Topic: Economic Devastation - page 55. (Read 504811 times)

...

Been on vacation, amigo.  Did not mean to irk you.

I DO wish I still had my copy of S. Homer's book.  A master of detail, even more do that Reinhardt and Rogoff's book on financial crises (over the past 800 years).

Ahem do you even read what I write?

...

History does not repeat, but it does rhyme (Mark Twain).

Sidney Homer "wrote the book" on the history of interest rates for the past 4000 years, not an easy read:

http://www.amazon.com/History-Interest-Fourth-Edition-Finance/dp/0471732834

I wonder if Armstrong has looked that far back?  (I do not know)

http://hackaday.com/2015/09/02/save-wifi-act-now-to-save-wifi-from-the-fcc/

Again I reiterate what I wrote upthread and ask all of you to email Armstrong. Does he really think there is a 5000-year cycle and interest rates will be trending up instead of down for next 5000 years?

Obviously usury finance is dying. And I explained why in the Economic Devastation thread.

This is another reason that crypto currency is going to change the world. It is all part of the this massive 309.6 year shift mentioned in my prior post.

That should be 2032.95 - 309.6.


Before you comment, make sure you are not ignorant of the subject matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1723

Also if you are looking at what happened at the same juncture before the turn in the 309.6 year cycle:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1706

What was happening around that time was the Enlightenment, fall of monarchies and the birth of the new world America, the nation-states, and the Industrial Age.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18th_century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Frost_of_1709

Now we are looking at the fall of the nation-state and birth of a global village and Knowledge Age.

are you elite family insider

I concur with all points; to add to this one you've just posted, it's a bit harsh to observe that the well educated, mentally evolved and intellectual population won't give birth to children. Instead we observe that humans from the third countries that have eliminated human rights to women, are using them as birth machines, literally filling the place with their children.

Let me clarify here that I'm not xenophobic and don't really care if I the child that's being born is German or Pakistani for that matter. I do have problems with the disability of the poor parents to give their children the necessary education, instead of just adding more members and thus making the family poorer. Certain religions (not pointing fingers here) are specifically targeted towards spreading more off-springs rather than making quality ones. Pluralism vs quality = 1-0.

Last but not least, if you're baffled with the situation in EU (and elsewhere) that is now filled with Syrians, Palestinians etc, who were forced out of their homeland, think about it this way: Which is harder to control? An educated person that speaks 4 languages and have a university degree (or more) OR 100 immigrants that will practically do anything in order for their children to survive within a foreign country?

It will be a mixed bag. There won't be an absolute solution in any direction. Again diversification.

By leading the way for more people to be productive with a scalable crypto currency, we will be laying the ground work for humanity.

This is a our duty as well as our profit. 

I suspect taxation will increase for a while as well as Socialism continuing its march to devastation.  I agree that it is the productive sector (the active participants in the Knowledge Age) that is the only real solution to our worldwide economic problems.

But, intrusive government looks very likely for at least some time.

Government dictatorship is one of the very ugliest set of scenarios facing us.  I hope TPTB's project is a step on the long & hard road to eventual freedom.

It is certainly not impossible to tax the rich just ask any rich person.
Businesses are only able to pass on a portion of new taxes to their employees and customers (see link below for why)

http://foundationsofecon.blogspot.com/2011/06/businesses-cannot-simply-pass-on-taxes.html?m=1

Increasing taxes does lead to increasing centralization and reduced dynamism in the overall economy.

Why do you say socialism on the decline? Unsustainable in its current form sure. Far from petering out socialism seems set to grow dramatically over the coming years.

But its impossible to tax the rich from a practical standpoint since every new tax you put on them will just simply be outsourced to his employees or customers.

The only solution to taxing the rich is to nationalize everything, which will obviously be a catastrophe as we know the government is unable to drive the economy at all.

So communism (as in central planning) doesn't work, socialism (currently used) is on the decline.


