Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Congressional Approval Rating at 14%







Post#1 at 06-20-2007 08:51 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-20-2007, 08:51 PM #1
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Congressional Approval Rating at 14%








Post#2 at 06-20-2007 08:59 PM by 1990 [at Savannah, GA joined Sep 2006 #posts 1,450]
---
06-20-2007, 08:59 PM #2
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Savannah, GA
Posts
1,450

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
Americans don't trust anyone or anything anymore. This 4T is really going to have to change our ideas about government.
My Turning-based Map of the World

Thanks, John Xenakis, for hosting my map

Myers-Briggs Type: INFJ







Post#3 at 06-20-2007 09:20 PM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
06-20-2007, 09:20 PM #3
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Cool Low Polling Numbers mean...

Quote Originally Posted by 1990 View Post
Americans don't trust anyone or anything anymore. This 4T is really going to have to change our ideas about government.
While, yes, Bush is 100% with the Democrat-led Congress on the immigration issue, these low poll numbers merely prove that America is longing for a Democrat in the White House to solidify the "regeneration" they desire. It's not congress sucks, stupid, it's Bush sucks, as usual.

The war in Iraq, the congressional earmark issue, the massive GOP corruption hearings and the never-ending "non-binding resolutions" the Democrats are passing all point to a rejection of the status-quo. America is longing for a federal "action and action now" of the FDR era.

Action means: withdraw of all American imperialist military presence in the Middle East, legalization of all Mexican immigrants now, massive new spending to insure free healthcare and other "wants" for all Americans, a return to the top-rate 90% tax bracket, an end to corporate welfare as we know it, and a nationwide reduction of greenhouse gases based upon the precedent set in Denver, Co.

Oh, and a nationwide ban of SUVs and tobacco, too.

That should do it. I fully expect the Democrat party to fully embrace all this, and their next presidential candidate to seriously campaign on just the opposite agenda (like FDR did in 1932).
Last edited by zilch; 06-20-2007 at 09:24 PM.







Post#4 at 06-20-2007 10:54 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
06-20-2007, 10:54 PM #4
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

People seem to always hate Congress but like thier congresspeople.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#5 at 06-20-2007 11:39 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,116]
---
06-20-2007, 11:39 PM #5
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,116

The tragical history tour is waiting to take you away

As anyone who has read this forum knows, we have been repeatedly asking the question of "are we 3t or 4t?" The power of the saeculium shows itself in unusual ways, and both sides can point to indicators to back up their claim. I'm becoming less surprised by this, in fact I've just about come to the conclusion that the heartland beyond the beltway has moved on into the 4t, whereas the impearial city, shealded by its lobbiests' larder and contractor cash, remains smugly 3t.
From the botched rebuilding of New Orleans to the concerned spouses living on our military bases to the harried driver suffering sticker shock at the gas pump, the common people know that things have to change, but that change hasn't been forced on our so called leaders.
It does appear that to a certian extent, the silent generation Democratic leadership operates under the assumption that worn out 3t processes will make due while watching their approval ratings reach Bushs' dismal range.

Where is all of this leading?

I hate to say it, but likely to more pain. The 2006 election may well be the harbinger to a 4t pattern, but if that happens in 2008 it will have to overcome the inertia of the 3t processes in the two parties that seem to be geared towards producing typical 3t nominees for president. It is almost impossible for the Republicans to nominate a candidate who, excepting the immigration bill, promises more of the same Bushian policies that were so soundly rejected last year. And, as for the Democrats, they look most likely to nominate the one candidate who is most easily tied to the 3t policies the heartland has rejected. There will likely have to be another shock before a true regeneracy can take place. Wheather it happens before or after the nominees for the 2008 election are locked into place remains to be seen.
If we are very unlucky, the early chosing of the nominees next year will lock into place two candidates that events later in the year will make unacceptable to the voters.

Instead of being a replay of 1932, next year's election could easily look and feel a lot like 1860.
Last edited by herbal tee; 06-20-2007 at 11:42 PM.







