You Are Here

Tyler Durden's picture

It's definitely different this time...

The 2008 analog lines the current trajectory up with August 2008 right after Treasury Secretary Paulson told the world reassuringly that:

"Our economy has got very strong long-term fundamentals. And you know, your policy-makers and regulators here - we're very vigilant."

And we all know what happened next...

h/t @ChrisBrady12

Could never happen again?

Yeah you're probably right...


Charts: Bloomberg

Comment viewing options

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

This time it's different...

And it is - this time it's worse.

ilion's picture

I truly wonder who is actually left trading these markets, especially the SP500. A lot of the guys have long left the stock market, some have become farmers, some have opened brokers like the guys from Vipro Markets, Tickmill, FXpro, etc.

BoNeSxxx's picture

Deutsche Bank going tits up will make Lehman look like a tempest in a teapot.  Get your popcorn ready fellas (and mscreant).

SWRichmond's picture


You want liberty?  Complexity is your friend.  Systems being "managed" by the "intellectuals" are doomed to fail, because they are too complex to be managed.

Oxbo Rene's picture

I was told that everything is going to be alright ! ! ! ! ! !

waterwitch's picture

DB puts bitchez. Bank puts bitchez. SQQQ calls bitchez.  ...

ThirteenthFloor's picture


Learn from history or be doomed to repeat it.

new game's picture

watching hell on wheels, yea-merica is cursed by wicked people, way it is everywhere, though, sigh, nuthin new under the sun, and darkness of night. refine those skills long lost to a generation of digital fools that never been at the end of handle...

mkkby's picture

DB will not be ALLOWED to go under.  The lesson was learned. The TBTF banks are TBTF and will be bailed out.  End of discussion.

Al Gophilia's picture

Why does a bank have to be vigilant in the first place? Is there something inherently wrong with the system or did these oh so competent and vigilant so-called-regulators (remember Bart and Gary) miss a thing or two on our way to financial perdition, hmmmm?


lakecity55's picture

Actually, the "intellectuals" are out to destroy the entire global economy. Cloward-Piven world wide. Out of Chaos, Order. They will try to institute the NWO and will gain converts because every single thing will be fucked. No food, clean water, fuel, only Chaos- until they bring in their "solution." And that will be when Satan rules the earth in some open form!

It will be similar to the time when the Roman Army destroyed Jerusalem: wholesale death, poverty, the usual Biblical horror events!

HopefulCynical's picture

Actually, the Zionist psychopaths are out to destroy the entire global economy.


+1 tho'

True Blue's picture

Unfortunately, when a centrally managed system proves too complex to manage the 'managers' tend to start killing people.

FinalEvent's picture

Somewhere, there is a system completely decentralized...

Dr. Spin's picture

Like Antonin Scalia???


Spoctor Din

walküre's picture

All major European banks are going kapputt. Greek banks are done. Italy's and Spain's banks are on life support. French, Austrian and German banks barely able to walk on their own.

It will be a complete meltdown this time. US banks can come in and buy Europe for cents on the Dollar.

Overflow's picture

yes... and a few months later US banks follow us in the fall, and are bought by Chinese for a few Good Delivery bars.

GOSPLAN HERO's picture

"And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth." - Genesis 47:15

knukles's picture

Troof be dat!
Lehman was at best a second tier broker dealer specializing in bonds.  End of conversation.
DB is one massive Leviathan, perhaps the single largest repository of swap/cds/you name it contracts in the world (and no, whatever they tell you, the shit doesn't "net") with every imaginable exposure (rates, stocks, commodities, counter-parties, jurisdictions, ratings, country, yadda yadda yadda....)
It will be EPIC, dude.

lakecity55's picture

Yes, and I think as they go further into NIRP, eventually everything will implode.

But, they will try going cashless first, seeing as the (-) rate gets bigger and bigger, folks will try to take cash out of the bank, so the obvious 'solution' is to ban cash!

TheReplacement's picture

Then we can measure our remaining time on earth by just how fast they move to implement cashless.  The desperation seems palpable now.

fiatmadness's picture

You can just imagine Angela Murkel's face having to 'deal with David Cameron' whilst she know's her biggest bank is about to fail, and fail so bad that no single state could save it.

jerry_theking_lawler's picture

I need to invest my money should I purchase a popcorn farm....or just buy the popcorn futures?

