Fear Transforms America

Convinced the planet's oil supply is dwindling and the world's economies are heading for a crash, some people around the country are moving onto homesteads, learning to live off their land, conserving fuel and, in some cases, stocking up on guns they expect to use to defend themselves and their supplies from desperate crowds of people who didn't prepare.

The exact number of people taking such steps is impossible to determine, but anecdotal evidence suggests that the movement has been gaining momentum in the last few years.

These energy survivalists are not leading some sort of green revolution meant to save the planet. Many of them believe it is too late for that, seeing signs in soaring fuel and food prices and a faltering U.S. economy, and are largely focused on saving themselves.

Some are doing it quietly, giving few details of their preparations — afraid that revealing such information as the location of their supplies will endanger themselves and their loved ones. They envision a future in which the nation's cities will be filled with hungry, desperate refugees forced to go looking for food, shelter and water.

"There's going to be things that happen when people can't get things that they need for themselves and their families," said Lynn-Marie, who believes cities could see a rise in violence as early as 2012.

Lynn-Marie asked to be identified by her first name to protect her homestead in rural western Idaho. Many of these survivalists declined to speak to The Associated Press for similar reasons. Interesting Associated Press article featured in today's Yahoo headlines.

Rapid Unraveling And The Demise Of Adolescent America

Some years ago, I found Carolyn Baker's nascent writings about Peak Oil fascinating and exceptional. Over time, I've come to discern a certain triteness (arm-chair new-age-iness) in the meta-narrative which frames her worldview. That's certainly evident in this opinion piece;

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of what we are witnessing-and there are oh so many, is the ubiquitousness of blame. Attending almost every report on skyrocketing gas prices is the question: "So whose fault is it?" I certainly am not surprised by this, but I find it unsettling to say the least. Because Americans in particular have been absolutely recalcitrant and incapable of looking at collapse, they are being and will continue to be increasingly blindsided by it. Sadly, when humans are traumatized, their functioning becomes progressively more primal and animal-like, and their capacity for taking in and assimilating new information is markedly reduced.

When Peak Oil experts first began sharing their research, they told us that food, perhaps more than any aspect of our lives, would be impacted by it, and so it is. The double-barreled trauma now hitting Americans which is putting both gasoline and food out of their reach, is certain to result in reactive, vindictive behavior that will irrationally target a plethora of scapegoats. Add to this a foreclosure or two, a bankruptcy, car repossession, job loss or loss of health insurance and you have a recipe for mayhem. Such behavior, understandable as it may be, is adolescent in nature and therefore, untempered and unwizened, making acting-out individuals exceedingly dangerous to themselves and others.

Like me, you are probably witnessing the barrage of blame in your community and nationally if you are paying attention to mainstream news. Dmitry Orlov has given us a treasure-trove of information about human behavior in the throes of collapse chaos. What is and will be different from the collapse of the Soviet Union for Americans, however, is the level of violence that is likely to proliferate as collapse accelerates. Russians were never intoxicated with affluence and entitlement as Americans are. Their history has been replete with suffering; ours marinated in privilege reinforced by gun culture and firearm fetishes.

That said, I believe the overall premise of her article is on point. Namely, that other more mature societies have indeed experienced and overcome profound traumas and hardships within living memory and in the process, been "initiated" into a more humane and discerning collective sensibility. America's cultural initiation is simply nigh at hand. I suspect that a lot of weaklings will be culled from the herd;

The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices to be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill, and suspicion can destroy, and the thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own; for the children, and the children yet unborn. And the pity of it is that these things cannot be confined to The Twilight Zone.

Sounds About Right - UK Price is already $9/Gallon

It may be the mother of all doom and gloom gas price predictions: $12 for a gallon of gas is “inevitable". Robert Hirsch, Management Information Services Senior Energy Advisor, gave a dire warning about the potential future of gas prices on CNBC’s May 20 “Squawk Box”. He told host Becky Quick there was no single thing that would solve the problem, due to the enormity of the problem.

