• Monetary Metals
    05/02/2016 - 01:28
    The price of gold shot up this week, and silver moved proportionally. Headlines are screaming for gold to hit $10,000 or $50,000. Does this alleged new bull market have legs?

Putting The Cart On Top Of The Horse, Or Why Heaping Fiscal "Stimulus" Upon "Stimulus" Is Suicide For America

Tyler Durden's picture




 
0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:03 | 1567747 pappyhlace
pappyhlace's picture

this is all a game of musical chairs

enjoy it while the music is playing

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:07 | 1567759 trav7777
trav7777's picture

these articles are so much mental masturbation by people unwilling to accept that the Era of Growth was ended by world Peak Oil.  None of this monetary or fiscal shit matters, because oil cannot be printed.

Dunno which is worse, the delusions that we can restart growth by fiscally stimulating or that if we just "let the debts go" that we'll achieve a new era of growth after that.  Neither side can face the hard truth.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:21 | 1567789 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Gold cannot be "printed" either, and it was in use long before oil was a commercial good.   Posts like yours are so much mental masturbation by one who is unwilling to accept the fact that OIL is a passing energy source just like others which have dropped into obscurity or minimal use.   Peat anyone?

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:25 | 1567800 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

There is some hope in Gen4 reactors and the Thorium fuel cycle.  Some.  And post-Fukushima it seems unlikely that anyone other than China, and maybe India, will continue work on nuclear power.

So yes, by all means, go back to peat.  Peat will power your central electric plants, your car, the combine, airliners, etc. etc.  I'm sure.  There can't possibly be any issues of energy density or flexibility of use.

World oil reserves were like a massive inheritance.  That inheritance is now largely consumed.  Some of it went for good use, some neutral, much ridiculously stupid, but so much is gone.

Please, tell us how whale oil will save us.  I'm sure there are a few whales left that the Japanese haven't killed.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:36 | 1567829 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Rocky is saying that human ingenuity will find new methods of power generation. What will they be? I don't know because I'm not a 21st century James Watt. We'll have to wait for such fellows to reveal their ingenuity but if we don't stifle the market or blow ourselves up such advances are a certainty.

Rocky is not talking about looking backwards and using peat or whale  oil. Seems that you've chosen to willfully misunderstand him.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:18 | 1567857 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I think you don't have clue what is Rocky really said...

If you are not the 21st century James Wattt, and dreams of such are the extent of understanding of energy, then you should really sit this one out and mentally masturbate about your free markets elsewhere. 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:25 | 1567968 Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

Are you implying that you are a 21st century James Watt?  That must be the reason you 'understood' Rocky and feel that you have the ability to weigh in on this discussion.

 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:32 | 1567980 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Unlike most here, I do know I am not the James Watt of the 21 century. But having studied things like thermodynamics, system modelling, a little petroleum engineering, and having been a close follower of the oil markets for many years certainly does allow me to chime in....

So you you want to talk about Energy? Surprise me...

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 02:47 | 1568106 RafterManFMJ
RafterManFMJ's picture

You all miss the future glory of America. We have the most disgustingly obese population on the planet, and human fat is pound for pound, as energy dense as gasoline.  The slack-jawed couch potatoes can be hunted easily or trapped using corn curls for bait.

Harvesting this resource will create many jobs, and we can export our blubber globally.  Human fat - the original biodiesel.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 04:52 | 1568155 Coldfire
Coldfire's picture

LMAO!

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:36 | 1568624 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

LOL

 

Killer punch line delivered in second paragraph!

 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:47 | 1568422 epwpixieq-1
epwpixieq-1's picture

Studying is fine especially when is done not by the text books. Have you studied Tesla? Do you know what Electricity is? ( Careful with this one, for even Tesla noted that he did not know that force of Electricity is )

Have you BUILD something that works by TRANSFORMING energy even with small neodymium magnets?

What is the controversy that is inherited in the second law of thermodynamic?

Do you know what is the fundamental theoretical problem that plague the physics that started with the twisted and subsequently widely accepted interpretation of the Dirac equation ( otherwise an amazing human achievement )

Do you know how many physical phenomena are in head on controversy with the standard book science, starting with Faraday's basic controversial experiment ?

When you can open your mind for what Energy is, only then there is a reason to talk about Energy. Everything else is isolating your self from Nature in mathematical formulations based on personal views, egos and misunderstanding of the Natural phenomena, although expressed in a beautiful language.

 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:19 | 1568562 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I've solved the Dirac equation....

