Comments on: Myths and the future

By: Space age seems dead. Long live the space age. « The Palimpsest of Sawbones Surio

Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:12:28 +0000

[...] What resonated in that article for me, was how entrenched the pervasive “myth” of the space age has been in much of the World’s collective conscious during the cold war period, regardless of caste, creed, colour, race, religion and whatever other division we know of. The other common myth that carries the same fixation and following of a similar scale was discussed by Jacob Fisker in his aptly titled, “Myths and the future”. [...]

By: Jaques

Jaques — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:20:53 +0000

Cold fusion is on the way… It has recently been sucessfully delo stratas by an Italian researcher and verified by teo VERY credible and sceptical swedish scientists. See http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

Best

jaques

By: Jacob

Jacob — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:08:28 +0000

@Jaques – Cold fusion has no potential. As far as I know, it has never been observed anywhere. The potential for hot fusion in a commercial applications within the next 100 years are slim. In comparison, ending poverty or increasing real wages are solvable and have been for decades, even centuries. It would seem that humanity overall has chosen not to though although I would say that some countries have certainly ended poverty. Also, until about 1970, the developed world did see increasing real wages [for the middle class]. Since then, they have declined.

By: Jaques

Jaques — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:01:31 +0000

Nice site Jacob!

What do you think about the potential with cold fusion? Increasing real wages? End of poverty?

Best

jaques

By: Daniel Lemire

Daniel Lemire — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:56:40 +0000

Collapse may lead to hyperinflation which could eat through your savings… thus disrupting your financial independence.

And no, real estate does not protect you from collapse. Just go to Detroit and have a look at what real estate looks like… Properties must be maintained. Tenants must be willing to pay. And so on.

By: GE Miller

GE Miller — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:45:59 +0000

I can see 2-party political hatred and completely paid off politicians driving us into the ground much faster than 3-5 generations. We need to tax more and cut spending in order to ensure that our entire currency isn’t devalued to the point of being worthless. Nobody wants to cut and Republicans don’t want to lose their rich buddies support – so they’ll never tax more.

We’re very close to it now….Social Security will go unpaid, Medicare will go unpaid, food stamps will not be given, roads will not be repaved, laws will not be enforced…. Chaos.

Another scenario is that the cheap energy and resources that allowed us to build this society are running out. Increased scarcity would lead to hyper-inflation and declining GDP’s, completely obliterating the economy. Without the economy, very few of us (1/1,000,0000) would actually have the skills to survive and the natural resources available to be able to do it.

Maybe it won’t happen….. but, it’s not hard to see either or both scenarios come to fruition in the next decade, if not year.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:35:08 +0000

@Oscar – From an ERE standpoint, you’ll probably have an easier time in Europe. The distances are shorter, public transport is great. You’ll pay higher taxes while working, but then you don’t have to worry about the health care system. However, housing in Europe is more expensive (compared to what you could find in the US).

By: Òscar

Òscar — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:15:56 +0000

Hi Jacob, very interesting. I just bought your book (it just arrived today) so I’m starting to prepare. Regarding the downfall of the developed world, do you see any difference between North America and Europe? Any specific, different way to prepare? (I live in spain) Thx!

By: dragoncar

dragoncar — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 04:23:08 +0000

Hspencer: I’ve been doing a lot of flying recently, and sitting in the window seat really drives your point home (ironic as it may be, considering the means of transport). When I look out over sprawling cities, with so many houses and so many cars, and I imagine how much water they use, how much oil they use, etc., it kind of blows my mind. For some reason, this is just not apparent on the ground, or by looking at big numbers in text.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 21:47:25 +0000

I love the views on this website, but I tend to disagree with the argument that being fit, biking, thrifty gardeners/fix-it-men will somehow be the best preparation for a coming dark age. I think this is a great way to be for the current times. However, I think if we enter a dark age, the political structure will change very significantly, in fact, it will probably change numerous times, through war. If we are entering such times, the best thing to be would probably be a warlord, or a politician, or control some resource, and be able to defend it. The thrifty gardener type might just end up being a successful New England farmer, but they equally likely might end up as a peasant, a serf or a slave. I have a map of southern plantations along the Mississippi river in the 19th century. Somehow, I’m guessing the plantation owners weren’t the most fit, but they were certainly powerful. I’ve visited a lot of websites that talk about a coming apocalypse, and discuss the best ways to relearn 18th and 19th century technology. However, wouldn’t it be better – in such a situation – to have friends in high places in government, the military, etc? than to be good at gardening?

