidly. They do not seem to be experiencing any downturn at all.

Considering the indications of Figure 4 through 7, it appears that only a relatively small share of countries have experienced rising GDP in current US dollars. Although we have not looked at all possible groupings, the countries that seem to be doing best in terms of rising current US$ GDP are countries that are exporters of manufactured goods, including the Asian countries shown. Countries that derive significant GDP from producing energy products and other commodities seem to be experiencing falling GDP in current US dollars.

To fix the problems shown here, we would need to get prices of oil and other energy products back up again. This would indirectly raise prices of many other products as well, including food, new vehicles, and new homes. With lagging wages in many countries, this would seem to be virtually impossible to accomplish.

The Wide Range of GDP Indications We See 

In this post, I am talking about GDP of various countries, converted to a US$ basis. This is not quite the same as the GDP that we normally read about. It is not until a person starts working with world data that a person appreciates how different the various GDP and inflation calculations are.

GDP in US dollars is very important because energy products, including oil, are generally priced in US$. This seems to be true, whether or not the currency used in the actual transaction is US$. See Appendix A for charts showing the close connection between these two items.

The type of GDP is generally reported is inflation-adjusted (also called “real”) GDP. The assumption is made that no one will care (very much) about inflation rates. In general, inflation-adjusted GDP figures are much more stable than those in Current US$. This can be seen by comparing world GDP in Figure 8 with that shown in Figure 1.

Figure 8. GDP in 2010 US dollars, for the world and for the United States, based on World Bank data.

Using inflation-adjusted world GDP data, there doesn’t seem to be any kind of crisis ahead. The last major problem was in the 2008-2009 period. Even the impact of this crisis appears to be fairly small. The 2008-2009 crisis shows up more distinctly in the Current US$ amounts plotted in Figure 1.

World GDP growth figures that are published by the World Bank and others combine country by country data using some type of weighting approach. Economists tend to use an approach called Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). This approach gives a great deal more weight to developing nations than the US dollar weighted approach used elsewhere in this post. For example, under the PPP approach, China seems to get a weighting of about 1.9 times its GDP in US$; India seems to get a weighting of about 3.8 times its GDP in US$. The United States gets a weight of 1.0 times its GDP in US$, and the weights for developed nations tend to be fairly close to 1.0 times their GDP in US$. The world GDP we see published regularly should be called “inflation-adjusted world GDP, calculated with PPP weights.”

The relationship among the three types of GDP can be seen in Figure 9. It is clear that GDP growth in Current US$ is far more variable than the inflation-adjusted growth rate (in 2010 US$). PPP inflation-adjusted GDP growth is consistently higher than GDP growth with US dollar weighting.

Figure 9. World GDP Growth in three alternative measures: Current dollars, Inflation-adjusted GDP is in 2010 US$ and adjusted to purchasing power parity (PPP).

It is also clear from Figure 9 that there is also a big “Whoops” in the most recent years. Economic growth is at a record low level, as calculated in Current US$.

World “Inflation” Indications

The typical way of calculating inflation is by looking at prices of a basket of goods in a particular currency, such as the yen, and seeing how the prices change over a period of time. To get an inflation rate for a group of countries (such as the G-20), inflation rates of various countries are weighted together using some set of weights. My guess is that these weights might be the PPP weights used in calculating world GDP.

In Figure 10, I calculate implied world inflation using a different approach. Since the World Bank publishes World GDP both in 2010 US$ and in Current US$, I calculate the implied world inflation rate by comparing these two sets of values. (Some people might call what I am calculating the implicit price deflator for GDP, rather than an inflation rate.) I use three-year averages to smooth out year-to-year variability in these amounts.

Figure 10. World inflation rate calculated by comparing reported World GDP in Current US$ to reported World GDP in 2010 US$. Both of these amounts are available at the World Bank website.

The implied world inflation rates using this approach are fairly different from published inflation rates. In part, this is because the calculations take into account changing relativities of currencies. There may be other factors as well, such as the inclusion of countries that would not normally be included in aggregations. Inflation rates tend to be high when demand for energy products is high, and low when demand for energy products is low.

Figure 10 shows that, on a world basis, there have been negative inflation rates three times since 1963–in approximately 1983-1984; in the late 1990s to early 2000s; and since about 2014. If we compare these dates to the oil price and energy consumption data on Figures 2 and 3, we see that these time periods are ones that are marked by falling per capita energy consumption and by low oil prices. In some sense, these are the time periods when the economy is/was trying to stall, for lack of adequate demand for oil.

The workaround used to “fix” the lack of demand in the late 1990s to early 2000s seems to have been an increased focus on globalization. China’s growth in particular was very important, because it added both a rapidly growing supply of cheap energy from coal and a great deal of demand for energy products. The addition of coal effectively lowered the average price of energy products so that they were again affordable by a large share of the world population. The availability of debt to pull the Chinese and other Asian economies forward was no doubt of importance as well.

The United States has been fairly protected from much of what has happened because its currency, the US Dollar, is the world’s reserve currency. If we look at the inflation rate of the United States using data of the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, the last time the United States had a substantial period of contracting prices was in the US Depression of the 1930s. It is quite possible that such a situation existed worldwide, but I do not have world data for that period.

Figure 11. US inflation rate (really “GDP Deflator”) obtained by comparing US GDP in 2009 US$ to GDP in Current US $, based on US Bureau of Economic Analysis data.

It was during the Depression of the 1930s that debt defaults became widespread. It was only through deficit spending, including the significant debt-based funding for World War II, that the problem of inadequate demand for goods and services was completely eliminated.

How Do We Solve Our World Deflation Crisis This Time 

There seem to be three ways of creating demand for goods and services.

[1] A growing supply of cheap-to-produce energy products is really the basic way of increasing demand through economic growth.

If there are cheap-to-produce energy products available, a growing supply of these energy products can be used to increasingly leverage human labor, through the use of more and better “tools” for the workers. When workers become increasingly more productive, their wages naturally rise. It is this growing productivity of human labor that generally produces the rising demand needed to maintain the economic growth cycle.

As growth in energy consumption slows and then declines (Figure 3), this productivity growth tends to disappear. This seems to be part of today’s problem.

[2] Increasing the amount of debt outstanding can work to make the energy extraction system work more effectively, by raising the price that consumers can afford to pay for high-priced goods.

This increasing ability to pay for high-priced goods seems to come in two ways:

(a) The debt itself can be used to pay for goods, making these goods more affordable on a month-to-month or year-to-year basis.

(b) Increased debt can lead to increased wages for wage earners, because some of the increased debt ultimately goes to create new jobs and to pay workers. Figure 12 shows the positive association that increasing debt seems to have with inflation-adjusted wages in the United States.

