China as a world power

POSTED BY: Khyron
UPDATED: Sunday, August 30, 2026 17:10
VIEWED: 6575
PAGE 3 of 5

Quote:

---

You said we are now, at this moment, moving away from Oil.

---

No I said its on its way out, then I clarified in my response and said that any one can observe the finitness of the resources will cause people to look for altenratives (And indeed several altenratives have been found and are continue to being researched... their just not comparatievly sound economically... yet).

Quote:

---

We are, at this moment INCREASING our demand for Oil, therefore at this moment we are not moving away from Oil, we are becoming more dependent on it, despite the prices currently going up. It really is as simple as that.

---

Yeah bitching about syntax is stupid. I'm sorry you continued to be misinformed on my meaning even after I clarified it in the previous response.

Quote:

---

An important line here is "the higher the factor cost of using it up..... The less people will want to use it..... ". You can not want to use something all you want, but if you have no choice you have no choice.

---

Actually in the long term people do adapt. Guess what, if year after year, you can't afford fuel, you'll take the bus, the train, if that dosn't work, you'll have no choice but to relocate your job if its to far away..... but by then infastructure of the altenratives (whatever it may be) will have been estalbished or demand to be established....

Quote:

---

But reality/science does conform to your ability to forecast we'll suddenly get a whole new societal/manufacturing/fuel/transport infrastructure within the time period forecast for peak Oil (some forecasts put it in the next decade)?

---

I should piont out the theory for the oil peak is also dubious, but lets assume its totatlly accurate, the US has peakce 2 decades ago and the world will follow within the next decade... its simple arithemetic, if oil starts to cost 7 - 8 bucks a gallon and all of a sudden those electric cars are cheaper, your going to want to have eletric cars and get rid of your obselete capital (the gasoline car); more eletctric cars will create more demand for electric fueling depots, that means enterprising individuals will open more since its not proftibale to do so and/or older firms will convert......In the long term, no captial is fixed.... I mean I"m not using anything beyond principles level micro theory, because analysis of this situation dosn't require it; unless we have hard data... But you havn't provided any so I can't comment.

Quote:

---

Let me put it like this, in the US every one calorie of Food requires ten calories of Oil. Firstly just taking Oil as a fuel:

---

the demand for organic foods is increasing. Further, the US has an absurd yield surplus for farming. In any event, I'm sure your right we won't find any other thing that will allow us to increase yields just as petroleum does. How silly of me to think that.

Quote:

---

There are a few experimental prototypes but these would have to be commercially viable at the time of peak Oil, people can't eat less, no matter how much economics wants them too.

Food storage devices such as refrigerators are made from Oil, made in factories powered by Oil, and run on electricity derived from Oil.

---

The only way to prove taht we're all going to starve to death is to show the data of the actaul yield effeicny based on the petrol fertilizer... I don't know much about this, but if you have the data feel free to share it.

Quote:

---

We can't simply use less it doesn't work like that in the real world, in an economics text book perhaps but not the real world. We have to find an alternative to ALL of Oils uses, some alternatives exist yes but not for all applications.

---

I'll await the data for this claim.....

Quote:

---

The laws of supply and demand alone are not enough to prevent an economic meltdown.

---

Really? How did you reach this profound conclusion? By reasoning in your head?

Quote:

---

Add to this prices rising staggeringly in the 70's with the Oil crises. Demand did not decrease,

---

Please show the study that shows that ne

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MarginalRevolution:

Quote:

---

http://www.forbes.com/business/2005/09/28/wef-gci-finland-cx_pm_0928gc
i2005.html]

Now let's take a little quote from this supposed index:

Quote:

---

All indexes reflect their components. The WEF's GCI has three main legs: the overall quality of a country's economy at the macro level (e.g., budget surpluses, good; deficits, bad); the state of its public institutions, which includes such measures as the independence of the judiciary and the level of public-sector corruption; and the level of its technological innovation.

---

So this isn't even actually based on GROWTH as defined by Economist.

---

Growth isn't everything, piracy has wonderfully fast growth, the fitness of an economy for business has far more factors than how hard you push your workforce. You should study more.

Quote:

---

"State of its public institions" how do they measure that exadtly?.... The vitality of the court system has very little to do with real GDP growth...

---

Do you want to protect your interlectual property? Do you want contracts you enter into to be enforced by law? Do you want to operate in a free market or one that goes to the guy that offers the biggest bribe?...... scratch that you're American, you have the best government money can buy..... Do you want your competitors to win contracts more on corruption than merit?

If so then all of that depends on the vitality of the court system. I can get great productivity by kidnapping kids of the street at gunpoint and working them in sweatshops, but if I lived in a place where I can get away with that I can be murdered in my bed just as easily.

Rule of law is important to business.

