#160. New Year’s Revolutions? #TwoFingers2Brino #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @wiki_ballot @financialeyes #IABATO #SAM #GE2019 Roger Lewis ( Porthos) @JoeBlob20

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/12/07/159-the-perils-of-equilibria/

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/12/20/160-new-years-revolutions/

rogerglewis
on December 25, 2019 at 8:11 am said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Hi David,
Its an excellent question and also one which Tim has addressed up to a point here before.

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2018/06/20/129-why-what-how/#comment-7389

drtimmorgan
on June 28, 2018 at 8:21 am said:
Thanks Roger.

I think we can start with the observation that what conventional economics should measure – but doesn’t – is prosperity. The article explains how SEEDS calculates it.

There are two points I’d make now. First, prosperity determines material satisfaction, not least because it reduces stress and worry, so this has political repercussions, and goes a long way to explain why the “unpopulists” are losing out.

Second, prosperity decides how able people are to carry financial burdens, most obviously debt, but ‘social burdens’ too, such as health, education, care for the elderly and defence.

From this, it follows that any school of economics which cannot measure prosperity effectively is of very little use. I think that recognition of this is now dawning on the ‘customers’ of economics – including government, businesses and finance.

What I’m looking at now is the remarkable predicament of China. Countries like the US and the UK typically add to debt at rates of between 5% and 6% of GDP annually – not satisfactory, of course, and far higher than growth, so not a sustainable model. But China, albeit with growth in the range 6% to 7%, borrows more than 30% of GDP each year. That is totally unsustainable – and has been happening for ten years.

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/07/14/153-one-for-the-sceptics/comment-page-4/#comments

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2018/05/19/126-whats-next-for-seeds/

drtimmorgan
on March 7, 2018 at 2:39 pm said:
With ECoE by fuel group, you need to remember that the energy used in contructing renewables equipment comes overwhelmingly from fossil fuels. Therefore, even as technology and economies of scale are lowering the ECoEs of renewables, the ECoE of their input costs will be rising. I am very far from convinced that we could – for example – extract or process copper or steel without using fossil fuel energy.

I look at every information source that I can, trying to avoid anything that looks like lobbying. Taking PV just as an example, there are some arguments that it will never cover its energy costs, and others saying it’ll almost “too cheap to meter”.

As you may know, I’m convinced that big commercial and official organisations are going to need to build something like SEEDS as conventional models become ever less useful. I’m not going to hand them the information to do that. So that’s why I publish ECoEs by fuel groups, but not by fuel types – it gives readers what they need, but doesn’t enable someone to build something like SEEDS.

@David Hughes on December 20, 2019 at 11:13 pm said:
Just wondering how you calculated your ECoE and where the data came from. Thanks.

We do Christmas on Christmas Eve in Sweden. Christmas Day is a Chillax day as is Boxing Day. This is kind of appropriate today and here in many ways.

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/12/23/over-population-paper-how-big-a-waste-paper-basket-ayers-quite-so-twofingers2brino-4pamphleteers-grubstreetjorno-wiki_ballot-financialeyes-iabato-sam-ge2019-roger-lewis-porthos-joebl/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/03/10/energy-returned-on-energy-invested-surplus-energy-economics-data-base-seeds-embodied-energy-circular-economy/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/05/19/whats-next-for-seeds-shifting-from-gdp-to-prosperity/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/07/05/grand-bargains-dangerous-choices-false-equivalences-land-of-brave-or-the-rising-sun-trumps-trade-war-or-who-ate-all-the-pies/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/07/08/redefining-fiscal-conservatism-the-terra-energy-based-fiscal-unit-fores-and-lagom-white-paper-boundary-conditions-for-a-fiscal-conservatism-based-upon-circular-economics-part-one-scope/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/06/30/end-of-ownership-circular-economy-proof-of-brain-and-primary-intermediary-and-consumption-energy-tokens-a-framework-evolves/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/02/26/possibilist-perspective-on-post-growth-sustainable-money-and-sustainable-energy-whos-reality/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/06/29/embodied-energy-cost-of-opportunity-cost-which-would-be-a-true-metric-of-decision-making-where-resource-constraints-involve-mutually-exclusive-investment-decisions/

http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2019/11/24/the-economic-oil-nexus-eon-part-1-why-have-low-oil-prices-and-various-economic-stimuli-over-the-past-several-years-failed-to-restore-global-economic-growth/