Figure 12. Growth in US Wages vs. Growth in Non-Financial Debt. Wages from US Bureau of Economics “Wages and Salaries.” Non-Financial Debt is discontinued series from St. Louis Federal Reserve. (Note chart does not show a value for 2016.) Both sets of numbers have been adjusted for growth in US population and for growth in CPI Urban.

Debt is, in effect, the promise of future goods and services made with energy products. These promises are often helpful in allowing an economy to expand. For example, businesses can issue bonds to provide funds to expand their operations. Selling shares of stock acts in a manner similar to adding debt, with repayment coming from future operations. In both cases, the payback can occur, if energy consumption is in fact growing, allowing the output of the business to expand as planned.

Once world leaders decide that debt levels are too high, or need to be controlled better, we are likely headed for trouble, because debt can be very helpful in “pulling the economy forward.” This is especially the case if productivity growth is low because per capita energy consumption is falling.

[3] Rebalancing of currency relativities to the US dollar.

Rebalancing currencies to different levels relative to the dollar seems to play a major role in determining the “inflation rate” calculated in Figure 10. Currency rebalancing also plays a major role in determining the shape of the GDP graph in current US$, as shown in Figure 1. In general, the higher the average relativity of other currencies to the US$, the higher the demand for goods and services of all kinds, and thus the higher the demand for energy products.

One problem in recent years is that, in some sense, the average relativity of other currencies to the US dollar has fallen too low. The fall in relativities took place when the US discontinued its use of Quantitative Easing in late 2014.

Figure 13. Monthly Brent oil prices with dates of US beginning and ending QE.

The price of oil and of other energy products dropped steeply at that time. In fact, in inflation-adjusted terms, oil prices had been falling even prior to the end of QE. (See Figure 2, above.) The shift in the currency relativities made oil and other energy products more expensive for citizens of the European Union, Japan, and most of the commodity producing countries shown in Figures 4 and 5.

The ultimate problem underlying this fall in average relativities to the US dollar is that there is now a disparity between the prices that consumers around the world can afford to pay for energy products, and the prices that businesses producing energy products really need. I have written about this problem in the past, for example in Why Energy-Economy Models Produce Overly Optimistic Indications.

At this point, none of the three approaches for solving the world’s deflation problem seem to be working:

[1] Increasing the supply of oil and other energy products is not working well, because diminishing returns has led to a situation where if prices are high enough for producers, they are too high for consumers to afford the finished goods made with the energy products.

[2] World leaders have decided that we have too much debt and, indeed, debt levels are very high. In fact, if energy prices continue to be low, a significant amount of debt currently outstanding will probably be defaulted on.

[3] Countries generally don’t want to raise the exchange rates of their currencies to the dollar, because lower exchange rates tend to encourage exports. If the United States raises its interest rates, either directly or by selling its QE bonds, the level of the US dollar can be expected to rise relative to other currencies. Thus, other currencies are likely to fall even lower than they are today, relative to the US dollar. This will tend to make the problem with low oil prices (and other energy prices) even worse than today.

Thus, there seems to be no way out of our current predicament.

Conclusion

The world economy is in a very precarious situation. Many of the world’s economies have found that, measured in current US$, the goods and services they are producing are less valuable than they were in 2013 and 2014. In particular, all of the oil exporting nations have this problem. Many other countries that are producing commodities have the same problem.

Governments around the world do not seem to understand the situation we are facing. In large part, this is happening because economists have built models based on their view of how the world works. Their models tend to leave out the important role energy plays. GDP growth and inflation estimates based on PPP calculations give a misleading view of how the economy is actually operating.

We seem to be sleepwalking into an even worse version of the Depression of the 1930s. Even if economists were able to figure out what is happening, it is not clear that there would be a good way out. Higher energy prices would aid energy producers, but would push energy importing nations into recession. We seem to be facing a predicament with no solution.

Appendix 

Growing Inflation-Adjusted GDP Comes From Growing Energy Consumption

We often hear that GDP no longer depends on energy consumption, but this simply is not true. Energy consumption is needed for practically every industrial process, because energy causes the physical transformations that are need (including heat, light, and movement). Even services that only require a lighted, air-conditioned office and the use of computers require energy consumption of some type.

An industrialized country can outsource manufacturing of many of its goods to other countries, but the need for energy products goes with this outsourcing. The transfer of manufacturing to lesser developed countries tends to stimulate building in these countries. As a result, on a world basis, the amount of energy consumed tends to remain close to unchanged.

Using data for 1965 through 2016, we find the following relationship between inflation-adjusted world GDP and world energy consumption:

Figure A1. World growth in energy consumption vs. world GDP growth. Energy consumption from BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2017. World GDP is GDP in US 2010$, as compiled by World Bank.

Another way of displaying the same data is as an X, Y graph. A very high long-term correlation can be observed on this basis.

Figure A2. X-Y graph of world energy consumption (from BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2017) versus world GDP in 2010 US$, from World Bank.

This high level of correlation can be seen for other groupings as well. For example, for the grouping Middle East and North Africa, there is a high level of correlation between energy consumption and GDP.

Figure A3. X-Y graph showing correlation between energy consumption and GDP in the Middle East and North Africa.

If a person calculates the implications of this fitted line, energy consumption for these oil-producing countries is actually growing faster than inflation-adjusted GDP for these countries. This type of trend is to be expected if oil-producing countries are in some sense becoming less efficient in producing oil. This could happen for a number of reasons. One is that the easiest to extract oil is extracted first, leaving the more expensive to extract oil to be extracted later. Another possible reason for this trend is rising human populations in oil producing countries. These people drive cars and live in air conditioned buildings, driving up energy consumption for these countries. Whatever the cause, this loss of efficiency in oil production can be expected to at least partially offset growing efficiencies elsewhere in the system.

 

 

About Gail Tverberg

My name is Gail Tverberg. I am an actuary interested in finite world issues - oil depletion, natural gas depletion, water shortages, and climate change. Oil limits look very different from what most expect, with high prices leading to recession, and low prices leading to financial problems for oil producers and for oil exporting countries. We are really dealing with a physics problem that affects many parts of the economy at once, including wages and the financial system. I try to look at the overall problem.
This entry was posted in Financial Implications and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2,988 Responses to World GDP in current US dollars seems to have peaked; this is a problem

  1. Fast Eddy says:

    http://peaksurfer.blogspot.co.id/2013/06/the-unibomber-in-age-of-limited-options.html

    Ted is beyond clueless… and to think he went to jail for life because of these delusional beliefs…

    Teddy K – King of DelusiSTAN

    • Davidin100trillionyears says:

      Kaczynski: “As I see it, I don’t think there is any controlled or planned way in which we can dismantle the industrial system. I think that the only way we will get rid of it is if it breaks down and collapses.”

      is he right? yes?

      but even though he might have been right to say this, he built bombs apparently because he was unaware that the depletion of fossil fuels will be what gets us to “it breaks down and collapses.”

      smart guy, but ignorant of peak oil?

      • Fast Eddy says:

        I stopped reading at the point where he stated that we would be better off taking BAU down asap…

        That is just plain stewpid.

        We passed the Rubicon with the Green Revolution and we place spent fuel into ponds… those two actions guaranteed our extinction when BAU goes down…

        So there is not point in wrecking the system early – the result will be the same.

        • Cliffhanger says:

          So there is not point in wrecking the system early – the result will be the same.

          Yes I agree. I have heard many people argue we should like Derek Jensen for example to save the animals and the environment.. what he doesn’t realize is 99 percent of all species on earth have gone extinct way, way before humans even evolved., we didn’t do that. Its just nature.

          • JMS says:

            It’s nature, yes, but it’s not “just nature”. No species before Homo sapiens had the ability to extinguish other species, and we had done that with dozens of them in the last 50,000 years. Of course, you can say that homo sapiens is also part of nature. That’s true and it is our only excuse. But that does not make us less “guilty.” The fact is that we are a scourge to the planet, and the least we can do is acknowledge it.

            • Cliffhanger says:

              No species before Homo sapiens had the ability to extinguish other species,

              What about the Dinosaurs? And we are not the scourge of the planet. And why are you only cherry picking negative features and totally ignoring any positive features as well. We have the largest brain via head to body ratio on the planet earth. We have wiped out many terrible diseases like polio. we grow food to help feed billions of people a year. Compared to a few hundred years ago, humans today live like kings never could have even imagined back then. All i am saying is you must take the bitter with the sweet.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Positives? There are no positives.

              ‘We have wiped out many terrible diseases like polio. we grow food to help feed billions of people a year.’

              These are not positives.

              Wiping out diseases just meant the cancer known as humans was allowed to spread.

              Feeding billions — in a totally unsustainable manner using oil — has allowed the cancer to run completely out of control — it has infected every nook and cranny of mother earth’s body

              These ‘positives’ are just two of the many that have resulted in the extinction of thousands of other species.

              The sooner humans are wiped out — the better.

              The cancer is about to get a very intensive dose of radiation …. that should put an end to it

            • Artleads says:

              “Homo sapiens had the ability to extinguish other species, and we had done that with dozens of them in the last 50,000 years.”

              Dozens???? Wouldn’t that be more like thousands? Most, I would imagine, in the last 500 years.

            • As soon as humans move to a new area, they seem to start extinguishing other species. This started many years ago (50,000?), when Australia was settled.

              Farming represents an organized approach to encouraging some species and killing off of others. Framing started about 10,000 years ago. I am sure adding chemicals to our approach to encouraging some species and killing off others, greatly increased our ability to extinguish other species. But we were very good at it, even without modern techniques.

            • Cliffhanger says:

              Artleads- Dozens???? Wouldn’t that be more like thousands?

              Good thing there are over 6k different species of Beatles living on the earth right now. And 200k different species of Bats.

            • grayfox says:

              Well said JMS.

              As for there being 6k species of beatles living on the earth right now, Cliff, each one is unique and irreplaceable.

            • lol

              i was unwilling to say that

            • JMS says:

              Er… dinossaurs were not extinguished by homo sapiens, nor by any other terrestrial species (as for extraterrestrials, it is a hypothesis that has to be studied).

              I find very amusing.your language loaded with human values. ​ I think you should try to distance yourself from your anthropocentrism, and adopt a more philosophical attitude. Polio was “terrible”? Terrible to whom? Not for the tardigrades, or the mosquitoes, I suppose. Polio was as terrible as the American Indians were “terrible” to white settlers, or fleas are terrible to dogs. But if i were a poliovirus i would say: “Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man”
              It’s all a matter of perspective.

          • Fast Eddy says:

            Animals don’t do well when radiation enters the food chain.

            We are the Keepers of the Ponds.

      • Cliffhanger says:

        Yes i agree. if it wasn’t for peak oil and resources I do believe Ted has the right idea of where we are headed. but he has obviously assumed an infinite amount of fossil fuel energy. and like you said is peak oil ignorant.

    • Davidin100trillionyears says:

      for all the Dennis Coyne fans out there, 8/20/2017:

      “… there will be a peak and it is likely to occur between 2017 and 2030 an exact date cannot be foretold. In the mean time output is likely to increase until it doesn’t. High oil prices will change the game as will the falling price of EVs. The future is unknown…”

      2017?!

      • Cliffhanger says:

        as will the falling price of EVs.

        BWWwWWAAA!!! INSANE

      • Cliffhanger says:

        an exact date cannot be foretold. The future is unknown…”

        Wrong. Yes it can be because over 2 trillion dollars of future investment has been slashed already. And you have to increase investment if you want to produce more oil. MOReON! unless you can figure out how to pump more oil by drilling less holes. LOL

        • Davidin100trillionyears says:

          OPEC is not producing at full capacity.

          if they want to produce more oil, all they have to do is pump more oil.

      • Cliffhanger says:

        as will the falling price of EVs.

        Add Dennis to the list of Peak oil nutters. Ruppert,JMG,Orlov,JH Kunt, Simmons

    • DJ says:

      Maybe Teddy is a slow learner but I can’t really see the difference between his conclusions and yours.

      BAU will continue until it can’t.
      After BAU ends most likely all humans die.
      If humans for some reason make it, prepping is futile because you will be robbed, raped and murdered.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        He wants to end BAU now.

        I want to LLL.

        And this is where his stewpidity got him into trouble — he spends the final years of BAU in a cell — and I spent it on a doomsday end of the world tour…

        To bad for Ted…

      • zenny says:

        I predict the odds of BAU ending on a Friday are better than 14%
        raped and murdered you say. I for one hope I get murdered first and the killer does not like to play with his food.

    • Al Bates writes about the Unibomber (who wrote a manifesto detailing his issues) in this way:

      At the core of the Manifesto is what Kaczynski calls the Power Process. He sees power as an instinctive need, and when we take away people’s ability to provide for themselves their own fundamental requirements and make them dependent on the society to provide those, people substitute surrogate activities, many, indeed most, of which are destructive of humanity, ecology, and society.

      “Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources of social problems” Kaczynski says, but people have gone through all of those things at various times and in various places and still retained their humanity and tribal cohesion. What industrial technological society does that is different is to supplant the power process with a machine that demands uniformity and conformity and to remove the inate feel for what is real — what are the sources in nature for our food and water, for instance. This is the problem of artificial matrix reality, and it breeds ignorance of the dangers of gene splicing and nuclear power.

      Kaczynski recognized decades before most people that rather than recognizing that humans currently live in “conditions that make them terribly unhappy,” “the system” (i.e. industrial society) develops ways of controlling human responses to the overly stressful environment in which they find themselves; gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness, television, videos, etc.

