Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Ivo_B on June 20, 2019, 01:40:34 pm
-
.. around my property to spy and infringe my privacy, I pull out my rifle and shoot it out of the air.
What is exactly the issue above Hormuz?
:o :o
-
What if the drone shoots you first?
-
Hormuz is a major shipping route and something like 20% of the worlds' oil shipments goes through the straight. Disrupting the straight would have major effects on the price of oil, which would then raise the cost of energy and everything else. It could also be damaging to the world economy.
This is exactly what Iran is doing by placing water mines in the straight. Given the recent sinking of one tanker and the severe damage to another, the situation needs be a monitored, which is exactly what the drone was doing.
The mines themselves was a pretty serious act. Shooting down drones sent there to make sure the straight remains safe escalates things quite dramatically and could point to the fact that Iran is continuing nefarious actions in the straight.
PS, with this being said, I am not implying that we should be involved, especially considering both tankers where not USA owned. However, this is still a serious action.
I should also add that your analogy is not really a good one. A better one would be, you are a arsonist that has committed a few crimes in your community. The police eventually start to realize your are the person responsible and gather enough evidence to obtain a search warrant. Prior to going onto your property, they fly a drone over a neighboring property and the drone never actually hoovers over your property. (The straight is not technically part of Iran, or at least it is shared between Iran and Omen.) You then shoot this drone down anyway. The police would interoperate this as a fairly serious action.
-
Ivo,
1. Happy to see there are trigger-happy cowboys in Belgium too ;)
2. The issue is: was the drone inside the international air space or did it violate Iranian air space.
-
Ivo,
1. Happy to see there are trigger-happy cowboys in Belgium too ;)
2. The issue is: was the drone inside the international air space or did it violate Iranian air space.
Was this ever answered?
-
Was this ever answered?
Yes, predictably. We say in, they say out.
-
And what else is new?
-
I should also add that your analogy is not really a good one. A better one would be, you are a arsonist that has committed a few crimes in your community. The police eventually start to realize your are the person responsible and gather enough evidence to obtain a search warrant. Prior to going onto your property, they fly a drone over a neighboring property and the drone never actually hoovers over your property. (The straight is not technically part of Iran, or at least it is shared between Iran and Omen.) You then shoot this drone down anyway. The police would interoperate this as a fairly serious action.
Is this a matter of perception? And why should the US vision be considered as ‘the law’ or ‘’the police’?
-
Ivo,
1. Happy to see there are trigger-happy cowboys in Belgium too ;)
2. The issue is: was the drone inside the international air space or did it violate Iranian air space.
1: I could be considered as a Cowboy, but I ‘m not trigger happy. Need some violation to go in that state of mind.
2: it was surely not flying above US territory. ::) ::)
-
More importantly, should we buy oil stocks now? Or rather Raytheon?
-
My cheery little thoughts on this:
We don't know who attacked the two oil tankers on June 13th, or what they used. Personnel on board reported a drone attack, and outsiders blamed limpet mines.
Who did what to whom is really a little inconsequential.
The real issue is that the closure of the the Strait of Hormuz would be catastrophic for the world economy.
Most economies are based on the twin ponzi schemes of economic growth and population increase. We know both can't continue indefinitely. The question is how well we will manage a slow deflation of our economic bubbles. Closing the Strait would effectively be sticking a pin in them. Iran doesn't have to physically close the Strait. Just the threat to sink any ship travelling through there would be enough to drive insurance premiums up to the point where shipping through there simply stops.
If you live in a country that relies on imported oil to make your economy work, there comes a point where economic activity stops if the price goes too high. The resulting stock market crash will wipe out your pension schemes (check if your pension scheme relies on the stock market. I shifted mine out away from that some years ago). What will happen to your population and economy when pensioners have no income, all service jobs disappear and food distribution systems crash?
Hint: when the Soviet Union dissolved most people without a secure job perished.
Added to the mix is the likelihood that China and Russia won't want to see Iran fail. Who knows.
-
.. around my property to spy and infringe my privacy, I pull out my rifle and shoot it out of the air.
I didn't know that in Belgium individual property includes the airspace
-
More importantly, should we buy oil stocks now? Or rather Raytheon?
With a republican in the White House, I think Raytheon would always be a wise purchase.
-
My cheery little thoughts on this:
We don't know who attacked the two oil tankers on June 13th, or what they used. Personnel on board reported a drone attack, and outsiders blamed limpet mines.
Who did what to whom is really a little inconsequential.
The real issue is that the closure of the the Strait of Hormuz would be catastrophic for the world economy.
Most economies are based on the twin ponzi schemes of economic growth and population increase. We know both can't continue indefinitely. The question is how well we will manage a slow deflation of our economic bubbles.
Closing the Strait would effectively be sticking a pin in them. Iran doesn't have to physically close the Strait. Just the threat to sink any ship travelling through there would be enough to drive insurance premiums up to the point where shipping through there simply stops.
If you live in a country that relies on imported oil to make your economy work, there comes a point where economic activity stops if the price goes too high. The resulting stock market crash will wipe out your pension schemes (check if your pension scheme relies on the stock market. I shifted mine out away from that some years ago). What will happen to your population and economy when pensioners have no income, all service jobs disappear and food distribution systems crash?
Hint: when the Soviet Union dissolved most people without a secure job perished.
Added to the mix is the likelihood that China and Russia won't want to see Iran fail. Who knows.
I don't think the effect of population growth on an economy is that cut and dry.
Although it is true that current trades are pointing to some countries having decreases in population, this is mainly due to the industrialization of those countries and the mass population moving into cities, which are safer. Since cities are generally safer and the amount of manual labor required to survive in a city is significantly less than in a country side dependent on subsistence farming, there is less of a need to have many children. Population growth is certainly going to slow due to this.
However, although the decrease in the speed of population growth will certainly effect GDP, perhaps even lowering, a couple of things need to be first taken into account before one can assume this would be negative. First, having a smaller GDP with a smaller population does not necessarily mean that the future population will be poorer per capita. It could be that the population decreases at a faster rate then the GDP, which would have the effect of increasing per capita GDP. Second, since cities are safer, and less physical energy and time is required to sustain yourself, generally speaking people growing up in cities (or at least in industrial economies) tend to be more productive. Increase in available energy (other then physical) is certainly a reason for this, but also less time spent on farming gives people more time for study and advancement of skills. So, with population decreases due to industrialization, the average person will actually become more productive, leading to an increase in per capita GDP as well.
So, if the population does decrease, this does not mean it will effect the economy in a negative way. Sure, maybe total GDP will decrease, but more then likely per capita GDP will continue to increase.
Now, I would agree that pension plans based upon future retirees paying in for current retirees to take (like traditional union pensions and social security) are indeed based upon the idea that the next generation will always be slightly larger then the previous one. They can only work if this is the case. So for those of you depending on traditional pensions or SS, you're pretty screwed if the population starts to decrease or even stagnant.
-
Hello Joe.
I agree with you on the whole. There are always a lot of ifs and buts that can't be put into a succinct post.
Here's what I had in mind.
There are lots of examples where towns gracefully collapse over time. Those who stay usually die of old age and their empty houses are demolished. Services are slowly shut down and eventually the few people remaining find themselves living in the countryside.
But I'm guessing things are different in a time when expansionary bubbles collapse. If a country has low private debt levels (meaning low borrowings on property in particular), rent controls, the willingness to demolish dilapidated houses, a functioning police force and some form of social welfare, I see no reason why a population contraction couldn't be managed. Especially if fairly cheap energy is available. Things may even improve, as you say.
If the opposite is true, especially if that country has used a demographic expansion to support a credit bubble and perhaps a brain drain from other parts of the world, a population decline may spell trouble in many cities.
Housing then becomes a buyers' market. Those with not enough equity are forced out as their total mortgage becomes more than the property is worth. Many renting are forced out as their incomes vaporise. As more places becomes empty and dilapidated, those who have money leave.
A cascading pattern is entered. Without the money to support infrastructure, a city will go into terminal decline and crime and violence skyrocket. Businesses then relocate, often overseas. If they can, those left often leave not just the city but also the country for good. Or, sadly, suicide. Drug addiction is a favourite. We're already seeing that.
-
I didn't know that in Belgium individual property includes the airspace
No, but privacy means something.
-
I agree about the economical importance of Hormuz.
That’s what make the straight also interesting for Iran. Iran peoples are heavenly suffering under the economical embargo against Iran. They believe (correct or not) to be mistreated by the embargo and the unilateral withdrawal out of the nuclear pact by the US.
It’s a rat in the corner. If you don’t want to get bitten, give it a way out or smash it. The latter, in case of a nation is tried a few times in history, not something to repeat, imo.
It’s a highly ignitable situation, and the cause is not necessarily Iran?
-
.. around my property to spy and infringe my privacy, I pull out my rifle and shoot it out of the air.
What is exactly the issue above Hormuz?
:o :o
I doubt that you'll shoot down that drone with a rifle (RQ-4A Global Hawk )
Anyway in the civilized word you are not allowed to just shoot into the air, the stray bullets come always down and in Europe there are lots of people on the ground that could be hit
The police would pay you a visit, I guess.