“[T]he prices that we’re paying at the pump today are, I think, going to be ‘the good old days,’ because others who watch this very closely forecast that we’re going to be hitting $12 and $15 per gallon,” Hirsch said. “And then, after that, when oil – world oil production goes into decline, we’re going to talk about rationing. In other words, not only are we going to be paying high prices and have considerable economic problems, but in addition to that, we’re not going to be able to get the fuel when we want it.”

Hirsch told the Business & Media Institute the $12-$15 a gallon wasn’t his prediction, but that he was citing Charles T. Maxwell, described as the “Dean of Oil Analysts” and the senior energy analyst at Weeden & Co. Still, Hirsch admitted the high price was inevitable in his view.

“I don’t attempt to predict oil prices because it’s been impossible in the past,” Hirsch said in an e-mail. “We’re into a new era now, and over the next roughly five years the trend will be up significantly. However, there may be dips and bumps that no one can forecast; I wouldn’t be at all surprised. To me the multi-year upswing is inevitable.”

Maxwell’s original $12-15-a-gallon prediction came in a February 5 interview with Energytechstocks.com, a Web site run by two former Wall Street Journal staffers.

“[Maxwell] expects an oil-induced financial crisis to start somewhere in the 2010 to 2015 timeframe,” Energytechstocks.com reported. “He said that, unlike the recession the U.S. appears to be in today, ‘This will not be six months of hell and then we come out of it.’ Rather, Maxwell expects this financial crisis to last at least 10 or 12 years, as the world goes through a prolonged period of price-induced rationing (eg, oil up to $300 a barrel and U.S. pump prices up to $15 a gallon).”

Airports Grow Quiet...,

Eliminating flights is the latest move by the airlines in a cost-cutting drive that also has led to ticket prices climbing 10 times this year and new fees, from charges for checking extra bags to changing itineraries.

Almost every major carrier, from American Airlines to Delta Air Lines and US Airways, is crossing cities off its list, leaving passengers with fewer choices than a year ago.

Some travelers have no choices, but it is not for lack of trying by city and state officials. After Hagerstown briefly lost its eligibility for a government program called the Essential Air Service last year, Maryland’s Congressional delegation helped win an extension that allowed Hagerstown, as well as Lancaster, Pa., and Brookings, S.D., to remain in the program until Sept. 30.

The Essential Air Service program was created in 1978, when the airline industry was deregulated, to ensure that communities in rural and remote areas would be linked to the nation’s air system.

Under the program, the government provides subsidies of about $100 million a year to the airlines, resulting in service to 102 communities.

But the subsidies have not risen fast enough to cover the jump in jet fuel costs, and passengers have resisted paying higher prices for plane tickets, prompting carriers to pull out of a number of cities, including Hagerstown.

the “subprime” crisis and how we got into it

In April I posted an article from the Post Autistic Economics Network called The Strange History of Ecomomics. I hope you took the opportunity at that time to subscribe to this information goldmine. If you did - then you received issue 46 yesterday and you're already in information-hog heaven. If you didn't, here's a taste in the form of the very best and most detailed treatment I've seen to date of the subprime mortgage crisis. It's called Global Finance in Crisis by Jacques Sapir, and no, it's not even this issue's article on the Housing Bubble, (I haven't read that one yet) so there's still much else to look forward to;

The bubble bursts - Defaults increased steadily from early 2007 onwards, reaching 16% of the outstanding subprime loans by October 200719. By late January 2008, 24% of subprime mortgages were delinquent or in foreclosure. By late September 2007 nearly 4% of all mortgages were delinquent or in foreclosure, meaning that for non-subprime compartments the average rate of delinquency was 2% against the traditional 0.5% rate. By late January 2008 the figure was 7.3% of all mortgaged loans, and 3.7% for all non-subprime compartments or seven times higher than the traditional rate. During 2007, nearly 1.3 million U.S. housing properties were subject to foreclosure, an increase of 79% over 2006.

In February 2008, the number of foreclosures was at the highest monthly level since the onset of the Great Depression in 1929. Nevada was the worst hit state with a monthly foreclosure ratio of 1 in 165 homes, followed by California (a 1 to 242 ratio), Florida, Texas, Michigan and Ohio21.

The Great Unravelling

In this brief two page article, Jayati Ghosh of Nehru University exemplifies pithy profundity;

The financial liberalisation of the past two decades across the world was based on two mistaken notions. First is the "efficient markets" hypothesis beloved of some economists and many more financial players, which asserts that financial markets are informationally efficient, in that prices on traded financial assets reflect all known information and therefore are unbiased in the sense that they reflect the collective beliefs of all investors about future prospects. Second is the notion that financial institutions, especially large and established ones, are capable of and good at self-regulation, since it is in their own best interests to do so. And therefore external regulation by the state is both unnecessary and inefficient.

Both of these presumptions are now in tatters, completely destroyed by the waves of bad news that keeps coming from the financial markets, and by the growing evidence of foolish and irresponsible behaviour that was clearly indulged in by large and respectable financial players. It has emerged that unreliable behaviours is not the preserve of a few relatively small fly-by-night operators, but is endemic even among the largest private players in the financial system.

About here is where I'd invoke Jay Hanson's merciless critique of economics as the province of professionally trained liars for the elite. Not because I think Professor Ghosh was untruthful, rather, because it's clear that he by no means went far enough in his assessment of the pushme/pullyou relationship existing between elite financial institutions in a current state of freefall, and the allegedly independent machinery of governance that's supposed to independently and objectively regulate and govern the aforementioned financial institutions. It's a short read - check it out and tell me what you think is left unsaid - if anything - in the great unravelling?

Obama Addresses Gluttony

and speaks words that make the theoconservative crowd go wild

OBAMA: All right. So that's what we want to do on global warming here in the United States. We are also going to have to negotiate with other countries. China, India, in particular Brazil. They are growing so fast that they are consuming more and more energy and pretty soon, if their carbon footprint even approaches ours, we're goners. That's part of the reason why we've got to make the investment. We got to lead by example. If we lead by example, if we lead by example, then we can actually export and license technologies that have been invented here to help them deal with their growth pains. But keep in mind, you're right, we can't tell them don't grow. We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times, whether we're living in the desert or we're living in the tundra and then just expect every other country is going to say OK, you know, you guys go ahead keep on using 25 percent of the world's energy, even though you only account for 3 percent of the population, and we'll be fine. Don't worry about us. That's not leadership.

Elite Governance at the Crossroads?

The London Review of Books featured an oddly repellent review of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine. Ultimately, this review was a backhanded slap at democratic populism and an apologetic for the future of humanity in the hands of a ruling elite. You'll have to read the whole thing in order to see for yourself. Two excerpts from the review galvanized my attention, first this thumbnail sketch of warsocialist praxis;

what, if anything, makes the Bush administration uniquely odious?

Her answer is that the Bush administration draws its political support not from America’s corporate class generally, but rather from a particular part of it: ‘the sprawling disaster capitalism complex’. She has in mind the companies that reap huge profits from catastrophes, both man-made and natural. They include defence contractors, arms dealers, high-tech security firms, the oil and gas sectors, construction companies, private healthcare firms and so on. Not exactly ambulance-chasers, they are driving the ambulances themselves – for a profit. For the most part, they capitalise on emergencies rather than deliberately bringing them about. But the distinction is not always so clear: the stock price of Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defence contractor, almost tripled between 2003 and 2007 after a former vice president at the firm chaired a committee agitating for war with Iraq. The Iraq war was also ‘the single most profitable event’ in the history of Halliburton, whose former CEO, who still retains stock options, is Dick Cheney.

Klein is outraged by the rapacity of corporations that see ‘exciting market opportunities’, rather than human suffering, in wars, hurricanes, epidemics and other disasters.

