I thought the increase in demand came from the lower prices. If efficiency increases but total output and price remains relatively stable (as in, a resource is actually running out but the increased efficiency with which the resource is harvested/mined/refined etc. is enough to offset the lowering of supply) then demand would surely remain stable?
If efficiency increases, prices would go down, enticing more marginal users to engage in purchasing.
Jackson LaRose: If efficiency increases, prices would go down, enticing more marginal users to engage in purchasing. What happens when scarcity is greater than the increases in efficiency? | Post Points: 35
Going into the woods is pure freedom. I was in the woods all today and never felt freer. Way better then living in civilization. And 100% non-aggressive too.
http://www.wilderness-survival.net/plants-1.php
Freedom4Me73986: Going into the woods is pure freedom. I was in the woods all today and never felt freer. Way better then living in civilization. And 100% non-aggressive too.
You're hilarious. If it's so great, stop being a hypocrite and typing on a computer inherently connected to civilization. Live out your values. The rest of us know that living in concert with other human beings is a massive survival and productivity advantage. And still possible to do so 100% aggression-free.
And still possible to do so 100% aggression-free.
Wrong. Civ REQUIRES aggression in order to sustain itself. Agriculture and dependence on ag caused states (violent monopolies) to form AND invade other lands. Ag destroys the land its done upon so the only way to keep ag going is to take over more virgin lands. This was the cause of all early state warfare. As long as there's a civ there will be massive amounts of aggression.
The rest of us know that living in concert with other human beings is a massive survival and productivity advantage.
Also 100% wrong. Civ is not sustainable. Even tho state violence has made civ last a lot longer then it would have otherwise it's still headed towards collapse. It's way better to learn survival skills NOW and start living off-the-grid.
If it's so great, stop being a hypocrite and typing on a computer inherently connected to civilization.
Why don't you try to live as state-free as possible?
Freedom4Me73986: And still possible to do so 100% aggression-free. Wrong. Civ REQUIRES aggression in order to sustain itself. Agriculture and dependence on ag caused states (violent monopolies) to form AND invade other lands. Ag destroys the land its done upon so the only way to keep ag going is to take over more virgin lands. This was the cause of all early state warfare. As long as there's a civ there will be massive amounts of aggression.
You're conflating states and aggression. It's possible for a state to exist without aggressing against its citizens or anyone else. Agriculture does not 'destroy the land', whatever that means. It's impossible to survive without being a burden on other species. You may as well claim that breathing destroys air.
Freedom4Me73986: The rest of us know that living in concert with other human beings is a massive survival and productivity advantage. Also 100% wrong. Civ is not sustainable. Even tho state violence has made civ last a lot longer then it would have otherwise it's still headed towards collapse. It's way better to learn survival skills NOW and start living off-the-grid.
Sustainable? Course it is. Just because eventually a society chooses policies which lead it to collapse doesn't mean it's not sustainable, but rather that it's possible to crash and eventually they do.
Way better? In what world? It would only be 'way better' if society had already crashed. Even when society's -do- crash economically, it's often better to stick with people still.
Freedom4Me73986: If it's so great, stop being a hypocrite and typing on a computer inherently connected to civilization. Why don't you try to live as state-free as possible?
Actually I'm not an advocate of state-free living, but rather of an essentialist state, a minimum state. And I'm in planning stages to build an essentialist government off-shore. If one existed already, I'd be there.
You already have woods, why aren't you living in them full time. Every post on this forum is a violation of what you say is 'way better'.
You're conflating states and aggression. It's possible for a state to exist without aggressing against its citizens or anyone else. Agriculture does not 'destroy the land', whatever that means.
Wrong. All you need to do is google 'is agriculture sustainable?' and you'll find all your answers there.
Ag means wiping the land of all living things in order to grow grains and other domesticated plants. This means the soil ends up being destroyed. The only reason ag continues is b/c fossil fuels are able to be turned into fertilizers, BUT that's not going to last much longer. Peak oil is around the corner and this will mean a massive die-off of most of the human race since so much of it is dependent on ag to survive.
Your not giving me any evidence. I want to know why you think civ can survive (esp. w/o aggression) when I've given you all the reasons otherwise.
Freedom4Me73986: Wrong. All you need to do is google 'is agriculture sustainable?' and you'll find all your answers there.