Not to speak of a 40m wingspan monster crashing into Brussels 8)
-
Why assume that the city is safer than the countryside? Why assume either is?
You get a rural idiot with straw hanging out of his ear and a carving knife in his hand as you get a metropolitan one wearing gang fashions with a gun inside his waistband.
It's not so much geography as low mentality.
Anyway, if dystopia accelerates, religion will win out, and we already know which groups breed the most.
Buy that sailing yacht tomorrow when the prices go down.
-
I doubt that you'll shoot down that drone with a rifle (RQ-4A Global Hawk )
Anyway in the civilized word you are not allowed to just shoot into the air, the stray bullets come always down and in Europe there are lots of people on the ground that could be hit
The police would pay you a visit, I guess.
Not to speak of a 40m wingspan monster crashing into Brussels 8)
Brussels is a hell hole anyway. 😬
Of course it is not allowed and very wise to shoot in the air over crowded land.
Flying a drone in the neighborhood of my swimming pool to spy on my daughter is also not allowed and if the drone operator is a known sex crime récidiviste, maybe the police would be happy to get that drone out of the air.
But but, I’m only checking if nobody is snoring coke around the pool....
🙄
Yeah right.
-
Why assume that the city is safer than the countryside? Why assume either is?
You get a rural idiot with straw hanging out of his ear and a carving knife in his hand as you get a metropolitan one wearing gang fashions with a gun inside his waistband.
It's not so much geography as low mentality.
Anyway, if dystopia accelerates, religion will win out, and we already know which groups breed the most.
Buy that sailing yacht tomorrow when the prices go down.
To late.
-
Brussels is a hell hole anyway. 😬
Of course it is not allowed and very wise to shoot in the air over crowded land.
Flying a drone in the neighborhood of my swimming pool to spy on my daughter is also not allowed and if the drone operator is a known sex crime récidiviste, maybe the police would be happy to get that drone out of the air.
But but, I’m only checking if nobody is snoring coke around the pool....
🙄
Yeah right.
Ivo, Ivo! There is no such thing anymore! Those people are all just folks who are different, and must be embraced and celebrated for their differences! It's the New Way: it's the all-encompassing, compassionate way to inclusive universal happiness.
As Elvis sang: don't be cruel!
Meanwhile, back in the barracks...
-
Hello Joe.
I agree with you on the whole. There are always a lot of ifs and buts that can't be put into a succinct post.
Here's what I had in mind.
There are lots of examples where towns gracefully collapse over time. Those who stay usually die of old age and their empty houses are demolished. Services are slowly shut down and eventually the few people remaining find themselves living in the countryside.
But I'm guessing things are different in a time when expansionary bubbles collapse. If a country has low private debt levels (meaning low borrowings on property in particular), rent controls, the willingness to demolish dilapidated houses, a functioning police force and some form of social welfare, I see no reason why a population contraction couldn't be managed. Especially if fairly cheap energy is available. Things may even improve, as you say.
If the opposite is true, especially if that country has used a demographic expansion to support a credit bubble and perhaps a brain drain from other parts of the world, a population decline may spell trouble in many cities.
Housing then becomes a buyers' market. Those with not enough equity are forced out as their total mortgage becomes more than the property is worth. Many renting are forced out as their incomes vaporise. As more places becomes empty and dilapidated, those who have money leave.
A cascading pattern is entered. Without the money to support infrastructure, a city will go into terminal decline and crime and violence skyrocket. Businesses then relocate, often overseas. If they can, those left often leave not just the city but also the country for good. Or, sadly, suicide. Drug addiction is a favourite. We're already seeing that.
Good point on the decrease in the value of property having an effect on the geography.
Also, although an initial recession would have the disadvantage of many businesses moving, the decrease in property value and the cost of doing business overall would provide a great opportunity for those who are left. Look at Detroit; interesting things are happening there even thought the property is kind of worthless (or was).
As the old saying goes, "When there is blood on the streets, buy property!"
-
Well I just got up to find the POTUS has said the Iranians shot down the drone by mistake, and anyway there was no one on board. So nothing to see here folks.
My guess is enough of his advisors read the confidential report on the economic and military results of a dust up with Iran, and made the appropriate collective response.
They soiled their underwear.
That's a relief. Hope things calm down.
-
Ivo, Ivo! There is no such thing anymore! Those people are all just folks who are different, and must be embraced and celebrated for their differences! It's the New Way: it's the all-encompassing, compassionate way to inclusive universal happiness.
As Elvis sang: don't be cruel!
Meanwhile, back in the barracks...
I guess I'm getting Old fashioned....