When gas hits $10 / gallon, we're totally [censored]

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, my original comment was directed to the fact that my confidence in 95% of the participants in this forum to truly comprehend the papers at mises.org are about what your confidence would be in their ability to truly comprehend the papers at physicstoday.org.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, mises.org is incredibly transparent and accessible.

[Felz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have any ideas on how to deal with this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no solutions...

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're looking for some solutions I would recommend www.mises.org .

[/ QUOTE ]

When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Truly excellent!

[Felz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, my original comment was directed to the fact that my confidence in 95% of the participants in this forum to truly comprehend the papers at mises.org are about what your confidence would be in their ability to truly comprehend the papers at physicstoday.org.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, mises.org is incredibly transparent and accessible.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't change the fact that maybe 95% of this forum lack basic understanding in economic theory.

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, my original comment was directed to the fact that my confidence in 95% of the participants in this forum to truly comprehend the papers at mises.org are about what your confidence would be in their ability to truly comprehend the papers at physicstoday.org.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, mises.org is incredibly transparent and accessible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Either you are in the 5% or you are incredibly naive and arrogant. Why don't you whip up a quick summary of Austrian Business Cycle Theories in the Reviews of the Federal Reserve System, including an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the paper. Or, I'll give you a choice, you could also do An Empirical Examination of Austrian Business Cycle Theory. And have it back on the board within two hours of reading this.

The quality of your work will determine which group you belong in. If you are in the 5%, I'll tip my hat. But the other result will be the expected one.

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, my original comment was directed to the fact that my confidence in 95% of the participants in this forum to truly comprehend the papers at mises.org are about what your confidence would be in their ability to truly comprehend the papers at physicstoday.org.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, mises.org is incredibly transparent and accessible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Either you are in the 5% or you are incredibly naive and arrogant. Why don't you whip up a quick summary of Austrian Business Cycle Theories in the Reviews of the Federal Reserve System, including an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the paper. Or, I'll give you a choice, you could also do An Empirical Examination of Austrian Business Cycle Theory. And have it back on the board within two hours of reading this.

The quality of your work will determine which group you belong in. If you are in the 5%, I'll tip my hat. But the other result will be the expected one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you asking me to repeat what is on the mises.org website in order to show that it's transparent? Just go read it. There's a lot of material there, but if you're too lazy to read it don't label is "not understandable".

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you asking me to repeat what is on the mises.org website in order to show that it's transparent? Just go read it. There's a lot of material there, but if you're too lazy to read it don't label is "not understandable".

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice cop out. Typical.

[Richard Tanner]

I know this thread became an AC/State war a while ago, but someone above posted the correct answer. We'll never see $10/gal gas (not considering inflation).

Synthetic fuels cost a little over $5/gal (working on finding the source I read for that) so once the price gets that high, money will likely shift towards creating those fuels (note here: the start-up costs are high, so it takes some time to make the shift).

The answer obviously are alt. fuels. Fuel cell, nuclear (not for cars certainly), and the like will remove the need for oil. Now if there were only some way to pump that money we give/return to oil companies into other fields of fuel research we could get there in ~10 years. Anyone? Anyone at all.

Cody

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you asking me to repeat what is on the mises.org website in order to show that it's transparent? Just go read it. There's a lot of material there, but if you're too lazy to read it don't label is "not understandable".

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice cop out. Typical.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? You can't ask somebody to summarize an entire field and then say "Well, if you don't summarize it for me then you obviously don't know what you're talking about". You can't summarize any rich area of arts, science, economics, whatever in a few pages. By your logic, nobody could suffiently understand anything!

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you asking me to repeat what is on the mises.org website in order to show that it's transparent? Just go read it. There's a lot of material there, but if you're too lazy to read it don't label is "not understandable".

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice cop out. Typical.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? You can't ask somebody to summarize an entire field and then say "Well, if you don't summarize it for me then you obviously don't know what you're talking about". You can't summarize any rich area of arts, science, economics, whatever in a few pages. By your logic, nobody could suffiently understand anything!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not asking you to summarize the entire field, just one paper at mises.org. Just search for the ones I listed, pick one, and churn it out. They're fairly narrow, so it should be easy for a genius like you. Show us what you've got.

[AzDesertRat]

I look forward to that day--no more [censored] SUV's on the road.