NationStates Jolt Archive

In the forseeable future, oil will become largely unavailable and this will cripple many economies, especially the USA. Given recent disasterous leadership and the grim possibility of more inbred apes arising to power, what would happen if this finished off the US economy, and challenegd the USA's superpower status, who would take its place?

Jamaica. *nod*

Sure, you look at me oddly now, but in thirty years, just remember who said it first!

islam.

The USA will adapt.

They didn't get this rich by being stupid. When the price of oil really does threaten their economy, the industrialists will adapt.

The only real threat to US strength is US bureaucracy getting in the way of innovation.

In the forseeable future, oil will become largely unavailable and this will cripple many economies, especially the USA. Given recent disasterous leadership and the grim possibility of more inbred apes arising to power, what would happen if this finished off the US economy, and challenegd the USA's superpower status, who would take its place?

If the US were to collapse tommorow, the world would be in trouble as there is currently no suitable replacement to fill the vacuum. The EU does not yet possess the popular support required to change it from a predominately economic organisation into a political federation. China and India, although rapidly developing, are not currently strong enough to take the place of the US. Russia is still trying to sort out the mess left by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

If the US were to collapse in 20 years, who can tell what the story would be? China would be the most likely successor but that is not to say that it is inevitable that they will be the next dominant superpower - political upheaval could destroy China's economic prosperity very quickly indeed.

If the US were to collapse tommorow, the world would be in trouble as there is currently no suitable replacement to fill the vacuum. The EU does not yet possess the popular support required to change it from a predominately economic organisation into a political federation. China and India, although rapidly developing, are not currently strong enough to take the place of the US. Russia is still trying to sort out the mess left by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

If the US were to collapse in 20 years, who can tell what the story would be? China would be the most likely successor but that is not to say that it is inevitable that they will be the next dominant superpower - political upheaval could destroy China's economic prosperity very quickly indeed.

What about islam?

What about islam?

Islam, being a religion, cannot be a superpower anymore than christianity was in the middle ages.

I wonder, if the US collapsed as a superpower, would the UN still be around? I mean, the US does fund a large part of the UN, doesnt it? If it were, I think the UN would try to do a lot of what the US does internationally. Would there need to be a superpower, anyway?

What about islam?

If by that you mean the Middle East, then no I cannot see that area being a super power within the next century. The only way for the Middle East to emerge as a super power would be if the various states underwent complete political union and that is not going to happen. The religious differences between some Middle Eastern states is far greater than the national differences between the European states.

In the forseeable future, oil will become largely unavailable and this will cripple many economies, especially the USA. Given recent disasterous leadership and the grim possibility of more inbred apes arising to power, what would happen if this finished off the US economy, and challenegd the USA's superpower status, who would take its place?

The USA still have about 1.5 centuries left of their own oil. Saw the stat other day not sure about it tho. Thats y we buy e1 else's within that timeframe i assume that we can come up with a bio replacment or another form of fuel. However China will challenge our Superpower stance anyway with their massive Economy.

After some consideration, my vote went to Japan.

I wonder, if the US collapsed as a superpower, would the UN still be around? I mean, the US does fund a large part of the UN, doesnt it? If it were, I think the UN would try to do a lot of what the US does internationally. Would there need to be a superpower, anyway?

Most UN peacekeeping operations are done by 'neutral' countries, which the US definitely isn't. Most of the laws, proposed by other countries, are ignored/not signed by the US. I'm sure that it would demand a reform in the working of the UN, but although the US does fund the UN some of its money (remember, they're not the only ones that do so), you still have the possibility of minor nations joining together under the political banner of the UN.

Certainly an interesting possibility.

And it's not so much that there is a need for a superpower, but superpowers just... appear. Like, Denmark was somewhat of a superpower when it had the largest merchant fleet. Britain was a superpower when it had its empire. France was a superpower when it invaded the whole of Europe, likewise with Germany. Russia was a super power when it and the US were the only ones really having a go at each other.

If by that you mean the Middle East, then no I cannot see that area being a super power within the next century. The only way for the Middle East to emerge as a super power would be if the various states underwent complete political union and that is not going to happen. The religious differences between some Middle Eastern states is far greater than the national differences between the European states.

But islam has massive numbers, and very strong backing in the West.

But islam has massive numbers, and very strong backing in the West.
Which west are you from?:rolleyes:

Which west are you from?:rolleyes:

The one that's posting here. I'd say that 97% of people here look forward to total world domination and rule by fundamentalist islam.

I'd say Japan or India was up to become next superpower. China are not capable of supporting that kind of economic growth for much longer, they are militarily weak, and the Chinese economy will get shattered when communism collapses. Korea might've had an outside possibility were it unified, but like Germany reunification any coming together of North and South would have serious implications for the economy.

Korea might've had an outside possibility were it unified, but like Germany reunification any coming together of North and South would have serious implications for the economy.

Worse. East Germany was pretty shabby, but North Korea is in absolute shambles. South Korea might decline unification so the North doesn't drag them down. :rolleyes:

The USA will adapt.

They didn't get this rich by being stupid. When the price of oil really does threaten their economy, the industrialists will adapt.


Americans NOW are pretty stupid though. They adapt to new things about as quickly as a glacier. The uneducated uhMerica of today is not even the America of WWII. They voted for Bush twice, they think the military is a good thing and they're illiterate, uneducated, and god addled. Certainly by comparison with any first world country. If it wasn't for the Mexicans nothing would get done in that place. Once petrol goes to the $5 a gallon mark their economy will implode. All the corporations will jump ship because there's no loyalty like Capitalist loyalty.

In the forseeable future, oil will become largely unavailable and this will cripple many economies, especially the USA. Given recent disasterous leadership and the grim possibility of more inbred apes arising to power, what would happen if this finished off the US economy, and challenegd the USA's superpower status, who would take its place?

China is becoming an economic powerhouse. I'd give it 10 more years (give or take) before it IS a superpower.

Reason for its economic growth- a highly disciplined, hardworking people (even without government coersion) who are evermore-increasingly becoming economically capitalistic, and less and less socialistic. US is evermore continuin down the slippery slope of socialism. China will become a superpower, whether the United States rises or falls.

Americans NOW are pretty stupid though. They adapt to new things about as quickly as a glacier. The uneducated uhMerica of today is not even the America of WWII. They voted for Bush twice, they think the military is a good thing and they're illiterate, uneducated, and god addled. Certainly by comparison with any first world country. If it wasn't for the Mexicans nothing would get done in that place. Once petrol goes to the $5 a gallon mark their economy will implode. All the corporations will jump ship because there's no loyalty like Capitalist loyalty.

Actually, our God-fearing, capitalistic side is all talk and not really practiced much anymore- we find ourselves shrinking in ranks.
We resemble Europe more than we do any God-fearing nation.

Bush, despite what the outside world thinks, is anything BUT conservative. He's betrayed his supporters. We find ourselve with a larger government, heavily involved in world affairs, a sliding in morals, and a one way ticket to economic globalization and ending of our sovreignty (UN, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, etc...)

I'm very disappointed in this spend-spend-spend President.

In the forseeable future, oil will become largely unavailable and this will cripple many economies, especially the USA. Given recent disasterous leadership and the grim possibility of more inbred apes arising to power, what would happen if this finished off the US economy, and challenegd the USA's superpower status, who would take its place?

Definitely not China, who is even worse than the US when it comes to energy efficiency; they're also dependent on us for most of their economic growth. The EU is better off, but they will have to overcome some of the problems facing them before they could see stronger growth. The Middle East will become economically irrelevant once oil production falls to certain levels, and Africa will only worsen as they are priced out of fuel. Russia faces the same situation as the Middle East, but they are also lucky to have plentiful natural resources as well as oil and gas. The leader will likely be India; they have the good fortune of a democratic government and commitment to developing a fuel-efficient, high tech economy. The Internet and technology sectors will be the strongest during the peak period aside from finance and oil/gas production, so nations that dominate in these will do alright.

However, I don't see the US collapsing from the peak in oil production. The nature of the economy will change, but it won't collapse; there will be recessions, inflation, and hardship much like the 1970's but for a more prolonged period of time but it will eventually end. The West Coast, New York, Texas, and Florida all have major industries well adapted to a peak oil environment; however, the Midwest and some of the New England states are not as lucky and will suffer economic hardship.

