What Would You Do? Next Great Depression? MIT study predicting ‘global economic collapse’ by 2030 still on track

  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Apr 11, 2012 1:45 AM GMT
    Next Great Depression? MIT study predicting ‘global economic collapse’ by 2030 still on track

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/next-great-depression-mit-researchers-predict-global-economic-190352944.html


    Futurism-Got-Corn-graph-631-thumb.jpg

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Looking-Back-on-the-Limits-of-Growth.html

    So, if this is correct, what would you do to prepare for this, and even if you don't prepare for it, what would you do if it happens? How would you deal with it?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:05 AM GMT
    Human history is littered with predicted massive disasters which never occurred.

    Of course, human history is also littered with massive disasters that actually happened, many which no one (who made it into the historical record) saw coming.

    Personally, I think we are still grossly UNDERestimating the extension of the industrial revolution into the computer revolution. Deming's assembly line has nothing on a computer which can reproduce an identical end product a practically infinite number of times for practically zero additional cost. And that doesn't even include 3D printing, still in its gestational period. I came to the conclusion about seven years ago that, if you ignore all existential issues and focus solely on economics (production, life expectancy, money supply, wealth creation, etc.) a very significant percentage of the human beings now living have no good reason for doing so.

    I believe a natural thinning of the herd is inevitable within the next 50 years, either through directly biological causes or through the entropic effecs of human nature acting upon a recursively multi-intra-dependent global society with emergent properties too multivariate for any person or group to even loosely guide much less control. That is to say, human beings are no longer making history; history is making us, and it is soon going to take us in a direction chosen neither by the huddled masses nor the wealthy elite, but rather by impersonal chaotic social forces that serve no man, no ideology, indeed no purpose at all. "Turning and turning in the widening gyre...", and all that jazz.
  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Apr 11, 2012 5:11 AM GMT
    ^
    I think that most of the previous predictions were based on religion/beliefs and not science.




    ‘World On Track For Disaster’: Researcher Backs 1970s’ Prediction Of Economic Collapse By 2030

    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/324392/20120405/world-track-disaster-researcher-supports-1970-s.htm



    Limits to Growth

    http://limits-to-growth.org/

    Anthropocene
    http://www.anthropocene.info/en/home
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:14 AM GMT
    I'll suffer like the rest of humanity. Wars and all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:14 AM GMT
    SportingChance saidHuman history is littered with predicted massive disasters which never came occurred.

    Of course, human history is also littered with massive disasters, many which no one (who made it into the historical record) saw coming.

    Personally, I think we are still grossly UNDERestimating the extension of the industrial revolution into the computer revolution. Deming's assembly line has nothing on a computer which can reproduce an identical end product a practically infinite number of times for practically zero additional cost. And that doesn't even include 3D printing, still in its gestational period. I came to the conclusion about seven years ago that, if you ignore all existential issues and focus solely on economics (production, life expectancy, money supply, wealth creation, etc.) a very significant percentage of the human beings now living have no good reason for doing so.

    I believe a natural thinning of the herd is inevitable within the next 50 years, either through directly biological causes or through the entropic effecs of human nature acting upon a recursively multi-intra-dependent global society with emergent properties too multivariate for any person or group to even lossely guide much less control. That is to say, human beings are no longer making history; history is making us, and it is soon going to take us in a direction chosen neither by the huddled masses nor the wealthy elite, but rather by impersonal chaotic social forces that serve no man, no ideology, indeed no purpose at all. "Turning and turning in the widening gyre...", and all that jazz.

    that was a very nice read
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:15 AM GMT
    SportingChance saidHuman history is littered with predicted massive disasters which never came occurred.
    It's also littered with unpredicted massive disasters that occurred.
    I'm more concerned about that than something that's predicted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:15 AM GMT
    I don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.
  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Apr 11, 2012 5:19 AM GMT
    ^
    we have all of those in my neighborhood. And deer, bears, coyotes, and big trout in the river. But being a vegetarian, I will pass on that. ;)


    MeOhMy saidI don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.



    ^
    what do you think of the possibility of peak oil (end of new cheap oil sources) happening by 2030?

