The free market can solve this

>the free market can solve this

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis
planetaryresources.com/asteroids/#asteroids-market-opportunity
rt.com/news/310170-platinum-asteroid-2011-uw-158/
defensenews.com/story/defense/innovation/2016/05/03/lockheed-nuclear-fusion-generator-investment/83870398/
planetaryresources.com/#home-intro
deepspaceindustries.com/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining#Ongoing_and_planned
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Americans and Europeans deserve it. You don't.

And I'm actually Belgian. (Just in vacation here)

>let's divide and conquer
lmao

resources aren't infinite.
they will end soon.

>implying the market hasn't already priced for such things accordingly
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis

the only real solution is space mining, but nobody gives a fuck about space.

you seem to forget this surely will end capitalism if resources are scarce.

We mad max soon

were going to space.

#Theunitedearthofspace2020

planetaryresources.com/asteroids/#asteroids-market-opportunity

What about crude oil?

Capitalism relies on scarcity. The impetus to mine space will be when the materials worth mining get expensive enough.

The replacements for the materials will be made when developing alternatives can be justified for the profit made after R+D.

You don't think a command economy would actually fix this right? They'd simply stall out the market rationing the materials, and we'd have the exact same collapse as if we had run out.

I'll be honest, capitalism will end.
It will be end by some totalitarian global socialism, resources wont be wasted on dumb jersey shore garbage.

this could be a solution if prices can afford that.

peak oil was in 2015.
expect massive oil prices from now, soon we'll get back to more than 100 dollars per barrel.
expect massive upheavals in 2020 when people realize what's happening.

capitalism reallies on economic freedom, there wont be economic freedom.
resources wont be allowed to be wasted on dumb ideas.

your stupid. this is like the oil running out. easily obtainable oil that literally squirts out of the ground when you drill into it probably will become very rare in the future but shale oil and under sea oil will last for centuries and by then technology will make it obsolete.
every resource can be replaced by technology and as rarity increases higher prices will reduce demand and incentivize seeking alternatives (free market will fix it).

liberals are so fucking stupid.

...

And the machine will bleed to death, Like Venesuela.

An alternative you cannot enact is not a threat; Capitalism is the only option, because it is the lowest energy form of market. No other forms can compete, and the only direction it can flow is towards more free market without significant excess of political or financial capital.

You know, like when you finish your revolt and strip everything out of the upper class. Buys you a decade to miss the good old days when there was bread in stores.

>he fell for the shale oil meme
lmao blue pilled retard.

sea oil is politically dead by now.

>80-90% of the oil is produced in 24 months
>all the good positions are now depleted
>can only be sustained if oil is more than 150 per barrel
>billions of damages to road and bridges
>extreme toxic metals get evaporated into the air
>destruction of the enviroment
>it gets leaked into the water supply
>deplete near towns of their water supply

lmao, almost as retarded as biodiesel.

cool, I believe in the free market.
but capitalism is already dead since the 80's and finally died in 2008.

update your memes.

Citation needed bucko. Unless you're addressing productivity vs wage or barrier to entry, both of which are caused by command-type modifications to the free market.

if your saying the price of oil will rise, well, yeah, no shit. the price will rise making demand fall and offering a higher incentive to replace oil, say with synthetic oils for manufacturing materials and "green" energy or nuclear energy for everything else. the free market will do this far quicker and more efficiently than any moronic politician giving tax payer's money to some shitty corporation that will fail because it doesn't have to compete in the market and has no incentive to succeed.

sea oil drilling will happen when the price rises to justify doing it or when technology makes it cheap enough to compete with other sources, same with shale and other techniques. learn to economy.

>but capitalism is already dead since the 80's and finally died in 2008.
wew lad. that's rich. tell me, when did centralized and controlled economies work better than a free market?

I'm addressing the concept of post capitalism, like wikipedia.

Information technology is destroying the core values of capitalism.

An economic model of the XV century can't not longer exist (or will have to change) when there's shit like acknoleging that resources are finite.

Look up any of google talks on post capitalism.
Technology advance will drive shit like 3D printing.

