PDA

View Full Version : Is society on the verge of collapse



ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 09:08 AM
I don't want to start a flame war. This is not a political discussion. This is a mere discussion on an issue which I have noticed from a lot of my peers. In an attempt to explain it (I love studying the human mind :-) ) I've noticed the same behavior from an increasing number of adults from every generation.

Growing up with what most counselors would call a hard life (to me they were learning experiences) but to one particular <which shall remain unnamed due to unrelenting anger with his advice> I never felt anything, I lied to myself my whole life, and I had multiple personalities. :-) which sent me into a spiraling depression and got me angry at everyone around me. Because logically, if those were true, then I was just some big phony who would never amount to anything and my hopes and dreams of getting past this "hard life" were all lies too. Anyway, before this guy's advice, I had dealt with people from various walks of life and had helped them get through some of their worst problems. Suicidal thinking, depression. . . Just a bunch of the darker side of humanity. I looked at the world with aspirations, hopes, dreams, and goals. I tried to help others get them who needed them. But seeing what I had, I also tried to hold onto the beauty in life. Because beauty comes from the living, and the living always fade.
What I've noticed about several of my peers, and even generations before ours, society tends to be pushing more and more towards work your butt off for what you want in life, and less and less for cherish what you have in life. I've noticed so many of my peers turning into complete butt holes because they would be working their butts off and forget something important to someone else and then look at that person in amazement when they got upset about it. Like. . . What's your problem??? (family birthday's and holidays)
I know that's how a lot of parents treat their children back when I was growing up. In an attempt to give their children everything, they often leave out, the one thing the child wants (Time with the parent).
If I haven't lost you yet, I bring this up, b/c I remember what school was like. Every day we're told "You can be anything you want to be. Just work your butt off to get there.". I know this isn't the 50s, 60s, or even the 80s but there seem to be less and less family oriented classes in school, and more of a work your butt off and forget about having a family. Schools are about pregnancy prevention, They're not about how to take care of yourself afterwards. They constantly teach you how to understand this and that, but not how to stop and take a breather and look at the world around you. It's all about you getting here, or there. I guess now I've made my point, I'm just wondering what you guys think. Without bringing in politics, has humanity became to self involved, or is it just me?

KiwiNZ
November 3rd, 2011, 09:36 AM
Life is not a free ride. If you wish to exist do little. If you wish to live, work for it.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 10:02 AM
Life is not a free ride. If you wish to exist do little. If you wish to live, work for it.

I didn't say it was a free ride. Allow me to phrase this differently, Did your grandparents who spent their entire life plowing the soil do little when they still made time for your parents at night?

That is another thing I dislike about people working their butts off recently. If someone takes time to enjoy the scenery, they must be a slacker??? I recall several times hearing my uncles talk about the beauty of the land on our farm. I also know people who work in the public sector who don't bust their butts (to the point of forgetting everyone) and still accomplish just as much as the people who do. In fact, they do the same jobs.

EDIT: There was actually a guy my social studies teacher let me listen to in HS who said that the world was coming to a social collapse. He said, all through history, when nations came to the point where it was all about the individual and no longer about the group, the civilizations just vanished. It's actually what inspired this post.

Grenage
November 3rd, 2011, 10:08 AM
Horses for courses.
Life is not not fair.
Some people are luckier than others.
You get what you work for, unless you don't.
Different people have different values.

The world won't end because people stop admiring the sunset.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 10:09 AM
Horses for courses.
Life is not not fair.
Some people are luckier than others.
You get what you work for, unless you don't.
Different people have different values.

The world won't end because people stop admiring the sunset.

Read my last edit.

KiwiNZ
November 3rd, 2011, 10:09 AM
When we were agrarian based to eke out a life was possible easier for the 40 years you existed for.

Life is more complicated, the needs are greater and the need for money greater. Therefore to live a decent life one must earn a reasonable income.

When we were agrarian we worked hard but it was more physical, many of us now for very hard but it is largely mental work.

Bottom line if you want luxuries get off ones butt and earn the cash to obtain it. Nothing wrong with that.

Grenage
November 3rd, 2011, 10:15 AM
Read my last edit.

While there are risks of financial collapse, social collapse is more than a little unlikely.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 10:28 AM
When we were agrarian based to eke out a life was possible easier for the 40 years you existed for.

Life is more complicated, the needs are greater and the need for money greater. Therefore to live a decent life one must earn a reasonable income.

When we were agrarian we worked hard but it was more physical, many of us now for very hard but it is largely mental work.

Bottom line if you want luxuries get off ones butt and earn the cash to obtain it. Nothing wrong with that.

I didn't say there was. But we as humans aren't meant to live without social ties, yet that is where we seem to be headed. With the desire to have the biggest and greatest. It honestly has nothing to do with being on one's butt. One can work and still take in the sunshine. One can work and still take the time to cherish their 5 year old daughter before she becomes 6. One can work and still celebrate their mother's birthday before she dies because she 97 years old and no one knows how long she has left. That is what I'm talking about. When people forget why their 97 year old mother is upset at them for not coming to their birthday, that's a problem. I know demand is high and work is a valid excuse, but it's not a valid excuse to be angry at them for it if you're not working at the time and they get upset about it. If you become so wrapped up in what must be and what life demands, you lose the entire purpose of living in the first place.

Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Angelo, Leanardo Da Vinci, Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, Darwin, none of them lazy, all of them disciplined, I can guarantee you that none of them wanted to be like anyone else, they decided to make their own paths and follow them (else they would've winded up like everyone else). They saw things that no one else did, b/c they took the time to look for them. Apple is selling (mainly and appearance) not b/c steve poured his life into something which he just decided to work to, but b/c of something he related to other people with. When you forget to take the time to look where you're going and where you've been, you get stuck in where other people are telling you to go and you forget where you wanted to go in the first place.

whatthefunk
November 3rd, 2011, 10:33 AM
There is nothing stopping you from stopping to smell the roses while all the people around you work themselves to death.

Also, civilizations dont vanish when they become self involved.

