There's a slight different between a back and forth exchange, and your first, unsolicited troll attempt of the day. Get it yet? I don't follow you around the forum, throw a punch, then hide behind the teacher. You do.

coffee... I'm not gonna keep doing this dance with you. Until you explain how energy, a basic requirement for advanced civilization, follows the same supply/demand model you assert, yours is the flawed economics.

Your tactic here is to troll up threads and get them locked down. I can gladly bring that all day. But, for the sake of this thread, which is far more important than your weird obsession with me, I'm not gonna engage you here until you actually (for once) agree to comment on global oil depletion and its affects on the economy - challenges you've proudly run from for months.

If you wanna keep up the pettiness in another thread, I'll be right there. But not here, please. Thanks!

Follow the forum rules, Jiggs. Calling others trolls isn't within the rules. You do things like that, then wonder why threads get closed (below?). Maybe you should read Mr. Wookie's post again that said you weren't keeping your nose clean WRT the rules.

Economics can and is applied to everything. Period.

BTW, you've talked about the supply of oil/energy and the demand of oil/energy. So at some basic level you realize those apply.

Wrong. Please stop lying. BTW, as stated in the forum rules (have you read those?) disputing someone's claims is not trolling. Saying their arguments are bad (especially when giving reasons) isn't trolling. I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings, but it isn't trolling.

OMG, seriously? You're going to ignore my points until I do something unrelated that you want me to do. Unique way of phrasing your REFUUUUUUUUUUUTE ME arguments. I guess you could twist these actions in your mind into thinking you're 'winning', but it's just another attempt of yours to duck the fact your economics knowledge is wanting. Deflections like the above (i.e. changing the topic) don't change that fact.

I'll be following this forum's rules (unlike you) and I'll post where I please.

Thanks!

Bump to save Jiggs' magnum opus from the archives. RIP Jiiigggggggggggssssssssssssss

Now even CNN has caught on we got plenty of oil to burn still, bump.

FREE JIGGGGGGGGGZ

This thread was peak jiggs.

Peak oil is bad because poor people wont be able to use higher priced oil, you are an idiot to say otherwise!

The demand curve for oil isnt downward sloping, you are an idiot to say otherwise!

Amazing.

lol. yes, please unban jiggs. I would love to have a "peak" anything debate.

Bump for updated energy briefs

Jiggs vs. coffee_monster. Good times...

wind, solar, electric, we has tons of energy now.... no worries...


The real problem in america is Peak Fox.... crazy is becoming crazier by the SECOnd... The people in my town that were nutz are becoming nutzerier and scary... I was wrong when I said a civil war wo0uld be over in 10 minutes.... it might take a week but these people are insane weed needs to be given to them no more schedule one.....or prozax or xantac or whatever...crazy mother****ers

Oil will be cheaper in 2050 than it is now, book it

...

Maybe Jiggs is only posting in Unchained?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_te...istration.html

Waiting for explanation from Jiggzzzz on how USA is not actually #1, obviously this oil and that oil doesn't count. Because of peak oils and whatnot.

GEOLOGICAL FACTS incoming

We need to have a thread like this that we can bump for mises/libertarian debt apocalypse crowd. It's pretty similar really, people predict doom over 17 trillion in national debt, market says otherwise, doesn't matter doom is always just around the corner.

"Food crisis of 2010" could be used for that purpose too.

I posted food crises of 2010, it was posted to discuss a link, not a statement of ohh noees we are doomed. Interestingly there were some pretty big events associated with food prices post 2010. Obviously there was no apocalypse. FWIW Food inflation in the UK has been pretty severe since 2010 as it has been in many places.

The most intellectually dishonest approach seems to be, no apocalypse, then business as usual must be completely fine then. Seems quite the false dichotomy. These dichotomies that are created in this forum by everyone rushing to take a diametrically opposed position are its biggest AIDS and shut down to discussion.

As I pointed out in another thread saying doom is around the corner is obviously hyperbole, but lets recognise that since the 70s you have never been more than 5 years from the last or next recession with the average being 4 years. Given the severity of the event in 2008 and recent economy history it seems reasonable to estimate a fairly severe economic event circa 2018. Obviously it is silly to predict doom as an outcome, but equally silly is to say "It wont be doom so business as usual is fine". However that is the position of many posters rushing out to head off the libertarians at the pass.

The libertarian agenda still drives far to much discussion on this forum as in that so many positions seem to be taken as satellite to it in opposition. Its quite boring and also creates a micro climate of debate that does not mirror discussion in the wider environment. A clear example of this is how opposition to the current debt based monetary system is seen as a purely right wing idea, its not, in Europe there is plenty of dialogue and organisation from the left that is critical of such systems and critical of advocates such as Krugman. See below.

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-...ve-keen-2012-4

and

http://www.positivemoney.org/about

I don't understand the 70s qualifier. That statement is true for the entire history of the US as a sovereign nation.

True, I was just making it contemporary to the lives of most posters.

There were others that posted in that thread, no? I referred to the thread (and was thinking of the THREAD, not the OP specifically)

I wish the US could have financial reform dialogue like the positivemoney link outlines, but the framing of issues in the US has shifted so far to right in recent decades that we literally don't even have much public debate over real leftist ideas and potential reforms. Take obamacare, in any other first world country it would be seen as conservative reform, in the US the far right successful rebrands it far left reform, it works. And this whole push the debate to the far right so moderate right policy is rebranded liberal/communist/soshilist is successful and drowns out real policy discussion on the left.

Obamacare is clearly not a conservative reform, it is more liberal than the status quo.

Thats the point, your status quo is more conservative than most developed countries.

Right, but the American conservatives aren't "rebranding" Obamacare as a liberal reform, it is by definition a liberal reform.