Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What experts are you referring to? I can name multiple economist that predicated the bust in housing 18 months ago. In fact its sort of ironic that many of the economist that did predicated matters 1-2 years ago are less doom/gloom than the "experts" that seem to only be predicting economic failure in the last 6 months.
My remark was a bit tongue-in-cheek. I should have put quotation marks around "experts". I never mentioned economists. Many economist were warning of the burst years ago while the "experts" were spouting of an endless river of gold. Unfortunately, people tend to be more influenced by so-called experts than professionals. Any market will follow the various self-proclaimed gurus for some reason while ignoring common sense. The results tend to be disastrous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid
There are no "laws of supply and demand" and to compare economics to physics shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what goes on in economic modeling/forecasting.
I strongly disagree. The law of supply and demand is quite real and follows Newton's 3rd law while economic modeling/forecasting, which I did not mention, seems to have more in common with astrology. It's true that the top economists gave us plenty of warning but nobody was listening to them. Most were busy listening to the gurus who were talking about sunshine and flowers. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This isn't a suggestion. There is no consequence for breaking the law since it quite simply can't be broken. The only consequence is for attempting to break a law that can't be broken. That consequence is failure. The housing bubble and resulting burst is a result of people using "creative" methods to work around the law of supply and demand. Obviously the attempt failed. Again, it's not doom and gloom but really simple math.
The rising price of rice is a perfect example of the law of supply and demand. The reality of a shortage is irrelevant. Since a shortage is perceived, the demand quickly rose above the available supply so the price went up. The bottom line is that the US is a huge rice exporter and we have a huge surplus but because certain parts of the world are in trouble, people started panicking and buying rice off the shelves. There's plenty of rice but they can't package and deliver it fast enough to keep up with the sudden demand. Since many folks will happily pay $40 for a bag of rice that cost $10 a couple months ago, everyone from the mills to the grocers are taking advantage of the lower supply and raising prices. I would. It's another bubble that will burst very soon. Many folks are jumping on the bandwagon and getting into the commodities market to buy rice. Actual economists and professional brokers aren't but the internet "experts" are screaming the virtues of buying rice and wouldn't ya know... they are. Just like in the housing and internet busts, a lot of people are going to lose their shirts. A lot more are going to find themselves with a 10 year supply of rice they paid more than 400% of real market value for and I wouldn't be surprised to see large quantities of rice being sold on craigslist for rock bottom prices real soon. I'd bet money there are people out there maxing out their credit cards to buy rice even!
The biggest failure of economists to accurately predict market trends is their failure to include exactly how foolish people can be with their money into the equation. Since there is apparently no known limit, it's a factor that simply can't be calculated so accurate predictions are more or less impossible.
All in all, it's not what the economists say but what people believe that has the greater affect.
This all illustrates the fact that if the population continues to increase unchecked (likely) and no magical new supply of resource is found real fast (unlikely), we are all in for a really rough ride and lots of folks wont make it. It would be great if "Mr. Fusion" were to appear on the shelves of the big box stores but I don't believe in the tooth fairy. No the US won't suffer as much but our standard of living will drop considerably and we'll have to defend our resources. We'll never, in any foreseeable future, completely run out of food because as the supply of people drops worldwide, so will the demand for food.
The third law of mechanics states " For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." So far no one has found a workaround to that law. The laws of supply and demand conform perfectly to Newton's third law.
In theory I agree. The problem is that there are too many politicians who toy around with supply and demand - thinking they are wiser than the invisible hand - and create artificial disruptions by regulations and taxes.
The idea that there are sparsely populated places on the planet that can "sustain larger populations" is bunk, pure and simple. Places that are now sparsely populated are so for a reason--they lack adequate water, are too hot, too cold, too swampy--simply stated, lacking some critical element to sustain a large human population. In fact, there is ample evidence--desertification in sub-Saharan Africa, deforestation in equatorial South America, water crises in more places than one can count, etc., etc.--that human population density has already exceeded the "carrying capacity" in many places in the world. As to "objective science and cooperation," no amount of technological horse**** is really up to the task of regrowing a rain forest, regenerating extinct species, rebuilding complete ecosystems, or "fixing" ravaged landscapes--humans may be smart, but we're not THAT smart. As to "cooperation," all of human history shows that when humans and their societies have to compete over inadequate resources, peace and cooperation are usually the first things that go out the window. In fact, resource scarcity usually foments the very dictatorships, caste systems, and corruption that destroy freedoms, free enterprise, and democracy. At least that's been the case for the last 10,000 years or so.
This is simply not true. There are many areas of the northern tier of the US that are sparsely populated and could sustain large populations if proper planning is instituted for compact communities with higher densities. These areas are far from being uninhabitable and enjoy some of the highest qualities of life in national surveys. The same is true with many parts of Canada as well. Brazil and other southern South American countries could better utilize available space and sustain larger populations with responsible growth and planning. Russia and the Ukraine are other possibilities as well.
You don't have to clear cut the forests and give every man his own acre to achieve a quality lifestyle. I'd be happy to live in a pedestrian-friendly, fairly self-contained community containing quality higher density residences.
This is simply not true. There are many areas of the northern tier of the US that are sparsely populated and could sustain large populations if proper planning is instituted for compact communities with higher densities. These areas are far from being uninhabitable and enjoy some of the highest qualities of life in national surveys. The same is true with many parts of Canada as well. Brazil and other southern South American countries could better utilize available space and sustain larger populations with responsible growth and planning. Russia and the Ukraine are other possibilities as well.
You don't have to clear cut the forests and give every man his own acre to achieve a quality lifestyle. I'd be happy to live in a pedestrian-friendly, fairly self-contained community containing quality higher density residences.
You'll find that the people in those "sparsely populated" Northern areas won't take kindly to being turned into an overpopulated urban hell.
Whoever wrote this article apparently does not understand the difference between rationing and supply shifts. Either that or they're fear-mongerers. Probablys some of both.
maybe a little. i just filled the freezer with very good priced meat, prices are going to go up. i got my tomato garden goin, we shall see.
You'll find that the people in those "sparsely populated" Northern areas won't take kindly to being turned into an overpopulated urban hell.
It is hardly that big of issue.
Much of rural Texas (where I operate from) is in negative population rates as are many parts of rural America for that matter, as well.
When I work in remote areas the local communities would sincerely like some growth -- else their kids wind up going away to college and not coming back. It becomes a real brain-drain of the community's "best and brightest."
Lincolnian is correct that many more places are quite habitable -- if that were the desired outcome. On the other hand, most existing cities could become oasis centers, as well, if that were the desired outcome. It just takes forethought, cooperation and follow-through.* Those are the hard parts. The climate, resource and technical issues are easy by comparison.
*(sounds like Peter Pan's "faith, trust, and pixie-dust," huh?)
Much of rural Texas (where I operate from) is in negative population rates as are many parts of rural America for that matter, as well.
When I work in remote areas the local communities would sincerely like some growth -- else their kids wind up going away to college and not coming back. It becomes a real brain-drain of the community's "best and brightest."
Lincolnian is correct that many more places are quite habitable -- if that were the desired outcome. On the other hand, most existing cities could become oasis centers, as well, if that were the desired outcome. It just takes forethought, cooperation and follow-through.* Those are the hard parts. The climate, resource and technical issues are easy by comparison.
*(sounds like Peter Pan's "faith, trust, and pixie-dust," huh?)
In reality you're right (the part of Alaska my land is in is declining in population too) but I was pointing out there'd be some trouble if someone attempted to put Lincolnian's idea into action, to put it lightly. Wall to wall people is not something to be hoped for, at least, not by people like me who don't like cities.
The law of supply and demand is quite real and follows Newton's 3rd law
What is the law exactly? Can you state the law mathematically? Its sort of amusing that you don't seem to realize that you are (naively) economic forecasting. But you are using the "laws of supply and demand" so...its all true right?
I am sure we will see the rich become targets if things get really bad. Serously, there is a limit on population, and we have exceeded it in many areas. Instead of endless resource wars, there should be more concentration on stopping population growth in economically depressed areas. Also people should live close to where their food source is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's true that the top economists gave us plenty of warning but nobody was listening to them. Most were busy listening to the gurus who were talking about sunshine and flowers. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This isn't a suggestion. There is no consequence for breaking the law since it quite simply can't be broken. The only consequence is for attempting to break a law that can't be broken. That consequence is failure. The housing bubble and resulting burst is a result of people using "creative" methods to work around the law of supply and demand. Obviously the attempt failed. Again, it's not doom and gloom but really simple math.
