“Regardless, both economic theory and history suggest that the market is capable of adjusting

“Regardless, both economic theory and history suggest that the market is capable of adjusting, without major

crisis, to commodity depletion.” I am an historian. Economic theory (and the last 300 years) may suggest that

that the market is capable of adjusting. History does not. There is still no wood on Crete. China has suffered

centuries of famine again and again. NIKE Shox shoes still hasn’t recovered from over-irrigation in the Middle

Ages. Resources run out. My question to you is: What do you consider a major crisis? And I’m not talking about

Easter Island.

By “market” I meant an economic system consisting of (among other things) self-ownership, private property,

and a low-friction medium of exchange (money). None of your examples qualify. By “major crisis” I mean one

large enough to justify this debate.

—

Tjalf Boris Prößdorf writes:

…[T]he fuel efficiency of industrial plants is a function of money invested — with marginal increase in

efficiency costing increasing capital investment. Thus, at given fuel prices, economic efficiency over the

lifespan of the plant is to be balanced against technical efficiency. Again, dramatic increases in fuel prices

may be absorbed by the market as a whole, but may needlessly ruin those, who planned on less dramatic fuel

price increases. Planning on dramatic price increases however means constructing plants that cannot function

economically here and now, as capital investment will be too high. Therefore it seems to me, that your optimism

is not entirely founded.