Day of reckoning looms for the U.S. dollar

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Of course we need to expand net energy to increase productions of goods and services and thus pay off our debts. Unfortunately it’s only going down, slowly now and quickly in a few years, probably 2-3. Factor in population growth and the per capita energy use has to go down and however that manifests. Most likely it will concentrate. Economics does not sufficiently handle this problem. Bernake can’t print energy and that by definition is the ability to do work.

As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

Arraya: I must confess I’m torn. You’re one of my favorite posters on this board and one of the more astute in my humble opinion.

However, you’ve just referenced a movie that not only features Ah-nuld, but Richard Dawson, Jesse Ventura and Jim Brown. Dude! What are we to think?

While I’m thinking about it, are you a Neil Gaiman fan? If so, check out author China Mieville (it’s actually a British guy). I think you’ll like his style.

[partypup]

[quote=partypup]”Bernanke has completely lost control. The Fed is now at the mercy of the purchasers of our debt. And he won’t be able to restrain interest rates for long. So I believe we will be slipping into the extremis state within the next twelve (12) months, if not sooner. At that point I would expect exporters to begin requiring many more dollars for products sold to the U.S., and in the case of hard assets with higher *real* value (such as oil), dollars may not be accepted at all, and this is already the case with at least one OPEC country (Iran) that has recently decided that the greenback — no matter how many they receive — is simply too worthless to purchase their oil. Venezuela will probably follow suit, as Iran is putting pressure on other OPEC countries to ditch the dollar altogether. I wouldn’t expect this to happen overnight, but when the dollar collapse begins in earnest I wouldn’t count on being able to find $2.59 gas. Think more along the lines of $5.”

[quote=patientrenter]partypup, I assume you make these posts to entertain yourself. But if you are trying to figure out what’s most likely to happen, then your comment about the OPEC countries not taking any number of dollars in return for giving us their oil doesn’t fit with your conclusion that oil will be at $5. If people accept $5 in return for a gallon of gasoline, then that means oil exporters will accept dollars too. They may just want more of them.[/quote]

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. OPEC controls most (78%) but not all of the world’s oil reserves. So it’s entirely possible for (a) OPEC not to accept dollars and (b) for the U.S. to continue to purchase oil with dollars elsewhere (the U.S. has a share of the non-OPEC reserves, and I think Canada and Mexico would be hard-pressed not to sell to us). Obviously, the price would reflect the drastically reduced supply of available oil. So in fact, $5/gallon would probably be on the low side. But the bottom line is that it is extremely likely at some point in the not-so-distant future that global acceptance of the dollar will fall dramatically, and that will have unimaginable repercussions here for all of us.

[quote=patientrenter]There’s a difference between a 30% or even 50% devaluation of a currency and its complete collapse. One is Bladerunner, the other is Mad Max.[/quote]

I don’t see how “Bladerunner” represents a world with a dollar reduced by one-third, but I also don’t see our future neatly following one of two commercial films. But if you are trying to figure out which movie we will most likely be watching 5 years from now, I think it will end up borrowing bits and pieces of “Bladerunner” and “Mad Max”, with a few frames from “Minority Report” and “Children of Men” tossed in for good measure.

[partypup]

[quote=partypup]”Bernanke has completely lost control. The Fed is now at the mercy of the purchasers of our debt. And he won’t be able to restrain interest rates for long. So I believe we will be slipping into the extremis state within the next twelve (12) months, if not sooner. At that point I would expect exporters to begin requiring many more dollars for products sold to the U.S., and in the case of hard assets with higher *real* value (such as oil), dollars may not be accepted at all, and this is already the case with at least one OPEC country (Iran) that has recently decided that the greenback — no matter how many they receive — is simply too worthless to purchase their oil. Venezuela will probably follow suit, as Iran is putting pressure on other OPEC countries to ditch the dollar altogether. I wouldn’t expect this to happen overnight, but when the dollar collapse begins in earnest I wouldn’t count on being able to find $2.59 gas. Think more along the lines of $5.”

[quote=patientrenter]partypup, I assume you make these posts to entertain yourself. But if you are trying to figure out what’s most likely to happen, then your comment about the OPEC countries not taking any number of dollars in return for giving us their oil doesn’t fit with your conclusion that oil will be at $5. If people accept $5 in return for a gallon of gasoline, then that means oil exporters will accept dollars too. They may just want more of them.[/quote]

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. OPEC controls most (78%) but not all of the world’s oil reserves. So it’s entirely possible for (a) OPEC not to accept dollars and (b) for the U.S. to continue to purchase oil with dollars elsewhere (the U.S. has a share of the non-OPEC reserves, and I think Canada and Mexico would be hard-pressed not to sell to us). Obviously, the price would reflect the drastically reduced supply of available oil. So in fact, $5/gallon would probably be on the low side. But the bottom line is that it is extremely likely at some point in the not-so-distant future that global acceptance of the dollar will fall dramatically, and that will have unimaginable repercussions here for all of us.

[quote=patientrenter]There’s a difference between a 30% or even 50% devaluation of a currency and its complete collapse. One is Bladerunner, the other is Mad Max.[/quote]

I don’t see how “Bladerunner” represents a world with a dollar reduced by one-third, but I also don’t see our future neatly following one of two commercial films. But if you are trying to figure out which movie we will most likely be watching 5 years from now, I think it will end up borrowing bits and pieces of “Bladerunner” and “Mad Max”, with a few frames from “Minority Report” and “Children of Men” tossed in for good measure.

[partypup]

[quote=partypup]”Bernanke has completely lost control. The Fed is now at the mercy of the purchasers of our debt. And he won’t be able to restrain interest rates for long. So I believe we will be slipping into the extremis state within the next twelve (12) months, if not sooner. At that point I would expect exporters to begin requiring many more dollars for products sold to the U.S., and in the case of hard assets with higher *real* value (such as oil), dollars may not be accepted at all, and this is already the case with at least one OPEC country (Iran) that has recently decided that the greenback — no matter how many they receive — is simply too worthless to purchase their oil. Venezuela will probably follow suit, as Iran is putting pressure on other OPEC countries to ditch the dollar altogether. I wouldn’t expect this to happen overnight, but when the dollar collapse begins in earnest I wouldn’t count on being able to find $2.59 gas. Think more along the lines of $5.”

[quote=patientrenter]partypup, I assume you make these posts to entertain yourself. But if you are trying to figure out what’s most likely to happen, then your comment about the OPEC countries not taking any number of dollars in return for giving us their oil doesn’t fit with your conclusion that oil will be at $5. If people accept $5 in return for a gallon of gasoline, then that means oil exporters will accept dollars too. They may just want more of them.[/quote]

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. OPEC controls most (78%) but not all of the world’s oil reserves. So it’s entirely possible for (a) OPEC not to accept dollars and (b) for the U.S. to continue to purchase oil with dollars elsewhere (the U.S. has a share of the non-OPEC reserves, and I think Canada and Mexico would be hard-pressed not to sell to us). Obviously, the price would reflect the drastically reduced supply of available oil. So in fact, $5/gallon would probably be on the low side. But the bottom line is that it is extremely likely at some point in the not-so-distant future that global acceptance of the dollar will fall dramatically, and that will have unimaginable repercussions here for all of us.

[quote=patientrenter]There’s a difference between a 30% or even 50% devaluation of a currency and its complete collapse. One is Bladerunner, the other is Mad Max.[/quote]

I don’t see how “Bladerunner” represents a world with a dollar reduced by one-third, but I also don’t see our future neatly following one of two commercial films. But if you are trying to figure out which movie we will most likely be watching 5 years from now, I think it will end up borrowing bits and pieces of “Bladerunner” and “Mad Max”, with a few frames from “Minority Report” and “Children of Men” tossed in for good measure.

