What are some possible outcomes after recession?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rasmasyean, Jan 3, 2009.

  1. rasmasyean macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #1
    What do you think will be some things that are going to be different after this crisis passes.

    Here are some I think might happen...

    China will lead the world in automobile production with lower cost automobiles being really popular.

    Much of the US auto industry will collapse with the exception of a few niches in like automated driving assistance technologies and other "premium features" (but this sector will be led by European sector).

    US lead is electronics will dwindle more giving Asia the brunt of the semiconductor production along with all the other related sectors they already dominate.

    On the bright side of things...

    US telecom infrastructure will connect more people, esp. with wireless if Obama's plan works.

    US will lead into materials production with nanotechnology products appearing on the market more. Weapons research and production will aid this effort as results get transferred into consumer sectors.

    US will lead "Web 3.0" or whatever new "internet related" business models come up with efforts from large companies and big capital like Microsoft and Google rather than past little startups. Software doesn't seem to be affected as much by this downturn.
    What are some of your foresights into the future?

    Discuss... :)
     
  2. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #2
    I think Europe will come out stronger after the recession. I would also be surprised if the dollar maintains its status as the most bought currency. The US financial institutions may have caused too much damage for it to be trusted so much in the future. All in all I think the Euro will pick up and ultimately I think Britain will join the Euro zone.

    Just some feelings on this.
     
  3. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #3
    I think once this crisis passes we may see the following changes:

    1) The possibility of scrapping our current income tax system in favor of a low-percentage no-deductions flat tax or a true consumption tax on new-production goods like FairTax. This would save Americans hundreds of billions of dollars per year in compliance costs and if we implement something like FairTax the savings rate will rocket through the roof because there will be NO tax consequences to saving and investing your assets.

    2) We will see various forms of excise taxation to discourage the consumption of certain goods. For example, buying a new car could have excise tax rates anywhere from 0% (if you buy an all-electric car) to as high as 25% for a high-end gas-guzzling luxury car. (I mean, would you buy a new Rolls-Royce Phantom limousine costing US$400,000 if you have to pay an excise tax of US$100,000 in addition to the sticker price?) The lobbyists will be fighting over excise taxation instead of over income tax breaks.

    3) There will be a movement to eventually tie the US dollar back to a mix of precious metals again, given the problems with fiat money.

    4) We may see the merger of the US dollar, Canadian dollar and Mexican peso by 2020 to create a stronger, more stable currency that can compete against the Euro. I would not be surprised that Asian countries may be considering something similar, too.

    5) There will be MASSIVE reforms to stabilize the financial markets. Expect minimum margin requirements to start at 20% and be as high as 35% for trading in strategic materials and financial companies. Much of the onerous Sarbanes-Oxley Act will be repealed in favor of the higher requirements I mentioned earlier. We may see a return to many provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act, which means brokerage companies can't have holdings in banks and vice versa (but there will be provisions for fast money transfers between banks and brokerage companies).
     
  4. valdore macrumors 65816

    valdore

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Location:
    Kansas City, Missouri. USA
    #4
    I believe most people don't really understand the scope of what's happening.

    Combine an economy arguably as messed up as the Great Depression economy (or on its way there quick) with volatile oil prices amid peak worldwide oil production (demand for oil on an upward trendline, supply of oil on a downward trendline), and the world stage is going to get scary.

    And at the risk of sounding too much like an author/blogger I follow weekly, Jim Kunstler, we are not going to be able to afford to continue running the Interstate highway system, Wal-Mart, American suburbia, and Disney World in nearly the same degree we've become accustomed to. The car culture of America will have to be reigned in heavily if we are to cope, and I see most Americans having to be dragged kicking and screaming into this new reality.
     
  5. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #5
    I think you're ignoring the progress of technology. :) After all, during times of crisis we always see a plethora of new ideas, and many new developments in the past two years could point the way for a future where the very idea of using crude oil sounds quaint.

    I cite two developments: 1) using various forms of biomass (e.g., oil-laden algae and cellulosic plant processing) to produce motor fuels and 2) development in ultracapacitor technology for electric power storage. While expensive now, with proper funding and research both technologies will rapidly drop in price, which means we may get gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil and kerosene from biomass in the future and we may finally see large-scale power storage working in conjunction with solar, wind and tidal powerplants and finally an electric car with long range (at least 400 km or 248 miles) and under 30-minute charging times. :)
     
  6. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #6
    I have a feeling that anyone buying a new Rolls-Royce isn't that concerned by an extra $100k.
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    Quite a bit of your list I just do not see happening.