Ronniety
November 3rd, 2011, 10:35 AM
Calm down son. I'm class of 69. We go through these crises now and again. Many of us know just how ugly this sort of thing can get and are working to prevent it. Nothing impossible to live with has happened yet. We're in for 20 to 30 years of deflation and depression but we've been through that before and we can get through it again. Its incredibly annoying but that's just the way things are. Its not worth killing over or ignoring the wisdom of the founding fathers to try something else in a panic.
Take your girl, a blanket and a bottle of wine someplace private and watch the sunset while celebrating life.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 10:53 AM
Calm down son. I'm class of 69. We go through these crises now and again. Many of us know just how ugly this sort of thing can get and are working to prevent it. Nothing impossible to live with has happened yet. We're in for 20 to 30 years of deflation and depression but we've been through that before and we can get through it again. Its incredibly annoying but that's just the way things are. Its not worth killing over or ignoring the wisdom of the founding fathers to try something else in a panic.
Take your girl, a blanket and a bottle of wine someplace private and watch the sunset while celebrating life.

LOL. I'm calm :-). I'm just a little on the fritzie side today :-) I love philosophical discussions. I guess from the mental perspective more. I'm just trying to say, that in a world of work, there can be enjoyment too, and hope. I've just seen too many people working to a specific goal in life and not taking the chance to enjoy it along the way. Somewhere in there, they work so hard towards the goal, that they forget who they are. :-( I mean what's the point in living, if you can't enjoy something every now and then.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 10:57 AM
There is nothing stopping you from stopping to smell the roses while all the people around you work themselves to death.

Also, civilizations dont vanish when they become self involved.

The guy on the tape was pretty convincing. He had a PHd in sociology or something to that effect. But honestly, even if we didn't, that tape just inspired this post. Along with recent events too. It's just puzzling to me at the moment how one generation can go from, you're working and enjoying it, to you're working and if you're enjoying it, you're a bum. That's what's puzzling and intriguing me right now. :-)

whatthefunk
November 3rd, 2011, 11:14 AM
The guy on the tape was pretty convincing. He had a PHd in sociology or something to that effect. But honestly, even if we didn't, that tape just inspired this post. Along with recent events too. It's just puzzling to me at the moment how one generation can go from, you're working and enjoying it, to you're working and if you're enjoying it, you're a bum. That's what's puzzling and intriguing me right now. :-)

I bet this kind of thing goes in cycles. People overwork for a decade or two then realize that they are missing the good parts of life and society adjusts itself to allow people more leisure. Then after a few decades, people feel lazy and start to want to work hard again.

It also probably has a lot to do with the current economy. A lot of people are feeling pressure from it and this makes people work harder.

satanselbow
November 3rd, 2011, 11:30 AM
To answer you original question: Collapsing? No.

Evolving might be a better term - although by definition evolution is a continuous process.

It is impossible to explore this sort of argument further without getting political - which therefore make it out of bounds on this forum... quite rightly IMHO.

The developed world has yet to adjust it's ability (or more truthfully it's will) to breed in line with it's ability (or more truthfully it's will) to feed.

Civilisation has made a lot less progress than it would have you believe.

Impossible to take it much further without looking into specific social / economic policies over the last 160 years that have made today's situation possible and inevitable.

Just my 2p...

Docaltmed
November 3rd, 2011, 12:02 PM
Is society on the verge of collapse?

Certainly. We're only about 4 meals away from anarchy. As an individual, you're only a few heartbeats and a couple of breaths away from death. Not just society, but life itself, is incredibly fragile.

So what do you do? Make sure you've got four meals in the pantry. Try to make sure your neighbor does too, because his well-being helps ensure your own, economically and physically. When it's time to work, go to work, when it's time to rest, then rest. Chop wood, carry water.

Lucradia
November 3rd, 2011, 12:05 PM
The Illuminati (that's a real dictionary word) have a few things to say to you if you think society is collapsing.

Docaltmed
November 3rd, 2011, 12:16 PM
The Illuminati (that's a real dictionary word) have a few things to say to you if you think society is collapsing.

I'm a Freemason. When I speak, the Illuminati listen.

Paqman
November 3rd, 2011, 12:45 PM
What I've noticed about several of my peers, and even generations before ours, society tends to be pushing more and more towards work your butt off for what you want in life, and less and less for cherish what you have in life.

On the contrary, our lives are much less work than our ancestors. Just doing the daily chores to keep yourself warm, fed and clean were a lot of labour for previous generations.

Compared to people only a few generations ago we have it seriously easy. They had to work their butts off, we don't.

Bölvağur
November 3rd, 2011, 12:50 PM
:lolflag::lolflag::lolflag::lolflag:

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 01:07 PM
I bet this kind of thing goes in cycles. People overwork for a decade or two then realize that they are missing the good parts of life and society adjusts itself to allow people more leisure. Then after a few decades, people feel lazy and start to want to work hard again.

It also probably has a lot to do with the current economy. A lot of people are feeling pressure from it and this makes people work harder.

That's quite possible. :-) That would work with the society collapsing model too though LOL. With every collapse there would have to be birth to newer and greater societies (not saying that's what happens, just that in any case, your idea would hold true)

Studying people is a passion of mine. :-) The way they all interlink with each other is kind of a hobby for me. So questions like this aren't meant to be a burden but a social exercise.

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 01:10 PM
On the contrary, our lives are much less work than our ancestors. Just doing the daily chores to keep yourself warm, fed and clean were a lot of labour for previous generations.

Compared to people only a few generations ago we have it seriously easy. They had to work their butts off, we don't.

I grew up on a 100 acres of farm land :-). It's harder yes, but you still get to enjoy the scenery every day.

Gremlinzzz
November 3rd, 2011, 01:19 PM
Calm down son. I'm class of 69. We go through these crises now and again. Many of us know just how ugly this sort of thing can get and are working to prevent it. Nothing impossible to live with has happened yet. We're in for 20 to 30 years of deflation and depression but we've been through that before and we can get through it again. Its incredibly annoying but that's just the way things are. Its not worth killing over or ignoring the wisdom of the founding fathers to try something else in a panic.
Take your girl, a blanket and a bottle of wine someplace private and watch the sunset while celebrating life.

The girls to busy studying or working to survive.The blanket is over priced.the wine will get me busted for public drinking and i cant see the sunset because of all the smog.Welcome to 2011:popcorn:

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 01:22 PM
I decided to do some independent research.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/27/health/main2519593.shtml
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101685456

Grenage
November 3rd, 2011, 01:26 PM
Is it independent research if your info is other people's reporting? ;)

ki4jgt
November 3rd, 2011, 01:31 PM
Is it independent research if your info is other people's reporting? ;)

Technically, yes and no :-) Yes, because it's independent of the original question and was started at a different time and it's away from the rest of the group. No, because even though I did research (for the study) I didn't actually dig in and deep research. LOL

Dragonbite
November 3rd, 2011, 01:48 PM
Y'know... they translated some heiroglyphics that said essentially "what's wrong with kids these days?"

