This is why people are ignorant about economics

[Little John]

SS I'm curious to know whether your degree course includes modules on the history of economics?
Such as what did Adam Smith actually write about markets, why there have always been bubbles followed by busts, etc.
This appears to be lacking in the thought process of mainstream economists (although so does even the slightest hint of critical analysis)

RB the history of economics is covered but not as a specific module AFAIK, however the course is under revision (I'm not starting until next year). The Wealth of Nations is on the reading list as is Small is Beautiful.

Your last sentence sums up my reasons for studying the subject in a nutshell.
The other thing that is sadly lacking is an appreciation of the dangers of information assymmetry in a perceived Free Market. I think that and your statement go a long way to explaining the World since 2008.

The problem with informational symmetry, of course, is that no-one gets to make a profit....

And we can't have that, now, can we.....

In other words, profit requires that someone lose in order for someone to win and the only way that happens is if there are asymmetries in the market.

The only way the above asymmetries have not led to total economic and political disaster before now (though, there have been some pretty close shaves, all the same) is because, until now, much of the loss was born by the earth itself in terms of giving up it's resources. Now that we have hit the resource buffers, though, the losers are going to be other market participants.

Or, to put it another way, for the last two hundred years of industrial growth some people have won a little and some people have won a lot. From now on in, for some people to win a lot, other people have to lose a lot.

[SleeperService]

I can't fault your reasoning Steve. What really tripped me into the subject was the statement that, as far as economists were concerned, Peak Oil is here now.

Production has levelled off but demand continues to grow. Result is that somebody doesn't get the supply they've had so somebody else can have it instead.

Growth is defined as an extra person benefiting NOT 100 suffering and 101 different people benefiting, this suggests something pretty bad will occur as the transition from oil supply to no oil may be literally overnight for some.

Interesting Times ahead.

[Little John]

I can't fault your reasoning Steve. What really tripped me into the subject was the statement that, as far as economists were concerned, Peak Oil is here now.

Production has levelled off but demand continues to grow. Result is that somebody doesn't get the supply they've had so somebody else can have it instead.

Growth is defined as an extra person benefiting NOT 100 suffering and 101 different people benefiting, this suggests something pretty bad will occur as the transition from oil supply to no oil may be literally overnight for some.

Interesting Times ahead.

This is a critical point you have made SS. Whilst, at the macro level, we can say that peak oil and its economic consequences will slowly come into view, this will be expressed at the micro level for many people in much more acute terms as "all-or-nothing" depending on which side of the economic divide they are.

Take a look at places like Greece or Spain. Take a look at the underlying price hikes in food that were the catalyst for much of the Arab-Spring uprisings. The extreme end of the economic fallout of peak oil is happening in those places now. The economic connection between peak oil and a poor, Greek urban peasant’s incapacity to feed himself and his family may seem obscure and indirect.

But, the connection is real nonetheless.

Coming to a country near you.