    I find it interesting that the various theories keep mentioning that they will happen by 2030.


    Spread Reckoning: U.S. Suburbs Face Twin Perils of Climate Change and Peak Oil
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2285345

    TOYOTA EXECUTIVE - We have about 10 to 12 years left before peak oil (2009)
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/770339
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:25 AM GMT
    metta8 said
    MeOhMy saidI don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.



    ^
    what do you think of the possibility of peak oil (end of new cheap oil sources) happening by 2030?


    I think that every year, we keep discovering more and more oil. Now, I am no supporter of overusing fossil fuels, and indeed, they are not 'infinite,' but I also think the "peak oil" craze is a bit of a scam. I would recommend reading Greg Palast, an American investigative journalist (who writes for British papers, because there is no such thing as investigative journalism in America), and he has gotten his hands on a great deal of original documents and has written a good deal on peak oil, and is really one of the best read people on the subject of oil in general.

    He explains how peak oil was a theory originated by a Shell Oil economist (hence, Hubbert's Peak), and that the big oil companies (the Seven Sisters) got together and decided to control the oil fields and not develop them all, promoting peak oil to create artificial scarcity (just like the diamond market, which is controlled by one company, and in reality, diamonds are worthless), and thus, the prices go up.

    Adam Smith, in 1776, wrote in "The Wealth of Nations" that "rarely do men of the same trade meet, whether for merriment or derision, without the conversation ending in some contrivance to raise prices or conspiracy against the public." Ironically, Adam Smith is the man who is hailed as the father of the "free market."

    However, yes, oil is not infinite, obviously. But I think we are way ahead of ourselves in knowing how much is left, how much is there, or when we "tip". The need to find alternatives is obvious, regardless of peak oil, but then, there are alternatives already, but they are suppressed... for obvious reasons.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:26 AM GMT
    It won't matter - the Zombie apocalypse is still schedule to happen in December of this year...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:32 AM GMT
    onaquest saidIt won't matter - the Zombie apocalypse is still schedule to happen in December of this year...


    get your guns and crossbows ready bitches!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:39 AM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    metta8 said
    MeOhMy saidI don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.



    ^
    what do you think of the possibility of peak oil (end of new cheap oil sources) happening by 2030?


    I think that every year, we keep discovering more and more oil. Now, I am no supporter of overusing fossil fuels, and indeed, they are not 'infinite,' but I also think the "peak oil" craze is a bit of a scam. I would recommend reading Greg Palast, an American investigative journalist (who writes for British papers, because there is no such thing as investigative journalism in America), and he has gotten his hands on a great deal of original documents and has written a good deal on peak oil, and is really one of the best read people on the subject of oil in general.

    He explains how peak oil was a theory originated by a Shell Oil economist (hence, Hubbert's Peak), and that the big oil companies (the Seven Sisters) got together and decided to control the oil fields and not develop them all, promoting peak oil to create artificial scarcity (just like the diamond market, which is controlled by one company, and in reality, diamonds are worthless), and thus, the prices go up.

    Adam Smith, in 1776, wrote in "The Wealth of Nations" that "rarely do men of the same trade meet, whether for merriment or derision, without the conversation ending in some contrivance to raise prices or conspiracy against the public." Ironically, Adam Smith is the man who is hailed as the father of the "free market."

    However, yes, oil is not infinite, obviously. But I think we are way ahead of ourselves in knowing how much is left, how much is there, or when we "tip". The need to find alternatives is obvious, regardless of peak oil, but then, there are alternatives already, but they are suppressed... for obvious reasons.


    So we discovering less and less oil since the 1960's is just a giant conspiracy? Using more oil than we find since I believe the 1980's. Just a large claim to put out there without any evidence. All these countries just faking to have production declining each year?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:43 AM GMT
    chris2787 said
    MeOhMy said
    metta8 said
    MeOhMy saidI don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.



    ^
    what do you think of the possibility of peak oil (end of new cheap oil sources) happening by 2030?


