How the Economy Works as It Reaches Energy Limits — An Introduction for Actuaries and Others

Why have long-term interest rates generally fallen since 1981? Why have asset prices risen? Can these trends be expected to continue? The standard evaluation approach by actuaries and economists seems to be to look at past patterns and assume that they will be repeated.

The catch is that energy consumption growth plays a hugely important role in GDP growth. It also plays an important role in interest rates that businesses and governments can afford to pay. Energy consumption growth has been slowing; it is hard to see how growth in energy consumption can ramp back up materially in the future.

Slowing growth in energy consumption puts the world on track for a future like the 1930s, or even worse. It is hard to see how GDP growth, interest rates, and inflation rates can ramp up in the future. More likely, asset price bubbles will pop, leading to significant financial distress. Derivatives may be affected by rapid changes in prices and currency relativities, as asset bubbles pop.

The article that follows is a partial write-up of a long talk I gave to a group of life and annuity actuaries. (I am a casualty actuary myself, which is a slightly different specialty.) A PDF of my presentation can be found at this link: Reaching Limits of a Finite World


Slide 1


Slide 4

After the audience had a chance to answer this question (mostly with yes), I gave my answer: “Yes, indeed, it is possible to build a model that gives misleading results, and not understand the situation.” For example, a flat map works as a perfectly adequate model in some situations. But when longer distances are involved, a globe is needed. A two-dimensional model works for some purposes, but not for others.

Slide 5

The model in Slide 5 is the familiar Supply and Demand model used by economists. According to the model, if Demand increases from D1 to D2, then price will increase from P1 to P2. The rising price, in turn, will allow the quantity produced to rise from Q1 to Q2, based on the upward sloping supply curve S. This model is true in some cases, but it is not always true.

Supply and Demand Are Both Affected by Reaching Limits

As the economy approaches energy limits, lack of sufficient growth in energy consumption affects both Supply and Demand. Diminishing returns leads to high costs on the Supply side. Because of this, the cost of producing oil and other energy products tends to rise.

At the same time, businesses find that they cannot pass on these higher costs to their consumers because the wages of consumers don’t rise with rising energy costs. Diminishing returns acts like growing inefficiency; it takes more materials, more labor, more tax dollars, and more debt to produce the world’s overall mix of energy products, leaving a smaller amount of resources for producing end products (such as homes, cars, and bicycles) that consumers really want.

Persistent high energy costs lead businesses to try to find workarounds to reduce total costs. A major target for cost reduction is labor costs. If some labor costs can be replaced by lower-paid labor from overseas, or by robots, the company can perhaps make a reasonable profit, even with higher prices for oil and other energy products. The catch is new lower-cost labor force does not create as much Demand for goods and services as was available before jobs were replaced by robots or sent overseas. Workers in China and India will buy some goods and services, but the quantity will likely be lower than if the jobs remained in the US, Europe, and Japan.

We end up with a tug-of-war between the high prices that the producers of energy products need and the low prices that the many low-wage workers around the world can afford. Energy products are used in making pretty much everything, including food, homes, cars, and computers. As young people need to live with their parents longer, and as demand moves to lower-waged countries overseas, the lack of buying power tends to pull energy prices down below the cost of production. Energy prices below the cost of production are just as much a product of reaching energy limits as high energy prices!

Peak Oil is Another Two-Dimensional Model

Before we go on, I should probably offer some more explanation. Some of you may have thought that I would be talking about the Peak Oil story today. I consider the Peak Oil story to be another two-dimensional model. It gives some insights, but it really does not give a good explanation of what can be expected as we go ahead. Its emphases on oil and on high prices are both wrong, in my opinion.

Geologists coming up with the Peak Oil model relied on the incorrect Supply and Demand model of economists. They did not understand that both Demand and Supply are affected, as energy limits approach. They also never considered what the energy needs of the economy really are–total energy consumption needs to grow, if enough goods and services are to be produced for the growing world population. Rising energy consumption is also needed to keep commodity prices high enough to keep production from collapsing from low prices, due to inadequate Demand.

The Role of Added Energy

Many of you have heard the saying, “As you sow [seeds], so shall you reap.” In other words, the effort you put in can be expected to correspond to the end product that is produced. This saying is somewhat true if an economy uses only human labor to produce goods and services. For example, if a person digs a ditch for five hours, the result will correspond to effort put in. Increasing the hours of digging to six can perhaps add 20% to the length of ditch that can be dug. (There is the detail that it even takes energy products to make a shovel. Perhaps the example should be digging a ditch with a stick, and thus using only human labor!)

If a person really wants to dig a ditch quickly, he needs ditch-digging equipment and diesel fuel to operate the equipment. The ditch-digging equipment is made with energy products; it also uses energy products while it is operated. If energy consumption per capita is rising, then businesses, on average, can use increasing amounts of energy to increasingly leverage the labor of the workers they hire. This seems to be what leads to productivity growth.

This is why I talk so much about energy consumption per capita, and the importance of falling prices of energy services (including efficiency gains) to encourage the growth in energy consumption. One example of energy services (whose costs need to fall) would be the cost of heating a 1,000 square meter home (including efficiency gains in furnaces and insulation). Another example would be the cost of transporting 100 kilograms of grain 100 kilometers.

Slide 6

In fact, over time, the cost of energy services has been falling. The fall in costs more than offset the growing quantity of energy consumed. Thus, the cost of energy services is becoming a smaller and smaller share of world GDP. This falling share of energy products as a percentage of the world GDP seems to be necessary, if the remainder of the world economy is to grow. If the cost of energy products starts to rise, it will tend to crowd out some of the discretionary goods and services that the world economy has been able to add, as the world economy has grown.

Higher Energy Prices Are Damaging to the Economy; Lower Energy Prices Encourage GDP Growth

Energy needs to be consumed by the system, whether workers dig ditches with shovels or with ditch-digging equipment. If energy is very expensive, it is likely that all that employers can afford is the equivalent of shovels for workers to work with. If energy becomes less expensive to use (including efficiency gains), then it becomes possible to scale up the use of tools using energy, and the economy can expand. As a result, workers can become more efficient, businesses can make more profits, and the government can collect more taxes. The falling price of energy services seem to be the major force underlying GDP growth.