Also there's more concern in people's mind about the enviroment destruction.

There's simply too many factors againts an economic model that was the sucessor to feudalism.

We need to device something better, as most socialist and marxist claim.

I'm not a socialist BTW.

Yes, dont you know? Roads will no more be needed because the free market will give us jetpacks running on feelz and rainbows.
At the same time your local warlord... i mean private police will protect your property. For sure i tell you.

>he thinks the only alternative is socialism or communism
lmao kid.
blue pilled as fuck.

look up post capitalism talks on google.
It will be more like bitcoin shit or open source infraestructure and p2p networks.

What does this have to do with liberals?

Technology can not create energy or replace resources. It can only help us exploit what is already there.

The free market would drastically reduce the world's population, and make things more efficient.

So yeah, it would solve it.

Want a fix? Stop inviting every single 3rd worlder to the west. Our populations and sustainable levels can't handle this. Our civilisations are going to collapse because no one wanted to be a big nasty racist.

This was a problem that would have fixed itself in the 60s/70s when our own populations started to drop to more reasonable levels. But we've artificially propped it up and it's going to fail, thank God. But it will be too late for the westerners by then

>socialism or communism
I never said socialism or communism you fucking moron. learn to read.

>centralized and controlled economies
>socialism
wew, you sure are stupid.

>An economic model of the XV century can't not longer exist
unless you meant that double negative your wrong. capitalism is perfect for industrialized economies. for technology economies like our own you can make arguments for a more controlled economy at the expense of individual freedom and wealth in order to achieve social goals like regulating pollution or providing a social safety net but that is a matter of opinion and moral values, not a matter of objective fact.

What is recycling and what are sub-economic reserves:-
-For a resource there is an amount we know exists and an amount that we can make money off of extracting and selling. There is also an amount we know exists but at the moment it is not profitable to extract, if prices change or costs go down sub economic reserves can become economic and vice versa.
-There is a lot of undiscovered reserves too, and out of that some if found would be economic or not economic.

Only extremely rare resources can be considered to be in danger of running out like Niobium but there are some countries with large amounts that can supply the entire worlds demand.

Anyway free markets can solve this by price changes making sub-economic reserves economic and by making exploration for new reserves more profitable.

then someone will find a solution when the cost for the resources becomes too high

>expecting people to lie down and starve to death en masse because the free market calls for it
>not realizing 99% of the population will engage in a massive chimpout when they see the rich continue to live it up while they have to starve to death

why are libertarians so autistic?

>Technology can not create energy or replace resources
>can not create energy
all sources of modern energy are technological creations, aside from using animals for move objects. gas, wind, nuclear, all came from technology and never existed before.

>replace resources
do you use a lot of paper these days? do you use a lot of whale oil to burn so you can see at night? do you spend 60% of your day tending you fields and livestock so you won't starve this winter? no? that's odd, I guess technology has replaced those once necessary resources.

>Want a fix? Stop inviting every single 3rd worlder to the west.

3rd worlders are the polar opposite of the problem when it comes to what the OP image is showing.

People in the west unable to live within their means and who demand everything on earth be available to them at all times are more to blame for resource consumption than anyone else. You don't need 500 different types of shitty spatulas made in China to be available to you at wal mart.

the solution is space mining, but the time is runing out.

my point is that capitalism will be replaced by an enviromentalism model focused on sutainability and 0 growth.

if you mean the free market, I think it wont dissapear.

current model of crony capitalism is not longer moraly, politically or even economically viable.

we can only hope for space mining.

this, thirld worlders not even consume 25% of world resources.

america is literally wasting oil and natural resources to live.

When 3rd worlders are living in Africa/Asia etc they aren't consuming as much resources. When they move to the west the consume far more here than back there.

no all animals achieve the maximum population for their environment will support then taper off naturally. there never exists a situation where population outgrows environment to the extent to which all of the members of the species starve. in places like africa the population is artificially inflated but it would return to naturally sustainable rates if not for misguided charity efforts.

don't blame refugees on this.
they're not even 10% of europe population.

>the free market couldn't fix it he said

Wrong. Capitalism relies on efficiency.

On the topic of the resources that could run out, they would only run out to countries that the selling country decides to embargo, and wouldn't run out in the producing countries for a long ass time if realistically ever.

africa has the lowest danger of starvation if oil prices star rising.

their agriculture is not dependant on oil, and it's more traditional.

first worlders are at bigger risk of social collapse than us.

Aye, but our populations have been in decline since the 70s. By now, in 45 years our populations would be a lot smaller but have been artificially propped up to unsustainable levels.

Thats exactly my point.

>crony capitalism
crony capitalism is antithetical to the free market so don't trash real free market capitalism just because america's totally non-free market sucks whenever the FED stops super inflating the currency to hide recessions.

This. Mexicans are the leading cause of environmental degradation where I live.

THEY HAVE SO MANY GODDAMN KIDS.

You mean something like the Zeitgeist movement?

>this thread

niggers are the ones expecting to increase.
but even with that, the earth is 60% asians.

you will have to genocide asians first if you want to reduce population.

do you imply the current system in america and europe is real capitalism?

I didn't mean the original definition of capitalism, I mean the current global system will collapse if there's no cheap oil.

sure, there seem to be a global change that is more eco friendly.
capitalism will be replaced by a 0 growth system.

There isn't an economic system that can reconcile itself with infinite growth on a finite planet. There is no answer.

And if we exhaust the easy resources on Earth before attaining the sustainable ability to draw resources from the asteroid belt, or further, then we're eternally fucked and bound to this planet, in material squalor.

>do you imply the current system in america and europe is real capitalism?
no, I explicitly said the opposite:
>america's totally non-free market

>I mean the current global system will collapse if there's no cheap oil.
not true. oil prices have risen high enough to make american reserves economically viable and nothing collapsed. My state of north dakota went fucking gang busters when oil prices were over $60 a barrel and now the fields are totally shut down because the price dropped. they will start right back up when it goes back. it will take hundreds of years to deplete these currently unused reserves and by then robots will be able to drill in the ocean which is 70% of the world or green/nuclear energy will be widespread.

Silver isn't in catalytic converters, platinum is. This pic is already wrong.

I do agree technology can solve this problem.
But we need to start investing in more science rather than helping saudis engage in proxy wars and make terrorists attacks on western soil.

Will start researching more about space mining now.

>and bound to this planet
in 100 years we went from riding horses to going to the moon I don't think space colonization is very far off, maybe a few thousand years which isn't much time for a species at all. mammalian species typically last for a million years and we are only 1/10th in, tops.

>finite planet
we are no where near depleting any very vital resource and won't be for thousands of years. even if oil runs out humans wont become extinct.

>capitalism will be replaced by a 0 growth system.
human freedom is synonymous with economic freedom, people can be enslaved but it typically doesn't last long on a historical time scale.

>But we need to start investing in more science rather than helping saudis engage in proxy wars and make terrorists attacks on western soil.
I agree but I don't think the government has a place in investing for people. I don't think they are good at it. look at the green energy investments made by america in the past 8 years, most of which have failed.

one of the core beliefs of capitalism is infinite growth.

when capitalism was invented there was the belief finite resources were magically infinite.

this core belief is not longer true, you need to expend energy to make things.

I don't mean the concepts of freedom will disapear, I'm talking current system will collapse soon.

by current system I mean stuff like the shadow banking system and derivative bubbles.

It's still impressive how cheap oil is, even at 150 per barrel.

>gas, wind, nuclear, all came from technology and never existed before.

No. This doesn't even make sense.

> technology has replaced those once necessary resources.

No. Moving from one resource to another is not "replacing" a resource.

I think the problem here is that you operate with the belief that technology can allow us to move from one resource to another indefinitely, or eventually culminate in the exploitation of something so widely available (e.g. some carbon allotrope) that it is no longer necessary to be worried.

However, this is basically magical thinking and has no basis in reality. Extrapolating trends in technology can only take you so far. We still overwhelmingly use oil and coal for transport and electricity, even after 150 years. These resources have not been "replaced" yet, despite many efforts.

>No. This doesn't even make sense.
yes it does, stupid. before wind turbines there was no wind energy. before electricity there was no electrical energy from water turbines or coal burning. these forms of energy were invented and did not exist until then. this is a pretty simple concept, friend.

>No. Moving from one resource to another is not "replacing" a resource.
re·place
rəˈplās/
verb
1.
take the place of.
"Ian's smile was replaced by a frown"

wew lad, your on a roll, aren't you?

>use oil and coal for transport and electricity, even after 150 years.
150 years is such a small amount of time for technology, if you had any historical perspective at all you would understand that.
>despite many efforts.
at less then $50 a barrel you would be a fool to invest any real money in RnD for a replacement.

>I think the problem here is that you operate with the belief that technology can allow us to move from one resource to another indefinitely
as soon as space colonization happens resources will be unlimited compared to the life of our species which is limited by evolution (in 2 million years humans will be extinct like Neanderthals - they will have evolved.)

This is just such a bad meme chart it isn't even funny.
I was going to come up with a good response to this, but I really have nothing to take out this kind of stupidity.
Only things here that are actually running out are the radioactives, and those are (mostly) used as nuclear energy sources anyhow, and we're 15 years away from practical microfusion, which means power isn't even a problem anymore.
The rest of it is just plain stupid.

>by current system I mean stuff like the shadow banking system and derivative bubbles.
these are not capitalistic phenomena they are legislative phenomena caused by interventionist economic policy, i.e. the FED and banking lobbies.

you seem to be saying capitalism cannot last because controlled markets don't work. well your right in that controlled markets tend to fail but your wrong when you say that is capitalism. there are almost no free markets in the developed world at this time, hong kong is the only big example I know of. typically free markets exist after an economy industrializes and once the state becomes wealthy from it they introduce controls which cause problems. see Britain in the 1900s, see america in the 1800s, they did very well with free markets.

> these forms of energy were invented and did not exist until then

I will take you seriously once your learn how thermodynamics work.

The only thing I'm worried about is antibiotics "running out."
There's no "ore that's too poor to be mined profitably with current prices" in those.
Developing 'em is costly and once you have something, the chinks will copy it and start handing it out like candy, making it ineffective.

you are so fucking stupid man.
I don't mean to say that wind was invented you stupid, stupid idiot. the technology required to utilize the wind as a source of energy was invented.
I hope your being intentionally dense because if not I feel bad for you and your care taker.

>antibiotics
there are many many types of antibiotics not yet "discovered". also antibody therapies may make antibiotics obsolete eventually.
as soon as things get resistant to the point where out current antibiotics become ineffective massive amounts of money will be dumped into RnD which is too expensive to do without a guaranteed return on profit.

>so don't trash real free market capitalism
>IT'S NOT REAL FREE MARKET CAPITALISM!!!!!!!!

You guys are just like commies.

Leftists have been saying all Earth resources are about to end since the fucking 60s.

>a fucking damp rag

> the technology required to utilize the wind as a source of energy was invented.

>Technology can not create energy or replace resources. It can only help us exploit what is already there.

Which was my original point.

Aye, there's undiscovered ones. There's most likely other, more efficient treatments that bacteria won't develop immunities to.

The question is if they can be developed fast enough. Other antibiotics, sure, but they only help for a short while unless the free market changes the way they're used in India and other shithole countries as a means to prevent disease rather than cure it.

>these are not capitalistic phenomena
Yeah. it's a communist fenomena

>reel free market capitalism
>free market
>free

what don't you get about free? how can you say the free market doesn't work while pointing at a non free market? are you retarded?

Capitalism will solve it. Prices for increasingly rare commodities will rise.

The only countries that will suffer are those that impose price controls to prevent the markets from correcting against overuse of resources. What will happen to those countries? The same thing that always happens to ignorant socialists: massive shortages and poverty.