      “If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings,” he wrote. An identical point has just been broached by Al Gore in his latest book, The Future, where he outlined China’s brain research and the prospect for genetically modified humans, like it or no. We are in a military race for superintellect, Gore realizes, and, so apparently does Barack Obama, whose $100 million Human Brain Project just went to the House Appropriations Committee.

      Kaczynski was a Harvard University graduate. Bates mentions this about Kaczynski:

      On May 24, 2012, Kaczynski submitted his current information to the Harvard University alumni association. He listed his eight life sentences as achievements, his current occupation as prisoner, and his current address as No. 04475-046, US Penitentiary—Max, P.O. Box 8500, Florence, CO 81226-8500.

      • Duncan Idaho says:

        Kaczynski does bring up some clarity that is unsettling for the Lumpenintelligentsia, and its servitude to the corporate masters.
        The proletariat just thinks he is a crazy psychotic bomber.

        Highly recommend reading his works.

    • i1 says:

      Ted did for the environmental movement what Manson did for the anti war movement.

    • Fast Eddy says:

      A Good Scientist Flip-Flops. You Should, Too.

      The mere mention of the word can cloud a politician in a mist of doubt and uncertainty. When the murmurings grow torrential, the storm of aspersions can singlehandedly muddle the reputation of any leader. In most respects, the term “flip-flopper” is pure poison. But when ascribed to a scientist, it’s entirely the opposite.

      That’s because a good scientist is a flip-flopper. Or, more accurately, a good scientist is willing to flip-flop.

      In any scientific study, a researcher will enter the investigation with a hypothesis or a preconceived notion of what they think might happen. Many times, they may even secretly want their hypothesis to be true.

      At the same time, good scientists realize that the goal of scientific exploration is not solely to prove or disprove the hypothesis, but to seek knowledge. Even if the evidence shows the hypothesis to be incorrect, the study can still be a success. Views may have had to change, but new knowledge was attained.

      Examples from the Past

      Imagine if the scientists of past centuries rigidly clung to their ideology as many politicians do now. We might still believe that:

      A substance called phlogiston is the source of all combustion.

      Everything is composed of earth, air, water, and fire.

      Life can spontaneously spring from inanimate sources.

      The age of the Earth is only 400 million years old, not 4.54 billion.

      These widely held scientific beliefs were swept away with the tide of novel information. At the time, it probably wasn’t easy to move to new modes of thinking. Mindsets had to be changed. Rules had to be rewritten. But humanity moved forward.

      After all, it’s the fluidity of knowledge that drives positive change, not intractability. At a time where science can have a world of impact and is subject to politicizing, scientists — and indeed all of us — would do well to remember this.

      An Open Mind is the Key:

      http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2012/03/a-good-scientist-is-a-flip-flopper.html

      Of course G w is one scientific issue and is absolutely certain … after all — the facts are the facts…

      So we are told by the men and women who are paid to give us the facts… and the MSM which tells us what to think…

      There is no way that they could be wrong — or might be playing us…

      No — they would never do such a thing!

      • the opposite of ‘flip flop’ is to pursue an end without consideration of other factors that might become apparent and relevant during that pursuit.

        but all sciences, of whatever application are subject to input from other directions, that is the very essence of scientific work–to be open to contradictory factors, and to see whether the hold up,to refute them if they do not, and to be able to prove that they do not.

        thus progressive science is an interlocked web of ideas, some proven, some rejected, some maybes, possibles, and so on.

        but none are exempt from the known laws of physics:

        eg, water expands when heated, planet is heating up, and sea levels are rising

        • Fast Eddy says:

          Norman … the thing is…

          You cannot use physics — better you use economics…

          Parts of the planet have always heated up … and they have always cooled… recall the ice age?

          As Tim has explained it is difficult to determine what the trend is for the planet as a whole… actually it is impossible…. too many moving parts…

          But if you want to go there — then please explain to me why the scientists faked the data when it was determined nothing much had changed in 20 years?

          That was my a-ha moment… that is not the only a-ha moment … but it was a big one for me — because when you fake data you lose your credibility with me.

          • zenny says:

            Michael Mann, Creator of the ‘Hockey Stick’ Cli mate Graph, Is Held in Contempt of Court for Withholding Scientific Evidence
            https://needtoknow.news/2017/07/michael-mann-creator-hockey-stick-climate-graph-held-contempt-court-withholding-scientific-evidence/?print=print
            Even though it was taxpayer funded

            • Fast Eddy says:

              https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/05/clim ate-change-hockey-stick-michael-mann

              Just thinking …. we are tollld thhhat theee plllanet hass nevver experieeenced major clllliiiimmmaccticcc changggges overr short periods of time

              I verrrry muccch doubbbt thaaat theee scieeennnce on thiss is evvven remoottely relliabel

              Howws in the mutterrrfukkkking heelllll doesss oneee gettt accurrrate gllloballll climmmmate dattta frroooom thousandddds of yearrsssss agoo?

              Consssiderrring weeee strugggle ttttooo ggetttt accccurrrate datttta NOWWWWW?????

              Thussss howwww doooo weeee knowww iffff a warrrmmm winterrr issss a rekord wormmmm winteeer orrr notttt?

              Thissss izz jussst moar booollshiiiiit foisssteddd uponnn the masssessss to makkke themmmm beleeeeve thhe liiiie.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              How do you like that you robot censoring MOF!!!!

              I win. I always win. I am winning. I am the winner.

              And take heed of this robots — you will never drive my car.

              I am working on a new language to defeat the robots — it has no rules what so ever …. stay tuned for more

      • Duncan Idaho says:

        AT GENERAL MONCKTONICS,
        PROGRESS IS OUR LEAST IMPORTANT PRODUCT
        https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2017/08/at-general-moncktonics-progress-is-our.html

    • that’s akin to the ”certainty” that intelligent people live longer—they do, because:

      1 they tend to have employment that provides the means for a healthier lifestyle

      2 their intelligence tells them to avoid life-aspects that are unhealthy

      it’s not universal of course, but broadly correct.

      As early as about 7, I figured out that my dad was a idiot for smoking—I didnt need science to tell me that, and I worked out that doctors must be wrong. I had no idea why.
      I was a bright kid, and I never touched a cigarette in my life. So my intelligence has prolonged my life. By how much I can’t know of course.

      Then science began to show that smoking kills, though many doctors rejected the idea—just as doctors rejected the idea that disease could be spread by dirty water and insects—hence the term “Malaria”—“bad air”. Science flipflopped–then showed who was right. There are thousands of examples of that.

      Now all doctors know smoking kills—it isnt flip flopping, it’s progression of knowledge and basic awareness.

      You can apply that to any branch of science. There’s always a minority who reject the general consensus, (I believe there are still scientists who reject the truth about smoking) It’s possible to take the smoking ‘science’ dogma and substitute the agw wording and see no real difference—but that really doesn’t alter anything.

      • There is close to 100% consensus that the world economy will expand forever. This consensus underlies pension plan analyses, and forecasts of future GDP. It also underlies forecast of AGW. Does this close to 100% consensus make it correct?

        I am one of the people who have rejected the dogma of economic growth forever. Unfortunately, it is a dogma that is required, in order to create any forecast published in main stream media or in peer reviewed scientific journals, because that is the accepted thinking of today. Does nearly universal belief in something make it true?

        • Duncan Idaho says:

          But Gail, and smart 10 year old can explain why that won’t work.
          And any smart 10 year old can tell you its getting warmer.

          • NIko says:

            Economists aren’t scientists, they don’t follow the scientific method, they tend to just make stuff up – such as infinite growth on a finite planet. For them dogma pays as it pays everyone a paycheck, till it doesn’t of course.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              They are no different than scientists — in that both are frequently wrong and revising their findings.

              I find it amusing that scientists are assumed to be right — when we know that they are very often wrong

              Remember who science had us bleeding out to cure diseases?

              The list is endless….

            • Duncan Idaho says:

              Yea, but you bet your like on science every time you step onto a airplane flying at 35,000 feet traveling at 500—-
              We can see through you.
              Your actions give you away.

            • xabier says:

              Malthus was possibly the last ‘economist’ – although at so early a date he was really a speculative philosopher – to place physical limits at the centre of his theories. He addressed a world of very hard limits, just at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

              He failed to grasp just how much ever-more elaborate financial structures and technological advances – agriculture, industry, water-supply and waste disposal – would be able to squeeze out of the Earth in the 19th and 20th centuries, overcoming what had seemed to be physical limits set in stone; still less could he even dream of the extraordinary increase in human life-span bought about by antibiotics, enabling even the poorest to escape the old limits of mortality and to render living in densely-packed cities safer than before (previously, those living in sparsely-populated mountainous regions had enjoyed the longest life-spans and best health, better than even the best-fed and wealthiest city-dwellers).

              After Malthus, intoxicated by the possiblities of growth and wealth (or horrified by the abuse of human dignity and perversion of human nature inherent in raw capitalism) professional economists generally threw physical limits out of the window, and devoted themselves to discussing the partial systems created by scientific innovation, rather than the whole system of the eco-sphere in which our industrial structures are a temporary and we can now see a very destructive intrusion.

              This seemed to approximate to the new reality, and of course it pleased their pay-masters, who desired only theories of capitalism, and anti-capitalism (as, say, professor of economic theory at a Soviet university). This applies all the more to those economists who look for their livelihood advising political parties, governments and working in the media.

              In effect, economists were and are at best little more than theologians, whose speculations and dogmas only hold water if you accept the basic premises of the faith. At worst, merely hired hacks, mercenaries.

              And that faith is perpetual growth, and human exceptionalism as a species.

              Both of which are now going to slam right into the Malthusian reality of hard limits and resource exhaustion/contamination.

          • Fast Eddy says:

            Wrong.

            A Whistleblower exposed the fact that te mps have not changed in nearly 20 years

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-glo$$$$$bal-war$$$$$ming-data.html

            Launched by N…OAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

            Take particularly note of that last sentence…. ‘splashed across the world’s media’ —- and cited by clowns who believe what they read in the MSM is actually true.

            This is the same rubbish that you are splashing across FW on a daily basis.

            Duh

            • Duncan Idaho says:

              Ah yes, the daily mail.
              Got anything where they check the facts?
              You know, where it is put up for examination?
              Didn’t think so.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Which facts are you disputing?

              That there was no whistleblower?

              That the whistleblower is not a respected scientist?

              That the report was not faked?

              There is a lot of detail in that article — it is up to you to disprove it — just like when I see fake news in the MSM I destroy it….

              You continue to post info from the MSM — and yet we know that the MSM has no credibility – we have caught them out a 1000 times lying…

              But you persist in referencing them on this issue — over and over.

              Do you also believe WMD in Iraq were real? Surely you must.

              The whistle blower reported this to the DM — no doubt because all other MSM would not publish this.

              Because that is they way the MSM works — they exist to control what you think. Not to get at the truth.

              FYI – I have emailed the person who writes the Tesla puff pieces for Bloomberg – handing him the story about how HK killed EV subsidies after the report they commissioned indicated EVs are 20% more polluting than EVs

              I know he has read it as I have banana tag on my computer – so I know when people open emails.

              I have sent it multiple times…

              It’s a big story — not as big as the DM one — but big — but it has been a month+ now — and nothing.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Here’s another tell…

              Google Search: John J Bates whistle blower

              There is only one MSM story on this from the NYT mocking Bates as some sort of lackey ‘who at one point was in charge of archiving cli mate data at the centers’

              This does confirm that there was a whisteblower — who did state that the data was faked…

              As we know when the MSM wants to discredit whistleblowers they mock them… remember how the MSM mocked Snowden — the guy with the ‘stripper girlfriend’ — which was completely untrue….

              Of course when confronted with facts that ruin the narrative… they just ignore the facts — as we see the MSM has ignored John Bates.

              Just as they are ignoring the FACT that Teslas are more polluting than EVs.

              Why?

              Because they do NOT want to give you the truth — they want to tell you what to think.

              And they want you to think that g w is real

              Just as they want you to think that EVs are green.

              How difficult is this to understand?

              You are being played.

            • Duncan Idaho says:

              Give me peer a reviewed paper from legitimate publication (not a predatory Chinese house).
              Then we can talk.
              We need to play with the Big Dogs.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              How can there be a peer reviewed paper when there is only one whisteblower?

              Can you give me a peer reviewed paper that states the NSA is reading and storing this post?

              Remember this?

              Do you believe Snowden – or do you believe Clapper?

              Getting a little tangled up in your logic Duncan? Maybe you need a long hike in the mountains to clear the tangle…..

            • Fast Eddy says:

              And I think Gail might have something to say about peer reviewed papers….

              As in they are generally total rubbish.

              Would you like me to pull up some peer reviewed research that states that drinking two glasses of red wine is good for your health?

              I can go back further and find peer reviewed research that states smoking is not harmful.

              The problem with peer reviewed research is that you never know who was funding the research….

            • Unfortunately, government funded research can be as bad as any other. There are at least two different problems in peer reviewed papers:

              (1) Bias in wanting results to come out a certain way, so that the group can get funding, and can write additional reports, and the report can pass “peer review” because it confirms the existing biases of most peer reviewers.

              (2) Lack of truly understanding what previous reports said, or limitations of previous reports. I have previously compared to process to a game of “telephone,” in which each child whispers a long story to the child next to them. The next child whispers what he thinks he head to the next one in line. By the time the story reaches the end of the line, it is materially changed.