Post#6 at 06-20-2007 11:52 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-20-2007, 11:52 PM #6
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by herbal tee View Post
As anyone who has read this forum knows, we have been repeatedly asking the question of "are we 3t or 4t?" The power of the saeculium shows itself in unusual ways, and both sides can point to indicators to back up their claim. I'm becoming less surprised by this, in fact I've just about come to the conclusion that the heartland beyond the beltway has moved on into the 4t, whereas the impearial city, shealded by its lobbiests' larder and contractor cash, remains smugly 3t.
From the botched rebuilding of New Orleans to the concerned spouses living on our military bases to the harried driver suffering sticker shock at the gas pump, the common people know that things have to change, but that change hasn't been forced on our so called leaders.
It does appear that to a certian extent, the silent generation Democratic leadership operates under the assumption that worn out 3t processes will make due while watching their approval ratings reach Bushs' dismal range.

Where is all of this leading?

I hate to say it, but likely to more pain. The 2006 election may well be the harbinger to a 4t pattern, but if that happens in 2008 it will have to overcome the inertia of the 3t processes in the two parties that seem to be geared towards producing typical 3t nominees for president. It is almost impossible for the Republicans to nominate a candidate who, excepting the immigration bill, promises more of the same Bushian policies that were so soundly rejected last year. And, as for the Democrats, they look most likely to nominate the one candidate who is most easily tied to the 3t policies the heartland has rejected. There will likely have to be another shock before a true regeneracy can take place. Wheather it happens before or after the nominees for the 2008 election are locked into place remains to be seen.
If we are very unlucky, the early chosing of the nominees next year will lock into place two candidates that events later in the year will make unacceptable to the voter.

Instead of being a replay of 1932, next year's election could easily look and feel a lot like 1860.
Mega-Civil Wars are slightly more rare in countries that don't have ethnic/religious fault lines. So if there is a U.S. Civil War, it will have to fall along political lines or through some sort of Constitutional Crisis. Prior to the Civil War, the issue of slavery was the political issue. It eventually became the sheath that masked the 4T. However, we don't face that same type of divisive issue that galvanizes the nation, nor do we face the numerous problems that a nation like China is facing, and especially will face after their economic bubble bursts.

I do see us heading down the path toward Civil War, but we are still in the early stages of that path. The road will diverge, but I don't think Civil War will be our final destination. As we go deeper into the 4T, the chances of a Crisis beginning will continue to rise for about 20 years I suppose, before leveling off. If nothing else arises, then it is a possibility.







Post#7 at 06-20-2007 11:57 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-20-2007, 11:57 PM #7
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
People seem to always hate Congress but like thier congresspeople.
My guess is that Americans judge their Congresspeople based on character while they judge the Congress as a whole based on how well they serve their needs. I'm sure our leaders are all very decent people, but their leadership qualities...







Post#8 at 06-21-2007 12:10 AM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
06-21-2007, 12:10 AM #8
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Individually, we like our Congresscritters. Collectively, they couldn't organize a shore leave trip to the nearest tavern.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#9 at 06-21-2007 12:14 AM by Pink Splice [at St. Louis MO (They Built An Entire Country Around Us) joined Apr 2005 #posts 5,439]
---
06-21-2007, 12:14 AM #9
Join Date
Apr 2005
Location
St. Louis MO (They Built An Entire Country Around Us)
Posts
5,439

Quote Originally Posted by herbal tee View Post
As anyone who has read this forum knows, we have been repeatedly asking the question of "are we 3t or 4t?" The power of the saeculium shows itself in unusual ways, and both sides can point to indicators to back up their claim. I'm becoming less surprised by this, in fact I've just about come to the conclusion that the heartland beyond the beltway has moved on into the 4t, whereas the impearial city, shealded by its lobbiests' larder and contractor cash, remains smugly 3t.
From the botched rebuilding of New Orleans to the concerned spouses living on our military bases to the harried driver suffering sticker shock at the gas pump, the common people know that things have to change, but that change hasn't been forced on our so called leaders.
It does appear that to a certian extent, the silent generation Democratic leadership operates under the assumption that worn out 3t processes will make due while watching their approval ratings reach Bushs' dismal range.

Where is all of this leading?

