http://dieoff.org/42Countries/42Countries.htm

Originally posted by Solo Inter
http://dieoff.org/42Countries/42Countries.htm

eh?

now that is useful information! :jambo:

lol :p

Um... that's how much they make, no references to IMPORTED oil. That's only how much is made in the country, which shows, actually, that it IS all about oil...:rolleyes: :crazyboy:

Originally posted by Hugo-45-Viana
Um... that's how much they make, no references to IMPORTED oil. That's only how much is made in the country, which shows, actually, that it IS all about oil...:rolleyes: :crazyboy:


yes....I was being sarcastic:)


C'mon Elder...its just a comparison of how much oil the top 42 producers have produced and their projected production.

wow Amazin!!
http://dieoff.org/42Countries/img28.gif

Originally posted by ShearerM4
wow Amazin!!
http://dieoff.org/42Countries/img28.gif

Yes...but don't forget to look the scale on the left...they differ from graph to graph.

Originally posted by Solo Inter
yes....I was being sarcastic:)


C'mon Elder...its just a comparison of how much oil the top 42 producers have produced and their projected production.

So let me guess.. you are saying because the graph for the USA shows a downward slope, that is the reason we went to war in Iraq? If so, it's getting old and nobody cares anymore!

We have plenty of oil here in the US, but we don't drill for it.

KNow what man...your "war for oil argument is getting old argument"...is f*cking getting old to me

I can't believe with all of your supposed insight....that you would be so f*cking naive to think and economics(wich means oil) has got absolutely nothing to do with the US's interest in the Middle East.


Yeah the US....and just about every other country except for Iraq, S A, and UAE.


As far as nobody caring...your about the only person on this forum (even alot hadcore conservatives will agree this war has little to do with WMD or civil rights) that is stupid enough to think oil has nothing to do with it.

Five companies dominate the world oil market. Four are based in the US and Britain: Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch-Shell (often described as a British-Dutch company), British Petroleum-Amoco, and Chevron-Texaco. (The fifth, TotalFinaElf, is sometimes described as a French-Italian company.) The US and Britain see regaining control over the Iraqi market, which they lost when the Iraqi government nationalized its oil industry in 1972, as key to maintaining their dominance over this critical economic resource.

Representatives of major US oil companies have been meeting with Iraqi opposition leaders. Ahmed Chalabi, leader of the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the US-funded umbrella opposition organization, told the Washington Post that “American companies will have a big shot at Iraqi oil.”

The Bush administration has close ties to the oil industry: both President Bush and Vice President Cheney worked in the oil business. Forty-one senior Bush administration officials were former oil companies executives or have substantial stock holdings or other financial ties to the industry.

Governments including Russia, China, and France have been negotiating with Iraq over plans to develop its oil fields once sanctions are lifted. A resolution of the current crisis through inspections, without a regime change, would allow these negotiations to go forward. This could be contrary to the interests of US oil companies. The Bush administration, in other words, with its extremely close ties to the US oil industry, has an interest in regime change that is not related to concerns over Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction.

In congressional testimony in 1999, General Anthony Zinni, then commander of the US Central Command which includes the Middle East and Central Asia, stated in congressional testimony (April 13, 1999) that the Gulf region, with its huge oil reserves, is a “vital interest” of “long standing” for the US, and that the US “must have free access to the region’s resources.”

War in Iraq will certainly affect the oil industry in various ways—prices, levels of production, and balance of power among both oil companies and oil-producing countries. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Iraq’s vast oil potential means wide ripple effects of any shakeup there.” But exactly how the ripples flow depends on the length and veracity of the war and the level of on-going instability in Iraq and the wider Middle East. Saudi Arabia may well become less important and Iran more important if Saddam Hussein is removed, the Journal analysis concludes.

Originally posted by Elder


We have plenty of oil here in the US, but we don't drill for it.

Don't know where you got that...must have made it up.


According to the EIA, the United States has 21 billion barrels of proved oil reserves as of January 1, 2000. The U.S. uses about 6.6 billion barrels per year. That is only enough oil to last the U.S. about three and a half years without importing oil from other countries. 84% of the reserves are concentrated in four states. Texas has 25%, both onshore, and offshore. Alaska has 24%, California has 21%, and Louisiana has 14% onshore, and offshore. Since 1990, U.S. oil reserves have dropped about 20%. New oil discoveries made in 1999 were made almost entirely in the Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska. (321 million barrels). All other discoveries were extensions of existing oil fields, or new reservoirs discovered in old fields. (404 million barrels).