Conversely, if oil consumption growth is constricted by a spike in oil prices, we know (based on the work of Economist James Hamilton) that the US economy tends to go into recession. Higher prices make it difficult for both businesses and consumers to buy energy products. Falling energy consumption is damaging to the economy, because the creation of goods and services depends on the use of energy products.

High Correlation Between World GDP and Energy Consumption

Slide 7

Energy consumption is not mentioned at all on the economists’ supply and demand model (Slide 5), but it is clear that energy consumption is highly correlated with economic growth. There is a reason for this: it takes energy products to make both goods and services. It even takes energy to heat and light an office for workers, and to make and power computers.

Economists tend to miss the connection between energy and the economy because they tend to perform their analyses on an individual country basis. The connection between GDP growth and energy growth is less clear on a country-by-country basis because individual countries can reduce their energy consumption by shifting some of their manufacturing to less developed countries, confusing the analysis. The International Energy Agency has concluded that higher oil prices can be expected to have an adverse impact on the world economy as a whole.

The Economy Is a Self-Organized System Operated by Energy

Slide 8

The reason for the strange behavior of energy prices near limits is because the system is very interconnected. It is a self-organized system that gradually changes over time. New customers are added over time. These customers are often also wage-earners. They decide what to buy based on their own wages, and based on other considerations, such as the prices of competing products and whether inexpensive financing is available.

Businesses make decisions based on what they think customers might want. They also consider products offered by competitors. Governments play a role as well, both in regulation and taxation.

Physics indirectly helps determine prices, wages, and profits, because the economy uses energy to make goods and services. If a rapidly growing amount of cheap energy is available, it becomes easy for businesses to make a profit and raise wages. As businesses grow, economies of scale tend to increase profits. Higher energy prices tend to reverse these beneficial effects.

Oil Prices Are Now Too Low for Many Oil Producers

Slide 9

If you are not familiar with energy price trends, it probably would be worthwhile to take a minute to look at the strange price pattern shown on Slide 9. If you are coming from a financial background, you will probably be familiar with the financial disruptions of 2008, but not the high oil (and other energy) prices of the same period. The steep drop in prices corresponds to the time of major financial distress.

Most United States infrastructure, such as interstate highways, pipelines, and electricity transmission systems, were built in the pre-1970 period, when the inflation-adjusted price of oil was generally less than $20 per barrel. Thus, in a sense, most of the oil prices we are seeing in recent years on Slide 9 are high, relative to historical costs. The question becomes, “How high a price can the economy withstand?” It becomes very expensive to replace a worn-out pipeline built with $20 per barrel oil using $120 per barrel oil.

On Slide 9, prices required by oil exporting countries (such as Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Norway) seem to be well over $100 per barrel. Such a high price is needed if these countries are to be able to collect enough tax revenue and also have funds for investment in new fields to replace depleting fields.

On the other hand, the economies of the United States, Europe, and Japan do very much better if oil prices are low. They would prefer prices under $50 per barrel. This is the price mismatch mentioned on Slide 9.

Extended periods of low prices can be expected to lead to two adverse impacts over a period of several years:

  1. Falling growth in energy production. Investment in new fields to offset declining production from existing fields is likely to fall. The big drop in oil prices occurred in 2014, and it is now four years later. Many analysts expect growth in oil production to slow in the next few years, because of inadequate investment. Coal, natural gas, and uranium have somewhat similar problems, with falling prices discouraging reinvestment.
  2. Collapsing governments of oil exporting nations. Governments of countries that export oil are often very dependent on the high price of oil to collect adequate tax revenue. The central government of the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, after several years of low oil prices. Lack of adequate tax revenue could cause a similar problem today. Venezuela is particularly at risk, but Saudi Arabia and many other countries could follow.

It is ironic that Venezuela reports the highest oil reserves in the world. These reserves can only be extracted if energy prices are much higher than today. This would seem to require higher wages of non-elite workers around the world. If wages were much higher in countries such as India and Nigeria, they could afford goods such as motorcycles and air conditioning, helping push up world demand for energy products.

Slide 10

It is clear that the growth rate of energy consumption simultaneously affects Supply and Demand.

An important point on Slide 10 is the fact that growing debt acts as a helper for energy consumption. It allows consumers to afford goods and services with their monthly wages, and it allows businesses to pay for new tools for workers over the lifetime of those tools. In a sense, debt is the promise of future goods and services made with energy products.

Money is a type of debt. We can print money, but we can’t print cheap-to-produce energy products. Thus, at some point, there can be a mismatch between promises of future goods and services and the quantity of affordable energy products available to create those goods and services. This is part of what is likely to cause debt defaults.

Slide 11

Slide 11 lists some of the things that seem likely as we reach the limits of cheap-to-produce energy supply. I will describe these issues more, later in this talk.

Slide 12

Slide 12 is an outline of the rest of the talk. This post primarily covers Points 1 and 2. Thus, this article relates primarily to GDP growth, interest rates, and asset prices. Slides are shown for Points 3 and 4 as well.

Slide 13


Slide 14

In recent years, it has become increasingly apparent that the ability of humans (and pre-humans) to cook part of our food supply has had a major impact on our ability to be different from other animals. We could eat a wider variety of foods, and we could get more energy value from those foods. Our bodies could evolve in a very different way. Our brains could become bigger, and our jaws and gut could be smaller.

Slide 15

Even back in hunter-gatherer days, humans were using more energy than similar animals. Now, in the industrial period, we are using 80 times as much energy (=8000/100) as a human-like animal would use, considering the various types of supplemental energy available to us. Some people have described the situation as having 80 energy-slaves for each person. This makes it possible to do tasks, such as farming and digging ditches, in a more efficient way than using sticks as tools.

Slide 16

Besides the usual tools, we have many related ways of using energy, with the goal of eventually providing more goods and services. Energy can be used to organize data on computers. Energy can be used to provide advanced education on topics helpful to growing the economy. If individuals or businesses are paid wages or interest payments, they can use those proceeds to buy energy products, such as a new car, or an overseas vacation. Thus, energy consumption growth affects every part of the economy.

Slide 17

Growing debt is extremely important in growing the world economy. I describe the situation more fully in this article: What has gone wrong with oil prices, debt, and GDP growth?

