Bankruptcy of U.S. now certain
strik...@mail.com
> This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which
>follows.
> To view this item online, visit
>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=118727
>
>
> Tuesday, December 22, 2009
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> INVESTOR INSIGHTS
> Bankruptcy of U.S. now certain
> Exclusive: Porter Stansberry explains why major inflation is a sure
>thing
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Posted: December 11, 2009
> 8:03 pm Eastern
>
>
>
> By Porter Stansberry
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> It's one of those numbers that's so unbelievable you have to actually
>think about it for a while ...
>
> Within the next 12 months, the U.S. Treasury will have to refinance $2
>trillion in short-term debt. And that's not counting any additional deficit
>spending, which is estimated to be around $1.5 trillion.
>
> Put the two numbers together. Then ask yourself, how in the world can
>the Treasury borrow $3.5 trillion in only one year? That's an amount equal
>to nearly 30 percent of our entire GDP. And we're the world's biggest
>economy. Where will the money come from?
>
> How did we end up with so much short-term debt? Like most entities
>that have far too much debt � whether subprime borrowers, GM, Fannie, or
>GE � the U.S. Treasury has tried to minimize its interest burden by
>borrowing for short durations and then "rolling over" the loans when they
>come due. As they say on Wall Street, "a rolling debt collects no moss."
>
> What they mean is, as long as you can extend the debt, you have no
>problem. Unfortunately, that leads folks to take on ever greater amounts of
>debt, at ever shorter durations, at ever lower interest rates. Sooner or
>later, the creditors wake up and ask themselves: What are the chances I will
>ever actually be repaid? And that's when the trouble starts. Interest rates
>go up dramatically. Funding costs soar. The party is over. Bankruptcy is
>next.
>
> (Column continues below)
>
>
> When governments go bankrupt, it's called a "default." Currency
>speculators figured out how to accurately predict when a country would
>default. Two well-known economists � Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti �
>published the secret formula in a 1999 academic paper. The formula is called
>the Greenspan-Guidotti rule.
>
> The rule states: To avoid a default, countries should maintain
>hard-currency reserves equal to at least 100 percent of their short-term
>foreign debt maturities. The world's largest money-management firm, PIMCO,
>explains the rule this way: "The minimum benchmark of reserves equal to at
>least 100 percent of short-term external debt is known as the
>Greenspan-Guidotti rule. Greenspan-Guidotti is perhaps the single concept of
>reserve adequacy that has the most adherents and empirical support."
>
> The principle behind the rule is simple: If you can't pay off all of
>your foreign debts in the next 12 months, you're a terrible credit risk.
>Speculators are going to target your bonds and your currency, making it
>impossible to refinance your debts. A default is assured.
>
> So how does America rank on the Greenspan-Guidotti scale? It's a
>guaranteed default.
>
> The U.S. holds gold, oil, and foreign currency in reserve. It has
>8,133.5 metric tons of gold (it is the world's largest holder). At current
>dollar values, it's worth around $300 billion. The U.S. strategic petroleum
>reserve shows a current total position of 725 million barrels. At current
>dollar prices, that's roughly $58 billion worth of oil. And according to the
>IMF, the U.S. has $136 billion in foreign-currency reserves. So altogether,
>that's around $500 billion of reserves. Our short-term foreign debts are far
>bigger.
>
> According to the U.S. Treasury, $2 trillion worth of debt will mature
>in the next 12 months. So looking only at short-term debt, we know the
>Treasury will have to finance at least $2 trillion worth of maturing debt in
>the next 12 months. That might not cause a crisis if we were still funding
>our national debt internally. But since 1985, we've been a net debtor to the
>world. Today, foreigners own 44 percent of all our debts, which means we owe
>foreign creditors at least $880 billion in the next 12 months � an amount
>far larger than our reserves.
>
> Keep in mind, this only covers our existing debts. The Office of
>Management and Budget is predicting a $1.5 trillion budget deficit over the
>next year. That puts our total funding requirements on the order of $3.5
>trillion over the next 12 months.
>
> So, where will the money come from? Total domestic savings in the U.S.
>are only around $600 billion annually. Even if we all put every penny of our
>savings into U.S. Treasury debt, we're still going to come up nearly $3
>trillion short. That's an annual funding requirement equal to roughly 40
>percent of GDP.
>
> Where is the money going to come from? From our foreign creditors? Not
>according to Greenspan-Guidotti. And not according to the Indian or Russian
>central banks, which have stopped buying Treasury bills and begun to buy
>enormous amounts of gold. The Indians recently bought 200 metric tons.
>Sources in Russia say the central bank there will double its gold reserves.
>
> So where will the money come from? The printing press. The Federal
>Reserve has already monetized nearly $2 trillion worth of Treasury debt and
>mortgage debt. This weakens the value of the dollar and devalues our
>existing Treasury bonds. Sooner or later, our creditors will face a stark
>choice: Hold our bonds and continue to see the value diminish slowly, or try
>to escape to gold and see the value of their U.S. bonds plummet.
>
> One thing they're not going to do is buy more of our debt. Which
>central banks will abandon the dollar next? Brazil, Korea and Chile. These
>are the three largest central banks that own the least amount of gold. None
>owns even 1 percent of its total reserves in gold.
>
> All of this is going to lead to a severe devaluation of the U.S.
>dollar, which I expect to happen within 18 months. If you haven't taken
>steps to protect yourself from the coming devaluation � like owning gold and
>silver bullion, foreign real estate, and farmland � make sure you do it
>soon. The dollar rout is coming.
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Editor's note: Porter Stansberry examines these issues in much greater
>detail in the November issue of his newsletter, which he considers the most
>important he's ever written.
>
Just a matter of a few short years until the wheels fly off. Our
markets are shrinking. If we can build it somebody can build it
cheaper and better. Large capital operations like Boeing excepted.
striker
phil scott
.> > How did we end up with so much short-term debt? Like most
entities
> >that have far too much debt whether subprime borrowers, GM, Fannie, or
> >GE the U.S. Treasury has tried to minimize its interest burden by
> >borrowing for short durations and then "rolling over" the loans when they
> >come due. As they say on Wall Street, "a rolling debt collects no moss."
Here is how we accumulated so much debt... several factors acting in
unision
- govt bloat, its costs exceeding actual saleable goods production,
hidden by
calling govt purchases and dog washing 'production'
- Civil service retirments at 3 to 10x the private sector... that
money paid for no production
at all.. at total loss. much if sent offshore
- a fat, lazy and corrupt lower grades educational system also
costing too much
has left the nation short of talent sufficient to even sustain our
techncial leads
- such faulty education has bred idiots who elect same to
congress.. having no
integrity as a rule. catering to special interests to the long
term detriment of the
nation... such as rewarding the offshoring of US industry and
education of our
competitors
- the debasement of our currency to hide the effects of such
rot...so that other nations
have less or no incentive to keep on funding our collapsing
situation.
such a mess spins in...it looses energy... it cannot spin out..
Phil scott
> striker- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dano
"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message
news:447ea533-555a-49bf...@y32g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
-----------------------------------------------------------
I notice not even a passing reference to over a trillion dollars spent on
two wars without raising taxes to pay for those vast expenditures. Never
mind the costs of maintaining over 1,000 military bases around the world.
Not even worthy of a mention eh? Why should anyone believe a fucking word
of what you say?
Werner
>...
> I notice not even a passing reference to over a trillion dollars spent on
> two wars without raising taxes to pay for those vast expenditures. Never
> mind the costs of maintaining over 1,000 military bases around the world.
>
> Not even worthy of a mention eh? Why should anyone believe a fucking word
> of what you say?
JerryD(upstateNY)
I notice not even a passing reference to over a trillion dollars spent on
two wars without raising taxes to pay for those vast expenditures. Never
mind the costs of maintaining over 1,000 military bases around the world.
Not even worthy of a mention eh? Why should anyone believe a fucking word
of what you say?<<<
Bush spent a trillion dollars on 2 wars in 7 years and you are whining like
a baby.
Obama spent a trillion dollars on pork, in 6 months and it's fine, huh ?
Why should anyone believe a fucking word of what you say ?
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
Kenneth McVay OBC
The cost of both Iraq wars is a pittance compared to
$112 Trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. Medicare
alone is some $60 trillion in the tank, thanks to
government theft of your contributions, and the
director of Social Security has said that SS will be
bankrupt within a few years... with $14 trillion in
unfunded liabilities, I'd say he's right to be
concerned.
A succession of governments, Democratic or Republican,
have continued to spend money without the least concern
for the American taxpayer, and I think that the massive
money bubble created by the Obama government will be
the straw that breaks the camel's back.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
>
>
>--
>JerryD(upstateNY)
>
>
--
"Streicher commit suicide while in the Nuremberg Jail But you
people did hang him after that"
(Kurt Knoll, Kitimat, B.C.'s Leading Revisionist Moron)
The Nizkor Project: http://www.nizkor.org/
Dano
Yeah? Well that's one (biased IMO) source. Here's another...
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868367,00.html
Of course all I was raising was the clear fact...whether you care to bicker
over numbers or not...that this extremely costly effort...righteousness or
not...was unfunded by the taxpayers in order to mislead the public into not
opposing the adventure. Just as the people were never asked to sacrifice in
any tangible way as they have in other war efforts. You can spin it any way
you wish. The facts are clear.
It wasn't JUST about Republican *defense* spending alone either.
http://mercatus.org/publication/spending-under-president-george-w-bush
This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking
insanity.
What did you expect?
Dano
I'm concerned as well Jerry. But when people suddenly find religion like
this it has quite the hollow ring to it. The past 8 years wreaked havoc on
the economy and hurled us into near (if not) depression and it was in large
part because of the policies and unfettered greed welcomed by the people
doing the loudest whining. This president hasn't completed his first yearm
let alone term.
I'm not at all pleased with a lot of what Obama has done or is doing. This
is not meant in any way as a defense of every policy at all. But let us be
clear about the problems and forces he has to deal with. Many brought about
by the very obstructionists fighting him and the Democratic congress at
every turn.
For example...everyone talks about a trillion dollar healthcare program.
That money is anticipated to be spread over the next decade. It's a lot.
Do you suppose it will be costing us any less if we continue on the same
disastrous course we are on? Costs are going up no matter what we do. The
REAL crime is the rise of unhindered profiteering by the insurers and the
industry itself and the obscene profit taking from the unwellness of our
citizens.
phil scott
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
my short replies on one topic never include all 5 million words of
possible response to
the wide range of countless other valid factors on all topics...
further, there is no way in hell
that my own particular and limited views are 100% correct or
comprehensive.. non can be.
we post on USENET whatever facets of any situation come to mind for
consideration by other
sentient people.... together a more rounded and accurate reality
arises.
Your abusive response unnecessarily smears your own valid points. no
need to weaken your view
that way...or hold completely polarized views, such as all democrats,
or all republicans are scum as though the
world was comprised of only these two bands of nitwits.
you have the option of stepping out of those sorts of sand boxes...
Phil scott
Dano
Oh please. Don't try to take the high moral ground after that. You are far
too transparent. To completely ignore the largest single waste of both life
and tax money...even IF it is tax monies deferred to the next guys, is
unconsionable in the context of the discussion of where our deficit is
today.
Of course you raised valid points. That does not excuse your leaving out
the military entirely.
By the way...your own words were at least as abusive...adjectives like
"fat", "lazy", "idiots", are hardly above the "sand box" battles you pretend
to decry. You are as much a part of the problem you pretend to abhor.
phil scott
> Not even worthy of a mention eh? Why should anyone believe a fucking word
> of what you say?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ok Dano, one other thing... regarding why should anyone believe
anything that I say.
My ardent advice to anyone, especially regarding myself and what I
say, is that no one
should ever for a second believe what I say.... its not bright to do
that.... my views are my
own, biased for sure..incomplete, ill educated on the limitless scale
of all that there is to know
and etc. I am at cave man levels of intelligence compared to say
where mankind will be
50,000 years if we last that long.
others are as well... we know a lot, but as percentage of all there is
to understand we are all
drooling morons. ( Polite behavior can be used to mask some of the
drooling however)
trying to gain knowledge as one is told in school, by believing the
teacher .... or a text book ....is useful
but only at the most rudimentary levels...beyond that a person must
learn to think and reason for
himself.
the tactic of issuing personal abuse as a response is common, you
came by it
honestly, but its ruinous of your own ability to be objective and
think beyond that level... it limits those
who engage in it... it is a distraction from the issues. sort of
like drinking ones brain to oblivion, one
feels smarter, but in actuality is in an oposite direction... even as
he gets drunker and louder...assured
of his position as el supremo.. we preclude such advance in that
fashion.
Anyone, such as myself for example, can get over it.... one tactic
that you will find useful is a drill.. I used to do this drill. since
I was
so hyper critical of others much of my life... (that doesnt work well
by the way)
I would notice
a drunken person in dirty clothes on the street, obviously in great
error across a broad spectrum, or at least
one would tend to think so....and I would do this drill:
I would ask myself as follows: 'what is this person doing 100% right
and to his own betterment and the betterment of others right now, in
the gutter'.. especially as compared to the obviously 'successful'
people in life.... say a bank repo officer for instance wearing
a 700 dollar suit.
now thats a drill and a half.
as your eyes begin to open in this manner your own limitless capacity
for intelligent thought will go even beyond
your current level.
Phil scott
Beam Me Up Scotty
Buy gold and wait for the implosion.
Rod Speed
Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it aint.
> What did you expect?
Rod Speed
They dont actually make obscene profits.
> and the industry itself and the obscene profit taking from the unwellness of our citizens.
Its completely silly to not allow anyone to profit from providing medical services,
if only because they end up with a decent well paid job that they enjoy etc.
Dano
> On Dec 26, 8:06 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Not even worthy of a mention eh? Why should anyone believe a fucking
>> word of what you say?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Ok Dano, one other thing... regarding why should anyone believe
> anything that I say.
>
> My ardent advice to anyone, especially regarding myself and what I
> say, is that no one should ever for a second believe what I say...
Okay Phil. Consider it done. Peace.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:hh8210$80l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> The past 8 years wreaked havoc on the economy and hurled us into near
Blah, blah, blah.
If you think the last 8 years were the only cause of the current
situation, I hope you don't reproduce.
--
--
Popeye
"If one does as God does enough times, one
will become as God is." -Dr. Hannibal Lector.
www.finalprotectivefire.com
http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> To completely ignore the largest single waste of both life and tax money
You mean abortion, right?
Pinstripe Sniper
end of the book I'll be thinking "Bankruptcy of U.S. now *almost*
certain..."
PsS
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A fictional account of how to drastically reform the financial world...
More at http://PinstripeSniper.blogspot.com and if that gets banned, check
www.PinstripeSniper.com
Werner
>...
>
> This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking
> insanity.
>
> What did you expect?
I don't argue with the fact of too much spending, or the military
aspect of it. I simply put it into perspective. Military spending is
up but non-military spending is up more. All spending is up.
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Federal-Spending.aspx
Taxes have been up as well.
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Taxes-Per-Household-Have-Risen-Dramatically.aspx
Werner
>...
> > This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking insanity.
>
> Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it aint.
>
>
We have a recession/depression. A tax increase will likely produce a
decrease in total collection.
Werner
Demon Buddha
> "Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:hh8210$80l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>> The past 8 years wreaked havoc on the economy and hurled us into near
>
> Blah, blah, blah.
>
> If you think the last 8 years were the only cause of the current
> situation, I hope you don't reproduce.
>
>
past their noses. "It was Bush's fault" - "It's Obama's fault." The
depth of stupidity that these positions represent cannot be given a
magnitude. No such number exists.
