Gas is gonna go through the roof.....

[DiscoBiscuit]

I'm leaning with Gramps on Saudi Arabia. They're swimming in cash and their population is much smaller than Egypt.

I watched a segment on the possibility. While not an afterthought, SA distributes more of it's income per capita than Egypt. It's like greasing the wheel. Sorry to sound smarmy but economic conditions are thought to be good enough to quell unrest.

 

[igrowone]

i don't think it's imminent with SA, more of an 'inevitable' deal
they have money/food for the moment, but the population continues to grow
the pressure cooker is simmering, the scary part is there is no gauge, you just can't tell how close to popping it is

 

[turbolaser4528]

Ok ok, I guess we will see what happens in the next few weeks, should be interesting.


Do you guys think this is the beginning of a widespread revolution ? There's a lot of countries with all the ingredients, do you think it will ignite all over, or just the middle east/africa ?


btw, It seems brutal in Egypt right now, just saw a guy get run over by a firetruck ! It seems journalists are being rounded up, and there's some shady shit goin' down, like the presidents goon squad running around firing into the anti-government crowds.

 

[HempKat]

There's a more complete definition of Tone from a literature sense. I don't see any mention of of what you claimed it to be... but a whole lot of what I claimed it to be. Much better definition than mine though.

I don't see where that matches with how you tried to define tone by comparing two thoughts that expressed opposite feelings.

Sorry... I see that in one place I did say overall conversation whereas I should have said overall relevant conversation. There was still relevant context in the thread to draw from.

Ah so now you accept it wasn't the context of the thread but rather the context of random posts in the thread that also had nothing to do with the context of the thread. That's like being at a protest rally in favor of marijuana but you happen to be standing next to a group of people opposed to marijuana that talk trash the whole time and then the next day you tell people you attended an anti marijuana protest rally.

I know your IC handle (that's something), even if that was all I ever read I would know that there's a guy on IC using the name hempkat. The more words posted by this entity hempkat online the more I know of his online persona... Is this really so difficult?

Knowing a person's handle is nothing, but when you say "From what I know of your online personality" It implies you know more then you actually do. I mean if you say "well because I know your name, I think you meant..." people would likely not listen to what you think was meant but if you first say "From what I know of your online personality" it suggests you have some meaningful knowledge and not as limited as just knowing their handle.

I made no assumption at all there... I stated that I had made an assumption (agreeing with you) and then I stated I wasn't sure anymore. I would still like to think those things of you.

You made no assumption even though you just stated you had made an assumption...like to argue much?

I tried to apologize as soon as you said something... I was sincere in that. I felt bad that you took issue with it the way you did. As far as my tone... it wasn't a matter of us agreeing... it was my response to your tone.

That's just it, I didn't take issue with it, I merely stated that the post you though was so funny, wasn't as funny as you seemed to think it was. If I was taking issue with anything I was taking issue with Spastic Gramps' joke.

But you ignored that and instead started an argument that you weren't offended and that I was making an assumption that you were offended. To be truthful... that raised my hackles a little.

Oh so your hackles get raised when someone tries to tell you how they feel and it doesn't match with your opinion of what they feel? Also I can't start an arguement about my feelings by telling you how I feel. I'm the only one that can accurately tell you what I feel because I'm the only one feeling it. If there is to be an argument over my feelings it's the person who is trying to tell me my feelings are different then what I say they are, that is starting the arguement.

Actually that wasn't me with the horse... I just keep this conversation going as a social experiment to see if you ever capitulate a point or let someone else have the last word in an argument. From the arguments I've read I can't recall a time offhand to be honest but those are just the ones I've read.

I didn't say it was you with the horse. I would recommend that if you can't follow along ypur probably shouldn't be trying to conduct social experiments.

It's not when I say "what I know" even if I only know that your here and you use the name hempkat... then that would be the limit of what I know. It's not a misrepresentation at all.

Sure it is, because knowing a person's handle is obvious since it appears on every post for all to see. Like I said earlier, if you said "Because I know your name I think you meant..." people would likely not pay attention. If however you say it in a way that makes it seem like your knowledge is greater, "from what I know of your online personality I think you meant..." It makes it seem like you have some pool of knowledge to draw from that you don't actually have.

That statement makes no sense to me... even that's something.

Yeah it's something that you respond to things you feel makes absolutely no sense to you with anything other then, "I didn't understand that, what did you mean?"

Who you are in a moment of time reflects who you are overall...

No it reflects who you are at that moment. If you catch me at a moment when I'm angry it doesn't mean I'm angry all the time. Just as if you catch me at a moment where I'm being jovial, it doesn't mean I'm jovial all the time.