    I think that every year, we keep discovering more and more oil. Now, I am no supporter of overusing fossil fuels, and indeed, they are not 'infinite,' but I also think the "peak oil" craze is a bit of a scam. I would recommend reading Greg Palast, an American investigative journalist (who writes for British papers, because there is no such thing as investigative journalism in America), and he has gotten his hands on a great deal of original documents and has written a good deal on peak oil, and is really one of the best read people on the subject of oil in general.

    He explains how peak oil was a theory originated by a Shell Oil economist (hence, Hubbert's Peak), and that the big oil companies (the Seven Sisters) got together and decided to control the oil fields and not develop them all, promoting peak oil to create artificial scarcity (just like the diamond market, which is controlled by one company, and in reality, diamonds are worthless), and thus, the prices go up.

    Adam Smith, in 1776, wrote in "The Wealth of Nations" that "rarely do men of the same trade meet, whether for merriment or derision, without the conversation ending in some contrivance to raise prices or conspiracy against the public." Ironically, Adam Smith is the man who is hailed as the father of the "free market."

    However, yes, oil is not infinite, obviously. But I think we are way ahead of ourselves in knowing how much is left, how much is there, or when we "tip". The need to find alternatives is obvious, regardless of peak oil, but then, there are alternatives already, but they are suppressed... for obvious reasons.


    So we discovering less and less oil since the 1960's is just a giant conspiracy? Using more oil than we find since I believe the 1980's. Just a large claim to put out there without any evidence. All these countries just faking to have production declining each year?


    How can we discover "less" oil each year? And if you actually follow the oil and energy markets and news, we keep discovering 'more', not less... this isn't "hidden", it's just not thrown in our face on a daily basis, therefore, as Orwell predicted, it's thrown in the "memory hole." Using more oil, yes, this is obvious. Competition for oil? increasing also. As I said, read Greg Palast, he has evidence, and discusses the issue in detail, with documentation. And again, as I said (twice!), oil is NOT infinite, but the peak oil scare is another matter.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:45 AM GMT
    i rather fuck all the hot guys i will saw starting today til 2030 hahaha im serious if this true!icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 5:48 AM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    chris2787 said
    MeOhMy said
    metta8 said
    MeOhMy saidI don't really adhere to the Limits to Growth report and am no fan (or have no faith in -- ) the Club of Rome, as a bunch of elitists. However, expect a great depression much sooner than 2030... like, this decade. It's already started, we just keep calling it a recession.



    ^
    what do you think of the possibility of peak oil (end of new cheap oil sources) happening by 2030?


    I think that every year, we keep discovering more and more oil. Now, I am no supporter of overusing fossil fuels, and indeed, they are not 'infinite,' but I also think the "peak oil" craze is a bit of a scam. I would recommend reading Greg Palast, an American investigative journalist (who writes for British papers, because there is no such thing as investigative journalism in America), and he has gotten his hands on a great deal of original documents and has written a good deal on peak oil, and is really one of the best read people on the subject of oil in general.

    He explains how peak oil was a theory originated by a Shell Oil economist (hence, Hubbert's Peak), and that the big oil companies (the Seven Sisters) got together and decided to control the oil fields and not develop them all, promoting peak oil to create artificial scarcity (just like the diamond market, which is controlled by one company, and in reality, diamonds are worthless), and thus, the prices go up.

    Adam Smith, in 1776, wrote in "The Wealth of Nations" that "rarely do men of the same trade meet, whether for merriment or derision, without the conversation ending in some contrivance to raise prices or conspiracy against the public." Ironically, Adam Smith is the man who is hailed as the father of the "free market."

    However, yes, oil is not infinite, obviously. But I think we are way ahead of ourselves in knowing how much is left, how much is there, or when we "tip". The need to find alternatives is obvious, regardless of peak oil, but then, there are alternatives already, but they are suppressed... for obvious reasons.


    So we discovering less and less oil since the 1960's is just a giant conspiracy? Using more oil than we find since I believe the 1980's. Just a large claim to put out there without any evidence. All these countries just faking to have production declining each year?