Quote:

---

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1999/07/art3full.pdf#search='Labor%20per%2
0capita'

US productivity is the highest in the world, so is our labor participation rate. Further, even your link admits US technoglocial innnovation is the hgihest, and we arn't even at a Pareto Optimal point... the US gov't meddles enough with the economy and directs research that the market is not totally able to behave naturally. If the US were to totally liberalize, it would be that much higher.

---

Yes Americans like GDP/Capita even though it's a worthless statistic. I suppose it's like Baseball, easy to win a world series when only Americans play. GDP/Capita includes various other factors including direct foreign investment, so everytime China or Europe buys a US company your GDP improves. Congratulations.


[quote}

The only argument you can give me is that the4 Solow Growth model does not link economic well-being with productivity; but since you don't nkow anyo of the theory you deem to criticisize I'll leave it at that.

---

Know why they are called models and theories? Because they are not verifiable enough to be used as laws. Even I have come up with an economic theory in my time that explains things just as well as any other. Economics is a social science like sociology and should be seen as such.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

No, you are an animal, your purpose is to reproduce your genes, that is why your genes made you -- the same way a plant makes a flower. Everything else you do in life is to support that function. The money you make, the posessions you amass everything else you do is just there to support that purpose. Few things you build, own or create in your lifetime will still be here in 1000 years except your decendants. If you made $200B and died childless, you will be a loser.

---

According to the defintion of biological fitness. I'm glad you took Bio 101, but that is merely saying "my defintion is better then yours."

---

Glad you admit it.

---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Oh dear, it seems someone was unable to answer my questions or points so they just threw their toys out of the pram and went for the string of fallacious insults response.

It's called cognitive dissonance my friend, look it up.

This ends any sort of discussion.

But anyway:

Quote:

---

No I said its on its way out, then I clarified in my response and said that any one can observe the finitness of the resources will cause people to look for altenratives (And indeed several altenratives have been found and are continue to being researched... their just not comparatievly sound economically... yet).

---

Nope you merely repeated what you said before. You've now changed what you've said and gone for the insult, but whatever gets you though the night yeah .

Quote:

---

Yeah bitching about syntax is stupid. I'm sorry you continued to be misinformed on my meaning even after I clarified it in the previous response.

---

Hmm, bitching about syntax, yep that's funny. You're a funny guy, you know that?

Quote:

---

Actually in the long term people do adapt. Guess what, if year after year, you can't afford fuel, you'll take the bus, the train, if that dosn't work, you'll have no choice but to relocate your job if its to far away..... but by then infastructure of the altenratives (whatever it may be) will have been estalbished or demand to be established....

---

Of course, its that simple... in an economics text book. If you had any knowledge of anything outside of Economics you'd know its not that simple in the real world, but whatever.

Quote:

---

I should piont out the theory for the oil peak is also dubious, but lets assume its totatlly accurate, the US has peakce 2 decades ago and the world will follow within the next decade...

---

Do you even know what peak Oil is? The Peak Oil bell curve has been seen time and again when Oil wells have dried up.

Quote:

---

I mean I"m not using anything beyond principles level micro theory, because analysis of this situation dosn't require it; unless we have hard data... But you havn't provided any so I can't comment.

---

Have you? Have you backed up a word you've typed with a single piece of evidence? The answer you're looking for is no.

Quote:

---

Really? How did you reach this profound conclusion? By reasoning in your head?

---

Well it beats the hell out of taking something you read in an economics textbook and applying it to every vista of Human existence, wouldn't you say? Oh actually no you wouldn't, never mind.

Quote:

---

SO you're prepared to show me proof that no alternative exists to petrol fertlizers?

---

There's plenty of alternatives, but they aren't used because they have a lower yield for a higher cost.

Add that to the previous points and what do you get? Come on you're an economist you can work it out.

No?

Okay, you get more expensive food. Oh but that's right, supply and demand always works under all circumstances, so everyone will find alternatives to food. Good to know.

Quote:

---

Right, prove this statement..... Your doing what you accuse me of doing, except whereas I have viable theory you just have words. I also note that all you have done is claim to "work in real life" but at hte same time ommited any real life examples that abides by your claims. In any event, since you have no theoretical freamwork you couldn't do the former anyways.

---

I thought it was common knowledge actually (I note you still haven't provided that proof I asked for, nor for anything else you've said BTW ). Here's a clue, History. Doesn't matter much which part it's all over it. And hell if you went off and read a book other than an economics textbook for once it would do you good.

I apologise for assuming I was speaking to someone who'd had a well rounded education, that is someone who has learnt something outside of economics, know what I'm sayin' .

Quote:

---

That is not a theory... that's merely a statmeent. There is no such thing as "Capitalist Manifesto" But what should I expect fr

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME