Thanks, glad you liked the post!
Regarding your question about my stance that a “collapse of the global economy… isn’t going to happen”, you made me realise that perhaps I should have fleshed that out a bit more.
For starters, when reading the arguments behind thoughts of fast vs. slow collapse (“led” primarily by Bardi and Greer, respectively), they at times both seem to make sense. “Well which one is it then?” I’ve asked myself, supposing one can even know.
Although it’s not a direct answer of whether or not a fast collapse can happen, one argument of Greer’s that has stuck with me is the notion that even if a rather fast collapse of the global economy did occur, wouldn’t the powers-that-be follow that up by doing whatever they could do to re-establish things rather than sit on their laurels and do nothing? That is, if it were a matter of flicking a few switches back on, continuing with the extend and pretend games, and triage-ing the poor people and nations with more austerity, wouldn’t they do that? And wouldn’t the gullible continue to buy the facade being sold and do what they could do re-start things?
Now, if we were so “lucky” as to get a large solar flare that knocked out a large chunk of the planet’s infrastructure, or even “better” a massive volcanic eruption that decimated the entire planet’s agricultural harvests for several years on end, then sure, the global economy could very well collapse and not be able to pick up to a level close to it previous state.
But if it’s a matter of human error and hubris… I don’t know. It’d be “nice”, but I can’t see why all those “ingenious” people out there wouldn’t pick it all up again, supposing that the great majority of things weren’t actually physically damaged.
Although come to think of it, I’m guessing that there are quite a few “Monkey Wrench Gangs” out there biding their time and waiting for the opportunity to make sure that things couldn’t pick up again. Could that be a large enough factor? I couldn’t say either way.