Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The coming US dollar crisis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: benwood who wrote (23743)	10/22/2009 1:31:46 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71406

i think you misunderstood me.

To: benwood who wrote (23743)	10/22/2009 2:08:21 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71406

to elaborate a little bit: the "glaring omission" i was referring to was Bernstein's omission of fossil fuel inputs as a primary factor leading to the explosion in productivity which began in 1820. consider this: this productivity growth is so extreme compared to the rest of human history that it demands an explanation. as c2 notes in post #23717 on this thread, Bernstein explains this productivity explosion in terms of four inputs: land, labor, capital, and knowledge. he writes: At some point in the nineteenth century in Europe and in the U.S., a "virtuous circle" came into being: Advances in technology begat improvements in productivity, which, in turn, begat increasing wealth, which then begat yet more capital to fuel still more technological progress. As the industrial economies increasingly employed highly productive capital and knowledge inputs, growth became self-sustaining and unstoppable. so for Bernstein it is really all about technology and increased efficiency of capital formation in a virtuous circle. my belief, which i think is consistent with yours and others familiar with peak oil, is that people since 1820 aren't that much smarter than all the humans before us. rather, the main thing that distinguishes the post-1820 period is, people started using fossil fuels to replace/enhance human and animal labor. early on in the industrial revolution it was all about coal, but then it expanded to petroleum and all the advantages liquid fuels offer for transportation.

To: benwood who wrote (23743)	10/22/2009 10:52:03 PM
From: Activatecard	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71406

I'm glad you are not concerned about carbon in the atmosphere. Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 – not so thick wattsupwiththat.com Cheap energy is good. It means wealth and a high standard of living. Expensive energy is bad, it is poverty. I root for cheap energy. The cheaper the better. James Kunster is a depressing fellow. I hope he does not live in suburbia. It must be difficult for Kunster to drag himself out of bed every morning. What's the point. Fossil fuel is not a finite resource, at least not in your lifetime.