Technology is what most people focus on, as being the way to move the world economy forward. However, it takes energy products to make the new machines made possible by technology. Without a steady supply of energy products, we cannot maintain existing roads, or the electric grid, or the internet.

Slide 18

Anyone who has purchased a home knows that interest rates are very important in determining what price of home a particular buyer can afford. Here I show a range of monthly payments, for a 30-year, $300,000 mortgage at various interest rates. It is clear that a person can afford to buy a great deal more house at a low interest rate than a high interest rate. If interest only loans are available, costs are lower still.

Slide 19

Everyone who works with interest rates is aware of this pattern in 10-year US Treasury interest rates. The peak in interest rates was in 1981, and there has been a downward trend most of the time since that date.

Slide 20

The interest rates that regulators can easily adjust are short-term interest rates. When these interest rates are increased, they tend to induce recession. There may be a lag in timing. The increase in short-term interest rates in the 2004 to 2006 period seems to have been instrumental in popping the subprime debt bubble and bringing on the Great Recession of 2007-2009. This is my article relating to this issue: Oil Supply Limits and the Continuing Financial Crisis

Slide 21

When energy consumption is growing rapidly, and there are productive projects that can be added (interstate highway system, long distance electric grid, interstate pipelines, first-time telephone service for many people, growing number of trucks and airplanes), then it is possible for the economy to grow rapidly.

In this rapidly growing economy, the economy could easily ramp up long term interest rates without damaging the economy because the underlying growth rate was so high. In a sense, the higher interest rates were analogous to inflation affecting food and energy prices. There was so much growth in demand for goods and services that the economy could afford to pay rising interest rates during the period between World War II and 1981.

Slide 22

The period since 1981 is a period when investments have become much less productive, from a point of view of allowing more goods and services to be produced. Instead, growth is coming from selling more services to each other, and sending more manufacturing to lower-cost parts of the world.

Since 1981, we find ourselves with an increasing amount of old infrastructure that needs to be maintained. Fixing this infrastructure doesn’t really improve productivity. New investments simply keep productivity from falling.

One recent innovation has been the internet. It gives us more information, and it relieves us from the burden of having to use the phone book or go to the library. Thus, it makes us more productive. But in many ways, it is not as important as many earlier inventions, such as the internal combustion engine, the light bulb, and the telephone. There is a temptation to computerize all kinds of data and to expect data mining to solve all our problems. A person wonders what the true cost/benefit is.

Innovations in medicine now allow more 85-year-olds to live to be 86-year-olds and allow more cases of cancer to be cured. But the big changes, brought about by antibiotics and better sanitation, occurred before 1981.

Another growth area has been higher education. The payback is often wages that are barely high enough to live on. How are college graduates who cannot find high-paying jobs going to be able to repay their loans and still get married and have a family?

Admittedly, some investments have been productive. This is especially true when new factories, roads, and ports have been installed in emerging markets. But a large share of recent investments have been aimed at making vehicles more fuel efficient. Or trying to reduce CO2 emissions. These do not really have a payback in lower-cost goods and services.

Interest on debt can only be paid if the economy is truly growing, and thus has a sufficient margin to pay interest with. This seems to be less and less possible outside of emerging markets. I would expect that this is why long-term interest rates are persistently low.

Slide 23

The decline in the ten-year interest rates should make homes more affordable. The long-term decline in shorter-interest rates should make vehicles more affordable. In spite of this boost to the economy, US GDP growth rates have persistently fallen. World GDP growth rates have fallen as well.

Slide 24

There is relatively little storage available for commodities of most types, including oil. As a result, even a small change in demand can lead to a major price shift.

I show in Oil Supply Limits and the Continuing Financial Crisis that the peak in oil prices corresponded to the peak in US debt in several categories, including credit cards and home mortgages. Once US debt stopped rising, the demand for oil fell, and prices dropped precipitously.

Quantitative Easing (QE) by the US Federal Reserve began near the end of 2008. It acted to lower interest rates, especially long-term interest rates. These lower interest rates helped get oil prices back up closer to the level required by producers. But once QE stopped in 2014, prices slid back down. As noted earlier, recent oil prices are far too low for most producers. But they do help stimulate the economies of oil importing countries.

Slide 25

If a business adds debt to expand a factory, this may lead to more wages. The chart indicates that growing non-financial debt does not always lead to higher wages. Sometimes it leads to asset bubbles.

Slide 26

Disposable personal income (DPI) is income that individuals receive, including payments such as Social Security and Unemployment Insurance. This amount is netted out for taxes paid. If we divide DPI by population, we get per capita DPI. This amount is not inflation adjusted; it gives us an estimate of how much incomes have been rising, including payments made to compensate for inflation.

Clearly, there have been huge changes in the growth of per capita DPI over time. Prior to 1981, per capita DPI was rising rapidly, as more women joined the workforce, and as companies gave cost of living raises, in an attempt to keep their employees. In several years, per capita DPI was rising at over 10%.

Families with rapidly rising incomes were looking for ways to spend their new-found wealth. This seems to be at least part of the reason for the high inflation rates of this period. Without this rapid run up in DPI, it is hard to see how the oil prices spikes of the 1970s could have occurred.

Now, the economy has slowed greatly. DPI per capita is sputtering along at less than 4% per year. With this low rate of increase in funds available for spending, it seems like the current economy will not be able to support a big spike in oil prices.

Slide 27


Slide 28

If the economy is not really growing, it is very difficult to pay interest. This is why a person would expect interest rates to roughly follow GDP growth. Back before 1981, GDP growth was significantly greater than 10-year Treasury yields. Since then, 10-year Treasuries have tended to yield a little more than GDP growth (including inflation). Very recently, the pattern seems to have returned to the pre-1981 pattern.

Slide 29

If interest rates are lower, more people can afford to buy a given house, or a piece of land, or shares of stock. The additional demand tends to bid up asset prices.

Slide 30

This should be clear from Slide 29.

Slide 31

Interest rate assumptions often were originally made when interest rates were higher.

Slide 32

Payments to individuals in a particular year act as a way of dividing up goods and services available in that year. If the share of goods and services going to those who are paid interest rises, it will mean fewer goods and services are available for others. History says that it is the non-elite workers that are most likely to be “shorted,” if there are not enough goods and services to go around.

