"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
There is no upcoming depression. That's wacko.....

I wish ....

Well, so do I but it's not going to happen in all reasonable likelyhood.
There's no evidence of something cataclysmic like that. The world
economy is relatively stable, certain the 1st world is in economic terms.
While there are major problems, India and Pakistan seem to be
headed in the right direction, at least not threatening each other on
a daily basis. China and Taiwan are not being beligerant. North Korea
isn't any more unstable than usual. The US and the rest of the 1st world
economies are generally doing ok.

What do you base that on?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
There is no upcoming depression. That's wacko.....

I wish ....

A sr economist one step under Greenspan said we (US) is now dependent on
borrowing from Euro banks who could suddenly decide to invest in their own
economies and that'd drive our gummyment into receiverhip.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

What do you base that on?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
There is no upcoming depression. That's wacko.....

I wish ....

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:37:06 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Well, so do I but it's not going to happen in all reasonable likelyhood.
There's no evidence of something cataclysmic like that. The world economy
is relatively stable, certain the 1st world is in economic terms. While
there are major problems, India and Pakistan seem to be headed in the
right direction, at least not threatening each other on a daily basis.
China and Taiwan are not being beligerant. North Korea isn't any more
unstable than usual. The US and the rest of the 1st world economies are
generally doing ok.

What do you base that on?

http://www.dieoff.org/page116.htm

I don't think that is a reasonable outcome. I doubt he thinks it's likely.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
A sr economist one step under Greenspan said we (US) is now dependent on
borrowing from Euro banks who could suddenly decide to invest in their own
economies and that'd drive our gummyment into receiverhip.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

What do you base that on?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
There is no upcoming depression. That's wacko.....

I wish ....

Too much reading for me right now...care to summarize?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:37:06 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Well, so do I but it's not going to happen in all reasonable likelyhood.
There's no evidence of something cataclysmic like that. The world
economy
is relatively stable, certain the 1st world is in economic terms. While
there are major problems, India and Pakistan seem to be headed in the
right direction, at least not threatening each other on a daily basis.
China and Taiwan are not being beligerant. North Korea isn't any more
unstable than usual. The US and the rest of the 1st world economies are
generally doing ok.

What do you base that on?

http://www.dieoff.org/page116.htm

Actually I first read the same statement about 30 years ago almost word for
word. The only difference was gas was supposed to rise to a cost $2 a
gallon. You will however see $5 a gallon gas talked about and like the
early seventies it may even rise to that but not for purposes of conserving
energy. Rather for purposes of raising funds to pay off the, created by
both political partys, national debt. You can't tax $1.50 on $2.00 a gallon
gasoline just as back then you couldn't tax 65 cents on 35 cent a gallon
gas. But give the great unwashed a taste of five at the pump then back it
off to $3.00 they will be so happy they will forget it used to cost $2.
Just like they did in the early seventies. Call it raising funds to pay
bills or call it devaluing the value of the debt or both . . .it worked then
and it will work again IF the resultingincome is used to reduce the debt
load and not 'spent' as some sort ofmythical windfall like the so called
peace dividend or the so called balanced budget with a surplus that never
existed (reference the Dep't of the Treasury balance sheet for those years).
IF by chance some conservational benefit isderived that would also be nice .
... in fact it might even be used as a supporting reason BUT it won't be the
main reason in realpolitik.

However I'm now getting near AARP years old so my main concern is, like
with most seniors, me. Grandparents and parents didn't care about me and
my generation when they could have done something . .. .why should I pay
the price? As the Brit's use to say, and may still do so, "I'm all right
Jack, Whats yours is mine and what's mine's me own."

And that's the true legacy of the USA.

M.

PS don't brag about those energy conserving sails so much. Remember it was
Red Ron Dellums of California that proposed a tax on sail boats because they
didn't pay their fair share. Shhhhhhhh.........


"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 15:07:35 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Right, but the vast majority of our use of oil is for cars. Remember, we
have lots of oil in the US. We could be self-sufficient if we wanted to.
I
suggest raising gas prices to $5/gallon. Give the automakers lots of
incentives to increase fuel efficiency and create alternative cars.

65% of the America's oil has already been burned. We could have been
self-sufficient, but now? Unless there is a massive and comprehensive
energy policy installed immediately, *we* may have oil, but our children
will have to live without.

http://www.faultline.org/news/2001/1...ependence.html

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:51:09 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Too much reading for me right now...care to summarize?

Oil, or lack of it. Production of world oil supplies are expected to peak
sometime between now and 2025. As oil is a gift deeply entwined in our
lives, the future without it will be quite traumatic. Depending on who
you listen to, the effects range from the death of a growth based economy,
to a population die off.

Oil, or lack of it. Production of world oil supplies are expected
to peak sometime between now and 2025. As oil is a gift deeply
entwined in our lives, the future without it will be quite
traumatic. Depending on who you listen to, the effects range from
the death of a growth based economy, to a population die off.

Fortunately, the US has lots of coal to make electricity with. Electric
motors with batteries will work just as well as combustion motors. It
just costs more to scrub the pollution from the coal emissions. Nuclear
power will look pretty attractive at that point too.

This implies that we won't find viable alternatives between now
and then. There will probably be some severe problems in
high population 3rd world countries, but they already have
these problems. The 1st world will be much less affected.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:51:09 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Too much reading for me right now...care to summarize?

Oil, or lack of it. Production of world oil supplies are expected to peak
sometime between now and 2025. As oil is a gift deeply entwined in our
lives, the future without it will be quite traumatic. Depending on who
you listen to, the effects range from the death of a growth based economy,
to a population die off.