By: sky

sky — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:36:05 +0000

If you go to the City of Detroit, you can find collapse and dysfunction that may be similar to the future of the Western world.

City services and utilities are unreliable. Vandals and looters pass through the neighborhood now and then. There are far fewer jobs than people to fill them. Literacy is low. Street “justice” is dealt out and only the most aggressive come out on top. The infrastructure is dangerous and falling apart, as are the abandoned buildings.

Perhaps collapsing urban areas can be used as a way to learn and develop strategies for the future.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:11:24 +0000

I agree with Chad on cheap energy sources, but we will never find or invent anything near as cheap/efficient at fossil fuels. It just doesn’t exist. Several people have mentioned that a doomsday scenario would just be a hiccup or pause and the world would return to growth. That is missing the point that fossil fuels are not renewable; we had a one-time lottery win of cheap energy. We could have used it to build wind turbines and PV panels but instead we spent most of it on cheap crap and weapons.

By: Chad

Chad — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:10:11 +0000

The majority of this all comes down to the cost of energy. We depleted a lot of the cheap oil and are now focusing on the last cheap energy resources…coal and natural gas. China has almost tripled its coal use in less than a decade and if you look at the U.S. we are positioning ourselves to use natural gas (tons of drilling going on). People in my home state of Pennsylvania are getting rather large checks for drilling rights and royalties (of course fracking destroys a lot of the ground water).

If we can come up with cheap energy it will prevent much of the doomsday scenario. The other issues will be creating an economic model that doesn’t rely on the pyramid scheme of population growth and rare earths, but even those can be solved to a certain extent with really cheap energy.

By: FrugalZen

FrugalZen — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 03:30:29 +0000

Thanks Jacob…

and its all the more reason for having just a flat rate consumption tax…but that takes a great deal of the benefit out of being a politicion.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 03:12:54 +0000

@FrugalZen – In general

Raising taxes (what democrats are apt to do) taxes where the money is made (workers, corporations, and capital gains), that is, those who make money.

Borrowing money (what republicans are apt to do) inflates the currency which hurts those on fixed income (retirees) or with savings, essentially those who have money.

The republican way is more sneaky, because while many people understand tax rates, much fewer understand how deficit-spending and inflation are tied together.

In either case, it should be realized that the money that government spends comes from someone (the private sector, that is, anyone who does not work for the government) in some way. The only question is how. Hence, the greater the government budget is, the more they take.

By: FrugalZen

FrugalZen — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 03:06:43 +0000

I had my suspicions on Jacob being a “doomer”…doesn’t matter… I enjoy reading the blog and get lots of good info.

Now a point…”government gets the money from the workers (Democrat) or from the savers and those on fixed incomes (Republican)”

Isn’t that a bit backwards???

In my experience the Democrats want to tax the $#@& out of those that save (ie: the “wealthy”) while the Republicans are out to get as much as they can from the workers (via low wages) so that in the end they have accumulated all the money and are become “the wealthy”.

????

~ R

By: Cristhyano

Cristhyano — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:48:48 +0000

I already read this post sometime or i just had a deja vu?

By: Concojones

Concojones — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:07:09 +0000

Jacob,
very thought-provoking post. However, what makes you think we’ll see this so soon? The causes you mention are all long-term and some can be stopped:
- global warming: long-term, and I don’t see how this in itself could have the effects you describe
- peak oil: there are alternative energy sources. But I agree that energy/capita has probably peaked
- destruction of the environment where we get our food: I guess that as this gets worse, conscience will rise and we’ll stabilize the situation (out of necessity)
My point is that there may be an alternative scenario where we lose some wealth but without the collapse you describe.

By: Concojones

Concojones — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:44:19 +0000

Jacob, I think you should read this (related stuff): http://www.goldonomic.com/tainter.htm

By: Moneyblogga

Moneyblogga — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 01:37:25 +0000

Jacob, I’m not a conspiracy theorist or a misinformation agent for that matter but what’s your take on the New World Order? I’ve given it a lot of thought because I feel that the concept has viability. I’ve never believed that society was random. Society is the way it is because it has been designed this way. People sit in front of TV for hours at a time, they stick their kids in front of TV for hours at a time and they spend money they don’t have on crap they don’t need. (I’ve been guilty of it too but I reformed a couple of years ago. Yay for me!)

Anyway, over population is definitely a huge concern. The NWO theory (for one) dictates that 80% of the world’s population will be exterminated by the global elite. I used to laugh at stuff like this but you know something? I don’t any more. The overall global crisis becomes more and more critical daily.

What is your take on a ‘doomsday’ scenario such as this? Do you think it’s likely?