The Global Revolution Is Accelerating - Mike Krieger Explains

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

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

Before I read this I have to say, I hope you explained your quotes this time.  You must explain your quotes for them to make sense or else you are merely putting words on a page.

Buy silver.

monkeys.pick.bottoms's picture

The intro quotes are a foreplay between the writer and the reader. No need to explain too much. Bought silver (i like to have reality on my side).

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

I see quotes at the top, I see who said them.  Then I skim the piece looking for a reference to Hitler/Fourth Turning/Dillon.  I find Fourth Turning.  Do you think I am going back to the top to read the Hitler quote?  I have no reference point for it, and could care less what Hitler thinks.  Maybe if I had a reference point I would.  It is better to work the quote into the article itself.

How to work a quote into a story, example:  Many quote George Soros as saying that, "Gold is the ultimate bubble."  Is he simply saying, it is in or will be in a bubble, or is there a direct implication behind his words?  The word "ultimate" can mean final, and that is what I believe he is saying.  'Gold is the final bubble.'

Do you see how I explained the quote?  Mike writes great pieces but he puts quotes up top that look like lonely girls waiting for a dance.  Mike has to ask his quotes to dance or they will wait there all night.

I am glad you bought silver.  Now go buy more.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

U.S. Treasury Bond Holders Will Never Be Paid

*Chuckle* :-)

Because it's really that hard to pay back $12 trillion in net public debt in a country that is producing $15 trillion per year and has natural reserves worth god knows how many hundreds of trillions of dollars.

Like it's difficult for a person making $50k a year to pay back a $40K mortgage who is living on an estate worth millions of dollars.

Right! Right?

Has ZH now morphed into a parody site making fun of GOP/libertarian paranoia and cluelessness, or is this still the real thing?

If this is a 'real' prediction I'm sure this will surprise Ron Paul, Paul Ryan and other GOP/libertarian dignitaries who are holding good chunks of their liquid wealth in treasuries :-)

 

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

And in the meantime pay banksters a 30% usury fee?  No thanks.  Take your fascism elsewhere, I would rather not pay to have my economy strangled.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Well, you have not managed to reply even remotely on-topic, so I'm not sure you have replied to the right comment. Care to clarify what your point was intended to be and how it relates to the nonsensical claim in this article, which was:

U.S. Treasury Bond Holders Will Never Be Paid

and whch claim I criticised in my reply?

Thanks.

 

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

I see, you need me to answer your questions for you...

America can not pay its debt while the bansters are sitting on their (America's) face.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Just to clarify - do you suggest that banksters were not sitting on America's face when this 1995-2000 period of paying back the federal debt occurred:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?bgcolor=%23B3CD...

?

 

thetruth's picture

The author did mention that if the debt is paid back, it will be with dollars.  He presumes they will be of relatively value but you believe that prices will still be low.  That is the only difference.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

(quoting from an earlier discussion today, which posting went unopposed:)

Regarding high prices, prices in modern economies are predominantly coupled to demand, not to supply.

Just perform this quick thought experiment: what is easier today or was easier in the past 50 years, to sell a product or to buy it? Furthermore, if you bought an item could you have bought 10 more?

If your answer is: 'selling is much harder' and 'I could have been sold 10 more' then almost by definition it's a buyer's market, i.e. it is demand is that is dominating and demand is what is setting the biggest portion of prices.

And guess what happens to "high prices" if few are able to pay for those items? Right, they are coming down. [*]

And yes, I realize that this short description is in stark contrast to the supply-side, neoclassical or even austrian monetarist dogma preached here on ZH. Sorry about that and welcome to the real world of keynesian economics, which is being crucified here because unlike its counterparts it actually works in practice :-)

[*] With the exception of monopolistic prices, which are more resilient to the lack of demand. How the libertarian and neo-GOP "get rid of anti-trust laws and let the big fish eat the small fish freely!" teachings are supposed to solve that particular problem of large companies cornering markets is a mystery though :-)

Goldilocks's picture

Regarding high prices, prices in modern economies are predominantly coupled to demand, not to supply.

... until that fails (due to the overwhelming demands from the population). Supply is part of the end game (as I see it).

XitSam's picture

Just because a post went "unopposed", does not make it true (or false).  I think everyone should stop feeding the troll, there's more important things to do.  Like maybe buy some silver.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

As a longer-timeframe speculation silver definitely makes more sense than say gold - because silver has significant industrial uses.

Price is still a bit high for me - I hate buying at the top a lot more than I hate missing a good deal - YMMV.