Second, this downright Cobbian assertion that benevolent elites are the only barrier against populist and democratic expression of xenophobia;

Anti-immigrant xenophobia, hostile as it is to the free-market model that she, too, opposes, is never mentioned as a genuine expression of democratic populism. Wasn’t there majority white support for the dispossession of New Orleans’ black community after Katrina? And wasn’t there majority Russian support for Putin’s wars in Chechnya? Isn’t the ordinary citizen’s fear and hatred of otherness as malicious a force as the corporate profiteer’s insatiable greed?[...]
This hope that ordinary people will ‘at last’ take control of large historical processes may explain, by backward reasoning, why Klein assumes that such processes are now tightly controlled by a predatory elite adhering to a sinister doctrine. If that were the case, then refuting ‘the shock doctrine’ would be a first step towards wresting control of world history from the corporate masters. Unfortunately, the developments she so tellingly describes, such as the proliferation of barricades and other techniques for managing class conflict, have deeper and more impersonal roots than greed and ideology. Current trends may be stymied or reversed, but, if this happens, Klein’s admirable aspirations for democracy and justice are not very likely to play much of a role.

Holmes has set up an interesting juxtiposition in this review of The Shock Doctrine. I find it more illustrative of the extent to which governance narratives have been undermined by the rapacious incompetence of the current administration, i.e., all faith in judicious rule by elites has been undermined, and to the extent that a truly chaotic tipping point may have already been reached.

Warsocialist Perversion Exposed

As anyone who follows this blog knows, I am not a fan of warsocialism. I tend to believe - in accordance with Pres. Dwight Eisenhower - that the warsocialist enterprise is like a cancer on the American political economy.

The other night, I saw for the first time a very eye-opening exposition on the criminal profiteering that has taken place pursuant to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. (to the left is a 4 minute excerpt - below I've linked the full monty) If you had any prior doubts about the evils of warsocialism, this movie will completely put those doubts to rest.

Eisenhower Warns of the Military Industrial Complex

Theoconservative BioEthics

The Stupidity of Dignity - Conservative bioethics' latest, most dangerous ploy - Steven Pinker;

This spring, the President's Council on Bioethics released a 555-page report, titled Human Dignity and Bioethics. The Council, created in 2001 by George W. Bush, is a panel of scholars charged with advising the president and exploring policy issues related to the ethics of biomedical innovation, including drugs that would enhance cognition, genetic manipulation of animals or humans, therapies that could extend the lifespan, and embryonic stem cells and so-called "therapeutic cloning" that could furnish replacements for diseased tissue and organs. Advances like these, if translated into freely undertaken treatments, could make millions of people better off and no one worse off. So what's not to like? The advances do not raise the traditional concerns of bioethics, which focuses on potential harm and coercion of patients or research subjects. What, then, are the ethical concerns that call for a presidential council?[...]

The sickness in theocon bioethics goes beyond imposing a Catholic agenda on a secular democracy and using "dignity" to condemn anything that gives someone the creeps. Ever since the cloning of Dolly the sheep a decade ago, the panic sown by conservative bioethicists, amplified by a sensationalist press, has turned the public discussion of bioethics into a miasma of scientific illiteracy. Brave New World, a work of fiction, is treated as inerrant prophesy. Cloning is confused with resurrecting the dead or mass-producing babies. Longevity becomes "immortality," improvement becomes "perfection," the screening for disease genes becomes "designer babies" or even "reshaping the species." The reality is that biomedical research is a Sisyphean struggle to eke small increments in health from a staggeringly complex, entropy-beset human body. It is not, and probably never will be, a runaway train.

Be that as it may, it's most interesting to observe the staunch prohibitions attempted as against the leading edges of biomedical research and the contrasting theoconservative ethics vis-a-vis cheap energy as an inalienable American right.

Human Rights, Science and the Energy Emergency

Dr. Arthur Robinson at HumanEvents.com

Today, we announce that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists -- over 9,000 of whom hold PhD degrees in relevant scientific fields -- have signed a petition to the U.S. government that states:

The people of the United States find themselves in an economic crisis caused, in large part, by energy shortages and rapidly increasing prices for energy.

Yet, the United Nations and other vocal political interests are urging the U.S. to enact new laws that will sharply reduce U.S. energy production and raise energy prices even higher. These interests claim that continued U.S. use of hydrocarbon fuels -- which account for 85% of U.S. energy supplies -- will destroy the Earth’s climate and cause many environmental catastrophes.

What should the U.S government do in response to this situation? The answer is provided by science, by economics, and by the basic principles of human rights. The inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, in a civilization based upon the achievements of science and technology, include the rights to obtain access to life-giving and life-enhancing technology. This is especially true of the right of access to the most basic of all technologies -- the right of access to energy. This right, we recognize, means we have the right to purchase energy, though the government does not owe us a supply of it. To the contrary, the government owes us an obligation to remove itself as an obstacle to our access to energy unless there is a reason our nation’s security is endangered by it. And there is no such reason.

The so-called “global warming” measures advocated by the UN and others create obstacles, rather than eliminating them.


Our right to access to energy and removal of government obstructions have been significantly abridged.During the past two generations in the U.S., a system of high taxation, extensive regulation, and ubiquitous litigation has arisen that prevents the accumulation of sufficient capital and the exercise of sufficient freedom to build and preserve needed modern technology.

This unfavorable economic environment has caused the transfer of many industries abroad and cessation of growth of many others. Nowhere is this damaging trend more evident than in our energy industries, where lack of industrial progress has left our country dependent upon foreign sources for 30% of the energy required to maintain our current level of prosperity.

etc., etc., and so on and so forth....,

America is a nation of 300 million citizens who consume 25% of the world's daily oil production. In a world populated by 6.7 billion people this means that there are approximately 2 billion who have access to *no* energy at all -- no automobiles, no air conditioners, and very little food.

The Bear Stretches....,

Russia accused of annexing the Arctic for oil reserves by Canada

The battle for "ownership" of the polar oil reserves has accelerated with the disclosure that Russia has sent a fleet of nuclear-powered ice breakers into the Arctic.

It has reinforced fears that Moscow intends to annex "unlawfully" a vast portion of the ice-covered Arctic, beneath which scientists believe up to 10 billion tons of gas and oil could be buried. Russian ambition for control of the Arctic has provoked Canada to double to $40 million (£20.5 million) funding for work to map the Arctic seabed in support its claim over the territory.

The Russian ice breakers patrol huge areas of the frozen ocean for months on end, cutting through ice up to 8ft thick. There are thought to be eight in the region, dwarfing the British and American fleets, neither of which includes nuclear-powered ships.

Canada also plans to open an army training centre for cold-weather fighting at Resolute Bay and a deep-water port on the northern tip of Baffin Island, both of which are close to the disputed region. The country's defence ministry intends to build a special fleet of patrol boats to guard the North West Passage.

"The message from Vladimir Putin is that Russia will no longer be shackled to treaties signed by Yeltsin when he was half drunk or when Russia was on its knees,"

Russia rivals Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer and is estimated to have the largest natural gas supplies. Energy earnings are funding a $189 billion (£97 billion) overhaul of its armed forces.

Cold War Oil Politics

The U.S. and the Soviet Union;

Richard Heinberg, a professor from Santa Rosa, California argues that a newly declassified CIA document shows that the U.S. used oil prices as leverage against the economy of the Soviet Union:

"The Memorandum predicts an impending peak in Soviet oil production 'not later than the early 1980s' (the actual peak occurred in 1987 at 12.6 million barrels per day, following a preliminary peak in 1983 of 12.5 Mb/d). 'During the next decade,' the unnamed authors of the document conclude, 'the USSR may well find itself not only unable to supply oil to Eastern Europe and the West on the present scale, but also having to compete for OPEC oil for its own use.' The Memorandum predicts that the oil peak will have important economic impacts: 'When oil production stops growing, and perhaps even before, profound repercussions will be felt on the domestic economy of the USSR and on its international economic relations.'"

