There are other important remarks to be made about economics as a field, overly inured to every economic challenge being a financial one rather than one existing in a world of real constraints.
For example, the reality is that the easy to access and high-quality mineral resources, oil, copper, nickel, and into a large degree, even sand have are now “mature” with no new significantly large deposits identified. In the resource extraction business a mature field is one that has reached its maximum extraction output which can be maintained for a period of time, but is being depleted in what this means is that further extraction necessarily draws on a resource that is more difficult to extract end of lower quality. The consequence is that more and more resources, energy, money, machinery, etc. are necessary for the process of extracting the fundamental materials necessary for the economy to function. So in order for an economy just to stay in place, it has to expand total output just to maintain its current size.
I will not hear that as “mature” resources become exhausted, output, declines, and accelerates as the resource ages out.
The short form of this is no amount of money is going to fix the the reality that the resource intensity and scale of the global economy has for all intensive purposes, exhausted the resources it needs to function and the timeline for this is that things become a real problem around 2050.
With all this information in hand, the cost of adaptation is irrelevant. The most urgent economic issue for every individual community, figuring out how they are going to make their way without a global or even national supply chain. You’re gonna have to figure out how to feed clothes and how yourself from the resources less than 100 miles away.
I’ve only read like the first few paragraphs, but I’m going to remark that the right wing mindset will always work with the powerful to control access to resources. This is intrinsic to all forms of hierarchy (“Hierarchy in the Forest” Boehm). Cultural anthropologist over a period of 30 years develop the framework of the material conditions and social factors that move societies towards egalitarianism or towards hierarchy. At this point, I consider it necessary reading because it is so useful to reason about politics and the economy.
A functional definition of left and right wing is therefore quite useful, leaning on the original meaning when the left right spectrum was created in and around the French revolution.
The left-wing purpose for government is to grant equality of economic, political and social decision-making power to everyone. The purpose of a right wing government is to consolidate power into the hands of powerful.
One is egalitarian and the other is orthodox hierarchy. This functional definition by which I mean, you know it’s left or you know it’s right by who it supports, clears away all this nonsense about big and small government. We all know that right wing governments, love themselves a big government for the things that aid wealth consolidation. Austerity is explicitly deployed to push more and more power into the hands of the rich. That’s the whole point neoliberal ideology. It exists to legitimize surrendering people sovereignty to totalitarian rule by wealth.
Who the government spends on and who the government neglects and who the government taxes and who the government does not tax determines wealth distribution in the nation. It is no different than a community who has access to financing and one that does not, with the distinction that the government has zero interest in infinite credit line with no obligation to pay anything back because the federal government is the only entity that can be in negative equity in order to provide positive equity to non-federal sectors.
Wealth is economic and political decision-making power. Morbidly, large disparities and wealth tells you that the nation is a plutocracy.
And one last comment.. I don’t think AI generated imagery benefits anyone’s post. But that’s just me.
There are other important remarks to be made about economics as a field, overly inured to every economic challenge being a financial one rather than one existing in a world of real constraints.
For example, the reality is that the easy to access and high-quality mineral resources, oil, copper, nickel, and into a large degree, even sand have are now “mature” with no new significantly large deposits identified. In the resource extraction business a mature field is one that has reached its maximum extraction output which can be maintained for a period of time, but is being depleted in what this means is that further extraction necessarily draws on a resource that is more difficult to extract end of lower quality. The consequence is that more and more resources, energy, money, machinery, etc. are necessary for the process of extracting the fundamental materials necessary for the economy to function. So in order for an economy just to stay in place, it has to expand total output just to maintain its current size.
I will not hear that as “mature” resources become exhausted, output, declines, and accelerates as the resource ages out.
The short form of this is no amount of money is going to fix the the reality that the resource intensity and scale of the global economy has for all intensive purposes, exhausted the resources it needs to function and the timeline for this is that things become a real problem around 2050.
With all this information in hand, the cost of adaptation is irrelevant. The most urgent economic issue for every individual community, figuring out how they are going to make their way without a global or even national supply chain. You’re gonna have to figure out how to feed clothes and how yourself from the resources less than 100 miles away.
I’ve only read like the first few paragraphs, but I’m going to remark that the right wing mindset will always work with the powerful to control access to resources. This is intrinsic to all forms of hierarchy (“Hierarchy in the Forest” Boehm). Cultural anthropologist over a period of 30 years develop the framework of the material conditions and social factors that move societies towards egalitarianism or towards hierarchy. At this point, I consider it necessary reading because it is so useful to reason about politics and the economy.
A functional definition of left and right wing is therefore quite useful, leaning on the original meaning when the left right spectrum was created in and around the French revolution.
The left-wing purpose for government is to grant equality of economic, political and social decision-making power to everyone. The purpose of a right wing government is to consolidate power into the hands of powerful.
One is egalitarian and the other is orthodox hierarchy. This functional definition by which I mean, you know it’s left or you know it’s right by who it supports, clears away all this nonsense about big and small government. We all know that right wing governments, love themselves a big government for the things that aid wealth consolidation. Austerity is explicitly deployed to push more and more power into the hands of the rich. That’s the whole point neoliberal ideology. It exists to legitimize surrendering people sovereignty to totalitarian rule by wealth.
Who the government spends on and who the government neglects and who the government taxes and who the government does not tax determines wealth distribution in the nation. It is no different than a community who has access to financing and one that does not, with the distinction that the government has zero interest in infinite credit line with no obligation to pay anything back because the federal government is the only entity that can be in negative equity in order to provide positive equity to non-federal sectors.
Wealth is economic and political decision-making power. Morbidly, large disparities and wealth tells you that the nation is a plutocracy.