Definitely not China, who is even worse than the US when it comes to energy efficiency; they're also dependent on us for most of their economic growth. The EU is better off, but they will have to overcome some of the problems facing them before they could see stronger growth. The Middle East will become economically irrelevant once oil production falls to certain levels, and Africa will only worsen as they are priced out of fuel. Russia faces the same situation as the Middle East, but they are also lucky to have plentiful natural resources as well as oil and gas. The leader will likely be India; they have the good fortune of a democratic government and commitment to developing a fuel-efficient, high tech economy. The Internet and technology sectors will be the strongest during the peak period aside from finance and oil/gas production, so nations that dominate in these will do alright.

However, I don't see the US collapsing from the peak in oil production. The nature of the economy will change, but it won't collapse; there will be recessions, inflation, and hardship much like the 1970's but for a more prolonged period of time but it will eventually end. The West Coast, New York, Texas, and Florida all have major industries well adapted to a peak oil environment; however, the Midwest and some of the New England states are not as lucky and will suffer economic hardship.

The EU is FAR from becoming a Superpower. It lacks military capacity, and European economies are in either in financial ruin or are headed that way. China will do whatever it has to get and stay on top. They are the most ingenuitive people on earth right now. Besides, the Three Gorges Dam will send their economy into hyper-drive when it is completed.

Once petrol goes to the $5 a gallon mark their economy will implode..

People said that about $2/gallon and $3/gallon. Both levels have been sustained for prolonged periods and there has been no recession. $5 gas is not that expensive in real terms; in order for gas to reach the percentage of income that it was in the 1950's gas would have to cost upwards of $7 per gallon.

Even the recent slowdown is due to interest rates, not the rise in oil prices. Companies are finding ways to boost efficiency and design products that are less dependent on energy to produce; people are either paying the higher prices or finding ways to improve efficiency and reduce consumption. The market will be able to bear the current prices without difficulty, and could handle $5/gallon if it occured gradually.

The problem won't be oil running out, per se, the problem will come from climate change. That will cost untold billions' worth of damage, if allowed to continue unchecked.

People said that about $2/gallon and $3/gallon. Both levels have been sustained for prolonged periods and there has been no recession. $5 gas is not that expensive in real terms; in order for gas to reach the percentage of income that it was in the 1950's gas would have to cost upwards of $7 per gallon.

Even the recent slowdown is due to interest rates, not the rise in oil prices. Companies are finding ways to boost efficiency and design products that are less dependent on energy to produce; people are either paying the higher prices or finding ways to improve efficiency and reduce consumption. The market will be able to bear the current prices without difficulty, and could handle $5/gallon if it occured gradually.

Except that our incomes have increased too. Our incomes, for the majority of us, has hit a peak- one that is predicted to go down. There is an increasing gap between rich and poor, and our middle class is rapidly shrinking, giving way to increasing poverty rates. Our incomes won't keep up with rising gas prices. Only if our economy turns away from oil will we survive.

The problem won't be oil running out, per se, the problem will come from climate change. That will cost untold billions' worth of damage, if allowed to continue unchecked.

Ain't you heard- our oil usage is causing global warming...:rolleyes:

Worse. East Germany was pretty shabby, but North Korea is in absolute shambles. South Korea might decline unification so the North doesn't drag them down. :rolleyes:

Ahhhh, reminds me of Ireland.


I doubt there will be ONE superpower- remeber thats only happened once in history, for only a few decades. I think we'll find ourselves back in the 1914 model, but without the desire for war.

The EU is FAR from becoming a Superpower. It lacks military capacity, and European economies are in either in financial ruin or are headed that way. China will do whatever it has to get and stay on top. They are the most ingenuitive people on earth right now. Besides, the Three Gorges Dam will send their economy into hyper-drive when it is completed.

The EU's problems are its laws...if they loosen the labor markets and unify tax codes, they can stimulate solid growth.

The main problem facing China is its overreliance on export industries and its inability to create domestic innovation; a lot of that has to do with the repressive government that stifles free access to the Internet and other technology. Were China to loosen its controls on free expression, the economy would be a lot healthier and more sustainable than it is currently.

