Topic: Global crisis... (Read 1879 times)

You seams to misinterpret me as a some sort of economics Taliban of the black&white branch.
Obviously I'm not a "lesser-fair" fanatic to such way or see it as a black and white rule-less anarchy.
We live in a world of mass-production, mass-production can only survive as long as there's mass consumption, and consumption is currently low, this is not "gossips to take down a market", just plain math.
Want to sort it out? Great! But it will never be sorted at the financial stack, make new stuff that people may need, a single industry can provide for a lot.

Systemic Event on Wall Street Coming

If you're not bearish on everything except precious metals and cryptocurrencies this year you're going to miss an opportunity of a lifetime to get rich at a time when everyone else loses their wealth.

First it was exactly an answer as such kind of answer I waited. In few words like the connection between your title of the thread and the content of your main post. So other thing is the beginning and another one the next beginning. Then is continued with the giving of data not needed (as were the first ones), jumps from concepts to concepts without following the normal logic and even totally wrong connections and perceptions which are one against another.

For example you write (I would pick only one because have no meaning to analyse all): "There's a major difference between private and public business, the first one can bankrupt, the second one can't, better said, can but will drag everyone in the tidal wave."

Here my interpretation of the above: First you must decide if an public business can bankrupt or not and then express this clearly. Because in your sentence first this kind of business cannot bankrupt and then can bankrupt but when do so "drag everyone in the tidal wave". The same way of expression was used in your previous post about the role of the State in the economy. Exactly the same. Nor meat and neither fish. This is the overall meaning of overall your write. To be "correct" with every possible interpretation. To not take an clear position. To have always a way to "go out" that is written. To reinterpret that. Except to criticize the government. This is clear in every moment. If I would go further with the above phrase I can tell that even this conclusion is not at all true. There is not any kind of differences in the bankruptcy of an public or private businesses. If bankrupt two businesses with different owners (private and public) and have the same  businesses data (employment, revenue, net profit, costs, share of the market etc) independently from the owner will have exactly the same consequences. The only difference is who lose the business.

Almost every sentence is followed by another which not necessarily (when has this "duty") argues the first one. Normally and figuratively are jumps form the first floor of a building to the the fourth of another building. As it is this bunch of sentences (again within the above phrase - told that will not analyse others like with this):

"There's a major difference between private and public business, the first one can bankrupt, the second one can't, better said, can but will drag everyone in the tidal wave. And here comes the Achilles' heel of 2008/9's action that will make the next crisis a much bigger one; States are now fragile with debt going through the roof and can't redo what they did back then."

Normally this bunch have meaning if could be some explanations between the two sentences like this: The state has used its money to not allow the bankruptcy of ...... and here is my question-mark; of who kind of businesses? Only public ones? If so you are in big wrong. General Motors is not a all public company. And was helped by The Government. Of private ones? The same answer.

Without going further with various interpretations (and as I told can be to many) is normal to do some questions before. Who asked such things? Why must be given those? Both us (and who may be interested to read these posts) is supposed to know what has made the Government of USA. Why must be given again these things when is supposed that here must be only your thoughts about the different solution of this crisis? Are needed in order that you give the overall argumentation about your solution? Lets agree this variant. Then let go forward accepting this supposition.

Bu what are your thoughts about the solution of the crisis of 2008? Regarding this in your post I find only one sentence (if can be taken as such and not another interpretation like those that only you are able to do):

Back on 2008/9, two courses of action could take place, laissez-faire and take the hit or bail it, making the hit smaller, but at short term. If the first one was bad, the second one ends up to be only apparently good.

According to this solution the crisis must be leaved to continue (this is the meaning of laissez - faire) and then will have as a result: "take the hit or bail it, making the hit smaller, but at short term. If the first one was bad, the second one ends up to be only apparently good."

This is the big solution.