:jambo:

According to BP U.S. Oil reserves will run out by 2012.

And by 2020 we will be importing 17 million barrels of oil per day...according to th US Department of Energy.

Maybe you should start quoting this stuff you are posting...

Originally posted by Solo Inter
According to BP U.S. Oil reserves will run out by 2012.

And by 2020 we will be importing 17 million barrels of oil per day...according to th US Department of Energy.

Yeah and according to scientists all over the world and nuclear weapons experts, we were all supposed to be dead by now from global warming and nuclear war.

There is a ton of oil in the US. Although I wish they would move towards some other form of energy because I am tired of giving money to any middle eastern country for their oil.

Originally posted by Elder
Maybe you should start quoting this stuff you are posting...


I wrote it myself....:crazyboy:


JK...I usually do...sorry let me go back.

Originally posted by Solo Inter
KNow what man...your "war for oil argument is getting old argument"...is f*cking getting old to me

I can't believe with all of your supposed insight....that you would be so f*cking naive to think and economics(wich means oil) has got absolutely nothing to do with the US's interest in the Middle East.


Yeah the US....and just about every other country except for Iraq, S A, and UAE.


As far as nobody caring...your about the only person on this forum (even alot hadcore conservatives will agree this war has little to do with WMD or civil rights) that is stupid enough to think oil has nothing to do with it.

I not such an asshole to think that the only reason you go to war is to have some oil from Iraq. For you, or anyone else to believe that, makes you look foolish and uneducated. Go print your slogans on your tshirts. They are still old and completely lame.

There is always something so simple that you forget about Iraq.... If we wanted their oil, all we had to do was lift the sanctions from the UN. BUt I am sure that goes over your head.

I guess by your logic we should invade Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia.. I mean, there lots of oil there!

Where can I sign up for the draft, I need to quench my thirst for black gold!

Originally posted by Solo Inter
I wrote it myself....:crazyboy:


JK...I usually do...sorry let me go back.

I know you are a smart boy, but even I can tell when it's block quoted... I can't get away with it in class, so you can't either. ;)

Originally posted by Solo Inter
According to BP U.S. Oil reserves will run out by 2012.

And by 2020 we will be importing 17 million barrels of oil per day...according to th US Department of Energy.

I don't believe it. I see these kind of studies all the time.. predicting doom, but when the time comes, nothing happens. It's also BP, a British company.. who knows what the motives behind the research are... That's something I am learning at school right now.. the need to filter through studies, see who does them, and the reasons behind them..

Like the study that says Oats are good for you and you should eat them every minute... brought to you by the research of Quaker Oats.. :confused:

Originally posted by Elder
Yeah and according to scientists all over the world and nuclear weapons experts, we were all supposed to be dead by now from global warming and nuclear war.

There is a ton of oil in the US. Although I wish they would move towards some other form of energy because I am tired of giving money to any middle eastern country for their oil.


UUUUUHHHHHHHH.....F*ck it....I'm not going to bother with you.


Once again, statements with no back up...till you start talking in facts...I aint going to bother.

I think the possibilty of drastic changes in our eviroment due to global warming...is more of what the scientists have been saying and are still saying.

Please...find me quote where someone(a scientist) said we would be dead by now cause of global warming.

Far as the nuclear war...that was in the movies.

And wether or not we decide to off ourselves with nukes has nothing to do with scientists predicting the outcomes of global warming or estimating our oil reserves.

Your way off this time.

Originally posted by Elder
I don't believe it. I see these kind of studies all the time.. predicting doom, but when the time comes, nothing happens. It's also BP, a British company.. who knows what the motives behind the research are... That's something I am learning at school right now.. the need to filter through studies, see who does them, and the reasons behind them..

Like the study that says Oats are good for you and you should eat them every minute... brought to you by the research of Quaker Oats.. :confused:


Yeah...no telling what kind of alterior motives Department of Energy must have.

:kader:

Originally posted by Solo Inter
UUUUUHHHHHHHH.....F*ck it....I'm not going to bother with you.