If agriculture wasn't sustainable, we wouldn't be alive right now. Come on. We've been farming for thousands of years. It's freakin' sustainable.
Freedom4Me73986:Ag means wiping the land of all living things in order to grow grains and other domesticated plants. This means the soil ends up being destroyed. The only reason ag continues is b/c fossil fuels are able to be turned into fertilizers, BUT that's not going to last much longer. Peak oil is around the corner and this will mean a massive die-off of most of the human race since so much of it is dependent on ag to survive.
Lol, you're hilarious. We already have oil replacements waiting in the wing. Biodiesel for instance. Solar for another. We'll be replacing oil, coal, and gas as primary energy producers I'd say within the next 25 years, as prices come down as enabled by tech.
Freedom4Me73986:Your not giving me any evidence. I want to know why you think civ can survive (esp. w/o aggression) when I've given you all the reasons otherwise.
We've had uninterrupted history since, well, the beginning of history. That's proof enough for me.
Freedom4Me73986: Your not giving me any evidence. I want to know why you think civ can survive (esp. w/o aggression) when I've given you all the reasons otherwise.
Oh, wow, this is rich.
Just because a glider thrown off a cliff hasn't hit the ground yet doesn't mean it won't eventually. The only reason ag is still around is because states took over new lands and forced the local populations into an agricultural system. The whole middle east is a desert b/c of millennia of ag.
Biodiesel = ag. And the reason no one wants wind/solar power is because they suck. And how can biodiesel be turned into fertilizers to sustain industrial ag?
I found video of F4M IRL!!!:
F4M: Why did you never tell us your IRL handle is Cuervo??
Clayton -
Cell phones: 50% increase in tumors in children
Still think tech is a miracle?
Anenome:You're hilarious. If it's so great, stop being a hypocrite and typing on a computer inherently connected to civilization.
So, you don't use any publicly subsidized services? I assume you are against coercion.
Live out your values.
Two words. Property Tax. It is extremely difficult not to be a wage slave and not be a criminal.
No argument here.
Mmm... not so sure about that one.
Agriculture does not 'destroy the land', whatever that means.
No?
It's impossible to survive without being a burden on other species.
But it is possible to survive without destroying our landbase's carrying capacity, which would include wiping out keystone ecological species.
You may as well claim that breathing destroys air.
Not even close to a reasonable analogy.
Not from what I can tell. Check it.
It would only be 'way better' if society had already crashed.
For you, maybe. I'd rather have clean air, water, food, and shelter, and not be a wage slave.
In fact, many European settlers deserted colonies to join the natives.
It's called a "raft". Not sure if you've heard of them? Make your dream a reality! That's basically what you are saying to F4M right now.
No. We have just been able to outpace the collapse. We are running out of places to run, though.
Green Revolution
Sumer
Groundwater Declines
We already have oil replacements waiting in the wing. Biodiesel for instance. Solar for another. We'll be replacing oil, coal, and gas as primary energy producers I'd say within the next 25 years, as prices come down as enabled by tech.
Fossil fuels are just stored solar energy. It seems quite the vote of confidence to assume that we will be able to extract enough energy every day from the Sun to sustain our current energy consumption.
1/400,000th of the Earth's history is an adequate sample size for you? Maybe 1/20th of humanity's existence?
Freedom4Me73986:Cell phones: 50% increase in tumors in children Still think tech is a miracle?
^Child mortality rates have certainly been dropping over time, and are lowest in countries with the most technology.
How many of those kids have autism? How many of those kids will become obese? How does that compare to kids elsewhere?
Rorschach:Child mortality rates have certainly been dropping over time, and are lowest in countries with the most technology.
The result? Let Darwin work!
Freedom4Me73986: How many of those kids have autism? How many of those kids will become obese? How does that compare to kids elsewhere? Well... They're ALIVE. | Post Points: 20
Obsese? For 99% of recorded history, children primarily died young... from starvation.
I'd rather die of starvation then be involuntarily injected w/ mercury and fed big ag GMO crops, pasteurized milk full of cancer-causing agents and water full of toxic fluoride.
Freedom4Me73986: Obsese? For 99% of recorded history, children primarily died young... from starvation. I'd rather die of starvation then be involuntarily injected w/ mercury and fed big ag GMO crops, pasteurized milk full of cancer-causing agents and water full of toxic fluoride.
