China's Oil Production About to Peak: That's a Very Big Deal

Thanks PO1 Tony Holland. China has been aware of this potential fro some time. They haven working on positioning themselves to extract oil from the South China Sea oil fields for a long time.
One issue not discussed was China's artificial currency value which is deliberately undervalued.
In our own nation and others the value of letting the market set the value allowed prices to rise which gave incentive to extract oil and natural gas from shale deposits [fracking] and dig deeper in other areas.
If China floated their currency to allow it to rise or sink to its "natural" level that would potentially incentivize additional oil exploration and production.
One advantage China has had over us these past 20 plus years is that they have no qualms about building refineries to process the oil they generate from their oil fields.
FYI COL Mikel J. Burroughs LTC Stephen C. Maj William W. "Bill" Price Capt Christopher Mueller Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL SSgt (Join to see) SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT John " Mac " McConnell SGT Robert George SP5 Robert Ruck SCPO Morris RamseyCPL Eric Escasio SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher Wright SPC Margaret Higgins

Very interesting article, they could give the Arabs a run for their money.

I'd pretty much expected something like that; look at a text called The Stages of EconomicmGrowth, by Walter W. Rostow, one of the JFK cabinet members, he got the whole process 99.999% right. All countries do that; I've mentioned the book on here before. I've also said on here that, had China not been vivisected and colonialized in the 19th century, and, had ,JApan not vivisected it during WW2, Chiang Kai Shek, despite his corruption, which was evident, would, most likely, have succeeded with the Nationalists. What makes the problem difficult now is that unlike what happened in the Soviet Union, Deng Xiao Peng, who was infinitely more dangerous than Mao The Tung and Chou En Laid, though their cohort, was, also, unfortunately, considerably smarter, showing that evil, as was evident at Tianenmen Square during the uprising that was suppressed, can, unfortunately, also be intelligent, to to the detriment of the human race. He'd realized, which Mao, Chou, Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, Andropov, and Brezjnev never grapes, though I'm fairly certain Gorbachev did, though too late (yet that still gave rise to Putin), that the only way for Communism to survive in a state the size of China, he had to let capitalism flourish. That way, Communism could also have time to adapt itself to the stages of capitalist growth Rostow did (Rostow's manifesto, as he said in it, was decidedly noncommunist, however) accurately predict. What the article describes is merely what Rostow termed "drive to maturity", which all countries go through. Different societies, as I've mentioned on here many times, evolve socioeconomically at different rates; unfortunately, most viewing history tend to focus on micro-phenomena, not maco-phenomena, the latter, not the former, is actually what determines history. History is very highly mathematical, that's precisely why it can, in fact, be wargames with considerable accuracy, in a good many instances. Wargaming shouldn't be construed as being limited to merely tactical scenarios, or even strategic scenarios solely involving military contexts. Wargaming, of necessity, must, and should, include, for accuracy, economic aspects, as those are, ultimately, on a purely statistical level, the aspects that drive history. The civilizing of the human race thus occurs in a highly staccato fashion, wit one segment frequently vastly accelerating past another, or, in the case of China, being at an actually earlier stage of industrial development than the UE, and yet still under the thumb of a Communist regime. One can only hope that, phenomenologically, China would, ultimately, outgrow Communism, which Rostow showed is a purely aberrant aspect of history, a form of mass social psychosis, the opposite extreme from fascism. Social Darwism very clearly predicted that the three type of societies would be capitalist, Communist, and fascist; most of the aberrant societies in the world today, and, thus, the less socioeconomically developed ones, hence, also frequently, the most dangerous, are, unfortunately, in the latter two categories. More evolved societies socioeconomically, e.g., the US and Europe, are now, fortunately, capitalist, with some minor variations, e.g , socialism, which is also aberrant, yet capitalist just the same. Deng Xiao Peng realized that reward incentive demanded that, for Communism to survive in China, he'd need to let in some capitalism, however, once that starts, the process, hopefully, ultimately overwhelms Communism once per capita income reaches a threshold. That's why France, not Russia, was the first European country to have gone Communist, during the French Revolution. That led to Napoleon only because France was, during the late 18th and early 19th centuries, still largely agrarian. When Marx, Engels, and Leninall appeared, tyrannical morons though they were, Russia had evolved sufficient industry to keep Communism alive there until it eventually grew out of it, accelerated by Gorbachev realizing that it was doomed there, as well as Pres Reagan and those around him accelerating its demise by continual military second mid pressure, which is what ultimately led to the fall of the Berlin Wall. All of that is now merely being repeated in China; Tianenman Square is no different than what happened in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, when their anti-Communist revolts happened. Themsa!e was true for Poland and Romania, with the Gdansk shipyard revolt, as well as the overthrow of the Ceaucescus, and also the breakup of Yugoslavia, which was, on a purely mathematical level, all, thankfully, inevitable. China will most likely, I think, outgrow Communism; its just a matter of sociopolitical patience, once its economy reaches that per capita income threshold, it hopefully should, as shown by history, as well as I think, mathematically, also fall. Read The Foundation Trilogy by Isaac Asimov, and his description of the science of psychohistory, Asimov was quite perceptive in his description of how mathematal statistics, and physics, actually drives societal growth, as well as causing sociologic mutations, which, unfortunately, also gives rise to dictators and also aberrant sociologic processes like Communism and fascism.I hope that was of at least some interest, those are obviously only my thoughts of course, I'd be most eager for any feedback, certainly, many thanks.