Deflation is a concept based on the money supply, as it chases goods and
services.
If the money supply is constant and the goods and services chased increase,
prices deflate. If the money supply is constant and the goods and services
decrease, prices inflate.
If you change the money supply (which happens today) any alternative is
possible, so even with increasing goods and services, inflation can happen
if the money supply is increased enough. The real problem today with the
money supply is the slow down in the velocity of money which in effect
changes the supply, decreasing it. The risk adjusted return today (seen as
very poor) is causing a significant reduction in the money supply and
productivity.
The important thing is productivity, how many goods and services can be
produced with the same effort, cold fusion will take many of the limiters
off productivity. Of course part of our problem today is the real lack of
need of human effort which will simply become worse with cold fusion. Since
we want to give money to people for their effort, when it isn't needed one
has to wonder how we will allocate money to them (and thus their ability to
participate in the allocation of the productivity).
But by far the biggest impact today of cold fusion would be to change the
concept of risk adjusted return. If you think things are going to improve,
you are less risk averse, spend and invest more often and in effect increase
the velocity of the money supply. This stimulates productivity throughout
the economy decreases the possibility of a deflationary spiral and
recession/depression.
In any event, the current notion of austerity is nonsense and is tied to a
tired and outdated concept that money is real or has some intrinsic real
value which it doesn't. Austerity = Stupidity and I think every so often we
as a society have to go through stretches of it before we remember that
basic truth.
Ransom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry Veeder" <hveeder...@gmail.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Migrant Workers in China Face Competition from Robots
Long term deflation?
Harry
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:23 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net>
wrote:
Alain wrote:
“since energy is $5-7Tn and GDP is $70Tn, the potential saving on energy
is
around 10%”
“maybe I miss the point?”
Did you consider the following???
Energy is to economies as physics is to science… it is FUNDAMENTAL, and
everything is built on top of it. A significant change to a fundamental
will propagate to anything built using that fundamental.
*If* LENR is able to deliver very cheap energy, then the cost of ALL
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES will also go down… manufacturing requires ENERGY,
moving those manufactured products to the end consumer (i.e.,
transportation) requires ENERGY (gas/diesel). If competition is allowed
to
take its course, the cost of nearly everything will come down. But the
ramifications of this are much more complex, and the reality of how this
would affect different aspects of life are hard to predict… my attitude at
this point is that much disruption will happen in the short term, but long
term the average person will be much better off… we are the most adaptable
species on the planet, and we will adapt; economies will adapt; financial
markets will adapt…
-Mark
From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com [mailto:alain.coetm...@gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Alain Sepeda
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 8:02 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Migrant Workers in China Face Competition from Robots
just to guive data
I've made some quick computation
http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=27&p=1139#p1139
since energy is $5-7Tn and GDP is $70Tn, the potential saving on energy is
around 10%,
that you can interpret as productivity increase.
The replacement of world energy source is estimated around 15% of GDP,
that
can easily be self-financed by the saving.
Energy is not free, but few maintenance, ridiculous matter, and some
investment.
It will be important shock, but not so huge. at most 10%
of course you can expect that the technology will become even cheaper, but
even if LENR get to zero, the turbines, cooling and alike will stay as
expensive (and I have under estimated their cost).
Some gain might came from the side-effect of LENR, like fewer pollution,
longer autonomy, sociological consequence of easier access to food, water,
health, heat... maybe is it there the biggest potential of productivity
gain.
Now I'm less enthusiast, yet it will very good, energy does not seems to
be
so important... 10% only.
maybe I miss the point?