Electricity is not a force...And please explain the "problem" with Faraday's experiment. In your own words, please.

You seem to playing word salad,...

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:32 | 1568609 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

 

His reply:

 

"Umm, duh, uhhhhh, er, ummm, can I uhhhh ...

 

What?"

 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:28 | 1568573 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

 

by epwpixieq-1
on Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:47
#1568422

Studying is fine especially when is done not by the text books. Have you studied Tesla? Do you know what Electricity is? ( Careful with this one, for even Tesla noted that he did not know that force of Electricity is )

Have you BUILD something that works by TRANSFORMING energy even with small neodymium magnets?

- -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -

Ha!

 

A 'free enetgy' nut no doubt.

 

Also, NO PROOF. Never has been. Unless you have a 'prime mover' (steam, wind, water) that MOVES a wire thru that magnet's magnetic field ...

 

Otherwise "Show me your experiment" demonstrating the effect beyond doubt. So far, NO DICE.

 

(NOTWITHSTANDING a plethora of YouTube vids where peak power,  voltage or current are conflated for the same RMS quantities. MAKE those same tests properly iinstrumented with a scope or RMS instrumentation and get back to me.)

 

 .

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 17:30 | 1570601 epwpixieq-1
epwpixieq-1's picture

Absolutely correct A 'free energy' nut.

I am not trying to convince anyone, I left this illusion of educating people a long time ago, it is difficult to "see" something when one does not have eyes for it.

Buy the way my the magnets were mentioned with conjunction with the word "even" in the meaning of a simple device.

With magnets I agree one needs a prime mover, but this is not the case when you have waves. The movement of the magnets creates nothing more but waves. It is just the most efficient rudimentary magnetic hammer humans have discovered.

In Nature Everything is based on vibrations the rest is up to the people to who CAN to create and to build. The rest are empty words.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 17:32 | 1570605 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Hey, write a paper and submit to hep-th over at Los Alamos.... You are clearly on to something.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:19 | 1568338 tinsmith
tinsmith's picture

.... i knew james watt, i respected james watt, and you sir are no james watt.   now, if you want to talk about harvesting energy, lets forget james watt and instead think of james brown.  someone works out a way to bring that man back to life and we are set.  ever seen the energy that man put out during a performance, we could measure browns instead of watts.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:48 | 1567996 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Well, I am a 21st century James Watt and then some, but will nto play the game because the gate keepers are precisely people like TRAV, whose know only simple concepts like the Second Law of Thermodynamics is inviolable.

ORI

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/pre-cursor-2-and-currents/

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 04:57 | 1568160 Michael
Michael's picture

The self fulling prophecy the MSM is trying to push just isn't working this time.

Statistically, Ron Paul is winning.

Besides, age isn't a problem these days since people are living a lot longer.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 07:20 | 1568253 snowball777
snowball777's picture

If Ron Paul wins (LOL...check the 'statistical' track record of those placing well in IA straw polls), and Medicare and SS are gutted (also LOL), that whole people living longer thing will no longer apply.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:38 | 1568394 Bendromeda Strain
Bendromeda Strain's picture

I only need to outlast you, Romer.

All you Berkeley types make a lot of assumptions about your own usefulness.

Let's test those assumptions already. Oh, I forgot to LOL.

LOL

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:34 | 1568376 g
g's picture

Assuming that some form of energy production will emerge to replace fossil fuels is naive and dangerous. We should have started contingency planning, improving efficiency, and integrating large numbers of other energy producing systems 20 years ago, to mitigate the disaster that could occur when fossil fuels run out or do not produce a gain in EROEI.

 

The fact the the media and the government refused to accept the peak oil concept is egregious. There may be no technological wonder, technology does not produce energy by the way, that will provide for our current energy needs. Fact is even if we could produce enough electricity for commercial, residential, and transportation systems without fossil fuels, our infrastructure could not use it, it would take a decade or more to transition the transportation infrastructure to use electricity, once again something we should have started 20 years ago.