This is the solution, according to you, of the second biggest world crisis since the creation of human kind. Given with two sentences and with a result nor meat and neither fish. Leave everything to the case. This action must be caused a much more prosperity in our days and any kind of risk for another more probable big crisis in the immediate or near future. So it was enough that the White House threw out all the advises of the Harvard minds with which was consulted at the time of crisis and then followed these two sentences given by you in your "solution of 2008 crisis" above post and in our days everything at USA and o all the rest of the world would be much, much more better not only economically but even in every other field of the life. With few words better in everything and in every aspect. I have no words to comment. Or better don't want to hurt you more with my comments.

You give even another solution about the actual terrible situation but as I told at the previous sentence I don't want to hurt you more.

I will give you (if want) below only some friendly life words. Then you can put it in the trash after the read.

If the world or even our home will be managed IN EVERYTHING using your mentality of "can be this of the opposite of this" or "can be this or that", or "can be this or almost that of this" and other this and that, in this day, me and you would be at the stone age hunting with archers in order to find the everyday feed.

Especially in time of crisis (any kind of crisis) have no place for dilemmas or suppositions but only for solutions. Any kind of solutions cannot be named such if have not action which aim to eliminate the crisis. Any kind of crisis cannot be solved itself. Or if can be the results would be, for sure, ALWAYS MUCH WORST than in the case of doing actions to stop and eliminate it. The laissez-faire is not magic. Every kind of market need always rules because in every market operate and will operate always impostors, stealers, criminals which are not at all stupids. If they will own the market (if are not rules the probability that they win is huge) the first thing they will do is to ban exactly the tool which allowed to them their status: the laisses-faire. Because this tool may serve to the others to throw away them from the status they have. This could be one of the mos probable scenarios that can happen if is given freedom without rules. This about the laissez-faire seen by you and to many others like economic magic tool.

As for all everything else in our threads I will end here. Don't find more interesting to discuss about this topic here. You can continue with your posts commenting everything written by me or other things because is your thread. But don't forget that much more hard (and some time even impossible) than destroying is to build. And if you will be able to build cannot be built nothing using only bricks and not all the other needed materials and all the necessary infrastructure.

To give solutions and to build first of all needed learning. Then much more, but this is the firs brick. Cannot be learned (especially some things) here in forum or only reading some article full of data. The world of knowledge is without end. Try to do a search and will be amazed but what you will find.

Let's start by the beginning; the creation of capital.
Capital starts at its harvest from nature.
Increases at industry, the add value.
Increases again at retail and logistics.

Basic extract 1 rock costs 100 bucks, a statue made of that rock costs 1000 and the guy at the gallery will sell it for 1500...

Between all these steps you've trade, isn't just a "Real estate sets the price" game! At each trade line prices need to be set, and those relies mostly on supply and demand. If I'm a RE agent and got 1 property to sell at a specific location for 1 million, I probably can do it, however if I've 20 properties on sale at the same location, or if the construction isn't attractive, I would be lucky to get 500k/each. In between because some trades requires good amounts of money, it usually included a bank financing it.
If at some point I start to sell them under production costs I can no longer provide enough for its industry, this cause a bankruptcy down the line, from the extraction to the builder including the bank.

"Who's to blame"? I see those "this have to have a guilty" (usually ending up with a fold guy) nothing but a waste of time. It's an economic cycle, with all and no one to blame.

Back on 2008/9, two courses of action could take place, laissez-faire and take the hit or bail it, making the hit smaller, but at short term. If the first one was bad, the second one ends up to be only apparently good.
There's a major difference between private and public business, the first one can bankrupt, the second one can't, better said, can but will drag everyone in the tidal wave. And here comes the Achilles' heel of 2008/9's action that will make the next crisis a much bigger one; States are now fragile with debt going through the roof and can't redo what they did back then.
They intended to control finances, and I don't say this isn't important, but in the economic cycle fix the finances is like trying to fix the OS when the issue comes from faulty hardware.

The solution is now a bit of a lottery; either the industry manages to somehow refresh its market and reboots or prepare to take the hit. The oil prices are an example of issues at layer 1 (extraction) caused by lack of demand at layer 2 (industry). Time will tell, anyway the rules of logic demands that we must always hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

That might resolve to a "megaphone" formation with bottom projected at or slightly below 500 on SP500.
Yep, 500. That would be a great place to buy as it will probably rebounce to 2000 within a decade.