    How can we discover "less" oil each year? And if you actually follow the oil and energy markets and news, we keep discovering 'more', not less... this isn't "hidden", it's just not thrown in our face on a daily basis, therefore, as Orwell predicted, it's thrown in the "memory hole." Using more oil, yes, this is obvious. Competition for oil? increasing also. As I said, read Greg Palast, he has evidence, and discusses the issue in detail, with documentation. And again, as I said (twice!), oil is NOT infinite, but the peak oil scare is another matter.

    I would go find my evidence but you are a person that you can't win against. I am not even going to try. We discover less oil each year. I don't know what is so confusing about that statement?
  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Apr 11, 2012 6:00 AM GMT
    myLoveAngel saidi rather fuck all the hot guys i will saw starting today til 2030 hahaha im serious if this true!icon_wink.gif


    You may want to mark this as a place to visit in the future ;)
    523714_384210831610485_130810663617171_1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 6:02 AM GMT
    I've cast a paling against global disasters. Ario is now immune to dire chaos!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 6:03 AM GMT
    We USE more oil each year, and DISCOVER more oil each year. Perhaps you mean to say that "we discover that there is less oil each year" ??? Because you can't "discover" less than what you already have. It's like starting with a glass of water, drinking half, and saying you "discover" that you only had half a glass of water to begin with.

    I'm not disagreeing that we are using too much oil, too dependent upon it, that we should get off of it and find (or at least use the) alternatives available to us. But it is a fact that every year, more oil reserves are "discovered" all over the world: in Canada, in the Arctic, in Africa, in Central Asia, etc. etc. When you discover MORE of something, and at the same time USE more of something, it may not be at a sustainable pace, but you can't say that is discovering LESS of something. That doesn't make sense. You can't drink "less" of a drink.

    And also, come on, is it really a shock that governments or corporations would lie? Like, is that at all even a question? They were born in lies, evolved through lies, function through lies, their leaders are liars, all they do is lie. It's in their interest. That's just power. Simple. Actually, perhaps I am mistaken in saying "lie", because saying that something or someone is a "liar" suggests that they actually have the capacity to tell the truth, which, history shows, governments and powerful financial and economic interests... do not. If you think it's a "wild" or "crazy" idea that corporations and governments would deceive you for their own benefit, I would recommend... well, history, as something to study. The examples are endless. And it doesn't have to be a "conspiracy" (which is a legal term, and one of the most prosecuted offenses in the U.S. legal system, so the idea that elites are incapable of it is naive), but it's just a social function. Governments have no interest in exposing lies of corporations, which have no interest in exposing lies of government, because they work together and support each other and are run by the same people for the same purposes (power and profit), and of course they own the media. It's just a social function for the elite in society, nationally and globally. It's not a "conspiracy" (also, because they talk and write about this stuff openly, and conspiracies are by their legal definition, "secret"), it's a "consensus" issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 6:51 AM GMT
    Im up for it, maybe a return to survival of the fittest. Humanity is overdue for a natural thinning out.
    bring it on
  • tautomer

    Posts: 1010

    Apr 11, 2012 7:06 AM GMT
    This prospect scares the living shit out of me (literally). I am too painfully aware of this. I suspect I will end up taking my own life before this actually were to occur, if not sooner.

    There is no conceivable way to solve these problems, at all. It's only getting worse and it's making me not want to be alive.
  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Apr 11, 2012 7:10 AM GMT
    MeOhMy said



    I would recommend reading Greg Palast, an American investigative journalist (who writes for British papers, because there is no such thing as investigative journalism in America), and he has gotten his hands on a great deal of original documents and has written a good deal on peak oil, and is really one of the best read people on the subject of oil in general.

    He explains how peak oil was a theory originated by a Shell Oil economist (hence, Hubbert's Peak), and that the big oil companies (the Seven Sisters) got together and decided to control the oil fields and not develop them all, promoting peak oil to create artificial scarcity (just like the diamond market, which is controlled by one company, and in reality, diamonds are worthless), and thus, the prices go up.



    Greg Palast: We're Not Running Out of Oil, Just Cheap Oil



    That is what I understood peak oil to be...about the end of cheap oil.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 7:10 AM GMT
    tautomer4314 saidThis prospect scares the living shit out of me (literally). I am too painfully aware of this. I suspect I will end up taking my own life before this actually were to occur, if not sooner.