They are also facing environmental and social problems caused by mismanagement of the economy by the state. The Chinese economy is overheating, and unless the government moves to slow it and rein in the investment bubbles in exports and lending, they will be hurt severely. If China reforms, it will do very well. Right now, its growth is being forwarded on increasingly shaky grounds and unless changes are made it will collapse. China has massive potential, but it is not going to reach it if current policies are continued.

Ahhhh, reminds me of Ireland.


I doubt there will be ONE superpower- remeber thats only happened once in history, for only a few decades. I think we'll find ourselves back in the 1914 model, but without the desire for war.

Well, there WILL be at least ONE. But it won't be any Western nation. It will be China, and any other given nation- Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan, take your pick.

The EU's problems are its laws...if they loosen the labor markets and unify tax codes, they can stimulate solid growth.

The main problem facing China is its overreliance on export industries and its inability to create domestic innovation; a lot of that has to do with the repressive government that stifles free access to the Internet and other technology. Were China to loosen its controls on free expression, the economy would be a lot healthier and more sustainable than it is currently.

They are also facing environmental and social problems caused by mismanagement of the economy by the state. The Chinese economy is overheating, and unless the government moves to slow it and rein in the investment bubbles in exports and lending, they will be hurt severely. If China reforms, it will do very well. Right now, its growth is being forwarded on increasingly shaky grounds and unless changes are made it will collapse. China has massive potential, but it is not going to reach it if current policies are continued.

It won't continue its current policies. It put's on a Communist Face, but communism is slowly dying there as it is in Cuba. They won't outlast the next two decades, if that. They will give way to freedom in their own due time- except, unlike Russia, they will have the economic boost to get them well on their way.

Well, there WILL be at least ONE. But it won't be any Western nation. It will be China, and any other given nation- Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan, take your pick.

I somehow doubt that the USA will loose its power as quickly as it been assumed here. And China's growth is unsustainable, and relies on Western (or, perish the thought, Japanese) Companies.

Ahhhh, reminds me of Ireland.


I doubt there will be ONE superpower- remeber thats only happened once in history, for only a few decades. I think we'll find ourselves back in the 1914 model, but without the desire for war.

1914 Britain with all her colonies certainly was a the dominating superpower of the world.

It won't continue its current policies. It put's on a Communist Face, but communism is slowly dying there as it is in Cuba. They won't outlast the next two decades, if that. They will give way to freedom in their own due time- except, unlike Russia, they will have the economic boost to get them well on their way.

Hopefully; I think the Communist government will eventually realize its efforts to control information are futile and gradually relax them. After that, it will snowball and a transition to democracy will slowly begin. A stong Chinese economy is good for the world economy as well as for its people; the more consumers and the more goods produced, the better the world economy will be at avoiding slowdowns or recessions.

People said that about $2/gallon and $3/gallon. Both levels have been sustained for prolonged periods and there has been no recession. $5 gas is not that expensive in real terms; in order for gas to reach the percentage of income that it was in the 1950's gas would have to cost upwards of $7 per gallon.

Even the recent slowdown is due to interest rates, not the rise in oil prices. Companies are finding ways to boost efficiency and design products that are less dependent on energy to produce; people are either paying the higher prices or finding ways to improve efficiency and reduce consumption. The market will be able to bear the current prices without difficulty, and could handle $5/gallon if it occured gradually.


$5 a gallon is coming real soon though, not eventually. Because of the highway system and cheap gas the housing in America has developed in a certain way. When a half hour drive is just a half hour that's not too annoying, when it's a half hour and $10 worth of gas, that's annoying.

Europe handled the 1974 crises differently. The price of petrol went up across Europe for the last 30 years. People learned to buy smaller more efficient cars. A 3 litre engine is considered big in Europe, learner drivers usually buy 1.1 litre cars or 1.4 if you're feeling flush.

Working over an hours drive from home is just not cost effective for the majority. That'll be a big change in America. Start investing in inner city property now. Why spend your money on petrol when you could spend it on location.

