|
Ty for your post.
I dont neccesarly have the same vision but it is definatly an interesting vieuw on the current and future economic situation of the world.
Personally i am not this negative about the us bonds though i do think rates will go up (and us bonds will go down) in the coming decade. America still has a good productivity and all of its products (besides cars lol) are sought after all over the world. As long as people can buy desirable products for their dollars and bonds they will retain a value. Rusia and china arent the biggest bondholders either, the us fed holds over 90% of all us bonds i believe so the effect of 10% flowing back to the usa might not be to big.China,s growing middle class should have a considerable demand for usa build luxery goods and the trade balance might become more favourable for the usa as a result of it. This would allow the bonds to naturally flow back to the usa, increasing their exports at the expense of a higher inflation and interest rate.
Dont think england will give up the usa just yet. The ties between europe, england and the usa are not only economic, they also pretty much share the same ideologys and religion.
|
so fight_or_flight posted a text in the bottom of the last page (in spoilers). I read it, it seems to make sense but is it sensationalized? Is the outlook for the western world really as drastic as that text makes it out to be?
It's really hard for me to imagine the US$ becoming devalued to that extent, especially seeing as we produce many advanced and desirable goods. But at the same time, because I'm living in the US, I may be victim to some kind of illusion that the US and the western world portrays.
What do you guys think?
|
I think that that article fight_or_flight posted is utter nonsense from the mouth of a gold trader who has everything to benefit from weakened confidence in fiat currency. Nothing to see there. I mean, come on, it's from "goldseek.com" lol.
|
|
|
I see there was some curiosity and confusion about the second thing in my last post. Let me try to give a little background on it.
First, people don't really make money by advocating that someone should buy physical gold. To buy physical gold, you generally go to your local coin shop and pay with cash, or you go to a place like apmex. These places are dealers which both buy and sell directly.
Jim Willie is an analyst who sells a subscription to his publication at www.goldenjackass.com/subscribe.html. The goldseek website is just hosting something he's written. He isn't some random guy, he's been doing what he does for many years and gives great insight and predictions, that's why people listen to him.
There are quite a few other people who people pay attention to, such as Karl Denninger, Max Keiser, Tyler Durden, Peter Schiff, Jim Sinclair, Paul Craig Roberts, Gerald Celente, James Turk, and many many others. Generally they're analysts or write publications which people subscribe to, some manage other people's money, etc. These people have been doing what they do for decades and people listen to them because they're intelligent people who have a history of being right (and wrong), but overall they're generally pointed in the right direction and see what's going down ahead of time. All these people have different views, etc, but they're pretty much on the same page. That article I posted and you guys read on the previous page is not viewed as sensational by the people listed above, nor is it viewed as sensational by the many people on the internet who are plugged into the news.
Having said that, everyone knows the overall facts such as the checkmate described in the previous article, but everyone also knows the rules can change anytime. So while everyone views it as an accurate analysis, everyone also knows that the timetable is unknown, potential wars or big events are unknown, developing crypto currencies, and nobody sells their house based on a single piece of news or analysis. But we see the big picture and we slowly and diligently prepare for it in a responsible way, such as any fund manager would do. Having said that, everyone of these people see how things are accelerating at an ever increasing speed over the last decade, so the concept of what a responsible action is may differ greatly between their point of view and ours.
The important thing is to stay aware, pay attention to the trends we see, and be responsible to the environment as needed. One of the top places to stay on top of things that are happening daily is at http://www.zerohedge.com/. People like Jim Willie do more of the big picture stuff where all the details are put together.
For example, here's a guy who wouldn't call the article I posted "nonsensical". He may disagree with it potentially, but like I said, everyone is pretty much on the same page about what's going on when you step back and look at the big picture.
+ Show Spoiler + He equates not being a profit of doom with not storing food. That's where the current sentiment is....preparedness discussion is about ammo and food now, not gold.
|
The problem is that those people are wrong most of the time, not just "some" of the time. Sure, the markets will allow you to ride some of your bad bets until they're better, like buying gold in the 80s and 90s. However, that just means they have nothing real to offer.
They have these elaborate explanations that connect isolated events together after the fact, not with diligence and journalism, but as conspiracy theories that people want so desperately to be true. They tote the same line of market collapse and the danger "nobody else sees," and posit that they KNOW the way the world works when a tiny portion of their message becomes aligned with reality for a brief moment. Like sitting at a red light, yelling out "green" every 2s and claiming you're psychic when you get it right after the 27th try. You're not psychic though, and these people don't actually know what they're talking about. They just found a way they can make money off of pretending.
|
On April 02 2013 14:49 aksfjh wrote:
not with diligence and journalism
Here is a place with excellent journalism: http://www.zerohedge.com/
As for the rest of your post it's pretty vague, and only time will tell. I bumped this thread after almost 5 years, when the "recession" first started. Five years later, it is now standard practice to take depositor's money to bail out banks (cyprus, new zealand, candada, italy, spain, and the US are all putting in place provisions for it or have already had provisions for it). I suppose in another 5 years we can bump the thread again and see what happened.
|
zero hedge has called 10 of the last 0 recessions. From 2009, every 4 months they will post "the collapse of the dollar is right around the corner" or "the collapse of the stock market is right around the corner" or "hyper inflation is right around the corner."
And it has always been standard practice to take depositor's money to bail out banks when the money is above the threshold of the insured deposit limit.
|
On April 02 2013 15:05 fight_or_flight wrote:Here is a place with excellent journalism: http://www.zerohedge.com/As for the rest of your post it's pretty vague, and only time will tell. I bumped this thread after almost 5 years, when the "recession" first started. Five years later, it is now standard practice to take depositor's money to bail out banks (cyprus, new zealand, candada, italy, spain, and the US are all putting in place provisions for it or have already had provisions for it). I suppose in another 5 years we can bump the thread again and see what happened.
Zerohedge is and always has been a site pushing a specific agenda and writing its own story. It's not about telling the story, but a story, just like Fox News and MSNBC.
And no, it's not standard practice to take depositor money in this way. It's happening in Cyprus because of some very unique circumstances, and a LOT of people, including economists and normally sane people, are not happy about it. Sub40APM is right in a sense though, if a bank defaults, depositors are expected to lose most, if not all, of their deposits above the insured amount.
I'm vague because these sources are bad in a general way. They're obfuscated in very, very pointed language and name-calling. I understand people like to come up with their own catch phrases and naming conventions, but that article you linked doesn't go 10 words without using some awful name for something, and they're all like that.
As for the thread itself, reading the OP, there is a lot that is wrong. At the very least, it's debatable. Stuff like the Fed and US Government being (mostly) responsible for the housing bubble is wrong, as well as the reasons banks were willing to participate in sub-prime lending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