Don Stewart on December 22, 2019 at 1:38 am said:

Geoffrey Chia on Peak Oil and Economic Collapse
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2019/11/24/the-economic-oil-nexus-eon-part-1-why-have-low-oil-prices-and-various-economic-stimuli-over-the-past-several-years-failed-to-restore-global-economic-growth/

This was published about a month ago. I probably read his article a few years ago on Bardi’s blog, but had forgotten about it. In a nutshell, in this article, after spending some time lambasting nitwits, he tries to explain why low oil prices have not stimulated a genuine economic recovery. His answer (oversimplified by me) is that the previous GFC destroyed demand from the middle class. Supply and demand curves still work, so reduced demand equals lower price.

If we consider ShadowStat’s inflation numbers as real, and the hedrnically adjusted and massaged official numbers as fiction, then look at the destruction aimed at the middle class:
*hollowing out of the bonds backing pensions
*hollowing out of stocks backing pensions as companies purchase their own shares using borrowed money
*failure of social security payments to match the real cost of inflation
*the continued retail apocalypse…which cannot be explained away by Amazon
*failure of wages to rise anywhere near the level of real inflation

When I look at that list, it gives me some confidence that Chia is providing a plausible explanation. Falling interest rates may have prevented total collapse, but they have not created organic growth. He looks to falling EROI for conventional oil as the underlying factor.

Don StewartReply ↓

  • austrianpeteron December 22, 2019 at 10:14 am said:Many thanks Don, great article and exactly as Tim describes in his book – the chart is exactly the same! i wonder where they got it?
  • rogerglewison December 25, 2019 at 9:02 am said:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    That’s an interesting Web site and the article is also interesting two glaring missing questions are State Licensing of Oil Extraction and also State Taxation of the Product along with State privatisation of the FIAT Currency Unit as Debt.Stripping out Oil Taxation from EROI and Prosperity measures, This will make the real underlying EROI evident and also bring light on the question of the Dynamic between the Economic Unit of currency ( FIAT) and the State choice of FIAT based world economies to accept sanctioning the privatised FIAT money System.https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/12/08/159-the-perils-of-equilibria/What are the economic principles of taxation?
    Hi, Tim Seasons Greetings.
    On the post, I do not think it is one of your best.
    It says that seeds predicts all of this and then gives a straightforward monetary analysis.
    I find this disappointing. I am going to download the resources and look for the correlations you are claiming but which you have not explained here.One glaring point missing from your analysis, even though you give per capita GDP and Debt figures are that wealth redistribution and increased inequality is not stripped out of your figures.
    I have become increasingly persuaded that the precariat is a matter of political Design and not some accident or necessity due to energy constraint realities. I believe it is explained by the oldest cause of want and that is the greed of a corrupted elite.Let’s Look at Norway. Brino is a deceased Norweigan Blue. Yet Corbyn’s sit on the fence “Credible leave Option”, points to a revival of the dead Norwegian Parrot. #EUMilitaryUnion and the Norwegian Option? #TwoFingers2Brino #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @Survation @wiki_ballot @financialeyes #WIKIBALLOTPICK #IABATO #SAM #GE2019 Roger Lewis ( Porthos) @JoeBlob20 @GloriaDePiero
    rogerglewis Uncategorized December 11, 2019 12 MinutesWiki_Ballot
    @wiki_ballot
    David James, Baron James of Blackheath #EUMilitaryUnification @ukcolumn https://www.bitchute.com/video/zRZMTnxrlDEb/ … #BitChuteTonefreqhz
    David James, Baron James of Blackheath #EUMilitaryUnification @ukcolumnbitchute.com
    9:45 AM – Dec 11, 2019
    Twitter Ads info and privacy
    See Wiki_Ballot’s other Tweets
    Why did Theresa May allegedly turn down the EU offer of a ‘free-trade’ deal with Europe?
    Keith Young
    Keith Young, studied History at Birbeck College, University of London
    Answered Nov 28, 2018
    I am not sure she did. However, a free trade deal was always a possibility (and still is).She did not want a free trade deal because she wanted to be in the single market and customs union, because she is a Remainer. What she tried to negotiate was access to the single market and customs union without membership. The end result is a deal to remain in the EU but with no say in EU policy. This is why Remainers are claiming (correctly) this is worse than Remain. It is a dog’s breakfast that will be rejected by parliament. I doubt the majority against will be much under 200. The more she advoca…How Norway Does State Oil and Political Economy COntrasted with the UK Neo-Liberal Experiment is quite fruitful.These 3 posts together will go into the excellent report called Drilling into Debt.https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/04/20/the-black-and-the-green-debt-oil-and-arms-zionist-imperialism-and-international-banking/
    http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2011/01/DrillingIntoDebt.pdf

5 thoughts on “#160. New Year’s Revolutions? #TwoFingers2Brino #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @wiki_ballot @financialeyes #IABATO #SAM #GE2019 Roger Lewis ( Porthos) @JoeBlob20”

  1. Stripping out Oil Taxation from EROI and Prosperity measures, This will make the real underlying EROI evident and also bring light on the question of the Dynamic between the Economic Unit of currency ( FIAT) and the State choice of FIAT based world economies to accept sanctioning the privatised FIAT money System.

    https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/12/08/159-the-perils-of-equilibria/

    What are the economic principles of taxation?
    Hi, Tim Seasons Greetings.
    On the post, I do not think it is one of your best.
    It says that seeds predicts all of this and then gives a straightforward monetary analysis.
    I find this disappointing. I am going to download the resources and look for the correlations you are claiming but which you have not explained here.

    One glaring point missing from your analysis, even though you give per capita GDP and Debt figures are that wealth redistribution and increased inequality is not stripped out of your figures.
    I have become increasingly persuaded that the precariat is a matter of political Design and not some accident or necessity due to energy constraint realities. I believe it is explained by the oldest cause of want and that is the greed of a corrupted elite.

    Let’s Look at Norway. Brino is a deceased Norweigan Blue. Yet Corbyn’s sit on the fence “Credible leave Option”, points to a revival of the dead Norwegian Parrot. #EUMilitaryUnion and the Norwegian Option? #TwoFingers2Brino #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @Survation @wiki_ballot @financialeyes #WIKIBALLOTPICK #IABATO #SAM #GE2019 Roger Lewis ( Porthos) @JoeBlob20 @GloriaDePiero
    rogerglewis Uncategorized December 11, 2019 12 Minutes

    Wiki_Ballot
    @wiki_ballot
    David James, Baron James of Blackheath #EUMilitaryUnification @ukcolumn https://www.bitchute.com/video/zRZMTnxrlDEb/ … #BitChute

    Tonefreqhz
    David James, Baron James of Blackheath #EUMilitaryUnification @ukcolumn

    bitchute.com
    9:45 AM – Dec 11, 2019
    Twitter Ads info and privacy
    See Wiki_Ballot’s other Tweets
    Why did Theresa May allegedly turn down the EU offer of a ‘free-trade’ deal with Europe?
    Keith Young
    Keith Young, studied History at Birbeck College, University of London
    Answered Nov 28, 2018
    I am not sure she did. However, a free trade deal was always a possibility (and still is).

    She did not want a free trade deal because she wanted to be in the single market and customs union, because she is a Remainer. What she tried to negotiate was access to the single market and customs union without membership. The end result is a deal to remain in the EU but with no say in EU policy. This is why Remainers are claiming (correctly) this is worse than Remain. It is a dog’s breakfast that will be rejected by parliament. I doubt the majority against will be much under 200. The more she advoca…

    How Norway Does State Oil and Political Economy COntrasted with the UK Neo-Liberal Experiment is quite fruitful.

    These 3 posts together will go into the excellent report called Drilling into Debt.

    https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/04/20/the-black-and-the-green-debt-oil-and-arms-zionist-imperialism-and-international-banking/
    http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2011/01/DrillingIntoDebt.pdf

  2. Don Stewart on December 29, 2019 at 4:11 pm said:
    Advertising and the Shearing of the Lambs
    Here is one example of the way scientists in service of the advertising industry can manipulate populations.

    “Consider this disturbing study out of the University of Toronto: People were randomly assigned to purchase items from one of two online shopping sites, identical except the products were described as environmentally friendly on one of the sites. Then, in a supposedly unrelated task, they played a computer game and were told to pay themselves out of a provided envelope of money for each correct answer. They were told no one was watching and it was all on the honor system. Who do you think acted more honorably? In actuality, the experimenters really were watching them, tallying up the actual number of correct answers, how many the subjects claimed they had gotten correct, and how much money they subsequently took. Those randomized to purchase the green products were significantly more likely to lie, cheat, and steal. Ethical acts may license unethical behaviors, and it may only take a molehill of virtue to create a mountain of immorality.”

    This is one example of the larger phenomenon of ‘licensing’. As in, “You deserve a break today…at McDonalds”. Just watching athletes perform on television may license a person to drink yet another beer…as if the person sitting in the chair has exercised enough to ‘earn’ the beer.

    A well-meaning amateur, though they may hold multiple PhDs in hard sciences, is no match for a skilled advertiser. The example above may give a clue as to why politicians who fail to beat their wives and dogs may feel ‘licensed’ to kill people they do not know with drones.

    Don Stewart

    Reply ↓
    el mar on December 29, 2019 at 4:30 pm said:
    We will step down Maslos Pyramid as soon as ECoE hits considerably! Thus, very soon!

    Reply ↓
    el mar on December 29, 2019 at 4:31 pm said:
    Maslow!

    Reply ↓

    raymonddeyoung
    on December 30, 2019 at 2:44 am said:
    Maybe not. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs assumes that you have to fulfill lower-level needs before moving up his ladder. But psychology, while validating the various needs, has rejected the hierarchy. One example is Viktor Frankl’s insight which came from studying behavior in concentration camps (which he survived). Contrary to Maslow, he found that those inmates who had turned on their fellow inmates (thus failing to fulfill Maslow’s mid-level social and higher-level actualization needs, and thus failing to have a meaning to their life except survival), but whose basic physiological needs were met, very often died early. Whereas, those inmates who decided to live as long as they could in order to bear witness to the atrocities (had framed their life as having meaning beyond the moment) often lived despite being worked and starved. I’m simplifying Frankl’s work here, certainly. He went on to found LogoTherapy which argues that striving to find meaning in life is the primary motivation in human behavior.

    To bring this back around to this site’s focus. Under declining prosperity it likely will become progressively harder to fulfill Maslow’s lower-level needs. If we accept his hierarchy, then all other levels are unattainable, and our well-being suffers. That leads to dark prospects. But if we take the modern psychology interpretations, where all needs are valid but not in a hierarchical relationship, then we have a chance to derive well-being despite a decline in material prosperity.

    I’d maybe go one step further and say that the very behaviors that need to be adopted under an energy descent (e.g., frugality, caring for one’s neighbors, being generative: treating life as a gift to be shared) contain their own rewards. And this is, perhaps, because they are challenging, not despite that fact.

    So framed, people may respond to declining prosperity not because it is necessary (although it will certainly be that), but because our individual choices will become, once again, consequential. How we adapt will matter to those we love. In Frankl’s language, our behavior can have meaning that is tangible, immediate, and long-lasting.

    austrianpeter
    on December 30, 2019 at 8:33 am said:
    Thank you so much Raymond for that link to logotherarpy. I have researched this and cannot understand why my tutors during my training missed this one! I trained in Integrative Counselling and qualified in 1997, I specialise in Humanistic Counselling and found it very effective in dealing with emotional disorders. Frankl’s work is a welcome addition to my studies.

    This book has been very helpful to my clients and it appears to follow Frankl’s work:
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-Letting-Fear-Gerald-Jampolsky/dp/1587611961

    Best wishes and Happy New Year.

    Steven B Kurtz
    on December 30, 2019 at 12:27 pm said:
    While this feels good, I wonder about the scientific validity of Frankl’s work. Turning on peers under hardship can bring similar responses as it does in other social mammals. Deviants in packs or herds of animals are corrected, punished, ostracized, or killed. The group is the responsible unit. It is difficult to thrive as a loner. Free will is (at a minimum) vastly overrated, and some philosophers hold that it is an illusion. Galen Strawson is excellent on this.

    drtimmorgan
    on December 30, 2019 at 10:09 am said:
    El mar, Raymond, Peter

    This is fascinating stuff, and an area clearly worth discussing further.

    austrianpeter
    on December 30, 2019 at 10:59 am said:
    I am happy to engage, thank you Tim and all.

    rogerglewis
    on December 30, 2019 at 6:06 pm said:
    [R]

    This documentary of Dr. Sapolsky’s work is very instructive. Sapolsky appears in the Peter Joseph Films
    series Zeitgeist.
    The study of the British Civil Servants is absolutely Hilarious as well as alarming.
    there might be a link between rank and stress
    13:43
    I mean that’s the thing about stress I think you’ve got to look at it in both
    13:48
    acute terms and chronic terms I think I’ve been under chronic stress
    13:51
    in this organization simply because I’m a square peg in a round hole
    13:55
    Kevin Brooks is a government lawyer, his rank
    13:59
    level 7 means he has little seniority in his department

    Sapolsky’s lectures available on Youtube are very well worth watching too.

    austrianpeter
    on December 30, 2019 at 6:37 pm said:
    I believe that ‘Level 7’ was the lowest floor of the government nuclear shelter described in a fiction book of the same name.in the 1960s

    rogerglewis
    on December 30, 2019 at 7:44 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihhVe8dKNSA

    Heres Sapolsky on Freewill. It’s interesting that He rejected his orthodox religious upbringing and seems to see free will as a religious argument rather than a behavioural one. My own thoughts on Free will are more to do with Psychology than a need to fight for or defend some religious doctrine or indeed a scientific school of thought. Perhaps the scientific and philosophical approach defines the thought of Free will in different ways.
    This 3-minute philosophy cartoon, on the Positions of Paramienideds and Heraclitus, is one of my favourites on the subject at the most basic level. I would argue that as ethical behaviours exist in all people, not just Religiously smug ones
    Points to the Pelagian view that the ability to choose one path ethically over another even against one’s own immediate interests shows that Free will is exercisable over and above biological impulses or habits. I actually do not think it actually matters that much either way there are soluble problems and there are wicked problems ( systems sense of the word Wicked not the moral sense)

    Sapolsky’s work has been very influential in my own studies, I listen very carefully and take on board his thoughts on free will but differ on a number of aspects which he chooses not to stress and where he does place emphasis particularly on deistic claims to gifts of free will I think he is addressing a set of arguments which are actually irrelevant to the question and also off-target to the essential meat of the question. Is there Choice and can we change our minds? If we are able to change our minds my simple claim is that that is proof of free will. It’s a simple truth claim and one which requires no ethical, moral or religious framework to support it.

    “We must now take precautions to prevent you from being embarrassed by something in which the ignorant majority is at fault for lack of proper consideration, and so from supposing with them, that man has not been created truly good simply because he is able to do evil. … If you reconsider this matter carefully and force your mind to apply a more acute understanding to it, it will be revealed to you that man’s status is better and higher for the very reason for which it is thought to be inferior: it is on this choice between two ways, on this freedom to choose either alternative, that the glory of the rational mind is based, it is in this that the whole honour of our nature consists, it is from this that its dignity is derived.”
    Pelagius

  3. https://off-guardian.org/2019/12/31/from-my-christmas-conversation-with-spirits-of-the-past-present-and-future/

    In the future, dissent is going to be less and less tolerated. We have a special lab, headed by the team of Swedish scientists with Greta at the helm: they are going to prove that Dissent pollutes the atmosphere eighty-seven times more than Obedience. So more and more dissenters will be be captured and recycled into into progressive people of the future, the ones who internalize the latest PC dogmas, embrace all neoliberal state policies, but who – in reward for their model behavior – are allowed to violently protest Evil Trump every week-end. That’s our model citizen of the future: a pussyhatter who pays taxes, supports military interventions, and recycles and consume his own compost after it’s been subjected to thermo-treatment at the local Whole Foods store. And, I believe our hard work at creating such a creature is already paying off!

Leave a Reply