 

Bay of Pigs's picture

Let me try to clarify it for you. The debt was NOT being paid back. It was still growing. Your charts (from the Fed itself) and thinking are simply dishonest. More like delusional.

FYI, that was also the time Greenspan, Rubin, Summers, etc..were dumping huge amounts of gold into the physical market and getting the derivatives machine going for their Wall St banking friends/crooks. They also got rid of Brooksley Born at the CFTC, who knew what the scam was all about and tried to stop it. USD up, stocks up, housing up, gold/silver down, no inflation. All good, right?

Not exactly.

Current USG debt is like the Space Shuttle lifting off, and the Fed's balance sheet has been utterly destroyed. This debt will never be paid back. What part of that don't you get?

 

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Your charts (from the Fed itself) and thinking are simply dishonest.

Nobody even on the right-wing has suggested that the Fed data is falsified. (It would be silly to do so even for them: balance of payments stats are public data and falsifying them would be a scandal of Watergate magnitude.)

Also, despite the White House (issuer of this data) and the Fed (maintainer of this time series data) being run by Republicans for 8 years, that 1995-2000 data has not been "corrected" - why not?

Reality is much simpler than a vast conspiracy to falsify key economic data: the deficit reduction and the surplus was small but real and all the "SS accounting gimmick" PR was just a clever Republican slur on the Clinton administration's economic record.

I also find it pretty likely that you never questioned the veracity of those claims yourself and you fell for that bogus claim hook, line, and sinker.

FYI, here's the absolute public debt level for that period (I clipped it right before it started growing again during the Bush presidency):

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?bgcolor=%23B3CD...

See the gradual 'bending' of the curve: that's when the deficit reduction was started. It needed a couple of years to result in an absolute-value reduction of the federal debt - but it occured. (The curve then flattened when the 1999-2000 dotcom bubble burst.)

So if you look at historic precedents you will see it's possible to reduce the federal debt, given the political will.

 

Sean7k's picture

Why must you lie so often? The debt was never paid back. Clinton merely stopped creating new debt on current budgets. There is a huge difference. The principle was never reduced.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

No, you are factually wrong (again).

The effect of the surplus I cited was that even the absolute public debt (principal amount) started going down by the end of the Clinton administration (muted by the 1999-2000 dotcom bust recession but not reversed):

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?bgcolor=%23B3CD...

Unless you claim that the official time series is manipulated by some vast data falsification conspiracy spanning two republican terms and two democratic terms and 8 years of Republican run Fed?

So yes, this is one of those right-wing zombie lies again. Given the political will it is possible to reduce the federal debt and it has been done before.

 

thedrickster's picture

Hard to argue with numbers. Note total debt flattens out in 2000 following a once in a generation leap in productivity, technological advancement, a stock market bubble and the resulting spike in tax reciepts.

The pigs remained at the trough, period.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Yeah, he told a bold-faced lie (again): quoting coarse annual data on Wikipedia while I showed the original data source, which is a more finegrained quarterly series :-)

Ironically, he is (unknowingly) contradicting his earlier claim as well that the data I used is fabricated: if you check the numbers you'll see that the Wikipedia article uses the exact same source of data as I did :-)

 

UGrev's picture

You've been math fucked. How's it feel to have numbers shoved up your ass sideways and coming out of your ears. Math doesn't lie, people like you do. 

KickIce's picture

or will be paid in worthless fiat.

Quit cherry picking.  Seeing that the fed/treasury is already purchasing much of it's own debt we are already in the early stages of default.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Please outline the mechanism through which QE will lead to a default in your opinion.

(I have strong doubts in advance, but cannot judge your arguments without having heard them first.)

 

KickIce's picture

Easy money, the more money you print (and we are printing money) the less value it has. All one has to do is study the dollar index from the creation of the Fed and in particular since we left the gold standard. 

The fact is we are purchaing much of our own debt.  It's very much like writing myself a check for my house and then claiming I'm debt free.

Question for you, Mr. Keynes, name one empire that has been able to print it's way to prosperity.  At least we can come up with concrete examples, ie Weimer, Zimbabwe where this practice has failed miserably.  But then the latest group to try it so much smarter and more sophisticated than the last, isn't that right?

The only reason QE appears to be working at this point is because most of the other world currencies suck more than ours.  When it comes to currency we are in a tallest midget contest.

Short term, you never bet against the man with the printing press, so you will be right until you are wrong - and it will be horribly wrong when it does happen.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Easy money, the more money you print (and we are printing money) the less value it has.

That's the simple-minded monetarist/Austrian view.

Problem is that it does not jibe with reality even remotely accurately. There's multiple problems with that view:

  • Ask the Japanese how they like their hyperinflation :-)
  • Money printing only creates less value if it results in a reduction in real wages (wages divided by price level / cost of living). As Germany and China has proven it after 2008 spending 2x and 4x of the (relative) size of the US stimulus they have helped their economies. Hard to argue against facts.

No doubt too much money printing can cause problems - but so can too little money printing cause problems. It's a balancing act.

 

LowProfile's picture

So if there's no downside to a country buying it's own debt, then why haven't all of them been doing it all along?

You are such a perfect fucking douchebag.  I hope all of your assets are in treasuries, small caps and Vegas condos.

NuckingFuts's picture

Lots of downsides, agreed.

But what I see (and am not the first to post on ZH) is that we are in a race to the bottom.  The winner hits bottom last and therefore "wins" as their economy is less shitty then all the others....but still sucking.

Is it wise?  I think not, but that seem IMO to be where we are headed.  A world were our economy sucks the least.  As has been quoted over and over "our system is the worst, except for all the others".

Good Luck everyone.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

So if there's no downside to a country buying it's own debt, then why haven't all of them been doing it all along?

Simple: because there's a natural balance between printing yourself out of debt and having a well functioning economy that keeps those policymakers elected. The balance is not in any of the extreme solutions of "never print money" or "print up to the Mount Everest" but somewhere inbetween.

What no country will do though is the stupidity suggested in this article: to not pay out bond holders in the currency they are printing :-)

 

nuinut's picture

Please define "the bottom".

I wasn't aware a bottomless pit had one. Just downsides.

AnAnonymous's picture

Looking at the past indicates that paying back the debt, other than by rolling the debt, has not been on the table.

The question is not to assess whether or not it will be easy to repay the debt but whether or not the ponzi can be kept up.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

Looking at the past indicates that paying back the debt, other than by rolling the debt, has not been on the table.

Actually, if you check the record you'll see that the Clinton administration managed to reduce the deficit gradually and produced an actual surplus quarter for the first time in 20+ years:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?bgcolor=%23B3CD...

Of course Bush quickly turned that into a deficit again. If you look at the end of the graph, Obama is starting to turn it around again.

But you can see the surplus section in the late 90s and in 00 so it's possible, given enough political will.

As I said the US is a rich country and a good debtor.

 

Bay of Pigs's picture

LMAO. That's the funniest and yet the dumbest fuckan thing I've ever read here.

Nice try.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Yeah, indeed, Republicans are pretty dumb to claim that the USG will go 'bankrupt'.

It is pretty hard to go bankrupt if you are indebted in the currency you print :-)

 

AndrewWJewell's picture

bet your ass, "Zimbabwe Superpowers" activate .... by the time Zimbabwe Ben is done 14 trillion will be the yearly operating budget of the United States government

 

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

So for the past 80 years of economic history the only example you can come up with when inflation turned into hyperinflation was an authoritarian dictatorship run by an 80 years old madman, indebted in foreign currency and mis-managed into the ground by utter, sheer incompetence?

Not a single developed economy?

Wow!

Can I cite Somalia and Afghanistan as shining examples of libertarian 'zero tax', 'no government, 'private law', 'gold standard' policies then? :-)

 

 

AndrewWJewell's picture

as applicable to United States foreign policy, the Libertarian suggestion I believe is for the U.S. government to acquire Hallmark. Then all foreign policy cables will read as the following “sucks to be you, good luck with that”.

 

Then following whatever [bahh who cares], we can extract whatever from the ground with our guys wearing radiation suits

 


Progressive Libertarian Party

 

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Progressive-Libertarian-Party/183444998335344

 

KickIce's picture

That's one more example than you have.

and isn't is interesting there have been reports that the German people have safety deposit boxes full of gold and silver?

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Have you checked the GLD/EUR charts lately?

If you have then you'll see that those german safety boxes full of gold were potentially a similarly stupid investment decision to those scared US pensioners in 1980 who bought an ounce of gold for $7150 (inflation-adjusted) and are still waiting for their original investment to break even, 30 years and counting ... [many of them are dead now, sadly. It's a bitch if you go for the austrian long run.]

 

tmosley's picture

I love how you turn an offhanded comment into the world's only example of hyperinflation.