I hate to say it, but likely to more pain. The 2006 election may well be the harbinger to a 4t pattern, but if that happens in 2008 it will have to overcome the inertia of the 3t processes in the two parties that seem to be geared towards producing typical 3t nominees for president. It is almost impossible for the Republicans to nominate a candidate who, excepting the immigration bill, promises more of the same Bushian policies that were so soundly rejected last year. And, as for the Democrats, they look most likely to nominate the one candidate who is most easily tied to the 3t policies the heartland has rejected. There will likely have to be another shock before a true regeneracy can take place. Wheather it happens before or after the nominees for the 2008 election are locked into place remains to be seen.
If we are very unlucky, the early chosing of the nominees next year will lock into place two candidates that events later in the year will make unacceptable to the voters.

Instead of being a replay of 1932, next year's election could easily look and feel a lot like 1860.

Both parties need to fail, for there to be a true rebirth. If we get Hillary, the failures should be spectacular for the Dems as well as the Republicans, particularly if the current Silent Dem leadership persists. If 2012 brings a reaction against the Dems (2006 in reverse, revenge on Hillary), a particularly nasty second-phase 4T would be the result. 2012-2024 could be a particularly bleak period in US history as a result. Gotterdammerung/Ragnarok for the Boomers. I envision financial disaster, rather than a Civil War, and loss of empire, if this occurs.







Post#10 at 06-21-2007 06:34 AM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,116]
---
06-21-2007, 06:34 AM #10
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,116

Good reactions Wally and Michael. I will add that the most likely scenerios I see happening right now are that a successful president will be elected next year or, and slightly less likely, the established system will begin breaking down between 2008 and 2012. The Republicans are not going to win next year, you can just about bet the casino on that. It's even more certian that an independant will not win next year which leaves the Democrats winning by default. If the next president proves to be a failure, then a revival of the still corrupt Republicans becomes possile with the emergence of a new third party somewhat less likely than that. In my mind, I've tried to assign weights on the possibilities of which way things will work out. To reach any conclusions, there will have to be more signs to guess by. Right now, the only thing I'm fairly certian of is that the Democrats will get their chance next year. If they blow it, we will likely have a crises of mythological proportions.







Post#11 at 06-21-2007 07:09 AM by Tristan [at Melbourne, Australia joined Oct 2003 #posts 1,249]
---
06-21-2007, 07:09 AM #11
Join Date
Oct 2003
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Posts
1,249

Quote Originally Posted by Pink Splice View Post
Both parties need to fail, for there to be a true rebirth. If we get Hillary, the failures should be spectacular for the Dems as well as the Republicans, particularly if the current Silent Dem leadership persists. If 2012 brings a reaction against the Dems (2006 in reverse, revenge on Hillary), a particularly nasty second-phase 4T would be the result. 2012-2024 could be a particularly bleak period in US history as a result. Gotterdammerung/Ragnarok for the Boomers. I envision financial disaster, rather than a Civil War, and loss of empire, if this occurs.
I've been figuring out how much of an economic decline will occur as a result of the great devaluation. The USA's per capita GDP could halve in the great devaluation (imagine if living standards roughly fell back to levels similar to those in the 1950's and 1960's), what would that do to US power. Who knows.
"The f****** place should be wiped off the face of the earth".

David Bowie on Los Angeles







Post#12 at 06-21-2007 09:43 AM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
06-21-2007, 09:43 AM #12
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by Tristan View Post
I've been figuring out how much of an economic decline will occur as a result of the great devaluation. The USA's per capita GDP could halve in the great devaluation (imagine if living standards roughly fell back to levels similar to those in the 1950's and 1960's), what would that do to US power. Who knows.
A few big-ticket items I happen to know enough about to compare today's living standards with yesterday's are -

1) Housing. In 1950 you could have a family of 4 in a 1,000 square foot home. That's one bedroom for the parents and one for the children. A 1,200 square foot home if the children were of opposite genders. It was taken for granted brothers roomed together and sisters roomed together.

2) There was one car and the paterfamilias drove it. However, there was usually a garage attached to the house to protect the car from the weather, birds, and thieves. That's because it wasn't easily replaced.

3) There was one TV set and it was in the front room. Everybody watched it and either they agreed on what was to be watched or the parents decided (or the father did) or they took turns.

4) The kids had bicycles. They were one speed and you braked by peddling backwards.

