For most people are ignorant of the science of management, and many who are not, myopically disregard its applied principles for reasons of the expedience and convenience of their vested interest, as the GFC again reminded us.

That we require new paradigm and dynamics for developments such as renewable resources, and for balanced market regulation, we may readily observe management science comprehensively capable of delivering such outcomes.

The Levitt paper, Marketing Myopia, produced from Harvard in the mid 1980’s, has not diminished of its credibility and relevance to the successive events that share in common their economic malaise observed of recent economic eras.

For it is myopia, of vested interest, greed and indifference, such aspiration and associated self adulation, observed to continually fail and beset us, that the principles of scientific management are also able to assist us with remedying. We need to get with the program, everything else is observed incomprehensive.

Ngarmada wrote,
>I disagree the hub of manufacturing will soon return to the US and
>Europe as current energy resources recede.

Actually I did not say that. What I did say was that manufacture of products
will return to the US. Just as manufacture of products will return to Australia.

The point is long distance transport of products will become uneconomical.
In other words everything will become local. Globalisation will be
finished and I suspect that it will happen a lot quicker than we
might expect in normal circumstances.
Even within countries long distance transport will not be feasible
for many products including food.
If your appliance breaks down, you won't buy a new one, you will go
and see the local serviceman to get it repaired.
To buy a new table, you will go and see the local furniture maker.

This is the solution that apparently I had not expressed strongly enough.

It will not need masses of highly paid managers either !

Bazz, if you had a mass of high paid managers I doubt you would know how to utilise them. In fact it was not the status quo of cheque book management currently available, I identified as resourceful to the global issue we face. I clearly demonstrated, utilising the example of the GFC failure, such suggestion as prime example of aberrant notion. I further exemplified previous economic failures retaining similar aberration in common. I summarised the quality of management according to propriety of application to its scientific principles, as required.

If you were not ignorant of the science of management Bazz, you would comprehend such differentiation, for the only apparent prediction you are able to offer, ostensibly is a return to a ‘flintstone’ economy. Such notion may be observed simplistic when other evidence is observed.

For example, some years ago a large US vehicle manufacturer, developed, then trashed its electric car development, and is now redeveloping the technology. There is no better example of vested interest restraining development for the maximising of profit. That the development of such technology is observed advancing, with no obstructive physical restriction evident, suggests a dislocation with the premise of your prediction.

Hmmm am I arguing with a computer ?

James Cumes concluded:

"It is not yet absolutely too late; but we cannot afford to fritter away further time in purposeless pretences or kowtowing to the moneymen."

I remember Australian political commentators such as Jeremy Lee making the same predictions nearly 20 years ago. Since then I have watched his predictions come to pass... gradually so as not to stampede the herd, but steadily worsening our position nevertheless. Profitable publicly owned assets sold off, sucked into unnecessary wars against those who were not our enemies, our savings depleted by deliberate inflation, personal freedoms curtailed, working hours increased, whilst through good times and bad, banks keep reporting obscene profits and politicians keep doing very nicely.

The few people who have spoken out against the causes of our decline were not published by the mainstream media, and were largely ignored. The one person who did start to become noticed for advocating ideas opposing the existing system had her political career ruined when ALL the major political parties joined most of the mass media in condemning and ridiculing her. Pauline Hansen demonstrated the futility of trying to seriously reform the existing system by playing by its rules and laws.

James Cumes stopped short of advocating a popular uprising to rid ourselves of the corrupt political system we are saddled with, but if he had, he would not have been the first to say that revolution is now the only way of solving our political problems.

Perhaps there is an alternative for the small group of people who recognize and agree that our enemies are government, bankers, mass media, and Zionists. By forming an exclusive club for the purpose of developing and sharing strategies for escaping our enemies, perhaps we may avoid the downwards slide that the herd, through its inertia, seems sure to suffer.