I guess you never heard of a little industrial powerhouse called Israel? http://www.jstor.org/pss/4532401

Also, I love how you think Afghanistan is somehow libertarian.  There are at least three governments in Afghanistan, all of which are fighting each other.  Somalia is actually the most developed nation among those in its region, despite being a dumping ground for the world's radioactive waste.  http://mises.org/daily/2066

Not only is more critical thinking needed on your part, but some basic understanding of the world, preferably not based on racism.  Also, I like how you very specifically picked your timescale in order to keep the classical example of western hyperinflation out of the picture.  Your intellectual dishonesty will take you far on your journey through the dark side.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Erm, Israel was at perpetual war against its oil producing neighbors who embargoed it, it was not a stable developed economy by any means.

Look how quickly Israel managed to control inflation after 1985:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Inflation-CPI.aspx?Symbol=ILS

Even such serious runaway inflation is trivial to handle policy-wise, compared to deflation which is very sticky.

Yet GOP/libertarians are suggesting to hard-code deflation via the gold standard and hard-code wealth inequalities once and forever. Clever! :-)

 

Sean7k's picture

How about these liar:

The performance of fiat currencies in the past century has been dreadful. But what has changed? If anything, the monetary setting of today is much worse than that of the 20th century, for at least in the earlier part of that century there was still a gold standard. Up until 1971, there was some semblance, however weak, of an international gold standard. The monetary shackles on today's central bankers are, much more lenient. Hence, the threat of inflation is far more lethal. As horrid a performance as the dollar turned in for the 20th century, the 21st might make it look pretty good in comparison. Paper monetary systems have a tendency to blow up, in what is commonly called a hyperinflation. They are really not so rare. looking back at the 20th-century experience, has heard of the famous German hyperinflation of 1922-23, where price inflation was 3,422% in 1922 alone (and where, in January 1923, one could buy a dollar for 20,000 marks - but by early November it took 630 billion marks to buy that same dollar). The numbers are simply staggering and hard to comprehend. Yet, Hungary's hyperinflation of 1945-46 was even more spectacular, with price inflation of 19,800% per month. Phillip Cagan wrote, in the 1950s, what many consider to be a classic study of hyperinflation, in which he set the definition of the term hyperinflation at an arbitrary inflation rate exceeding 50% per month. Even so, Cagan still manages to find seven hyperinflations meeting his definition, the limiting factor being that these seven were the only ones where monthly price data was available. They include the great German hyperinflation, two in Hungary and also hyperinflations in Austria, Greece, Poland and Russia. These all occurred between 1921 and 1946. Witness, then, that the phenomenon was not a rare thing. To update Cagan, the more recent hyperinflations were mostly in emerging markets. According to "The Realities of Modern Hyperinflation") some of the more recent ones occurred in places like Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Peru and the Ukraine and that doesn't cover them all. Further searching provided examples of devastating hyperinflations in Zimbabwe, Zaire, Georgia and Nicaragua. Large inflations but not quite Hyperinflations occurred since 1998 in Malaysia and other far east emerging countries as well as Russia and I suspect there are many more but they did not keep records.


More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

The performance of fiat currencies in the past century has been dreadful.

Your whole premise is wrong - you are still stuck in the 19th century, thinking in terms of absolute numbers printed on green-tinted pieces of paper ...

It's as if you defined the quality of your car by the model number it carries. That Ford model "40" must be way better than this BMW-Z "4", right? :-)

Instead how about thinking of the last 200 years as continuous progress and improvement in the quality of life that brought you:

  • The ability to communicate with friends and loved ones possibly hundreds or thousands of miles away. Send pictures, share stories, talk to them instantly. Experience loving personal life in a way that was never possible before.
  • Living in a city that actually has breathable air, clean running water, clean rivers, lights, etc.
  • The ability to travel anywhere in the country pretty much anytime in the year. The ability to live anywhere in the country you like and still be connected to civilization.
  • Having modern medical facilities and treatments that can cure so many things that nature throws at us.
  • Travel to many other, weird, strange, exciting places on the planet and see how people are living there. Heck, be able to travel farther than 100 miles away than where you were born ...
  • Instead of having to carry lumps of gold or green paper, you can carry a small piece of plastic and pay with it. Lose it and get a replacement. If it gets stolen you get a replacement and any fraudulent transactions are rolled back.
  • The country is 10 times larger, the economy is 100 times more interconnected and the likelyhood that you can find a suitable activity that you enjoy and which also allows you to make money has increased perhaps 1000 fold. You are no longer born as a farmer and die as a farmer - only if you want to.
  • Not seeing every second child of yous die before the age of 5, due to a preventable illness. Not seeing mothers die so often, giving birth to children.
  • Also, even in real terms, the average wage today will buy you so much more than the average wage bought you 200 years ago - and comparatively much less work effort is asked for it. Whatever you are doing for a living, your great-grandfather would quite likely not recognize that as 'working' - it would be a form of idle leisure to him!

etc. etc.

