Quote:


And, what problem would that be?

Quote:

1) Reducing the overall immigration intake and adjusting Public policy to ensure that the Total Australian population, begins to slowly Decline over time, not increase.

2) Commence measures to reduce our Overall Energy footprint, over time, as Energy is set (notwithstanding objections from Gizmo) to become scarce & more expensive, a lot more!

3) Undertake a complete review of all governments, government related bodies & their impacts on society. Included in these reviews, should be -
A simplification of Taxation.  
A disbanding of one arm of government, local councils.
A complete review of all Revenue & Expenditure.

An attempt, over time, to reign in Public Debt, without impacting the Publics disposal income, too radically, as seems to be what the Conservatives in the UK are about to try.

They might be a starting points of reference.

However, I should also say, that none of this will make much difference, if OZ does it, but the rest of the world continues trying to maintain the status quo!

Quote:


This would make the aging population issues worse, not better.

Quote:


Our energy footprint is one of the most meaningless measures available. Energy will get more expensive, at least in the short term, but it will never be scarce. It is how we get energy that matters, not how much we use.

Quote:


You still haven't provided any meaningfull numbers on this.

Quote:


Quote:


Then use another term, if you want. What I'm saying is that we will have to use less energy, here in OZ & Global!

And, I don't see anyway that Energy will not get more expensive, but also more scarce.
With the Global Population set to continue to increase for another 20-30 years and Oil production set to decline, in real terms, at around 4-8% on estimates I have seen and that are already coming thru, Energy will definitely be more scarce!

Btw, both Production & usage do matter!

The Lost Decade, U.S. Edition

If you have read Harry S. Dent's The Great Boom Ahead as well as the sequel The Great Depression Ahead, and still are not convinced of the critical importance of demographics on the economy and markets, then there's nothing I can say to convince you. Move on.

And if you haven't read them, please do yourself a favor and read them. Just discard the "commodities cycles", "presidential cycles", "yearly cycles" and so forth, and focus on demographics.

The earliest babyboomers are 55 years old now, well past their peak spending years and into their retirement savings period. The later boomers, in their late forties, would be entering their peak spending years; but the scares and scars of the 2008 crisis may have forced them to enter the saving phase earlier than usual. There are many reports indicating that boomers may have been hit harder by lay-offs, and have a harder time re-entering workforce due to their age. In addition to damaged or even destroyed home equity nest eggs, the risks on social security and Medicare have risen sharply due to the dismal state and future outlook of the federal deficit, especially for the late boomers.
In terms of housing, boomers may be forced to either forego the usual trade-up or even trade down.

The result is declining productivity, consumer spending and debt (deleveraging), and continued weak demand on housing. The decline will continue until circa 2016, followed by a small rebound of 2-3 years, then resume until the early 2020's. But it's hard to say whether the small rebound would manifest into the financial markets.

To make matters worse, Europe and Japan have entered the declining phase earlier and will be stuck in the glut longer.

Can governments save us all by money printing? Japan stands as a resounding answer of "NO" to this question. They've ramped up a huge pile of public debt, sucked up domestic savings, created a huge counter-productive bureaucracy, and nothing else. If it weren't for the extremely resilient private sector and domestic savings culture, Japan would've been in much worse shape today. I can't help wondering if it would've been much better if the government had not engaged in the futile deficit spending and the domestic savings had gone to the private sector.

If the above sounds familiar, it's because that's exactly what the US government has been trying to do. Except we won't have nearly as much domestic buying of the debt in relative terms. Uncle Sam's ability to borrow and print directly and singularly hinges on the dollar's reserve status. But the world has been actively looking for alternatives; the lunacy of some of the proposals only speaks to the desperation. How long can we count on the world's failure in this regard? Desperation is the best motivation. If the situation becomes grim enough, alternatives that sound lunatic today may appear more and more plausible.

The only hope is to create another asset bubble, or a series of them, with wide participation that last beyond 2025. A better Ponzi. BIC may be the only candidate big enough to support such a grand Ponzi. But how do we participate in that? Can they please be stupid enough to participate? Well, good luck with that.

Interestingly, Europe seems to have embarked on a very different approach to the same problem: austerity. Even the new Japanese prime minister seems to lean towards that direction. It's the only right thing to do, but it remains to be seen whether they can implement it because the short-term pain would be high. I'll write more about this later. But in any case, I don't see any political will in the US to follow suit.
Link -
http://seekingalpha.com/article/211418-the-lost-decade-u-s-edition?source=email
===============
A couple of observations -
1) How would Japan have gone, if the rest of the world had got sucked into this problem, at the same time as Japan did, 20 years ago?

2) Aust-erity will not fix the problems, it will only make it worse, we are steadily going down similar paths, to the 1929 Depression, we need to pull back and look at issues with a new perspective!

Quote:


Quote:


Actually, it does!

In the USA, the planets largest consummer of Energy, Oil is nearly twice as large, as the next two major Energy components (Natural Gas & Coal), that are currently in use and the remaining Energy sources, whilst the may expand, are currently minor.

That said, the following chart, which comes from the EIA, is of usage in the USA and whilst the mix in other countries will be variable, the Global mix is likely to be pretty close.  

If you are referring to what produces the most energy, then that is of course the sun, but solar technology is not currently at a point where it could replace Oil, Coal & NG and in a number of aspects, in may never do so.

Btw, both NG & Coal are both similar to Oil, in that they are finite resources, which have limits and those limits are not that much behind Oil!

If my assumptions prove to be correct, then I would see the following graph of New Housing in the USA continue its overall downwars trend, for some time to come.

The above graph comes from the following Seeking Alpha article -
http://seekingalpha.com/article/211524-housing-numbers-show-worst-data-ever-reco...






I would also suggest the following correlations, as food for thought -
1933 - 1983 (Birth rate starts to increase - Economy & Share markets start to rise)
1945 - 1995 (Birth rate goes into high gear - Economy takes off)
1956 - 2006 (Birth rate Peaks - Economy Peaks)
1964 - 2014 (End of Boomer Gen - ???)

Good luck, watch the Debt & hope for Innovations, because Energy has Peaked!