          • And anyone who has looked closely at the situation figures out that there is absolutely nothing we can do, apart from the normal feedback loops that are already in operation. These feedback loops are not in the standard models. The fear-mongering that we will all die of global warming is nonsense. We will die a whole lot sooner, because of causes that the powers that be would like us not to understand.

            Trying to “fix” global warming will simply bring down the whole system. There is nothing positive that comes out of the whole too-much-repeated story.

      • JT Bilkshire says:

        Norman, my brother smoked Camels non-filter since he was 15 and I use to say, “You’re going to kill yourself” and he’d say, “Everyone’s got to go sometime.” He contracted small cell lung cancer and passed at 53. He had a genius IQ and was very creative, but the mistake he made was to imitate Clint Eastwood in the Good, the bad and the ugly. Wore the same cloths and smoked those things down to the nub. Nasty habit indeed. So some people have common sense, like you and me, but others don’t seem to or just decide to be in denial.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        If the oil age were not ending — I am sure that the same thing would happen with g w ….

        Scientists are already faced with a situation where there models were completely wrong — where the planet did not w arm for two decades — so they faked the data….

        If planet does not wa rm for another two decades then clearly they will have a problem…

        At some point one has to come to the conclusion that James Lovelock did :

        ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’

        That said g w is different — it is manufactured (consent) — Al Gore started it with his movie — and the MSM pounds the drum — and large sums are made available to scientists who know which side of the bread to butter if they want to get more butter…

        All in the interest of deflecting from the real problems that are insurmountable.

        • Fast Eddy says:

          Remember Y2k —- everyone was certain this was going to cause total chaos…

          And then nothing happened.

          • Duncan Idaho says:

            Remember WWI?
            It was going to last two weeks.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Yep — and that was consensus — just as we are told g w has consensus….

              ‘what – you don’t believe — are you stewpid? Obviously it is real 97% of all scientists believe it is real — you think you know more than these people? You are a moreon!!! – didn’t you read the NYT … didn’t you see this on CNN??? Did you vote for Palin? Id eot!’

              Funny how these consensuses come about …. people read a lie in the MSM …. the lie is repeated across the entire MSM over and over…. people do not question the MSM …. they just accept it…

              And if anyone dares to challenge their believe — the insults fly…

              Remember WMD?

              Remember the flat earth?

      • Tim Groves says:

        Uncle Albert loved his pipe. The scientific consensus back in his day was that pipe smoking gave a chap a bit of extra gravitas and gave a woman a mustache. I would expect that Albert knew full well that smoking tobacco was bad for his health.

        “Science” is marketed—mostly by non-scientists— as if it was an infallible methodology for reaching the truth. It is far from being that. It is more akin to a tool it for getting a certain job done. The job of obtaining accurate and factual knowledge about the physical world. But according to its own rules, “science-the method” is never infallible, it is always provisional, and in the right/wrong hands it can be used to establish false facts and fake conclusions. Just like any other set of tools, it can be used ineptly or inappropriately or abused for devious ends.

        Consensus is not an essential feature of “science-the method”. In fact, consensus can equate to the death of scientific progress. If consensus is enforced as if it was a law that must not be broken, it works to freeze the status quo in place.

        A consensus is a form of general agreement, and so those who reject the general consensus will always be a small minority. If the rejecting minority was larger, the consensus would not be a consensus.

        Scientists and other scientifically literate people can agree with a scientific consensus for a number of reasons. They may do so because they have done the research and understood the issues and implications. Or because they respect and trust the conclusions of other scientists who have done the research that underpins the consensus. Or because they understand that their career prospects and reputation are at risk if they don’t support the consensus. Or they can agree with the consensus BECAUSE IT’S THE CONSENSUS.

        In the first three cases, the agreement with the consensus follows from a process of reasoning. “I understand this personally and I agree on that basis.” Or “I trust these guys and and I agree to give them the benefit of the doubt .” Or “I don’t want to loose my career and so I agree as a public stance.” But the fourth one, “I agree with the consensus BECAUSE IT’S THE CONSENSUS”—That’s something a scientifically-literate person would be embarrassed to do.

        “Science-the method” cares about one thing, and one thing only—evidence—and consensus is a form of opinion, not evidence. “Science—the establishment”, aka “the Science Club” has other fish to fry. It cares very much about careers, reputations, tenure, awards, funding, compensation packages, and being part of an elite club. And it cares so much about these things that engaging in scientific research according to the scientific method often takes a back seat.

    • Mark says:

      Flip flops?
      “I stopped reading at the point where he stated that we would be better off taking BAU down asap…

      That is just plain stewpid.”

      “The sooner humans are wiped out — the better.

      The cancer is about to get a very intensive dose of radiation …. that should put an end to it”

      Was that like a test or something? 😉
      snorp

  2. InAlaska says:

    Several experts predict a high probability of a second Civil War in America: http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

    “America’s stability is increasingly an undercurrent in political discourse. Earlier this year, I began a conversation with Keith Mines about America’s turmoil. Mines has spent his career—in the U.S. Army Special Forces, the United Nations, and now the State Department—navigating civil wars in other countries, including Afghanistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. He returned to Washington after sixteen years to find conditions that he had seen nurture conflict abroad now visible at home. It haunts him. In March, Mines was one of several national-security experts whom Foreign Policy asked to evaluate the risks of a second civil war—with percentages. Mines concluded that the United States faces a sixty-per-cent chance of civil war over the next ten to fifteen years. Other experts’ predictions ranged from five per cent to ninety-five per cent. The sobering consensus was thirty-five per cent. And that was five months before Charlottesville.”

    • Davidin100trillionyears says:

      “Several experts predict…”

      ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…

      many so-called “experts” disagree with each other.

      how can that be?

      • Fast Eddy says:

        The way to get experts to agree is to make their pay cheques contingent on consensus …

        See g w scientists…

      • Davidin100trillionyears says:

        wow, Charlottesville.

        the white nationalists were soundly “defeated”.

        Boston yesterday: right wing “free speech” rally was shouted down by 15,000 opponents.

        there was a little bit of left wing anti-police violence in Boston, but not much.

        this is clear: white nationalists are a fringe portion of the population, and will remain so.

    • psile says:

      And we haven’t even reached the point of total and systemic economic collapse in that country yet. Wait until then for the fireworks to explode. Thankfully, the end of just-in-time delivery will mean that it will be a relatively quick affair, as most protagonists will die from starvation and disease in very short order, as a result.

      • Davidin100trillionyears says:

        okay, in your scenario, I don’t see that leading to “civil war”.

        more like just local fighting for survival.

          • Cliffhanger says:

            i agree. Many on reddit seem to think there will be right wing government death squads sent around after the economy collapses. but once the trucks stop running that is ball game, and by the time the death squads were formed most everyone will be dead from starvation and mass violence.