 

Check out ChrisMartenson.com, he sums it up best, some nice statistics on the number of alternative power producing plants it takes to replace fossil fuels, mind boggling really. He also discusses the issues with converting the transportation system to use electricity. Check it out.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:54 | 1567872 I think I need ...
I think I need to buy a gun's picture

oil and gold very important

go out on todays highways and by-ways it moves america...to say that it can be replaced by just anything....i don't think so and i think we are going to find that out

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:29 | 1567974 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

 

James Grant Suggests Life In Prison for Bernanke in WSJ

 

Jim Grant also points out that The Bernank could, slternatively, be hsnged under U.S. statute:

Ben S. Bernanke doesn't know how lucky he is. Tongue-lashings from Bernie Sanders, the populist senator from Vermont, are one thing. The hangman's noose is another. Section 19 of this country's founding monetary legislation, the Coinage Act of 1792, prescribed the death penalty for any official who fraudulently debased the people's money. Was the massive printing of dollar bills to lift Wall Street (and the rest of us, too) off the rocks last year a kind of fraud? If the U.S. Senate so determines, it may send Mr. Bernanke back home to Princeton. But not even Ron Paul, the Texas Republican sponsor of a bill to subject the Fed to periodic congressional audits, is calling for the Federal Reserve chairman's head.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 07:24 | 1568257 snowball777
snowball777's picture

I love the paleocon view of the world, where the US was frozen in carbonite 200 years ago and none of the laws passed or SCOTUS decisions rendered in that period ever need to be taken into account. Why not keep going backward? Claim something under the Articles of Confederation or the Mayflower Compact!

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 10:02 | 1568701 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

Truly; FREEDOM is such an over-rated concept and "created equal" is a farce.

 

 

 

 

 

/sarc

 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 08:37 | 1568395 g
g's picture

I think we would all be happy enough if the FED was abolished. I am sure there is an element that would love to see the Bernank hanged. However, just getting congressional audits of the FED would be a miracle.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:21 | 1567791 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

I am ever so slightly less pessimistic than trav, but in about 99% agreement.  Absent oil, OR some breakthrough energy source not currently in use, the current population of earth is well and truly fucked.  And Peak Oil is more of a historical fact than a theory now.

Choices are a lower standard of living, a lower population, or (ding ding ding) both.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:28 | 1567805 AngryVoter
AngryVoter's picture

Maybe it was a load of crap but I remember reading that there is a massive amount of oil sands in Canada and can be extracted and profitable with oil north of $120.  Realizing that isn't cheap but it isn't doomsday.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:57 | 1567863 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

There is a massive amount of bitumen in Canada, you will be producing synthetic crude at ~2 mmbpd for 250 years.... The rate  cannot be scaled to replace the "easy oil" that is declining... Unless of course you have a few Trillion to drop and don't mind creating Mordor in the north...

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:04 | 1567907 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

That's even a bit kind - it's already creating Mordor of the frozen north, at current rates.  Economically it's an OK energy source, but the EROEI is bad, and the environmental damage is somewhere between appalling and catastrophic, barreling towards mind-blowing.

The 250 years might be a decent estimate, but it won't happen that way... in 250 years we will either have advanced nuclear (or better) energy, or we'll be hunter-gatherers.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:09 | 1567921 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

No, it will be mined, too valuable a source of hydrocarbons that have many other uses besides burning. 

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:15 | 1567947 delacroix
delacroix's picture

that recovery, relies on cheap natural gas, and lots of it

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:25 | 1567963 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Yes it certainly does now, but oil is all but irreplaceable as input to too much *useful* stuff that they will find the NG.  

No need for  too many details in a quick post

Edit: IIRC, it currently using 25% of domestic production of NG in Canada... 

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:52 | 1567867 Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

The issue there is not so much the amount of oil in the ground but the amount of water needed to harvest it.  Northern Alberta does not have the water resources to extract all of the oil in the ground.

At the current rate of consumption it will not last that long anyway.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:09 | 1567926 bid the soldier...
bid the soldiers shoot's picture

How much was a barrel of oil when you read that? That $120 could be a lot more now.

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:52 | 1567865 PulauHantu29
PulauHantu29's picture

Oil is way too cheap in the USA. Gas is more expensive even in China!

We need $5 to $8 gas before people get serious about driving those Mega-SUVs to hair saloons and soccer games with only 1 or 2 persons on board.

Nomura predicts oil to $220 and I suspect they will be right....event hough you can't drink oil (or eat gold either!).

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:17 | 1567949 Milton Waddams
Milton Waddams's picture

We need $5 to $8 gas before people get serious about driving those Mega-SUVs to hair saloons and soccer games with only 1 or 2 persons on board.

History, if it exists, will recall it as a mania on a level of Kindleberger proportions.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:24 | 1568580 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

by PulauHantu29
on Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:52
#1567865

Oil is way too cheap in the USA. Gas is more expensive even in China!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

NO. Not historically, going back to like 1979 ...

