![]() | Saudi Arabia - production forecasts and reserves estimates | The Oil Drum | EROEI Short #3: Price-Estimated EROEI | ![]() |
143 comments on DrumBeat: August 31, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
143 comments on DrumBeat: August 31, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Men argue; nature acts.”
—Voltaire
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Be sure to read Mish's take on this. Really good.
Bush Moves to Aid Lenders
snip
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/
Mish's take is just like what the MasterCard commercials say, "Priceless". John
Prudentbear has less humour:
Just wait, the other shoe will soon drop. The dollar will decline in value, and the cost of imports will go up. TPTB must have decided that higher prices for Chinese junk at Sprawl-Mart & fuel at the gas pump would probably generate less flack than a further decline in house values.
But hey the "official" U.S. debt limit stands at 8.989 trillion as of yesterday and no talk of raising the limit nor is there any media talking head to ask, "Where's the Beef?". John
By those clocks numbers, we will be at 9 trillion dollars by this time next week or sooner. And seeing as we can never pay off this debt, what in the real world is going to happen to the USA in 20 years?
The cost of China sourced goods will go up only if they show some restraint in currency manipulation by buying less dollars and letting the yuan float, as all other major currencies do. So far they have refused to do either. So worry not - that $25 DVD player may soon go to $15.
I'll confess up front I'm a physicist, not an economist. It always troubles me when I hear that spending of one sort or another is going down because consumers have to spend their money elsewhere. The paradox I see is that the money still goes somewhere. It doesn't vanish. Or does it?
Say a person borrows against equity and buys a new big screen TV. They now have to pay that money back through higher monthly payments.
Say that ARM rates go up by the same amount so that person doesn't buy the big screen TV. They just make the payments. However, the lender gets more money and they turn around and either use that money to lend to other people to buy homes or they take it as profit and go out and buy a Mercedes or a yacht.
Why is one different for the economy than the other?
Unlike energy, money can be spontaneously created or destroyed without changing forms (being exchanged for goods or services.)
When you buy something (like a house) and then its price drops, the money representing the difference in price is destroyed.
If we take your example forward a few steps:
The ARM rates go up by a huge amount. Millions of borrowers stop buying all products except what they need to live.
Most people work for companies that don't provide what people need to live. Nobody is buying their products anymore. Millions of borrowers who work for these companies are laid off.
Unemployed people can't afford the ARM payment anymore. They try to sell the house, but nobody else has cash either. This causes house prices to plummet, which reduces people's ability to get out of house debt by selling the house. Eventually many default on their home loan.
The lenders at first make a lot of money. The relatively few people who make yachts or Mercedes do OK as a result. As more and more borrowers default, however, the lenders begin to lose a lot of money, too. Because now the houses are worth much less, and the original borrower won't ever pay off the original debt.
What you are describing is exactly what has been happening in the US economy which is transitioning into a rentier economy in which 10% of the population owns 99% of the assets. The other 90% of the population own next to no assets and remain indebted to the property owners.
From a political economy point of view, the 10% will have effective control of all apparatus of government and will manage it to serve their interests. This is already taking place. The 90% keep running faster and faster just to stay in place and fail to understand why their effort is fruitless.
This economy is far, far different from the Jeffersonian ideal in which each citizen was a property holder and each therefore had a vested interest in the governing structure. The US is transitioning back to the very political economy that it rebelled against 200 off years ago.
The wealthy buy luxury goods and services so if you offer these goods you will do well. The wealthy also invest for the greatest return and if this turns out to be in India or China then that is where the investment flows, the factories get built, the employment increases, and the exports originate.
There is nothing inherently wrong with any of this. We are just re-arranging the chemical bonds to come up with a new molecule that contains all the original elements but which functions in a different way. This is the position of a moral relativist.
On the other hand, 10% of the population are making out like bandits and fleecing the other 90% out of their wages, their property, their communities and their avowed form of government. From the perspective of a true conservative this is an abomination, a call to arms, grounds for an attack on the ruling class and a return to the status quo.
The $800 trillion dollar question bubbles up when this state borrows, and borrows, and borrows. At a certain point the creditors have as much or more influence as the citizens, perhaps more. The creditors observe the 10% moving their funds offshore and do likewise. The result is a major economic collapse in which the 90% suffer while the 10% again make out like bandits.
What remains to be seen is how long a rentier society can continue when a significant number of the 90% own guns, many of the 10% do not, and most of the military -- including the officers -- originate from the 90% rather than the 10%.
Historically, rentier societies featured a disarmed proletariat/peasantry, and an officer corps drawn from the propertied classes. This was how social control was able to go hand-in-hand with economic control.
When there is too much of a disconnect between the ruling class and the officer corps, then the thought inevitably occurs to the officer corps that the ruling class could just as easily be THEM, and that there really is nothing to stop them from taking over. There is a lot of historical precedent for this, too.
The 10% may make out like bandits, but then again bandits make out like bandits -- until they swing from the end of a rope.