One culture goes down, another one rises up so long as there are humans to rise up (not going into the sci-fi "if apes were to rise up cultured" and such).

Chinese Dynasties, Egyptian Pharaohs, Rome, Czars/Kings and Queens, they've all fallen in one way or another... but we still know about them. We still learn of them, their rise and their fall.

At the time, and at that point of our technological advancement those eras were what worked. Those which didn't you don't hear about or see any lasting evidence other than a footnote from some professor looking for something different out of interest or to make a name for themselves.

Look at computers; IBM (mainframes) => Microsoft (desktop) => Google (web) => ??? (???)! Oh, how technology has changed. To the mainframe users, their technology is collapsing into the nooks and cranies of the technology world.

As for personal "stop and smell the roses" there is nothing wrong with it. Does it go against what other people think? Maybe, but it is stronger of the person to follow their own beliefs rather than others.

Yes, hard work is necessary but at the same time YOU are in charge of YOU! If that means that YOU feel compelled to work-work-work then that is what is right for YOU. If YOU feel like you need to take a break, then YOU should do it (just don't do it out of laziness).

Knowing what YOU want, and knowing about reality, will help you decide your course of action that moves you towards your goal realistically.

When I was young, I had so much time to spend doing what I wanted to do, but I had no money to do it. Now I am older and have money to do what I want to do and no time to do it.

Life is balanced.

If something teeters off one side, eventually it will swing the other way.

F.G.
November 3rd, 2011, 02:39 PM
I don't want to start a flame war. This is not a political discussion. This is a mere discussion on an issue which I have noticed from a lot of my peers. In an attempt to explain it (I love studying the human mind :-) ) I've noticed the same behavior from an increasing number of adults from every generation.

Growing up with what most counselors would call a hard life (to me they were learning experiences) but to one particular <which shall remain unnamed due to unrelenting anger with his advice> I never felt anything, I lied to myself my whole life, and I had multiple personalities. :-) which sent me into a spiraling depression and got me angry at everyone around me. Because logically, if those were true, then I was just some big phony who would never amount to anything and my hopes and dreams of getting past this "hard life" were all lies too. Anyway, before this guy's advice, I had dealt with people from various walks of life and had helped them get through some of their worst problems. Suicidal thinking, depression. . . Just a bunch of the darker side of humanity. I looked at the world with aspirations, hopes, dreams, and goals. I tried to help others get them who needed them. But seeing what I had, I also tried to hold onto the beauty in life. Because beauty comes from the living, and the living always fade.
What I've noticed about several of my peers, and even generations before ours, society tends to be pushing more and more towards work your butt off for what you want in life, and less and less for cherish what you have in life. I've noticed so many of my peers turning into complete butt holes because they would be working their butts off and forget something important to someone else and then look at that person in amazement when they got upset about it. Like. . . What's your problem??? (family birthday's and holidays)
I know that's how a lot of parents treat their children back when I was growing up. In an attempt to give their children everything, they often leave out, the one thing the child wants (Time with the parent).
If I haven't lost you yet, I bring this up, b/c I remember what school was like. Every day we're told "You can be anything you want to be. Just work your butt off to get there.". I know this isn't the 50s, 60s, or even the 80s but there seem to be less and less family oriented classes in school, and more of a work your butt off and forget about having a family. Schools are about pregnancy prevention, They're not about how to take care of yourself afterwards. They constantly teach you how to understand this and that, but not how to stop and take a breather and look at the world around you. It's all about you getting here, or there. I guess now I've made my point, I'm just wondering what you guys think. Without bringing in politics, has humanity became to self involved, or is it just me?

i think on some level i agree with you. coincidentally i was talking about this issue just last night, with a friend. he was speculating that we would probably be happier if we were born into amazonian tribe, where the social group was smaller, the expectation of life more limited. something like Rousseau's 'Noble Savage' (the reality of which would actually be a nightmare).

i do feel that general anxiety about life can make it difficult to relax and enjoy what you have. I certainly feel that my expectations and ambitions in life are higher than they would naturally be, out of nurture. and this is not always a good thing (and certainly isn't always a good thing for everyone).

regarding a few post giving the 'weights and measures'/'swings in roundabouts' argument. while in general i do agree, the recent post regarding the BBC population analysis indicates that issues like population size and overcrowding are not recurrent issues, and i believe that this is likely push the trend more toward highly-pressurised, over-competitive societies developing where more people are generally unhappy. in an episode of QI i saw the other day Mr Fry indicated that the happiest societies are those with the least economic disparity between rich and poor (in as much as you can test for happiness), which makes sense to me. In the UK, at any rate this disparity has been growing in recent years rather than shrinking. In an over populated world wont this gap inevitably get bigger?

anyhow, i'm probably just scaremongering, but i feel this is food for though and we could see over the next 40 years some sci-fi dystopic issues arise.

Bandit
November 3rd, 2011, 02:44 PM
Life is not a free ride. If you wish to exist do little. If you wish to live, work for it.

AMAN Good Reveron! :popcorn:


On the other hand, I good relaps back into the darkages would really help clear up my credit score..

whatthefunk
November 3rd, 2011, 02:49 PM
On the contrary, our lives are much less work than our ancestors. Just doing the daily chores to keep yourself warm, fed and clean were a lot of labour for previous generations.

This is actually untrue. Pre-industrial peoples worked a lot less than we do.

IWantFroyo
November 3rd, 2011, 02:55 PM
I agree. People work to get somewhere, and never stop to smell the roses. Also, when you don't try to smell the roses, you forget about them. I was severely depressed at one point in my life. Although I had a loving family, a good reputation, and an Internet connection (;)), I felt like something was missing. I didn't get out of my rut in the road until I started looking around, and paying attention to my surroundings. There's a lot of beauty in this world we don't notice.

Now, I try to love my life and see the beauty in the world as much as I can. I take walks in the evening just to see the sun set and the stars come out, and I try to enjoy these moments as much as I can.

