- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
I'll bet YOU don't.
It was the market that cause the failures
- Thread starter Gary Allan
- Start date
- Status
A little unemployment will do wonders for the army recruiting problem.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
A little unemployment will do wonders for the army recruiting problem.
I knew there was a bright side to government spending
A little unemployment will do wonders for the army recruiting problem.
I knew there was a bright side to government spending
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Ahhhhh, banks need to lend money. That's how they make money. They're not going to stop giving out loans cause then they'd go out of business.
Then they go find their own money source to lend. Having government buy their bad loan isn't much better than letting them print their own money to loan, both increase currency supply which leads to high inflation.
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies, and restart some new banks to give out only good loans (i.e. the new FM & FM with the old share holder wiped out) based on a depreciated housing price (not the current market price).
Not fair? Not going to work? Guess what, that's the fundamental, unless you go back to fundamental it is just postponing the inevitable. Price will drop/rise until the fundamental kicks in.
Recession isn't as bad as hyper-inflation and the problems that follow. Spending 700 billion elsewhere can still stimulate the economy. How about high speed railroad? how about alternative fuel? how about education system, or medicare? they will certainly do better than giving a check to wall street and tell them business as usual.
Politicians and wall street only talk about lowering tax during bad time, but never talk about raising tax during good time. They also never talk about reducing spending during good time (or pay off more debt than minimum) or crack down on questionable loans/business practices during good time. Wonder why? Just follow the money and who made them.
Ahhhhh, banks need to lend money. That's how they make money. They're not going to stop giving out loans cause then they'd go out of business.
Then they go find their own money source to lend. Having government buy their bad loan isn't much better than letting them print their own money to loan, both increase currency supply which leads to high inflation.
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies, and restart some new banks to give out only good loans (i.e. the new FM & FM with the old share holder wiped out) based on a depreciated housing price (not the current market price).
Not fair? Not going to work? Guess what, that's the fundamental, unless you go back to fundamental it is just postponing the inevitable. Price will drop/rise until the fundamental kicks in.
Recession isn't as bad as hyper-inflation and the problems that follow. Spending 700 billion elsewhere can still stimulate the economy. How about high speed railroad? how about alternative fuel? how about education system, or medicare? they will certainly do better than giving a check to wall street and tell them business as usual.
Politicians and wall street only talk about lowering tax during bad time, but never talk about raising tax during good time. They also never talk about reducing spending during good time (or pay off more debt than minimum) or crack down on questionable loans/business practices during good time. Wonder why? Just follow the money and who made them.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
That's about it, Panda ..stuck between two groups of con artists and no where to turn in terms of TRUE value. Everyone wants THEIR advantage with the promise of "just do it my way and all will be better". Like we've not seen that before.
I give up. No matter who prevails it's going to cost me and mine. You can be taxed to death or debt serviced to death ..or inflated to death. You're still dead.
Anyone offer cake yet??? I'm waiting (honing my skewers
)
I give up. No matter who prevails it's going to cost me and mine. You can be taxed to death or debt serviced to death ..or inflated to death. You're still dead.
Anyone offer cake yet??? I'm waiting (honing my skewers
Ahh.... The 2nd coming of the GREAT REPUBLICAN DEPRESSION. Wasn't the GREAT second coming supposed to be a Deity in Jerusalum?
Instead we have the supposed "consevatives" behind the strings of this Great Failure... but fortunately we have the "socialist" tax payers; the back-bone workers of the American economy, to bail out the sorry-butt elites of "free market" capatilism that absolutely screwed main-street America and the fundamental greatness of the U.S.A.
Country First... yeah right
Instead we have the supposed "consevatives" behind the strings of this Great Failure... but fortunately we have the "socialist" tax payers; the back-bone workers of the American economy, to bail out the sorry-butt elites of "free market" capatilism that absolutely screwed main-street America and the fundamental greatness of the U.S.A.
Country First... yeah right
Originally Posted By: Kernel Potter
Ahh.... The 2nd coming of the GREAT REPUBLICAN DEPRESSION. Wasn't the GREAT second coming supposed to be a Deity in Jerusalum?