Slide 33


Slide 34


Slide 35


Slide 36


Slide 37


Slide 38


Slide 39


Slide 40


Slide 41


Slide 42


Slide 43


Slide 44


Slide 45


Slide 46

Even a decline in coal consumption is a problem, if it causes total energy consumption per capita to fall! Wind and solar cannot possibly make up the shortfall. Also, their installed cost is high, if the cost of intermittency workarounds is included.

Many slides skipped!


Slide 62


Slide 63


Slide 64


Slide 65


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.

1,963 Responses to How the Economy Works as It Reaches Energy Limits — An Introduction for Actuaries and Others

    • Fast Eddy says:

      ‘The economy is healthy’ and that is putting the squeeze on consumers – interest rates are going up because everything is so awesome….and meanwhile there are jobs aplenty.

      Double speak at its finest

  1. New WSJ article talking about current high energy prices and how they expect the situation to be resolved: Small Outages Have Big Impact on Oil Prices
    Tension may persist for a while, but market can quickly fill void

    The expected fall in exports from Iran of perhaps several hundred thousand barrels a day, joined with declines in a few other hot spots, helped push the international crude benchmark Brent to $80 a barrel last week for the first time since 2014.

    The main non-Iranian factor is Venezuela, where production has been falling steadily. Output in April was about 1.4 million barrels a day, down 500,000 barrels a day from the 2017 average.

    . . . the high prices should help boost supply. U.S. shale oil executives may no longer restrain spending, and countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia will be tempted to fill the void left by Iran even before their supply agreement ends.

    Price spikes contain the seeds of their own destruction in a commodity market.

    I suppose the other seed of their destruction is falling demand, as debt problems become greater. Subprime auto loans become less available, cutting into demand. A person wonders too about problems in China getting worse. It is the largest oil importer in the world.

  2. Baby Doomer says:

    Jeremy Corbyn’s right hand man, John McDonnell: It is my job to overthrow capitalism

  3. Third World person says:

    here are some my favorite Churchill quotes

    • churchill was a man of his time—
      but lynching was a favourite pastime in that era too—i believe there’s a new memorial just opened to lynching victims

      we can all hear the unpleasant rattling of skeletons in cupboards

      i merely pointed out the likely outcome had he made peace with germany in 1940

      i also said he made mistakes, with regard to cow worship, everyone is entitled to there own opinions—especially 100 years ago

      people do that—he was in public office so his mistakes were bigger than yours or mine

      • Third World person says:

        so in simple words One Man’s Terrorist Another Man’s Freedom Fighter

        Churchill was freedom fighter for British
        and for Gandhi he was terrorist for British

        • that’s always been the case

          but one shouldnt see50 years of poltical service in simple black and when terms

          i’ve pointed out the range of his achievements and failings equally, which seems the right approach to the man

          just pointing out his failings with enthusiam is a lopsided discussion

          • theblondbeast says:

            I like your evenhanded approach. Really we should all ease up on the criticism. After all, I fed two house pets this morning. In the two minutes it took me to do that, 120 people died of hunger, including 24 children (including hunger related disease).

            I’m aware of this and I’m going to do it again tomorrow. Who am I to get on a soapbox? I don’t pretend to be overly sentimental and tend to mistrust those who do – largely because of issues like these.

          • oops….black and WHITE terms

          • jupiviv says:

            I have to interject here and point out that no one is claiming Churchill was the incarnation of evil. Ok Crazy Eddy is doing that but that’s neither here nor there. He was, however, psychopathic and base natured. Like all people drawn to power.

            PS – I find the view that Churchill saw Britain through the war quite naive. It was American and Soviet industry that won the war. Britain’s role was essentially being a rock, an iiisland which Germany couldn’t invade without a massive airforce and navy that it couldn’t build or maintain without paralysing itself operationally.

            • djerek says:

              Really American industry and Soviet blood/bodies. The Soviets were massively supported by Lend-Lease and all those programs that really propped up their industrial needs.

            • jupiviv says:

              Lend lease was more of an added bonus than a lifeline to the Soviets. 1942 onwards the Germans were decidedly outmatched by them in mil-industry. The tide didn’t turn at Stalingrad but within the newly instated Siberian factories.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Is the lion evil?

            • churchill was responsible for the fiasco of gallipoli

              when he realised the disaster he resigned from government and rejoined the army as a front line officer

              psychopathic and based natured?

              i said churchill held his nerve in 1940—i didn’t say he saw britain through the war

              without uk as a aircraft carrier—the usa would have lost ww2 because germany would have got nukes first…..

            • Fast Eddy says:

              What about the millions he starved to death in India…

              H i tler would not be such a bad guy either … if we just ignored his gassing of millions of men women and children

            • jupiviv says:

              It’s obvious that Churchill saw nothing wrong with committing atrocities upon entire populations to achieve the ends of empire (resources+geopolitics), so yes he was a psychopath.

              As for keeping his nerve through 1940 – Britain would have fought even without him. The enemy couldn’t invade them and had to contend with the USSR. Also, the US would join sooner or later. The choice was certainly not immediate surrender vs glorious death.

        • craig moodie says:

          Churchill was ultimately a puppet of the Zionists.

          • Fast Eddy says:

            “I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, … The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply.” Nathan Rothschild

            “Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nation’s laws. … Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.” — Mackenzie King, Canadian Prime Minister 1935-1948.

            “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” – Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

            “Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” ― Woodrow Wilson

        • Kim says:

          Churchill was a bought and paid for creature of the Jews (see the group “Focus” which paid his debts and fed him his instructions). He did nothing for the British and European peoples. Rather, he took them into a ghastly and disastrous war in which the only victors were the Jews and Communists.

          The best that we can say about him is that at least his history of the war was published before the days when publishing companies required everything that was produced to parrot that offalous collection lies about the Holohoax.

          • Churchill lived in a time when there were not enough energy (and thus foods) resources to go around. (Per capita consumption was flat, as it is now.) There was a need to provide for ever-growing population. There were also many parts of the economy with a constant need to grow (especially government, businesses, and education), and the constant problem of, “How does the world feed a growing population on a fixed number of acres of arable land?” This, of course, is a kind of diminishing returns that the world constantly struggles with. The question was, “Who, of the many competing groups, will have access to energy resource?” “Who will get left out, when there is not enough food to go around?”