5) Cooking with canned food and mixes was the norm. Lunches consisted of a sandwich (meat, cheese, a couple of lettuce leaves, 1-ounce slices of bread), a piece of whole fruit (apple, orange, peach), and a cookie or cupcake.

6) The parents had a collection of books. Kids had a collection of kid's books. For things like novels and murder mysteries and science fiction, we used the public library. However, magazines and milk were delivered door to door and everyone read newspapers.

I will not go into the litany of "They didn't have such luxuries as cell phones and computers then" because you're not going to reverse that short of a holocaust that returns us to the Middle Ages, and because many of those "luxuries" are simply today's version of what was available yesterday. If you're going to play that game, why use 1950 as your benchmark and not 1920, 1850, or for that matter, 1066?

Okay. It wasn't paradise. And a lot of it rested on the unpaid labor of the materfamilias and in may cases the underpaid labor of the yardman and the maid, barred from better employment by the still-prevalent racism of the period. And remember, being post-Crisis, it felt a whole lot better than it would as a Crisis time economic failure.

But for anyone who wants to know what it looked like, there you are.

P.S. for anyone pining for a cleaner and more moral time, I refer you to Louisa May Alcott's novel - I forget the name of it - about the country cousin who comes to visit a city cousin in the, what, 1850s? 1870s? The grandmother, who remembers the period right after the American Revolution, decries the materialism and vanity, disrespect for elders, and general spoiled-brat attitude and behavior of these mid-Victorian young ladies and gentlemen, who really do behave like teenagers.

For that matter, Gene Stratton Porter's "Girl of the Limerlost" puts a country cousin up against the vanity and fashion obsession of the "mean girls" of the
last saeculum. Hah!
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#13 at 06-21-2007 10:17 AM by Tristan [at Melbourne, Australia joined Oct 2003 #posts 1,249]
---
06-21-2007, 10:17 AM #13
Join Date
Oct 2003
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Posts
1,249

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
A few big-ticket items I happen to know enough about to compare today's living standards with yesterday's are -

1) Housing. In 1950 you could have a family of 4 in a 1,000 square foot home. That's one bedroom for the parents and one for the children. A 1,200 square foot home if the children were of opposite genders. It was taken for granted brothers roomed together and sisters roomed together.

2) There was one car and the paterfamilias drove it. However, there was usually a garage attached to the house to protect the car from the weather, birds, and thieves. That's because it wasn't easily replaced.

3) There was one TV set and it was in the front room. Everybody watched it and either they agreed on what was to be watched or the parents decided (or the father did) or they took turns.

4) The kids had bicycles. They were one speed and you braked by peddling backwards.

5) Cooking with canned food and mixes was the norm. Lunches consisted of a sandwich (meat, cheese, a couple of lettuce leaves, 1-ounce slices of bread), a piece of whole fruit (apple, orange, peach), and a cookie or cupcake.

6) The parents had a collection of books. Kids had a collection of kid's books. For things like novels and murder mysteries and science fiction, we used the public library. However, magazines and milk were delivered door to door and everyone read newspapers.

I will not go into the litany of "They didn't have such luxuries as cell phones and computers then" because you're not going to reverse that short of a holocaust that returns us to the Middle Ages, and because many of those "luxuries" are simply today's version of what was available yesterday. If you're going to play that game, why use 1950 as your benchmark and not 1920, 1850, or for that matter, 1066?

Okay. It wasn't paradise. And a lot of it rested on the unpaid labor of the materfamilias and in may cases the underpaid labor of the yardman and the maid, barred from better employment by the still-prevalent racism of the period. And remember, being post-Crisis, it felt a whole lot better than it would as a Crisis time economic failure.

But for anyone who wants to know what it looked like, there you are.

P.S. for anyone pining for a cleaner and more moral time, I refer you to Louisa May Alcott's novel - I forget the name of it - about the country cousin who comes to visit a city cousin in the, what, 1850s? 1870s? The grandmother, who remembers the period right after the American Revolution, decries the materialism and vanity, disrespect for elders, and general spoiled-brat attitude and behavior of these mid-Victorian young ladies and gentlemen, who really do behave like teenagers.