    1.) will never happen because the firms like HR block will never let it happen to much money is involved. Also the savings rate will not jump at all. People as it stands do not invest nor save money they spend all they have because they want short term satisfaction not long term. For example for most people if I offered them $10 today or they could have $11 tomorrow. Guess what most people would choose. $10 today. It would not change if the taxes where changed. Proof stands is look at how few people have more than $500 in savings currently. The numbers just keep dropping off. I do not have any money invested out side of retirement because I do not have enough in savings to allow for it yet. It is not the taxes stopping me but my own savings.

    2.) you will not see thoses taxes happen in the current market. Increase taxes are a HUGE no no during bad times and would be political suicide to do it. So not going to happen.

    3.) not going to happen. US does not have enough gold to cover the amount dollars currently out there. Forcing it to happen would make the currency even worse because of how much it would have to be devalued to make it work.

    4.) Not going to happen. Mexico economey is to weak. Canada and the US could do it but Mexico is to far behind US and Canada for it all to flow into one. US and Canada will not do it because of how much it would piss off Mexico.

    5.) Again not going to happen since some of the major banks absorbed some major brokerage firms to save the brokerage firm. This was done by the US government to keep things from getting worse. Already the fed broke rules to save the banks and that is having one bank have more in savings than a certain percentage and now I believe we have 4 banks that cross that line because of all the mergers organized by the feds to keep things from getting worse.
     
  8. itcheroni macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #8
    What you say is true now, but I suspect the average American will be different in 10 years. When our standard of living drops, people will be forced to change their routines.
     
  9. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #9
    1 word............... Inflation.

    as far as

    Flat tax , it will never happen because the endless changing tax code is the congress (house) real power, without it they could go home.They will never give that one up. count on it.
     
  10. itcheroni macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #10
    Inflation is an increase in the money supply. For the first 150 years, we had no income tax for the most part and no inflation. So more money in people's pockets won't result in inflation if that's what you meant.
     
  11. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #11
    I think you're forgetting that the Conservative Party and David Cameron are Government-elect of this country. They'd never let us join the Eurozone, thankfully!
     
  12. MacTraveller macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    #12
    China and India will emerge as the top 2 superpowers.

    Iraq will re-invent itself as the (Shiite) Islamic Republic of Iraq.

    Bush will play exhibition golf games with a lousy player President Obama. Bush will win the games, shaming Obama's athletic ability.

    Osama bin Laden will die during a very poorly-implemented dialysis treatment inside some cave using a power generator. He'll die halfway during the dialysis session. And that's the end of him.

    President Obama will try... and fail.... at least 5 times during his Presidency... to quit smoking. He will fail and regress over again. At least all the smokers will admire his efforts. He's "one of them". :rolleyes:

    Steve Wozniak will do something to become important again. Something newsworthy.

    Fidel Castro will still be (barely) alive... even after Obama leaves office. Old Man just refuses to die.
     
  13. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #13
    Yea okay. Say hello to the black market.
     
  14. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #14
    Not according to current polls. Not joining the Eurozone could well be the worst decision this country takes.
     
  15. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #15
    Actually, one good thing about tax simplification or going to a true national sales tax like FairTax is eliminating tax cheats at the income level. Given the frightening cost of compliance (US$265 billion per year in 2006 according to the last official calculation, probably around US$300 billion per year now) with the Federal tax code, it would save a lot of aggravation (not to mention no longer tying up our legal system!).
     
  16. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #16
    but remember the problem with sales tax is it is a very regressive tax. The less you make the larger share of you income is going to be paid in taxes. It is consider a very unfair tax.

    A flat tax all puts a much greater share of the tax burden on the poor as well because a larger part of there disposable income is paid in taxes. The founding fathers believed that the rich should share the largest burden of taxes.

    I will say that the tax code is overly complicated now. Mostly in ways to look for deductions.
     
  17. mysterytramp macrumors 65816

    mysterytramp

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #17
    The trouble with a flat tax is that it needs to be in the neighborhood of 20 percent to generate enough to cover current government spending. I'm unfamiliar with FairTax but other flat tax proposals have pushed the number to 25 percent, providing a ridiculously persoanl exemption (like around $30,000, at least that's my memories of the Kemp Commission).