            The laws of physics are behind the problems we were reaching then, and are reaching now. The quantity of energy to operate the world economy needed to be high enough. Otherwise, “survival of the best adapted” would have to lead to some groups losing out. The tendency of the economy is very much to look like the three phases of water. What energy is available tends to primarily concentrate in the the top-most group–the leaders and the highly paid members of society. Other portions of the world economy tend to get frozen out. The world leaders were influential in figuring out which portions got frozen out. Unfortunately, there was not really an option of “Everyone live peaceably together and share what resources we have.” Such a solution would have used up resources, way too quickly. It also is not the way the laws of physics works.

            So we end up with world leaders who tried to push the problems as far away from their own people as possible. This will happen again now, I expect.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              When bones are scarce… the most vicious dogs will do whatever it takes to get some…

              Churchill did what one would expect… as did every other mass murderer in history

      • xabier says:

        Churchill despised the Indian (Hindu) caste system, above all the idea of Untouchables: he thought it was criminal and inhuman, and he was right.

        He also thought the Muslims and Hindus would always be at daggers drawn and would need an imperial power to keep them both under control, and protect both communities.

        As for Ghandi, he actually did an about-face and came to terms with him, generously admitting that he had lost that battle and that they should get on and make the future work.

        The thing about Churchill is that although he could be very wrong, he was never vindictive and petty – not at all like Hitler watching the film of the plotters being hanged with piano wire for his private pleasure.

        • the don reads ofw

          don’t go giving him ideas

        • Third World person says:

          He also thought the Muslims and Hindus would always be at daggers drawn and would need an imperial power to keep them both under control, and protect both communities.

          how wrong he was on this especially with india and pakistan put nuclear weapons on
          each other

        • Sungr says:

          xabier said “The thing about Churchill is that although he could be very wrong, he was never vindictive and petty – not at all like Hitler watching the film of the plotters being hanged with piano wire for his private pleasure.”

          I’m not sure the survivors of the Dresden firestorm would agree….

          • ask the citizens of coventry

            as Sir Arthur Harris put it:

            They have sown the wind, now they will reap the whirlwind.

            Prove me wrong if you can, but for all his faults, if Churchill had not stood alone in 1940- and kept his nerve–we would not be sitting here arguing the toss about wrong or right

            we would be told what was right.

            • bofpwr says:

              Well, aren’t we told what is right all the time when we are addressed to by the media (or our superiors) ? Aren’t you a bit caricatural here ?

            • djerek says:

              “we would be told what was right.”

              Haahahaha as if we aren’t told what is right now?

            • djerek says:

              Let’s be realistic – the WWII battle (and Cold War that ensued) was ultimately over three different powers with three different strategies for a modern totalitarian state.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              If it wasn’t Churchill it would have been another leader who would have stood…

              I prefer to discuss the forced starvation of many millions of Indians…

              Any thoughts on that?

            • if you’re referring to the bengal famine, i covered that in a previous response

              my comment was based on the circumstances of the time—none of us can unpick the threads of history, no matter how much we may wish to do so

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Yes but starving millions to death on purpose…. can there be an excuse for that?

              By all standards of civilization – now and then — is this not a epic act of evil?

              Should not such a man share space in the pages with Mr H… Pol Pot… King Leopold…. Bob McNamara… Don Rumsfeld?

            • Duncan Idaho says:

              Yea Churchill is a good guy.
              Thats right, right?

            • Ed says:

              Let us not forget Mao and Stalin.

          • Sungr says:

            The German 2-engine Heinkel bombing campaigns were barely a factor in WW2 when compared with the 4 engine bombing campaigns of the Allied Strategic Command. Hitler’s thumbs down on a German 4-engine bomber fleet may have been his greatest mistake of the war- it certainly spelled doom for the invasion of the USSR when the Soviets were able to transfer USSR war industry from the Ukrainian industrial zone to new sites beyond the Urals- beyond reach of Hitler’s 2-engine bomber fleets.

            Compare the pictures of aerial bombing damage in Berlin, Hamburg, & Dresden with the 2-engine Heinkel damage in London during the early years of the war.

            No comparison.

            • unfortunate

              but once ware is in progress—there has never been an agreement about some kind of ”damage balance”

              otherwise there would be the nonsensense that—-we just lost 10000 killed—but you lost 7500—therefore you owe us 2500 dead people

              war doesnt work like that

            • Sungr says:

              Nazi Germany effectively lost the war in 1941-

              1. When the US industrial behemoth entered the war with massive industrial capabilities and the richest oil reserves in the world ie East Texas and…

              2. When the June 1941 German invasion of the USSR failed to secure victory before the start of the first Russian winter. Of course, the Germans were stopped dead outside Moscow in December 1941 and faced the wrath of the Siberian units armed with weapons designed to fight on through winter conditions ie T34 tanks w wide treads.

              The brits did build some good airplanes. And they did function pretty well as an island aircraft carrier for the US military buildup.

            • bofpwr says:

              Response to @Norman Pagett,

              Yes, there are rules in War, such as : don’t murder non combatants, don’t murder POWs, etc… Geneva convention… The proportionality principle is central to this. You are not allowed to kill indiscriminately, no.

              You seem to have a “Vae Victis” mentality, you villify the losers of WW2 for being war criminals but at the same time you condone the war crimes of WW2 winners because that’s what it takes to win, right…

              So yeah, “winners write history”, but that doesn’t mean we have to like it and condone it.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Rules of war … only apply to the losers…

              Human Rights Watch report claims Israel committed war crimes in its use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells


              I don’t see any Isra.eli’s being hung over this…

            • rules of war are generally broken—thats just the way things are i’m afraid

              i don’t think i’ve used the term war criminal—but there certainly weresuch people. if the suggestion is that churchill should have been tried at nuremberg—then I must bow out of this discussion.

              the allied forces did not set out to eradicate an enter section of the human race on grounds of religious identity (perhaps you have information i do not?)

              i dont think one can equate so call ”war crimes” perpetrated on the allied side with that intention.

              with all this it’s best to examine everyting in dispassionate detail before making sweeping comments—to my knowledge, britain didnt fire the first shot—-and the first ”air raids” dropped leaflets—cities were attacked in response, not pro actively.

              were we to take the position that bombing cities with ultimately superior forces was somehow ”bad manners”?