For that matter, Gene Stratton Porter's "Girl of the Limerlost" puts a country cousin up against the vanity and fashion obsession of the "mean girls" of the
last saeculum. Hah!
Personally I do not believe living standards will revert back to what you described. Probably more like say 1970's, with adjustments for technological changes in the meantime.
"The f****** place should be wiped off the face of the earth".

David Bowie on Los Angeles







Post#14 at 06-21-2007 12:24 PM by jeil [at Rural Missouri joined Jul 2001 #posts 67]
---
06-21-2007, 12:24 PM #14
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Rural Missouri
Posts
67

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
Mega-Civil Wars are slightly more rare in countries that don't have ethnic/religious fault lines. So if there is a U.S. Civil War, it will have to fall along political lines or through some sort of Constitutional Crisis. Prior to the Civil War, the issue of slavery was the political issue. It eventually became the sheath that masked the 4T. However, we don't face that same type of divisive issue that galvanizes the nation, nor do we face the numerous problems that a nation like China is facing, and especially will face after their economic bubble bursts.

I do see us heading down the path toward Civil War, but we are still in the early stages of that path. The road will diverge, but I don't think Civil War will be our final destination. As we go deeper into the 4T, the chances of a Crisis beginning will continue to rise for about 20 years I suppose, before leveling off. If nothing else arises, then it is a possibility.
I am not sure about the idea that the USA is not ethnically divided. I can't remember the author, but there is someone putting forth the idea that the likely future for the USA is a breakup based on race, white, black and hispanic.

My take on the last Civil War was that it had little to do with slavery, but rather the South left on the basis of economics. The North manufactured, the South farmed and exported. When the federal government attempted to impose duties to protect Northern manufacture, the South suffered the foreign retaliation by having its exports hurt by duties imposed in other countries on its exports. This caused the succession. What caused the war was that the federal revenue was coming from import duties collected mostly in Southern ports and the federal government suddenly lost 80% of its tax revenue, which was unacceptable to Lincoln, who then deliberately called Congress into session, only not for months so that he could war without their interference.

As far as the next Civil War, I think that we are at a point now like per French Revolution. We have a debased currency, rulers who spend our money like drunken sailors while ignoring the wishes of the ruled, a privileged class who just party on, and a system of government control and plunder. The economic pie has been expanding significantly for at least the last 100 years, but the subservient majority have not enjoyed as great a share as the privileged few; the majority have received enough to have a noticeable increase in living standard, which has kept them supporting the system.

In France, the combination of the heavy burden of taxation, the inflation from the debasement of the currency, and a sudden series of cold weather induced crop failures pushed the masses to desperation and revolt.

We have a heavy burden of taxation and inflation for the debasement of our currency. While the standard of living is stagnating for the majority, it has not significantly declined so we just have discontent but not yet life threatening suffering. That will change with the 4T crisis which is now evident to me to be the end of the oil age and the inability of the industrial age to function without oil. The cheap oil is gone. Discoveries in the last 20 years have not been adequate to replace the oil we have used, and estimates are that after 2011, gross oil production will begin to decline. (This fits well with the 4T hypothesis of a crisis leading to a violent conflict.) There is no adequate substitute, so I think the trigger event will be the an energy crisis. The population is 6.5 billion, but before we became dependent on oil it was closer to 1 billion. This is the stuff of which Civil Wars are made. My view is that this will not only be a great political struggle, but also a great struggle for people to just survive without adequate food and shelter or health care; many will not.







Post#15 at 06-21-2007 12:36 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
06-21-2007, 12:36 PM #15
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by jeil View Post
I am not sure about the idea that the USA is not ethnically divided. I can't remember the author, but there is someone putting forth the idea that the likely future for the USA is a breakup based on race, white, black and hispanic.

My take on the last Civil War was that it had little to do with slavery, but rather the South left on the basis of economics. The North manufactured, the South farmed and exported. When the federal government attempted to impose duties to protect Northern manufacture, the South suffered the foreign retaliation by having its exports hurt by duties imposed in other countries on its exports. This caused the succession. What caused the war was that the federal revenue was coming from import duties collected mostly in Southern ports and the federal government suddenly lost 80% of its tax revenue, which was unacceptable to Lincoln, who then deliberately called Congress into session, only not for months so that he could war without their interference.
I think one can see it as a perfect storm of economic and cultural reasons. But what you cite above was certainly a very strong aspect of what happened.

