Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
its kind of a strange statement presented by jobster. it doesnt really mean anything, just some hysterics. nobody can conduct a war without oil because nobody can power their equipment without oil. why does that matter? is he suggesting that one day russia will have all the oil and we wont be able to go to war anymore? sounds pretty great to me but its also ignoring a lot of other realities to ultimately end up saying nothing of any meaning.
Yes.
Oil is a strategic resource.
US and Canadian oil is mostly heavy and high sulfur. Additionally, the EIA reports that if the US was somehow forced to rely on its own resources, we have approximately 5 years of oil left at current US consumption rates, which doesn't factor in growth, nor does it factor in how much will actually be recovered vs how much is recoverable.
I don't know if the numbers reported by the EIA is in actual recoverable resources or just estimates, but it is not uncommon to only extract 25% over a duration of a decade. For example, in a 1B barrel find, they might extract 250M barrels recovered over 10 years.
It has been said that Russia has perhaps, 60 years of oil remaining. However, I must admit, that I do not know the capability of our current military technology. It's possible that a military confrontation with a formidable opponent capable of surveillance, defense, and multi range projection capability, that the US would use weapons where oil is a non-factor, but certainly for any long term occupation, oil resources would be necessary.
With that said, I think its important for the US to conserve what it has and focus on a more sustainable economic system.
The current economic system, predicated on unrelenting growth, is fundamentally flawed considering the subject of Economics would cease to exist without scarcity. So even if we have great "economic" years, at what cost? In most cases, the costs won't be recognized until years later, if recognized at all. Therefore, it is important that we plan for the future. I think it is our role as Americans to guide the way for other nations, as we have done in the past.
As others have mentioned, every nation eventually turns into an Oligarchy, and we are all aware of this and see it occurring before our eyes, than why do we do nothing to stop it? Why can we not peacefully resolve this inequality in such a way where we may initially have to scale back our standards of living, for those of us in developed nations, but also where the likely outcome will be innovation in more sustainable technologies that will allow us to continue to live in harmony with one another and in comfort.
I don't think we recognize how far we have gone. I don't know. I don't want to walk around in a world where violence is the way of life. When the world is harsh and unrelenting, the people will respond likewise. I don't want to live in that type of world, but that's what it's going to come to if you leave a whole lot of people behind.
US and Canadian oil is mostly heavy and high sulfur. Additionally, the EIA reports that if the US was somehow forced to rely on its own resources, we have approximately 5 years of oil left at current US consumption rates, which doesn't factor in growth, nor does it factor in how much will actually be recovered vs how much is recoverable.
I don't know if the numbers reported by the EIA is in actual recoverable resources or just estimates, but it is not uncommon to only extract 25% over a duration of a decade. For example, in a 1B barrel find, they might extract 250M barrels recovered over 10 years.
It has been said that Russia has perhaps, 60 years of oil remaining. However, I must admit, that I do not know the capability of our current military technology. It's possible that a military confrontation with a formidable opponent capable of surveillance, defense, and multi range projection capability, that the US would use weapons where oil is a non-factor, but certainly for any long term occupation, oil resources would be necessary.
With that said, I think its important for the US to conserve what it has and focus on a more sustainable economic system.
The current economic system, predicated on unrelenting growth, is fundamentally flawed considering the subject of Economics would cease to exist without scarcity. So even if we have great "economic" years, at what cost? In most cases, the costs won't be recognized until years later, if recognized at all. Therefore, it is important that we plan for the future. I think it is our role as Americans to guide the way for other nations, as we have done in the past.
As others have mentioned, every nation eventually turns into an Oligarchy, and we are all aware of this and see it occurring before our eyes, than why do we do nothing to stop it? Why can we not peacefully resolve this inequality in such a way where we may initially have to scale back our standards of living, for those of us in developed nations, but also where the likely outcome will be innovation in more sustainable technologies that will allow us to continue to live in harmony with one another and in comfort.
I don't think we recognize how far we have gone. I don't know. I don't want to walk around in a world where violence is the way of life. When the world is harsh and unrelenting, the people will respond likewise. I don't want to live in that type of world, but that's what it's going to come to if you leave a whole lot of people behind.