Dano
"Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:f130299b-4450-44f4...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Well that's one spin...from the conservative perspective. I wonder how they
determine these numbers myself. Are they including many costs such as the
cost of rehabilitating the vast numbers of retuning troops? The medical
costs for the folks returning with missing limbs alone has to be
astronomical. Are all military pensions...the price tag for private
contractors...the rebulding process overseas...for schools and
infrastructure and such that we pay for? How about the loss of productivity
back home? There are many factors that I'm sure are not accounted for using
very specific methods for these calculations. I'm sure you're aware of how
creative one can get with such vast stacks of numbers. They can be twisted
to make nearly any case. Before you say it...I will point out that your
source has just as much of an agenda to pursue as my choice.
Dano
-----------------------------------------------
Well you say so anyway. I guess it MUST be true. Thanks for the studied
input.
We'll all be waiting with baited breath for you to back this up with more
cooked numbers from a conservative think tank.
Dano
"Demon Buddha" <Nob...@no.where> wrote in message
news:nMednfW6rPrxQaXW...@giganews.com...
What are you talking about? Do YOU even know?
Popeye (from my killfile) is a blithering fool. I am not deluded that Obama
is a savior. I'm quite concerned about many of his policies. I would
however point out he is in his 12th month in office following 8 years of a
Republican president, who also had a Republican dominated congress to work
with for three quarters of his term. Who had control of our security during
the worst attack on American soil in our history...and then proceeded to
embroil us in two of the most costly wars in the history of mankind all
while refusing to ask us to PAY for it!
WHAT did you morons EXPECT was going to happen to the deficit?
phil scott
>
> - Show quoted text -
It seems that most people realize the necessity to defend oneself...
its a survival instinct. and its a good thing.
.... with verbal assault we seem to defend ourselves also.
I consider that an enitirely fatal mistake. (with serious caveats I
will mention later)
why do I consider that an entirely faltal mistake. Because humans
err... no point of view or set of 'facts' is entirely
accurate... most are significantly flawed or just inapropriate in some
cases..
***
when defending that sort of thing the error in them is locked
in.. .. producing what is seen on some USENET groups
and in various sub cultures of totally correct drunks etc... its not
progress, but fatal to the person...these are common in the
culture, and are self identifying in that manner.
These lock in their own, often ludicrous levels of error. I see it
in corporate america and small business is the employee/ employer
relationship and competition for jobs.. if some idiot smears another
other ... and the second person fails to obliterate the first
argument, or ruin the guy with an adhominem assault or smear
campaign ...the person can loose his job. with severe
consequences.
in that manner we are often driven into a position of having to
**defend our own error**, since no way in hell are we 100% right all
the
time on all facets of any given issue... we lock ourselves into our
own error in that fashion (not be read as the other person is
right)... I am focusing on everyones inevitable, constant and
pervasive error...regardless how right they might be in various other
aspects of any scene.
by defense we lock in the erroneous aspects of our thinking.... that
limits ones own success in life dramatically, very often to the pits
if one is honest. No money, or the wife and kids hate your guts or
each other... or ones ass gets up to 400 lbs of blubber AND his wife
hates him... he gets fired, or becomes one of the 60% among us with
other serious issues and their repercussions.
***
I get past such two bit pissing contests by informing my clients at
the first meeting, all of them at once, **and their behind the scenes
advisors**, that on a scale of absolutes as an expert in my field for
which they have retained my services.... that I know at best no more
than 1% of all there is to know or will ever be known in the field...
I let that sink in, and give a few examples.. all things evolve, and
to do so much leave their previous standards, errors and insights
behind to one degree or the other.
**
There is always a contingent of loud obnoxious jerks lurking in the
wood work...these turn out to be the least capable, .they survive by
being so damaging that others back off... many are adicted to the
adrenalin surge they get by being abusive.
You see this in sport also... the best of the best are pleasant people
as a rule.
I grew up flat tracking (bikes on the dirt ovals along the west
coast, 1/4 to mile dirt ovals).. in the pro ranks you dont see abusive
idiots. these are people with respect for each other... they know
what it takes to get that far.
Only at the bottom, and generally only first time riders in club
races..do you find the occasional idiot.. stomping around in crappy
leathers, his trashy looking bike, trying to be macho... those
virtually allways finish last, only he is blind to it. Everyone
else recognises the phenomena.
It is the inferior that seem to have a need to abuse others.
The real talent goes into the turns sideways at 130 mph or so, with
the throttle wide open roosting dirt into the stands on the finest
machines in the world...these are decent people off the track.
those who see a need to be abusive with others are not the winners in
life.
Phil scott
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>> This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking insanity.
>> Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it aint.
> We have a recession/depression.
Nope, just a severe recession.
> A tax increase will likely produce a decrease in total collection.
Bet it doesnt federally.
Kenneth McVay OBC
The only question that interests me is how the
government (regardless of party in power) intends to
repay over $112 trillion dollars in unfunded
liabilities.
When governments create bubbles, sooner or later those
bubbles have to burst. The housing bubble's demise,
which continues to this day, is the latest example, but
the bubble being created now is much, much larger, and
the burst will be ugly.
Sooner or later, the government is going to be forced
to reduce the money supply (see the depression of 1920,
for example). When that happens, all hell's going to
break lose.
May we live in interesting times...
--
Who is your choice for the Dumbest celebrity? George W. Bush
holds a commanding lead at 27.8%, Kurt Knoll is second at
20.7% & Paris Hilton 3rd with 16%. VOTE NOW,
VOTE OFTEN: http://squidoo.com/think-you-are-stupid-eh
Werner
> "Werner" <whetz...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f130299b-4450-44f4...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 27, 11:14 am, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >...
>
> > This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking
> > insanity.
>
> > What did you expect?
>
> I don't argue with the fact of too much spending, or the military
> aspect of it. I simply put it into perspective. Military spending is
>
> Taxes have been up as well.http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Taxes-Per-H...
>
> Well that's one spin...from the conservative perspective. I wonder how they
> determine these numbers myself. Are they including many costs such as the
> cost of rehabilitating the vast numbers of retuning troops? The medical
> costs for the folks returning with missing limbs alone has to be
> astronomical. Are all military pensions...the price tag for private
> contractors...the rebulding process overseas...for schools and
> infrastructure and such that we pay for? How about the loss of productivity
> back home? There are many factors that I'm sure are not accounted for using
> very specific methods for these calculations. I'm sure you're aware of how
> creative one can get with such vast stacks of numbers. They can be twisted
> to make nearly any case. Before you say it...I will point out that your
> source has just as much of an agenda to pursue as my choice.
>
> http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
Our excessive military expenditures did not occur over just a few
short years or simply because of the Bush administration's policies.
They have been going on for a very long time in accordance with a
superficially plausible ideology, and have now become so entrenched in
our democratic political system that they are starting to wreak havoc.
This is military Keynesianism -- the determination to maintain a
permanent war economy and to treat military output as an ordinary
economic product, even though it makes no contribution to either
production or consumption.
http://www.bitethebullet.us/node/2
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> "Demon Buddha" <Nob...@no.where> wrote in message
> news:nMednfW6rPrxQaXW...@giganews.com...
>> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote:
>> > "Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:hh8210$80l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> The past 8 years wreaked havoc on the economy and hurled us into near
>> >
>> > Blah, blah, blah.
>> >
>> > If you think the last 8 years were the only cause of the current
>> > situation, I hope you don't reproduce.
>> >
>> >
>> This is the problem with most people - they cannot see effects much
>> past their noses. "It was Bush's fault" - "It's Obama's fault." The
>> depth of stupidity that these positions represent cannot be given a
>> magnitude. No such number exists.
>
> What are you talking about? Do YOU even know?
>
> Popeye (from my killfile) is a blithering fool. I am not deluded that
> Obama
> is a savior. I'm quite concerned about many of his policies. I would
> however point out he is in his 12th month in office following 8 years of a
> Republican president, who also had a Republican dominated congress to work
Blah, blah, blah.