Once again, statements with no back up...till you start talking in facts...I aint going to bother.

I think the possibilty of drastic changes in our eviroment due to global warming...is more of what the scientists have been saying and are still saying.

Please...find me quote where someone(a scientist) said we would be dead by now cause of global warming.

Far as the nuclear war...that was in the movies.

And wether or not we decide to off ourselves with nukes has nothing to do with scientists predicting the outcomes of global warming or estimating our oil reserves.

Your way off this time.

All I am saying is that there is always someone out there who is "predicting" the future. Of course you believe in Global Warming.. I mean, those poor Siberians will really be pissed when it warms up one degree more. :confused:

Now I am just giving you a hard time, hope you don't mind. :D

Originally posted by Elder
I know you are a smart boy, but even I can tell when it's block quoted... I can't get away with it in class, so you can't either. ;)

I said I was joking...no for real...wasn't trying to take credit for sumone esle...I was just in a hurry.

Originally posted by Solo Inter
Yeah...no telling what kind of alterior motives Department of Energy must have.

:kader:

World Domination under the evil hitleresque Bush Administration? :mrpimp:

Cool man...yeah we like to go at it...all in good nature (i try to keep it that way,sometimes I loose my head).

Funniest thing I find about you is your choice of bands...maybe we could start a punk rock band and argue about politics the whole time.:crazyboy:

Originally posted by Solo Inter
I said I was joking...no for real...wasn't trying to take credit for sumone esle...I was just in a hurry.

I know that, I was just giving you a hard time. And now it looks like we are both post boosting. :)

Originally posted by Elder
World Domination under the evil hitleresque Bush Administration? :mrpimp:

HaHA....don't make start talking about the aliens.

Originally posted by Elder
I know that, I was just giving you a hard time. And now it looks like we are both post boosting. :)


What this forum's for right...and kepping my mind from work.:D

Oh sh*t...I'm off in ten minutes...better finish these reports.

Originally posted by Solo Inter
Cool man...yeah we like to go at it...all in good nature (i try to keep it that way,sometimes I loose my head).

Funniest thing I find about you is your choice of bands...maybe we could start a punk rock band and argue about politics the whole time.:crazyboy:

Actually, that sounds like a good idea! The funniest part is, I used to believe in a lot of the things you write here, and what many others write here. I was vegan for 7 years, so I was a greenie weenie!

But I never had much faith in politics or our government. I don't like the Bush Administration that much, (didn't vote for him the first time, won't the next time) but I think things did change after 9/11 and I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt in the Iraq case. BUT, and this is a big BUT, the more facts come out regarding why we went to Iraq, the less "benefit" I am willing to give them. I am about fed up with it all actually, and just wish we could speed up the process and get the hell out.

And I think heads should roll about the Intelligence information, but I have yet to see that happen. So maybe Bush doesn't deserve for more years, but Kerry or Dean in office is just as scary to me.

Just my two cents.

Originally posted by Elder
Actually, that sounds like a good idea! The funniest part is, I used to believe in a lot of the things you write here, and what many others write here. I was vegan for 7 years, so I was a greenie weenie!

But I never had much faith in politics or our government. I don't like the Bush Administration that much, (didn't vote for him the first time, won't the next time) but I think things did change after 9/11 and I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt in the Iraq case. BUT, and this is a big BUT, the more facts come out regarding why we went to Iraq, the less "benefit" I am willing to give them. I am about fed up with it all actually, and just wish we could speed up the process and get the hell out.

And I think heads should roll about the Intelligence information, but I have yet to see that happen. So maybe Bush doesn't deserve for more years, but Kerry or Dean in office is just as scary to me.

Just my two cents.


:jap:

from http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/ (note: this is only about half the article)

Dear Reader,

Civilization as we know it is coming to an end soon. This is not the wacky conclusion of a religious cult, but rather the result of diligent analysis sourced by hard data and the scientists who study global “Peak Oil” and related geo-political events.

So who are these nay-sayers who claim the sky is falling? Conspiracy fanatics? Apocalypse Bible prophesy readers? To the contrary, they are some of the most respected, highest paid geologists and experts in the world. And this is what's so scary.

