MN Patriot
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,705
Why do you think that "technological advancement" will ensure that there are always enough basic commodities available? Or if they are available, what makes you think that they will always be affordable to the average American?
Technology is what we use to create commodities. Our technology has gotten more productive and efficient.
Cotton and food have to be grown, fertilized, harvested and transported -- each step currently requires oil. What if oil prices went up by another factor of 5? That's something that could easily happen, given the decline in the dollar and increasing demand from Asia.
Easy answer: they won't. The USA and Canada has enormous energy resources in the form of coal, tar sands and oil shale. In a few years we will start harvesting those, if we have the political will to overcome the environmentalists.
Today, the nation's infrastructure is in a declining state of disrepair. Transportation is available, but costs will continue to increase with the price of oil. It seems possible to me that in the near future, air travel might only be affordable by the very rich. Don't forget that the production of cars and planes is intensely energy intensive, so prices for those "basics" will continue to increase too.
One bridge collapses and everyone panics. Yeah, we need to keep fixing stuff as it gets older. Cars and planes aren't really basics. Manufacturers have come out with cars that cost only a couple of thousand dollars. Really basic cars, but they get people from point A to point B for really cheap. We've been spoiled, and as new technology comes around, our new cheaper cars will continue to spoil us. That is how the market works. Trust the market.
What would happen if people couldn't afford to keep their phones? What if radios and TVs were no longer affordable?
They can make radios and TV's so cheap, they will be like paper plates someday. Use 'em and throw 'em away.
Bernanke studied the causes of the Depression at great length. He believes that it could have been prevented if the Fed had acted more aggressively, based on his Keynesian view of the world. According to the Austrian view, he's dead wrong. Amazingly, it looks like he'll get the chance to try out his theories (makes one wonder why he was picked to be chairman, doesn't it?).
Look, the basic situation is that wealth is a result of production. America has moved most of its production overseas, and its wealth has followed. It has devolved into a service and consumer based economy. Wealth is not being produced, it's being spent. To make matters worse, Americans are borrowing to fund their spending. Plus, the government is now socialist and imperialist, with huge spending on social programs and in attempts to maintain the US overseas empire. I couldn't imagine a more precarious scenario if I tried!
Some people claim the Depression was deliberate, to consolodate the power of the federal government. FDR did that quite well, with all his programs and the Social Security pyramid scheme that is slowly consuming us also.
Yes, I agree we are in a precarious situation. Yes, production has moved overseas, but thanks to advanced technology we could restore it quickly. It isn't like we could never start producing stuff here again.
Kind of like the big worry people have always had about foreigners buying our assets: "The Japanese own the Empire State Building! Oh No!"
My reply: "So what, do you think they are going to move it back to Japan?"