Oh my Ghod, I'm starting to sound like a cross between a second hand car salesman and an estate agent. I'm just off out to shoot myself in the head.

I somehow doubt that the USA will loose its power as quickly as it been assumed here. And China's growth is unsustainable, and relies on Western (or, perish the thought, Japanese) Companies.

It's self sustained for thousands of years. If the West collapsed, they'd be taking 20 steps back after making 6 steps, but they wouldn't fall below where they were before their step onto the world stage. They'd find a way. They can make stuff so cheap that third world countries could afford them- but they aren't the ones who are forking up bzillions- but if we stop forking up bzillions, they'll turn to the next best thing. They, with the third world, will feed off each other. It will work for no other reason than that they all would work hard- industrious people make industrial countires. It's how the US got to where it is- alot of hard work. And now it will lose it, because it's working less and less hard.

Hopefully; I think the Communist government will eventually realize its efforts to control information are futile and gradually relax them. After that, it will snowball and a transition to democracy will slowly begin. A stong Chinese economy is good for the world economy as well as for its people; the more consumers and the more goods produced, the better the world economy will be at avoiding slowdowns or recessions.

There's a thought- China wouldn't need foreign customers- they have PLENTY of people to fire and consume their own economy- enough home customers to self-sustain.

I didn't see India before, but there's another country with all the same tools that China has- except foreign customers to buy. If they could figure out a way to make BIG trading deals with the US and Europe, they'd be riding high with China- for all the same reasons.

One of my professors told me something a while back that stuck in my mind and it was that economic power can generally be turned into military power in a period of two years. That's why he was somewhat skeptical of China's prospects for power. Despite its robust growth, Japan still has more economic power which could be channeled into beefing up the military if it ever needed to.

So the question I would ask is, who will have economic power in the forseeable future. I'm sure China will be up there, but part of me has more faith in India which is not only right behind China in growth but also has highly skilled scientists and engineers, good English speakers (the language of business) and whose middle class is actually buying stuff - appliances, electronics, consumer goods. I'm not sure China can keep up its growth if its middle class doesn't develop as well as India's. Someone said of China that it has the worst aspects of capitalism and the worst aspects of communism packed in one country. You've got all the wealth centered around one group of people in one area of the country but at the same time you still have a lot of restrictions on social and economic freedom.

And if we aren't destroyed by a collapse of morale in the face of terrorism and a world that no longer likes us, the U.S. might still be the big man on campus in the near future. We are still a monstrous economic and military power. The New York Times wrote a couple of years ago that the present day U.S. military is the strongest war machine in history (at least strategically speaking). It's both the most powerful today and more powerful than the 1st century Roman legions and the Wermacht of '42.

One more thing China has got going for them (India does too), is that China is ready to abandon godless Communism, and will readily become a God-fearing people, which is another part of prosperity (but is also for another day, another time, and another debate). Both nations are devout and spiritual.

One more thing China has got going for them (India does too), is that China is ready to abandon godless Communism, and will readily become a God-fearing people, which is another part of prosperity (but is also for another day, another time, and another debate). Both nations are devout and spiritual.

I wouldn't say being God-fearing is a requirement for power. If you've got hard working, devoted people you'll be powerful with or without faith in a deity. Look at Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. The Soviet 'god' was the Revolution. The Nazi 'god' was the German race.

1914 Britain with all her colonies certainly was a the dominating superpower of the world.

So Britain would like you to beleive, but really it was a mixture of The Russia, France, Germany AND Britain.

Britain was only powerful because no one was openly against it, much like the USA today.

So Britain would like you to beleive, but really it was a mixture of The USSR, France, Germany AND Britain.

Britain was only powerful because no one was openly against it, much like the USA today.

The USSR didn't even exist yet in 1914.

I would'nt bash the Chinese army, they have gone oh so very far since the Korean war, even then, their numbers were effective. however now, they not only outnumber EVERYONE, but they also are heavily investing on making their military a modern one, new guns, new jets, new ships, new tanks. and they've been using they're own Sun Tzu's art of war to guide them in strategy, which is proven superior to anything to west can counter with.

One more thing China has got going for them (India does too), is that China is ready to abandon godless Communism, and will readily become a God-fearing people, which is another part of prosperity (but is also for another day, another time, and another debate). Both nations are devout and spiritual.