[partypup]

[quote=partypup]”Bernanke has completely lost control. The Fed is now at the mercy of the purchasers of our debt. And he won’t be able to restrain interest rates for long. So I believe we will be slipping into the extremis state within the next twelve (12) months, if not sooner. At that point I would expect exporters to begin requiring many more dollars for products sold to the U.S., and in the case of hard assets with higher *real* value (such as oil), dollars may not be accepted at all, and this is already the case with at least one OPEC country (Iran) that has recently decided that the greenback — no matter how many they receive — is simply too worthless to purchase their oil. Venezuela will probably follow suit, as Iran is putting pressure on other OPEC countries to ditch the dollar altogether. I wouldn’t expect this to happen overnight, but when the dollar collapse begins in earnest I wouldn’t count on being able to find $2.59 gas. Think more along the lines of $5.”

[quote=patientrenter]partypup, I assume you make these posts to entertain yourself. But if you are trying to figure out what’s most likely to happen, then your comment about the OPEC countries not taking any number of dollars in return for giving us their oil doesn’t fit with your conclusion that oil will be at $5. If people accept $5 in return for a gallon of gasoline, then that means oil exporters will accept dollars too. They may just want more of them.[/quote]

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. OPEC controls most (78%) but not all of the world’s oil reserves. So it’s entirely possible for (a) OPEC not to accept dollars and (b) for the U.S. to continue to purchase oil with dollars elsewhere (the U.S. has a share of the non-OPEC reserves, and I think Canada and Mexico would be hard-pressed not to sell to us). Obviously, the price would reflect the drastically reduced supply of available oil. So in fact, $5/gallon would probably be on the low side. But the bottom line is that it is extremely likely at some point in the not-so-distant future that global acceptance of the dollar will fall dramatically, and that will have unimaginable repercussions here for all of us.

[quote=patientrenter]There’s a difference between a 30% or even 50% devaluation of a currency and its complete collapse. One is Bladerunner, the other is Mad Max.[/quote]

I don’t see how “Bladerunner” represents a world with a dollar reduced by one-third, but I also don’t see our future neatly following one of two commercial films. But if you are trying to figure out which movie we will most likely be watching 5 years from now, I think it will end up borrowing bits and pieces of “Bladerunner” and “Mad Max”, with a few frames from “Minority Report” and “Children of Men” tossed in for good measure.

[partypup]

[quote=partypup]”Bernanke has completely lost control. The Fed is now at the mercy of the purchasers of our debt. And he won’t be able to restrain interest rates for long. So I believe we will be slipping into the extremis state within the next twelve (12) months, if not sooner. At that point I would expect exporters to begin requiring many more dollars for products sold to the U.S., and in the case of hard assets with higher *real* value (such as oil), dollars may not be accepted at all, and this is already the case with at least one OPEC country (Iran) that has recently decided that the greenback — no matter how many they receive — is simply too worthless to purchase their oil. Venezuela will probably follow suit, as Iran is putting pressure on other OPEC countries to ditch the dollar altogether. I wouldn’t expect this to happen overnight, but when the dollar collapse begins in earnest I wouldn’t count on being able to find $2.59 gas. Think more along the lines of $5.”

[quote=patientrenter]partypup, I assume you make these posts to entertain yourself. But if you are trying to figure out what’s most likely to happen, then your comment about the OPEC countries not taking any number of dollars in return for giving us their oil doesn’t fit with your conclusion that oil will be at $5. If people accept $5 in return for a gallon of gasoline, then that means oil exporters will accept dollars too. They may just want more of them.[/quote]

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. OPEC controls most (78%) but not all of the world’s oil reserves. So it’s entirely possible for (a) OPEC not to accept dollars and (b) for the U.S. to continue to purchase oil with dollars elsewhere (the U.S. has a share of the non-OPEC reserves, and I think Canada and Mexico would be hard-pressed not to sell to us). Obviously, the price would reflect the drastically reduced supply of available oil. So in fact, $5/gallon would probably be on the low side. But the bottom line is that it is extremely likely at some point in the not-so-distant future that global acceptance of the dollar will fall dramatically, and that will have unimaginable repercussions here for all of us.