    What that does is push millions of people off that tax-paying rolls. Personally, I'd rather they paid taxes (at least a little) because taxes tend to get people interested in the political process.

    I'd bet the Dow stays above 9,000 by the end of the first quarter. Sometime during the year exuberance will push it toward the 14,000 mark, but it won't be sustained. But by year's end, the Dow stays above 10,000.

    Obama administration will direct a lot of attention on Wall Street regulation. Tycoons will bitch about SEC interference, which will help to depress the stock market. They'll end up finding few shoulders to cry on.

    By year's end, Congress will start the debate on how to pay for the stimulus package. Expect discussion of a surtax, possibly a federal sales tax on Internet sales to be implemented in 2010.

    At least two of the major U.S. automakers merge. Both promise to release "Corolla-killers" by 2011.

    After Bush beats Obama in golf, Obama challenges him in basketball. Bush, the big chicken, refuses leading to a lot of trash talk between Paul Begala and Ann Coulter.

    mt
     
  18. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #18
    rasmasyean, you absolutely cannot avoid consideration of methods for income for the blue collar folks, who are such a large percentage of the workforce. What sort of jobs, in an ever-higher-tech world? Just one example: If China's output is "the car of the future" and we mostly go out of the business, that's some 2.5 million jobs or more that must be replaced somehow.

    One concern of mine--spoken to in pessimistic fashion by Kunstler--concerns both electric energy and transportation fuels. The absolute needs for our existing society mandate more of all forms of generating capacity: Coal, nukes, wind, solar, geothermal, whatever. Folks can holler conserve and carbon cap and all that, but there is no THE answer, as some seem to think about wind generation. Yet, we're hamstringing our efforts to meet our needs.

    Transportation fuels? I'm afraid that Kunstler is correct, and some aspects of that will become more clear in these next very few years.

    The present situation is that not only is the U.S. broke, it's heavily in debt. Yet, we need more infrastructure fixings--some $10 trillion, per the ASCE--and more generating capacity that's now double the installed cost of a few years back. And the world's available oil is declining faster than it's being replaced with new discoveries or alternative fuels.

    Changes? Bunches. Probably, more folks rejuvenating inner cities. Exurban and suburban real estate values going toward zilch. Competition between fuel for farmers vs. fuel for commuters--rationing?. Don't buy stock in an RV company. Harsher laws to control social unrest during the changes and with the continuing population growth here. More taxation to try to provide governmental services at even greater coverage than at present.

    There will be no change in the illusion that government can somehow fix things...

    'Rat
     
  19. rasmasyean thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #19
    I don’t think there will be less blue collar jobs, but just that the definition will change a bit. Much of the automobile is made by robots today anyway, and with Japan and South Korea gaining even more ground in this arena while the US lost its lead in the ‘80’s and never bounced. Though the US seems to currently lead in “emerging service robots” with the military spring-offs as I mentioned might help in this arena.

    There will still be “manual labor” jobs out there in the high tech industry just like when the concept of automobile was considered “high tech” at one point in history. Just because a few Ph.D.s operate the “carbon nanotube furnace”, that doesn’t mean that once it’s produced, end-products move on to the customers themselves. As a matter of fact this will generate even more “low-tech” jobs than advancement of IT, because these involve mostly physical products (some can be really huge) rather than being in large part data and tiny chips that keep getting smaller and more integrated. But even chips by the millions takes up its fair share of cargo footprint.

    I’m not so sure about the world’s energy shortage problem. I’ve always questioned the high price of oil that sprung this propaganda because it increased greatly disproportionate to the actually demand. Of course in hindsight it looks more like a speculative bubble now. If you look at it from 2001 to peak...at most 20% increase in demand resulted in an at least %700 increase in price! ROFL!

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    I suspect it has more to do with power players manipulating the markets and exaggerating the issue. Plus, even if so, there is oil out there, it just needs a little bit of time to be dug up. Iraq is stabilizing and I’m sure that will help keep oil prices down. I'm sure that country is in for it's own long delayed boom. Just hopefully they spend more on other things besides US weapons...although this wouldn't be so bad for NA. :eek: If not, time for more digging…which would actually create jobs too.
     
  20. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #20
    Oil is priced on the margin. A very small change in demand or supply will cause a large swing in price.

