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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (73805)	6/13/2010 4:42:11 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Respond to of 74559

Yes, economics works like that. <China and India is taking over resource rich countries > That's why the British Empire took over so much - great economic and intellectual impetus bringing hordes of local yokels into the globalized economy. Meanwhile, it's a mistake to think of China as becoming the world power. <I think the consensus here is that economic growth is the key to becoming a rising power. > Where is the greatest economic growth in the world? It is not in China. It is in cyberspace. While cyberspace does not have geographical borders, that does not mean it does not have a community of interest. Community of interest is what drives power. Taking over countries rich in resources is part of economic and therefore political power, but resources are less and less a big deal in the globalized cyberspace realm. In the early 1970s when I joined the oil industry, oil and the later stages of the industrial revolution were a very big deal. Now, oil is a technological monster is decline. As Sheik Yamani used to say, the stone age didn't end for lack of stones and the oil age won't end for lack of oil. In my personal life, oil is now very much an also-ran. Al Gore still uses vast amounts but he's exceptionally greedy. Some people still think of out space as the frontier. It is minor. Nobody is going to Mars. The most they could do is go into orbit. Unlike going to the Moon, going to Mars is a vast undertaking with a launch from the surface of Mars involving a much greater gravitational force and atmosphere to overcome than that of the Moon [zero atmosphere and a little gravitational field]. universetoday.com It is NOT an easy undertaking to even land on Mars, let alone get off it again back to Earth. universetoday.com Even getting there is pointless. There have been visits to Mars by robots and they didn't show any nice locations such as Bali. In space, there is nowhere to go. The cosmos is simply too big for travel on mechanical devices. Getting anywhere would involve permanent departure with nowhere to go. Arriving at the nearest star, only 4 light years away, is quite a journey and the number of welcoming planets there would be nil. Hunting around the cosmos for somewhere to go would find a big trip with no point in going. We are designed for life on Earth. Perhaps in a million years it would a good idea to build permanent habitats for biological creatures, but it's much more likely that consciousness and sentience will evolve to suprasomatic existence. It's not as though any humans will be going anywhere. Just as dogs were bred from wolves, anybody that does go will bear only a passing resemblance to the current crop of humans. For now, cyberspace and genetic engineering are the frontiers. They will be the big deal and will not be based on geographical borders. China might be big in resources and might even take over a bunch of countries. That's 19th century thinking. Mqurice