Bitcoin has faced another crisis, and as for the more global crisis... I doubt that bitcoin will be used as a refuge value. Only some desperate people will do that, as Bitcoin is too volatile and it is surrounded by a lot of uncertainty too.

Perhaps some big fish talking about bitcoin in positive terms would help.

Remember 2011 crisis, this isn't first Bitcoin faced. Also I don't think that a global crisis is coming in near time, at least not in 2016. There are a lot of oil source and prices are going downwards. Middle East is in a chaos but developed countries don't want to interfere, they are waiting. Things will settle this year or chaos will trigger the crisis for next year.

I see again anger and mismatch of facts. And I am not missing nothing. Seeing the big picture is my genetically profession. It is always that I do. When I can and when I write about something. Rarely do bullshits and when see facts (classified as such according to me) which make me understand the situation in which I am, have not even the most little problem to admit that I am wrong. But be sure that this case is not at the previous mentioned.

First I am not blaming no one but only telling what was exactly happened. Real estate are not at all construction business but a totally different and independent one. It is not the construction business who decide whatever can happen at real estate. Are not the construction businesses which determine the prices of the sale or the bought of the constructions managed by the real estates. And even less are not those who determined or managed the stupid policies of prices of buildings in time which was even the main factor (but not the only) which caused the begin of the chain of events finished with the explosion of the crisis. The firsts have not at all any kind of power to the seconds. Real estate are totally independent business from any kind of other business. They decide what to do and what to not do without asking no one. As such are totally those responsible for their actions. All the kind of actions. Including these who caused the crisis of 2008.

Is again without sense and a wrong example that regarding the fault of lack of sales of laptops at the big chain of hyper stores mentioned by you. If I would use your logic I can tell that the cause of lack of sales of Compaq computers (taken with normal price from HP and published to be sold with the triple of the normal price by Walmart) compared to a Dell with the same parameters but with normal price (always at Walmart) is the fault of HP and not of the Walmart who determine these prices. Are not Dell and HP who determine the prices but Walmart (following its sales policies). The same is even with the case of Real Estates. It is not any kind of Industry which create or follow their policies in selling and buying but only those themselves.

As for your expression about the blame of the subjects mentioned by you as "not guilty" (Walmart and MediaMarkt) regarding the low laptop sales performance, FOR SURE that I "blame" those (if can be used this expression). Such kind of subjects are created only to sell. They have not any other duty. If one day there it will be not more need to sell something (theoretically) these subjects will disappear. In today world if such kind of subjects are not able to sell they bankrupt. Because cannot be able to fulfill the aim of their existence. Exactly like any kind of other business. As such they are responsible (and only those) about everything have to do will the selling of everything they chose to sell (because think that will bring to those profit). Doing wrong calculations in this direction mean that they are unable to be professional in the field of work in which have chosen to work and must go home.

I cannot go further with interpretations about your comments and discussions connected with the way chosen by Government to face the crisis. I sincerely accept and understand every kind of criticism and point of view make by everyone to everything (naturally when have logic and meaning). Even because I find to many times myself against all and being in such situations it is hard to defend your ideas because of prejudices or the inability of "all" to understand what is told from the other side. And I never will be at the part of the "all".

But I make (always) even another thing when criticize. Give always my point of view about WHAT MUST BE DONE. In other words I never only "destroy" and stop in this phase. When I try to "destroy" something have as aim in doing this action ONLY to "create" another new "better" (according to me) thing  than the "destroyed" one. I NEVER criticize only to do this action. If I don't have something to propose after the action of the "destroying" of the subject after the criticism I don't do nothing. Even if I don't like or think that the other part is in big wrong. The reason is very simple. He has its TOTAL picture. Me not. If I am not able to create MY big picture I am inferior to him. If I am not able to "solve" fully my puzzle I always will be loser in confront of the other part. Even I can have all the right of this world on my critics. I am not able to conclude.

