Economic crash happening later this year?

[Jo498]

The cooking argument is basically against the cornucopians who claim that "science will come up with something" like (cold) fusion or some other vaporware, independent of fossile fuels. Hardcore transhumanists are probably too far gone because their uploaded brains will colonize the galaxy so they do not care about boiling the oceans.
(The blog has also an interesting survey where he asked physics students and faculty about the feasibility of several futuristic (or phantastic) technologies. Naive techno-optimism drops steeply past the sophomore years and even more for postdoctoral faculty members. It's probably not a coincidence that among fanciful transhumanists IT people (and "philosophers") are more prevalent than physicists.)

[Hayyoth]

Maybe not:

http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall

The start of a potential game changer. Enough to dent fossil fuel usage, though not enough of a dent to prevent serious economic issues.

Reading nonsense like this gives me a headache.

Buy four L16 deep cycle lead acid batteries (decent ones retail for about $400 each), get yourself an off the shelf inverter/charger and you have yourself a system at least as good as Tesla's powerwall. Upside if you ever have a house fire you won't have to worry about having a shit load of lithium stored in your garage. Another upside you'll be paying a half to a third retail for what Tesla's offering wholesale. Game changer? Marketing bullshit more like. What is it about environmentalists that makes them leave their brains at the door when it comes to discussing tech?

[Commodore]

my favorite chart

join the bitcoin revolution

[The Marquis de Leech]

my favorite chart

So you blame Reagan for the massive spike in 1% incomes then?

[DanteGabriel]

So you blame Reagan for the massive spike in 1% incomes then?

I sure do. The patron saint of greed and media-bestowed virtue.

[aceluby]

my favorite chart

join the bitcoin revolution

That chart doesn't say what you think it says. The stupidity of it is absolutely mind boggling. I guess for those who don't have any idea of history or economics.

[Commodore]

That chart doesn't say what you think it says. The stupidity of it is absolutely mind boggling. I guess for those who don't have any idea of history or economics.

it says the top 1% did not see massive income growth until we went off the gold standard

[awesome possum]

it says the top 1% did not see massive income growth until we went off the gold standard

That's a pretty loose reading of what it says, or at least what you were told it says. Curious how if ending the gold standard is what created massive income growth for the 1%, why does the chart not show that? Because to me, and people with an ability to read a basic chart, the growth coincides with Reagan's tax cuts.

[Commodore]

That's a pretty loose reading of what it says, or at least what you were told it says. Curious how if ending the gold standard is what created massive income growth for the 1%, why does the chart not show that? Because to me, and people with an ability to read a basic chart, the growth coincides with Reagan's tax cuts.

also the Clinton tax increases

and not the Kennedy tax cuts

hardly a correlation

[aceluby]

it says the top 1% did not see massive income growth until we went off the gold standard

No, it doesn't say that. It says we went off the gold standard, and at some point after that there was a massive income growth for the 1%. It doesn't show any correlation whatsoever between the two, and doesn't make a lick of sense if you think about it for more than 5 seconds.

The clinton tax increases show a growth in both the 1% and the bottom 90%, as does the Kennedy tax cuts, which were relatively small.

I worry about someone who can't read a basic chart.

[lokisnow]

Maybe not:

http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall

The start of a potential game changer. Enough to dent fossil fuel usage, though not enough of a dent to prevent serious economic issues.

-0-0-0-0-

That said, fifteen years ago, the local minimum wage was $5 an hour (actually a bit more, a dollar above the federal level). Back then, I could go into the grocery store and pick up my usual items for about $12 - $15, depending on what was on sale.

Now we are talking a $15 an hour minimum wage, and the same usual items at the grocery store will run me $40, give or take a few bucks.

Dang near a tripling in cost...and the pay to keep up with that cost. Seems like inflation to me.

-0-0-0-0-0-

As to a crash, pretty much every week or two I come across yet another story about yet another giant financial scandal. Lessee...wasn't it just yesterday I was reading about a multi-billion dollar judgment handed against banks for manipulating foreign exchange rates or some such? I mean, blatant dishonesty seems to be the norm in that world. So...given that, combined with a overvalued stock market...could get interesting. Maybe not full crash interesting, but severe correction interesting.

re: inflation

Does your ATM dispense $50s or $20s? If it dispenses $50s then inflation has been as severe as you allege, if ATMs are still dispensing $20s, then inflation has not occurred on this scale. There is a finite amount of storage in an ATM, and if inflation was over 300% as you claim, ATMs would not be able to meet demand with only $20s.

So far as I remember, ATMs are still dispensing $20s, just as they did in the late 1980s, when I first remember my parents using them. That indicates inflation has been pretty low over the time period. The supply of ATMs has expanded, but the supply of ATMs leveled off in the last decade and we still haven't switched to $50s in ATMs.

Re: batteries:

there's an article in the LAtimes today that indicates Tesla batteries are a poor value, but as with most moronical articles, it only considers a robotic formula. Having grown up in Tornado country and dealt with multiday power outages before after natural disasters, and now living in earthquake country, solar panels and a Tesla battery would yield a large peace of mind for me, that combo is a cost we will roll into our first house purchase, certainly. One thing the LAtimes article was good for was that it pointed out the Tesla battery will not power Air Conditioners nor clothes Dryers, which I hadn't seen mentioned anywhere else.

Last year, I bought an electric car, a Nissan Leaf, and I worried about how much it would cost me. My first electric bill, covering two months, went up by about $30, charging every other day, driving about 1200 miles over those 60 days. That's a cost savings way better than we had expected (caveat, we have a two bedroom apartment, and are always in the lowest tier of electricity usage, even with the car charging). The value over the replacement vehicle cost netted a savings of $282 in gas over that 60 day time frame. I replaced a vehicle that got about 17 mpg, and would have needed to buy 71 gallons of gas at $4/gallon last summer, so that means I saved about 250 in just the first two months in gas alone. Point of comparison, our apartment, like the majority of los angeles construction of its era, does not have any insulation in the walls, and the windows are all single pane. That means in February, when it drops to 45 outside at night, it's about 55 inside. Since there is no central air, and the heater is a 1929 gas heater that doesn't connect to the bedrooms, we run a small space heater in our bedroom to offset the chill. That space heater draws more power over a two month billing cycle than the car does. So I'm very skeptical of any claims that the Tesla battery + solar will take 75 years to pay for itself, as the LA times alledges, because our experience with an electric car has wildly out performed the widely reported scoffing skepticism. The car that replaces this one in 5-10 years will also be an electric, because neither one of us can ever imagine going back to having two gas cars.

(actually our costs plummeted even further, four months after we bought the car, my office park installed car chargers in the parking structure and they give you three hours free, which is enough to fully charge the car, even when depleted down to 10%. since then, I've probably charged at home fewer than 20 times. Based on the tally I've kept, since buying the car a year ago we've driven 8000 miles and its cost us a bit over $100 total to drive those 8000 miles).

[The_BlauerDragon]

But what I want to ask is this: As we watch the world burn with a spike in unemployment, companies going bankrupt and rising poverty, will people turn to extremist reactionary forces or will this be an opportunity to rethink the way we do things and then come up with a more sustainable system?

I too, am likely to get into a bit of trouble here. Only because I'm choosing to jump in before even glancing at the pages of existing discussion (old habits die hard, I suppose). While I have no idea as to whether or not a financial collapse will occur 2 days after my birthday this year, I am confident that I know at least a little about human nature. As a collective. As a species. We only pause to engage in reasoned thought and consider things like sustainability, fairness, altruism, and so-called "liberal" pursuits when we have lacked any challenges or hardships for such a long time that we've forgotten what they actually are and we've been so comfortable for so long that we have gotten bored with comfort. There are always exceptions, but if a truly great collapse occurs you should be prepared to deal with abunch of panicked apes running around like their heads are on fire looking for some gasoline to put it out with.

[Shryke]

Maybe not:

http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall

The start of a potential game changer. Enough to dent fossil fuel usage, though not enough of a dent to prevent serious economic issues.

That does not actually seem at all relevant to what I said though. Like, nothing on there indicates to me it's anything other then fairly standard battery technology.

Reading nonsense like this gives me a headache.

Buy four L16 deep cycle lead acid batteries (decent ones retail for about $400 each), get yourself an off the shelf inverter/charger and you have yourself a system at least as good as Tesla's powerwall. Upside if you ever have a house fire you won't have to worry about having a shit load of lithium stored in your garage. Another upside you'll be paying a half to a third retail for what Tesla's offering wholesale. Game changer? Marketing bullshit more like. What is it about environmentalists that makes them leave their brains at the door when it comes to discussing tech?

You don't know ThinkerX at all, so it's nice to see you just assume shit to keep your unfounded bias going. Pretty fucking funny honestly.

[Fragile Bird]

re: inflation

Does your ATM dispense $50s or $20s? If it dispenses $50s then inflation has been as severe as you allege, if ATMs are still dispensing $20s, then inflation has not occurred on this scale. There is a finite amount of storage in an ATM, and if inflation was over 300% as you claim, ATMs would not be able to meet demand with only $20s.

So far as I remember, ATMs are still dispensing $20s, just as they did in the late 1980s, when I first remember my parents using them. That indicates inflation has been pretty low over the time period. The supply of ATMs has expanded, but the supply of ATMs leveled off in the last decade and we still haven't switched to $50s in ATMs.

Most of the ATMs up here issue a mix of 50s and 20s, although some only issue 20s. No 100s, except in the casinos. And our inflation has pretty well been within the Bank of Canada's target range, between 1 and 2%.

[Swordfish]

Reading nonsense like this gives me a headache.

Buy four L16 deep cycle lead acid batteries (decent ones retail for about $400 each), get yourself an off the shelf inverter/charger and you have yourself a system at least as good as Tesla's powerwall. Upside if you ever have a house fire you won't have to worry about having a shit load of lithium stored in your garage. Another upside you'll be paying a half to a third retail for what Tesla's offering wholesale. Game changer? Marketing bullshit more like. What is it about environmentalists that makes them leave their brains at the door when it comes to discussing tech?

Yep.

Most of the ATMs up here issue a mix of 50s and 20s, although some only issue 20s. No 100s, except in the casinos. And our inflation has pretty well been within the Bank of Canada's target range, between 1 and 2%.

And ATM's in the eighties dispensed 5's.

Not that ATM's are a good guage of inflation anyway.

[Commodore]

No, it doesn't say that. It says we went off the gold standard, and at some point after that there was a massive income growth for the 1%. It doesn't show any correlation whatsoever between the two

It wouldn't show a correlation because it's an off switch that was only flipped once. It does show a severe trend line change soon after a singular event.

and doesn't make a lick of sense if you think about it for more than 5 seconds.

It doesn't make a lick of sense that the ability to print unlimited amounts of money might explain a sudden explosion of income for a tiny elite?

[The Marquis de Leech]

It wouldn't show a correlation because it's an off switch that was only flipped once. It does show a severe trend line change soon after a singular event.

It doesn't make a lick of sense that the ability to print unlimited amounts of money might explain a sudden explosion of income for a tiny elite?

By your reasoning we should have seen a spike in 1% incomes after FDR took the US off the gold standard in 1933 (Nixon merely ended the US dollar's convertibility into gold). Oddly enough, there isn't.

All your chart shows is that for half a century following FDR, the ordinary person benefited from growth, as opposed to the wealthy. Which, considering the presence of unions, high taxes on the wealthy, and regulations, is not surprising. The Reagan-Clinton-Bush era of weak unions. low taxes on the wealthy (Clinton didn't put the top tax rate back to 70%, did he?), and deregulation, is not surprising.

Your chart doesn't call for a revival of the gold standard. It calls for a revival of the New Deal.

[Loge]

re: inflation

Does your ATM dispense $50s or $20s? If it dispenses $50s then inflation has been as severe as you allege, if ATMs are still dispensing $20s, then inflation has not occurred on this scale. There is a finite amount of storage in an ATM, and if inflation was over 300% as you claim, ATMs would not be able to meet demand with only $20s.

So far as I remember, ATMs are still dispensing $20s, just as they did in the late 1980s, when I first remember my parents using them. That indicates inflation has been pretty low over the time period. The supply of ATMs has expanded, but the supply of ATMs leveled off in the last decade and we still haven't switched to $50s in ATMs.

Re: batteries:

there's an article in the LAtimes today that indicates Tesla batteries are a poor value, but as with most moronical articles, it only considers a robotic formula. Having grown up in Tornado country and dealt with multiday power outages before after natural disasters, and now living in earthquake country, solar panels and a Tesla battery would yield a large peace of mind for me, that combo is a cost we will roll into our first house purchase, certainly. One thing the LAtimes article was good for was that it pointed out the Tesla battery will not power Air Conditioners nor clothes Dryers, which I hadn't seen mentioned anywhere else.

Last year, I bought an electric car, a Nissan Leaf, and I worried about how much it would cost me. My first electric bill, covering two months, went up by about $30, charging every other day, driving about 1200 miles over those 60 days. That's a cost savings way better than we had expected (caveat, we have a two bedroom apartment, and are always in the lowest tier of electricity usage, even with the car charging). The value over the replacement vehicle cost netted a savings of $282 in gas over that 60 day time frame. I replaced a vehicle that got about 17 mpg, and would have needed to buy 71 gallons of gas at $4/gallon last summer, so that means I saved about 250 in just the first two months in gas alone. Point of comparison, our apartment, like the majority of los angeles construction of its era, does not have any insulation in the walls, and the windows are all single pane. That means in February, when it drops to 45 outside at night, it's about 55 inside. Since there is no central air, and the heater is a 1929 gas heater that doesn't connect to the bedrooms, we run a small space heater in our bedroom to offset the chill. That space heater draws more power over a two month billing cycle than the car does. So I'm very skeptical of any claims that the Tesla battery + solar will take 75 years to pay for itself, as the LA times alledges, because our experience with an electric car has wildly out performed the widely reported scoffing skepticism. The car that replaces this one in 5-10 years will also be an electric, because neither one of us can ever imagine going back to having two gas cars.

(actually our costs plummeted even further, four months after we bought the car, my office park installed car chargers in the parking structure and they give you three hours free, which is enough to fully charge the car, even when depleted down to 10%. since then, I've probably charged at home fewer than 20 times. Based on the tally I've kept, since buying the car a year ago we've driven 8000 miles and its cost us a bit over $100 total to drive those 8000 miles).

Your old car wasn't particularly fuel efficient, so a large chunk of your savings is simply the result of replacing it with a modern hatchback. Switching to a gasoline car of the same size probably would have cut your fuel bill by 50% already.

[Hayyoth]

You don't know ThinkerX at all, so it's nice to see you just assume shit to keep your unfounded bias going. Pretty fucking funny honestly.

Is cool you're white knighting and all but if you'd taken a second you might have realized that I wasn't commenting on the poster but the article he/she was linking to. The amount of crap I read regarding supposed 'game changing' environmental technology, a classic was the idea of putting wind turbines on cars which would supposedly generate electicity while they were being driven, a bright 8 year old would have been able to work out why that brilliant idea couldn't work, but I actually read articles from grown adults seriously discussing the idea. Then there's solar sidewalks (facepalm) The advantage of lithium batteries is their relative light weight and smaller size. In a domestic setting you're far better off with a lead acid set up, they're cheaper will operate just as well and the little bit of extra space they take up will be more than made up for the fact you'll be saving thousands of dollars and won't have a potential fire hazzard living in your garage or basement.

re: inflation

Does your ATM dispense $50s or $20s? If it dispenses $50s then inflation has been as severe as you allege, if ATMs are still dispensing $20s, then inflation has not occurred on this scale. There is a finite amount of storage in an ATM, and if inflation was over 300% as you claim, ATMs would not be able to meet demand with only $20s.

So far as I remember, ATMs are still dispensing $20s, just as they did in the late 1980s, when I first remember my parents using them. That indicates inflation has been pretty low over the time period. The supply of ATMs has expanded, but the supply of ATMs leveled off in the last decade and we still haven't switched to $50s in ATMs.

Re: batteries:

there's an article in the LAtimes today that indicates Tesla batteries are a poor value, but as with most moronical articles, it only considers a robotic formula. Having grown up in Tornado country and dealt with multiday power outages before after natural disasters, and now living in earthquake country, solar panels and a Tesla battery would yield a large peace of mind for me, that combo is a cost we will roll into our first house purchase, certainly. One thing the LAtimes article was good for was that it pointed out the Tesla battery will not power Air Conditioners nor clothes Dryers, which I hadn't seen mentioned anywhere else.

Not sure what this means. What's a robotic formula? Tesla batteries are poor value because you can get an equivalent which performs just as well for a fraction of the cost. But if you want to waste your money go for it.

[Loge]

Is cool you're white knighting and all but if you'd taken a second you might have realized that I wasn't commenting on the poster but the article he/she was linking to. The amount of crap I read regarding supposed 'game changing' environmental technology, a classic was the idea of putting wind turbines on cars which would supposedly generate electicity while they were being driven, a bright 8 year old would have been able to work out why that brilliant idea couldn't work, but I actually read articles from grown adults seriously discussing the idea. Then there's solar sidewalks (facepalm) The advantage of lithium batteries is their relative light weight and smaller size. In a domestic setting you're far better off with a lead acid set up, they're cheaper will operate just as well and the little bit of extra space they take up will be more than made up for the fact you'll be saving thousands of dollars and won't have a potential fire hazzard living in your garage or basement.

Not sure what this means. What's a robotic formula? Tesla batteries are poor value because you can get an equivalent which performs just as well for a fraction of the cost. But if you want to waste your money go for it.

I'm not an expert, but lead acid batteries don't like it at all when you actuallly drain them. That should make them rather poor energy storage devices.