              It might be interesting to research the Zeppelin raids of WW1—where the cruised around britain, dropping bombs randomly, or battleships standing off eastern seaports and shelling randomly.

              We eventually developed fighters to reach their height with incendiary shells—-were we thus war criminals for killing the zeppelin crews? We could have asked them politely to go away—or our king would punch their king (his cousin)

            • Fast Eddy says:

              He most definitely should have been tried for Crimes Against Humanity re: India.

              crime against humanity
              a deliberate act, typically as part of a systematic campaign, that causes human suffering or death on a large scale.

              As the resistance swelled, he announced: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” This hatred killed. To give just one, major, example, in 1943 a famine broke out in Bengal, caused – as the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has proved – by the imperial policies of the British.

              Up to 3 million people starved to death while British officials begged Churchill to direct food supplies to the region. He bluntly refused. He raged that it was their own fault for “breeding like rabbits”. At other times, he said the plague was “merrily” culling the population.

              Skeletal, half-dead people were streaming into the cities and dying on the streets, but Churchill – to the astonishment of his staff – had only jeers for them. This rather undermines the claims that Churchill’s imperialism was motivated only by an altruistic desire to elevate the putatively lower races.


              A truly despicable man … who deserved the gallows. Or at least life in prison.

              As it stands… it’s as if a fat pasty f789 who just finished murdering a family and walking away with their jewels… saves a little old lady who was about to be flattened by a bus….

              And is lauded as a hero.

              Or how about this same pasty fat f789 robs a bank … kills everyone inside… then goes home and hands out half the cash to friends and family…

              Hip hip hoorah — hip hip hoorah…

              Let’s take a look at this fat pasty f789-face of a monster….

        • Fast Eddy says:

          I would imagine that Hit ler was not all bad either…

          We must keep in mind where Hit ler was coming from …. he was leading a country that had just been totally f789ed over by traitorous bankers during WW1… and driven into chaos and poverty…

          Let’s imagine what would happen in similarly nationalistic countries such as the US or UK….

          My brother was in New York recently … I am not sure how the discussion came up but a number of cabbies mentioned their hatred of a certain tribe…. pop onto ZH whenever an evil banker story is published… and watch the comments… there is simmering hatred there…

          All it takes is a spark…. now imagine as the US sinks.. a populist politician playing upon the influence that a certain group has in US affairs… some might call it complete control…..

          Now imagine if that person were to gather support from the masses against this once group…


          At the end of the day — Churchill was at the helm when millions of Indians were forcibly starved to death.

          That needs to be his ultimate legacy. Nothing else he did could offset that.

        • futhark says:

          “not at all like Hit ler watching the film of the plotters being hanged with piano wire for his private pleasure.”

          If somebody had personally tried to blow me up and nearly succeeded, I think I’d like to do the same to them, if I got the chance. But then that is part of the escalation that war produces. And no, I’m not actually defending Hit ler – his own acts made him eminently blow-up-able in the first place.

          Interestingly, Hit ler was surprisingly loyal and sentimental to his comrades in the early years, except when he was persuaded they were an imminent threat, e.g. Roehm before the Night of the Long Knives. Stalin was far more vindictive towards his colleagues. Molotov once dared to ask Stalin when his (Molotov’s) wife might be released from prison (she’d been accused of trumped-up anti-Soviet activities). “Don’t worry”, replied Stalin, smiling encouragingly. “We’ll find you another wife!”

          Yet Hit ler was increasingly monstrous to those huge groups he perceived as unAryan, or whatever. Why was he so violent? Psychologists assume he’d suffered extreme humiliation in childhood. His misdirected anger in adulthood knew no bounds. He had suffered severe beatings from his father as a child. The same is true of Stalin and Franco. Three bloodthirsty beasts, all damaged in childhood.

          • Fast Eddy says:

            7 or 8 years ago … I was sitting in front of a computer… and began to think about Mr H…. I cannot recall what triggered the thought — probably some other heinous crime had been committed and I was wondering what motivates people to carry out such atrocities….

            Anyway… I googled ‘Why did Mr Hk kill the ____s’

            And up came page after page of utter bullllll shiiiit. Pretty much a canned responses…

            And when I see results like that — I smell a rat… I smell manipulation … I smell something being covered up…

            Surely there must be some credible explanation as to why a man would want to kill every single member of a religious group….

            What had they done to elicit such extreme actions in Germany?

            And then…. I found this

            And then I read Protocols of the El der s of Zi on….twice…

            And then I understood the issue.

            Does all of this justify Mr H’s actions?

            Is there justification for Europeans wiping out millions in the Americas?

            As a wanna be Nihilist… I do not care — the weak always get trampled… Is rael understands this … China understands this…. you either learn from what happened to your people…. and become strong…or at least try….

            Or you remain in the gutter forever….

            There is no judging … but there is no excuse for not understanding… or attempting to.

        • SomeoneInAsia says:

          Did Churchill pay India any compensation for the Bengal famine he caused?

          Just wondering…

        • Kim says:

          The endless mass firebombing of civilians is not a war crime? The starvation of millions by blockade was not a war crime?

        • SomeoneInAsia says:

          QUOTE:***Churchill despised the Indian (Hindu) caste system, above all the idea of Untouchables: he thought it was criminal and inhuman, and he was right.***

          I suppose we should likewise give modern China the thumbs-up for ‘liberating’ Tibet from a repressive theocracy that enslaved her people for centuries…

          • Fast Eddy says:

            Churchill must have been conflicted….

            Surely he would have noticed that colonialism was the ultimate cast system? On one hand you have the Brahmins (British) — and then you have the nig…gars… (his word – not mine).

            I am surprised his head didn’t explode …

            The damage he did continues to this day…. when you have respected leaders espousing the rancid beliefs that he did…. they percolate through the masses… and they become established ‘truths’…

            And once that happens — it is very difficult to un-indoctrinate…..these become learned attitudes that get passed down to children …. in a never ending cycle of poison…..

