I’ve been a realist (pessimist my whole life) and cut my teeth reading Helen and Scott Nearing, Mother Earth News in the 70’s. Yet we keep plugging along as we can keep consuming resources and energy like it’s never going to end. I remain a realist but have found joy in beekeeping. Despite all the fear porn that bees are in trouble and that our universities and researchers need endless grants to solve this problem(of which they have no desire to fix). I’ve ignored their rhetoric and found solace in the resilience of these little creatures.
At the bottom I posted a link to the Limits to growth BAU chart. I realize that this is a study done before I was born but it has held up fairly well see here : https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/looking-back-on-the-limits-of-growth-125269840/
The Club of Rome is basically a NGO of the ruling elite. Their goal is control the masses with their propaganda and solutions. We are going to face some major changes but I have no desire to be under their rule, the UN and World Bank have done little to make things better for the masses, only for the ruling elite. https://climatism.blog/2014/01/24/in-searching-for-a-new-enemy-to-unite-us-we-came-up-with-the-threat-of-global-warming/
The blossoming of science and technology a few centuries ago enabled more efficient use and extraction of fossil fuels which then allowed human population to grow due to a variety of factors, most notably the inversion of the energy return of agriculture to be a net consumer of energy. So both population growth and fossil fuel consumption were a result of technological development. I wouldn’t say one necessarily caused the other.
Physical technology has hit limits decades ago so we can’t expect any more disruptive developments in energy. When fossil fuels run out, agriculture will again revert to a net positive energy return. When you do the math of how much energy can be offered on an acre of farmland and how many people this can support, the result is that the planet is severely over populated.
But we aren’t going to run out of fossil fuels soon. But once past peak extraction/consumption, economic growth will turn negative resulting in a breakdown of society. This will result in the initial population decline. But we aren’t likely going to 1 billion anytime soon, absent a nuclear war.
Physical technology has hit limits decades ago so we can’t expect any more disruptive developments in energy.This simply isn't true. Physical tech is ongoing. In fact, due to advancements in physical tech, I've personally witnessed a 10X decrease in workers required to produce the same oil volume. It's killing employment. The physical tech has completely changed: new material for smart pigs, ceramics, drones to monitor spills, fracing tech, drilling tech, on and on.
When fossil fuels run out, agriculture will again revert to a net positive energy return.This is, at best, a theory. We have no idea what the future holds, technology or energy-wise, nor how this conflates population growth. Reflect on the 3-Body Problem. Re-read The Black Swan. No matter what, it's unlikely we will ever fully deplete fossil fuels, because they will just get too expensive and we will adjust our technologies and lifestyle to match. We've been doing this since whale oil disappeared. How this impacts GDP is still unknown. But for now, we have LOTS of coal and nukes. And, just like running out of whales, we won't change unless prices force us to. Regardless, said predicted energy/population crisis has been "around the corner" for my entire life. Population Bomb. Hersch Report. Peak Oil. On and on. And this viewpoint has been a spectacular failure for 50 years and more. The most recent unpredictable event (for me)? Shale oil/ZIRP. This has already thrown a huge wrench into so many predictions. Yet will we ever let go of our hubris? A wise man leaves his options open, remains realistic (and this includes optimistic possibilities) and examines the results of prior predictions. Absorb nothing but negative information since 2009 and act on it? Miss out on a historic stock market rally. Who knows what the next decade holds, positive or negative. I remain open to both, based on the evidence. What say you? PS: BP, those are some good links, a fair antidote to the thread theme.
I wasn’t clear about what I meant with “physical tech” and I expected someone to call me out on it. I mean tech related to our use of energy, from a thermodynamic perspective. I stand by my statement. We haven’t had any significant advancements for many decades, and there aren’t any more on the horizon. The only one we’ve seen of any possible significance would be increasing solar panel efficiency.
What has advanced markedly is information technology, which has enabled us to find (in other words, to deplete) fossil fuel reserves that would have been unheard of previously. But it doesn’t change the efficiency with which we use fossil fuels. When we run out, we run out.
We moved beyond whale oil because we found better oil. If we hadn’t found better oil you can be sure the oil bearing whales would gave quickly gone extinct.
It is not a theory that when fossil fuels run out, agriculture will revert back to positive net energy. We won’t have any other energy source to subsidize agriculture and it will revert by necessity.
I agree that we still have lots of coal left which is why I don’t see this catastrophic population reduction happening for many decades or even a century. But we could have population reduction earlier than that due to societal decay.
There is no doubt that my drafts are more satisfying than all the coal and nukes. Now alotta folk gonna get wasted? It’s the price one pays for satisfaction? I dunno.
Hey BP,
I don`t disagree that elites may be promoting an agenda through the report done by the club of Rome. Does that make the findings any less valid?
A team of MIT PhDs are the ruling elite? Get real. There are many levels of elites. If the Club of Rome are the ruling elites, why are the oil companies fighting the disclosure of the Limits to Growth results. Their own internal memos show that they were totally aware of the danger of climate change back in the 70s. But yet they spent millions (billions?) on tobacco industry style propaganda. The original LTG report was attacked viciously for decades by the true believers of perpetual everything growth. They still are. Religions die hard.