[/rant]

drawkcab
November 3rd, 2011, 03:01 PM
You're talking about two things:

1. It's wishful thinking to believe that industrial society won't collapse. The industrial/capitalist paradigm of solving all economic problems by growing production and consumption is not sustainable. We are rapidly consuming the thermodynamic base of our society. Shifting to a combination of alternative energies will help ease the problem but there's no silver bullet replacement for fossil fuels even when we combine them. Couple that with the fact that we are simultaneously destroying the ecological base of our society and the picture looks worse. Will society collapse suddenly and abruptly? Probably not. Nevertheless industrial society will likely decline and decomplexify slowly over the next 150 years as the reproduction of human life becomes more and more difficult. The financial collapse and resource wars of the last decade are just the beginning. All of this is to say that civilization is about to go through the most radical transition in history.

2. The effect of industrial capitalism on human being is to alienate human beings from nature, from others and, finally from themselves. Marx (estrangement), Thoreau (quiet desperation), Marcuse (one-dimensional man) all problematized alienation (don't worry it is an ethical/ontological issue, not a political issue). Their concern was essentially correct, that a capitalist order structured by class struggle (between those that own the means of production, i.e. capitalists, and those that labor on behalf of capitalists) inevitably shapes man into a vicious producer/consumer who, at the end of day, values the accumulation of property more than nature, living well, other human beings or even their own happiness. Since human beings in industrial capitalist orders are necessarily conditioned to respond to economic directives, the economy becomes their cosmology, their fundamental reality. Hence it is impossible for them to critically engage industrial capitalism, to consider the hypothesis that it is neither sustainable (ecologically and thermodynamically) nor desirable (ethically and democratically). The end result is wishful thinking, the belief that it is in fact both sustainable and desirable (i.e. "what else would we do?").

Ironically enough, I am writing this as my students take an exam in an institution that is supposed to be educating them. But the truth is that this is not about educating (i.e. developing the human being to their highest intellectual and moral potential) so much as it is about instructing (i.e. developing their capacity to integrate into the economy as successful producers/consumers). What is even more ironic is that we are preparing them for an economy that will likely not exist in 20 or 30 years while giving them no capacity to critically transform their social, economic or political realities.

Thewhistlingwind
November 3rd, 2011, 03:04 PM
Not necessarily collapse but:

1. I am worried that we will get stuck in the malthusian trap again. (Where new technology just results in more people, not better quality of life.)

2. I am also worried that we will see an economic collapse. Just because an economy is extremely damaged, it doesn't mean the society falls apart. (Example: Zimbabwe)

3. And of course theres the standard stuff like nuclear war to think about.

Ric_NYC
November 3rd, 2011, 03:09 PM
"Society" is not made of glass... it doesn't brake... it stretches like rubber... I think.

:D

F.G.
November 3rd, 2011, 03:14 PM
@drawkcab I think tension and alienation are natural states for humankind. I don't think that there is any way away from this. (also i think that this thread is veering dangerously close to the electric fence of politics).

@thewhilstlingwind i agree, also your username suggest you have no problem appreciating the wonders of nature.

drawkcab
November 3rd, 2011, 03:41 PM
@drawkcab I think tension and alienation are natural states for humankind. I don't think that there is any way away from this. (also i think that this thread is veering dangerously close to the electric fence of politics).

The difference is that, at other times, economic values faced genuine opposition from other countervailing, alternative values. In medieval europe, for example, economic forces were in tension with the values of Christianity. Individuals were given a choice (albeit a false dilemma perhaps) of choosing between the pursuit of their material well-being or their spiritual well-being. Nowadays, however, capitalism has subsumed Christianity the extent that we have consumer Christianity--i.e. just shop around for the church that best affirms what you already do/believe. In other words, religion no longer operates as a countervailing force or alternative to economics. It no longer really challenges us to become more than bourgeois, self-satisfied producer/consumers. Religion has become an ideological lynchpin that actually enables and supports the prevalence of economic values. The weekly hour or so of communal guilt alleviation which preceeds football watching allows us to return to our economically defined roles with the assurance that, since the world is already fallen and human beings exiled, God affirms and even rewards our alienation.

satanselbow
November 3rd, 2011, 04:04 PM
It's becoming like a Sociology 101 in here today... surprised no-one's said "John Locke" yet :D

dpny
November 3rd, 2011, 04:10 PM
If society doesn't collapse I've spent all this money zombie-proofing my house for nothing.

Ric_NYC
November 3rd, 2011, 04:49 PM
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9017/paidvacationdays.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/708/paidvacationdays.png/)

drawkcab
November 3rd, 2011, 04:54 PM
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9017/paidvacationdays.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/708/paidvacationdays.png/)

lol!!

drawkcab
November 3rd, 2011, 04:55 PM
It's becoming like a Sociology 101 in here today... surprised no-one's said "John Locke" yet :D

I was about to but that'd take like 5 pages to explain. ;)

Dragonbite
November 3rd, 2011, 05:06 PM
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9017/paidvacationdays.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/708/paidvacationdays.png/)

I'm moving!

Ric_NYC
November 3rd, 2011, 05:08 PM
i'm moving!

lol

Ric_NYC
November 3rd, 2011, 05:14 PM
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5580/47568847sag2011enlarge.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/20/47568847sag2011enlarge.png/)

F.G.
November 3rd, 2011, 07:00 PM
i really like these graphs, really says alot about different cultures (surprise, surprise the French take the most holidays, i think they employ one of the largest portions of their population in the civil service, about a third).

@drawkcab i personally believe that the medieval church was principally driven by the economics of power and money. and the theologians/theology were essentially secondary. i'm sure you're aware that the templars were the first international bankers and they also practiced usury. most pilgrim routes across Europe essentially acted as ideological barriers as their geography suggests they might (eg the santa maria del compostella rout across the top of Spain, to protect against the Moors). If the principal aim had been non-capitalistic social redistribution of wealth then the vatican would not be nearly so ornate. pardons and indulgences were boought and sold like any other commodity (i point you in the direction of Chaucer's 'Pardoner's Tale').
anyway, just my opinion...

to all ye Locke fans out there, read the Leviathan, Hobbes is clearly the superior philosopher (i feel like all the Americans in the room have frozen in shock at this comment).

del_diablo
November 3rd, 2011, 07:13 PM
I guess I like this thread.

nerdybrunette
November 3rd, 2011, 07:21 PM
When you forget to take the time to look where you're going and where you've been, you get stuck in where other people are telling you to go and you forget where you wanted to go in the first place.

I couldn't agree with you more.