They've worn out chanting "Bush lied, people died" and have to diversify.
2010's going to be a gleeful bloodletting.
3877
You are nothing like a winner in life. You have ended up at the end of you life with very
little in the way of assets, no property at all, and are very bitter and twisted as well.
Rod Speed
> In article <hhao41$lto$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Dano <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:7be4b64a-54ad-40f9...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 27, 2:04 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure
>>>> freaking insanity.
>>>
>>> Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it
>>> aint.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> We have a recession/depression. A tax increase will likely produce a
>> decrease in total collection.
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> Well you say so anyway. I guess it MUST be true. Thanks for the
>> studied input.
>>
>> We'll all be waiting with baited breath for you to back this up with
>> more cooked numbers from a conservative think tank.
>
> The only question that interests me is how the
> government (regardless of party in power) intends to
> repay over $112 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities.
They dont have to be repaid, stupid.
You just pay the liabilitys as they become due instead.
> When governments create bubbles, sooner or later those
> bubbles have to burst. The housing bubble's demise,
> which continues to this day, is the latest example, but
> the bubble being created now is much, much larger, and
> the burst will be ugly.
Fools ran the same line with the WW2 debt.
> Sooner or later, the government is going to be forced to reduce the money supply
They aint that stupid.
> (see the depression of 1920, for example). When that happens, all hell's going to break lose.
Fools ran the same line with the great depression debt.
> May we live in interesting times...
Much better if fools like you die instead.
Rod Speed
They are a fart in the bath compared with the cost of the bailout.
> This is military Keynesianism -- the determination
> to maintain a permanent war economy
You wouldnt know what a real war economy was if one bit you on your lard arse.
> and to treat military output as an ordinary economic product, even
> though it makes no contribution to either production or consumption.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
It was in fact WW2 that got the US economy out of the great depression.
> http://www.bitethebullet.us/node/2
Just another completely mindless steaming turd.
Dano
You have me scratching my head at this. That sure seems to make my point.
What is the point you're at any way? Clearly nothing will improve until we
rein in the military industrial complex...if indeed that is even possible.
I don't really care which president's lap you care to plop this on...they
are all just a cog really. I happen to think the second Bush was simply the
most ineffectual and uncaring of the lot. This simplistic buffoon was easy
to sway. Certainly the increase in war realated spending under his
administration will be hard to surpass. I'm far from happy with what Obama
has done so far.
Dano
You DO tend to ramble on interminably. Oh I'm sorry. Is that what you
consider to be abusive?
Demon Buddha
> Kenneth McVay OBC wrote:
>> In article <hhao41$lto$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Dano <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> "Werner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7be4b64a-54ad-40f9...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Dec 27, 2:04 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure
>>>>> freaking insanity.
>>>> Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it
>>>> aint.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> We have a recession/depression. A tax increase will likely produce a
>>> decrease in total collection.
>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>> Well you say so anyway. I guess it MUST be true. Thanks for the
>>> studied input.
>>>
>>> We'll all be waiting with baited breath for you to back this up with
>>> more cooked numbers from a conservative think tank.
>> The only question that interests me is how the
>> government (regardless of party in power) intends to
>> repay over $112 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities.
>
> They dont have to be repaid, stupid.
That's helpful.
>
> You just pay the liabilitys as they become due instead.
And you think this is a good thing? I take it you see no down-side to
all this?
> Much better if fools like you die instead.
Wow, that's pretty tough talk.
Demon Buddha
> It is the inferior that seem to have a need to abuse others.
Seems about right.
> The real talent goes into the turns sideways at 130 mph or so, with
> the throttle wide open roosting dirt into the stands on the finest
> machines in the world...these are decent people off the track.
Much like competitive shooting, pro or otherwise. I've been to a lot
of matches. Never once have I ever seen nor even heard rumor of anyone
ever copping an attitude or being impolite. We go, we shoot, and
whatever the result is, we accept it, keep smiling, and don't lose sleep
over any of it.
This seems to be one of the differences between individual and team
sports, though not in all cases. Look at what goes on in baseball,
basketball, football, soccer, *hockey*... all manner of disgraceful
behavior by athletes and fans alike. Remember when Brits and Italians
were literally murdering each other over the World Cup? But this is
what is heralded as virtue. OK... sure.
>
> those who see a need to be abusive with others are not the winners in
> life.
Even if they win, they remain losers. I guess it must be very
satisfying to let loose on those whose opinions do not agree with one's.
>
>
>
> Phil scott
>
Demon Buddha
>> those who see a need to be abusive with others are not the winners in
>> life.
>
> You are nothing like a winner in life. You have ended up at the end of you life with very
> little in the way of assets, no property at all, and are very bitter and twisted as well.
Because you say so. Right.
You have a nice day, OK?
Demon Buddha
>> those who see a need to be abusive with others are not the winners in
>> life.
>>
>
> You DO tend to ramble on interminably. Oh I'm sorry. Is that what you
> consider to be abusive?
Was someone holding a gun to your head, making you read it?
I suppose this is the best you can come up with. You must be very proud.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Kenneth McVay OBC wrote
>>>> Werner <whet...@mac.com> wrote Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> This kind of runaway spending while cutting taxes, is pure freaking insanity.
>>>>> Not when the tax cuts produce a increased total tax collection it aint.
>>>> We have a recession/depression. A tax increase will likely produce a decrease in total collection.
>>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>>> Well you say so anyway. I guess it MUST be true. Thanks for the
>>>> studied input.
>>>> We'll all be waiting with baited breath for you to back this up
>>>> with more cooked numbers from a conservative think tank.
>>> The only question that interests me is how the
>>> government (regardless of party in power) intends to
>>> repay over $112 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities.
>> They dont have to be repaid, stupid.
^^^^^^
> That's helpful.
>> You just pay the liabilitys as they become due instead.
> And you think this is a good thing?
There is no alternative.
Not doing the bailout would have cost even more.
> I take it you see no down-side to all this?
I see a real downside with not doing the bailout, we would have seen another great depression or worse.
And that would have cost MUCH more.
>> Much better if fools like you die instead.
> Wow, that's pretty tough talk.
Nope, just a statement of fact.
John Galt
It's not. All it does it get you worked up over nothing. :-)
JG
>>
>>
>>
>> Phil scott
>>
Werner
Reining in the military industrial complex and replacing it with
health industrial complex will hardly get the country out of
bankruptcy.
Rod Speed
No need to replace it, the health industrial complex has been around for a century or more now.
> will hardly get the country out of bankruptcy.
Wrong again. Not only isnt the country bankrupt, drastically reducing the military industrial
complex and moving to an medical industrial complex that costs HALF the percentage of
GDP that the current one does will do a hell of a lot for the financial situation of the country.
Dano
Right back at ya jackass.
Seldom has one so obviously had his head this firmly lodged in his rectum.
BTW...that IS abusive. Enjoy.
Dano
No. But I think it's money better spent to take care of the health of our
own citizens rather than roaming the world killing and being a hated pariah.
As a further side benefit, perhaps it would make us less of a target for the
hatred we have engendered as a nation as well.
Incidentally...who says we don't already HAVE a health/big business complex?
I don't know that industrial fits the description. But it sure is big and
makes a LOT of money for a lot of people. Very powerful people obviously.
The congress has just mandated that every citizen contributes to the wealth
of the private health care complex. How does it get worse than that?
Forcing people to support profit making corporations. Wonderful solution.
Werner
Do you have any evidence? Or is this another article of faith?
===
In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt promised the American people
that the new Social Security Tax would be invested at 3 per cent
interest, so that, by 1983, the tax could be ended and returns on the
investments would guarantee a retirement income for all Americans. NOT
TRUE.
He Promised participation in the Program would becompletely
voluntary; that the participants would only have to pay 1% of the
first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the program; that the
money the participants elected to put Into the program would be
deductible from their income for tax purposes each year; that the
money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather
than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would Only be
used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and that the annuity payments to the retirees
would never be taxed as income. NOT TRUE.