    There is no conceivable way to solve these problems, at all. It's only getting worse and it's making me not want to be alive.


    The suicidal pallor in this post overshadows what the topic even is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 7:12 AM GMT
    SportingChance saidHuman history is littered with predicted massive disasters which never came occurred.


    Ehm, nobody mentioned a massive disaster.. they mentioned collapse, which has happened several times in many societies.. ancient Rome collapsed, so did many classic Mayan city-states, so did the Olmecs, so did several African empires, so did the Khmer empire collapse, so several island civilisations such as Rapa Nui, so did many fabled Amazon civilisations which have not yet been uncovered.. all of these had advancing technology.... the list is endless enough to think that avoiding a collapse of any civilisation as even a remote possibility thanks to advancing technology, is essentially, founded on no historical precedent whatsoever

    About the oil issue: considering that civilisations have risen and fallen without oil, I doubt that civilisation requires oil... the present one does, but that problem can easily be circumvented, I wouldn't be too worried about the oil and gas running out, the real challenge, I think, is getting over it being required at all. Considering the space of time of technological advancement we see currently and have had over the past century, it is surely feasible in theory in my mind, but it will require a fundamental change in thinking I am sure
  • tautomer

    Posts: 1010

    Apr 11, 2012 7:20 AM GMT
    Ariodante said
    tautomer4314 saidThis prospect scares the living shit out of me (literally). I am too painfully aware of this. I suspect I will end up taking my own life before this actually were to occur, if not sooner.

    There is no conceivable way to solve these problems, at all. It's only getting worse and it's making me not want to be alive.


    The suicidal pallor in this post overshadows what the topic even is.


    I'm sorry I have said it then. I am not suicidal and I am not planning on taking my own life. Nevertheless I have been battling through some depression for the past month or so. The ailments of the world itself have been a major reason for me to go through this. the ideas of the world falling apart at the seams, being powerless do anything, and finally seeing refrences to these sorts of scenarios materialize around me is making me feel like I am only a few steps back from being scuicidal. I am too self-aware, and aware of all the people around me I would effect of I were to do such a thing, so I hold myself back from going in that direction. Nevertheless, I will not deny the fact that there is a good chunk of me that does desire to no longer live, I am just doing my best not to acknowledge it and let it go beyond an idea.

    I am just unable to outlet this thistime. Because unlike cases in the past, I can't actually jump out into the world in some way and stop the initial spark of feeling this way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2012 7:30 AM GMT
    MeOhMy saidWe USE more oil each year, and DISCOVER more oil each year. Perhaps you mean to say that "we discover that there is less oil each year" ??? Because you can't "discover" less than what you already have. It's like starting with a glass of water, drinking half, and saying you "discover" that you only had half a glass of water to begin with.


    Ehm, I think I see a misunderstanding here. I understood it thus: say two years ago, people went and scoured the ground for new water wells in say, the island of "kanoahe", and we found six. The search continued, and last year we find five, this year we find four. Thus, we discover fewer new water wells as the years go by. We can project that next year we are likely to find three, the year after only two and so on, until we run out of water wells completely,because they have all been discovered. I believe it might be the same with oil and gas, that the amount of new sources being discovered underground is decreasing yearly.

    That said, I believe the projections for the amount of oil and gas resources we need to discover and at the present rate of discovery could keep the petro-civilisation (let's call it that for now) alive and well for about another century, not yet taking into account its increased use, I would have to research the numbers for that amount. But the last time I talked to someone about it, the projected timeframe for the fossil fuel-based civilisation (including other fossil fuels such as gas) was about another century. However, this does not take into account the economic cost of such an endeavour vis-a-vis the environmental damage done, and the subsequent increased possibilities of natural disasters (due to greenhouse gases and earth movements), the biospheric poisoning leading to a decrease in food and water supplies, which is ongoing presently and will likely lead to collapse of major sources of food, thus leading to a collapse of society not due to a lack of fossil fuels, but due to their very use.

    I hope that was clear