In other words and in simple words, it is easy to "destroy" but very hard to "build". It is easy to criticize but very hard to give (alternative) solutions.  Everyone can "destroy" but are rare them who are able to build.

As a conclusion, without playing the role of the devil, but only the role of the curious person (the only role that I can take in this case because is true that I don't have not a solution in this case but I haven't did even any kind of criticism) what would be the right choice according to you which would must be followed by the Government of USA in solving or eliminating the crisis of 2008? I see only criticism in your post. Cannot see the second part of the above theorem. Exist one? If yes can you give it in the next post...  

Real estate are construction salesman. Again you miss the picture by blaming the retail. Will you blame MediaMarkt or Wallmart for low laptop sales performance?

About governments, I'm not a "government hater", and isn't exactly the "did they wrong or did they right" kind of thing, but rather a "what can they do".
They tried to sort it at the higher layer of the economic stack, and did so by injecting debt-generated money into it. So the question is: What good does it do other than a temporary relief?

"Oh they regulate financial markets"... right... what is that suppose to mean? They close the stock market if something goes too low? They forbid banks to loan to less profitable industries? How can they tell which industries are profitable? Venezuela style?
Everybody is acting as if capital was generated at the financial layer!

Yes, there are lot of possibilities for that, and I too predict many investors now will look for alternate investments like gold and bitcoin. So, buying bitcoin now and save them will protect us from any economic crisis.

I think that we are headed towards another GFC. Quite a few of my friends and I, believe that it is going to happen.

Here we are. Another one hate the Governments and their actions. And think that have a better receipt than that of Government to solve the various crisis. About all, the crisis of 2008. A world one. But lets go with order.

First of all your thread is titled "Global crisis" and not "What it will be with bitcoin in the global crisis" So normally first the comments must be for the "Global crisis" and not about what it will be with bitcoin in this "Global crisis". In my comments i forget to treat this (which to tell the right is that you asked to be treated at your main post - in contradiction with the title of the thread but lets forget this) but I have only few words to comment about this fact. If it would be another crisis like that of 2008 bitcoin will become more strong and will have more value. It is not strange that the people buy it to preserve their wealth. Bitcoin may be seen as rescue of their situation. A little example about this point of view become from the behavior of people during of crisis in Cyprus.

Second, I am not able to understand your point of view regarding the role of Government during a crisis. Must be or not intervention of an Government during a crisis?

At the beginning of your post you tell: "But, well, first those who think laws can "prevent" 2008, deserve an epic face palm! That's exactly the worse part of 2008/9's crisis, it put governments to mess up with economics." My understand of these two sentences is: 1. the crisis can be solved only without the intervention of Government (must be totally freedom for the markets - only laissez faire) and that the prevent from another crisis like that of 2008 cannot be made by the creation of new laws (which, according to me, have as aim the regulate the markets in order that they cannot act more in a irresponsible way like happened before the crisis of 2008 not by "one industry, construction" like you mention at your post but from the real estate market). In few words you tell with the above: out Government (totally) from the market (it put governments to mess up with economics). And me deduct from your written words: leave the market on itself because it is able to be auto regulated.

But at the end of your post I read another, totally against the above phrase, thing: "So basically that's it, I don't say that governments will not try to pull all the "schemes" to delay it, as stated at the zerohedge's article, or if something new comes along to boost the markets, but at the moment we've a receipt for disaster. To tell the right I don\t catch the overall aim of this sentence but one thing is written clear and black over white. This: "So basically that's it, I don't say that governments will not try to pull all the "schemes" to delay it.." First, with one paragraph you have explained all the crisis of 2008 and argued the totally unneeded role of Government in such kind of crisis. Then in the next paragraph you tell that you have not told that are against the "try of Government to pull all the schemes to delay it  .... but for the moment we've a receipt for disaster". If I understand right you tell that all made from the USA Government after the crisis of 2008 until the moment your made your post was a receipt for disaster.