The situation is so dire that even George W. Bush's Energy Adviser, Matthew Simmons, has acknowledged that "The situation is desperate. This is the world's biggest serious question."

According to Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, "America faces a major energy supply crisis over the next two decades. The failure to meet this challenge will threaten our nation's economic prosperity, compromise our national security, and literally alter the way we lead our lives."

If you are like 99% of the people reading this letter, you have never heard of the term "Peak Oil". I had not heard the term until a few months ago. Since learning about Peak Oil, I have had my world view, and basic assumptions about my own individual future turned completely upside down.

A little about myself: A few months ago, I was a 25 year old law school graduate who found out he had just passed the California Bar Exam. I was excited about a potentially long and prosperous career in the legal profession, getting married, having kids, contributing to my community, and living the "American Dream."

Peak Oil has caused me to seriously question how realistic this vision of my life is.

Whether you're 25 or 75, an attorney or an auto mechanic, what you are about to read will shake the foundations of your life.

Below you find a brief explanation of Peak Oil, the ramifications, and what we can do about it. For the sake of simplicity, I have designed the following explanation for somebody unfamiliar with Peak Oil. If you would like more in depth explanations with graphs, charts, and the like, please consult the extensive interviews, articles and sites I have linked to throughout this site.


What is "Peak Oil"?

All oil production follows a bell curve, whether in an individual field or on the planet as a whole. On the upslope of the curve production costs are significantly lower than on the downslope when extra effort (expense) is required to extract oil from reservoirs that are emptying out.

Put simply: oil is abundant and cheap on the upslope, scarce and expensive on the downslope.

For the past 150 years, we have been moving up the upslope of the global oil production curve. "Peak Oil" is the industry term for the top of the curve. It's often referred to as "Hubbert's Peak" a reference to King Hubbert, the geologist who discovered that oil production follows a bell curve.

Once we pass the peak, we will go down the very steep downslope. The further we go down the slope, the more it costs to produce oil, and its cousin, natural gas.

In practical terms, this means that if 2000 was the year of Peak Oil, worldwide oil production in the year 2020 will be the same as it was in 1980. However, the world's population in 2020 will be both much larger (appoximately twice as big) and much more industrialized than it was in 1980. Consequently, worldwide demand for oil will outpace the worldwide production of oil by a significant margin.

The more demand for oil exceeds production of oil, the higher the price goes.

Ultimately, the question is not "When will we run out of oil?" but rather, "When will we run out of cheap oil?"


When will Peak Oil occur?

The most wildly optimistic estimates indicate 2020 will be the year in which worldwide oil production peaks. Generally, these estimates come from the government.

A more realistic estimate is between the year 2004-2010. Unfortunately, we won't know that we hit the peak until 3-4 years after we actually hit it. Even on the upslope of the curve, oil production varies a bit from year to year. It is possible that the year 2000 was the year of peak oil production, as production has dipped every year since.

The energy industry has quietly acknowledged the seriousness of the situation. For instance, the president of Exxon Mobil Exploration Company, Jon Thompson, recently stated:

By 2015, we will need to find, develop and produce a volume of new oil and gas that is equal to eight out of every 10 barrels being produced today. In addition, the cost associated with providing this additional oil and gas is expected to be considerably more than what industry is now spending.

Equally daunting is the fact that many of the most promising prospects are far from major markets — some in regions that lack even basic infrastructure. Others are in extreme climates, such as the Arctic, that present extraordinary technical challenges.

If Mr. Thompson is that frankin an article posted on the Exxon Mobil webpage, you have to wonder what he says behind closed days when he talks about oil depletion. (note - if you read the link, read it in the context of what Matthew Simmons says - see below)

Even the Saudis are aware of the situation. They have a saying that goes, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet airplane. His son will ride a camel."

That sounds pretty bad, but if gas prices get too high, I'll just carpool or take public transportation more. What's the big deal?

Almost every current human endeavor from transportation, to manufacturing, to electricity to plastics, and especially food production is inextricably intertwined with oil and natural gas supplies.

Commercial food production is oil powered. Most pesticides are petroleum (oil) based, and all commercial fertilizers are ammonia based. Ammonia is produced from natural gas.

Oil based agriculture is primarily responsible for the world's population exploding from 1 billion at the middle of the 19th century to 6.3 billion at the turn of the 21st.