In 1964 President Lyndon B. Johnson in his Special Message to the
Congress Proposing a Nationwide War on the Sources of Poverty said, “
I have called for a national war on poverty. Our objective: total
victory ... And in the future, as in the past, this investment will
return its cost many fold to our entire economy ... The new program I
propose is within our means. Its cost of 970 million dollars ...” NOT
TRUE AND OFF BY TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
How about federal health care programs? Medicare for the poor aged is
an extension of the original Social Security Act and financed much
like the Trust Fund. Like the Trust Fund it has no surplus, no
savings, no assets, only federal IOUs. Medicaid expenditures for poor
adults and children, financed directly by the treasury, are largely
out of control and demand an ever expanding part of government budgets
and the economy. Like the Social Security retirement program, both
medical programs are flirting with FINANCIAL CATASTROPHE.
The nation is bankrupt. It can not afford another government reform.
How much care can a bankrupt country provide?
===
Dano
So let's get it straight. You oppose Social Security and think it was a bad
idea, but don't think the military/industrial complex has overwhelmed the
federal budget and spiraled the deficit to near bankruptcy?
Just be clear.
Rod Speed
>>>>>>> What did you expect?
>>>>>> http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
Yes, every other modern first and second world country gets its health
care for HALF the percentage of GDP that the US does and they ALL
do better on every measure that matters, longevity and years in good
health too.
> Or is this another article of faith?
Nope.
AND you dont have a shred of evidence that the US is bankrupt ANYWAY.
Another lie. The worst that can happen is that taxes have to
be increase if they run out of money or the money be diverted
from the immensely expensive military system etc etc etc.
> The nation is bankrupt.
Easy to claim. Pity you cant actually substantiate that claim.
> It can not afford another government reform.
Corse it can if that costs HALF the percentage of GDP and slashed military spending.
> How much care can a bankrupt country provide?
You wouldnt know what a real bankrupt country was if one bit you on your lard arse.
Extravagan
> Demon Buddha wrote
>> I take it you see no down-side to all this?
>
> I see a real downside with not doing the bailout, we would have seen another great depression or worse.
We will anyway.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Demon Buddha wrote
>>> I take it you see no down-side to all this?
>> I see a real downside with not doing the bailout, we would have seen another great depression or worse.
> We will anyway.
Nope.
> http://kunstler.com/blog/2009/12/forecast-2010.html
Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel.
Extravagan
> Extravagan wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Demon Buddha wrote
>
>>>> I take it you see no down-side to all this?
>
>>> I see a real downside with not doing the bailout, we would have seen another great depression or worse.
>
>> We will anyway.
>
> Nope.
Yep.
>> http://kunstler.com/blog/2009/12/forecast-2010.html
>
> Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel.
Have you an actual valid counterargument to what's written there, or are
you merely making a bald assertion unsupported by evidence?
phil scott
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote:> "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:hh8210$80l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> >> The past 8 years wreaked havoc on the economy and hurled us into near
>
> > Blah, blah, blah.
>
> > If you think the last 8 years were the only cause of the current
> > situation, I hope you don't reproduce.
>
> This is the problem with most people - they cannot see effects much
> past their noses. "It was Bush's fault" - "It's Obama's fault." The
> depth of stupidity that these positions represent cannot be given a
> magnitude. No such number exists.
einstein said... Intelligence has limits, ignorance and stupidity
are bottomless. (paraphrased)
phil scott
>
> - Show quoted text -
i do not disagree with you,,, but the country is not comming out of
bankrupcy regardless... not a chance in the world
does that mean other nations are better off,,,, no
the worlds working class is in deep trouble, the next decades will be
very very interesting along the lines of the ancient chinese curse
'may you have an interesting life'
a happy survival will go to those traveling light,. with superb broad
range skills, tools, and below the more ruthless levels of taxation
these will not be overworked,, if teey eat right will live long and
have sufficiency... some of the greedy will do well also, but will
not live long nor prosper in any but superfical aspects.
3877
Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.
> does that mean other nations are better off,,,, no
>
> the worlds working class is in deep trouble,
Clearly those in china are doing much better than when their
only option was rural poverty.
the next decades will be
> very very interesting along the lines of the ancient chinese curse
>
> 'may you have an interesting life'
Plenty claimed that during the great depression too.
And plenty did have an interesting life in WW2.
It looks like we will not see another of those essentially because nukes make them unthinkable now.
>
> a happy survival will go to those traveling light,.
Nope, to those who have a very decent collection of assets
which allows them to ride thru the inevitable booms and
busts that we have not yet worked out how to avoid.
with superb broad
> range skills, tools, and below the more ruthless levels of taxation
> these will not be overworked,, if teey eat right will live long
Not if their genes are duds they will not.
and
> have sufficiency... some of the greedy will do well also, but will
> not live long nor prosper in any but superfical aspects.
That is just plain wrong too. They will have sufficient assets so
they will not have to keep working into their dotage like you do.
They can do what interests them instead if the economy has just seen a bust etc.
Werner
SS is a Ponzi scheme going bankrupt. How is it a good idea for those
getting the shaft?
http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/SocialSecurity.shtml
http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
The 2008 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the
combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached $101.7
trillion in today's dollars! That is more than seven times the size of
the U.S. economy and 10 times the size of the outstanding national
debt. The unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits
that have been promised to retirees and what will be collected in
dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. Last year alone, the size of
the debt rose by $11.5 trillion. If no other reform is enacted, this
funding gap can only be closed in future years by substantial tax
increases, large benefit cuts or both.
http://retirementreform.org/socialsecurity/brief-analysis-616-social-security-and-medicare-projections-2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDVn_S-Rrg&feature=related
It is not simply the military industrial complex that overwhelmed the
budget. Entitlements are doing it much faster. Entitlements are not
constitutional. The military is.
Werner
> phil scott wrote:
...
>
> > i do not disagree with you,,, but the country is not comming out of
> > bankrupcy regardless... not a chance in the world
>
> Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
>
> The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.
>
It took a major war. Lots of people died to juice the economy and
lower unemployment. You should worry this model will soon be
repeated.
Rod Speed
>>> i do not disagree with you,,, but the country is not comming
>>> out of bankrupcy regardless... not a chance in the world
>> Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
>> The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.
> It took a major war.
And its less clear if the same sort of massive govt Keynesian spending
without the war would have worked even better. Very likely it would have.
> Lots of people died to juice the economy and lower unemployment.
And its less clear if the same sort of massive govt Keynesian spending
without the war would have worked even better. Very likely it would have.
> You should worry this model will soon be repeated.
Nope, because nukes have completely eliminated any possibility of another world war.
And we have done the massive govt spending without bothering with a war too.
It is clear that china has essentially ignored the complete implosion of the
entire world financial system, essentially by going for massive govt spending
I bet we wont see any bankruptcy, just another recovery, just like WW2 was.
We recovered fine from the S&L fiasco too and didnt even end up with another great depression this time either.
Rod Speed
You wouldnt know what a real Ponzi scheme was if one bit you on your lard arse.
> How is it a good idea for those getting the shaft?
No one is getting the shaft.
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/SocialSecurity.shtml
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
> The 2008 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports
> show the combined unfunded liability of these two
> programs has reached $101.7 trillion in today's dollars!
So what ? Neither were ever pure accumulation schemes, they were
always about paying for current outgoings with current incomings.
> That is more than seven times the size of the U.S. economy
> and 10 times the size of the outstanding national debt.
And those liabilitys cant even be due at one time, because they are
only legally obliged to pay out to those who qualify later in time.
> The unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits
> that have been promised to retirees and what will be collected
> in dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. Last year alone, the
> size of the debt rose by $11.5 trillion. If no other reform is enacted,
And that is the obvious way to deal with that, stupid.
