STEVE LEMON. I really don't understand the large significance of inland waterways. Maybe in the 1800s but now everything is transported by rail or road.
@@ryanm9371 i dont think Peter is taking into account that you have to load and unload the barges, which is expensive. if fuel costs are cheap it might make more sense to just leave the stuff on a truck and transport it all the way.
ryan M Peter explained on his website under his Mexico newsletter(June 15 2020)that since the passing of the Jones Act of 1920, the US seriously handicapped itself, economically, by only allowing American made ships, crews,captains, etc. to travel on American waterways. I think that’s why in this video specifically, he mentioned that between 1776 and WW2 was the US’s greatest growth. (This is one of the reasons Mexico is able to do so well, since it’s only competing with American trucking costs rather than waterway transport costs).
@@Withnail1969 If American Waterways were allowed to be more competitive, it wouldn't take much engineering to develop barges that act more like Cargo Ships carrying removable containers. The loading and unloading wouldn't be too onerous with the proper infrastructure in place. In any case, there IS a lot of bulk commodities shipped all along American rivers, literally billions of dollars worth each year.
Zeihan always has the same spiel about the US Navy. But I wonder if the navy is really responsible for protecting the bulk of the world's international trade all this time, especially since the end of the cold war. He always says that China is dependent upon being the exporter to the world. He could be right about the ability --at least for now-- to cut off their access to petroleum, but even so, why would China risk their ability to export by getting into a war?
He's spoken about this before about how china has two zones. Beijing and then Shanghai. Beijing is more militarily focused whilst Shanghai which is pretty much china's wall street is more economically focused. Xi Xinpings faction is the Beijing faction. This is a VERY summed up thing so I'd recommend looking at some of his other talks.
This feels closer to an attempt at crafting a 'national myth' than to cold dispassionate strategic analysis. Not that I question Peter Zeihan's strategic analysis abilities, usually it just takes a surprising Q&A moment for him to say something truly new and not part of his main spiel.
@odegaard I disagree at least on agriculture shipping. After harvest the Mississippi is clogged with corn, soybeans and wheat on its way to New Orleans then on to the rest of the world.
@@murc111 exactly, the river is the best way to transport bulk products. It's not just agg but also gravel, sand, coal, petroleum products, chemicals and more. If you ever see the barges going up and down the river you would be shocked. They are huge.
@odegaard i know, according to Peter no country without navigable rivers can produce any food at all at an affordable price, which is demonstrably untrue. Right now Russia is the world's largest wheat exporter.
Where you not listening? BEFORE Bretton Woods if you wanted something you went and took it. That was how the world worked!! It was US that created a fairer, more open system!!! YOUR WELCOME!!!
@@Withnail1969 Can you point us to someone who doesnt? Or explain your qualification or experience and your opposing hypothesis as to the workings of the current order and its trajectory?