Then you're silly. Silly for believing tripe like anti-vaccination BS, GMO BS, milk BS, and fluoride BS.
There will always be tradeoffs. This is the great lesson of economics.
If vaccinations cause occasional side-effects the diseases they've prevented are far worse.
If GMO crops have some negative aspects, the starvation they've abolished is far worse.
If milk pasteurization causes some health problems, then the deaths by bacterial infection and the like it prevents is far worse.
If fluoride has some negative effects, the tooth problems it prevents are far worse.
You would abandon an awesome world, the modern world, the best world there has -ever been- historically, because it's not a perfect utopia.
And everyone on this board thinks you're a complete fool for it.
And your callous response, that death for the masses is better than a few accidental health problems for the vast minority, is evil.
Then you're silly. Silly for believing tripe like anti-vaccination BS, GMO BS, milk BS, and fluoride BS. There will always be tradeoffs. This is the great lesson of economics. If vaccinations cause occasional side-effects the diseases they've prevented are far worse. If GMO crops have some negative aspects, the starvation they've abolished is far worse. If milk pasteurization causes some health problems, then the deaths by bacterial infection and the like it prevents is far worse. If fluoride has some negative effects, the tooth problems it prevents are far worse.
Fool. All these things are ways the gov is trying to kill us off. Of course most govs today won't toss us in gulags. they'll just poison us w/ whatever they can esp. our food and medicine. They do it through corporate monopoly. Just give a handful of corporations tons of subsidies, regulate everyone else so no one can compete and watch the population's physical and mental health decline. Then make living off the grid illegal and censor all news which exposes this.
Raw milk isn't BS. There was a study from Harvard of all places which PROVED that pasteurization creates cancer-causing agents in milk. Google it if you don't believe me.
Fluoride isn't BS. Even certain gov. agencies are admitting that too much fluoride in water is causing serious health effects.
Vax aren't BS. Go to naturalnews if you don't believe me. Autism was unheard of before kids were injected with tons of vax.
I'd also look up chips being injected into humans and ask myself whether or not there part of a new surveillance method.
Freedom4Me73986: Fool. All these things are ways the gov is trying to kill us off. Of course most govs today won't toss us in gulags. they'll just poison us w/ whatever they can esp. our food and medicine. They do it through corporate monopoly. Just give a handful of corporations tons of subsidies, regulate everyone else so no one can compete and watch the population's physical and mental health decline. Then make living off the grid illegal and censor all news which exposes this.
"Instead, let's go back to H/G society which is completely unsustainable at current population levels, thus killing off 90-95% of the human population!"
Freedom4Me73986:Raw milk isn't BS. There was a study from Harvard of all places which PROVED that pasteurization creates cancer-causing agents in milk. Google it if you don't believe me.
Googled it. Only references I found were to the increased amount of hormones found in milk when milked out of season. NOT pauseurization. *Shocker*
Freedom4Me73986:Fluoride isn't BS. Even certain gov. agencies are admitting that too much fluoride in water is causing serious health effects.
Freedom4Me73986:Vax aren't BS. Go to naturalnews if you don't believe me. Autism was unheard of before kids were injected with tons of vax.
Freedom4Me73986:I'd also look up chips being injected into humans and ask myself whether or not there part of a new surveillance method.
Jackson LaRose: So, you don't use any publicly subsidized services? I assume you are against coercion.
Correct, I do not. Where I have an option anyway.
Jackson LaRose:Live out your values. Two words. Property Tax. It is extremely difficult not to be a wage slave and not be a criminal.
You lack imagination then perhaps. My solution is to start a libertarian state on the water and make taxation illegal thereby. The only excuse for not living there is that it doesn't yet exist--in planning stages. Give me time. But, assuming such a place existed, would you move there?
Jackson LaRose:And still possible to do so 100% aggression-free. Mmm... not so sure about that one.
Examples? Support?
Jackson LaRose: Agriculture does not 'destroy the land', whatever that means. No?
That very article is rife with solutions to top soil erosion. It's a problem much like obtaining clean water is a problem, meaning it's solvable by the application of human energy and ingenuity. There are both farmland means of stopping erosion, as well as ways to replace lost topsoil. It would be more surprising if farming required no maintenance. Soil erosion would only make farming unsustainable were there no solution to it. But there is.