I'm not saying I stalked you or anything, I just read a lot more than I post myself and I've been reading a lot on here for the past two years... I've read over a thousand words a minute since the fourth grade. I'm one of those weird people that likes really long threads. I've been here since before 2009, I can remember reading posts of yours back then when I first signed up. Is that following?

Oh okay and since you stated my thread was the first you read and this dates back to at least 2009 we can now see clearly, from your own words, that I was right when I commented on how you've been following me for years. Yet for a moment there you tried to argue that?

I guess where I go wrong sometimes is forgetting that as a result of my earlier very infrequent posting (I did a lot of earlier reading on my blackberry... I hate posting using that) that nobody knows my online persona or at least not that much of it. Almost all of my posts are from the last 3-4 months. It's only relatively recently that I've come out of my shell and taken a more active role in this community.

Perhaps, although I still think you go wrong by trying to tell people what they feel and then argue with them when they correct you for being wrong about how they feel.

I think I've made it abundantly clear that I made a limited statement...

You've made it abundently clear you made a statement.

I'm not afraid to capitulate a point or admit that I was wrong... at the time I was assuming that you were responding to the post you had quoted of mine at the time... not another post from months ago in a different thread. When you reminded me of the other thread I realized I was wrong in that context and admitted so. We're all capable of judging human personality... we all do it... all the time.

Well if you're not afraid to admit that you are wrong then why are you having such a hard time doing it now with regards to how I felt about your reply to Spastic Gramps' joke?

I guess you didn't convince me with that answer as you still have a hang-up over my use of the limited statement "what I know". I have a clue/clues to your online personality... you leave one every-time you post... it's a clue.

I have no hang up over your use of the statement "what I know" what I have a hang up about is that you're not admitting that you really know very little. I can't speak for you or anyone else but when I post something I leave information, not clues. Clues suggest that something is hidden. I'm not hiding anything in my words.

I never claimed to know you personally... I only made a claim to your online personality (meaning your collection of posts on here) and a limited claim at that... only "what I know" of your online posts/persona. When I read a hundred or more posts by the same person I have a clue to their online personality.

You don't know my online personality though. You think you know it, you keep trying to make assumptions about it but because your assumptions are so far off from the truth, you clearly don't know as much as you think you know.

Assumption... I don't skim... I don't "speed read"... I don't know how I do it to be truthful, I just read really fast.

If you don't skim then how come you thought I was saying you made post #361?

It was a question about your interpretation of the words "what I know".

Those are your words though, do you really expect me to go around defining your words for you?

as I said earlier I was making an attempt to be friendly that went far off course... We could have avoided all this if you had acknowledged my apology at the time as well. As I said before I meant it sincerely.

I did by telling you I wasn't offended which you refused to accept and now we are here.

Yes... I did notice it... I thought that was funny too actually, reminded me of something a teacher said to me once... "hey, it's fun... and the horse doesn't mind".

I see, so you thought the teacher's response was a genuine encouragement to continue the behavior?

Remember earlier in this post you said that I made that statement? Obviously I didn't... #361 was not mine.

No shit sherlock, go back and reread what I said, I never said you made that post.

Sorry to everyone else in the thread too... I hope we've amused you.

Looking back now I see it as my fault for being to familiar with you. As I said earlier... I often forget that people haven't read as much from me as I have from them... and I apparently have overstepped this boundary.

I still disagree with you on the definition of tone and how you know about someone's online persona, but I imagine we've about exhausted the possibilities of that conversation though.

Of course you still disagree, it's your online persona to disagree with me. Remember in your opinion a moment in time reveals how you are all the time.

 

[Yes4Prop215]

i went on a road trip from SF-Chico-South lake tahoe-SF...total is almost 600 miles. in my chevy tahoe that gets 15mpg freeway total cost was around 160 dollars, 3 fillups at 60 each time with a quarter tank left when i got home...

whatever..........if gas was 5 bucks a gallon id still drive my tahoe...fuckin love that thing. i have japanese cars that get 30mpg but i rarely drive them lol...

 

[igrowone]

Ok ok, I guess we will see what happens in the next few weeks, should be interesting.


Do you guys think this is the beginning of a widespread revolution ? There's a lot of countries with all the ingredients, do you think it will ignite all over, or just the middle east/africa ?


btw, It seems brutal in Egypt right now, just saw a guy get run over by a firetruck ! It seems journalists are being rounded up, and there's some shady shit goin' down, like the presidents goon squad running around firing into the anti-government crowds.

things have calmed down a bit this morning(seemingly), but Egypt has set a precedent
a Middle Eastern strongman is being taken down, how far/fast it spreads, well, better minds than mine speculate on that
but i look at it as raising the likelihood of change in these places, and the change doesn't look too orderly

 

[Chronic Don]

If we topple all the worlds gov't like they are in egypt does no one thing of the calamity that will follow? does no one remember what happend after Saddam Hussein was toppled? the insurgents took over. what do you think will happen when egypts ELECTED gov't gets booted out? who will follow? you can bet it'll be some radical who uses this movements momentum to instill a religious run gov't thoughts into already weak minds succeptible to anything that offers to change their life to the better

 

[Chronic Don]

or offers 70 virgins as the prize for using their weak minds to further some assholes power/lifestyle.
How many reigious leaders go Jihad? the answer is NONE, they dont want to die, so they convince simpletons that God will reward them, and with what? VIRGINS are muslims not supposed to keep clean minds and not look at women as sex objects. yet their religion contravenes itself by offering VIRGINS as your reward for KILLING people

 

[SpasticGramps]

If we topple all the worlds gov't like they are in egypt does no one thing of the calamity that will follow?

That's something you'll have to ask Bernanke. I don't think he is thinking. As long as inflation keeps going up the Third World will have more and more socio-political unrest.

 

[turbolaser4528]

That's something you'll have to ask Bernanke. I don't think he is thinking. As long as inflation keeps going up the Third World will have more and more socio-political unrest.

Is that because US inflation raises worldwide food prices, and those on the poverty border feel it the most as they spend a larger amount of their income just trying to feed themselves ?

Makes sense I suppose, if it does keep going that means eventually even the richer countries will start having riots ?!?!

The thought of this inevitably happening in Saudi Arabia has me browsing survival websites lol. If SHTF within the year I want to at least be able to eat and grow my own food !

If it did happen to Saudi Arabia, what would the effect be on gas/oil prices ? $10 a gallon/$150 a barrel ??


I'd imagine it would send us into an instant recession at the very least.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Someone in the developed world spends around ~5% on food. Someone in the Third World spends around ~55%. Any sudden change is felt very quickly by them. It's not only US inflation, but rather world wide inflation. Bernanke is not the only one devaluing currency. Japan, the Euro, Brazil, almost everyone is to keep up with the drop in the reserve currency. It's the race to the bottom.

The food inflation is the trigger for the unrest and revolution. There are a lot of underlying problems of dictatorship and autocracy in Third World countries which have been boiling up for a long time. These are the first countries that will go. Inflation is the straw that can break any camels back. The deal with oil (WTI and Brent) inflation is that it inflates everything else from food to cotton, just everything.

Inflation gains momentum too. There is a point where it gets out of control as it started to in the late 70's and early 80's. Volcker had to increase the interest rates to 21% to withdraw liquidity from the market and get inflation under control in 1981. We are so far beyond that now though. Who knows what the interest rate would be to withdraw the liquidity that's been dumped into this market. Whatever it is it's very clear that Bernanke doesn't have the guts to do it.

 

[igrowone]

Is that because US inflation raises worldwide food prices, and those on the poverty border feel it the most as they spend a larger amount of their income just trying to feed themselves ?

Makes sense I suppose, if it does keep going that means eventually even the richer countries will start having riots ?!?!

The thought of this inevitably happening in Saudi Arabia has me browsing survival websites lol. If SHTF within the year I want to at least be able to eat and grow my own food !

If it did happen to Saudi Arabia, what would the effect be on gas/oil prices ? $10 a gallon/$150 a barrel ??


I'd imagine it would send us into an instant recession at the very least.

i think some planning is a good idea, not so much because i think the end of the world is coming, but a much changed world seems more likely
that SA is going to a dark place is partly my own opinion, not necessarily destiny
but it seems way too likely for my tastes
where we will end up is the question of our time, even if SA self destructs, the world could get by
but very large structural change would have to happen, it's the transition time that is the scary part

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

If we topple all the worlds gov't like they are in egypt does no one thing of the calamity that will follow?

Yeah, anarchy.

I know one calamity, it's called America. The country that others came, saw and took... all in the name of gawd.

Oh, you mean people already lived here? That's alright, we allowed the ones who negotiated to resort to life as refugees. We forced them to walk thousands of miles to relocation. Then we spent decades trying to kill the rest. Now that's what I call world-class calamity.

Oh yeah... we forced another race of people to work our farms, clean our homes and raise our kids to be moral and honest. We called ourselves masters, we called them slaves.

does no one remember what happend after Saddam Hussein was toppled? the insurgents took over.

You need to read more. Iraqis in-general rioted and looted. The only entity that took over was our dumb ass SOD who in turn passed the reigns to a dumb ass civilian authority (Bremer.)

