Heinberg – he makes the most sense to me.

I think he’s pessimistic on his appraisal of coal reserves, otherwise I don’t have a divergence with this guy. He’s where I got to too, same process same basis same time-span.

http://transitionculture.org/2011/03/15/richard-heinberg-interviewed-in-totnes-i-think-2011-is-going-to-be-an-interesting-year-in-the-chinese-sense-part-two/

a taste:

“It is tricky because to a very large extent economics isn’t a science – it’s a set of philosophies and assumptions to which a lot of very complicated mathematics has been attached.  The math looks very scientific to an outside observer but it’s based, again, on a lot of assumptions.  Really, moral philosophy is what it’s been, almost from the very beginning.” ………………….  “I gravitated towards people who, first of all, used as a their basis for thinking, bio-physical reality – rather than starting from economic theory as a given and sorting things out on that basis”.

Couldn’t put it much better, really. Economists are the High Priests of a discredited 🙂 religion.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: