Comment 5736

By David (anonymous) | Posted March 06, 2007 at 02:01:35

Heinberg is one of the most refined torch carriers for this problem today, along with Matt Simmons. They perhaps dilute slightly from apparently doing well with book sales, although the quality of the writing and research returns most of that loss.

I believe it has been made very clear there is no alternative to oil which can maintain lifestyles and consumption at the present levels. With the US dollar so utterly dependant on maintaining the consumption, it is painfully obvious that either scaling back oil consumption or utilizing other feeble attempts to replace it will have to result in massive changes of lifestyle, massive depreciation of dollar hegemony, and massive economic reductions, with the latter two feeding on each other. I anticipate an elasticity due to the need of people to cope with the price with any other form of sacrifice in order to still make it to work - and we are probably building in that mode right now, considering the recent drop in household balance sheets below the zero line. Then at some point, maximum coping power will be exceeded by a large enough percentage of the lower income that business for the higher income will collapse, rendering the whole country to the same level of economic poverty virtually overnight. Energy and present levels of economic participation are way too interwoven into the success of every business for any to succeed without it, especially once the dollar becomes worthless. All the incentive for anyone to go to work will be gone, including the people who keep the power plants running.

But ahead of that I believe we are presently seeing the US attempt to support it's debt through control of the oil prices at the highest level affordable, allowing the Petrodollar recycling to take over support where other countries and our own economy are failing. The lack of civility in their worldwide approach is indicative of the desperation to prop the dollar. Going into Iraq to steal the oil for the US may have at least been noble, even if criminal. But it is clear that the objective was to turn off the flow to raise the price to save the dollar, then use that oil tap to help balance the world needs at that high price as their actions in other dollar-support efforts such as attacking Iran destabilize the world supply - basically the Iraqi oil becomes their tool to allow other attacks without totally losing the economy back home. But that attack will certainly raise oil prices initially, which again will flow right back to the US with Petrodollar recycling - further helping the dollar's position, along with the hegemony of gunfire.

If I am correct, support of the US dollar is far and away the #1 objective of the warlords, for if that fails, the price and availability of oil no longer matters much. And by supporting the dollar this way, it is clear that the govt is saying the debt has gotten too far out of control for anyone to support it through regular means. They have given-up on their own country, and quickly alienating past avenues of support worldwide. I can't see how war can be sustained forever, yet that seems to be the position the US has gotten themselves into. Is there a way out of this?

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds