Comments on: Policies of Scarcity in a Land of Plenty http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/ Institute for Energy Research Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:06:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ormond Otvos http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-5888 Ormond Otvos Wed, 11 May 2011 19:11:00 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-5888 This entire analysis is flawed at the core, because it ignores the tremendous effects of global warming AND adopts a "head in the sand" attitude about population growth and resource depletion, pretending that there will be no famines, weather disasters, or governmental attempts to conserve or protect the current population from growing. The basic misleading axiom here is BAU, Business As Usual, which on closer examination is the operating instructions for a cancer cell. Business only looks at profit, never at the overall benefit to the economy. If everyone is competing, no one is looking out for the greater good of the society, since there's no money to be made there. That's why governments regulate business, and that's why these long term catastrophes keep occurring. We have adopted the wrong philosopphy. Business Uber Alles, and to hell with mankind's future. This entire analysis is flawed at the core, because it ignores the tremendous effects of global warming AND adopts a “head in the sand” attitude about population growth and resource depletion, pretending that there will be no famines, weather disasters, or governmental attempts to conserve or protect the current population from growing.

The basic misleading axiom here is BAU, Business As Usual, which on closer examination is the operating instructions for a cancer cell. Business only looks at profit, never at the overall benefit to the economy. If everyone is competing, no one is looking out for the greater good of the society, since there’s no money to be made there.

That’s why governments regulate business, and that’s why these long term catastrophes keep occurring. We have adopted the wrong philosopphy. Business Uber Alles, and to hell with mankind’s future.

]]> By: admin http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-3845 admin Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:51:31 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-3845 Admin edit: The sentence, "And those current reserves include only a small fraction of the potential oil resources in the U.S., not to mention other areas around the world where technology is unlocking new resources," had a typo. It now reads, "And reserves are only a fraction of potential oil resources, not to mention that technology is continually unlocking new resources." Admin edit: The sentence, “And those current reserves include only a small fraction of the potential oil resources in the U.S., not to mention other areas around the world where technology is unlocking new resources,” had a typo. It now reads, “And reserves are only a fraction of potential oil resources, not to mention that technology is continually unlocking new resources.”

]]> By: admin http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-4547 admin Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:51:00 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-4547 Admin edit: The sentence, "And those current reserves include only a small fraction of the potential oil resources in the U.S., not to mention other areas around the world where technology is unlocking new resources," had a typo. It now reads, "And reserves are only a fraction of potential oil resources, not to mention that technology is continually unlocking new resources." Admin edit: The sentence, “And those current reserves include only a small fraction of the potential oil resources in the U.S., not to mention other areas around the world where technology is unlocking new resources,” had a typo. It now reads, “And reserves are only a fraction of potential oil resources, not to mention that technology is continually unlocking new resources.”

]]> By: Andrew http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-3812 Andrew Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:36:46 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-3812 Is this even a coherent sentence, guys? "worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S." It seems if you're going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources Is this even a coherent sentence, guys?

“worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S.”

It seems if you’re going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources

]]> By: Andrew http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-4241 Andrew Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:36:00 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-4241 Is this even a coherent sentence, guys? "worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S." It seems if you're going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources Is this even a coherent sentence, guys?

“worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S.”

It seems if you’re going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources

]]> By: Andrew http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/06/23/policies-of-scarcity-in-a-land-of-plenty/comment-page-1/#comment-4548 Andrew Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:36:00 +0000 http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/?p=6024#comment-4548 Is this even a coherent sentence, guys? "worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S." It seems if you're going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources Is this even a coherent sentence, guys?

“worldwide oil reserves are the highest they have ever been, and those reserves are only a small fraction of potential oil resources in the U.S.”

It seems if you’re going to make unsupportable statements, they should at least be logically coherent. This is not. There is no way that current world oil reserves are a small fraction of potential oil resources

]]>