Sometimes a new message can't be heard or a new idea understood because compelling reasons for change are not apparent enough. If the old ways of doing things still bring enough money into bank accounts, keep cars filled with gas, roofs over heads, lights on with the flip of a switch, and plates heaped with food, then why bother doing anything differently?

But with Thomas Friedman, popular promoter of globalization, questioning the prevailing economic paradigm and reports that India is doing better than other countries because it is less connected to the global market and has a strong locally-oriented agrarian economy, I thought this essay written nearly a couple of years ago could finally resonate.

What do readers think? Are you finding that resistance is weakening when you try to bring up subjects that were formally considered wacky? Is disillusionment an opportunity? Will everybody now hang on my words because I have basically made some great calls over the past few years, as in: "Get out of the stock market because it is a bubble," "Energy and food prices are soon going to skyrocket," and "Don't permit that new suburban subdivision because you will have trouble selling new homes soon?"

Introduction

Here are a few of my predictions: Many trends of the last century or more, made possible by cheap and abundant energy sources, are going to be reversed. These trends include population growth, centralization of political and economic power, vastly increased quantity of global trade, and mass tourism.