Being a Super-Power has nothing to do with religion. Soviet Union.

There's a thought- China wouldn't need foreign customers- they have PLENTY of people to fire and consume their own economy- enough home customers to self-sustain.

That's why businesses and the Chinese government want to reduce savings and boost consumer spending...the engine of a stable economy isn't its exports, it's the domestic consumption. However, China still needs to import certain resources and comparative advantage prevents it from meeting all of its needs. Trade will not be the focus of its economy in 25 years.

The USSR didn't even exist yet in 1914.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! How did I make that mistake!

I've been studying the Cold War for TOO long!

Im sorry. *Kills self out of shame*

I assure you that wasn't sarcasism.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! How did I make that mistake!

I've been studying the Cold War for TOO long!

Im sorry. *Kills self out of shame*

I assure you that wasn't sarcasism.

The Cold War didn't start until about 1945. :D
...just messin' with ya.

$5 a gallon is coming real soon though, not eventually. Because of the highway system and cheap gas the housing in America has developed in a certain way. When a half hour drive is just a half hour that's not too annoying, when it's a half hour and $10 worth of gas, that's annoying.

Well, the average commute is around 25 miles or 50 miles per day. In order to mitigate $5 gas the fuel economy of the US fleet has to double, and it has to quadruple to mitigate $10 gas. Both are possible, but the market still doesn't demand fuel efficient cars enough to really motivate it. We doubled fuel economy in five years, and we can do it again; we've had 26 years of technological advancement so it should be even easier.

Suburbs and highways have their advantages, but the car will have to change dramatically for them to remain advantageous. I think they will, but not before there is economic hardship and a transition period.

Europe handled the 1974 crises differently. The price of petrol went up across Europe for the last 30 years. People learned to buy smaller more efficient cars. A 3 litre engine is considered big in Europe, learner drivers usually buy 1.1 litre cars or 1.4 if you're feeling flush.

The US will have to as well; economic necessity tends to triumph over personal taste.

Working over an hours drive from home is just not cost effective for the majority. That'll be a big change in America. Start investing in inner city property now. Why spend your money on petrol when you could spend it on location.

I think cities will have a resurgence over the next two decades or so and then start to slow again as alternatives to gas become widespread and cheaper. People like to live in suburbs, so the trend will likely resume once the transition is complete. Thankfully, however, the environment will not be savaged by the vehicles of the 2050's like it was with the ones of the 1950's.

Oh my Ghod, I'm starting to sound like a cross between a second hand car salesman and an estate agent. I'm just off out to shoot myself in the head.

You wouldn't be the first...:p

The United States will fall as a world power when it collapse in on itself due to revolution and civil war, after the corrupt government forces a police state on the people.

The United States will fall as a world power when it collapse in on itself due to revolution and civil war, after the corrupt government forces a police state on the people.

Erm, no.

The United States will fall as a world power when it collapse in on itself due to revolution and civil war, after the corrupt government forces a police state on the people.

-From the New Book of Revelations, Chapter IV

Well, the average commute is around 25 miles or 50 miles per day. In order to mitigate $5 gas the fuel economy of the US fleet has to double, and it has to quadruple to mitigate $10 gas. Both are possible, but the market still doesn't demand fuel efficient cars enough to really motivate it. We doubled fuel economy in five years, and we can do it again; we've had 26 years of technological advancement so it should be even easier.

What I think is even more likely is people will stop commuting. They'll either work from home over the internet, or move out of the suburbs.

I moved to avoid a commute, so now I walk to work. Commuting isn't necessary. The real thing fuels costs will impact is shipping of goods. Like food.

When people say that global warming will harm the US economy, I don't really understand why. Economies with a large agricultural sector will be harmed badly, but first-world countries hardly grow any of their own food. Their service-based economies should be unaffected. And they have the capactiy to find new sources of food (like aquaculture).

The United States will fall as a world power when it collapse in on itself due to revolution and civil war, after the corrupt government forces a police state on the people.