Quote Originally Posted by jeil View Post
As far as the next Civil War, I think that we are at a point now like per French Revolution. We have a debased currency, rulers who spend our money like drunken sailors while ignoring the wishes of the ruled, a privileged class who just party on, and a system of government control and plunder. The economic pie has been expanding significantly for at least the last 100 years, but the subservient majority have not enjoyed as great a share as the privileged few; the majority have received enough to have a noticeable increase in living standard, which has kept them supporting the system.

In France, the combination of the heavy burden of taxation, the inflation from the debasement of the currency, and a sudden series of cold weather induced crop failures pushed the masses to desperation and revolt.

We have a heavy burden of taxation and inflation for the debasement of our currency. While the standard of living is stagnating for the majority, it has not significantly declined so we just have discontent but not yet life threatening suffering. That will change with the 4T crisis which is now evident to me to be the end of the oil age and the inability of the industrial age to function without oil. The cheap oil is gone. Discoveries in the last 20 years have not been adequate to replace the oil we have used, and estimates are that after 2011, gross oil production will begin to decline. (This fits well with the 4T hypothesis of a crisis leading to a violent conflict.) There is no adequate substitute, so I think the trigger event will be the an energy crisis. The population is 6.5 billion, but before we became dependent on oil it was closer to 1 billion. This is the stuff of which Civil Wars are made. My view is that this will not only be a great political struggle, but also a great struggle for people to just survive without adequate food and shelter or health care; many will not.
I hope your comparison to the French Revolution is wrong, but I would be hard pressed to argue with you about it.

What would be your take on the future of thermonuclear fusion as a power source? I have read wonderful things about it, here on this board and elsewhere. My take is that if we are willing to spend even a fraction of what we have spent on Iraq, we could very likely make fusion power an attractive alternative.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#16 at 06-21-2007 12:59 PM by jeil [at Rural Missouri joined Jul 2001 #posts 67]
---
06-21-2007, 12:59 PM #16
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Rural Missouri
Posts
67

Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post

What would be your take on the future of thermonuclear fusion as a power source? I have read wonderful things about it, here on this board and elsewhere. My take is that if we are willing to spend even a fraction of what we have spent on Iraq, we could very likely make fusion power an attractive alternative.
So far it has not proven to work. The major government funded project is just a welfare program for engineers according to some top researchers.

We have a real problem of being very late in the game to react. Where will the energy come from to invest in any alternative? We are already using all our available energy to support 6.5 billion, albeit at significantly varying levels, so in order to take resources to build an new infrastructure, what we consume to survive currently would drastically be curtailed. The magnitude of what it would take is gargantuan. And that assumes there is something worth investing the resources into. Right now we are throwing a good deal of wealth into ethanol which is marginal at best. If you imagine a 6% return for ethanol compared to the current 500% return for oil, that means that to substitute ethanol for gasoline we could instead of running 500 delivery trucks we could only run 6. Not a good prospect for those waiting in line at the grocery store.

If you go down the list of proposed alternatives, none alone, or in combination can come even close to solve the problem, even if we had the resources to make the conversion, which we do not. These topics are well discussed at sites like peakoil.com, the oil drum, the energy bulletin, and Association for study of peak oil (ASPO). The views range from hopeful to cataclysmic, my own falling more in the latter category. There are lots of oil insiders revealing the facts while the official line from the oil companies and government is, "don't worry, be happy", or statements like "the era of cheap oil is over" which has little meaning to the public.

No body knows the future for sure, but that is part of the reason we look at the ideas like 4T to make some estimates. The data in the oil industry is a little more concrete.







Post#17 at 06-21-2007 02:07 PM by antichrist [at I'm in the Big City now, boy! joined Sep 2003 #posts 1,655]
---
06-21-2007, 02:07 PM #17
Join Date
Sep 2003
Location
I'm in the Big City now, boy!
Posts
1,655

woohoo!

Another energy guy. I'm stoked. While PO.com can be sort of a crazy place, it is a most interesting read from a 4T perspective. And seriously, the more you read about energy, the scarier it gets.

