The "Game Over" Redux

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Arrowflinger's picture

Game over.

Government referees threw the game.


JW n FL's picture

Transitory Manipulation for the Benefit of the New Normal, Sir…

mophead's picture

Game over? Too much dept? End of QE2?

Sock Puppet's picture


"Lapolla is convinced in the opposite: namely that the end will be not a bang but a hyperdeflationary whimper."

Just another Mo Fo trying to get you to sell your PMs.

Don't do it, Troll alert.

Rynak's picture

@Tylers: I love what you do, but it would be helpful if in some articles you'd use the enter key a few more times :-)

FunkyMonkeyBoy's picture

Let's hope it is game over soon, after all, those who are enjoying the game are the only ones who would want it to continue. Sanity asks who would possibly want a game to continue that they aren't enjoying... anyone enjoying this 'game'?

Rynak's picture

Anything that doesn't involve the word "nuclear" and doesn't involve dictatorships is a fine "end" to me.

JohnG's picture

So we are already only half way there?

Rynak's picture

:-/ yeah.... i noticed that when writing it..... considered rephrasing it to "the state not getting much worse than it is already" or smth like that.... but then just thought "too complicated - people will get it anyways"

sullymandias's picture

i thought he was talking about the nuclear half..

Oracle of Kypseli's picture

I am very sceptical about posts that entice you to short stocks, because the end is near and posts that entice you to stay with stocks because the shark must keep swimming to survive.

I think that both want to feed on players whether long or short. They can suck blood either direction with their HTF uber-software.

Thus, only a few of my marbles are in play as a hedge. Mostly puts

chubbar's picture

Sorry but ALL of your marbles are "in play". Cash IS a risk position if the gov't backing them is 14T in debt with 100+T in out year obligations. If your cash is in some other currency then perhaps it is marginally safer or in greater danger depending on the backing country. Have no illusions about what is coming, a full re-write of the monetary system. There are no SAFE positions without making an assumption about the future value/purchasing power of the US dollar, which you are doing IMO.

Zero Govt's picture

John Maynard Keynes ..coined the term "technological unemployment." ...writing about the use of technology to supplant labor in the factory

Did the West, who out-engineered and out-robotocised the East (USSR), create more unemployment? ...or did the West create more wealth and employment through the productivity and efficiency of machines?

Academics and economists always manage to lack common sense and miss economic history/reality which is why it's about time they were all made redundent 

Rynak's picture

As i wrote a few times already, economic planners should worry less about how to reduce unemployment, and worry more about how to stop making it a problem. Machines are here to stay. Increases in efficiency are here to stay. Trying to fight it, is a fighting a losing war. Think about how to solve it, rather than compensate it. But be warned: This WILL involve cultural and moral changes are the rootlevel - and they are not what "oppressors" would want.

rufusbird's picture

You are so right. The solutions are not financial or technical. They are social issues that corporations have no interest in. What kind of world will we have in 100 years? Interesting to consider...

johnnynaps's picture

It's good to see that there are a FEW that can see this! Thomas Jefferson said "leave the afternoon for recreation and exercise"......good to see they were able to enjoy the afternoon 200 years ago! What time period are we living in now that we have to work the whole damn day away? What is the sense in advancing the human race since it apparently makes the workday longer. We have the capability and technology to do without the 50 hour workweek......time to find a system for the entire country to live a comfortable life.

Rynak's picture

not just working the whole damn day.... working the whole damn day DESPITE of massive increases in efficiency. This alone.... that an increase in efficiency results in MORE work.... should ring alarm bells that something is seriously going wrong.

And if that isn't enough to wake up people stuck in the common mantra, then here is my usual oversimplistic (but structurally valid) hypothetical example: Imagine a small island with a population of 10 people, who for whatever reason only need bread to survive. At first, 10 people are necessary to produce enough bread for everyone. Then a while later, only 7 people (or 70% of time) are needed to produce enough bread for everyone. On our common sense island, the people will be happy that they now have more capacity free to do other stuff than working to survive. But in our current system, the happiness and wealth turns into partial poverty and existencial fear.

johnnynaps's picture

Couldn't agree more! The funny thing about our current predicament compared to your logical illustration is.......we are over $14 Trillion in debt and the workday needs to get longer to pay it back. Now that's IRONY! I am personally trying to work minimally, because I don't support the GDP system, our bloated GMENT, these wars, the debt I didn't cause, the Oligarchy, 55 hour workweeks, our Judicial system and this stupid way of life where everything we produce turns to crap thus causing pollution and creating obscure diseases.

Rynak's picture

Which is why a gov shouldn't even be allowed to engage in such massive programs with money/debt of people who do not support it. If we already do not get to vote on such stuff, may we at least vote with our money?

Quixotic_Not's picture

But the sheeple did support it!

They kept voting for the (D) & (R) Free Crap Empire™ election after mind-numbing election, didn't they?

johnnynaps's picture

Most. Unfortunately, this population doesn't embrace change and isn't smart enough to recognize when change is needed.

BobPaulson's picture

Humans evolved in a simpler world with many fewer abstract concepts required for survival or integration into society. As it gets more complicated, that normal distribution of intelligence stays put, while the median required intelligence to function slowly creeps up.

It doesn't make sense to ridicule the less intelligent. They're not going to go away. If we plan a world that steadily requires more smarts to function, we're naive to be shocked when some people can't cope with it.

grok's picture

well.. or rather, priority should be placed by the planners in making people more educated before making processes more complicated (growth of intelligence being a nurtured attribute).

BobPaulson's picture

There are sustainability issues if we would hope to keep providing more education to the population. I'm a professor, and I see a bubble in education where too many people are getting more education for more costs, too many professors writing too much bullshit, yadda yadda. That feels very top heavy when many students don't give a shit about the content as long as they get the credentials. 

Again, from a sustainability standpoint, we I don't think it's wise to envision a world on a ramp to continuous growth in anything, be it education, organization complexity, resource use, or population - of course, M2 has no notional limit, especially with the convenience of floating point arithmetic :)

ibjamming's picture

And they KEEP on telling us that the races are equal! 

Sure they are equal...THAT'S why they compete so well? 

Blacks and browns don't have the smarts to make it in our "white" modern system...they don't...that's why they NEED affirmative action, they need welfare, and that's why our inner city schools are so shitty.  It's why all the inner cities suck. 

It's like we're expecting the cows on the farm to take care of themselves.  They CAN'T.  If they were in "the wild" they could scratch out a living...but they don't have the "smarts" to survive in a modern farm setting...without people to do the complicated stuff for them. 

I've been saying this for years...of course, with our conditioning...nobody listens.

Alpha Monkey's picture

I wonder what racism does to self confidence?  I wonder what poverty, worrying about food and shelter and other basic neccessities does to self confidence?  I wonder why "blacks and browns" are willing to work in shitty conditions for little pay and don't stand up to their bosses demanding respect?  I wonder what it's like hoping to be qualified for financing, or being able to afford financing earning minimum wage with most of your income going to food and energy?  Somehow I don't think it's their inability to compete, but rather the marvelous system we have set up that keeps people properly in their place.  It's not just inner city schools that suck, but most schools throughout the united states.  Why?  Because white people beleive everyone should be like them.  Therefore they have set up the school system, not to teach one how to learn and become inteligent critical thinkers, but instead how to follow orders, stay in line, and be smart enough to play in the "white" system where you get a job and keep your head down for the rest of your life.


interesting perspective I have on this one, I'm half hispanic but was raised in a nice racist midwest town, where I learned how to live the "white" way as a brown person.  I think you need to spend more time widening your perspective.

sleepingbeauty's picture


The risk to thinking this way, and assuming that you are part of the crowd that is intelligent enough, is that you need to take a "Big Brother" role in protecting the people who can't understand. At some point in your protecting them, you have a situation where what is best for you is worse for them and vice versa. You convince yourself that if you don't survive they cannot (kind of like the parent putting the air mask on before their kids on an airplane). And after that it gets easier to do what is best for you. And then you can believe you are doing God's work.

JW n FL's picture

the reality of.. or our shared reality... is that the Duly Elected have sold us po' folk down the river for some pretty trinkets and beads!


here's a Great Slave Song that we should all learn.. so that we can sing it together while working for slop.


You might as well get in the mood, for your kids sake becuase they will surely being singing this song becuase no one wanted to get off their fat ass! no one wanted to threaten their pension.. lol! PENSION PROTECTIONS!!! LMFAO!!!

Oracle of Kypseli's picture

@ Rynak

That was a failed experiment already. We exported physical work to China and we were sitting on desks playing solitaire and had "bring your daughter to work" days, blue jean Fridays and company barbecues. No pain no gain. 

Rynak's picture

Well, perhaps instead of playing solitaire, we could use the time to create more "luxury" (art, entertainment, literature, research) on a freelancer basis..... but you know, that would imply a society that no longer is living to survive, but has managed to solve existencial needs totally, and which now is concerned with stuff beyond this..... but noooo, must stay lowly primitives who live in fear of death. In the big picture, it almost is like mass-sadomasochism.... a civilization that has the technology and knowhow to make existencial needs peanuts, yet still artificially makes itself fight for survival.

Hey, i got an idea.... if those fucking stupid morons like pain so much, could they at least let those who are a bit more evolved, do something better with their life?

swissbene's picture

nice.  the mental model is key first step.  in my experience, people are often constrained by their own thinking.

when i quit corp job, colleagues/friends/family very curious 'what would i do'.  ie how possibly to fill the void and achieve meaning.

sometimes i felt obligated to make something up.  simply to 'consume' one's own life is foreign to the dominant work-to-consume model.

i am with you & T. Jefferson though.  even seems obvious :)

FreeNewEnergy's picture

Your comments have hit the nail pretty squarely, but, allow me to add, current economic conditions are fostering an environment where work has changed and what you call the "existential needs" might more reasonably be filled by the technology-marginalized workers, such as home gardening, DYI home repair and generally more resourcefulness and less dependence on the "system", the grid.

I am one of these technology-marginal types, in my own home business, with very limited overhead, having to actually do work about five to six hours a day, and that only four days a week. The rest of my time is spent raising my own vegetables, making my home more energy efficient and sourcing other income streams. It's actually a pretty sweet spot.

The promise of technology was always presented - back in the 60s and 70s - as more leisure time, but the banksters and politicians stole that luxury lifestyle from the common man. However, through their own rampant greed, this is backfiring, because more people are now on welfare (read: government-supplied leisure), not paying mortgages (bankster inspired leisure), and working less (congress, thanks for doing nothing).

With all this free time on their hands, common folks - the smart ones - are devising ways to capitalize and take back their leisure, which has some new definitions, such as, leisure as not spending, leisure as self-education, leisure as efficiency.

Deflation is going to hurt the most at the top of the food chain. Those already at or near the bottom will be scarcely affected, while the smartest of that group will actually prosper, just as in the depression.

It's all coming at very slow speed, thanks to the Fed's unending fight against deflation, but it's coming, no matter what. There is no other good alternative.

Baptiste Say's picture

Yeah, all the coal, iron ore, copper, steel, rare earth, thermoplastics, semiconductors, oil, gas, electricty and whatever else you rely on to maintain your life of sloth is going to extract and produce itself if we simply focus more on art and literature.


Piss off you bum.

Seer's picture

"Machines are here to stay. Increases in efficiency are here to stay."

Saying so won't make it so.

Machines require energy.  As was the case with (corn-based esp) ethanol, people finally got it, got that the machines weren't going to get that energy.  Walk around any nearby city and note the vandalism; infrastructure gets pummeled when people are messed up.

Further, 2/3 of the world's population subsists on the equivalent of $3/day or less- do you think that machines play a big role in Their world?

Lastly, in regards to "efficiency," look up Jevons Paradox.

Rynak's picture

When i said efficiency, i meant efficiency. That is: Requiring less input to get the desired output. Unless knowledge or ability to built such mechanisms is lost, it stays and only increases with accumulating improvements (i agree though, that the returns must in the longterm be dimishing).