This happened to me in college, actually. Everyone told me to do one thing, and I did it. Now, I wish I had done another. It's too late, though.

I definitely think society has become WAY too under-concerned with cherishing life, savoring every single moment, and doing what makes you happy - instead of doing what makes you "look cool" or gives you an "advantage" over others. It's almost like suddenly we're in a competition with everyone else. When did that happen?

I'm not advocating for "laziness" - I'm just saying, I don't want to ever regret not spending enough time enjoying my life when I'm on my death bed.

satanselbow
November 3rd, 2011, 07:33 PM
i really like these graphs, really says alot about different cultures (surprise, surprise the French take the most holidays, i think they employ one of the largest portions of their population in the civil service, about a third).


And are largly union led...



...the medieval church was principally driven by the economics of power and money.

You forgot to mention fear...



Hobbes is clearly the superior philosopher

Can't agree that Hobbes is "superior" - there was certainly affinity between Locke's / Hobbes' musings though from somewhat contrary sides of the fence ;)

KiwiNZ
November 3rd, 2011, 07:39 PM
I didn't say there was. But we as humans aren't meant to live without social ties, yet that is where we seem to be headed. With the desire to have the biggest and greatest. It honestly has nothing to do with being on one's butt. One can work and still take in the sunshine. One can work and still take the time to cherish their 5 year old daughter before she becomes 6. One can work and still celebrate their mother's birthday before she dies because she 97 years old and no one knows how long she has left. That is what I'm talking about. When people forget why their 97 year old mother is upset at them for not coming to their birthday, that's a problem. I know demand is high and work is a valid excuse, but it's not a valid excuse to be angry at them for it if you're not working at the time and they get upset about it. If you become so wrapped up in what must be and what life demands, you lose the entire purpose of living in the first place.

Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Angelo, Leanardo Da Vinci, Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, Darwin, none of them lazy, all of them disciplined, I can guarantee you that none of them wanted to be like anyone else, they decided to make their own paths and follow them (else they would've winded up like everyone else). They saw things that no one else did, b/c they took the time to look for them. Apple is selling (mainly and appearance) not b/c steve poured his life into something which he just decided to work to, but b/c of something he related to other people with. When you forget to take the time to look where you're going and where you've been, you get stuck in where other people are telling you to go and you forget where you wanted to go in the first place.

Those who know me know that past events have made me keenly aware of the pleasures of life and the small things that count.
They also know that I am very aware of the hardships and curve balls that life can fire.

I believe that, life is good but you have to go get it, it is not pre-ordained.

Once we lived in small villages with collective farming and hunting etc. We still do,except the village has changed. The work place is part of the village and we still work collectively. Some are the group gatherers others are the lone hunters that return at the end of the day. Same process different pictures.

Dry Lips
November 3rd, 2011, 08:52 PM
@Ric_NYC: This is completely off-topic, but I just thought I'd like to mention it
before I forget it again: Your avatar rocks! :popcorn:

Shpongle
November 3rd, 2011, 09:12 PM
No , unfortunately we are not that lucky.

ki4jgt
November 4th, 2011, 12:39 AM
@ric_nyc: this is completely off-topic, but i just thought i'd like to mention it
before i forget it again: Your avatar rocks! :popcorn:

+ 1

drawkcab
November 4th, 2011, 12:45 AM
@drawkcab i personally believe that the medieval church was principally driven by the economics of power and money. and the theologians/theology were essentially secondary. i'm sure you're aware that the templars were the first international bankers and they also practiced usury. most pilgrim routes across Europe essentially acted as ideological barriers as their geography suggests they might (eg the santa maria del compostella rout across the top of Spain, to protect against the Moors). If the principal aim had been non-capitalistic social redistribution of wealth then the vatican would not be nearly so ornate. pardons and indulgences were boought and sold like any other commodity (i point you in the direction of Chaucer's 'Pardoner's Tale').
anyway, just my opinion...

No, I actually agree with all this. But I still think that the substantial difference is that the espoused values and cosmology of the Christian church, operating perhaps at the local level, were still at odds with the economic and political values that animated the organization as a whole. It is really in the last 200 yrs that economics has displaced both religious and scientific reality as the fundamental reality according to which most in the developed world live their lives whether they admit to it or not. I can't help but imagine what Jesus, who threw the money changers out of the temple, would think of Joel Osteen or any of the other pastors out there who preach the gospel of material success.


to all ye Locke fans out there, read the Leviathan, Hobbes is clearly the superior philosopher (i feel like all the Americans in the room have frozen in shock at this comment).

Most Americans don't understand the Lockean basis of their Constitution. That said, I agree with you that Hobbes is the better, more consistent philosopher even though most reject him on the basis that they find his conclusions unacceptable.

The thing that's most significant about Locke, I think, is that it marks the place in time that property/wealth becomes the prime public value. This is to say that, publicly, all interests must be convertible into property interests given the fact that all other values and conceptions of the common good have been regulated to the private sphere. This solved the problem of how a religiously plural polity can survive in the modern world but it does so by pre-empting the possibility that the polity might be criticized in terms of values other than property values. Thus the founding fathers can complain about taxation w/out representation (i.e. taxation as slavery) while still holding slaves (i.e. slaves are my property and essential to wealth acquisition).

ki4jgt
November 4th, 2011, 12:54 AM
You're talking about two things:

1. It's wishful thinking to believe that industrial society won't collapse. The industrial/capitalist paradigm of solving all economic problems by growing production and consumption is not sustainable. We are rapidly consuming the thermodynamic base of our society. Shifting to a combination of alternative energies will help ease the problem but there's no silver bullet replacement for fossil fuels even when we combine them. Couple that with the fact that we are simultaneously destroying the ecological base of our society and the picture looks worse. Will society collapse suddenly and abruptly? Probably not. Nevertheless industrial society will likely decline and decomplexify slowly over the next 150 years as the reproduction of human life becomes more and more difficult. The financial collapse and resource wars of the last decade are just the beginning. All of this is to say that civilization is about to go through the most radical transition in history.

