The Party's Over - book review

[natedogg]

The Party's Over - by Richard Heinberg

This book is part of the recent spate of peak oil doomsday books. I finally decided to read one and boy did I pick a doozy.

This book is so over the top that if you wanted to caricature a raving lunatic leftist consumed by the feverish imaginings of his own fears and paranoias, I doubt you could top the real thing found in "The Party's Over".

His disorganized ramblings cover pretty much all standard leftist hotbutton issues, from abortion to WalMart wages (I kid you not), to public ownership of all powerplants. Yes folks, he advocates nationalizing energy production.

In his twisted world view of course, the consumer is powerless in the face of corporate control. We are all the unsophisiticated dupes tricked into buying their products by slick advertising.
In a passage lamenting our consumption levels, he states "After all, people currently have to be coaxed and cajoled from cradle to grave by expensive advertising to consume as much as they do. If the message of this incessant propoganda ... were reversed, people could probably be persuaded to happily make do with less". It's unthinkable that some people might just actually *want* and *enjoy* these products.

You see, since we are all such malleable idiots, all it would take is to propogandize anti-consumerism and we would all happily put down our toys and start hoeing vegetablesin the back yard I guess. His disdainful elitist views are extreme even for a modern leftist.

He even goes so far as to credit the rise of the use of coal in the 18th century to some kind of backroom machinations by evil plutocrats, apparently bent on destroying the souls of mankind in pursuit of their own untrammelled greed. His ability to spin anything into a story of "evil corporations eating us alive" is rather impressive.

He of course, advocates coercive worldwide programs of population control, preferably administered by a much-stronger UN than we have now. His elitist vision of the anointed would have us all on a five year plan, no doubt.

As I said, if this book was written as a stinging caricature of an extreme mad leftist, it would be brilliant.

Also, without any irony or humor as far as I can tell, he actually quotes PAUL ERLICH in support of his own nonsensical views.

At least he bothers to make an argument about the decline of oil production. In this he has some facts to back him up. It looks like oil production will decline, yessiree. But that's where the facts end.

The rest of the book is a meandering journey through his own twisted paranoid view of world history and current geopolitik, which , as you can imagine, is a hoot. He tangentially comments on the "deeply flawed" US election of 2000. He speculates about the inner thoughts of Tony's Blair and Blair's putative opinion of George Bush as "little more than a buffoon". What this has to do with peak oil is beyond me.

His discussion of alternatives to oil are particularly interesting, as he has no problem throwing up *political* objections to alternatives when *practical* ones won't do. So apparently, we can't even consider increasing our use of nuclear power because indigenous peoples may be displaced by mining operations, and new plants are expensive. I guess we'll all sit on our hands crying when the lights go out because indigenous people live too close to the uranium. Oh well.

He even discusses wind power as a legitimate solution. The numbers on wind power are good. Very good. Yet, you guessed it, it causes (I'm not making this up) "visual pollution" and is dangerous to migrating birds. Once again, I suppose we'll all sit on our hands and weep for the end of civilization as we watch the beautiful birds flying over the pristine landscape that *could have* been used to power our society with wind turbines.

He also predicts the total collapse of our power grid based on the fact that the grid is in poor shape and cannot now, today, handle a huge surge in demand. Apparently, all profit-making enterprises will sit around idly as their assets diminish in value and do nothing to capitalize on the opportunities. On this he is already incorrect: http://www.thestreet.com/_tscana/funds/jubak/10230041.html

Once he knocks down all possible alternative energy, he proceeds to speculate about how the meltdown of our global society will occur. This is actually the least interesting chapter because it is so prosaic. Standard off-the-shelf leftist dream of a return to agrarian society.

One thing I want to know. Why do so many leftwing doomsdayers always pronounce that a return to an agrarian existence will mean we have more "fulfilling" and "meaningful" lives? This is a theme repeated often by Heinberg. Once we are all reduced to growing our own food and living in isolated villages with no technology again, we'll be able to enjoy more "spiritual", "connected", "fulfilling lives". He claims that a "national or global ethic of conservation could be socially therapeutic" (whatever that means) because "our consumptive lifestyle damages communities, families and individual self esteem".