Instead we have the supposed "consevatives" behind the strings of this Great Failure... but fortunately we have the "socialist" tax payers; the back-bone workers of the American economy, to bail out the sorry-butt elites of "free market" capatilism that absolutely screwed main-street America and the fundamental greatness of the U.S.A.
Country First... yeah right
You just really don't get the root cause either. I used to have a little respect for your opinion, but if we go into a depression, it certainly is not because of conservatives or the free market. Do some reading outside of left wing blogs.
Ahh.... The 2nd coming of the GREAT REPUBLICAN DEPRESSION. Wasn't the GREAT second coming supposed to be a Deity in Jerusalum?
Instead we have the supposed "consevatives" behind the strings of this Great Failure... but fortunately we have the "socialist" tax payers; the back-bone workers of the American economy, to bail out the sorry-butt elites of "free market" capatilism that absolutely screwed main-street America and the fundamental greatness of the U.S.A.
Country First... yeah right
You just really don't get the root cause either. I used to have a little respect for your opinion, but if we go into a depression, it certainly is not because of conservatives or the free market. Do some reading outside of left wing blogs.
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Gary - with all your beating around the bush, you miss the root cause and jump on the band wagon with the press and the pops. All in the guise of "helping the poor become homeowners" we get [censored].
Originally Posted By: Tempest
None of this would have happened if FM and FM had not been put in place by big gov. to medal in the mortgage industry to effect a political outcome.
And now the Government is going to buy their loan (and their cc debt) and it will be politically impossible to kick them out. Looks like a new generation of Squatters living in their unafordable homes compliments of the Government tit (that would be those of us actually paying their mortgage).
Gary - with all your beating around the bush, you miss the root cause and jump on the band wagon with the press and the pops. All in the guise of "helping the poor become homeowners" we get [censored].
Originally Posted By: Tempest
None of this would have happened if FM and FM had not been put in place by big gov. to medal in the mortgage industry to effect a political outcome.
And now the Government is going to buy their loan (and their cc debt) and it will be politically impossible to kick them out. Looks like a new generation of Squatters living in their unafordable homes compliments of the Government tit (that would be those of us actually paying their mortgage).
Things will get worse over the next 20 years, as the average voting demographic moves into prime Alzheimer's years. But maybe they will forget how to vote before they get bad enough to really screw things up.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The only bailout that should occur is protection of personal mortgages performed by people who are willing to WORK for their handout... nobody wants anyone to loose their house if they are willing to WORK for it.
That sounds nice but its impractical. These people can't afford their mortgage bc of various reasons. That's tough, but life sucks.
I don't care if they are working or not. Its not up to the government (me) to pay a mortgage that they can't afford.
So you and the government would adjust their mortgage based on what they are earning?? I'm retired and my expenses are too high..what can (and should) the government do for me? Maybe it can lower my light bill or send me an extra check every month so I can have some extra Wine with my cheese. Maybe get me a cheap loan so I can replace my 8 year old car.
The only bailout that should occur is protection of personal mortgages performed by people who are willing to WORK for their handout... nobody wants anyone to loose their house if they are willing to WORK for it.
That sounds nice but its impractical. These people can't afford their mortgage bc of various reasons. That's tough, but life sucks.
I don't care if they are working or not. Its not up to the government (me) to pay a mortgage that they can't afford.
So you and the government would adjust their mortgage based on what they are earning?? I'm retired and my expenses are too high..what can (and should) the government do for me? Maybe it can lower my light bill or send me an extra check every month so I can have some extra Wine with my cheese. Maybe get me a cheap loan so I can replace my 8 year old car.
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Ahhhhh, banks need to lend money. That's how they make money. They're not going to stop giving out loans cause then they'd go out of business.
Then they go find their own money source to lend. Having government buy their bad loan isn't much better than letting them print their own money to loan, both increase currency supply which leads to high inflation.
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies, and restart some new banks to give out only good loans (i.e. the new FM & FM with the old share holder wiped out) based on a depreciated housing price (not the current market price).
Not fair? Not going to work? Guess what, that's the fundamental, unless you go back to fundamental it is just postponing the inevitable. Price will drop/rise until the fundamental kicks in.
Recession isn't as bad as hyper-inflation and the problems that follow. Spending 700 billion elsewhere can still stimulate the economy. How about high speed railroad? how about alternative fuel? how about education system, or medicare? they will certainly do better than giving a check to wall street and tell them business as usual.
Politicians and wall street only talk about lowering tax during bad time, but never talk about raising tax during good time. They also never talk about reducing spending during good time (or pay off more debt than minimum) or crack down on questionable loans/business practices during good time. Wonder why? Just follow the money and who made them.
I think you've nailed it. My retirement dreams have taken a big hit due to being heavily invested in stocks and mutual funds. I feel bailing out the banks is a mistake, a big one! How about a full investigations of the illegal actions exposing the individuals that loaded their pockets be stripped of their wealth and put in jail, all of them right down the line. Let them be made an example to future thieves, of how they will be treated when caught.
Since they stopped short selling in certain segments of the market to curtail the meltdown, why not make oil and gas futures traders hold their contracts for lets say 30-60 days? You'll see how fast home heating oil and gas comes down when no one would want to get stuck holding the bag. But then it wouldn't be a free market? When they stopped the short sellers was that a free market? I think the short sellers just uncovered a bunch of fundamentally poor [censored] and made money as it fell apart. They didn't cause the problems, they capatalized on them!
Let the banks fail, that were going to fail. Sometimes you have to lose a finger to save an arm.
Rant off!
Frank D
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Ahhhhh, banks need to lend money. That's how they make money. They're not going to stop giving out loans cause then they'd go out of business.
Then they go find their own money source to lend. Having government buy their bad loan isn't much better than letting them print their own money to loan, both increase currency supply which leads to high inflation.
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies, and restart some new banks to give out only good loans (i.e. the new FM & FM with the old share holder wiped out) based on a depreciated housing price (not the current market price).
Not fair? Not going to work? Guess what, that's the fundamental, unless you go back to fundamental it is just postponing the inevitable. Price will drop/rise until the fundamental kicks in.
Recession isn't as bad as hyper-inflation and the problems that follow. Spending 700 billion elsewhere can still stimulate the economy. How about high speed railroad? how about alternative fuel? how about education system, or medicare? they will certainly do better than giving a check to wall street and tell them business as usual.
Politicians and wall street only talk about lowering tax during bad time, but never talk about raising tax during good time. They also never talk about reducing spending during good time (or pay off more debt than minimum) or crack down on questionable loans/business practices during good time. Wonder why? Just follow the money and who made them.
I think you've nailed it. My retirement dreams have taken a big hit due to being heavily invested in stocks and mutual funds. I feel bailing out the banks is a mistake, a big one! How about a full investigations of the illegal actions exposing the individuals that loaded their pockets be stripped of their wealth and put in jail, all of them right down the line. Let them be made an example to future thieves, of how they will be treated when caught.
Since they stopped short selling in certain segments of the market to curtail the meltdown, why not make oil and gas futures traders hold their contracts for lets say 30-60 days? You'll see how fast home heating oil and gas comes down when no one would want to get stuck holding the bag. But then it wouldn't be a free market? When they stopped the short sellers was that a free market? I think the short sellers just uncovered a bunch of fundamentally poor [censored] and made money as it fell apart. They didn't cause the problems, they capatalized on them!
Let the banks fail, that were going to fail. Sometimes you have to lose a finger to save an arm.
Rant off!
Frank D
Originally Posted By: Steve S
Rosie must have been very active at one time in her life . Are you sure Pabs? The Krispy Cremes reason seems more like the cause but we all look to you for the correct answer!!!
Last time I checked, Krispy Kremes don't jump into anyone's mouth. There is usually a hand shoving them in.
Just like the market. No one forced these guys to invest the way they did in the market. They just shoved those investments into their portfolios, not really knowing what they were.
Food doesn't make anyone fat, choosing to shove it into your mouth does.
Investments don't make anyone lose money. Choosing those investments is what leads to financial ruin.
People make choices, people experience the consequences of their decisions. Should be true for both good and bad consequences.
When we let folks make decisions with OPM, let them profit from this, but expect others to bail them out if they are losing OPM, then the system over values things and will ultimately collapse.
Hmmm, looks like that is what is happening.
A bailout by the Fed and the Federal Government is just more taking risks with OPM.
Let Wall Street match any federal bailout with money from the executives who stand to gain. If they won't put their own money into the pot to buy the securities they are trying to sell the government, then why should the government buy at that price?
Rosie must have been very active at one time in her life . Are you sure Pabs? The Krispy Cremes reason seems more like the cause but we all look to you for the correct answer!!!
Last time I checked, Krispy Kremes don't jump into anyone's mouth. There is usually a hand shoving them in.
Just like the market. No one forced these guys to invest the way they did in the market. They just shoved those investments into their portfolios, not really knowing what they were.
Food doesn't make anyone fat, choosing to shove it into your mouth does.
Investments don't make anyone lose money. Choosing those investments is what leads to financial ruin.
People make choices, people experience the consequences of their decisions. Should be true for both good and bad consequences.
When we let folks make decisions with OPM, let them profit from this, but expect others to bail them out if they are losing OPM, then the system over values things and will ultimately collapse.
Hmmm, looks like that is what is happening.
A bailout by the Fed and the Federal Government is just more taking risks with OPM.
Let Wall Street match any federal bailout with money from the executives who stand to gain. If they won't put their own money into the pot to buy the securities they are trying to sell the government, then why should the government buy at that price?
I'm not against corporations making money. Profit is good. Profit allows business to expand, allows investors to earn money on their investments, etc.
But no one is ENTITLED to a profit. If the government bails out a sector because it's suddenly losing money, then why not bail out EVERY enterprise that loses money?
That's my problem with a bailout.
Like I said, it's OPM, Other Peoples Money. Either they borrow the money on margin, or they have invested money they were entrusted to manage, such as pension funds, 401(k) and IRA funds, etc.
If your population growth is flat, and even if it's growing, but less so, there is only so long you can grow your economy on credit before it collapses.
At some point, folks are going to wonder if the value is really there, and want more in return for loaning you their money, or your currency drops in value. Basically, confidence is eroded in your economy.
Much of economics today is not about numbers, but about confidence. How confident is a bank that you'll repay a loan, any where from that $500 credit limit card at Best Buy to institutions loaning money one to another.
If confidence is lost, the economy slows.
We are seeing what many have said for years, that what we are doing is not sustainable.
But no one is ENTITLED to a profit. If the government bails out a sector because it's suddenly losing money, then why not bail out EVERY enterprise that loses money?
That's my problem with a bailout.
Like I said, it's OPM, Other Peoples Money. Either they borrow the money on margin, or they have invested money they were entrusted to manage, such as pension funds, 401(k) and IRA funds, etc.
If your population growth is flat, and even if it's growing, but less so, there is only so long you can grow your economy on credit before it collapses.
At some point, folks are going to wonder if the value is really there, and want more in return for loaning you their money, or your currency drops in value. Basically, confidence is eroded in your economy.
Much of economics today is not about numbers, but about confidence. How confident is a bank that you'll repay a loan, any where from that $500 credit limit card at Best Buy to institutions loaning money one to another.
If confidence is lost, the economy slows.
We are seeing what many have said for years, that what we are doing is not sustainable.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Well, so far I see Panda and java making sense
Those who aren't objecting the straight bail out are obviously heavy into the market and see their little ditty bag (or big one) getting the most IMMEDIATE help with sliding their short term losses off on the government buy out sheet.
They're just as short sighted as the mega million CEO's that provide good quarterly reports, get their bonuses, and exercise their stock options as they drive the company into the ground.
They don't want a good solution. They don't want a fair solution. They want one that fattens their cheeks the best so they can get out and leave someone else holding the bag.
Choose your DJ on musical chairs.
Those who aren't objecting the straight bail out are obviously heavy into the market and see their little ditty bag (or big one) getting the most IMMEDIATE help with sliding their short term losses off on the government buy out sheet.
They're just as short sighted as the mega million CEO's that provide good quarterly reports, get their bonuses, and exercise their stock options as they drive the company into the ground.
They don't want a good solution. They don't want a fair solution. They want one that fattens their cheeks the best so they can get out and leave someone else holding the bag.
Choose your DJ on musical chairs.
Came across this nugget this morning. About the best summary of our current situation I can find. Short and sweet.
http://benbittrolff.blogspot.com/2008/09/shock-and-awe-option-or-option-b.html
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Shock and Awe: Option A or Option B?
[ hat tip Comrade Baron Von Helmut III ]
The “Shock and Awe” campaign is well underway. Paulson and Bernanke are busy fear mongering…
Option A: If you DON'T pass this bill, you'll lose:
1. Your house
2. Your job
3. Your money
4. Your 401k
5. Your wife
6. Your dog
7. Your truck
Option B: If you DO pass this bill you will get these bonuses too:
8. Hyperinflation
9. Much much higher taxes
10. Much much higher interest rates
11. Much lower standard of living
In other words, no free lunch. All you get to do is choose your pain.
http://benbittrolff.blogspot.com/2008/09/shock-and-awe-option-or-option-b.html
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Shock and Awe: Option A or Option B?
[ hat tip Comrade Baron Von Helmut III ]
The “Shock and Awe” campaign is well underway. Paulson and Bernanke are busy fear mongering…
Option A: If you DON'T pass this bill, you'll lose:
1. Your house
2. Your job
3. Your money
4. Your 401k
5. Your wife
6. Your dog
7. Your truck
Option B: If you DO pass this bill you will get these bonuses too:
8. Hyperinflation
9. Much much higher taxes
10. Much much higher interest rates
11. Much lower standard of living
In other words, no free lunch. All you get to do is choose your pain.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Well, so far I see Panda and java making sense
Those who aren't objecting the straight bail out are obviously heavy into the market and see their little ditty bag (or big one) getting the most IMMEDIATE help with sliding their short term losses off on the government buy out sheet.
They're just as short sighted as the mega million CEO's that provide good quarterly reports, get their bonuses, and exercise their stock options as they drive the company into the ground.
They don't want a good solution. They don't want a fair solution. They want one that fattens their cheeks the best so they can get out and leave someone else holding the bag.
Choose your DJ on musical chairs.
Gary, everybody is sub-prime now, from consumers to corporations, to policy makers. From easy, no payment for two months big ticket items, to packaging toxic loans and passing it on to the next sucker, to politically expedient "solutions" that throw parts at the problem but really don't identify any causes. We are going to solve a sub-prime private problem with sub-problem policy solutions. We are screwed.....royally.
Well, so far I see Panda and java making sense
Those who aren't objecting the straight bail out are obviously heavy into the market and see their little ditty bag (or big one) getting the most IMMEDIATE help with sliding their short term losses off on the government buy out sheet.
They're just as short sighted as the mega million CEO's that provide good quarterly reports, get their bonuses, and exercise their stock options as they drive the company into the ground.
They don't want a good solution. They don't want a fair solution. They want one that fattens their cheeks the best so they can get out and leave someone else holding the bag.
Choose your DJ on musical chairs.
Gary, everybody is sub-prime now, from consumers to corporations, to policy makers. From easy, no payment for two months big ticket items, to packaging toxic loans and passing it on to the next sucker, to politically expedient "solutions" that throw parts at the problem but really don't identify any causes. We are going to solve a sub-prime private problem with sub-problem policy solutions. We are screwed.....royally.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Quote:
We are screwed.....royally.
Of this, I have no doubt
Quote:
We are screwed.....royally.
Then wouldn't it tend to make sense that WE bear the burdens and the liabilities? The struggle? The hardship? Broad spectrum ..full span ..from the homeless useless eater having to go through leaner garbage cans ..to the multi that has to cut back on his/her Leer jet usage??
Please keep in mind that I've taken it on the chin from most of you guys with my pathetic "doom and gloom" (your collective words) predictions for more than a few years. Now that the cliff has been reached, I'm still the same smackedarse (no one in particular, pal).
We are screwed.....royally.
Of this, I have no doubt
Quote:
We are screwed.....royally.
Then wouldn't it tend to make sense that WE bear the burdens and the liabilities? The struggle? The hardship? Broad spectrum ..full span ..from the homeless useless eater having to go through leaner garbage cans ..to the multi that has to cut back on his/her Leer jet usage??
Please keep in mind that I've taken it on the chin from most of you guys with my pathetic "doom and gloom" (your collective words) predictions for more than a few years. Now that the cliff has been reached, I'm still the same smackedarse (no one in particular, pal).
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies
Ummm, that is exactly what the bailout is! Bookvalue at the current time IS the severely devalued amount.
The taxpayer's will mop up all the bad MBOs for pennies on the dollar, the banks will have fresh liquidity (remember, with the new accounting rules in place, they've already expensed the bad MBOs in their income statements so that won't be affected now, only cash flow will - exactly what they need), hopefully lending will once again follow (good legitimate lending!), the housing market will bottom and people will get into foreclosed houses and the cash flow from the MBOs will be back once again, the MBOs will appreciate in value, upon which the taxpayer unloads them into the market since they will have actual value based in cash flow at that point. Many of the same institutions that will unload the currently bad MBOs will likely buy them back once they start producing cash flow again.
Yea, it sucks royally that we got in this mess, for all the reasons cited, but letting things collapse is just a stupid and unacceptable alternative. In a theoretical text book ra ra ra way, lets screw the wall street execs by screwing all of us, I'd agree.
Yup, then the overall macro ponzi scheme continues into perpetuity. Voting has shown to not change things in a macro sense, that's for sure...
They wouldn't want to sell the bad loan below book value because that means they will have to sell more assets to stay afloat. So we shouldn't be bailing them out, we should raid them by buying their ASSETS (non bad loans) for pennies
Ummm, that is exactly what the bailout is! Bookvalue at the current time IS the severely devalued amount.
The taxpayer's will mop up all the bad MBOs for pennies on the dollar, the banks will have fresh liquidity (remember, with the new accounting rules in place, they've already expensed the bad MBOs in their income statements so that won't be affected now, only cash flow will - exactly what they need), hopefully lending will once again follow (good legitimate lending!), the housing market will bottom and people will get into foreclosed houses and the cash flow from the MBOs will be back once again, the MBOs will appreciate in value, upon which the taxpayer unloads them into the market since they will have actual value based in cash flow at that point. Many of the same institutions that will unload the currently bad MBOs will likely buy them back once they start producing cash flow again.
Yea, it sucks royally that we got in this mess, for all the reasons cited, but letting things collapse is just a stupid and unacceptable alternative. In a theoretical text book ra ra ra way, lets screw the wall street execs by screwing all of us, I'd agree.
Yup, then the overall macro ponzi scheme continues into perpetuity. Voting has shown to not change things in a macro sense, that's for sure...
Last edited:
Quote:
Please keep in mind that I've taken it on the chin from most of you guys with my pathetic "doom and gloom" (your collective words) predictions for more than a few years. Now that the cliff has been reached, I'm still the same smackedarse (no one in particular, pal).
Gary, honestly, I'm not trying to be an arse with what I'm about to say (fyi, I do consider you a good guy with great intentions so I am not trying to offend.). But here goes:
I've mentioned once before that it has less to do with your predictions and more to do with delivery style....an "all knowing style" combined with a constant need to be validated for making the predictions. Pablo makes a ton of predictions about stocks and he's often right. But he is not constantly asking for validation. Others make predictions too but don't constantly remind people how right they are. And btw, when it comes to predictions, it would be much more useful to give us an ETA for your predictions. Just saying something will collapse isn't enough. All empires and civilizations collapse, this is an immutable social law. So predicting a collapse is as easy as predicting it will rain someday. Sure it will, but tell us when. That's when it becomes USEFUL.
Please keep in mind that I've taken it on the chin from most of you guys with my pathetic "doom and gloom" (your collective words) predictions for more than a few years. Now that the cliff has been reached, I'm still the same smackedarse (no one in particular, pal).
Gary, honestly, I'm not trying to be an arse with what I'm about to say (fyi, I do consider you a good guy with great intentions so I am not trying to offend.). But here goes:
I've mentioned once before that it has less to do with your predictions and more to do with delivery style....an "all knowing style" combined with a constant need to be validated for making the predictions. Pablo makes a ton of predictions about stocks and he's often right. But he is not constantly asking for validation. Others make predictions too but don't constantly remind people how right they are. And btw, when it comes to predictions, it would be much more useful to give us an ETA for your predictions. Just saying something will collapse isn't enough. All empires and civilizations collapse, this is an immutable social law. So predicting a collapse is as easy as predicting it will rain someday. Sure it will, but tell us when. That's when it becomes USEFUL.
Frankly - I'm still waiting for Gary to spell out the root cause correctly.
- Status
