*Sustainability is more important that automation.*

Well Vanna, whilst the global population keeps increasing by
a quarter of a million extra people, every single day, you
won't have sustainability. Nature will just have to sort
it out with a big crash, given that as a species we are not
smart enough to address it. So be it.

*A series of draughts wiped them out, but the draughts weren’t so bad, it was the cost of pumping water.*

I'm assuming that you mean droughts here, rather then draughts.

The thing is, because your project did not work out, does not change
the fact that globally, manufacturing has and will continue to head
towards automation for the goods that we produce. That will affect
employment levels in manufacture and where those larger capital
investments are made. A small market like Australia will have a
much harder time to justify that sort of expenditure and globalisation
makes perfect sense in terms of using capital resources in the
most efficient way. Consumers benefit and we are all consumers.

Vanna & Yabbie, interesting discussion.
Way back when before computers in control systems I was there too.
However Vanna, industry will be changing but will be coming much
simpler. The very large corporations will gradually find that they
cannot cope with with complex systems and just in time will no longer
be possible.
The Ikea's will also be replaced by the local furniture maker.
The oil based glues may continue as the marginal costs would be small
but the lavish use of plastics will fade away.
Rising unemployment & lack of money will gradually reduce industrial
activity and the finance industry, as it is misnamed, will revert to
be more of a money minder.

Can the level of electronics needed by present day systems survive.
For a while, but if one critical material becomes unavailable the
whole internet and telecommunications systems could become unstable.

It is known as systemic collapse.
It is managing the coming long descent that politicians should be
engaged in, not worrying about minor problems like how warm it is
going to be in 50 or 100 years time. That will be the least of our worries.

Bazz,
I would agree.

Global Warming (or I think the latest speak is Climate Change) may or may not occur, but reduction of resources is continuously occuring.

I think Australia has seen enough loss of forests, loss of topsoil, loss of wildlife, loss of coastal habitats, loss of river systems etc, and most of this is because of a desire for continuous growth, which is considered a good.

Sustainablity is now more important than prices and increasing profits.

Yes indeed Vanna.
We can expect in the next 2 to 4 years that unemployment will rise
significantly and credit supply and governement largess will dry up.
Oil prices will be such that the economy will be unable to generate
enough cash to do other than keep running in the one place let alone
undertake new infrastructure.
I am afraid because the politicians would not listen we have left it
too late to undertake some really useful infrastructure.

I saw a reference that the coalition is studying whether it would be
possible to turn Northern Australia into a food bowl for Asia.
They were looking for projects for damns to cover the dry season.

Unfortunately they are too late, we will not have the money to do it.
By 5 years they may have trouble paying pensions.

If they want to stretch the time of reckoning out they should have
started a program of converting cars and trucks to natural gas 10 yrs ago.
There is just not enough time to get all the service stations setup
and the pipelines enlarged.

We need to duplicate the interstate rail lines and electrify them
by yesterday at the latest. The way it is going we will not be able to
afford the rails, let alone the power supply.
In thirty years time we will have a very poor electricity supply so
much so that buildings over three or four floors will be redundant.
The CBD of Sydney and Melbourne will be basically a wasteland.
I don't think Coles & Woolies will be operational, except perhaps as
a space for farmer's market stalls.
Actually thinking about that it might be good idea for now, hi !

Just finished reading James Kunstler's The Long Emergency.
He is certainly either a pessimist or realist, I can't decide which
but everyone should read it and at least have an idea of what could be.

Bazz
Well yes, I have heard of the theory of what has been done in recent decades to increase profits.

First the wrecking of the trade union movements in many countries so as to reduce worker’s wages as much as possible.

Profits increased but plateaued.

So then globalisation, which meant items could be produced cheaply in one country, and then sold for much higher prices in another (eg certain brands of sports shoes).

Profits increased but plateaued.

So then easy credit was tried, with the hope of increasing profits again, and the banks were to be bailed out by the public if they went bust.

The 1st GFC was the result, with another to probably follow.

But throughout resources are being continuously depleted.