            I would enjoy an hour in a room alone with that pudgy pc of sh it…. I am sure he would not have approved of my slav/french genetic structure…. since I would be considered inferior … I should be allowed to bring along a baseball bat…. to even things up a bit…

            The more I think about this character… the more I despise him… he is the post fat p ig for so much of what ails the world…. a weak, arrogant pri ck who pisses on everyone but his aristocratic mates.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        Shall we dismiss the Holocaust a mistake as well… and get over it … I look forward to the first statue of Mr H being unveiled in Germany!


        • Fast Eddy says:

          I really don’t think Churchill gets enough credit for his actions.

          Afterall, he is one of the greatest mass murderers of all time.

          And most people are not aware of this.

          He deserves more.

        • Kim says:

          I think you mean “Holohoax”. After all, Churchill did not see fit to mention it in his account of the war. If 6,000,000 had indeed been killed by the odious Germans, you would think he would see fit to mention it.

          By the way,where are all of the bodies of the millions that supposedly died in that event? And how were they killed?

          And where is the documentation? The Germans are notoriously officious, yet no one has ever produced even a single scrap of paper to support that story. Even though every death in a camp was in fact recorded and THOSE records exist! Typhus was the great killer. How could that be?

          The gas chamber story is ludicrously unbelievable. Have you ever seen a drawing or image of how such a gas chamber would work, be emptied, be prepared? You would think that for dramatic purposes this is something Steven Spielberg would dwell on. Yet, oddly, he did not. Not a single shot of either the “gas chambers” or of the “ovens”. Because to try to show them on film would demonstrate just how ridiculous the entire story is.

          And the incineration. A modern crematorium requires almost two HOURS to incinerate a body to ashes. How did the Germans manage to do that to 6,000,000 under endless bombing and under siege? Where did they get the fuel? What fuel was used?

          A silly story that only the most entirely brainwashed and uncritical people could possibly believe.

          • if we’re into holocaust denial now (and I expected it to reach this level of silliness)—I’m out of this discussion

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Very dogmatic…. when one considers how this story has been leveraged by the Z’s every since…

              Accuse them of burning up Palestinians with phosphorous … and you are anti-sem itic…. the Howlacost is quickly evoked… to shut up any critics.

              How convenient… and ironic… considering the founders of Is rael … provoked the Howlacost

              I would not be surprised if they intended to do that…


              Sacrifice people (including Joooos sometimes) when necessary

            • Fast Eddy says:

              The full list

              * Place our agents and helpers everywhere
              * Take control of the media and use it in propaganda for our plans
              * Start fights between different races, classes and religions
              * Use bribery, threats and blackmail to get our way
              * Use Freemasonic Lodges to attract potential public officials
              * Appeal to successful people’s egos
              * Appoint puppet leaders who can be controlled by blackmail
              * Abolish all rights and freedoms, except the right of force by us
              * Sacrifice people (including J…..ooooos sometimes) when necessary
              * Eliminate religion; replace it with science and materialism
              * Control the education system to spread deception and destroy intellect
              * Rewrite history to our benefit
              * Create entertaining distractions
              * Corrupt minds with fil….th and pe…..rversion
              * Keep the masses in poverty and perpetual labor
              * Take possession of all wealth, property and (especially) gold
              * Use gold to manipulate the markets, cause depressions etc.
              * Introduce a progressive tax on wealth
              * Replace sound investment with speculation
              * Make long-term interest-bearing loans to governments
              * Give bad advice to governments and everyone else

          • Karl says:

            My grandmother told me the only time she ever saw her father weep was after he got back from the war and he got drunk and described the German camps they liberated. For what it’s worth……

          • doomphd says:

            i visited Dachau, located just outside of Munich, when there for a conference in 2015. they hosted the prototype gas chamber at Dachau. i’ve been in it and took pictures. the room had heavy gasket-sealed steel entrance and exit doors. the gaskets are now gone. the so-called shower heads were embedded into the ceiling–most had been removed by souvenir hunters. outside, there were chutes to drop the Zyklon B from canisters, where it reacted with water to produce the cyanide gas. twin coal, then natural gas heated cremation units were in an adjacent room, where they also hanged prisoners from the rafters. two older cremation units were located in another building close by.


            • Fast Eddy says:

              I don’t doubt people were gassed…. the question is how many… 6M seems implausible.

              If you had two choices:

              Death by gas courtesy of Mr H

              Death by starvation courtesy of Mr C

              Which would you choose?

          • Fast Eddy says:

            I visited Auschwitz a couple of years ago … and I was surprised at the small scale of the place… particularly the gas chambers….

            I understand that this was not the only camp… however to process 6M people would surely require far more infrastructure than I saw…. literally hundreds if not thousands of these camps?

            And … it is my understanding that the people interned at these camps were primarily there as slave labour…. and that when they were no longer fit to work they were terminated.

            Anyway…. the narrative is that 6M were murdered… Churchill apparently did nearly that number in India…

            Therefore if there is a hell… then Churchill is most definitely down their throwing coal on the fire along with Pol Pot, Mr H… Genghis… and the many other World Champion Mass Murderers of History (this is one belt I do not possess…)

          • zenny says:

            I have seen 2 of the camps in Poland and was convinced lots of people were killed with factory speed…They had slave labor.

            • Fast Eddy says:

              My understanding is that these camps were primarily slave camps…. and those that could not longer perform… were gassed…

              Now if I am Don Draper… I am spinning this to the advantage of my client… and riding the story for decades … with reinforcing reminders from the likes of Spielberg… to ensure nobody forgets…

              I am inflating numbers as well…

            • i thought this nonsense would die down….but in a last—probably futile attempt to put this peddling of evil to rest, i would make the following points:

              a few days ago, in OFW, somebody made a comment, that his mother had only seen his father weep once—-when he was telling of the liberation of the death camps

              nobody—but nobody—makes up a story like that


              One might meet, say, a scientologist, or a flat earther, or a jwitness, or moon walk deniers and engage in good-humoured ”discussion” about their beliefs, because ultimately it is nonsense, irrespective of those cherished beliefs—in other words, they are ultimately harmless, just misguided, and hopefully will one day realise that.