Good grief, what a pompous pedant.

As always, it appears that his own personal hatred of modernity is what fuels his apocalyptic visions. It has nothing to do with actual reasoning based on facts and evidence.

Although his bio states he is a "journalist, educator, lecturer, and musician" Heinberg is, frankly, an idiot.

natedogg

[lehighguy]

You should write reviews for Amazon. In addition to being concise, that was amusing as hell to read.

[MMMMMM]

Yes, Nate, as lehighguy more or less suggests, you could review it for Amazon.

You could just copy your review there as a counterweight to the 49 customer reviews for this book already on record: average review = 4 out of 5 stars.

Somehow, I have more faith in your review, though;-)

[scalf]

/images/graemlins/smile.gif..nate..

good thinkin' ; as usual...

people envision themselves as the plantation owner or king; when thinking about agrarian life...

they do not even consider they would be a serf, slave or poor small farmer with little or no rights...

but what are the oddz?

think about it

gl

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
In his twisted world view of course, the consumer is powerless in the face of corporate control. We are all the unsophisiticated dupes tricked into buying their products by slick advertising.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problem with this. The success of the advertising industry is because of their continual success at creating 'need' where this none.

When similar products are released on the market, its not often the better product wins; its the product with the slicker advertising.

The rest of the review I can't comment on not having read it. But I studied communications ever-so-long a go and there is plenty of evidence to support the case for the power of advertising to create 'need' where there is none.

[Cyrus]

I agree with the others that you should post up your piece as an amazon.com review.

[ QUOTE ]
[The author] predicts the total collapse of our power grid based on the fact that the grid is in poor shape and cannot now, today, handle a huge surge in demand. Apparently, all profit-making enterprises will sit around idly as their assets diminish in value and do nothing to capitalize on the opportunities.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know little about the process but if this is done on a concession-basis, I can see the point that the author is making. If you have a concession to build, operate and exploit a fountain of water at a certain physical location, and the concession runs for 20 years, then this will happen: As you get nearer the end of the concession period and you get no sure feelers for the concession's renewal, you'd be one stupid businessman if you'd invest a dime for the damn contraption to run one more day than 20 years.

That I know.

But have you noticed why the power companies in question are investing now heavily, like good altruists? Look here (http://www.thestreet.com/_tscana/funds/jubak/10230041_2.html), from your own link :

[ QUOTE ]
The ... law includes tax breaks for new power plants.
<font color="white"> . </font>
The Senate version of the bill ... contains $2.25 billion in tax credits for coal production and $278 million in tax credits over 10 years for building advanced nuclear power plants.
<font color="white">. </font>
Oh, and the bill also provides loan guarantees for the construction of nuclear and coal power plants.


[/ QUOTE ]

[lehighguy]

If your talking about the people that bought pet rocks, then they deserve to lead miserable lives.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
The Party's Over - by Richard Heinberg

In a passage lamenting our consumption levels, he states "After all, people currently have to be coaxed and cajoled from cradle to grave by expensive advertising to consume as much as they do. If the message of this incessant propoganda ...were reversed, people could probably be persuaded to happily make do with less". It's unthinkable that some people might just actually *want* and *enjoy* these products.

You see, since we are all such malleable idiots, all it would take is to propogandize anti-consumerism and we would all happily put down our toys and start hoeing vegetables in the back yard I guess. His disdainful elitist views are extreme even for a modern leftist.

He of course, advocates coercive worldwide programs of population control...

Why do so many leftwing doomsdayers always pronounce that a return to an agrarian existence will mean we have more "fulfilling" and "meaningful" lives?



[/ QUOTE ]

Great review. I haven't read the book, but I've read articles on peak oil'. I'm not left or right wing.

Just a few points.

There is some evidence that people are in fact malleable idiots. Madison Avenue exists because it serves a purpose. And that purpose is persuading people to buy. The key is to hook consumers when they are young and program them.