What is possible? Well, being an engineer with considerable experience in combustion and fluid dynamics I would say it is more than possible that the young lady in the image heading this article better get some heat shields in her rear pockets! 
Seriously it is a slight change in perspective that can have profound effects on the day to day work we all do. A good thought experiment.
I’m going to take a pass on the “Oh **** we’re all gonna die!” part of the discussion. In my short time on this site I’ve made it very clear that I disagree with the underlying thesis. We’re already in free fall. THIS is what it looks like dudes and dudettes. Christ, it took what? 400 years after the fall of the Roman Empire until they stopped rationalizing and accepted that it was gone?
I put the Mad Max thesis in the same box as a self correcting market, free trade theory, libertarianism, and believing that a 1st round QB draft means your dismal NFL team is headed to the Super Bowl next year: adolescent masturbatory fantasies. All of them.
Peace,
Will
Two articles by a Jon Hellevig have influenced me greatly this last week. I believe that this information helps explain many of the topic discussed here on PP.
Extreme Concentration of Ownership in the United States The Oligarch Take over of Healthcare and Big PharmaA close-knit oligarchy controls all major corporations.
Institutional investors like BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, Fidelity, and JP Morgan, now own 80% of all stock in S&P 500 listed companies. The Big Three investors - BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street – alone constitute the largest shareholder in 88% of S&P 500 firms, which roughly correspond to America’s 500 largest corporations. (*3). (source “Extreme”) Blackrock and Vanguard would then alone own more than one-third of all US publicly listed shares.The consolidation of ownership of media and social media give the oligarchy the power to limit internet searches, place their opinion makers before the TV camera, flavor editorials and news, shadow ban opposing viewpoints and prohibit voiced dissent in the name of “public safety.” In the discussion below, recall that the BlackRock fund’s major investor is Vanguard. Vanguard’s major owner is BlackRock. Other elements of Vanguard’s ownership are masked as they are other Vanguard funds. Who owns your health insurance company?
Who owns your bank?
Your oil company?
Your computer company?
Your favorite Military Industrial Complex supplier
Your vaccine manufacturer?
1- Clear rules.
2- Defined Purpose.
3- Clear collective decision making process with transparent accountability.
that is https://e-nation.org/
Mostly agree but with such broad properties one would have to understand much more in each of those and our relationship to them.
“Men’s work” has shown me that what a group of men in a room will do first is argue about what the rules ought to be, get everyone frustrated and then the group (micro community) collapses. Who makes the rules? More likely folks will self select and join an established community on the basis of established rules which means we’re looking at being a follower, an ouslander or insider. Systems of risk and reward work since that’s what our brains are doing all the time. Friend, Foe or Meat?
Would the Constitution of the United States of America suffice for number 3? How’s that going? Well, the risk reward system has evolved to put the risk on the community and the reward into “private” hands. I think they call it Capitol-ism.
Can’t underestimate the importance of ritual to support the boundaries. Ritual(s) that re-enforce and enhance our relationship to self and the community. Look to the cultures that have survived the European expansion for useful rituals.
“…the journey that men make, to find themselves. If they fail in this it doesn’t matter what else they find.” --James Michener
I’ve been thinking about this since this post went up, and I keep coming back to thinking that underlying the general rules and methods for discussing and conducting community business, it requires civil, respectful speech. Even in disagreement. A mature person masters their emotions, keeps the community objective of resilience at the forefront, remembers that none of us are perfect, and offers up ideas, suggestions, and even opposing views with kindness and civility. Imagine all the problems solved before they even start if you can do this.
Robinson, Newsbuoy, Phoenixl and Sand_puppy (and CM)
This idea about rules is a central theme for starting any kind of organization. I know that it can consume much time/money/effort and that people prefer never to deal with lawyers and instead to rely on religion or holding hands or strong leadership or whatever is used to settle differences instead. But the proper application of law can actually breath life into noble desires for making something (like energy, building of soil, etc) valuable by creating a legal existence for things that should have value. Also, proper lawyering is a medium by which the finest aspirations of each group member can achieve substance.
This and has been a focus of mine such that I wrote rules (operating agreement) for a community building exercise that resulted from much discussion about how to avoid problems which increasingly beset America. The group I worked with mutually decided that all community regulations dissolve automatically after a set time and have to re-passed if still needed in the future, no one who works to govern the community ever gets remunerated for his/her time in any shape, form or manner, adjudications must be made by outsiders with absolutely no ties to the community (the circuit riders (judges) of the original 13 colonies come to mind), etc.
As a lawyer assisting others to prevent problems , I always get the parties to sit down (or video conference) multiple times and try to predict ALL of the possible problems they might have in the future, and then write down (while everyone is amicable) the solutions (as a contract) for how to handle those things. I did this with a group who wanted to start a community and can sent you the results if you like. Law and NOT psychology is the way to do this because Law respects each person and assumes their liberty and freedom, whereas psychology treats each person like a bug- I am sure that Adam will disagree with this, and I really don’t want to spend any more time chit chat crapping on this forum since I am very busy, but will point out that psychology is as much a “science” as is economics. If you want to treat people with respect and honor their freedom and independence, proper lawyering is better to solve disputes then a so-called predictive “science” of their behavior which only seems to work if at all by accident and even then only when the subject is not aware he is being studied and predicted.