That's what I think the article touched on.
this is a lot of typing and not really saying anything. in what scenario is america living solely on its own oil production? im not really sure what the point is of that strange hypothetical and bringing in russia. russia has zero ability to go to war with america. the best it could do is fire long range missiles. which would suck but oil has nothing to do with it.
i have no idea why you think it is America's role to guide the way for the rest of the world. America isnt in charge of the world. it isnt good enough to handle that role and there is no reason for Americans to believe they have any right to be in that position. but still, i have no idea what you want America to do to guide the world into a better tomorrow. you seem to have had some kind of mental breakdown. i generally dont like to direct any commentary on the person making a post but something weird is happening here. what set you off?
i care about the authors of stuff i am reading. if your crazy uncle writes and article; are you going to bother reading it and refuting every point? i like to see what box you fit in before i take your article too seriously.
You are exactly why scammy late night infomercials of lifestyle products always feature some "doctor" in a white coat endorsing the product.
Businesses just love preying on people who lap up authority bias rather than focusing on the facts and merits of the topic itself.
This could all simply being a sign of America slowly sinking from the ruling country to a country that is now past its prime.
Other countries seem to go through a boom and then a bust. The Dutch ruled the world, then France, then England, and then the US. All of those other countries slowly faded out of the top spot and maybe at this time America is now doing the same. You know, maybe it's not such a bad thing that the US quits competing to be #1. Maybe if we just accept the fact that this country has problems and then work on solving those problems without having to be the world's peacekeepers or keep bailing out everyone else, we can settle down a little and start attain some internal goals we've needed to get to for a long time now.
Part of our problem is we have this hysterical fear of being invaded if we quit being the world's number one policeman. But the Netherlands is still standing and the UK is still standing and France is still standing. Those countries who have slipped down from being world powers didn't get invaded or overrun or have their ideology corrupted. In fact, they're doing much better than we are in some ways.
To me, the US seems to be the belligerent old man who is past his time to retire but still hangs on, annoying everyone and refusing to acknowledge that sometimes there really are better ways to accomplish things. And in this country, he seems to be surrounded by his equally old belligerent friends supporting his outdated and unworkable ideas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant
But where the author goes astray, is that he fails to observes how brutish and terrifying life was, as recently as say 150 years ago, before penicillin, public sanitation, universal free public schooling, and the like. For every child that’s today gunned down in a school shooting, 150 years ago, 10 would have died from dysentery, typhoid or cholera – or even malnutrition. Life expectancy in America may (in some demographic groups) be falling, but consider how much higher it is today, even among drug-addicts or the desperately poor, than it was 150 years ago, even among aristocrats.
That could be changing. The number of people refusing to vaccinate and those who can't afford health care or food is rising. We could find ourselves in a situation where we have children dying of malnutrition, communicable diseases, AND from being shot in the streets and at school all at the same time in the near future.
Quote:
In other words, our world today could (and perhaps should) be considerably better. But it's still inordinately better than it was in the days of our great-great-grandparents.
Well, no. My great-grandparents were all immigrants to this country and within their lifetimes (long ones, by the way), they were able to attain a stable and successful life in farming, as did my mom's parents. My own mother and father (who only went through the 10th grade) were able to buy a house when they were in their 30s with three kids and one salary, my mom being a stay-at-home mom.
On the other hand, my own existence is pretty precarious. At the age of 60, I have no permanent place to live, no income except Social Security, and I am far less healthy and don't expect to live as long as my great-grandparents. From my point of view, my great-grandparents had it better in every instance.
You know, maybe it's not such a bad thing that the US quits competing to be #1. Maybe if we just accept the fact that this country has problems and then work on solving those problems without having to be the world's peacekeepers or keep bailing out everyone else, we can settle down a little and start attain some internal goals we've needed to get to for a long time now.
If that was what is happening. Is it? Erm... no. We are not pulling inward and turning towards solutions to internal inequalities and failures of policy. No... rich people are turning towards contemplating vast fortunes so unwieldy and unliquid that they aren't good for anything except bragging about. I haven't any idea of actual numbers but the money in the Cayman's right now is surely many times the entire expressed wealth of the planet a few decades ago. And? In the Bay Area what percent of the Administrative Support workers are living in tents? Their employers live in mansions and their support staff live in tents. Does that make sense?
The problem is the tearing of the social fabric from three sources: 1. Social Media 2. Conservative Media and 3. Presidential politics.
Problems are being magnified while at the same time our ability to cope with these problems are diminishing. We live in our own bubbles. Media, especially conservative media, makes the opposition into enemies and propagate conspiracy theories like real news. Trump has made his administration the poster child for a divide and conquer strategy.
These are all reversible. I am not as pessimistic as the author.
We need to face our problems as a nation and not a collection of individuals. Then we we will find redemption.
I would add that social institutions have been hollowd out and that lack of institutions that give people their identity and meaning (many of which have been destroyed by the sources you list) has left people alone and unable to support each other. Churches, ethnic societies, labor unions and other class based institutions have all gone nearly away. The churches that are strongest today are those non-denominational ones that ask little of their membership; mega-churches and such like.
America has no one ethnic nationhood and belief in American democratic government institutions and our system of self government has been the unifying force that made us all "Americans." Too bad the 3 things you name have worked so hard to destroy this belief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
we are all individuals. its viewing people as a nation rather than a collection of individuals that causes problems.
No. We do like to THINK we're stand alone guys, but we're dependent on the socialization we received as kids; the public schooling, the belief that everyone can make it economically if they try, etc. No man is an island, no matter what brand of cigarettes he smokes.
I'm new to this thread, but thought I'd respond to your question.
The author *has* picked up on a disturbing vibe, but appears to be clueless about the cause or the reasons for it. The US will not fail. We are just experiencing the birth pains of a major socio-economic shift. Robotics will change everything
People appear to be agitated, frightened, angry, divided, disturbed, etc, at a greater level than any time since I've been old enough to pay attention (1970s).
Granted, there are a couple of good reasons to be uncomfortable, but safety isn't one of them. And the reality of our situation should bring us closer to consensus rather than further apart. Contrary to popular belief, there is way less violence in the US than there was 20-30 years ago. People here are safer and live longer than ever.
Is there anything about your daily life that is fundamentally more divisive and anxiety inducing than 20, 40, 60 years ago? Or is the media you are plugged into causing most of this?
Statistically, there may be less violence today but in the past the violence was confined to certain areas. Today the violence is everywhere. Who, back a few decades ago, would have imagined that innocent school children wouldn't even be safe in their own school? Who would have imagined that people wouldn't be safe in their church? Violence isn't just some abstract idea anymore. Violence can occur in your own workplace just because someone didn't like getting fired and decided to come back with a gun and kill people.
Of course things are more divisive and anxiety producing than 20, 40, 60 years ago. People are getting shot, and it's not just in some unheard of part of the country thousands of miles from where you live. Anxiety is produced when people don't care enough to support health care for all and we are getting back to where illness caused bankruptcy. The left wing is spouting extreme views and putting illegals before US citizens while the right wing cares about their greedy selves. The left wing has good intentions and wants to help everyone, bu that's unrealistic and even unfair. The extreme right wing is being selfish and once they get theirs, they forget that the are part of a country composed of other people. This situation isn't anxiety producing to patriotic Americans?
I'm pretty sure that, 25 years from now, the author of that article will wish he never wrote it. Yeah, those are legit problems, but he comes off looking like a hand-wringing ninny.x
If that was what is happening. Is it? Erm... no. We are not pulling inward and turning towards solutions to internal inequalities and failures of policy. No... rich people are turning towards contemplating vast fortunes so unwieldy and unliquid that they aren't good for anything except bragging about. I haven't any idea of actual numbers but the money in the Cayman's right now is surely many times the entire expressed wealth of the planet a few decades ago. And? In the Bay Area what percent of the Administrative Support workers are living in tents? Their employers live in mansions and their support staff live in tents. Does that make sense?
That's inequality and I think it's one of the big reasons the US is losing our number one spot. We've always had despots working in positions where they could exploit their workers, but never in such numbers or in such ways. In the past, such inequality used to affect US politics and policies. Now it affects world politics and policies and not for the better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
Statistically, there may be less violence today but in the past the violence was confined to certain areas. Today the violence is everywhere. Who, back a few decades ago, would have imagined that innocent school children wouldn't even be safe in their own school? Who would have imagined that people wouldn't be safe in their church? Violence isn't just some abstract idea anymore. Violence can occur in your own workplace just because someone didn't like getting fired and decided to come back with a gun and kill people.
Plus, the violence is much more random and when it occurs, it kills so many more people. It's like saying flying on a jet is safer than driving in cars today. But we know where car crashes occur and we know the major causes of them. Most of them are survivable and most of them are also within the control of the individual involved in the crash, like road rage, drunk driving, etc.
A plane crashes because of something that is beyond the control of the passenger, it's much more random and except in rare cases, everyone usually dies. That's the pattern of violence we're facing today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