When I look at all the white boys from the suburbs acting like black guys, I immediately think of the late 50's movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

In general, the "Pods" (commercials) are stronger than the average consumers' will power.

Would everyone want to start reading Whole Earth books and become Amish-like? Probably not.

Will new energy technology solve the problem? It takes energy and resources to create new technology...

From what I've read (and hopefully it will be proven wrong) is that future population control will be effected through bio-terrorism (launched by some control group and blamed on third world terrorists) in order to knock off half the worlds population of "useless eaters".

Agrarian life is probably postulated as more fulfilling because there would be less distractions and stress impinging on us. I don't know...

Just like in poker, we will have to see how the cards are dealt in the coming decades.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
But have you noticed why the power companies in question are investing now heavily, like good CAPITALISTS? Look here, from your own link :

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed your post.

Yes there are tax incentives but that is the result of a foolish Congress that believes in using tax incentives for business.

The level of meddling in the economy from our Congress is so deep and pervasive that there's no way to actually determine what kind of real economics would play into any business venture.

Regardless, The Party's Over postulates that we have no choice but to sit back and watch our power grid fall apart. And that is obviously sheer nonsense.

natedogg

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
If your talking about the people that bought pet rocks, then they deserve to lead miserable lives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pet rocks were a great product that offered real value to the consumers who bought them. Think for a few minutes about all the reasons why a person might buy a pet rock. Pet rocks were a great embodiment of the zeitgeist of the 70's, in my opinion and as a product they were simulataneously brilliant, and provided EXACTLY what the consumer wanted from it.

natedogg

[natedogg]

Malleable idiots are the ones who buy Crest toothpast over Pepsodent because of the commercial.

Junkies and strange hermits fail to buy toothpaste at all. That's the difference.

Heinberg implies that everything, including fundamentally useful inventions, are only sold because of corporations manipulating the minds of the malleable idiots. He explicitly implies that the automobile is one such case. To believe that people only buy cars because of advertising, as opposed to the fact that it is the most useful and convenient transportation device ever invented, requires closing your eyes to reality in belief of your anti-coporation religion.

Of course, the same belief allows him to absurdly believe that anti-consumerism propoganda would actually cause people to be less materialistic and stop buying all these incredibly useful, time-saving, labor-saving devices that fill our homes.

natedogg

[lehighguy]

Yeah I waste money on crap too. The other day I bought a family guy mint tin and then immediately threw out the mints. Just wanted the cool cover with my favorite quote from Brian.

I think OP doesn't realize that life doesn't end with need, people also want things. Want is important too.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
Malleable idiots are the ones who buy Crest toothpast over Pepsodent because of the commercial.

Junkies and strange hermits fail to buy toothpaste at all. That's the difference.

Heinberg implies that everything, including fundamentally useful inventions, are only sold because of corporations manipulating the minds of the malleable idiots. He explicitly implies that the automobile is one such case. To believe that people only buy cars because of advertising, as opposed to the fact that it is the most useful and convenient transportation device ever invented, requires closing your eyes to reality in belief of your anti-coporation religion.

Of course, the same belief allows him to absurdly believe that anti-consumerism propoganda would actually cause people to be less materialistic and stop buying all these incredibly useful, time-saving, labor-saving devices that fill our homes.

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, Crest is the shiznit.

-ptmusic

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]

Dude, Crest is the shiznit.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly, anyone who doesnt use Colgate Total is isnt maximizing the EV of their teeth. Do you see why? I'll let others elaborate.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there are tax incentives but that is the result of a foolish Congress that believes in using tax incentives for business.

The level of meddling in the economy from our Congress is so deep and pervasive that there's no way to actually determine what kind of real economics would play into any business venture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for accepting that the motivator for the power companies' investment in new grids, etc, was the result of tax incentives. You call it "good capitalism", I call it that too! (I called it "altruism" sarcastically. Whoooosh!)

But you have not addressed the main point of my response: I claim that the power companies would NOT have invested in and would have actually allowed the grids to deteriorate, if the system is working on a concession basis. I claim that as the concession's end approaches, a (good capitalist) company would be wasting its shareholders' money if it invests on something that she will be forced off soon enough.

What have you to say on this, please ?

In terms of "real economics", if you don't mind.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Malleable idiots are the ones who buy Crest toothpast over Pepsodent because of the commercial.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you saying? That consumers are basically idiots? (Of the malleable kind?)

All consumers formulate choices on the basis of information available to them. The information is processed into feelings. Or vice versa, as in the case of advertising.

If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

...Can I see some ID, please?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus, if you close your eyes and think really hard, I have hope that you will see why the conclusion stated above is logically false (does not ineluctably follow from the premise).

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

The conclusion stated above is logically false (does not ineluctably follow from the premise).

[/ QUOTE ]

It is posts of yours such as that one which make me realize how little you know of capitalism's tenets.

Carry on parroting Smith.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.


[/ QUOTE ]


The conclusion stated above is logically false (does not ineluctably follow from the premise).


[/ QUOTE ]


It is posts of yours such as that one which make me realize how little you know of capitalism's tenets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus, look how you used the word "whole" in the first quote.

OBVIOUSLY the second part cannot follow ineluctably from the first, BECAUSE you made the meaning logically wrong by improperly using the word "whole".

If only PART of the capitalist contraption is based on lies and deception, it is WRONG to state that the whole of it is. And clearly only part of it is, because some of it is driven by plain need for goods and services. Advertising only plays a partial role: real need plays a role too.

Why isn't this obvious? And yes I really do mean that question seriously.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
If only PART of the ... contraption is based on [rotten bases], it is WRONG to state that the whole of it is [possibly doomed].

[/ QUOTE ] Ask a civil engineer about what you just wrote.

And get a grip on yourself, your posts are becoming ludicrous.

[ QUOTE ]
Only part of [the capitalist contraption] is based on lies and deception, because some of it is driven by plain need for goods and services. Advertising only plays a partial role: real need plays a role too.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are right, even without any advertising of them at all, we would still flock to buy jet skis, George Foreman juicers and pet rocks.

So you are saying that the continuous new needs of the consumer base (consumption of ever expanding ranges and quantities of goods and services) is not a basic tenet of capitalism, are you?

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus this is what you wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've tried to explain to you why this is wrong, but you seem to be misunderstanding my explanation.

Advertising is only a PART of the "capitalist contraption."

Even if all advertising is deceptive (which is not the case), the statement you made above would be wrong because the "capitalist contraption" is greater than the smaller part of it, advertising.

Therefore, given the above premise, the WHOLE "capitalist contraption" has not been shown to be based upon lies and deception (even if we presume that advertising itself is).

Put another way, even if all advertising is deceptive, the BASE of capitalism is not SOLELY advertising. Capitalism is based on many other things besides advertising, including real needs for goods and services.

Therefore it cannot be rightly said that deceptive advertising means that capitalism is BASED on lies and deception.

Got it? A third-grader could understand it--can you?

[natedogg]

The real economics is this Cyrus. People need power. And there's money in it. It's that simple.

So what happens? If someone is granting a concession, and the limit is running out, yet the capital asset itself is deteriorating, the owner is in a bind.

1. renew the concession meaningfully so that the asset can be leased out again

2. upgrade it yourself.

Only an idiot, or a government, would sit on that asset with a limited concession to it without preparing for the end of the concession period.

Regardless, the grid is not going to fall apart. It's one of the more absurd conclusions found in the book.

And the tax incentives are not the "motivator" for the new capital investment. They certainly sweeten the pot but we cannot know ho much captial investment would occur without the tax incentives.

natedogg

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

MMMMMM is right this time, Cyrus. It's ok to admit it.


natedogg

[MMMMMM]

Here Cyrus maybe this will simplify things.

Here is what you wrote:

[ QUOTE ]

If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the whole capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you had instead written one of the following, it would have been correct:


If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then the capitalist contraption is partially based on lies and deceptions.

OR

If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then part of the capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

Precision, dear Cyrus, precision...for clarity's sake.

[Cyrus]

I seem to be hitting a central nerve with you.

PM me its location, so we can do the Marathon Man routine.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus I know in my mind and my heart that you are a good egg as I've said before.

Is accuracy in writing and discussion too much to ask? If you are using hyperbole to make a point, that's one thing. If you are actually trying to make a point, it's entirely another.

I don't think blackjack would be as patient with your errors as I am. If you play a hand inaccurately, the deck will not explain to you why your play was inaccurate.

Good Luck Good Cyrus,

M (The Patient One)

[Cyrus]

I have no problem with your fine tuning. It is, indeed, more precise. Here's more fine tuning:

[ QUOTE ]
If advertising is fooling (and molding) consumers' minds, then at least that part of the capitalist contraption is based on lies and deceptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have yet to see either natedogg or you addressing the point of my post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2778694&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;s b=5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1). To wit, natedogg originally claimed the following, in this sub-thread:

[ QUOTE ]
Malleable idiots are the ones who buy Crest toothpast over Pepsodent because of the commercial.

[/ QUOTE ]
I find this a facinating admission for a bona fide capitalist! It says, essentially, that people who make choices on the basis of perception are idiots. (Note that advertising -which is not just the ads- aims, beyond brand choice, to create demand.) And that advertising can mold consumer's choices to the point of idiocy! Wow.

A truism, in fact, but one which is astonishing to hear from the totally-free market corner.

...I begin to think my hyperbole was called for, boys.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Malleable idiots are the ones who buy Crest toothpast over Pepsodent because of the commercial.

[/ QUOTE ]
I find this a facinating admission for a bona fide capitalist! It says, essentially, that people who make choices on the basis of perception are idiots. (Note that advertising -which is not just the ads- aims, beyond brand choice, to create demand.) And that advertising can mold consumer's choices to the point of idiocy! Wow.

A truism, in fact, but one which is astonishing to hear from the totally-free market corner.



[/ QUOTE ]

Why on earth would you find it surprising? Do you actually oppose free markets simlpy because not every consumer makes the wisest of choices? The point of free markets, other than the fact that they work best, is that people have the *freedom* to make their own choices, even if you or I think that choice is unwise or stupid.

In my opinion, choosing Crest because the commercial was funny is stupid. But that in now way undermines the the importance and value of free markets, and individual consumer freedom. IF anything it bolsters that notion.


natedogg

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, the grid is not going to fall apart.

[/ QUOTE ] I have no way of knowing. This might have been Richard Heinberg's assertion, although I'm gonna take a look myself into what he wrote. You're prone to hype! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
If someone is granting a concession, and the limit is running out, yet the capital asset itself is deteriorating, the owner is in a bind. Only an idiot, or a government, would sit on that asset with a limited concession to it without preparing for the end of the concession period.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, from what you're saying, either the concession's owner can unilaterally renew his concession before the period runs out, in which case the concession is indefinite -or- the gov't (again, before the period runs out) puts out a tender for the next period.

In the latter case, what happens if the current concession's owner does not win the tender for the next period? He sure as hell ain't gonna invest in something that'll be taken over by another party soon!

And the next concession's owner sure as hell ain't gonna be investing until his time comes up.

...You're sure about the govenment needin' to stay absolutely the hell out, right? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
The real economics is this. People need [electrical] power. And there's money in it. It's that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler". I'm afraid you just simplified things too much. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ACPlayer]

If you use the word advertising in the sense that it includes all promotion then it is the bedrock of capitalism.

You can build a better mouse trap but if you cant sell it your stock goes to zero.

You can create markets for deodarants, new and improved kelp enhanced crest, garbage like MS Windows 3.1, stock schemes, reelection campaigns etc. So whether the advertising is over the airwaves or door to door or by word of mouth or whatever, it is the pillar of capitalism.

There is a good reason why engineers, accountants, office managers make less money then salesmen.

[Zeno]

Did he give a specific date for when 'The Party's Over' ? I would assume he made at least some vague reference to a date or number of years.