But we had a smart SOS who said, "You break it, you own it."

what do you think will happen when egypts ELECTED gov't gets booted out? who will follow?

ROFL... elected. You need to read... lots more.

you can bet it'll be some radical who uses this movements momentum to instill a religious run gov't thoughts into already weak minds succeptible to anything that offers to change their life to the better

Yeah, kind of like evangelical politicians and shock jocks in America, invoking visions of caliphate. Nobody's promising a better way of life over here, though. It's just hateful divisiveness.

or offers 70 virgins as the prize for using their weak minds to further some assholes power/lifestyle.

So? Christians sing that EVERY non-christian will burn in HELLLLL!!!

Poor Gandhi.

How many reigious leaders go Jihad? the answer is NONE, they dont want to die, so they convince simpletons that God will reward them, and with what? VIRGINS are muslims not supposed to keep clean minds and not look at women as sex objects. yet their religion contravenes itself by offering VIRGINS as your reward for KILLING people

And America is a peaceful, free nation... to simpletons.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Did WikiLeaks Confirm "Peak Oil"? Saudi Said To Have Overstated Crude Oil Reserves By 300 Billion Barrels (40%)

In what can be the "Holy Grail" moment for the peak oil movement, Wikileaks has just released 4 cables that may confirm that as broadly speculated by the peak oil "fringe", the theories about an imminent crude crunch may be in fact true. As the Guardian reports on 4 just declassified cables, "The US fears that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest crude oil exporter, may not have enough reserves to prevent oil prices escalating, confidential cables from its embassy in Riyadh show. The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels – nearly 40%." Could the OPEC cartel's capacity for virtually unlimited supply expansion to keep up with demand have been nothing but a bluff? That is the case according to Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, who met with the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and "told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached." And yes, that conspiracy concept of peak oil is specifically referenced: "According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then – possibly as early as 2012 – global oil production would have hit its highest point. This crunch point is known as "peak oil"." And it gets worse: "Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap." Look for Saudi Arabia to go into full damage control mode, alleging that these cables reference nothing but lies. In the meantime, look for China to continue quietly stockpiling the one asset which as was just pointed out is the key one to hold, for both bulls and bears, according to Marc Faber.

Copies of the cables are included in the link. I've never believed in peak oil. Still don't think I do. Regardless, if this is true its no beuno.

 

[igrowone]

Did WikiLeaks Confirm "Peak Oil"? Saudi Said To Have Overstated Crude Oil Reserves By 300 Billion Barrels (40%)


Copies of the cables are included in the link. I've never believed in peak oil. Still don't think I do. Regardless, if this is true its no beuno.

Saudi Arabia has always been secretive about its reserves, info like this could reinforce the fear of overstatement of reserves
perception is sufficient, once it gets into the global consciousness that we are at the peak of oil, well, it gets really interesting in the vein of the Chinese curse, 'may you live in interesting times'

 

[robbiedublu]

what do you think will happen when egypts ELECTED gov't gets booted out?

Bwhaaaahaaaahhaaaaahahahaha! Good one bro!

 

[Chronic Don]

Bwhaaaahaaaahhaaaaahahahaha! Good one bro!

I agree, I realize he had been elected just not 30+ yrs ago and was still in by an "emergency" law.
I still hold on it tho, as what happened when saddam was outed? insurgents took over

 

[SpasticGramps]

'may you live in interesting times'

We definitely do bro. We definitely do. Secular changes such as we're experiencing are 100+ year events.

 

[HUGE]

Did WikiLeaks Confirm "Peak Oil"? Saudi Said To Have Overstated Crude Oil Reserves By 300 Billion Barrels (40%)


Copies of the cables are included in the link. I've never believed in peak oil. Still don't think I do. Regardless, if this is true its no beuno.

Watch the documentary collapse. It is about peak oil.

 

[Mountain]

Saudi Arabia has always been secretive about its reserves, info like this could reinforce the fear of overstatement of reservesperception is sufficient

Posted this elsewhere here but OPEC members are only allowed to pump what they do based on their reserves. So a country with larger reserves can pump more oil and make more money. Don't know when they changed that but what do you think happened? Countries started raising their reserve numbers, pretty significantly, even though no new discoveries in almost all cases. Came across this info about 5 years ago while researching peak oil.

Also Saudi Arabia was starting to have problems with some of their fields a few years ago. Their ability to pump more oil than they already are is pretty limited. They're pretty much maxed out. Any significant global recovery will really put a strain on the system.

On the flip side industry analysts are predicting the US will be pumping a lot more oil than we already are due to advances in drilling technology. The hot spot is the Bakken shale area for new discoveries but Texas is seeing increases in production. All this won't make much of a dent though.