P.S.: Energy/Ressource supply certainly matters, and it is one reason why i consider nowadays wasteful and growth-greedy culture so problematic. It doesn't change the advantages of increased efficiency though. Even if ressources decrease, i can still get more output per input, with efficiency improvements.

StychoKiller's picture

RICH Economy step 1:


Offer a prize of $50,000/year to any worker that designs a
machine/software/process that will replace him/her.
Offer an additional prize of $30,000/year to ALL OTHER WORKERS that get replaced.

Answering conservative objections:
1. A machine works 24/7, thereby tripling output immediately.
2. Machines do not take sick leave.
3. Machines are never late for work.
4. Machines do not form unions and constantly ask for higher wages and more fringe benefits.
5. Machines do not take vacations.
6. Machines do not harbor grudges and foul up production in sneaky, undetectable ways.
7. Cybernation was advancing every decade anyway, despite the opposition of Unions, government, and other Alpha males; it was better to have huge populations celebrating the reward of $30K to $50K/year for group cleverness than huge populations suffering the humiliation of welfare.
8. With production rising due to Cybernation, consumers were needed and a society on welfare was a society of very meager consumers.

The majority of the unemployed, living comfortably on $30k/year, spent most of their time drinking, smoking, engaging in primate sexual acrobatics and watching TV.
When Moralists complained that this was a subhuman existence, Hubbard answered, "And what kind of existence did they have doing idiot jobs that machines do better?"

[/quote] -- R.A. Wilson

TrueStrengthTurnsTheCheek's picture

Sorry I dont buy it. This could only happen in a sane world not run by elite/evil bankers who would much rather just inslave us all. they will lie to us until its to late to do anything and we wake up realizing we own nothing of value and must beg the government to feed us. thats how I see it. get some physical silver/guns and stay free!

Crab Cake's picture

It will never, never ever, be too late to do something. What? You think you are going to live forever? I plan to die on my feet, rather than live on my knees should it come to that.

sullymandias's picture

i guess when you die on your feet it will be too late to do anything..

serotonindumptruck's picture

Thought I recognized that quote.

"It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees!" -- Emiliano Zapata

Well done. ;-)

TrueStrengthTurnsTheCheek's picture

hey! I meant for the general populous. I've made the proper preperation to stay free (0 debt, ounces upon ounces of silver, retreat house with years supply food and water, guns and ammo) nothings ever certain but I plan to make it through all this just fine. drones do worry me...

johnnynaps's picture

when drones are used against the population, that is when we strategically storm police headquarters and get some of our own.

TrueStrengthTurnsTheCheek's picture

Ah but what about when they are using drones not against the "population" but against "terrorists"?

drones already kill thousands of innocents in tens of countries because we think they are killing terrorists. we are being set up the 60 minutes piece on sovereign citizens as "terrorists" and the threat we are constantly reminded of "homegrown" terrorists.. the gov. will spin it however they want and the american sheeple will eat it up. a police state is being enacted across the world with the civilian control mechanisms being tested in america and europe and the rebellion control mechanisms being tested in iraq/afghanistan/pakistan.

Rynak's picture

Ownership only works as long as most people respect it. Material force overrides all "laws" if the force is strong enough. Casualities on the other hand......

nufio's picture

+1. i never understood why people think that their ownership of something would actually be considered fair by others.. just because they themselves think they earned it.

I think personal property rights is just ingrained in the moral code that we grew up with, but for someone who grew up in a communist nation for example it might not be evident.

serotonindumptruck's picture

I'm reminded of Chief Seattle's philosophy on land ownership.

Seer's picture

Yeah, I think that we should all hold hands and sing "let's protect property rights" when everyone is homeless and TPTB own/control it all.  NOTE: TPTB aren't communists, they aren't anything, really, just folks who will do anything to stay on top of the pile.

gangland's picture

you could say such folks are legitimately a separate species, a further evolved species than sapiens...homo psychopathicus