"Larry Blanchard" wrote:

My initial Ponzi comment was not pointed at Social Security, which
does
seem to be in fair shape with a few tweaks needed to keep it going
for
the rest of this century.

Rather it was directed at the need for an ever increasing population
to
keep things going. What would happen to the housing industry,
durable
goods, automobile, etc. if the population was static? Think about
it.
---------------------------------------------------------
Would agree, especially if we continue to waste the world's resources
to feed our life style.

OTOH, if we choose to make modest investments in third world
countries, we will develop markets for our products and reduce the
demand for basic resources to feed our habits by improving our
lifestyle
efficiencies.

Simple low cost things like providing clean water and sanitation,
mosquito netting to reduce malaria, spotted fever, etc in Africa.

Farming assistance to show that clear cutting the world's jungles
to produce heating fuel, provides only short term solutions.

Continuing to flush our topsoil down the Mississippi River by
using the present farming methods to produce corn is not a winner.

The only winner in that game is Monsanto.

Recognize that the so-called "War On Drugs" is not working.

Maybe it is better to treat drugs like tobacco and alcohol.

Legalize them and then regulate and tax them.

Wasn't that what Prohibition was all about?

Guess we don't want to learn from our mistakes.

The USA will never again compete as a producer in the
low tech world.

If we want to continue to enjoy our lifestyle, we are going to
have to make a place at the feed trough for the world's low
tech producers so they can afford to buy our high tech products.

As the old saying goes, "What goes around, comes around".


Lew