The only possible future is a free capitalist system with self-regulated bodies. There are plenty of clever and innovative people who can build use a better society in the future, but for this we really need to get to a knowledge age so I agree with that.

If the collapse hits soon then everybody will go wild and it will be a disaster filled with looting, mobs forming, and total societal breakdown.

If it hits gradually then we will have an opportunity to slowly replace it, with a better and well though system.

I expect that the rich will be increasingly unable to escape taxation going forward. The wealthy will be tracked and taxed while safe havens and tax shelters are increasingly shut down.
Millionaires will be hit hard and even the billionaires take a small hit. As national sovereignty is ceded there will increasingly be no place for them to go.

You are correct when you note that this will only stall potential collapse. Down the road we will find ourselves with a massive and inefficient global welfare state that is stagnate and in constant danger of failure. At this point humanity will desperately need a paradigm shift. I believe the knowledge age as outlined by Anonymint in the OP represents such a shift.

My exception and hope is that the the current system will survive long enough for the knowledge age to really take off and simply grow us out of the morass. As more people transition themselves from the welfare state to the knowledge age the risk of collapse will decline as the overall size and cost of the welfare state declines to an insignificant portion of the economy.

The trend towards future population reduction is already well underway. It seems likely that further population reduction will occur spontaneously as a byproduct of the status quo.    
http://www.economist.com/news/21589151-crashing-fertility-will-transform-asian-family-baby-boom-bust

 

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/36655




Please everyone email this to Armstrong. His email address is: [email protected]

Can't he see what the above chart says? I have written about this extensively in the Economics Devastation thread.

This is the end of usury finance and debt. I have explained why in the Economics Devastation thread.

This is a momentous change for humanity.

Why do you think I am working on anonymous solutions we need in order to cross the chasm!

Please support my efforts. It is that damn important.

That could stall the collapse for another 20-30 years however it actually won't.

You forget that rich people don't pay taxes, at all. No matter how much you force them (as if you could since they own the politicians), you cannot have the rich taxed because they will just outsource the taxes to his employees or customers.

Socialism eliminates the middle class, and the middle class is the only class that pays taxes, as poors only receive poor welfare, and the rich receive corporate welfare, bail-in, bail-out money.

So even if the robotization would happen, and people would be left with no jobs, the government cannot give them welfare as there would be nobody left to pay taxes.

They cant just print money to give welfare because that would be instant hyperinflation. Could be a slave society with food rationing and slave labour for the poor? Maybe.

But i`m more worried that eugenics and population reduction is a more likely outcome unfortunately, since war is not on the table anymore.

You repeated almost verbatim what I have written upthread

@minor-transgression

I more or less agree with most of your post above.

You appear to be arguing that our current banking system is not a fractional reserve system because historically traditional fractional reserve banking was done with sound money gold or silver.
This seems to be a debate over etymology. Do you feel my actual conclusions are inaccurate? If so put your penny down and state where and state where and why.

Edit: I see you started a new thread on this topic so I will reply there. I do think you have a good point we you argue that our current system is fundamentally different then the classic fractional reserve banking of old and thus deserving of its own name. I will link to your post below.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unrestricted-banking-and-problem-banking-1165896

@Coincube - Wikipedia? Webster's dictionary?
Please tell me you got these from Google. (If so I get to ROFL)

Would you happily accept a $1,000,000 IOU from a guy who is $5Tn
"in the hole"  than a $1 IOU from me (I am debt-free)?

We are discussing banking, and I'm going with narrow definitions:

JP Morgan : "Gold is money and nothing else"

Bitcoin, Gold, a Central Bank Note, and an IOU from minor transgression.
Of these only Bitcoin and Gold have no counterparty risk, and are money.
The others are valued entirely on the creditworthiness of the issuer,
and are credit. Where Notes are issued by government or a Central Bank,
they create both a credit and a debt.
Similarly when you spend with a credit card, you expand the supply of credit,
and when you spend with a debit card, the supply of credit decreases. No new
bitcoins or gold (real money) are created or destroyed in these transactions.