Concepts such as overpopulation and scarcity are the biggest myths on earth, and no country with a free market will ever have to suffer from believing in them, thankfully. Only the socialists will burn, as well they deserve.

>Resources are infinite

are you kidding me?

your arguing over semantics, technology can and will very likely enable us to harvest energy from many sources for as long as our species lasts.

Literally the same applies to fucking socialism and communism. Like i said, you guys are like socialists

>resources are infinite

Again, magical thinking.

nice straw man you got there

I doubt resources will be depleted in our lifetime. If it comes to lack of resources in the future, I'm sure someone will invest in an asteroid and rip it to shreds. I mean there's a damn platinum rich asteroid lurking in the solar system somewhere that's worth about 5 trillion of dollars alone.
rt.com/news/310170-platinum-asteroid-2011-uw-158/

>conservation of mass and energy isn't a thing
All "consumed" resources can be put back given enough effort, besides radioactives, and the shit that's fucked off into space for various reasons.
Max pop the planet can support doesn't change.
If we actually run into resource trouble we need to either
>A) research how to reclaim "consumed" resources
>B) kill excess population

We are 15 years from practical microfusion.
Power isn't a problem and will never be.

they are effectively infinite when you consider the mass available in outer-space.
technology also makes non renewable resources obsolete eventually.

>neo-malthusian bullshit

Yeah, no.

>iterally the same applies to fucking socialism and communism
the same what?

>Like i said, you guys are like socialists
if you mean the american economy then I agree, it is not a free market. It used to be, before 1900.

your just throwing out baseless assumptions. the historical trend has been one of an increasing supply of energy sources. how, for instance, will solar energy run out?

>We are 15 years from practical microfusion.
source?

>they are effectively infinite when you consider the mass available in outer-space.

Yeah, your mom is also hot when she as a bag in her head. But she doesnt. And we can't mine asteroids yet or in the foreseable future.

Oil is running out fast bro, we don't have that much time

>resources are infinite

I will repeat this one time before you confirm that you are not well-informed or well-studied enough in fields such as economics, history, or political economy to carry on this conversation. If your response fails to demonstrate comprehension, I will not be replying to you again.

Prices for increasingly rare commodities ("resources") will rise, meaning that people will not be able to afford to use them. Oil is a good example. As we run out of available oil, it will start to cost a lot of money to buy gas -- and I do men a LOT of money. People who are reliant on cars will have to find some other means of transportation. Alternatively, the cost-benefit analysis for electric cars may finally pay off at that point. The crux of the issue is that prices on the resource will rise, and demand for that resource will subsequently and necessarily fall.

The only countries that do not function in this manner are ones that impose price controls to force certain commodities (such as oil) to remain "affordable." These countries are incapable of fundamentally destroying the earth with their "demand". Instead, what will happen is that oil producers won't sell to them, and there will be massive shortages of oil in those countries without any of the cost incentives to replace it. And the sad part is that they will probably blame capitalism for their failure, as you are doing. See: Venezuela.

>source?
Lockheed martin.
defensenews.com/story/defense/innovation/2016/05/03/lockheed-nuclear-fusion-generator-investment/83870398/
Thank fuck for the military industrial complex.

That X country is not real socialism, then socialism should not be blamed for it's mistakes

Oil is not running out.
The easily reachable/extractable oil is.

Besides, we can replace oil with other stuff already. Like hydrogen, ethanol or plain batteries. Oil is just a hell of a lot cheaper currently.

>Prices for increasingly rare commodities ("resources") will rise, meaning that people will not be able to afford to use them. Oil is a good example. As we run out of available oil, it will start to cost a lot of money to buy gas -- and I do men a LOT of money. People who are reliant on cars will have to find some other means of transportation. Alternatively, the cost-benefit analysis for electric cars may finally pay off at that point. The crux of the issue is that prices on the resource will rise, and demand for that resource will subsequently and necessarily fall.
>Yeah, a oil based society will totally change to something based economy easily bro!!! It0s the free market

Do you even have any real life example of this happening?

Well, let's see if they are correct or they are just desperate for investors

can space mining bros give me some lecture over the economics of space mining?

