As someone who was raised during the collapse of Soviet Union, I can assure you that just because you live there, it doesn't make you a communist. I think I have a good understanding of the author's perspective, he is someone who has witnessed the collapse of a social/economic system, so he doesn't have that sense of American confidence that "things will work themselves out" or "the market will take care of it". Ironically, many analysts claim that the main impetus for USSR's break-up was the expensive and drawn-out war in Afghanistan, just something to think about.

The main gist that I got from reading that essay is basically our current path is not sustainable, which for me, is hard to dispute. It doesn't mean this trend can't change and I don't share the author's fatalistic perspective. First of all, most demographic projections have the world's population topping out at 9 billion. It's a simple matter of record that as economies develop, women have less incentive to have more kids. Just look at Europe. Environmentally, I do think we're in deep doo doo, but it's encouraging that human-caused global warming has essentially become a scientific consensus and it's only a matter of time until the rest of us catch up. Most experts believe that 2050 is probably the point of no return at current trend, so we've got 40 years to get our act together. The passing mention of global dimming is a valid point, I wish more people had some concept of that phenomenon and what it means.

In any case, thank for the read. The writer is a bit of an egotistical windbag, but that doesn't mean that alot of his points aren't relevant.

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.

Just as a clarification, that is why I said "raised as" and not that he was one.

__________________
Czar of the 26th Ward.

Doesn't matter, I assume the guy is relatively young and by the time of perestroyka, very few Soviet residents were card carrying communists. Most were just trying to get by and get enough food to feed their families, the party was mostly despised by the average citizens.

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.

I think you are looking too much into what I am saying. Raised a communist by the fact that everyone in the Soviet Union was raised a communist. Not saying he agreed with them or liked them, but it was the environment you were brought up in.

Just pointing out a bunch of his pessimism could be be based being raised in a system that never really worked, had a quick collapse and still hasn't recovered. Whereas in the west, there are success stories of economic collapse and successful recovery.

Recall his opening line is "It's been a couple of years since I started writing on the subject of economic collapse, as it occurred in Russia and as it is likely to occur here in the United States." He is saying he is basing his analysis on a completely different economic model.

"It's been a couple of years since I started writing on the subject of pregnancy, as it occurred in a woman and as it is likely to occur here in a man."

He is the one giving credence to his experiences in the Soviet union and Russia. I was just pointing it out as why it loses some weight of conviction, to me at least.

__________________
Czar of the 26th Ward.

I'm just pointing out the difference between being raised as a communist and being raised in a communist system. Just because you were raised in that system, doesn't mean you agreed or believed in it.

I see your argument that his views are in-part formed by witnessing the collapse of a bad system. It's true that the American system is superior and withstood shock in the past, but that doesn't mean it'll go on in perpetiuity. So doesn't witnessing such a collapse also give insight to the warning signs preceding it? You can't use one argument without allowing another.

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.

What people find profitable individually may not be best for the society as a whole, sometime. Capitalism, IMO, is not the penacea for everything. The opposing argument is that capitalist zeal to make profits now without worrying about consequences tomorrow is what leads to our extended use of resources until they are completely depleted. Fossil fuel is just one example. Metals mining shows even steeper fall off. Mining of our aquifirs is also at a rapid pace and estimates show that the vast Ogalala could run dry by the middle of this century, thus leading to another dust bowl, this time on a bigger and wider basis.

__________________


Is it ghey that I love this song so much?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl_Wc6Nm8lc

I guess you could say I'm not as jaded about "stuff" such as enduring love yet...

Fair point.

Yes, I think you can. "Warning signs" of two different systems do not necessarily translate to the same result. A car and a horse both have the job of getting people from point A to point B, but via different mechanisms (Capitalism and Communisim have similar goals of managing an economy via different mechanisms). If a car starts leaking water at a rapid rate, it is a warning sign of possible collapse. If a horse starts leaking water at a rapid rate, the horse is actually working as intended.

He is applying scientific method when there is no control group.

__________________
Czar of the 26th Ward.

nice! . . . to the zombies of death, quit holding out, draw another breath.

When most common folks talk about "pollution" they're concerned about their local "bad air" which is indeed different from GHG emissions and is also regulated differently. But yes, I would say both need to be addressed, and so far we've not addressed the COs and methane emissions. On the whole, local air in most American cities and towns is far improved than it was back in 1970 when EPA was established, thanks to targetted emissions reductions.

I think the thrust of this thread was about eventual sustainability of all our systems. Just substituting one fuel with another may not be enough, because even the "green" fuels aren't all that green when thought of in a holistic sense. Solar panels don't get made without any polluting industry as a byproduct. Ethanol creates way more waste than people seem to realize. And so forth.

As far as population goes, China's has stabilized by now. India's has slowed and is expected to soon stabilize. Each Indian woman used to give birth to 3.2 children (yeah, averages produce fractional children!) back in 1970s, and that rate has been steadily coming down to now it is around 1.4, I believe. India may max out at 1.5 billion people by 2050. But there are other, smaller countries, where the birth rate is still quite high. We're talking about trying for just replacement level (2 or less per couple), and we haven't achieved that yet on a global basis, so the population runaway train is still coming down the tracks.

__________________


Is it ghey that I love this song so much?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl_Wc6Nm8lc

I guess you could say I'm not as jaded about "stuff" such as enduring love yet...

You can't look at the differences without acknowledging the similarities. If the horse is mechanical and has two wheels, it's called a motorcyle and the leaking of water can also be considered a warning sign....just to take your analogy a little further. If you don't think America is overextended with war and overburdened with debt, then you're not paying attention.

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.