              On the other hand, to engage discussion about the ”scientific facts” that ”prove” the earth is flat, or the moon landings actually took place is to elevate their beliefs to the level of something open to debate,…which it patently is not….. which must then be ”disproved” (or otherwise) by logic and science and discussions on an equal level of intellect.

              by doing that, one is offering the possibilty that they might be correct in their view of the world, against all known laws of physics, common sense and established proven evidence to the contrary.

              so one walks away from such ”discussion” as being demeaning to any normal level of intellect—it is simply not necessary to constantly ”prove” certain things from history or scientific information

              Apart from minor details, they are fixed…..but of course this is unacceptable, to those who must find untruth, to confirm their own version of ”truth”

              the Germans were nothing if not meticulous in record keeping.

              The name and location of each camp has been verified, as have the numbers passing through them, and the suppliers of the equipment used, names, times, dates and so on.

              In Germany itself, holocaust denial is illegal….for very goodreason—-the danger of it all rising up again

              All that material is there, and as immutable as the spherical earth, and footprints in moondust, despite the childlike ranting of the flat earthers or other misguided individuals seeking to make their voices heard for whatever reason.

              The people who witnessed all that are now few, and will all soon be dead.

              There will be no eyewitnesses left

              And as the eyewitnesses go, so we see the rise of the deniers—because no one can ”disprove” what they say—all a hoax you see.


              To revert back to my comment at the start—to imply that it was all a ”hoax”, is the gravest insult to those who had to do that in 1945.
              the 6 million who did not survive to be liberated suffer an ever graver insult from those who, for reasons best known to themselves. insist it never happened

            • Fast Eddy says:

              Ho ax takes it too far….

              I would question 1. the total numbers involved… and 2. if total genocide was the primary goal why did they not just queue these people up – men women and children — and exterminate them immediately — why did they maintain these camps — house them – feed them (a little)… and so on…. from what I understand they were standard concentration camps – with a difference – if you could not work – you were killed.

              Keep in mind NOT only Je ws lived in these camps — many slavs worked and were gassed…

              Anti-Slavism, also known as Slavophobia, a form of racism, refers to various negative attitudes towards Slavic peoples, the most common manifestation being claims of inferiority of Slavic nations with respect to other ethnic groups. Its opposite is Slavophilia. Anti-Slavism reached its highest peak during World War II, when Nazi Germany declared Slavs, especially neighboring Poles to be subhuman and planned to exterminate the majority of Slavic people.[1]


              Seems to me the J e w s simply had better PR …. and an agenda … they have been riding this for nearly a century now…

              You know what?

              Is rael operates off the premise that ‘might is right’ … they steal land and water… they shoot babies and children in the head – and laugh (one of my good friends is a former UN observer who has been in between Is raeli soldiers trying to stop such atrocities – and been told to f789 off)….

              Recall how that American girl was run over by a bulldozer some years ago trying to stop atrocities in Palestine?

              So regardless of the veracity of Steven Spewberg’s films….

              I really do not give a f789…. live by the sword – die by the sword….

              If 6M were killed…. well Steven Sp…. as the saying goes… f789 off. I am not interested.

              Is rael has its reasons for doing what it does… Germany/Hi tler had his reasons.

              Does not matter if we think they are valid….

              It sucks to be weak. Simple as that.

    • Fast Eddy says:

      Amazing that such a vile person could be held in such high esteem…

      I suppose it says something about Britain. And the British.

      Churchill is an embarrassment. A bit like OJ Simpson.

      • futhark says:

        As you know, most people are not very bright, and every country has its own national propaganda, and their populations grow up enveloped and surrounded by this propaganda. Your average Brit thinks (if s/he considers the matter at all) that we only got the Empire by being nice to people. After all, the Order of the British Empire is one of our highest honours. And yes, we do still have a tiny empire – Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Falkland Islands, etc.

      • Lastcall says:

        Being a US president is basically a hanging offence.

        • Fast Eddy says:

          And that is why Obama said it is time to move on … after the Bush war crimes…

          Because he knew full well that he was going to be ordered to commit same

  4. Third World person says:

    see the British rule on india i think India and Pakistan deserve having nuclear weapons

  5. Third World person says:

    one thing British empire failed in conquered the whole of afghanistan

    because afghans are very tough people to conquer compared to Indians

    • Karl says:

      I love Indian people. I love Indian food. I love Indian family loyalty. My wife is of Indian descent and my kids are half Indian. I even have an offshore employee in India. But when you consider that Michael Phelps has more gold medals than the entire nation of India…….let’s just say I agree the Indians are not the most physically tough people on the planet. 😂

      • Or perhaps they do not spend the time training for sports that give gold medals.

        • SomeoneInAsia says:

          Or perhaps they’re mature enough to think for themselves and have decided that they have no need to measure themselves by some yardstick the West came up with, such as how many gold medals they have.

          • Kim says:

            If they thought they could succeed at it, they would try. They ape everything the West does. Generally poorly.

      • doomphd says:

        when it comes to love of their food, i am an honorary Indian, and Indonesian.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        Or perhaps it’s not a priority….

        Keep in mind that all medal winners in the Olympics are using PEDs.

        • SomeoneInAsia says:


          • Fast Eddy says:

            Consider this …

            Ben Johnson — juiced – ran a 9.79 100

            Usain Bolt — clean??? — ran a 9.58

            The current world champ – Justin Gatlin – who has been busted twice for PEDS…. is now running FASTER (and supposedly clean) …. than when he was doping.


            Lance Armstrong never tested positive for doping in his entire career.

            Neither did Marion Jones….

            And they would have been tested hundreds of times.


            In 1992, physician, osteopath, and publicist Robert Goldman posed a question to elite athletes. He asked them if they were given the option to take a drug that would guarantee an overwhelming success in their sport, but cause their death in 5 years time – would they take it. The results were rather overwhelming; more than half of the elite athletes that were questioned answered yes. This became known as “Goldman’s Dilemma” and the experiment was repeated several times:

            Gabe Mirkin: Elite runners – 50%+ Yes.
            Bob Goldman: Combatant power sports – 50%+ Yes.


            Most PEDS will not kill you — certainly not withing 5 years of taking them…. Arnold took steroids for years…

            Another thing … do not mistake slightness of build for being clean…. Lance Armstrong was on a diverse cocktail of drugs from steroids to HGH …

Comments are closed.