"...Soon after assuming office in 1981, the Reagan Administration abandoned the established policy of pursuing détente with the Soviet Union and instead instituted a massive arms buildup; it also fomented proxy wars in areas of Soviet influence, while denying the Soviets desperately needed oil equipment and technology. Then, in the mid-1980s, Washington persuaded Saudi Arabia to flood the world market with cheap oil. Throughout the last decade of its existence, the USSR pumped and sold its oil at the maximum possible rate in order to earn foreign exchange income with which to keep up in the arms race and prosecute its war in Afghanistan. Yet with markets awash with cheap Saudi oil, the Soviets were earning less even as they pumped more. Two years after their oil production peaked, the economy of the USSR crumbled and its government collapsed.

As noted in April - In a radically altered world— where Russia is transformed from battered Cold War loser to arrogant broker of Eurasian energy, and the United States is forced to compete with the emerging “Chindia” juggernaut—the only route to survival on a shrinking planet, lies through international cooperation.

Gurdjieff Movements

The Enneagram - A Lecture by G.I. Gurdjieff

In every man there has been implanted a need of (desire for) knowledge, differing only in its intensity. But the passive human mind, while utilizing every means possible to it of taking in (and working over) impressions, often gets into an impasse in trying to find an answer to the question "Why".

Man's eyes are dazzled by the bright play of the colors of multiformity, and under the glittering surface he does not see the hidden kernel of the one-ness of all that exists. This multiformity is so real that its single modes approach him from all sides - some by way of logical deduction and philosophy, others by way or faith and feeling. From the most ancient times down to our own epoch, throughout the ages of its life, humanity as a whole has been yearning for a knowledge of this one-ness and seeking for it, pouring itself out into various philosophies and religions which remain, as it were, monuments on the path of these searches for the Path, leading to the knowledge of unity. Very extensive lecture here.

Gurdjieff on Influences

ONCE there was a meeting with a large number of people who had not been at our meetings before. One of them asked: “From what does the way start?” The person who asked the question had not heard G.’s description of the four ways and he used the word “way” in the usual religious-mystical sense.

“The chief difficulty in understanding the idea of the way,”‘ said G., “consists in the fact that people usually think that the way” (he emphasized this word) “starts on the same level on which life is going. This is quite wrong. The way begins on another, much higher, level. This is exactly what people usually do not understand. The beginning of the way is thought to be easier or simpler than it is in reality. I will try to explain this in the following way. Full excerpt here.

Conspiracy Theory

Also by Stephan Faris, but in next month's Atlantic Monthly.

As scientific evidence accumulates on the destructive impact of carbon-dioxide emissions, a handful of lawyers are beginning to bring suits against the major contributors to climate change. Their arguments, so far, have not been well received; the courts have been understandably reluctant to hold a specific group of defendants responsible for a problem for which everyone on Earth bears some responsibility. Lawsuits in California, Mississippi, and New York have been dismissed by judges who say a ruling would require them to balance the perils of greenhouse gases against the benefits of fossil fuels—something best handled by legislatures.

But Susman and Berman have been intrigued by the possibilities. Both have added various environmental and energy cases to their portfolios over the years, and Susman recently taught a class on climate-change litigation at the University of Houston Law Center. Over time, the two trial lawyers have become convinced that they have the playbook necessary to win big cases against the country’s largest emitters. It’s the same game plan that brought down Big Tobacco. And in Kivalina—where the link between global warming and material damage is strong—they believe they’ve found the perfect challenger.

Given the inability of the Rockefeller heirs to get ExxonMobil to budge, perhaps mobilization of trial lawyers seeking a major bounty is the only way to crack the adamantine corporatist nut?

Berman and Susman aren’t alone in drawing parallels between the actions of the defendants and those of the tobacco industry. The Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental advocacy group, has accused Exxon­Mobil of adopting the cigarette manufacturers’ strategy of covertly establishing “front” groups, promoting writers who exaggerate uncertainties in the science, and improperly cultivating ties within the government. The oil company, it says, has “funneled approximately $16 million to carefully chosen organizations that promote disinformation on global warming.”

The prospect of catching folks lying conspiratorially makes this interesting and analogous in many regards to the tobacco industry which was successfully assayed by well prepared trial lawyers.

Is Climate the Real Culprit in Darfur?

The fighting in Darfur is usually described as racially motivated, pitting mounted Arabs against black rebels and civilians. But the fault lines have their origins in another distinction, between settled farmers and nomadic herders fighting over failing lands. The aggression of the warlord Musa Hilal can be traced to the fears of his father, and to how climate change shattered a way of life.

Until the rains began to fail, the sheikh’s people lived amicably with the settled farmers. The nomads were welcome passers-through, grazing their camels on the rocky hillsides that separated the fertile plots. The farmers would share their wells, and the herders would feed their stock on the leavings from the harvest. But with the drought, the farmers began to fence off their land—even fallow land—for fear it would be ruined by passing herds. A few tribes drifted elsewhere or took up farming, but the Arab herders stuck to their fraying livelihoods—nomadic herding was central to their cultural identity. (The distinction between “Arab” and “African” in Darfur is defined more by lifestyle than any physical difference: Arabs are generally herders, Africans typically farmers. The two groups are not racially distinct.)

Stephan Faris in last year's April Atlantic Monthly

It's Liquidation Time...

It's approaching three months since we last sampled a little bit of the Hypertiger's wisdom. I tend to dot connect from the periphery of what's available to us in the mainstream if we'll only focus our attention diligently enough to see it.

F'zample, the makings of the Greatest Depression are all readily available for anyone to see. The pernicious gaming of the food supply and gradual conditioning of public awareness to this process is another subject we've covered extensively, and, which other dot-connectors have summarized nicely to our attention.

But at the end-of-the-day - I've only come across a single purveyor of an internally consistent grand unified theory of the end of the world as we know it (TEOTWAWKI) who goes well beyond the popular periphery and deep into historical detail and comes back up and out with simple, readily accessible explanatory summations. I believe it imperative that you go and fully assimilate Hypertiger Wisdom if want to have a comprehensive handle on the current situation - that said, I humbly yield the microphone to the Hypertiger;

A well rested horse is not an exhausted horse. And an exhausted horse is zero.

Top lives off the yield from the bottom. When the yield from the bottom to the top becomes zero...The top goes nowhere. The top needs to find a well rested horse to ride...You can add as many exhausted horses to the equation as you want...You are not going anywhere.

Rich people get all the power they have from the bottom...and when the bottom is exhausted...There is nothing they can do...They have no power other than what you all give them.

And you think when you can no longer pay the top what you owe them that they are going to print up what you owe them...hand it to you and then you hand it back to them to pay them what you owe them...

Sorry...When the bottom is exhausted...It's game over.

No magic printing press or anything else is going to work....The only thing that works is liquidation.

the top needs assets and saves assets...But once the bottom is used up...They are not assets anymore...They are liabilities and either self liquidate or are wiped off the face of the ledger...

Can't feed 6 Billion boot lickers anymore...well...liquidate them until you get to the point that you can.

The above is real economics...Not the wishful thinking fantasy economics you all are devoted to and promote.

Very, very few people realize what we've enbedded in...An absolute capitalist hierarchial food powered make work enterprise...

GDP break down...

Agriculture: 1% The producers of the power...

The consumers of the power. (food powered make work liabilities)

Industry: 20.7%
Services: 78.3%

Sorry but none of you eat Gold and Silver or copper or crude oil, etc. to sustain the continued existence of your bodies...

Total labor force out of the population of 300 Million...150 million.

farming/food production 0.5% or 7.5 million people...

In any evaluation of the actual state of an economy, the intellectual tools of historic comparison are invaluable. When those tools are used today to examine the US economy, what one finds is a massive multi-generational retrogression which has been constant since the mid-1960s. To give just one example of this, today, the US manufacturing base takes up a mere 9.9 percent of total employment.

If the gargantuan and grotesque US military-industrial complex is subtracted, as it ought to be as sheer economic waste, what would remain are those still employed in the US civil and private economy. In reality, genuinely productive employment in the US economy is much lower than 9.9 percent. This is de-industrialisation in broad daylight. Some folks not only haven't a clue about the nature of the beast, they actively promote disinformation which serves to keep other clueless folks distracted from seeking a clue on their own.