They have forced a police state, there was no revolution.
The state would nip any 'terrorist' revolution in the bud with their police state power to tap all phone calls. The draconian laws which allow 'terrorists' to be held indefinitely without trial, are in place. Now they're outlawing video games to breed a more docile society.

Remain calm, everything is fine.

Good to see large chunks of the world being ignored as always. Some things are never likely to occur to the parochial minds here. Never mind, you will see in the future. :D

Good to see large chunks of the world being ignored as always. Some things are never likely to occur to the parochial minds here. Never mind, you will see in the future. :D

Belgium has already had it's turn, the Belgian Congo was nothing to be pleased about. Argentina is in tatters financially. Chile/Peru has it's little Japanese issue to sort out. Venezuela, now that's a country. Once they take over the running of Southa America in the grand Bolivarian alliance, then things will happen.

The state would nip any 'terrorist' revolution in the bud with their police state power to tap all phone calls. The draconian laws which allow 'terrorists' to be held indefinitely without trial, are in place.

Those things aren't actually new. The government's just a bit less discreet about them these days.

What I think is even more likely is people will stop commuting. They'll either work from home over the internet, or move out of the suburbs.

Also, some businesses will relocate a larger portion of their workforce to the suburbs. The land, utilities, permitting, costs and taxes are all easier to obtain or lower; the company can then provide telecommuting and mass transit for its employees as well as cut down on the commuting and relocation costs. Another big advantage is that building communications networks is cheaper making telecommuting easier to launch.

I think the suburbs will grow more self-contained and the cities will expand mass transit to them. It's economically more attractive to invest in mass transit and keep the suburbs expanding alongside them than it is to let them die and be forced to deal with the problems of urban growth.

I moved to avoid a commute, so now I walk to work. Commuting isn't necessary. The real thing fuels costs will impact is shipping of goods. Like food.

Fortunately, the residual fuel oil used in container ships and trains is cheap and easy to produce. The stuff is like tar, and there's tons of it; that's one of the main reasons why imported goods and foods produced halfway across the US haven't inflated as much as more locally produced ones...the fuel price spikes are in refined products, not the residuals.

Good to see large chunks of the world being ignored as always. Some things are never likely to occur to the parochial minds here. Never mind, you will see in the future. :D

You mean like Brazil? Just wait until cellulosic ethanol takes off...you'll be the new OPEC.

the fuel price spikes are in refined products

I think you get to blame the EPA for that one. There hasn't been a major refinery constructed in the US since... what, 1981?

There's a plan for a huge new refinery in Canada, but there's some question about how the product is going to reach consumers.

Belgium has already had it's turn, the Belgian Congo was nothing to be pleased about. Argentina is in tatters financially. Chile/Peru has it's little Japanese issue to sort out. Venezuela, now that's a country. Once they take over the running of Southa America in the grand Bolivarian alliance, then things will happen.

You missed, yet again. :p

You mean like Brazil? Just wait until cellulosic ethanol takes off...you'll be the new OPEC.

We have a winner. As a prize a plate of quindims:

http://www.hotelvillasantoagostinho.com.br/imagens/quindim.jpg

Jamaica. *nod*

Sure, you look at me oddly now, but in thirty years, just remember who said it first!

I have the feeling people are going to be looking at you oddly then, too.

Guessing (wildly) from historical models, it looks like the US has 50-100 years left before collapse/civil war. At that point, either the US will emerge as a true imperial power, or someone else will step in and at least the middle part of the North American continent will go the way of the Roman Empire.

If we assume a Roman model (for the hell of it), we have (probably) Japan or China playing a rising Persian power to the US's Rome. I give the US a max lifespan, with it's current territory, of 300 years.

The biggest problem with a Roman model is that communication is too fast now, and so is transport. So we're probably looking at more a 19th century Europe syndrome: the US, a la France, will lose a big war, and end up fighting a series of smaller wars trying to regain prestige, and finally end up losing to Canada. Or losing to somebody, anyway. After which China, Japan, possibly Russia and India, and the EU/a couple of European nations will politely scheme and backstab and skirmish in the attempt to establish a new pecking order.

But I doubt the US will fall apart real soon.

I have the feeling people are going to be looking at you oddly then, too.

Well, this is Lunatic Goofballs you're talking about here.