Looks like you're having a ball there Uncle Col!

Dear Dagget...

Col was actually fairly close in his assessment of the interaction between you blokes.
'Small minded' is probably not my choice of words.. more preferable would be 'limited vision'.. but thats Col, you should know this by now. Don't take it too personally, just roll with the punches and come back with a counter argument.

Annnnyway.. my point in all this discussion is a bit different.
-Mining...fine.

I'm more concerned with what is often done in order to SELL the stuff in terms of 'shareholder value' rather than true national interest.
I consider "national" interest to be as follows:

A Sales strategy which does NOT sacrifice other local industries on the alter of the nth degree of financial return for shareholders.

A simple example is: Lets say ESSO locks up a contract with the Chinese to sell them LPG at such and such a price, which has been negotiated vigorously by the Chinese to get the lowwwest possible price. Ok..so far so good, BUT.. if Esso THEN say "Hey.. we need to get a better return on this.. lets CRANK UP the price of DOMESTIC sales to make up for what we will NOT get from the Chinese !

AAAAH.. now that.... is where shareholder value has transgressed against NATIONAL interest.

The same applies to Mining output..and the deals made by government and private enterprise which see the evaporation of the Slavery Tax (tarrifs) which protect local industry from unfair, unjust and slave based competition.

Why is this important ? Simple, if you kill a blokes livelihood and his family by your own selfishness, don't be surprised if he comes back and gives you a kick in the shins without mercy later on. We reap.....what we sow. Just because we seem to be getting away with something after we do it, it doesn't mean we will continue to do so forever. Sadaam Hussien being a very contemporary example.

"Do for others as you would have THEM do for you"

David BOAZ “Share holder interest: National Interest”

That is a bit of a furfy David.

I know what a “share holder interest” is, being one (share holder, that is). I am stuffed if I know what you mean by “National Interest” in any context which it could conflict with “share holders interest”, except where the share-holder is an ex-national, not subject to the regulatory environment enshrined in national statute.

Your attempts to quantify/qualify it do not help

Re “A Sales strategy which does NOT sacrifice other local industries on the alter of the nth degree of financial return for shareholders.”

Since “other local industries” are also owned by shareholders, such an action would be to the detriment of shareholders as well as the “national interest”.

If you are talking about selling cheaper overseas than locally, such an action risks Dept of Customs and Excise trading sanctions (one reason why we have government, as arbiter and regulator of commerce).
The loss of the local market, assuming the local market is not a monopoly will be taken up by other suppliers.

If it is a monopoly, the government should step in and break it up, as enshrined, in US, in the Sherman Anti-Trust Acts, and as used by US Supreme Court to break , guess who, “ESSO” in 1911.

We already have, in Australia, the necessary statutes and processes to avoid “conflicts of National versus Shareholder Interest” of the context you speak.

Rainier “Looks like you're having a ball there Uncle Col!”

Nothing like “unmasking” the fallacies, Rainier.

Enjoying the post Christmas euphoria.

Following on from your comment, I would call it a “un-Masked Ball”

(Note happy to be included in your extended family)

I was just reading on one of daggett's links about Cuba. I can't say I aspire to returning to using oxen to plough my fields. Perhaps someone could tell me the EROI ratio for them. Also I'm a bit attached to my air conditioning, and fridge because it's too far to walk to town from my place for fresh food.(oh I forgot, I'd be growing it myself).
It is interesting that in organic systems bio-pesticides don't seem to count as pesticides despite their toxicity.
Ever wondered why Cuba has so many doctors? No better ticket into any other country in the world perhaps.
Perhaps someone could shed light on why so many Cuban inhabitants go to so much trouble to leave if things at home are so rosy.

rojo,

The Cubans had no choice but to use non-mechanised means to farm their crops.

Our own oil reserves will be exhusted in 6 years time, if something else is not found before then, after which we will be totally dependent upon imported oil and will have to vie with the likes of China and India in attempting to procure our share of a global supply of oil that most oil geologists believe will be diminishing by then.

If Howard doesn't succeed in selling the rest of our gas reserves off overseas, this might help, but gas is not nearly as convenient a form of energyas is oil. And coal liquefaction can help, but only by worsening global warming and overall pollution levels.

Sooner, rather than later, we may be faced with no choice but to return to non-mechanised forms of agriculture, as the Cubans are now doing.

I suggest you need to re-read my earlier post in which I discussed the diminishing EROI figures of oil and the low EROI values of its alternatives, then, perhaps, follow the link to read Alice Friedemann's article "Peak Oil and the Preservation of Knowledge" at http://www.energybulletin.net/18978.html

Then you may care to tell us why you think she is wrong.