SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Castle
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (2914)3/2/2004 8:04:07 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 7936
 
You're assuming that there would be no replacement for the oil. That's not what's being proposed.

1 - Almost any replacement for oil also results in CO2 emissions. Nuclear power doesn't but its expensive, unpopular and won't easily replace things like the gasoline used in cars.

2 - Even if there was a perfect replacement fuel it would be expensive to develop a new infrastructure for it.

It was the end of the Roman Republic and the disappearance of representative government on earth for almost 1,700 years, until the English Civil Wars in the 1600s. That is the reality we are confronting today—offering up our democracy in propitiation to an Empire for Oil.

Nonsense.

You just made the argument up above. Without oil, we're dead in the water

1 - What I quoted and called nonsense was that the US was becoming something like the Roman empire.

2 - Oil won't disappear quickly. If you ignore the up and down volatility its likely to gradually go up in price (in inflation adjusted dollars). As it goes up people make adjustments to consume less oil.

What do you think will happen when shortages develop?

The price goes up, which causes demand to go down and increases the supply of substitute sources.

What do you think brought down other civilizations?

All sorts of different things.

Do you really believe we are invincible?

I think we are not becoming an imperial monarchy or a dictatorship.

How long do you think you would stay solvent if YOU had a severe drug dependency?

There are more differences then similarities between a drug dependency and our need for oil. An addict often takes drugs that cause him harm or even death. It might harm us if oil gets more expensive but using the oil is helping us not harming us. Also we use oil because it makes economic sense to use oil not because we have an actual addiction to it. If the price of a drug goes up a lot the addict will still want it. If tin 50 years the real price of oil is 10 times as high as it is now then we will use less oil. If the price of oil reached and stayed at or above 1.5 to 2 times what it is now then a lot of alternative fuel sources start to make sense.

And how long do you think the oil will last? There's talk that Saudi Arabian production is maxing out. Meanwhile demand is growing. How much time do we have left......30, 50, 100 years?

30 years from now oil will probably cost more possibly even a lot more, we might be producing less of it then we are now. 100 years from now oil will still be around even if it no longer meets a large percentage of energy needs.

I think the best and most efficient way to adjust to changes in supply and demand of fuels and energy sources is to let the market sort it out. Its likely to do a better job then the government.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News