> this funding gap can only be closed in future years
> by substantial tax increases, large benefit cuts or both.
And all of that is perfectly feasible.
> http://retirementreform.org/socialsecurity/brief-analysis-616-social-security-and-medicare-projections-2008
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDVn_S-Rrg&feature=related
> It is not simply the military industrial complex that overwhelmed
> the budget. Entitlements are doing it much faster.
Another lie. Without Vietnam, the cold war and Iraq etc and the
immense number of US bases all over the world, it would have
been perfectly possible for the US to have a balanced budget.
> Entitlements are not constitutional.
Wrong.
> The military is.
Wrong. A standing army aint.
JerryD(upstateNY)
Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.<<<<<<<<<<<
World War 2 got us out of the depression.
We would have been out years before the war but FDR's policies kept the
depression going.
I don't think WW3 will get anyone ot of a depression/resession.
Obama's policies are very simular to FDR's so we can plan on it being a long
time before our economy comes back to what it was before the Community
Reinvestment Act tubed the whole world's ecomoy.
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
phil scott
> phil scott wrote:
>
> > i do not disagree with you,,, but the country is not comming out of
> > bankrupcy regardless... not a chance in the world
>
> Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
entirely correct...and not only that in the 4 previous depressions in
the US, most involving
total collapse of the banking system and currency! we came out of
it. so you are correct,
and can probably prove it...I know I can.
what many are missing is the historical facts regaring the life cycles
of nations... thats been well documented in various books,
Ive posted those references a few times... briefly, nations are
driven by human nature as it affects economics... we get strong
through struggle at the start, we breed strong and successful kids and
a productive infra structure...then we get prosperous, then fat and
lazy, then corrupt, our kiddies get lazy and do poorly, govt bloats,
special interests rule... the economy tanks, wars are begun to try to
remedy the cash flow problem... the nation is then assaulted on all
fronts by those it sought to hose, (and the slave labor it imported as
we see today with the mexicans)... the nation looses empire and goes
though one or two generations in collapse half starved mode.
the cycle is 250 years with only slight deviations... the exceptions
have been nations with no finance or banking or written language, the
mongols for instance went 1,000 years.
apparent exceptions are only apparent... china for instance, been
there for thousands of years...its individual dynasties though? last
200 with little deveiation...starvation fills in the gaps between...
and please dont take my word for this... or any books word for
this... we all err. But that is my position in this matter, you
may want to search Kondratiev, economic winter.. or Ravi Batra's
book 'the coming depression (or collapse I forgot) 1990'
the US is a bit ahead of schedule to collapse at 250 years...about 20
years ahead of schedule..but with end stage indicators running out its
ears.
>
> The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.
>
> > does that mean other nations are better off,,,, no
>
> > the worlds working class is in deep trouble,
>
> Clearly those in china are doing much better than when their
> only option was rural poverty.
yes..that is correct...on this larger cycle ive mentioned there are
many blips... china btw is on the
asscendant part of its national life cycle... it will keep going up
for another 10 or 20 years, then level off for 20 years or so,
then begin its own decline...with the same demographic drivers Ive
mentioned... the USA half starved by then, will come back like a lion,
to begin its next 250 year or so cycle.
>
> the next decades will be
>
> > very very interesting along the lines of the ancient chinese curse
>
> > 'may you have an interesting life'
>
> Plenty claimed that during the great depression too.
of course.. the nation was 150 years old then, still coming out of its
early struggle years, with a strong work ethic and virtually no
international competition in
manufacturing... we got stronger and peaked 50 years later..
we are now roughly 240 years old... this is now.
that was then.
>
> And plenty did have an interesting life in WW2.
>
> It looks like we will not see another of those essentially because nukes make them unthinkable now.
stay tuned, Iran is buying 30 tons of yellow cake from Kazakistan it
appears... a dirty nuc can be make by
morons and floated into one of our harbors a dozen different ways (we
not even search 98% of our container cargo)
one goes off there and the panic will bring our economy to its
knees. ( I had lunch with one of our nations head utiliity
honcho's.. just after 911,he told me his offices were over run with
CIA and NSA people brainstorming and doing worst case analyis on where
we could be hit and brought to our knees economically... cost 10
cents in many cases... apparently the powers that be would like to
keep selling us oil, precluding such action.
say for instance NY harbor was dirty bombed, empying the city and the
worlds chief financial hub empty for months if not years...who woulld
we bomb in retaliation? we wont be sure who did it... and we
cant bomb the entire middle east into green glass..it would stop all
oil producton and collapse the rest of our economy... maybe it would
be N Korea that did the dirty bomb... total victory for that moron in
that event.
Im a semi retired consulting engineer, much of my work was in the US
nuclear and other weapons plants and I talk occasionally with friends
in the same areas.... let me tell you this, any plumber almost could
tell you how to infect a few million people at a wack with ebola or
small pox from a bathtub in a cheap motel for the cost of the motel
bill for 2 weeks, , and some not so tricky piping and the right
pump... thats virtually any plumber... same with any major utility sub
station lineman... none of that is rocket science...not in the
faintest.
now its getting out in the open, some of the talk shows are mentioning
these options because its leaked to us that the opposition, many
having long experience as senior engineers in these utilities know all
this and a limitless range of combinations and other options.
the US is 100% targetable with no way in hell to defend when all it
takes is one heavy hit to take our economy out... yes we can stop
some, but that will be a minority of the hard core attempts... our
enemies do not want us broke, imo, they want us under their control
and that may account for why we have seen no dirty bombs in any of our
big harbors...but I sure as hell wouldnt count on it.
> > a happy survival will go to those traveling light,.
>
> Nope, to those who have a very decent collection of assets
> which allows them to ride thru the inevitable booms and
> busts that we have not yet worked out how to avoid.
You are at least 50% correct... but not entirely correct... assets get
lost in dire times in many different ways,
riots you cant cant control, insurance companies bankrupt, taxation
you cant pay...health goes south etc. but yes assets work in
many cases.
also traveling light works well...with much less risk...but its a lot
more work..as you age that can be an issue...
so Im not
saying its a panacea.. I have a friend who was a millionaire running 5
good sized high end shops and food related operations in
2005, completiton moved in, he then over worked trying to make up for
the loss of sales...bankrupcy ensued, now he is on a wage at
20 bucks, and happy to get it... a study of history in these matters
demonstrates who make it and how the do it...
>
> with superb broad
>
> > range skills, tools, and below the more ruthless levels of taxation
> > these will not be overworked,, if teey eat right will live long
>
> Not if their genes are duds they will not.
Now there you have a superb point that had eluded me entirely... I am
reasonably competent and versitile and not afraid to work hard
or get dirty.. so my set of notions is reasonably viable for *me...but
not for a great many others for the range of reasons you are
suggesting...and to be sure...for me its not a cake walk either,
although not so bad at all.
.
>
> and
>
> > have sufficiency... some of the greedy will do well also, but will
> > not live long nor prosper in any but superfical aspects.
>
> That is just plain wrong too. They will have sufficient assets so
> they will not have to keep working into their dotage like you do.
I could have retired on investments 10 years ago, and i still can,
easily...but I noticed the macro trends and saw real estate headed
into the current mess...and the stock market and national
demographics...but mainly I saw what happens to retired people.. and
in myself when I had tried retirment at at 55.. my brain turned to
mush almost instantly, I found that out when I tried to a controls job
on the side...
at that time I made my mind up to disinvest in the market and to sell
my realestate..and move to non taxable digs, living in the worlds most
plush local (have you ever seen the view across the SF bay in a light
fog from sausalito? .. or point richmond. apartments with that vie
rent for 3,000 to 10,000 or more a month... I get it at no
cost ..well... boat registration fees etc.
and its a cheeeep boat too :) ol philise here is a tight wad when
it comes to giving money way, but I do ride a haul ass bike, and
my girlfirend does not lack for high heels and hot pants...not so bad
for 69, given that I will be deader than hell shortly anyway.