>or in the foreseable future.
planetaryresources.com/#home-intro
deepspaceindustries.com/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining#Ongoing_and_planned

think again.
oil will last for another 1000 years at least and that ignores advances in technology that reduce demand or increase availability of oil. just 200 years ago we didn't use oil at all for energy unless you count burning animal fat in lamps

>they are just desperate for investors
>biggest defense contractor in the nation
>desperate for investors
M8, they spend their time making deer frying electromagnetic force fields and microwave rays that were originally supposed to be a crowd control device but ended up just cooking people.
They have no money problems.

Here's the short version:
Possible in theory, but so fucking expensive with current technology that it isn't worth it.
Or did you want to know how it'd be done?

socialism is when a government controls the means of production, a free market is when the government does not restrict economic freedom.

socialism has been tries many times and has always failed. free markets have been very rare but always successful.
learn to economics.

check the wiki on space mining. has an economics section.

Lolbertarianism is based on the same Utopian handwaving that Communism is based on
>Dude, the Market/Planning will fix it! You don't need to worry about anything brah

I am not assuming anything. Solar energy will not run out, but our ability to harvest solar energy efficiently will diminish over time if we are not careful with our resources.

One does not simply take sand from a beach and produce a solar panel. Instead, you need an entire ecosystem of industries, many of which depend on oil and coal, to extract minerals from mines and manufacture the panels.

You see, that is the problem with most new sources of energy. They are tertiary. We don't take solar panels out of the ground like we do with oil.

I am not saying we are doomed, but the way things are going now is in the wrong direction, these new sources of energy do not close the loop without relying heavily on the crutch of fossil fuels.

I'm reading an asteroid could be worth 200 billions or more.

one of it has 150 times more the world supply of some rare metal.

One does simply take sand from a beach and shove it into a fusion reactor and get power though.
Well, sort of.

>WOW, so in 10 years probes will be sent as pioneers?!?!?!?!?!?!??!? It's like tomorrow space ncolonization is about to happen!!!!

>oil will last for another 1000 years at least
lol, any source?

>They have no money problems.

According to a user on the internet

How long until major space mining operations?

"We'll never run out because it will be too expensive" is a very dumb way to state "the last barrel of crude oil will be on display in a trillionaire's museum" and doesn't actually say anything about the source of cheap energy other than *waves hands wildly* "other means."

Economics: the dismal science.

>figures do not take in account changes in demand or new technology

So your graph essentially claims that resources are finite, by ignoring the factors that prove they are not.

Resources are anything that is utilized by the market. Whale Oil is not a resource because it was replaced with petroleum. Also petroleum is a GROWING resource because we have found new ways to develop that resource. Fuel efficiency has reduced the demand for petroleum through innovation.

These are examples of substitution, price mechanics and proven reserves. They show that anyone who claims we are "running out"of resources is profoundly ignorant of economics.

>socialism is when a government controls the means of production
Wrong, can't even know your definitions. Socialism is when workers own the means of production.

>communism
>planing
lol

>According to a user on the internet
Do your research m8, they're literally our biggest defense contractors.
You know how much we spend on them per year?
They have access to area 51 for fucks sake, that's where the SR-71 was developed.

>Do you even have any real life example of this happening?

Sure. When oil prices rose in the last decade and the US just let the market handle it, people drove less and purchased cars with better mpg. When oil prices rose during the 1973 oil crisis, the US imposed price controls which caused massive shortages. In some sense, the way they handled the recent oil "crisis" was informed by what went wrong in the 70's.

The same goes for any resource, and it also goes for all price controls. The economic behavior is the same. Supply decreases, demand increases, price goes up and people have to either make a sacrifice if they want that resource, or choose something else.

It is an asymptotic relationship, and it well and truly does mean that we will never actually run out of any resource -- it will simply become too expensive to afford, and another resource will replace it long before that at a better price.

Source, not conduit. Build me a fusion reactor sandcastle.

>Known reserves

New ones are constantly being discovered. You were probably one of those faggots screaming about peak oil 20 years ago.