I've been armchair researching energy for 3-4 years now, and we don't have jack near as I can tell. A full scale implementation of nukes, solar, wind, coal, and beginning to transition some of our transpo to electric, and conservation might give us a comfortable future.

However, the grid needs tremendous infrastructure investment. Nuke needs tremendous infrastructure investment. Imported LNG needs tremendous infrastructure investment. And it wouldn't hurt to build some heavy oil refineries. And, conservation is really going to be difficult in a land built of single-use sprawlburbs.

Good thing ppl are saving loads of money so there's a lot of capitol to invest in all this infrastructure. Good thing ppl are making financial and life choices that will allow this transition. Good thing the govt sees where we need to go, and didn't decide to piss it all away by involving in resource wars which will only buy a couple decades at best.

oh wait, THAT'S why congress' approval rating is 14%







Post#18 at 06-21-2007 04:23 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
06-21-2007, 04:23 PM #18
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Peakoil.com has become the home base for apocalyptic nutters and wacko survivalists of many shades. They are so nutty that one of the mods (MonteQuest) doesn't even understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#19 at 06-21-2007 07:31 PM by jeil [at Rural Missouri joined Jul 2001 #posts 67]
---
06-21-2007, 07:31 PM #19
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Rural Missouri
Posts
67

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
Peakoil.com has become the home base for apocalyptic nutters and wacko survivalists of many shades. They are so nutty that one of the mods (MonteQuest) doesn't even understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Have you ever run the numbers yourself on oil production or human population?

MonteQuest on that site is quite well read and a clear thinker. You may not want to understand the dynamics of species overpopulation, but I have seen few other than he who have a clear picture in mind. Aside for my respect for his thinking, he is otherwise a jerk emotionally, which does not detract from his intellect.

So perhaps you will be willing to show us how he does not understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics or that you do. His forte is understand the balance and dynamics between populations and their environment. I have never disagreed with his thinking on this subject, and have on occasion presented statistical evidence that the human population is at a level beyond the 3rd standard deviation in relation to the long term norm, ready to snap back to the mean (1 billion). He and I both think there will be a population crash between now and mid century that will be unimaginable by most. Think that we cannot go from 6.5 billion to less than 1 billion in 50 years; I say think again.

There are numerous ways to look into the future. One is knowing so much about a particular field that the implications are obvious. Another is mathematical analysis based on statistical techniques applied to historic data. The 4T concept is a soft approach to cyclical patterns that are more clearly seen by time series analysis. All are beyond the intellectual capacity of almost everyone, but the presentation of the ideas of these very few are understandable by a much larger population. You should be careful about those great minds that you choose to disparage so as to elevate your own self, only in your own mind, Odin.







Post#20 at 06-21-2007 08:49 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
06-21-2007, 08:49 PM #20
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

The "inevitable disastrous crash" scenario is an insult to human ingenuity based on the bone-headed assumption that elevates oil is a moronically high, irreplaceable, pedestal. It will go down in history in the same trashbin of ideas as the notions 150 years ago that heavier-then-air flight was impossible and 60 years ago that we would never get to the moon. 100 years from now we will have a society that is both ecologically sustainable and has more energy available then we can ever imagine.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#21 at 06-21-2007 10:33 PM by jeil [at Rural Missouri joined Jul 2001 #posts 67]
---
06-21-2007, 10:33 PM #21
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Rural Missouri
Posts
67

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
The "inevitable disastrous crash" scenario is an insult to human ingenuity based on the bone-headed assumption that elevates oil is a moronically high, irreplaceable, pedestal. It will go down in history in the same trashbin of ideas as the notions 150 years ago that heavier-then-air flight was impossible and 60 years ago that we would never get to the moon. 100 years from now we will have a society that is both ecologically sustainable and has more energy available then we can ever imagine.
Gee, a guy that does not believe in freedom expressed through free economic activity thinks that human ingenuity will solve an insolvable problem. It that going to be through a government controlled collectivist approach, or by individual effort?