Sustainable.
Jackson LaRose:It's impossible to survive without being a burden on other species. But it is possible to survive without destroying our landbase's carrying capacity, which would include wiping out keystone ecological species.
Should be.
Jackson LaRose: You may as well claim that breathing destroys air. Not even close to a reasonable analogy.
Breathing renders air less usable. Farming renders land less fertile? Neither air nor farmland are 'destroyed' by either however, and natural processes restore the value of both.
Jackson LaRose: Sustainable? Course it is. Just because eventually a society chooses policies which lead it to collapse doesn't mean it's not sustainable, but rather that it's possible to crash and eventually they do. Not from what I can tell. Check it.
There's essentially an infinite amount of property and energy in the universe. Jevon's paradox is only a problem if you maintain that man never moves into space and never achieves population stability.
Jackson LaRose: It would only be 'way better' if society had already crashed. For you, maybe. I'd rather have clean air, water, food, and shelter, and not be a wage slave.
Then you'd better support technological innovation, freedom, and business. Becuase they are what create all those things you say you value.
Jackson LaRose: In fact, many European settlers deserted colonies to join the natives.
From your article, these were primarily women and children whom were literally raised in Indian society, were culturally indian and:
captives had been returned who, like many of the Ohio prisoners, responded only to Indian names, spoke only Indian dialects, felt comfortable only in Indian clothes, and in general regarded their white saviors as barbarians and their deliverance as captivity.
So, it's not really surprising.
Jackson LaRose: You already have woods, why aren't you living in them full time. Every post on this forum is a violation of what you say is 'way better'. It's called a "raft". Not sure if you've heard of them? Make your dream a reality! That's basically what you are saying to F4M right now.
o_O No, a raft would not suffice. What I propose does not yet exist, at all, or I'd be there.
Jackson LaRose: If agriculture wasn't sustainable, we wouldn't be alive right now. Come on. We've been farming for thousands of years. It's freakin' sustainable. No. We have just been able to outpace the collapse. We are running out of places to run, though.
And we did it with science. Not with a return to hunting-gathering. Not with a repudiation of the modern world. We did it because freedom.
Jackson LaRose:We already have oil replacements waiting in the wing. Biodiesel for instance. Solar for another. We'll be replacing oil, coal, and gas as primary energy producers I'd say within the next 25 years, as prices come down as enabled by tech. Fossil fuels are just stored solar energy. It seems quite the vote of confidence to assume that we will be able to extract enough energy every day from the Sun to sustain our current energy consumption.
Have you done the math? Looked at the issue? There's far more energy immediately available than we'd likely ever need. Need more? Fine, the earth's surface is an incredibly tiny portion of the sun's total output. There's plenty of schemes already for space-based energy collection and distribution.
There is so much energy out there, even considering long-term growth. And we're only talking one star. Lookup a Dyson Sphere if you want your mind blown.
Jackson LaRose: We've had uninterrupted history since, well, the beginning of history. That's proof enough for me. 1/400,000th of the Earth's history is an adequate sample size for you? Maybe 1/20th of humanity's existence?
Yes, because man survives by thinking, and man survived long enough to develop writing. You think agriculture just started? No, it's the march to the modern world that began with agriculture.
When people were living as the OP suggests is the ideal, the ideal he wants to return to, they spent all day, every day, simply trying to feed themselves. If you have any leisure time at all right now, it's because of things agriculture and tools made possible.
And it's things those tools will continue to make possible moving forward, as long as people are free to keep creating this world we've made. They could disappear, sure, but it won't be from soil erosion, lead poisoning, vaccines, milk, or fluoride, but rather from something dumb and artificial like war.
Anemone:Correct, I do not.
You are lyng, or ignorant.
Anemone:Where I have an option anyway.
Well, that isn't what I asked .
Anemone:You lack imagination then perhaps.
Maybe I just like where I'm living. New England is truly God's country.
Anemone:My solution is to start a libertarian state on the water and make taxation illegal thereby. The only excuse for not living there is that it doesn't yet exist--in planning stages. Give me time.
Sounds like we both have the same problem, then. Lack of capital, LOL.