[quote=patientrenter]There’s a difference between a 30% or even 50% devaluation of a currency and its complete collapse. One is Bladerunner, the other is Mad Max.[/quote]

I don’t see how “Bladerunner” represents a world with a dollar reduced by one-third, but I also don’t see our future neatly following one of two commercial films. But if you are trying to figure out which movie we will most likely be watching 5 years from now, I think it will end up borrowing bits and pieces of “Bladerunner” and “Mad Max”, with a few frames from “Minority Report” and “Children of Men” tossed in for good measure.

[partypup]

[quote=Arraya]As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

I see we have some real sci fi fans here! I’ll tip my hat to a couple of underrated 70s flicks: “Soylent Green” and “Planet of the Apes” (only the first one). Sure, they looked kind of schlocky and the acting was painful – but they presented some damn provocative and creepy themes.

And I know they don’t make movies they way they used to, but I saw the new “Star Trek” last weekend and really enjoyed it. It was fresh, the casting was excellent, and the effects were very nice. J.J. Abrams sure knows how to entertain.

[partypup]

[quote=Arraya]As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

I see we have some real sci fi fans here! I’ll tip my hat to a couple of underrated 70s flicks: “Soylent Green” and “Planet of the Apes” (only the first one). Sure, they looked kind of schlocky and the acting was painful – but they presented some damn provocative and creepy themes.

And I know they don’t make movies they way they used to, but I saw the new “Star Trek” last weekend and really enjoyed it. It was fresh, the casting was excellent, and the effects were very nice. J.J. Abrams sure knows how to entertain.

[partypup]

[quote=Arraya]As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

I see we have some real sci fi fans here! I’ll tip my hat to a couple of underrated 70s flicks: “Soylent Green” and “Planet of the Apes” (only the first one). Sure, they looked kind of schlocky and the acting was painful – but they presented some damn provocative and creepy themes.

And I know they don’t make movies they way they used to, but I saw the new “Star Trek” last weekend and really enjoyed it. It was fresh, the casting was excellent, and the effects were very nice. J.J. Abrams sure knows how to entertain.

[partypup]

[quote=Arraya]As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

I see we have some real sci fi fans here! I’ll tip my hat to a couple of underrated 70s flicks: “Soylent Green” and “Planet of the Apes” (only the first one). Sure, they looked kind of schlocky and the acting was painful – but they presented some damn provocative and creepy themes.

And I know they don’t make movies they way they used to, but I saw the new “Star Trek” last weekend and really enjoyed it. It was fresh, the casting was excellent, and the effects were very nice. J.J. Abrams sure knows how to entertain.

[partypup]

[quote=Arraya]As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

I see we have some real sci fi fans here! I’ll tip my hat to a couple of underrated 70s flicks: “Soylent Green” and “Planet of the Apes” (only the first one). Sure, they looked kind of schlocky and the acting was painful – but they presented some damn provocative and creepy themes.

And I know they don’t make movies they way they used to, but I saw the new “Star Trek” last weekend and really enjoyed it. It was fresh, the casting was excellent, and the effects were very nice. J.J. Abrams sure knows how to entertain.

[Arraya]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Arraya]Of course we need to expand net energy to increase productions of goods and services and thus pay off our debts. Unfortunately it’s only going down, slowly now and quickly in a few years, probably 2-3. Factor in population growth and the per capita energy use has to go down and however that manifests. Most likely it will concentrate. Economics does not sufficiently handle this problem. Bernake can’t print energy and that by definition is the ability to do work.

As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

Arraya: I must confess I’m torn. You’re one of my favorite posters on this board and one of the more astute in my humble opinion.

