PermeateFree said:

is that all there is?

PermeateFree said:

RICHARD JONES, 7 JUNE 2019
“Fascinating to read how the Reserve Bank wants to push up inflation which is well below their target range.

They also want to increase retail spending to boost sluggish growth. They’re stuck completely on the old endless growth paradigm.

Few economists have recognised that it’s impossible to have endless growth on a planet with strictly limited resources.

The harsh reality is humans all need to consume less. Those who consume most – us- need to reduce the most.

It’s hardly fair to ask those who live without electricity and survive hand to mouth to cut down!

We are not yet having a serious discussion about what a reduced consumption of new resources economy really looks like, in over-developed countries like ours.

IQ45’s trade war is beginning to have serious repercussions, hitting his own supporters hardest.

It may well lead to a crash. It wouldn’t be new to him. He has bankrupted many companies.

Trouble is, the poorest come off worst.

If that crash occurs, we will need to construct a different economy from the wreckage, not based on endless consumption, creating more dangerous pollution, destroying oceans and wildlife.

Suggestions include far more localisation, support of local clean food producers, small businesses, repair shops, re-use centres, shared ownership of equipment and so on.

It has worked well in the past by necessity. It may be forced on us again, if we are to survive.

With or without an economic crash, we’re going to need to become very creative.

Your suggestions are welcome.”
Richard Jones

Richard Jones is a former Member of the NSW Upper House and environment advocate, but of greater importance is the thoughts expressed.

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

is that all there is?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

is that all there is?

Sorry, apparently accidentally tapped the “enter” key that posted the premature post.

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

is that all there is?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M

nods.

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

RICHARD JONES, 7 JUNE 2019
“Fascinating to read how the Reserve Bank wants to push up inflation which is well below their target range.

They also want to increase retail spending to boost sluggish growth. They’re stuck completely on the old endless growth paradigm.

Few economists have recognised that it’s impossible to have endless growth on a planet with strictly limited resources.

The harsh reality is humans all need to consume less. Those who consume most – us- need to reduce the most.

It’s hardly fair to ask those who live without electricity and survive hand to mouth to cut down!

We are not yet having a serious discussion about what a reduced consumption of new resources economy really looks like, in over-developed countries like ours.

IQ45’s trade war is beginning to have serious repercussions, hitting his own supporters hardest.

It may well lead to a crash. It wouldn’t be new to him. He has bankrupted many companies.

Trouble is, the poorest come off worst.

If that crash occurs, we will need to construct a different economy from the wreckage, not based on endless consumption, creating more dangerous pollution, destroying oceans and wildlife.

Suggestions include far more localisation, support of local clean food producers, small businesses, repair shops, re-use centres, shared ownership of equipment and so on.

It has worked well in the past by necessity. It may be forced on us again, if we are to survive.

With or without an economic crash, we’re going to need to become very creative.

Your suggestions are welcome.”
Richard Jones

Richard Jones is a former Member of the NSW Upper House and environment advocate, but of greater importance is the thoughts expressed.

It … reads like it’s written in 6 second sound bites. With no connection between any of them.

The possibility of an economic crash really frightens me.

The current negative or near negative rate of inflation is a total disincentive to saving money.

mollwollfumble said:

The current negative or near negative rate of inflation is a total disincentive to saving money.

Please show working.

Yeah nah. Some resources are unlimited, or limited only by the expected lifespan of the sun.

party_pants said:

Yeah nah. Some resources are unlimited, or limited only by the expected lifespan of the sun.

It is not just resources it is the increase rate of growth required in any enterprise, which unless it continues to grow is regarded as a failure.

Productivity growth allows for economic growth with a stable population.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

Yeah nah. Some resources are unlimited, or limited only by the expected lifespan of the sun.

It is not just resources it is the increase rate of growth required in any enterprise, which unless it continues to grow is regarded as a failure.

It seems that way nowadays profit isn’t good enough it has to be increased profit or else you failed
It seems those make the policies and decisions will be dead when everything goes to pot and have the money and resources to weather it out until then. They don’t care about everyday people who work hard so they can afford to work hard to live. Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

Every world government in spiralling debt doesn’t make sense.

mollwollfumble said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

Every world government in spiralling debt doesn’t make sense.

Yes you are absolutely right. The only alternative to continual expansion within a finite space is spiralling debt.

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

The current negative or near negative rate of inflation is a total disincentive to saving money.

Please show working.

Zero or negative income from savings is a real bummer.

mollwollfumble said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

Every world government in spiralling debt doesn’t make sense.

This statement has no bearing on my query.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

mollwollfumble said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

The current negative or near negative rate of inflation is a total disincentive to saving money.

Please show working.

Zero or negative income from savings is a real bummer.

So don’t invest in things with zero or negative return.

It’s possible to imagine the economy growing by means that use fewer and fewer resources, not more.

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Plus I wonder who or what is over exploited to fund this continual expansion, I imagine much of what goes on is hidden or ignored. People don’t seem content with what they have they always want more/better.

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Using limited resources and the environment more productively counts as economic growth.

Bubblecar said:

It’s possible to imagine the economy growing by means that use fewer and fewer resources, not more.

Yes better management of resources, food is one product that is wasted

We’ve always got soylent green as a back up.

Bubblecar said:

It’s possible to imagine the economy growing by means that use fewer and fewer resources, not more.

Well yes, and that is obviously the optimal way forward, but the current economic debate does not seem to consider this approach at all.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Using limited resources and the environment more productively counts as economic growth.

Not necessarily.

The way economic growth is measured hides future costs. That is the essence of the problem.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Using limited resources and the environment more productively counts as economic growth.

For instance, the winner of the recent Australian federal election explicitly and completely discounted this approach, and even the loser didn’t do much to promote it.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Using limited resources and the environment more productively counts as economic growth.

Not necessarily.

The way economic growth is measured hides future costs. That is the essence of the problem.

I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Cymek said:

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

furious said:

Cymek said:

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

It’s so 15th and 17th century to flood a market with metals…

furious said:

Cymek said:

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Doesn’t that come across as self defeating and manipulation, you have access to huge resources but won’t use them as it means monetary loss, surely a better system needs to be constructed

• Doesn’t that come across as self defeating and manipulation, you have access to huge resources but won’t use them as it means monetary loss, surely a better system needs to be constructed

Send it all to mars to kick start their colony…

furious said:

Cymek said:

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

I hope that was intended to be ironic.

furious said:

• Doesn’t that come across as self defeating and manipulation, you have access to huge resources but won’t use them as it means monetary loss, surely a better system needs to be constructed

Send it all to mars to kick start their colony…

That could work

furious said:

• Doesn’t that come across as self defeating and manipulation, you have access to huge resources but won’t use them as it means monetary loss, surely a better system needs to be constructed

Send it all to mars to kick start their colony…

It wont matter, the earth, moon mars etc will all burn when the sun goes supernova.
The only possible thing that could give witness that life once existed in the universe is Voyager I.

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Cymek said:

Continual economic expansion doesn’t even make logical sense

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Actually, no.

All resources are unlimited. Every resource that moves from the lithosphere to the anthroposphere stays in the anthroposphere, and can be recycled within the anthroposphere. So far as i can tell, there is not a single resource anywhere on the planet that is in danger of depletion in the forseeable future. It’s called “conservation of nass”.

As for the environment, humans are part of the environment.

Continued economic expansion is not only sustainable, it’s vital.

• It wont matter, the earth, moon mars etc will all burn when the sun goes supernova.

I don’t believe that our sun fits the requirements to go supernova…

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Actually, no.

All resources are unlimited. Every resource that moves from the lithosphere to the anthroposphere stays in the anthroposphere, and can be recycled within the anthroposphere. So far as i can tell, there is not a single resource anywhere on the planet that is in danger of depletion in the forseeable future. It’s called “conservation of nass”.

As for the environment, humans are part of the environment.

Continued economic expansion is not only sustainable, it’s vital.

We can expand but at what cost we could destroy the environment to the point it can’t grow us food.
I suppose if we have enough energy we can overcome this and live on a Earth that is a pale imitation of what we have now.

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

How so?

We live in a closed system with limited resources plus the environment to consider

Actually, no.

All resources are unlimited. Every resource that moves from the lithosphere to the anthroposphere stays in the anthroposphere, and can be recycled within the anthroposphere. So far as i can tell, there is not a single resource anywhere on the planet that is in danger of depletion in the forseeable future. It’s called “conservation of nass”.

As for the environment, humans are part of the environment.

Continued economic expansion is not only sustainable, it’s vital.

I hope that was intended to be ironic.

furious said:

Cymek said:

furious said:

• I wonder if off world mining counts as economic expansion if at first it is a huge loss but over decades starts to give a return

Off world mining could potentially completely crash the world economy…

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

Cymek said:

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Could devalue something like precious metals are they are no longer rare if you find the motherlode, but then they have lots of uses that might be met if they are no longer rare

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

Cymek said:

Cost or it proves so viable it causes metals/ores to be worthless.
I do wonder if we will build and make things because we can and have the resources and the cost and profit isn’t considered.

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Space mining is not even possible at this stage. As with so many spaaaace predictions, the actual costs involved are likely to be astronomical.

Bubblecar said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Space mining is not even possible at this stage. As with so many spaaaace predictions, the actual costs involved are likely to be astronomical.

Well, quite.

Bubblecar said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

Mining just one large asteroid could collapse the world economy due to surge of new supply for valuable metals

“If somehow we would be able to mine these metals and bring them back to Earth, our entire global economy could collapse due to a sudden surge of valuable metals. As noted by Futurism, the iron in 16 Psyche alone is estimated to be worth $10,000 quadrillion while today the entire global economy for this mineral is only worth $78 trillion. If anyone were to mine that asteroid, the resulting riches would collapse the entire economy in a blink.”

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Space mining is not even possible at this stage. As with so many spaaaace predictions, the actual costs involved are likely to be astronomical.

Yes. One of the actual tangible benefits of space mining may be moving construction materials top Earth orbit and building a space elevator from the top down. I wonder if steel would be flexible enough if there isn’t carbon readily available.

The profits from guiding huge hunks of metal to a safe crash landing on the earth will be slightly less than the insurance and compliance costs.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bubblecar said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bloody bunch of bullshit. Neither the Space.news article or the Futurism one outline exactly how space mining would crash the world economy at all. At worst it would destroy the business model of the iron-ore industry which would in no way devastate the remainder of the economy as is stated. Even if we were to imagine that all terrestrial mining could be replaced by off-world mining the consequent end to world-wide mining would only affect the 5-10% of the economy that is dependent on it (this 5-10% is my estimate of the share of global GDP represented by mining and could be generous given that a nation like Australia that is very dependent on mining still only has it constitute 6-7% of our GDP).

In short the claims of global collapse are ludicrous with the change to the mining industry easily manageable over the time-scale involved in space mining.

Space mining is not even possible at this stage. As with so many spaaaace predictions, the actual costs involved are likely to be astronomical.

Yes. One of the actual tangible benefits of space mining may be moving construction materials top Earth orbit and building a space elevator from the top down. I wonder if steel would be flexible enough if there isn’t carbon readily available.

Apart from which, the idea that having one component of the production cost of one material reduced would by itself collapse the World economy is ridiculous.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bubblecar said:

Space mining is not even possible at this stage. As with so many spaaaace predictions, the actual costs involved are likely to be astronomical.

Yes. One of the actual tangible benefits of space mining may be moving construction materials top Earth orbit and building a space elevator from the top down. I wonder if steel would be flexible enough if there isn’t carbon readily available.

Apart from which, the idea that having one component of the production cost of one material reduced would by itself collapse the World economy is ridiculous.

Oops, I see I’m just repeating Witty.

I suppose I ought to read stuff before quoting it.

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Yes. One of the actual tangible benefits of space mining may be moving construction materials top Earth orbit and building a space elevator from the top down. I wonder if steel would be flexible enough if there isn’t carbon readily available.

Apart from which, the idea that having one component of the production cost of one material reduced would by itself collapse the World economy is ridiculous.

Oops, I see I’m just repeating Witty.

I suppose I ought to read stuff before quoting it.

It’s not the forum way.

Space mining might take the model of another expensive and unsure proposition, the spice explorations where gentlemen would pool money with no payout for years and no certainty of a payout at all. Then sell stocks.