Good, so you take the responsibility that with one post with four paragraphs and, lets say 50 sentences, make and give all the facts that verify that all this activity (2008-2016) of the Government of the most powerful country of the world is a totally wrong one and for more (this is the most important) are able to give another solution for the crisis of 2008 which, according to you, is wrong solved.

I have not more comments about that but only a few questions.

1. If the role of the USA Government was so bad who solved the crisis of 2008 (the markets not because was not leaved free to act as you write in your post because of the intervention of the USA Government)?

I don't want to put data here because must do a search and don't worth to do it because of THE FACT that now is a much better MACROECONOMIC and MICROECONOMICS situation than in 2008 (employment, increase of production, resurgence of various markets etc). Or to better and simple tell: 2016 cannot be compared with 2008. It is much better now than that year.

This was the first question.

2. The second one: How do you think that can be solved a crisis without any kind of intervention of any Government? First of all if it is a global one?

Hope that you will put here words and sentences that I will be able to understand and comment again (if I would have something else to tell).

I don't think of this as a conspiracy and neither do governments can prevent, or otherwise, what's happening.
Let's, for an instance, look at the IT industry, if you've a 2010 computer hardly you need new hardware, laptops and PC's are in downtrend for a while. Meanwhile tablets and smartphones took over and kept it alive. But at this time everybody has a lot of phones, tablets enough to make play cards decks with it... so what to do next? TV, same. The transaction from CRT to TFT/LED boosted the market for a while, but it doesn't look like UHD or 4K are of any use, so hardly it will sell enough to pay up.

Without anything to make the market move, it slowly burns out. Simple as that.
You can "create" consumers with money giveaways, but those "consumers" aren't producing nothing themselves (not adding capital to the system), so they're leaches and will do nothing but to help on deplete the existing money.

The way i see it is that economic crisis in the non crypto world only adds fuel to the fire in the crypto oriented parts.
Remember the Greece, banks taking peoples money.. Cyprus..  Even tho the events were devestating - the bitcoin only grew stronger with that.

Yeah, I don't know.  I was just voicing an opinion and I know there are many variables in play.  The 3.17T you mentioned has been wiped off of all stocks?  I'm not questioning the truth of that figure, I just don't know where you got it from or how it compares to 2009.  When all stocks lose value I'd expect the number to be that high as there are so many of them in existence.

With tin foil hat on, to be honest I see no evidence they want to prevent a crisis. To me all the evidence looks like this is planned to be a massive global financial crisis by elite globalists. Yes 'planned'. For example look at todays news about Iran deal and how sanctions are lifted, the timing is not accident it is to cause maximum chaos. When oil is already low lets lift sanctions and flood even more oil. Look at timing of rate rise in USA, worst timing possible. Not an accident.

Out of chaos comes order. New world order. With global govt and SDR for currency. First they create the chaos.

First of my primary question was how do you think Bitcoin will perform during an eventual crisis, not discussing that crisis here.

But, well, first those who think laws can "prevent" 2008, deserve an epic face palm! That's exactly the worse part of 2008/9's crisis, it put governments to mess up with economics. And, no, it wasn't solved, basically what governments did was to bail-out, and bailing out is to bankrupt twice, specially because they've no money for it, means they made their own people backing the loans needed to bail-out some and those loans set public debt over the roof.
Also many fail to notice the obvious: no crisis start at the banks, it just turns visible when it reaches the banks. 2008's started by oversupply at one industry, construction, obviously the banks were financing this industry, as they do to them all, and were hit hard by its downfall. The only real banking problem came out of Maddoff's Ponzi, which got uncovered by banks trying to pull back some liquidity. And if construction alone made this huge hit, just go check the industry numbers now to see how many are endangered.

So basically that's it, I don't say that governments will not try to pull all the "schemes" to delay it, as stated at the zerohedge's article, or if something new comes along to boost the markets, but at the moment we've a receipt for disaster.

The dangers for Bitcoin during this crisis, if it comes to be, under my view are the governments turning to it after turned upside-down the citizens with taxes and no penny drops anymore, also the far-left attempts to tax on capital, being bitcoin resilient to such attempts may lead to BTC-hostile governments at some countries.

Very good. Even Excellent. At least now we have a source (or the source because I don't believe that will have another - anyhow cannot put my hand over the fire even about those). If I am not wrong this guy was the person who predicted or argued that the pump of November of bitcoin began and was caused mainly or totally by the increase of demand come from the Chinese market. If is him deserve respect (at least from me) and must be more serious on answering. And I will do so. Telling the mine. Without pretend to have right. So, what are my thoughts regarding his article.

His analysis cannot be told that is not full and totally inclusive. Even more, is much that needed full of data. In the meaning that is to meticulous. If I would be bad may tell maniacally full of data and analyses. To tell the right I can try to analyse its article but I am sure that will be lost on it. First because I am not so maniac on data analysis and maybe this is a my defect. I try to see everything from more high where the seen is more wide but with much less details. Maybe this can be another my wrong characteristic (and maybe even big one) but until today haven't make me any kind of damage and haven't caused me to take any kind of wrong important decision. Told all above about me and not spoken about the article only to tell the below. According to this my above explained point of view, the situation analysed at the article have nothing essentially new. All the problems analysed are not new. Are repetition of the previous ones (maybe in other countries or areas) or further deterioration of these or others yet known before. Nothing revolutionary cannot come from those. So, with few words, according to me, there are nothing new under this sky (to use the expression of a famous writer). These situation can be managed as it was made until today. I have years that hear about the collapse of us dollar. Read and seen tens of articles full of facts and data who argues that such events is so near that maybe would happen the next day. Years of these articles. But only the last year us dollar was evaluated about 25%. What can be deducted from this? That the data in most of cases are only figures. Are totally other thing those who make or manage those.

As for the prediction that the next crisis would be a worst one compared to that of the 2008 beh here I want to be sincere and would tell only to words: very exaggerated. The crisis of 2008 was an immense lesson for everyone, not only in USA when was born, but in every country. So everyone has learn at least a few how to prevent or what to do to not have again the same situation. To not speak about USA where is accumulated the "cream" of world mind. All this situation (always seen from my high point of view and without having desire to enter in details because seems not useful to me) make me to bet a symbolic 1 bitcoin that cannot be and will not be during all this year a crisis more big or deep than that happened at 2008 (I don't want to bet about the fact that it would be at all any kind of world crisis because don't want to push much in my point of view of the things). I have a very respectful escrow and I am ready to contact him in order to be escrow in this bet about this matter. The only problem is that I have invested all my bitcoin this moment and cannot have one such before the month of March. Maybe you cannot believe me but I am not rich and these few bitcoins that have try to invest and reinvest continually in order to make always more. Every bitcoin not invested mean few bitcoins for me. So normally have never even 1 bitcoin free. I can accumulate this bitcoin not investing my profits during this time. It you will accept the bet must wait the March to make this bet. All this if needed that bitcoin be sent immediately after the deal to the escrow (don't know the rules because is the first time that bet here in bitcointalk and first time in all my life to bet such amount in us dollar - I hate gambling and about or few less than half of my 400-500 last posts are against this gangrene - i make this bet only to show respect about the author of article and his work and to you that understand that the words without facts deserve only slight).

And at the end a little explanation about my seen "high". This expression doesn't mean at all that who see from "under" or from "down" is inferior in thoughts or reasoning. Are only and simply point of view, totally equal between those on importance but have to do only with the "position" in which is positioned the point of view of the "seen" of the phenomenon. So I prefer to see high and another not. That doesn't mean at all that I am superior compared to him in something. Even the verified of facts which decide who has right and who has wrong doesn't mean this. Because the next time may happen that be the "loser" to "win". So is simply an way to understand the situation, to make its analysis and to lay out the conclusions. Nothing else.

The economy just doesn't perform as the optimistic people were hoping. At this point nothing special has happened beside the oil price going lower and lower. Stock market prices have been too high and are now comming to more normal prices. It's just the market that gets rid of the speculation in the stock prices.

Stocks still look a wee bit high to me. (from article linked earlier)