However, you’ve just referenced a movie that not only features Ah-nuld, but Richard Dawson, Jesse Ventura and Jim Brown. Dude! What are we to think?

While I’m thinking about it, are you a Neil Gaiman fan? If so, check out author China Mieville (it’s actually a British guy). I think you’ll like his style.
[/quote]

Ha! That is too funny. Honestly, I was hesitant to post for that very reason. It’s also way I said to watch the first 15 minutes because the rest is just a more cheesy and violent version of American Gladiator.

[Arraya]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Arraya]Of course we need to expand net energy to increase productions of goods and services and thus pay off our debts. Unfortunately it’s only going down, slowly now and quickly in a few years, probably 2-3. Factor in population growth and the per capita energy use has to go down and however that manifests. Most likely it will concentrate. Economics does not sufficiently handle this problem. Bernake can’t print energy and that by definition is the ability to do work.

As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

Arraya: I must confess I’m torn. You’re one of my favorite posters on this board and one of the more astute in my humble opinion.

However, you’ve just referenced a movie that not only features Ah-nuld, but Richard Dawson, Jesse Ventura and Jim Brown. Dude! What are we to think?

While I’m thinking about it, are you a Neil Gaiman fan? If so, check out author China Mieville (it’s actually a British guy). I think you’ll like his style.
[/quote]

Ha! That is too funny. Honestly, I was hesitant to post for that very reason. It’s also way I said to watch the first 15 minutes because the rest is just a more cheesy and violent version of American Gladiator.

[Arraya]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Arraya]Of course we need to expand net energy to increase productions of goods and services and thus pay off our debts. Unfortunately it’s only going down, slowly now and quickly in a few years, probably 2-3. Factor in population growth and the per capita energy use has to go down and however that manifests. Most likely it will concentrate. Economics does not sufficiently handle this problem. Bernake can’t print energy and that by definition is the ability to do work.

As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

Arraya: I must confess I’m torn. You’re one of my favorite posters on this board and one of the more astute in my humble opinion.

However, you’ve just referenced a movie that not only features Ah-nuld, but Richard Dawson, Jesse Ventura and Jim Brown. Dude! What are we to think?

While I’m thinking about it, are you a Neil Gaiman fan? If so, check out author China Mieville (it’s actually a British guy). I think you’ll like his style.
[/quote]

Ha! That is too funny. Honestly, I was hesitant to post for that very reason. It’s also way I said to watch the first 15 minutes because the rest is just a more cheesy and violent version of American Gladiator.

[Arraya]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Arraya]Of course we need to expand net energy to increase productions of goods and services and thus pay off our debts. Unfortunately it’s only going down, slowly now and quickly in a few years, probably 2-3. Factor in population growth and the per capita energy use has to go down and however that manifests. Most likely it will concentrate. Economics does not sufficiently handle this problem. Bernake can’t print energy and that by definition is the ability to do work.

As for movies depicting the future. Watch the first 15 minutes of “The Running Man”. Has the timing dead on, IMO. The creators must be peak oil savvy.

The year is 2017. The world economy has collapsed. The United States has sealed off it’s borders and has become a military controlled police state which controls TV, movies, art, books, communication and censorship. In the police state America has become, criminals have a choice…

Arnie gets in trouble for not obeying orders to shoot food rioters.

Blade Runner is in my top five as well.

[/quote]

Arraya: I must confess I’m torn. You’re one of my favorite posters on this board and one of the more astute in my humble opinion.

However, you’ve just referenced a movie that not only features Ah-nuld, but Richard Dawson, Jesse Ventura and Jim Brown. Dude! What are we to think?

While I’m thinking about it, are you a Neil Gaiman fan? If so, check out author China Mieville (it’s actually a British guy). I think you’ll like his style.
[/quote]

Ha! That is too funny. Honestly, I was hesitant to post for that very reason. It’s also way I said to watch the first 15 minutes because the rest is just a more cheesy and violent version of American Gladiator.

[Author]

Posts