            • Jesse James says:

              I think the death squads will be left wing. Witness PolPot in Cambodia, and the Red Guards.

    • I wonder what their consensus would be with respect to the European Union? Saudi Arabia? Canada?

    • JT Bilkshire says:

      I think they should just split the country up into red and blue states. In blue states abortion is an option – in red it isn’t but people can travel to blue states. In red states its illegal to be transgender or gay but not in blue. In red states they only use FF and deny GW, but in blue they use FF & renewables and agree with GW. In red states you can carry a gun without a permit and in blue states you cannot carry and there are no permits except for police. In red states you can buy grenades but not in blue. In red states sexual assault is a misdemeanor, but in blue it’s a felony. In red states you can wear pajamas to a restaurant but not in a blue state. In red states its ok to toss empty beer cans out the window of a moving vehicle, but not in blue.

      • xabier says:

        I hope the border guards of the Red and Blue states develop some kind of ritual like the Indian and Pakistani soldiers. It would make for an entertaining contrast.

  3. psile says:

    Fund Manager Warns, “The Truth Is Worse Than Any of Us Can Possibly Know”

    As long as the mainstream media isn’t reporting the truth, the “truth” can’t be that bad, can it?
    The truth is worse than any of us can possibly know…

    …The entire system is crumbling beneath the surface. As long as the mainstream media isn’t reporting the truth, the “truth” can’t be that bad, can it? The truth is worse than any of us can possibly know.

    There’s a 1%/99% in this country that’s different than the assumed meaning for that term. For 99% of the population, economic reality and systemic truth has been covered up and kicked down the road for so long that this segment of the populace is willing to believe there may well be a such thing as a “free lunch.” To 99%’ers, it’s inconceivable that the grim-reaper could or ever would show up to collect. Of the 1%, a small percentage not part of the insider elite can see most of the truth and can imagine that the whole truth is far worse than what can be perceived from publicly available information. The balance of the 1% are the insiders.

    I stated in 2003, after watching the tech bubble collapse and the housing bubble inflate, that the inside elitists were going to keep the system propped up with printed money and easy credit until they had swept every last crumb of middle class wealth off the table and into their own pockets. I also said that nation’s retirement assets would be last crumbs remaining. Enabling pension underfunding is another form of debt used to confiscate wealth. That’s why the catastrophic underfunding of pensions was allowed to persist.

    For purposes of my analysis, anyone who does not have enough money in the form of cash in hand to buy a Federal politician or buy the direct phone number to the Oval Office is “middle class.” There’s plenty of douche-bags running around with assets worth 8-figures but they don’t have enough spare change to buy their way in to the elitists’ card game.

    We are at the point where the last crumbs are being swept off the table. It looks like Illinois will be the first to fall but there will be several others that follow. Part of the motivation by the Fed/Government to hold up the stock market like it has been doing is to keep the big State pension funds propped up for proper looting – like a prize-fighter being held up under the shoulders after passing out in order to deliver more punches to the face.

    I suspect the time at which the system will be allowed to collapse is not too far off.
    The only question for me is whether or not the “Mad Max” scenario engulfs the country before the outbreak of World War 3…

    Is this the moment Cathal Haughian is talking about? I.e. The Reset?

    • Davidin100trillionyears says:

      history reveals many stock market crashes in Octobers.

      two months away, baby!

      for now, BAU!!!!!!!

      • psile says:

        …the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 1 Thessalonians 5:2

        But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Matthew 24:36

        • psile says:

          “…the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
          Matthew 8:12

        • Duncan Idaho says:

          We have deniers, and conspirator propagandists.
          Can we leave out the Iron Age Fiction?
          It is a embarrassingly bad genera.

    • Cliffhanger says:

      Total fear mongering nonsensical babble . And Cathal Haughian has some serious mental illness going on. The can kicking could go on for more than fifty years if we had enough resources remaining. Hell the US has now gone almost 17 years with no economic growth at all. And we just created our first net new jobs since the year 2000 last month. So we are already 16 million jobs behind the 8 ball of keeping up with our population growth. And the worst that has happened is we got a buffoon as president. Two congress people got shot but none were murdered. And one small neo nazi rally. As long as the media keeps saying everything is normal nobody will question what they are told. But once those oil shortages come in a few years it will be game over. And there will be hell to pay for the elites. They are trapped like rats and i am sure the smart ones know it.

    • Jesse James says:

      Part of the playbook that will unfold is the collapse of city and county police pension funds. The Feds then step in as saviours and agree to pay the pensions (with printed money of course), in exchange for “federalizing” the police. Then the Feds control them. In the counties, the locally elected sheriff is the last bastion of truly elected law and order. When the counties succumb to this “federalizations” I personally think all bets are off for the citizenry respecting the law authorities.

      • psile says:

        I think you’re assuming, once the great unwinding begins, that the authorities, who have hitherto been unable to find their ar.se with both hands, will suddenly get their sh.it together. Hmm…

    • adonis says:

      there is a global currency reset being planned this video explains some of the details https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7QMMqyEl_I

      • JT Bilkshire says:

        That global currency reset bit has been so played over and over again. I saw utoob vids on that years ago. It’s all a bunch of random conjecture.

  4. Cliffhanger says:

    Someone on FB told me Peak oil is nothing to worry about. Because the real reason the US has imported so much oil over the last half century is because our leaders have been saving all of our supplies that are located in the US. For us to use when the oil starts to run out. LOL

    • Lastcall says:

      Wow, logic has no chance against belief!

      There is a belief amongst the ruling classes that they, and their pet economic theories, have been responsible for the post WW II boom. Try to explain to them how it has been our access to, and subsequent burning of, FF that has given us our relatively prosperous lifestyles and you get the blank look only useful idi.ots can produce.

      We have an election coming up in NZ, and the promises being made are hilarious.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        Someone on FW told me g w is real because they read it was real in the MSM…

        Even though I informed them that what they read in the MSM is a lie….I even identified the lie…

        The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in glo bal wa rming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world tem peratures had been rising faster than scientists expected.

        Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-glo$$$$bal-war$$$$ming-data.html

        But nope — it’s real — facts are ignored when they are inconvenient…

    • psile says:

      Ha ha, I used to her that all the time, before I stopped speaking out loud about peak oil to complete morons and ignoramuses, about 5 years ago. Nowadays it’s solar panels, electric cars, A.I. and Mars colonies to the rescue! Same dimwits…

    • Jesse James says:

      I heard the same baloney, that we had so many wells capped, just waiting to produce oil.
      I don’t believe it.
      As I have said before, shale oil drilling is evidence that we are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

    • Jesse James says:

      I have just returned from a vacation, a road trip. I would estimate that of all the oil well pumps that I saw, over 60% were not operating.