2. The effect of industrial capitalism on human being is to alienate human beings from nature, from others and, finally from themselves. Marx (estrangement), Thoreau (quiet desperation), Marcuse (one-dimensional man) all problematized alienation (don't worry it is an ethical/ontological issue, not a political issue). Their concern was essentially correct, that a capitalist order structured by class struggle (between those that own the means of production, i.e. capitalists, and those that labor on behalf of capitalists) inevitably shapes man into a vicious producer/consumer who, at the end of day, values the accumulation of property more than nature, living well, other human beings or even their own happiness. Since human beings in industrial capitalist orders are necessarily conditioned to respond to economic directives, the economy becomes their cosmology, their fundamental reality. Hence it is impossible for them to critically engage industrial capitalism, to consider the hypothesis that it is neither sustainable (ecologically and thermodynamically) nor desirable (ethically and democratically). The end result is wishful thinking, the belief that it is in fact both sustainable and desirable (i.e. "what else would we do?").

Ironically enough, I am writing this as my students take an exam in an institution that is supposed to be educating them. But the truth is that this is not about educating (i.e. developing the human being to their highest intellectual and moral potential) so much as it is about instructing (i.e. developing their capacity to integrate into the economy as successful producers/consumers). What is even more ironic is that we are preparing them for an economy that will likely not exist in 20 or 30 years while giving them no capacity to critically transform their social, economic or political realities.

Those are some of the points addressed by the tape shown to our class in 2008. Along with addressing the fact that it has happened to civilizations before (several ancient civilizations were named). Although I don't believe in a social calapse (people will always be around there are just too many now to keep from bumping into each other.) I do believe in a structural calapse. That is what I'm afraid of. Millions of people under government collapse. I can only guess how that would turn out (anywhere from small religious communities in areas, to absolute anarchy in other areas. Each group having their own laws that they are free to enforce or deny)

drawkcab
November 4th, 2011, 01:04 AM
Not to hijack the thread, but consider how unintelligent the U.S. health care (non)system is in terms of how much we spend vs. how much we get when compared to our peer nations. I really don't understand why the primary questions isn't this: what is Norway getting right that we're getting so wrong?


Total Health Expenditure per Capita, U.S. and Selected Countries, 2008

http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/images/OECDChart1.gif


Total Health Expenditure per Capita and GDP per Capita, US and Selected Countries, 2008

http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/images/OECDChart2.gif

Growth in Total Health Expenditure Per Capita, U.S. and Selected Countries, 1970-2008
http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/images/OECDChart3_1.gif

http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/images/OECDChart10.gif

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/images/healthins.gif

The World Health Organization's ranking
of the world's health systems (2000)

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
40 Brunei
41 New Zealand
42 Bahrain
43 Croatia
44 Qatar
45 Kuwait
46 Barbados
47 Thailand
48 Czech Republic
49 Malaysia
50 Poland

fantab
November 4th, 2011, 06:16 AM
Interesting.

Is the society on the verge of collapse? Which society? I will assume it to be the Modern Western Society, which was created out of the Industrialization to suit Industrial structures, its values of consumerism and its reinvention of slavery based on the high morals of democratic ideals. Here workers are not owned, in the strict sense of the word, they are hired under contracts which are offered as a choice but is there one, really? In what kind of a societal setup is 'to work' is the highest ideal? Is there a choice? Is there any free choice?

This is the society BY the Private Masters and FOR the Private Masters. We don't know if THIS SOCIETY is on the "verge of collapse", what we do know is if its built it then eventually it will collapse. Bigger the structure greater the fall and its consequences. I would love to study/read about the psychological state of the Slaves in the pre-modern era. I doubt that they fared any worse then the today's "free" workers with choice. (By workers I imply anyone who works for some one else). Isn't it strange and ironic that we endeavor so damn hard to become one by going to college/universities, queuing up for job interviews, fighting amongst us for plump and or meager job offers? Doesn't all this give the impression that we are doing this out of our own volition? Are we?

This model is being emulated all over the world with an impish zeal in the name of progress and development. There is too much going on against this societal setup, something will give in... it has to. The Oil-Age is definitely coming to an end sooner than later... and with it will come the end of lots of things as we know it today.

If one is to equate the modern societal setup as Closed-Source then Societies should seriously consider the Open-Source Free(dom) model and build a society around it. Why not?

Ric_NYC
November 4th, 2011, 06:20 AM
@Ric_NYC: This is completely off-topic, but I just thought I'd like to mention it
before I forget it again: Your avatar rocks! :popcorn:


+ 1

;)

del_diablo
November 4th, 2011, 02:18 PM
But lets say "The West" finally collapses, just like the doomsday prophets says it will. Can we please sit down and define "The west" before that?
We all agree that Africa, South America, Mexico, Asia and Russia as well as Australia is not a part of it? I guess we can bicker over Australia, but its ignored enough to be left out, since its geographically far away from the rest of the word.

So basically "The west" is North America(USA and Canada) and quite a large portion of Europa, perhaps every single nation who attempted imperialism is to be charged guilty of belonging to this definition? We could still extend it to the members of the EU that has not been a part of the previous imperialism and colonization, just to get a rough definition.
So lets say USA collapses, because that is what is currently the issue. Why will Canada and EU collapse then? Canada might be dragged down due its geographical location, but still: Why will EU which is across a waist ocean fall down alongside North America?

Of course, there might never be a issue of collapse, just some other nation group deciding to out tech the rest of the world, IE China.

mips
November 4th, 2011, 02:34 PM
I'm moving!

You are gonna hate this but at one stage I managed to accumulate 120 days of paid leave! :biggrin:

I never really took leave and ended up with that. Rules changed and leave accumulation was gradually reduced to about 30 or 40 days. I cashed most of my leave in.

meh_phistopheles
November 4th, 2011, 03:20 PM
I decided to do some independent research.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/27/health/main2519593.shtml
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101685456

this is not proper research. the news, more often than not, is just fictional entertainment presented under the disguise of trustworthy information. if you're serious about what you're studying, you should be reading scholarly journal articles/books. see here: http://www.library.arizona.edu/help/tutorials/scholarly/guide.html

about your whole concern over society collapsing, i would say not to worry about something like that. nobody can predict the future really. if you think a certain society is worse than another, then figure out a way to move to the more desirable society and invest your taxes there. if you think something is wrong with the world, like the war, then get a job with some non-profit organization where the mission statement is to end the war. if you're dead-bent on theorizing over the conditions of society, then work your way through a phd program in sociology or philosophy and get a job in academia where you're paid to do that for a living.

that's my philosophy. it's very pragmatic. i've taken graduate level theory classes in sociology, and i'm not very fond of theorizing about stuff like this. admittedly, i was bad at theory, but i just feel like people have been complaining about something forever, and it just never ends. i don't mean to rag on theorists. i regard theory as more important than i understand it to be. i just don't really want to work in academia, is what it basically boils down to.