Oil allowed for farming implements such as tractors, food storage systems such as refrigerators, and food transport systems such as trucks.

As oil production went up, so did food production. As food production went up, so did the population. As the population went up, the demand for food went up, which increased the demand for oil.

Oil is also largely responsible for the advances in medicine that have been made in the last 150 years. Oil allowed for the mass production of pharmaceutical drugs, and the development of health care infrastructure such as hospitals, ambulances, roads, etc . . .

We are now at a point where the demand for food/oil continues to rise, while our ability to produce it in an affordable fashion is about to drop.

Within a few years of Peak Oil occurring, the price of food will skyrocket because of the cost of fertilizer will soar. The cost of storing (electricity) and transporting (gasoline) the food that is produced will also soar.

Oil is required for a lot more than just food, medicine, and transportation. It is also required for nearly every consumer item, water supply pumping, sewage disposal, garbage disposal, street/park maintenance, hospitals & health systems, police, fire services, and national defense.

Additionally, as you are probably already aware, wars are often fought over oil.

Thus, the aftermath of Peak Oil will extend far beyond how much you will pay for gas. Simply stated, you can expect: war, starvation, economic collapse, possibly even the extinction of Homo sapiens.

This is known as the post-oil "die-off". The term "die-off" captures perfectly the nightmare that is at our doorstep


What do you mean by "die-off"?

Exactly what it sounds like. It is estimated that the world's population will contract to 500 million during the Oil Crash. (current world population: 6 billion)

5.5 billion deaths? That is ridiculous. I could see that things might get pretty bad, but the idea that 90% of the world's population could die is ludicrous! Did you just pull that number out of your ass?

Far from it. That estimate comes from biologists who have studied what happens to every species when it exceeds the carrying capacity of its environment in one life giving aspect or another.

For instance, bacteria in a petri dish will grow exponentially until they run out of resources, at which point their population will crash. Only one generation prior to the crash, the bacteria will have used up half the resources available to them. To the bacteria, there will be no hint of a problem until they starve to death.

While comparing humans to bacteria in a petri dish is a bit uncomfortable, the similarities are numerous:

The first commercial oil well was drilled in 1859. At that time, the world's population was about 1 billion. Less than 150 years later, our population has exploded to 6.3 billion. In that time, we have used up half the world's recoverable oil. Of the half that's left, most will be very expensive to extract . If the experts are correct, we are less than one generation away from a crash. Yet to most of us, there appears to be no hint of a problem.

We need not look solely to the petri dish to predict what will happen to the planet. We can look to our own history.

Take the case of the famous Irish potato famine. For well over a century, year after steady year, the British encouraged and the Irish developed a near-total dependency upon a single dietary mainstay, the potato, and the population of the island grew from 2 million people to more than 8 million.

Then suddenly in 1845, a parasitic fungus turned the potatoes into sticky, inedible, mucous globs. Within a generation the country was devastated, more than half the population died or emigrated, and those who remained were reduced to a poverty that diminished only a century later.

In some ways, planet Earth's future is likely to be worse than Ireland's past. The severity of the potato famine was offset by the fact that many of the Irish could emigrate to the land of plenty: America. This allowed those who remained to make the most of what little resources were left.

Unlike the Irish, we have nowhere else to go. But we do have lots of WMD's to toss at each other.

Oh, by the way: you want to know what the bacteria do as their population crashes?

They eat each other.

Now I'm really laughing! Ha, ha, ha!!! You silly conspiracy theorists!!

Tin foil hat wearing freak!!!

You're right. I am a tin foil hat wearing freak.

I am a tin foil hat wearing freak who is trying to tell you essentially the same thing that Dr. David Goodstein, physics professor and vice provost of the California Institute of Technology, is trying to tell you.

George W. Bush's Energy Advisor, Matthew Simmons, is essentially saying the same thing.

Lets see what two "conspiracy theorists" like Goodstein and Simmons have to say about Peak Oil.

In his just-released book, Out of Gas: The End of Oil, Dr. Goodstein argues forcefully that the worldwide production of oil will peak soon, possibly within this decade. That will be followed by declining availability of fossil fuels that could plunge the world into global conflicts as nations struggle to capture their piece of a shrinking pie.