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:22 | 1567793 spiral_eyes
spiral_eyes's picture

there is an equivalent to printing oil, and that is developing a meaningful alternative energy infrastructure. 

"scientists find bugs that eat waste and excrete petrol"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece 

the technology exists, you just need the infrastructure to harness it. all the stimuluses just went to helping the old banks, the old systems, and the old infrastructure, and that's why it sucks.  

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:39 | 1567837 mr. mirbach
mr. mirbach's picture

better link to biofuel: http://www.ls9.com/about/

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:40 | 1567802 forexskin
forexskin's picture

Dunno which is worse, the delusions that we can restart growth by fiscally stimulating or that if we just "let the debts go" that we'll achieve a new era of growth after that.  Neither side can face the hard truth.

I appreciate your point, lucid and clear. It is an interesting (to me) human trait that we all wish to have a viewpoint that encompasses or circumscribes all others, like a 'theory of everything'.

I'm aware that my limit is access to incontrovertable information. since I don't sit in on FOMC meetings or run POMO ops, or sit in on Exxon's resource reporting meetings, I conclude that my views have to be assigned probablities, and my adaptation to possible future conditions weighted accordingly.

How much skin you have in the peak oil view, and how do manage to reconcile uncertainty as to who is really pulling the strings?

"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on... or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain

Twain got it, but apparently only as far as asking the right question...

What do you gather if peak oil is just another manipulation (while believing myself its odds are 4:1 in favor of true). If it is manipulation, what is the bigger game?

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:01 | 1567898 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

One clue about Exxon is that even with the SEC mandating that tar mixed with sand is "oil" that Exxon was unable to replace its oil reserves over the past decade, down 5%... Buying existing oil production does not add to supply.

Net exports on the market are down ~10% since 2005, google Export Land Model, you'll get an idea how it will play out.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 09:55 | 1568686 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

by Flakmeister
on Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:01
#1567898

One clue about Exxon is that even with the SEC mandating that tar mixed with sand is "oil" ...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Wow; the SEC is now involved in oil exploration geology and term definitions?

 

Who woulda thought ...

 

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:32 | 1567817 Dick Fitz
Dick Fitz's picture

Trav-

Your moronic rants are tiring. Do you believe that all progress started once we found out how to pump oil? Can anyone be that stupid?

Even if oil ran out tomorrow, our accumulated knowledge would allow us to use alternative methods to extract solar/wind/tidal energy with barely a blip (a few decades at most) in reduction of global wealth.

The problem isn't oil/coal/shale, it's politics! There is more than enough food to make the world fat- it's the uneven distribution via politics that causes starvation.

Have you ever had a clue?

Tue, 08/16/2011 - 23:41 | 1567835 forexskin
forexskin's picture

c'mon, give trav a break. there's a really good correlation between population growth and the successful explotation of fossil fuels for the last hundred years.

i absolutely agree with your point about uneven distribution due to politics, though.

once i looked into replacement energy technologies seriously, i understood just how difficult a proposition replacement is, and given the current population, the possibility of serious dislocations exists.

take a look at 'a century of war' by william engdahl - real eye opener onto the stage of the great game around oil.

ignore kunstler, he's pitching his own shit, somewhat over the top, and not amenable to getting any smarter, apparently.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:06 | 1567916 Drag Racer
Drag Racer's picture

no, don't give trav a break. he is here with an agenda to disrupt and hijack threads to throw them off the topic. he is a piece of shit waste of time to respond to.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 00:17 | 1567934 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Trav has his views about things, but his observations on oil and energy are rarely to be disputed.

Wed, 08/17/2011 - 01:02 | 1568014 tmosley
tmosley's picture

If Trav had his way, 97% of humanity would be sterile and female geniuses would be lining up to be his fuck slaves "cause hes so smurt".  He claims that this is somehow "humane", while never mentioning the fact that his dumb ass couldn't even predict the demographic NIGHTMARE that such a policy would create (ie the offspring of 3% of humanity have to support 97% of the population, aka old people starving to death in the streets around the world).

Just because his dumbassed ideas and crappy metaphors go unopposed by you, doesn't mean they are valid.  Christ, he STILL won't accept the fact that ionic liquids extract oil from sand with very little energy input, meaning that we can extract bitumen from tar sands and restart practically every well on the planet.  He demands death for all immediately, and anything that doesn't fit with that grand proclamation of his is viciously attacked with ad hominem until everyone involved is bored to death.  Which I guess is where he wants them.  Dead.  

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!