PuddingKnife
November 4th, 2011, 03:34 PM
Is society on the verge of collapse? I don't know. Let's ask this question instead:

Is infinite growth possible on a finite planet?

Paqman
November 4th, 2011, 03:48 PM
Is infinite growth possible on a finite planet?

No, but it's not at all certain that we're trying for infinite growth, or that we'll perpetually be limited to just this planet. It's highly likely that our civilisation will eventually have access to all the resources in the solar system, and projections are that our population will stabilise long before then.

del_diablo
November 4th, 2011, 04:21 PM
Is infinite growth possible on a finite planet?

Yes and no.
For each unit of currency you earn, somebody has to give that up. Be it from being denyed access in the first place, scams, or volunterely trading them in for resources.
That means you can not accumulate more than what the marked can support you accumulating. Once you reach the actual cap, the marked collapses or just changes fiat to resource or something else.
Now, "just keep on building", is fully possible to keep on doing to infinity.
Contrast to what corporations wants: To keep on eating and hoarding cash, until they have eaten the marked. While its not usual for a corporation to reach such a size: Its fully possible they will do so, and the situation is usually a "Too big to fail" scenario.

PuddingKnife
November 4th, 2011, 04:30 PM
If infinite growth is not possible, but our entire economic system, which is inherently tied to energy production, is set up to grow infinitely, then some sort of collapse seems inevitable.

We just reached 7 billion in our population. Before the advent of oil, the worlds population was 2 billion. Oil is obviously finite.

Paqman
November 4th, 2011, 04:36 PM
If infinite growth is not possible, but our entire economic system, which is inherently tied to energy production, is set up to grow infinitely, then some sort of collapse seems inevitable.


There are energy sources in the Universe that are so large that they are, for all intents and purposes, infinite. We're just not yet at a technological level that we can make good use of them. However, the pressure to switch from non-renewable to renewable energy is irresistible. We either do so or we fail as a civilisation.

ikt
November 4th, 2011, 04:37 PM
For each unit of currency you earn, somebody has to give that up.

I don't think that's true, as explained here via an analogy involving a printer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AvU2cfXRk

PuddingKnife
November 4th, 2011, 04:42 PM
There are energy sources in the Universe that are so large that they are, for all intents and purposes, infinite. We're just not yet at a technological level that we can make good use of them. However, the pressure to switch from non-renewable to renewable energy is irresistible. We either do so or we fail as a civilisation.

Sure, but we live on Earth. When all travel and food production is intricately tied to a quickly dwindling finite resource, it begins to matter less and less what is 'out there' in the universe, than what that means to our near future.

Paqman
November 4th, 2011, 04:50 PM
Sure, but we live on Earth. When all travel and food production is intricately tied to a quickly dwindling finite resource, it begins to matter less and less what is 'out there' in the universe, than what that means to our near future.

Even on Earth, the total renewable energy resource available to us is waaaaay beyond what we currently require, or will require for the foreseeable future.

The issue is how much of that is practically, economically and technically accessible. These restrictions are fluid, and can change with different priorities, new technologies and the relative prices of competing technologies. Simple economics would suggest that increasing scarcity of fossil fuels will drive the prices up and make non-fossil fuels economically more attractive. Although rising fossil fuel prices would also have the effect of making recovery of more of the fossil fuel reserves economically viable too. However, as you say, eventually there will be none more to dig up and sell. Personally I have absolutely confidence in the greed of humans to motivate us to find energy to sell to ourselves in their stead.

del_diablo
November 4th, 2011, 05:02 PM
I don't think that's true, as explained here via an analogy involving a printer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AvU2cfXRk

Its true, its just that it happens on such a large scale that its troublesome to fanthom.
For every 400 million dollars somebody earns, thats 1 dollar from each citizen in USA.
Now, they never had a chance to get their hands on it, because a lot of capital is just floating capital that keeps on circulating between large corporations.
This money is redistributed into wages and bonuses, which again is used to buy goods, which again changes hands.
For every unit of currency somebody earns, there is somebody who is not earing that. Its basically the limitation of "finite money".
Money is finite, but the actual value is inflated so that people can't just hoard money to use for later(think big corporation, and not normal consumer). And there is several tons of direct and indirect money regulation to keep the system from stagnating.

But the point still stands: Somebody has to give up their money in order for you to get hands on money. Be it trade for goods, property, scams, services, or anything.

ki4jgt
November 4th, 2011, 05:13 PM
this is not proper research. the news, more often than not, is just fictional entertainment presented under the disguise of trustworthy information. if you're serious about what you're studying, you should be reading scholarly journal articles/books. see here: http://www.library.arizona.edu/help/tutorials/scholarly/guide.html

about your whole concern over society collapsing, i would say not to worry about something like that. nobody can predict the future really. if you think a certain society is worse than another, then figure out a way to move to the more desirable society and invest your taxes there. if you think something is wrong with the world, like the war, then get a job with some non-profit organization where the mission statement is to end the war. if you're dead-bent on theorizing over the conditions of society, then work your way through a phd program in sociology or philosophy and get a job in academia where you're paid to do that for a living.

that's my philosophy. it's very pragmatic. i've taken graduate level theory classes in sociology, and i'm not very fond of theorizing about stuff like this. admittedly, i was bad at theory, but i just feel like people have been complaining about something forever, and it just never ends. i don't mean to rag on theorists. i regard theory as more important than i understand it to be. i just don't really want to work in academia, is what it basically boils down to.

I'm not worried about it. I could care less. Everything that begins has an end but I was at the time more concern about why people were just so work driven today, to me, it's just unnatural.

EDIT: and the news report makes reference to a scholarly study.
EDIT: also, about infinite growth/finite planet, If I remember correctly, someone said that the entire planet (humans) could live in a trailer park the size of Texas.

drawkcab
November 4th, 2011, 05:19 PM
Personally I have absolutely confidence in the greed of humans to motivate us to find energy to sell to ourselves in their stead.

I don't. If the market were actually free, we'd now be a lot further in terms of reconstructing our energy infrastructure over the last 30 years or so. The problem is that greed leads to manipulation of the market so as to keep oil prices artificially low. If this were to reverse suddenly, we'd be desperately behind on reconstructing our infrastructure and w/out the resources to do it.