What argument have you made to refute what I have presented other than to ridicule my thinking. You attack by saying that my thoughts are so absurd that they should not be considered and that since others have mis-estimated the future so that I must by some assumed association be also incorrect. This is no argument on your behalf; it is just ridicule, a convenient way to look superior when you have no credible response.

But then what else should I expect from the being that post the crap you do?







Post#22 at 06-21-2007 10:46 PM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
06-21-2007, 10:46 PM #22
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Cool Big Brother's Ameri-World

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
Peakoil.com has become the home base for apocalyptic nutters and wacko survivalists of many shades.
Mother Earth Lovers to Odin Dude: Getta grip fella, the whole Earth First game in a nutshell is to create a Big Government strong enough for the new Millennial task at hand. It ain't about the "task" per se. I mean, who was worse the Nazis, or the Stalinist commies we joined arm-in-arm to wipe out fascism? -- Sheesh, and then we loudly cheered "As GM goes so goes [fascist Amerika]"

No, you got it all wrong. Peakoil.com is just the Big Dragon on the block. Big Liberals, who love Big Government, need a Big Dragon to slay. And Big Oil, like Big Global Warming, er Cooling, er, Warming (whatever), and Big Drugs and Big Healthcare fit the Big Bill real nicely.

Hey, hop on board the train, young fella, we're gonna march onward and upward to the next 1T!

Only this time Big GM ain't gonna win in Big Brother's Ameri-World.
Last edited by zilch; 06-21-2007 at 10:49 PM.







Post#23 at 06-21-2007 11:46 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,116]
---
06-21-2007, 11:46 PM #23
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,116

Avisory

Keep in mind that voters tend to punish the party that they consider to be the one in power. And that party is the Republicans

As long as Bush is in the white house, his continually dropping numbers, now at 26% will drive the overall trendline.







Post#24 at 06-22-2007 12:54 AM by Bob Butler 54 [at Cove Hold, Carver, MA joined Jul 2001 #posts 6,431]
---
06-22-2007, 12:54 AM #24
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Cove Hold, Carver, MA
Posts
6,431

Revisionist History

Quote Originally Posted by jeil View Post
My take on the last Civil War was that it had little to do with slavery, but rather the South left on the basis of economics. The North manufactured, the South farmed and exported. When the federal government attempted to impose duties to protect Northern manufacture, the South suffered the foreign retaliation by having its exports hurt by duties imposed in other countries on its exports. This caused the succession. What caused the war was that the federal revenue was coming from import duties collected mostly in Southern ports and the federal government suddenly lost 80% of its tax revenue, which was unacceptable to Lincoln, who then deliberately called Congress into session, only not for months so that he could war without their interference.
I've seen that opinion many times, but it is pure revisionist history.

On the eve of the war, Senator Crittenden of Kentucky propose the "Crittenden Compromise," in a last gap effort to defuse the crisis. It is 100% slavery related. There is no clause that in any way raises the question of uneven taxation. While many southern revisionist historians are attempting to minimize the importance of slavery to the south, if one reads the documents written at the time by southern politicians it is absolutely clear that slavery was the dominant issue of the time.

My personal opinion is that the conflict would not likely have come to open war had there not been a problem with balance of political power. The north was expanding in population and territory faster than the south. The south greatly feared northern congressional majorities that could outlaw slavery, and blocked the addition of new slave states. Everyone wanted to expand west, but the need for political and slave related compromises prevented the western expansion. While much of the north was willing to tolerate slavery where it was, nobody, north or south, was pleased by the inability to settle the west.

Among the first things the Union Congress did when the southern congressmen went home was to pass homestead acts and western railroad enabling acts. If there were economic pressures driving the war, they are related to western expansion far more than southern taxation. While there were southern tax issues several years before the war broke out, they had been resolved by 1860. They simply were not an issue at the time the war started.







Post#25 at 06-22-2007 01:28 AM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
06-22-2007, 01:28 AM #25
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by herbal tee View Post
As long as Bush is in the white house, his continually dropping numbers, now at 26% will drive the overall trendline.
I am more convinced than ever that Katrina, of all things, ended the Phoney Fourth. As recently as June 2005, it would have been considered very unlikely that the President's approval rating could drop down to 26% in two years time. But in those days in late August and early September something changed. We have been living with that change ever since.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.
-----------------------------------------