You know, I am so disgusted right now that I am going to get on a Harley and change the air in my head! Maybe I will stop at the Iron Horse and see Helment Dave and the regulars.

To cite Oscar Wilde:
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

And again,
Moderation is a fatal thing... nothing succeeds like excess.

And yet again,
We are all of us in the gutter.
But some of us are looking at the stars.

Cheers! Enjoy the ride!

well the bank we[+ one adult child] use is on some short lists for failing . i closed out savings there as a precaution 6 mos. ago & tomorrow get most checking $ out[wife's check goes there for now] & will open an account at another. over 25 yrs. w/ em.

clearest sign to me re my bank was stock down over 90% YTD .

today CNBC analyst said, 'we can't recommend putting $ under u'r mattress"...

also NBC analyst 'oh FDIC has 60 billion & if that's not enough u have the full force of the US gov. backing u'r account..'

Would that 65 be in "new" dollars or old dollars?

No-you have to give them a special label that intimidates the mark. SIVs (structured investment vehicles) is a good one. Sounds really intelligent and technological, like financial engineering. Actually anytime you can get words like "structured" or "engineering" in the title you are on the right track. You want your scam to sound very complex-Greenspun was the master at this garbage.

"The link to the Nicene Creed is, to be mild, ill-advised."

But nonetheless, in the context of the post, interesting. I tend to abhor dogma--I appreciate this example of the tragedy it sometimes leads to.

Excellent points all, SamuM.

My feeling, however, is that if demand were to take a sudden nose dive, OPEC would curtail production in an attempt to defend some floor price.

Furthermore, I believe that they would be successful.

Afterall, between 1979 and 1985 OPEC did get its act together and reduced production from approximately 32 million BOPD to 17 million BOPD. At that time, however, it just couldn't overcome the combination of a flood of new production hitting the world markets from Russia, Mexico, the North Sea and Venezuela and decreased world demand from 67 million BOPD to 58 million BOPD (1979-1983). Because I have managed to convince myself that we have reached non-OPEC Peak Oil, I don't see things playing out this time like they did in the 1980s.

When two arguments lead to the same conclusion, in this case the vitalists and the materialists conclude production isn't going to increase, sometimes both are right. The vitalists have a legitimate argument concerning the motivations of producers, even if they don't acknowledge PO. As they point out PO is not necessary in order to predict a supply crunch. And as the materialists point out, if PO has been reached, then whatever the motivation supply will decrease. IMO, we have reached a point where both processes have come into play. A complete understanding of the world requires both interpretations be used appropriately.

This is not to ignore the other meaning of vitalist in this thread, which is the spread of magical thinking. But it also true that one can be a psychologist or and economist, and still be realistically dealing with the human part of the world, even if many ignore real world physical limitations in their theory.

shargash,

I certainly didn't mean to impugn all the posters here on TOD. Gosh, people come here from all sorts of political, philisophical and relgious backgrounds. And the service that TOD performs is invaluable.

The argument between the Vitalists and Materialists is actually a very old one. It started with the advent of the Renaissance. Up until that time the Vitalists--i.e., theologians--held sway. But then concepts like reason, rational thought, empiricism, objectivism and scientific materialsim started to take hold, which all got rolled up into a larger philosophical framework called Modernism. Today scientific materialism has become one of its dominant creeds.

Perhaps one of the best modern-day critiques of Materialism is given by Daniel Yankelovich in his book Coming to Public Judgment: Making Democracy Work in a Complex World. As he explains, one of the flaws of Modernism is:

...the elevation--almost worship--of science, technology, and expertise at the expense of other values... It has gained a dominant position in modernism because it has proven so efficacious in permitting those who master its modes of knowing to exercise a great deal of control over the human environment. This capability has given humanity more control than it has ever had in human history over the ancient challengs to the human habitat--reliable sources of food, shelter, clothing, a stable environment in which to raise children, warmth, light, comfort, entertainment, health care, security against enemies, longevity, a fixed social order, and, when basic needs have been satisfied, the indulgances of individualism.

The same idea is expressed more concisely by Jacques Barzun: "[W]hen by a combination of science and finesse, useful inventions are created and benefit the common life, the public is doubly convinced that science has a monopoly of truth."

An early critic of Materialism was Max Weber. He questioned its spiritual failings. As Yankelovich explains:

Instrumental rationality is the systematizing, objectifying, and technicalizing mentality that dominates industrial culture. Weber saw the growth of instrumental rationality as the master key to modern history, and he did not like it. His fear was that the dynammism of this world view would ultimately destroy quality of life in Western civilization. At one point in his writings he describes this effect as "an icy-cold, polar night." He predicted that it would shape the social character of humanity so adversely that the typical individual would become a "heartless expert, a spineless pleasure seeker."

Materialism experienced another crisis following WWII. Disillusionment came about when science and technology were used to perpetrate mass murder and genocide on a scale never before imagined.

I believe that Materialism may now be facing another crisis, this time not triggered by those turning its achievements towards evil, but by men of good intentions. More specifically, I believe science and technology may have reached their limits to control the environment for human benefit and comfort. But even more alarming, good intentions may end up having negative, unforseen and extremely destructive consequences, such as global warming.