In a recent article on ABC, Dr. Goodstein had this to say about Peak Oil:

Worst case: After Hubbert's peak, all efforts to produce, distribute, and consume alternative fuels fast enough to fill the gap between falling supplies and rising demand fail. Runaway inflation and worldwide depression leave many billions of people with no alternative but to burn coal in vast quantities for warmth, cooking, and primitive industry. The change in the greenhouse effect that results eventually tips Earth's climate into a new state hostile to life. End of story.

In a recent interview, Matthew Simmons largely echoed Dr. Goodstein's sentiments. When asked if it was time for Peak Oil to become part of the public policy debate, Simmons responded:

It is past time. As I have said, the experts and politicians have no Plan B to fall back on. If energy peaks, particularly while 5 of the world’s 6.5 billion people have little or no use of modern energy, it will be a tremendous jolt to our economic well-being and to our heath — greater than anyone could ever imagine.

When asked if there is a solution, Simmons responded:

I don’t think there is one. The solution is to pray. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that it’s a certainty.



Still laughing?

Originally posted by Elder
World Domination under the evil hitleresque Bush Administration? :mrpimp:


thats why they're bombing everyone ;) :read: :crazyboy:

Superb article, Perles.

I see noone has responded to it yet...

cant b bothered reading it...... could someone tell me wat its about ? :o

Took out the main points...

It talks about "Peak Oil"

Supposebly Oil Production follows a "bell curve" like goes up and then down.

So, when the curve is going up, oil is abundant and cheap while when itz going down itz expensive and rare

so if 2000 was the year of "Peak Oil", oil production in the year 2020 will be the same as 1980, But the problem is the world population in 2020 will be twice as large as in the 1980s. The demand of oil will be much higher then the worldwide production of oil.

"Ultimately the question is not "when will we run out" but "when will we run out of cheap oil"

A realistic estimate of when Peak Oil will occur, is between 2004-2010. But the problem is we won't know that we hit it until 3-4years after.

It is possibe that 2000 was teh yearm since production has dropped every year since.

"Almost every current human endeavor from transportation, to manufacturing, to electricity to plastics, and especially food production is inextricably intertwined with oil and natural gas supplies."

Commercial food production is oil powered, so when oil production went up so did food production. And food production lead to to population increasing and this increased the demand of oil

We are now at a point where the demand for food/oil continues to rise, while our ability to produce it in an affordable fashion is about to drop.

Within a few years of Peak Oil occuring, the price of food will skyrocket cuz of the cost of fertillizers increasing. The cost of storing (electricity) and transporting (gasoline) the food will also soar

Oil is required for a lot of things not just food medicine and transport. It is also required for every consumer item, water supply pumping, sewage, police....

and wars are often fought over oil. So the after math of Peak oil will go far beyond how much u will pay for gas, : war, starvation, economic collapse and possibly even the extintion of the huuman race

It is estimated that the world population will strink down to 500 million (currently 6 billion) during the oil crash.




Itz really scary and disturbing especially thebacteria in petre dish comparison :(

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/tablee1.html

tables of oil consumption by country, by year

uhhhh...its late...I just got home from a gig...will have to read it tomorrow

....goes back to smoking bong(H)

It goes without saying that US foreign policy is driven by energy concerns. Deny it and you deny reality. So...

Ok, those tables show that the rate of increase of Chinese consumption will equate the US increase of the rate of consumption at the end of the time period they cover.
At current economic growth rates, China will overtake the US as the worlds largest economy in 2038 (check any serious economists stats, this will be covered).
I totally accept that the war in Iraq was about staking a claim in the middle east, politically and economically. To deny that is to deny reality.
The cost of international shipping has increased around 500 per cent in the last 5 years becasue of China's demand for imprted resources and rapid growth.

My question... wtf is the US doing about China??? Invading Iraq takes care of the Russia and the EU, but they are not the main threats to US hegemony.

Anyway, Elder. About 'BP' propogating a particular point of view. I think you are going to have to make a pretty convincing argument that a multinational liker BP have a vested interest in the 'British nation'. They are an oil company. They only care about a 'nation' if their govt policies are conducive to business. Gloabl capitalism escaped the concerns of 'nationalisms' long ago.