Anemone:But, assuming such a place existed, would you move there?
To a big boat in the middle of the ocean? LOL, no way!
Anemone:Examples? Support?
Why? I was just meeting an assertion with a counter-assertion. You go first, then we'll talk.
Anamone:There are both farmland means of stopping erosion, as well as ways to replace lost topsoil.
LOL, how do you replace lost topsoil?
Anemone:Soil erosion would only make farming unsustainable were there no solution to it. But there is.
A bit Pollyannish, no? Topsoil is going away, plain and simple. Whether or not there are theoretically solutions, doesn't mean they will be implemented in time to beat Malthus.
Anemone:Sustainable.
LOL, what is?
Anemone:Breathing renders air less usable. Farming renders land less fertile? Neither air nor farmland are 'destroyed' by either however, and natural processes restore the value of both.
OK, well using your (lame) analogy, breathing does destroy air. Tie a plastic bag around your head, and you'll soon find that out. Farming destroys soil. There are ways to grow crops that don't destroy soil, but they aren't implemented on a wide scale, and per acre, would be much less economical from a commodity standpoint. So, they won't be happening anytime soon.
Anemone:Jevon's paradox is only a problem if you maintain that man never moves into space and never achieves population stability.
LOL, or you have a problem with making this planet like Coruscant. This presupposes the primacy of satisfaction of human material desires as the ultimate good.
And Jevon's Paradox is exactly why population stability is a farce, unless you are ready to adopt some sort of Brave New World style Fabian dystopia.
Anemone:What I propose does not yet exist, at all, or I'd be there.
Well, what F4M and I propose (an anarcho-primitivist world) doesn't exist yet either, so join the club.
Anemone:And we did it with science.
OK, and we can stave off the economic collapse with more money printing, right? The "Green Revolution" is failing.
Anemone:There's far more energy immediately available than we'd likely ever need.
Remeber Jevon's Paradox? There's no such thing as "enough" energy.
Anemone:You think agriculture just started? No, it's the march to the modern world that began with agriculture.
Uh, yeah, it did "just start". And the modern world carries the state along with it. I don't know why you are all so quick to celebrate it.
Anemone:When people were living as the OP suggests is the ideal, the ideal he wants to return to, they spent all day, every day, simply trying to feed themselves. If you have any leisure time at all right now, it's because of things agriculture and tools made possible.
That is completely wrong. Laughably wrong, in fact. Link.
Anemone:They could disappear, sure, but it won't be from soil erosion, lead poisoning, vaccines, milk, or fluoride, but rather from something dumb and artificial like war.
They?
Remember that NONE of this could happen if not for a tech-driven society which depends solely on ag (esp. big ag) for food.
Eugenics and vaccines
Toxic ingredients list
do you know where I could find out how to make wilderness pemmican? Specifically do you know how to render fat without copper age tools? Or know anyone who might know? Thanks.
Do you eat raw paleo? do you know where I could find out how to make wilderness pemmican? Specifically do you know how to render fat without copper age tools? Or know anyone who might know? Thanks.
Do you eat raw paleo?
I eat a raw vegan diet. No meat, no dairy (except raw milk of course) and no grains.
Come to New Hampshire. We have an ABUNDANCE of wild food here. Plenty to gather.
@Anenome so you want to keep living in violent and unhealthy civ?
excel:What happens when scarcity is greater than the increases in efficiency?
I don't know. I've been told here that entrepreneurs will just come up with some innovation (or would be able to, in a laissez-faire society) to maintain the supply of goods. Replacement goods, essentially.
Freedom4Me73986: I eat a raw vegan diet. No meat, no dairy (except raw milk of course) and no grains. Come to New Hampshire. We have an ABUNDANCE of wild food here. Plenty to gather.
Let's see a picture of your average breakfast, lunch and dinner please?
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
Dumped my cell phone last year. No camera.
Jackson LaRose: I don't know. I've been told here that entrepreneurs will just come up with some innovation (or would be able to, in a laissez-faire society) to maintain the supply of goods. Replacement goods, essentially.
If we accept that as true, then the paradox does not apply to reality.
excel:If we accept that as true, then the paradox does not apply to reality.
Well, I haven't read any good reasons to accept that conclusion. I'm just repeating what I've seen so far.