Comments by "Jim Luebke" (@jimluebke3869) on "Zeihan on Geopolitics"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronbaker2186 Er, in fact we (the United States) insisted that Ukraine stay in the war despite the fact that they wanted to negotiate shortly after the war started.
I'm not in favor of fighting to the last Ukrainian, and that's where it looks like we're going, here. "It's always been Russia's war to lose", as Peter has said.
Fighting in the West can only have one outcome -- the benefit of the East. Disruptions in Germany's industrial exports benefit China. Russia selling petrochemicals East instead of West benefits China (and makes it less vulnerable to the piracy Zeihan goes on about). Russia draining the West's military coffers and boosting our war weariness makes Taiwan more likely to fall, not less.
And, to top it off, if Russia "ceases to exist as an entity", China will be able to gobble up half of Asia, securing them a lot of the raw materials they need to avoid any sting of Western sanctions.
I think that offering Russia the DonBas and Crimea is not great, but if we also offer them East Turkmenistan, Greater Mongolia, and Tibet for their sphere of influence, that could be a win-win situation.
Certainly better than the lose-lose we're in now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheMasonK I look at our energy options now, and everything I see I also saw in the educational filmstrip "Our Mr. Sun" from 1956. (Check it out, it's a lot of fun.)
You'd think that 70+ years would be enough time to make these technologies pay off, if they were going to. (I still have hopes for nuclear, myself.)
(But, the truly insane environmentalists are against it. Almost makes you wonder whether our entire energy regulatory apparatus is run by people who aren't so much interested in energy for people alive today, as how to rebuild civilization after a collapse.)
(We'd need as much fossil fuel still in the ground as possible, and nuclear power plants could be incredibly destructive if the industrial civilization around them got wrecked. Maybe that's why every US politician that's supposedly against fossil fuels, is okay with importing massive amounts of other countries' reserves instead of building out our own.)
Oh, and I've kept hearing "peak oil" since I was old enough to start paying attention, decades ago. I stopped hearing it a few years ago, when the fracking revolution expanded our fossil fuel reserves dramatically.
I'm glad that at least you haven't made any arguments that are based on computer models that are utterly inadequate to the task of making accurate predictions of where the climate is going.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theyux1 A terrible housing market crash happened in 1992, for starters. Increasing environmental regulations sapped the vitality of the agricultural sector. The peace dividend started the fall of the aerospace industry. Much of Southern California has never recovered from that, by the way.
A lot of this was masked by the tech boom, driven by that peace dividend's shifting California's high tech workers from aerospace to computers. Why do you think Silicon Valley happened in California, and not, say, along Massachusetts' Route 128?
While Moore's Law was in effect and fiber optic networks were built out, more and more amazing things could be accomplished with computers and networks.
However, connectivity has gotten about as good as it's going to get (to the point that it's clogged mostly by video nowadays), and Moore's Law hasn't been true for most of a decade. The miracle factory has stalled out. The low-hanging fruit has been picked.
California rose with tech, now the hollowing-out of all its other economic sectors -- which probably won't come back, barring an anti-green, pro-defense revolution in California politics -- California will fall with tech.
The only way California can keep from collapse now, is if vote-counters start seeing a lot more Republican ballots. Do you see that as likely? I don't.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Adi-bo5do Yes, democracy isn't quite dead here yet. =)
Even better, there is a sense that we are embarking on a new Cold War, led by a country that is legendary for its expert class, (mandarins) and its glorification of groupthink over freedom -- China.
I suspect that in the same way the Industrial Revolution posed the question, "What is the best way to produce and distribute the most and the best material goods?" our new Information Revolution is going to pose the question, "What is the best way to produce and distribute expertise?"
Freedom is going to be the answer. Bhattacharya was right, Fauci was wrong, and our system is going to have to be reformed into a more distributed model, to take that into account.
Currently our legacy institutions have been taken over by ideologues seeking the power of the cultural high ground. This has caused the collapse of their credibility and will soon cause their financial collapse as well. Whether they can be preserved or whether they will be replaced, remains to be seen.
Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting you, but you're on the wrong side of history here, it seems. Look into the people who are critiquing climate models. Look into the people who were right all along, about our recent global medical scare.
Actual evidence leads interesting places.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1