So now I work 10 hours a week on average to stay in practice and I
make sure much of that is with the tools even if its pro bono...and it
is hard work, and no..Im not entirely in shape for it...and it can be
both risky and painful...but thats what I do. Retirement is not for
me.
I enjoy what I do but only on this relaxed basis.
I wouldnt trade places with many of the white knuckled stressed out
millionaires living in this area on the hillsides, (many, the happiest
ones btw on adjacent boats, some off of buoys...and not all on plush
yachts..you'd be surprised.)
Phil scott
phil scott
see my reply to this person on the issue.. we are at the end of a
national life cycle, by stats, and all the
demographics and symptoms.. and yes we have recovered from 5
previous major economic collapses, 4 before the 1929
depression...
that was then........... this is now...and this time we industrial
mfgr competition big time...then we had virtually none...and we
had very little debt then...now we oww 50 trillion counting what we
owe SS etc... with no way in hell of paying it.
but those are just symptoms.. its the underlying drivers I mention in
that post that are relevant.
Phil scott
3877
> 3877" wrote in message
>> Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
>> The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.<<<<<<<<<<<
> World War 2 got us out of the depression.
Yes, but even those who did not get involved in WW2 got out of the great depression.
> We would have been out years before the war but FDR's policies kept
> the depression going.
> I don't think WW3 will get anyone ot of a depression/resession.
There will be no WW3, the Marshall Plan and nukes have ensured that.
> Obama's policies are very simular to FDR's
No they are not. Obama is not proposing anything new anything like social security.
so we can plan on it being
> a long time before our economy comes back to what it was before the
> Community Reinvestment Act tubed the whole world's ecomoy.
The CRA did nothing of the sort. There were never enough CRA loans written
to do that, even if they had all defaulted and they did not in fact default at a
higher rate than non CRA loans. And even if they had all defaulted, the most
that could have done is increased the cost of non CRA loans.
It was the securitizing and bundling of sub prime loans and giving
those bundled securities AAA ratings that they didnt even come
close to qualifying for under the stupid US non recourse system
that completely imploded the entire world financial system.
3877
> On Dec 30, 10:28 am, "3877" <3...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> phil scott wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> i do not disagree with you,,, but the country is not comming out of
>>> bankrupcy regardless... not a chance in the world
>>
>> Plenty claimed the same thing during the great depression.
>
> entirely correct...and not only that in the 4 previous depressions in
> the US, most involving
> total collapse of the banking system and currency! we came out of
> it. so you are correct,
> and can probably prove it...I know I can.
>
> what many are missing is the historical facts regaring the life cycles
> of nations... thats been well documented in various books,
> Ive posted those references a few times...
You have just closed your eyes to the countless
examples of nothing like bankruptcy with the absolute
vast bulk of nations in the last thousand years.
briefly, nations are
> driven by human nature as it affects economics... we get strong
> through struggle at the start, we breed strong and successful kids and
> a productive infra structure...then we get prosperous, then fat and
> lazy, then corrupt, our kiddies get lazy and do poorly, govt bloats,
> special interests rule... the economy tanks, wars are begun to try to
> remedy the cash flow problem... the nation is then assaulted on all
> fronts by those it sought to hose, (and the slave labor it imported as
> we see today with the mexicans)...
America has imported cheap labor ever since it started, that is nothing new.
the nation looses empire and goes
> though one or two generations in collapse half starved mode.
We never saw even a single example of one or two generations
in half starved mode in the last thousand years.
> the cycle is 250 years with only slight deviations... the exceptions
> have been nations with no finance or banking or written language, the
> mongols for instance went 1,000 years.
And western europe has already been going for a hell of a lot more than 250 years.
And Japan lasted for a hell of a lot more than 250 years without
one or two generations half starving. The most they got was a
couple of years of half starving just after they lost WW2.
> apparent exceptions are only apparent... china for instance, been
> there for thousands of years...its individual dynasties though?
Individual dynasties are completely irrelevant, just like individual
monarchies in western europe are too. What matters is that
the basic society continued for a hell of a lot more than your
claimed 250 years without any one or two generations of half starving.
last
> 200 with little deveiation...starvation fills in the gaps between...
We do not get starvation anymore except when things have
degenerated into the most obscene levels of civil war and
civil chaos and we do not get starvation when that happens
in the west either, essentially because we organise things better.
>
> and please dont take my word for this... or any books word for
> this... we all err. But that is my position in this matter, you
> may want to search Kondratiev, economic winter.. or Ravi Batra's
> book 'the coming depression (or collapse I forgot) 1990'
Depression.
He didn't even get the timeline right, let alone the basics of what would
produce that depression and we haven't even seen a depression either.
> the US is a bit ahead of schedule to collapse at 250 years...
It is not going to collapse.
about 20
> years ahead of schedule..but with end stage indicators running out its
> ears.
Plenty made the same claim about the great depression.
It worked out fine anyway.
>
>>
>> The entire west came out of bankruptcy anyway.
>>
>>> does that mean other nations are better off,,,, no
>>
>>> the worlds working class is in deep trouble,
>>
>> Clearly those in china are doing much better than when their
>> only option was rural poverty.
>
> yes..that is correct...on this larger cycle ive mentioned there are
> many blips... china btw is on the
> asscendant part of its national life cycle... it will keep going up
> for another 10 or 20 years, then level off for 20 years or so,
> then begin its own decline...
Nothing like that happened with Britain, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Italy, Germany etc etc etc.
with the same demographic drivers Ive
> mentioned... the USA half starved by then,
How odd that that never happened with Britain, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Italy, Germany, Japan etc etc etc.
will come back like a lion,
> to begin its next 250 year or so cycle.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> the next decades will be
>>
>>> very very interesting along the lines of the ancient chinese curse
>>
>>> 'may you have an interesting life'
>>
>> Plenty claimed that during the great depression too.
>
> of course.. the nation was 150 years old then, still coming out of its
> early struggle years, with a strong work ethic and virtually no
> international competition in
> manufacturing... we got stronger and peaked 50 years later..
>
> we are now roughly 240 years old... this is now.
>
> that was then.
There is not even a shred of evidence for any 250 year cycle.
>
>
>>
>> And plenty did have an interesting life in WW2.
>>
>> It looks like we will not see another of those essentially because
>> nukes make them unthinkable now.
>
> stay tuned, Iran is buying 30 tons of yellow cake from Kazakistan it
> appears... a dirty nuc can be make by
> morons and floated into one of our harbors a dozen different ways (we
> not even search 98% of our container cargo)
They aren't that stupid. They know what Isreal will do if they are that stupid.
> one goes off there and the panic will bring our economy to its
> knees.
Not a chance.
( I had lunch with one of our nations head utiliity
> honcho's.. just after 911,he told me his offices were over run with
> CIA and NSA people brainstorming and doing worst case analyis on where
> we could be hit and brought to our knees economically... cost 10
> cents in many cases... apparently the powers that be would like to
> keep selling us oil, precluding such action.
Pure fantasy.
> say for instance NY harbor was dirty bombed, empying the city and the
> worlds chief financial hub empty for months if not years...who woulld
> we bomb in retaliation? we wont be sure who did it... and we
> cant bomb the entire middle east into green glass..it would stop all
> oil producton and collapse the rest of our economy...
The same claim was made about the first gulf war. It worked fine anyway.
maybe it would
> be N Korea that did the dirty bomb... total victory for that moron in
> that event.
>
> Im a semi retired consulting engineer, much of my work was in the US
> nuclear and other weapons plants and I talk occasionally with friends
> in the same areas.... let me tell you this, any plumber almost could
> tell you how to infect a few million people at a wack with ebola or
> small pox from a bathtub in a cheap motel for the cost of the motel
> bill for 2 weeks, ,
If it was that easy, it would have happened by now.
and some not so tricky piping and the right
> pump... thats virtually any plumber... same with any major utility sub
> station lineman... none of that is rocket science...not in the
> faintest.
If it was that easy, it would have happened by now.
> now its getting out in the open, some of the talk shows are mentioning
> these options because its leaked to us that the opposition, many
> having long experience as senior engineers in these utilities know all
> this and a limitless range of combinations and other options.
>
> the US is 100% targetable with no way in hell to defend when all it
> takes is one heavy hit to take our economy out... yes we can stop
> some, but that will be a minority of the hard core attempts... our
> enemies do not want us broke, imo, they want us under their control
> and that may account for why we have seen no dirty bombs in any of our
> big harbors...but I sure as hell wouldnt count on it.
If it was that easy, it would have happened by now.
>>> a happy survival will go to those traveling light,.
>>
>> Nope, to those who have a very decent collection of assets
>> which allows them to ride thru the inevitable booms and
>> busts that we have not yet worked out how to avoid.
>
> You are at least 50% correct... but not entirely correct... assets get
> lost in dire times in many different ways,
Not if you have a clue about how to ensure they do not.
I did not lose a cent in the most recent fiasco.
> riots you cant cant control, insurance companies bankrupt, taxation
> you cant pay...health goes south etc. but yes assets work in
> many cases.
>
> also traveling light works well...
No it does not when the economy tanks
so badly that there is no work for you at all.
You are MUCH better off with some decent assets that
you can live off until the economy gets going again,
because you do not need anyone to pay you anything.
with much less risk...but its a lot
> more work..as you age that can be an issue...
It can indeed, particularly when you can no longer work.
You're much better off with some decent assets you can live off instead.
> so Im not
> saying its a panacea.. I have a friend who was a millionaire running 5
> good sized high end shops and food related operations in
> 2005, completiton moved in, he then over worked trying to make up for
> the loss of sales...bankrupcy ensued, now he is on a wage at
> 20 bucks, and happy to get it... a study of history in these matters
> demonstrates who make it and how the do it...
And hordes more ensured that they had decent assets and
can do fine even when no one wants to pay them to do anything.
>>
>> with superb broad
>>
>>> range skills, tools, and below the more ruthless levels of taxation
>>> these will not be overworked,, if teey eat right will live long
>>
>> Not if their genes are duds they will not.
>
> Now there you have a superb point that had eluded me entirely... I am
> reasonably competent and versitile and not afraid to work hard
> or get dirty.. so my set of notions is reasonably viable for *me...but
> not for a great many others for the range of reasons you are
> suggesting...and to be sure...for me its not a cake walk either,
> although not so bad at all.
>
> .
>
>
>>
>> and
>>
>>> have sufficiency... some of the greedy will do well also, but will
>>> not live long nor prosper in any but superfical aspects.
>>
>> That is just plain wrong too. They will have sufficient assets so
>> they will not have to keep working into their dotage like you do.
>
> I could have retired on investments 10 years ago, and i still can,
> easily...but I noticed the macro trends and saw real estate headed
> into the current mess...and the stock market and national
> demographics...but mainly I saw what happens to retired people.. and
> in myself when I had tried retirment at at 55.. my brain turned to
> mush almost instantly, I found that out when I tried to a controls job
> on the side...
Plenty don't get anything like that result.
JerryD(upstateNY)
Yes, but even those who did not get involved in WW2 got out of the great
depression.
So what ? WW2 was still the reason behind us getting out of the depression.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be no WW3, the Marshall Plan and nukes have ensured that.<<<<<<
Oh yea, a peace treaty will cure everything.
Iran will have nukes soon and will sell them to terrorists and they will
explode them here because of the useless president we have.
Bush would take a pro-active approach to Iran.
Obama will wait until a nuke kills 2-3 million people and then get on TV and
tell everyone that they will find the people who did this and see they are
tried for their crimes.
That will help a lot, won't it ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama's policies are very simular to FDR's
No they are not. Obama is not proposing anything new anything like social
security.<<<<<<<
hahahahaha..............you are kidding right ?
What the hell do you call the takeover of our health care ?
What about the Cap and Trade that the nitwit-and-chief wants to pass ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was the securitizing and bundling of sub prime loans and giving those
bundled securities AAA ratings that they didnt even come close to qualifying
for under the stupid US non recourse system
that completely imploded the entire world financial system<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You should read what you write.
I quote "It was the securitizing and bundling of sub prime loans and giving
those bundled securities".....
If there were no CRA loans, there would be no "SUB PRIME LOANS" to bundle
and sell.
The CRA caused the whole thing and you just proved it.
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
">
3877
Wrong, as always. There were hordes of sub prime loans that weren't CRA loans.
> The CRA caused the whole thing and you just proved it.
Presumably you actually are that stupid.
phil scott
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
one is left in stunned amazement at your intelectual capacity...sheer
wits and historical
insight, ability to predict the economy and war with such certainty.
I must bow out of the discussion here.
Regards,
Phil scott
3877
Could have sworn you attempted that yourself with where the US is headed right now.
> I must bow out of the discussion here.
Always wise when you can not point to even a single example of anything like your
250 year cycle with one or two generations of near starvation in the last thousand year.
Or in the two thousand years before that either.
> Regards,
> Phil scott
Old Pif
>
> one is left in stunned amazement at your intelectual capacity...sheer
> wits and historical
> insight, ability to predict the economy and war with such certainty.
>
> I must bow out of the discussion here.
>
> Regards,
> Phil scott
Phil, are you always like that or only during Christmas time?
phil scott
no..I just finally got hip to the new 'rod speed' sock puppet...
engafing with sociopaths is not very bright.
.. awarding these with their own output is about the best one can
do...
3877
> On Dec 30, 7:32 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 30, 10:17 pm, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> one is left in stunned amazement at your intelectual
>>> capacity...sheer wits and historical
>>> insight, ability to predict the economy and war with such certainty.
>>
>>> I must bow out of the discussion here.
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Phil scott
>>
>> Phil, are you always like that or only during Christmas time?
>
> no..I just finally got hip to the new 'rod speed' sock puppet...
> engafing with sociopaths is not very bright.
Corse that wouldnt be you being abusive at all, eh ?
John Galt
> On Dec 30, 7:32 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 30, 10:17 pm, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> one is left in stunned amazement at your intelectual capacity...sheer
>>> wits and historical
>>> insight, ability to predict the economy and war with such certainty.
>>> I must bow out of the discussion here.
>>> Regards,
>>> Phil scott
>> Phil, are you always like that or only during Christmas time?
>
> no..I just finally got hip to the new 'rod speed' sock puppet...
Bingo. I figured it out on our last exchange. Same m.o. Generalize the
point being made by your opponent, create a straw man position from it,
argue against the straw man, not the actual point, and if you can find
an isolated instance to try and "prove" your point (prefaced with the
term "Pity that....."), all the better.
Boring.
JG
Rod Speed
> phil scott wrote:
>> On Dec 30, 7:32 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Dec 30, 10:17 pm, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> one is left in stunned amazement at your intelectual
>>>> capacity...sheer wits and historical
>>>> insight, ability to predict the economy and war with such
>>>> certainty. I must bow out of the discussion here.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Phil scott
>>> Phil, are you always like that or only during Christmas time?
>>
>> no..I just finally got hip to the new 'rod speed' sock puppet...
>
> Bingo. I figured it out on our last exchange. Same m.o. Generalize the
> point being made by your opponent, create a straw man position from
> it, argue against the straw man, not the actual point, and if you can
> find an isolated instance to try and "prove" your point (prefaced
> with the term "Pity that....."), all the better.
And yours is to lie about straw men and hope no one notices the lie.
> Boring.
Your sig is sposed to have a line with just -- on it in front of it.
Demon Buddha
Which I suspect he lifted from Voltaire, who said that anyone wishing
to understand the mathematical concept of infinity need only contemplate
the limits of human stupidity.
Dano
Einstein also said...
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So is a lot."
But then...he said lots of things. <g>
Beam Me Up Scotty
Doesn't the infinite group of stupid idiots know that?