Paqman
November 4th, 2011, 05:40 PM
The problem is that greed leads to manipulation of the market so as to keep oil prices artificially low.

???

The influence of the cartels like OPEC was to restrict supply in order to keep prices artificially high. Opening up new fields outside of their control has brought prices down, which is the free market working like you'd expect.

Mikeb85
November 4th, 2011, 06:45 PM
Its true, its just that it happens on such a large scale that its troublesome to fanthom.
For every 400 million dollars somebody earns, thats 1 dollar from each citizen in USA.
Now, they never had a chance to get their hands on it, because a lot of capital is just floating capital that keeps on circulating between large corporations.
This money is redistributed into wages and bonuses, which again is used to buy goods, which again changes hands.
For every unit of currency somebody earns, there is somebody who is not earing that. Its basically the limitation of "finite money".
Money is finite, but the actual value is inflated so that people can't just hoard money to use for later(think big corporation, and not normal consumer). And there is several tons of direct and indirect money regulation to keep the system from stagnating.

But the point still stands: Somebody has to give up their money in order for you to get hands on money. Be it trade for goods, property, scams, services, or anything.

Not true. Everyone of us actually loses worth whether we spend our money or not, through inflation. Central banks constantly print more money, increasing the total supply of money, but bringing the value of it down.

This theoretically would equalize wealth (as those who have alot of it lose it, and those making it make more), but because rich people invest in markets and poor people generally don't, it causes more disparity in wealth. Saving = losing money, because of inflation.

Mikeb85
November 4th, 2011, 06:51 PM
I do believe western society may be on the verge of collapse, or at the very least we're in for a huge change. What's happening right now is that because of the global economy, and surging 'emerging markets', wealth is basically being redistributed from Western countries, to emerging markets. The average wage is going up around the world, at the expense of those in North America and Europe.

A prime example is China - they became the world's largest producer of consumer goods through having cheap labour, but now they've peaked, and because of labour shortages wages are going up, the Renminbi has gained alot of value despite the Chinese government's regulation, and now China is shifting from just being a producer of goods, and is becoming a huge consumer of goods. India is following the same pattern, although they are currently very far behind China at the moment.

Mikeb85
November 4th, 2011, 06:57 PM
Another thing to keep in mind, and this brings us back to the concept of inflation and investment, is that we've become a spineless people. We work hard, but we don't work for ourselves. We don't take risks. Look at the riots in Greece and the 'Occupy' protests in various countries. While some protesters do have a political agenda, many simply are protesting the disparity in wealth we have in our society.

But disparity comes because most of society doesn't want to take risks - they are content to simply work for someone else, get paid, and go home. But as they are saving their money, they are losing it to inflation. Furthermore, economic growth HAS to come from the ground up. Entrepreneurship and small business is what really creates economic growth.

If the average person wants to help themselves, and if our countries want to grow, we need to encourage small businesses, and for the 99% to actually take a risk and invest in themselves.

As the old saying goes, 'Fortune favours the bold'

del_diablo
November 4th, 2011, 07:03 PM
Not true. Everyone of us actually loses worth whether we spend our money or not, through inflation. Central banks constantly print more money, increasing the total supply of money, but bringing the value of it down.

This theoretically would equalize wealth (as those who have alot of it lose it, and those making it make more), but because rich people invest in markets and poor people generally don't, it causes more disparity in wealth. Saving = losing money, because of inflation.

I didn't say that either, please read my post.
Inflation only exists to stop a saving speculation, as in hoarding and saving money to just profit on that. Thats the only reason why flation exists. If induviduals where "sane", there would be no inflation because nobody would sit down and hoard money to earn free money from it while stagnating the entire economy.
It has nothing to do with wealth equalisation, it only forces the bigger corporations to keep on spending their money in order to not lose anything to the inflation.
Taxes is actually a part of that game too, except that tax has to be spent, while inflation is creating free devaluated money.

PuddingKnife
November 4th, 2011, 08:49 PM
It's hard to argue against the idea that mankind's population growth from 2 billion in 1900 to 7 billion 2011 is a freight train tied directly to the availability of cheap energy.

That was the first part of the bell curve. Meanwhile, we've now reached 1 billion internal combustion engines around the globe. We've now reached the top of that bell curve, where the peak of oil production, intrinsically tied to how money works, begins to display it's effects around the globe. There is a particular country in the middle east that once claimed to hold a quarter of the worlds hydrocarbon energy reserves. That particular monarchy made, and continues to make a lot of money off of those reserves. And they are now the largest leaseholder of off shore oil rigs, an expensive and dangerous endeavor. It's solid evidence that the oil under the surface has reached a peak of production --hence the offshore rigs. If that country has reached its peak of production, then the world has.

What that means for society has yet to be determined. We should remember that money represents the ability to do work, while energy IS the ability to do work. When the energy begins to decline, how does that effect money? We live in interesting times for sure, but in an economic paradigm that demands constant (infinite) growth, the way of life of the first world seems to become increasingly unsustainable.

That's why I don't do too much thinking on the oil deposits on Mars.

beast2k
November 4th, 2011, 11:18 PM
No, we are evolving. Big difference.

Lucradia
November 4th, 2011, 11:41 PM
No, we are evolving. Big difference.

This is true, because humans didn't originally have double or even triple helixes. We had a TON more. So actually, we're re-evolving.

You may know that people with issues like Autism and ADD (Severe even) have a triple-helix mutation.

drawkcab
November 5th, 2011, 06:49 AM
???

The influence of the cartels like OPEC was to restrict supply in order to keep prices artificially high. Opening up new fields outside of their control has brought prices down, which is the free market working like you'd expect.

Until Reagan and Bush Sr. established a strategic relationship with Saudi Arabia to overproduce oil so as to artificially lower the prices. Had we not done that, there would have been more incentive to reconstruct America's energy infrastructure as with the Carter adminstration.

HappinessNow
November 5th, 2011, 10:14 AM
Until Reagan and Bush Sr. established a strategic relationship with Saudi Arabia to overproduce oil so as to artificially lower the prices. Had we not done that, there would have been more incentive to reconstruct America's energy infrastructure as with the Carter adminstration.

So I guess political threads/ post are allowed again in the cafe?

sffvba[e0rt
November 5th, 2011, 10:25 AM
So I guess political threads/ post are allowed again in the cafe?

No they are not.


Thread closed.


404