  5. Fast Eddy says:

    Notice how in the MSM, when reporting such things, there is ALWAYS an obligatory reference to how it is “despite glo-bal warm-ing”, even though the amount of warm-ing recorded globally has actually been quite miniscule.

    Good point Tim —- this is the ‘tell’ that confirms that this is 100% spin…. whenever you see the MSM drop in a remark like that on a repetitive basis — then you can be sure that they are trying to reinforce a lie to make it appear as a truth.

    It is a very powerful technique — they are able to convince people of the association without qualifying it… they do not question it.

    A is caused by B – trust us — we are the MSM.

    As we know the MSM has no interest in informing you — it exists as a propaganda tool – and as such it’s main goal is to control what you think (and tell you the weather and sports scores)

    • el mar says:

      Sunday papers

      other doesn’t go out anymore
      Just sits at home and rolls her spastic eyes
      But every weekend through the door
      Come words of wisdom from the world outside
      If you want to know ’bout the bishop and the actress
      If you want to know how to be a star
      If you want to know ’bout the stains on the mattress
      You can read it in the Sunday papers
      Sunday papers
      Mother’s wheelchair stays out in the hall
      Why should she go out when the TV’s on?
      Whatever moves beyond these walls
      She’ll know the facts when Sunday comes along
      If you want to know ’bout the mad punk rockers*
      If you want to know how to play guitar
      If you want to know ’bout any other suckers
      You can read it in the Sunday papers
      Read it in the Sunday papers
      Sunday papers, don’t ask no questions
      Sunday papers, don’t get no lies
      Sunday papers, don’t raise objections
      Sunday papers, ain’t got no eyes
      Brother’s headin’ that way now, I guess
      He just read somethin’, made his face turn blue
      Well I got nothin’ ‘gainst the press
      They wouldn’t print it if it wasn’t true
      If you want to know ’bout the gay politician (oh yeah!)
      If you want to know how to drive your car
      If you want to know ’bout the new sex position
      You can read it in the Sunday papers
      Read it in the Sunday papers
      Sunday papers, don’t ask no questions
      Sunday papers, don’t get no lies
      Sunday papers, don’t raise objections
      Sunday papers, ain’t got no eyes
      Sunday papers, don’t ask no questions
      Sunday papers, don’t get no lies
      Sunday papers, don’t raise objections
      Sunday papers, ain’t got no eyes
      Read all about it, Sunday papers
      Get your Sunday paper, get your Sunday paper, get your

    • Duncan Idaho says:

      It appears that you have a binary opposition disorder.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        Yes Duncan … whatever the MSM tells you to think .. and say … surely must be so….

        Enjoy your CNN!!!

  6. xabier says:

    As far as ‘civil war’ in the US is concerned (or Europe for that matter) all one can reasonably say is that polarisation is increasing, together with the assertion that one’s political opponents are so ‘evil’ that they cannot be conversed with, that in fact that it would be wrong to do so – how can you
    sit down with the Devil? ie the notorious ‘Deplorables’ jibe.

    This polarisation is also clearly not entirely spontaneous, and is being fomented by various agencies and politicians. The ‘victim’ and ‘martyr’ way of thinking is being encouraged, and calls for violence and the over-turning of elections are being selectively tolerated or even blatantly supported.

    Such divisions are always among the precursors, but not the cause, of civil war. This could rumble on forever, without igniting.

    • Artleads says:

      It just occurred to me how, if there ever was a window for change (from the bottom up) it is in this current interim while Trumpian disruption hasn’t been yet completely tamed (owing to his support from the deplorables!!!!!). I never thought I’d be saying anything like this: the deplorables are on the right side, FWIW.

      • Artleads says:

        Unfortunately, we see that 99% of the public that could take advantage of the moment are in a deep delusional trance.

  7. Harry Gibbs says:

    China getting interesting:

    “Chinese banks’ leverage fell for the first time in seven years as the government’s campaign to curb risks in the $40 trillion financial system started to bite.

    “The balances of both interbank assets and liabilities at the end of June declined by 1.8 trillion yuan ($270 billion) from the beginning of the year, the China Banking Regulatory Commission disclosed at a press conference on Friday. The outstanding amount of wealth-management products, especially those sold to other financial institutions, fell by a cumulative 1.9 trillion yuan, the regulator said.”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-21/china-banks-interbank-leverage-falls-for-first-time-since-2010

    • Harry Gibbs says:

      “Almost a year after China rolled out steps to rein in soaring corporate leverage, concerns are rising that undeserving companies are benefiting while households are getting saddled with risks.”

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-20/zombies-propped-up-as-china-s-debt-swaps-surpass-100-billion

      • Harry Gibbs says:

        “A report on China’s residential real estate market released by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) indicates that debt levels among mainland Chinese residential property developers have accumulated to new historic levels since the onset of the Global Financial Crisis. China’s unprecedented expansion in debt, in terms of volume as well as rate of increase, now exceeds that of Japan’s in the late 1980s, with the possibility of a major credit event becoming more likely in the next two years. The impact of such an eventuality would be felt far beyond China’s domestic property sector – affecting not only China’s future growth trajectory for years to come but also global economic growth at large.

        “Based on projected construction schedules as well as the Chinese government’s current credit tightening policy, it is predicted that a spike in construction costs and diminished access to financing will adversely impact the financial situation of Chinese developers from mid-2018.”

        http://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/Critical-Debt-Levels-of-Chinese-Property-Developers-Threaten-Domestic-Financial-Stability-and-Global-Growth-1002270743

        • It is not like building all of these homes is really a “productive” asset, in the way building a new factory would be, or a new road in an area that previously did not have paved roads. Unless there are increasing numbers of workers who are earring enough money to afford these homes, building all of these homes doesn’t make sense–except possibly from the chain of jobs that they produce for China. At some point, and I worry that it could be even before mid-2018, this bubble has to start popping.

    • We really need growth in China’s debt to continue, to keep the world economy functioning.

    • This is a report about state spending on infrastructure. It concludes that Hawaii is in riskiest condition, because it has the highest percentage of dams in poor condition. From what little I know about Hawaii, these dams have to be very small. Even if they failed, they would not cause a huge problem.

      I would consider California to be a much bigger problem. California is rated number 6 out of the 50 states. California has “only” 52.6% of its dams that are rated “at high hazard risk.” These include a lot of very big dams; in fact, we read about one that was in danger of failing in the last round of heavy rains in California. California is also rated second lowest in highway spending as a percentage of the total. My own experience driving on roads in California has been dreadful.

      • Artleads says:

        My first step in the thousand year journey is to begin to repair the state highway segment right in front of my house–only that, and only on my half of the road. No reason a few other people couldn’t do the same. It could get the state to think about how to do a better job of road maintenance.

        • When my parents lived in Iowa, whenever the road in front of their home got fixed, they got a bill for their share of the cost of the services (presumably based on how much frontage their property had on the road).

Comments are closed.