I have read the postings pertaining to CM’s thoughts and others postings about establishing a community and have been saddened. If the goal is to set aside something to spend the remaining years of middle aged life in a pleasant environment (less than one generation persistence/existence) then such short term community can possibly rely on kumbaya holding of hands and/or strong leadership by one person (until he/she dies) as a way to stay together. That seems to be the object of the community contemplated here, and so I have not really considered throwing my two cents in (actually more than 2 cents because I am a lawyer with 25 years experience in a variety of areas).
But your comments and the link are very interesting. Creating a legal framework can go very far towards: a. making an impact in the world (the community can be franchised (you can monetize the success) and even lead to country building b. creating something that can withstand the test of time, c. truly integrate the new understanding of energy as a central theme for human existence by embodying the production and handling of energy (and other real wealth such as soil) as a central theme of the community. For example valuation of soil improvement and valuation of energy production if established within the community founding document WILL BE USED (relied on to make judgements) even by outside judges when handing a dispute between parties. Here is a tiny example. After ten years of working to build up a farm, Molly and Mark have a divorce. Molly increased the humus of 1.5 acres farm land from 1% to 3% during this time, but that is all the value that she can prove from her marriage, during which Mark went to school and learned valuable skills to make money. Because the community organizing agreement specifically declares the value of land fertility as a goal and gives examples, Molly gets rewarded for her effort when an outside court splits their property. I can think of many examples where lawyering can help put a desire for real wealth into action. A shining example for how to integrate the real issue of energy into community value can result from good contract making that overtly respects the role of energy. This has not been done before and could truly be revolutionary.
CM seems to be avoiding this topic as a central organizing theme, but that seems appropriate for a retirement club where everyone is specially selected and the club or association is only expected to survive based on special friendship as a requirement of its creation and permanence. Such is a very pleasant way to finish up a life.
On the other hand, the people who created the United States (and made it MUCH better than the other new territory of the Americas-- think of the different countries in central and south America that were not started or based on legal principles) did so by an extreme time consuming and energetic use of lawyering. Maybe they did not have formal training but the founding fathers of the US were nothing else if not lawyers and did excellent lawyering work. I would go so far as to argue that the greatness of America (U.S.) arose from that excellent lawyering. America before its recent and irreversible (in my opinion-that is why I walked away from K street) corruption was basically a country of laws and not of subjective custom, where anyone from anyplace could come and unleash his/her human potential.
Like it or not, CM’s community will be subject to laws. Laws of the local county, state, and national government. Anyone living there will find this out when someone gets a
a divorce, someone dies and their surviving spouse becomes hateful or a spoiled child inherits their land and wants something from the community, etc. Or maybe someone water runoff or well is affecting someone else and their mental disposition changes.
Having a well thought out legal structure can provide better liberty for a community, even in a state like NH in two ways that I can think of quickly:
- the rules of home owners associations (ie. legal contracts made at the local level to handle affairs of people living in near proximity) will be followed by outside courts to the extent that they seem fair. Such rules could have liberty protective effects and help push back against tyranny of outside laws that would otherwise be used to adjudicate problems.
- contracts (such as mediation and arbitration clauses in contracts) to handle disputes can go a long way towards avoiding the cost/travail of outside dispute settlements by outside courts. Judges generally will do their best to honor dispute resolution agreements. This is another big rabbit hole, but this is a very big deal to those who write agreements. We specify what kind of adjudication to use and even which set of laws to use (I usually specify N.Y. for reasons I wont get into here) to avoid outrageous loss of time and money. On this subject, I don’t like arbitration clauses because arbitrators directly or indirectly always seem to favor the side that pays the bill (or seems likely to be paying a bill in future work). Also arbitrators are more likely to split the baby even when one side should normally get the whole…
I wasn’t going to comment because I am very practical and dont like to see over use of lawyers. A temporary retirement community between close friends is not the same as a social movement or permanent community. However, a good contract can help shield against evil lawyering in an unfriendly forum, as mentioned above. And, did I say something about how corrupt the legal system is in the U.S. ? Anything that the community can do, including writing its own contract to push back against outside law, can help protect assets of community members from legal robbers from the outside who will come as their world collapses.
Development
Development, strategy, and auditing must be taken into account. When creating my own product in my shop, I had to consider all technical and digital factors. One day, I discovered shopify development agency which helped me create a list of crucial activities and strategies for developing my products. It’s an invaluable resource that aids in business development and yields benefits.
Marketing And Social Networks.
I agree with previous author. But also it is very important to pay attention to marketing. For example you can start with Instagram. First, define your target audience and create a compelling profile that reflects your brand. Post high-quality content regularly and engage with your followers. Instagram offers benefits like increased brand visibility, expanded reach, and the opportunity to build a loyal community. And if you’re looking to boost your engagement, services like this Jesusmanifesto can help you get authentic likes. Get ready to harness the power of Instagram for effective marketing!