You seem so bitter. Take it easy ...

 

Sean7k's picture

You're a liar. You always lie- every post, then try to argue around it. 

Just as your list is a series of subjective statements that are in conflict with reality. 

It would be just as easy to argue that technology has caused more personal dislocation, shallowness in relationships and broken down traditional family values- note the rise in psychological and behavior problems for a larger segment of society.

Rivers and city water are more polluted than ever- now, it is toxic chemicals (flouride and cchlorine), gas additives, prescription drugs and chemical hormones. These are causing cancers and hormone changes. Poisoning fish, animal and man, concentrating in the apex predator when he eats the others.

Medical treatments are incapable of "curing" the common cold, much less anything else. Instead, it merely treats and then steals your earnings through a lifetime regimen of drugs.

Travel has been a benefit, but it has also allowed the introduction of invasive species and the movement of diseases that can have pandemic results.

I prefer the gold relic for money, then I wouldn't be forced to use a paper one that has lost 97% of it's value in the last 100 years. Further, that card is an invasion of privacy, recording my movements, susceptible to theft that can threaten all my accounts and credit ratings for months on end.

The country is the same size it was, less Hawaii and Alaska. Ten times? Your usual math skills at work here. Funny, as I look at the 19% U-6 number, I'm not sure those people would agree with your assumptions.

Our birth/death model is a disgrace. We are starting to approach third world status as it increases each year.

People are now required to have two incomes today to have any chance at a decent living standard. In the 1960's, you could live just as well with one parent working. 

I am not bitter, but I will continue to oppose and expose your lies. Your miserable attempts at propaganda are laughable.

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

 

Medical treatments are incapable of "curing" the common cold, much less anything else. Instead, it merely treats and then steals your earnings through a lifetime regimen of drugs.

Wow, you really are bitter! You really are living in the past and you hate the present. Up to now you were just someone I thought was somewhat confused about how the world works, but today I started sincerely feeling sorry for you.

You should know that part of your problem is that you are fantastically out of touch with reality. Here's a quick list of major modern medical advances. They have saved the lives of millions and have improved the quality of life of hundreds of millions of people:

  • 1900’s
    • First electrocardiograph machine

  • 1920’s
    • First modern respirator

  • 1930’s
    • Artificial pacemaker invented
    • Kouwenhoven cardiovascular research

  • 1940’s
    • First kidney dialysis machine
    • Plastic contact lens created

  • 1950’s
    • First artificial hip replacement
    • Artificial heart valve developed
    • First cardiac pacemaker
    • First successful open-heart bypass surgery
    • First human kidney transplant

  • 1960’s
    • First totally internal pacemaker
    • Laser treatments made available for optic purposes
    • ICU was administered
    • Nuclear machine

  • 1970’s
    • Soft contact lens
    • Physical therapy
    • CT scan introduced
    • First cochlear implant surgery

  • 1980’s
    • MRI scanners
    • First permanent artificial heart implant
    • Deep-brain electrical stimulation system
    • First laser surgery on human cornea

  • 1990’s
    • Human Genome Project
    • Radiosurgery created
    • Brachytherapy Remote Afterloader used to dissolve tumors inside-out
    • Stereotactic Needle Biopsy System to diagnose breast cancer

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

The country is the same size it was, less Hawaii and Alaska. Ten times?

Population, Sean, population.

You are thinking in way too materialistic terms. You are ignoring the people and you are missing 90% of the fun in the world. Let me guess, you are alone most of the day?

Dude, you seriously need professional help - there's not much I can do for you.

 

More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

I prefer the gold relic for money, then I wouldn't be forced to use a paper one that has lost 97% of it's value in the last 100 years.

Again you are mistaken - it has not. Even if you ignore all the advances a modern society gives today you can buy the same things with one day of (average) work performed today than you could have bought 100 years ago - in fact you can buy more today.

Life was a lot harder in 1910, both objectively and subjectively.

 

AndrewWJewell's picture

this is actually an absolutely great point, I personally dont see why anyone flagged him as "junk"

tmosley's picture

Must be a citizen of Harare.