I made an attempt to garner some input on this subject via my 'Collective Wisdom' post, but only one prophet of doom gave a firm date: February 4, 2351 (when final human dies). I need some more data points for the end of the world so the post had disappointing results, especially since I offered prizes to the winner. This is, apparently, one of the few advertising gimmicks in modern history to actually not work. How could that be?


-Zeitgeist

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you actually oppose free markets simlpy because not every consumer makes the wisest of choices?

[/ QUOTE ] I do not oppose free markets. I am simply open minded and honest about the contradictions and the injustices (and oftentimes the catastrophies) perpetuated through the notion. I have, personally, benefited from free markets.

I try to be aware of what I am and what is happening. It's not easy. "But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard".

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, choosing Crest because the commercial was funny is stupid.

[/ QUOTE ] ...There goes Madison Avenue!

(Note : That was a joke, so don't you two get yer pants in an uproar once more!)

Seriously, seems like the only difference of opinion on this matter is in our respective estimates of the amount of lying involved, along with its importance in the greater scheme of things, i.e. capitalism. You say "small potatoes", I say "big tomatoes".

And I have nothing personal against lying, per se. I can be a terrific liar.

[Cyrus]

...Merely lubrication. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[ QUOTE ]
You can create markets for deodarants, new and improved kelp enhanced crest, garbage like MS Windows 3.1, stock schemes, reelection campaigns etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Memorable TV moment, at the height of the Windows 95 blanket-coverage ad campaign: TV crew interviews consumers leaving the store carrying their sparkling new boxes with the exciting product inside. Young guy, carrying box on his shoulder, sheepishly smiles to the camera when asked what type of computer he has. "I don't have a computer", he chuckles. The reporter is taken aback. "No", he continues, "but I thought what with all the hoopla, this is a must-have". Silence. "Maybe I will buy a computer now".

I was too stunned to laugh.

[ACPlayer]

Ah, that Windows 95 opening day extravaganza. Makes the SCOTUS(!) battle look tame.

Glad I bought the stock of those cheap, evil lying manipulators. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
To believe that people only buy cars because of advertising, as opposed to the fact that it is the most useful and convenient transportation device ever invented, requires closing your eyes to reality in belief of your anti-coporation religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you've got it all wrong. The only reason I drive my car to work is that I've been brainwashed by advertising. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it takes me 20 minutes each way to get to work and back home by driving and 90 minutes each way by riding the bus (and bicycling or walking on each end from the bus stop to my destination), along with the pleasure of standing out in the rain, snow cold or heat waiting for the bus.

Also, I can't imagine why you would question the notion that the collapse industrial civilization would make our lives more fullfilling. Here is a sample of the fullfilling experiences that the industrial revolution has deprived us of.

1. Taking a dump in an outhouse when it's 20 below.
2. Taking a dump in an outhouse when it's 95, with the wonderful aroma and the flies biting your ass.
3. Having half your kids die before their second birthday.
4. Mucking out the barn.
5. Plowing the fields behind a team of oxen.
6. Losing all your teeth by the time you're 40.
7. Hauling basket after basket of [censored] from the barn or the privy to the fields to fertilize them.
8. Polio, typhoid, cholera, smallpox and the plague.
9. All the wonderful days spent squatting in the field, thinning the crops and pulling weeds.
10. The ability to fully apreciate a splitting headace, without having the experience dulled by dangerous drugs like Aspirin, Tylenol or Ibuprofen. The advertisers have just brainwashed us into thinking that pain is unpleasant. It's not that bad, really.

Yes, I'm really looking forward to a return to the simple, fullfilling agrarian life.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are using hyperbole to make a point, that's one thing.

[/ QUOTE ] That's the one.


[ QUOTE ]
I don't think blackjack would be as patient with your errors as I am.

[/ QUOTE ] You know how many times I wished you were my dealer? And not because of my ...errors. But because I'm sure you would be so good for me.



[ QUOTE ]
I know in my mind and my heart that you are a good egg.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't let the deodorant fool you.

[vulturesrow]

Cyrus,

How does the lady who had goldenpalace.com tattooed on her forehead fit into all this? /images/graemlins/grin.gif