This point is relevant because at one time real money was the "Reserve" in
fractional reserve banking. History provides a list of bitter experience
where prudent lending limits were exceeded.
   
Fractional Reserve Banking implies a hard limit on the supply of credit.
An important consideration is that as the limit is approached, there is a
reasonable expectation that rates of interest on loans will rise. This
should provide some measure of stability to an otherwise unstable system.
In my humble opinion, fractional reserve banking ceased when Nixon took
the dollar off the gold standard in 1971, and I harbour some doubts that
it was ever effective post 1913. Clinton and Brown buried it in the 2000's
via "light touch regulation" and "risk-based regulation".

Haldane, "Why Banks Failed the Stress Test" speech [p12], 2009, summing up
the beyond-laissez-faire ethos perfectly:
"No. There was a much simpler explanation according to one of those present. There
was absolutely no incentive for individuals or teams to run severe stress tests and
show these to management. First, because if there were such a severe shock, they
would likely lose their bonus and possibly their jobs. Second, because in that
event the authorities would step-in anyway to save a bank and others suffering
a similar plight."
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2009/speech374.pdf

These perverse incentives render further discussions moot until we can
agree on some basic definitions. Asking me to believe in fractional reserve
banking where the "reserve" is conjured up after the fact out of thin air, is
asking an awful lot. Once we understand each other we can talk.

I will put up a new thread to handle further discussion on this topic.

@TPTBNW thanks for the heads-up on whatsapp. Somehow the MSM was able to keep that
request for a backdoor well away from the front page.

RealBitcoin you are not accounting for the predictable government response to spill over inflation.
I agree with you when you say there will be spill over inflation which combined with technological progress will progressively undercut the real earnings of the majority.

Government response to this is will not be to let the system collapse but instead to "put down more concrete". As earnings are eroded governments will simply move on a worldwide basis to supplement the incomes of the newly impoverished masses via redistribution and welfare programs. A small part of this redistribution will occur in the form of significantly higher taxes. However, the lions share will come from increased government debt.

As governments become insolvent they will find markets unwilling to service debt in their home currencies and will be forced to transition their debt to a supranational one (probably SDR's). This will be the only way to continue supportive handouts to dependent populations. Think Greece but on a global scale. Going forward this scenario would result not in immediate catastrophic collapse but rather a slow progressive grind with individual countries going into crisis at different times while being forced to surrender sovereignty.

I believe we are witnessing the gradual but inevitable death of nationalism and the modern nation state.

This time its different, because it's not just the surface problems that is caused by this massive disallocation of resources, but the economy is also fundamentally distorted.

In an average depression, many jobs get lost, business go bankrupt, for the same fact that they are not belonging to that economy, so they have no place there to exist.

But now its over 50% of the GDP that is comprised of financial services/banking & corporate business, and not just the jobs that will be lost, but the capital.


1) If they put more concrete, a.k.a. print money and buy all bubbles up, then eventually the leaked inflation becomes so big that the real earnings of the populus will be detrimentally hurt. If the inflation increases more than your earnings, and drastically more, then eventually you will starve to death as you cannot even buy the food in the stores, despite the food supply being constant. And of course this hurts the economy even more, imagine if 99% of the GDP is got from banks, who will produce anything?

And each time they print money, the GDP gets distorted more, if the financial sector is 50% of the GDP and the bust sets in then consider a 49% GDP decrease depression, because about 49% out of 50% does not belong there. But the hyperinflation will probably wash away the rest too, so my guess is about 80-90% depression, and alot of unemployed people (+robotics caused unemployment). By the next decade we can easily see 50% unemployment of able bodied people.

2) If they dont print money then obviously speculators will pull out their money, and it will cause a bust spiral that will bust the entire economy, starting from the 1:1000 leveraged firms , down to the small vendor who has a little mortgage.

The amount of financial devastation pending will be big, and it will cause civil unrest probably.