    I suggest you hunt up "Matt Simmons" via Google. First, check out his credentials. Then, note what he has to say about the world oil supply, and the decline of output from existing fields. (The declines are common knowledge.)

    Something we also know as fact is that we're not finding new oil at anywhere near the rate the present oilfields are declining in output. We also know that at prices anywhere below $50 to $60 per barrel, deepwater offshore efforts won't be made, and alternate sources such as tar sands and oil shale won't be developed. Right now, some $40 billion worth of projects are on hold.

    That "World Energy Consumption" chart shows oil's usage rising from roughly 140 quadrillion BTU now to 250 quadrillion BTU in 2030. That means going from roughly 85 million bbl/day to roughly 152 million bbl/day. Ain't gonna happen.

    We're straining a gut trying to stay at 85 million bbl/day of output. How are we gonna get to that projected use rate for 2010, or about 109 million bbl/day? No way, Jose. Add 24 million bbl/day in just a year or so? Pipe dream. Acid trip.
     
  21. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #21
    I would agree if we're still using today's technology to extract crude oil. But there are these wildcards here:

    1. The extraction of oil from the continental shelf of every ocean (we've only touched a very small portion of the world's potential offshore oil resources).
    2. The extraction of oil from oil shale and oil tar sands (there's enough oil in oil shale and tar sands in North America to equal way more than the known proven reserves in the Persian Gulf).
    3. The very likely possibility of producing diesel fuel, heating oil, gasoline and kerosene (e.g., jet fuel) from renewable biomass sources such as oil-laden algae and cellulosic enzyme processing of plant matter.
    4. The very likely possibility that within 30 years a huge fraction of the world's energy production will come from gigantic solar farms, large scale wind turbine installations, and tidal power. By then, battery technology will be good enough that personal vehicles will be battery-powered with ranges of 400 km (248 miles) or more and recharge times measured in 10-15 minutes from a commercial charging station.
     
  22. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #22
    S.G.18, you're #1 notion has a couple of problems. In U.S. waters, most of those areas are legislatively off-limits. And, by and large from what I've read, oil in quantity is not all that much in the near-offshore.

    Oil shale and tar sands need beaucoup water in the refining process. Oil shale is in a desert area, and the tar sands are in a generally water-short area. Aside from water itself as a resource, the energy balance of Energy Return On Energy Input (EROEI) is poor.

    Digressing a moment to EROEI: Onland wells had an historical rate of about 100:1. That is, you get 100 barrel's worth of energy from output oil for every one barrel's worth of energy input. Nearshore wells fall to around 30:1, and deepwater offshore wells are about 7:1 and in cases like those of the discovery off Brazil's coast, possibly as low as 4:1.

    As for biomass, show me what sort of acreage and volume will provide the equivalent of today's 85 milion bbl/day production. Or even half of that.

    Battery-powered electric cars are a very good idea, given the apparent breakthroughs in battery technology. I just hope the timeframe is a whole bunch less than thirty years, though. And they still have to work on scaling up for heavy work, such as trucks, trains, farm and earthwork equipment and such.

    The summary is that all of these alternatives ideas help. But the vast quantities of electricity needed along with the vast quantities of oil? We're quickly running out of time, and we've already run out of money.
     
  23. mysterytramp macrumors 65816

    mysterytramp

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #23
    What's the deal with the Bakken oil field? Is it hokum or is there really crude under there?

    mt
     
  24. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #24
    The Bakken is an extensive field with a rather large quantity, in total. A problem is that it's "sour" crude and rather thick. Low production per well.

    The keys to oil production are the "Three Ps": Porosity, Permeability and Pressure. Porosity has to do with the amount of oil in some volume of material. Permeabilty has to do with the rate of travel through the formation. Pressure is what drives the oil to the well. The Bakken is apparently rather low in all three.

    As comparison: Some Saudi wells have produced over 20,000 bbl/day per well. The Chevron Jack #6 in a mile of water in the Gulf of Mexico is expected to produce some 4,000 bbl/day from each of its fourteen production wells.

    Bakken wells are likely to be in the 50 to 100 bbl/day production range.

    'Rat
     
  25. rasmasyean thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #25
    That's pretty consistent with the US oil policies of the past actually. To sum it up...dry up everyone else's oil wells first and in the end...they will depend on US...that is, if any extra can be spared! :D It's the national long-term business strategy kept secret from the public...dontcha know?! :p
     

Share This Page