TxExPat's picture

Physical Popcorn, or the Farm, not the futures. One "Force Majeure" call from one of the big banks on the wrong side of your futures contract, and your contract is useless...  (assuming the things really do hit the fan here...).



nuubee's picture

I love how he straight-faced claimed that the policy-makers and regulators in the U.S. are "vigilant".... As if the crowd of two-faced puppets who believe what they're told and do as the financiers say could be seriously called "vigilant"

Enki Anu's picture

Love to see Doush bag bank go Leaman.
They don't have the Gold anyways.

crghill's picture

i signed in just to upvote you!

fockewulf190's picture

Phyzz is an effective tool against such curses.

wet_nurse's picture

I heard this on the radio the other day and laughed a bit to myself. I remembered hearing it when I young and thinking he was an old fool. I'm older now.

PatriotFirst1776's picture

That is a great track. But, I was recently "hipped" to this track by long-time songwriter, Chet Nichols. The song is entitled, "Walking In Circles".... how appropriate?


inosent's picture

"Israel is a curse on America and on those in the Church who worship it"

That is one way to look at it. And it isn't just Hagee. I think pretty much 100% of American christianity is down with the zionist agenda, quoting this verse that and the other to justify it all.

How many times have I rolled my eyes when the MSC (main stream christians) quote Gen 12:3.

So, I tell them, OK, fine. Was not USA corp used as the key tool the zionists used, via world wars, to get the current version of israel set up over there in the ME?

Sure, yeah, easy.

So where's the blessing - *from a Christian point of view* - ?

in 1963 the SC took away prayer in the schools.

To a *christian*, is that a blessing?

Billions of aide to israel. They even sunk the USS Liberty, but there was no official action taken against it.

Here is the next 'blessing' - Roe V Wade in 1973.

Billions and billions more to israel.

June 25, 2015 4 jews and a senile old jew puppet give us homosexual marriage.

Again, from a *christian* point of view, is that what they call a blessing?

I have sent letters to many MSC pastors to elaborate on these 'blessings', and suggest the *facts* contradict the mythology.

Guess how many have responded?

Nobody :)

But, sure enough, on Sunday they area all smiles talking about the upcoming trip to the 'holy' land.


Did Jesus ever say dirt was holy? Maybe I missed that verse.

He did say, so we see in the text at least, God is holy. I get that.

Land? 'holy' *land*?

Again. my post is for christians only.

Any sincere follower of Jesus is gonna have to walk away from the religious system, and let go of the bible. re-create a vastly reduced 'holy' book that cannot be in any way used for some political purpose, only for the development of good, honest character.

We got into this mess because christians fell for the line of bull that Jesus was part of the jewish tradition, which modernly the term 'jewish' is mercurial, and even if we can pin it down, there is no connection to 'jew' today, and who was living back then.

Jesus *did* repudiate the levitical system, so there is ample evidence based on the text of what was attributed to him as having said he could not have been a party to any axiom or ideology that a jew today would want to reach back and claim to be theirs, as all they find is the levitical BS, turned Talmudic, which is the hocus pocus torah and 'prophets' on steroids.

Jesus advocated an entirely different philosophy that was not rooted in the levitical sham system. he came to fulfill (which can mean a lot of things) any part of any established *truth* that reflected the sublimity of the perfect awesome and holy God who loves and created *all* people, not just one psycho sect.

For centuries, and this started to happen *after* Jesus died, and whoever started writing the stuff down had a *lot* of time to think about what they would have Jesus saying and doing, but 40 years later, we find Jesus forced into the levitical tradition, as if he were a *part* of it, even though a careful examination of the text has Jesus *repudiating* it.

I don't think it is a matter in dispute Jesus was killed, actually brutally tortured and then crucified, but it was not for singing songs and serving happy meals. It was for his *heresy*, his *rejection* of the levitical farce, and that *must* have included *big fat chunks* of what we refer to today as the old testatment, which stupidly 'somebody' for 'some' reason way back when 'decided' was to be made part of a 'holy' book, as if *that* was a critical factor in 'properly' following Jesus.

Getting to the bottom f who Jesus was, what he said and did is pretty much next to impossible. The *only* reason he is a person of interest all these years later is for the sake of the sublime spirit that existentially intersects the lives of people.

Unfortunately, we go from that sublimity, and end up in a 'church' holding thi8s 'bible' and before you know it, we are saying 'amen' to MSC pablum about zionism, and have basically com full circle, part and parcel with a type of religious system Jesus got killed for repudiating :)

Talk about, like, you know ... *missing the point* (!)


thanks for the link.

Obadiah's picture

Yep we were warned of these people you speak of.

Rev 2:9 Commanding John to write to the church of Smyrna

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Kenites they are... the offspring of satan hisself... so of course they do his bidding... but there is still salvation open to them



BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

The great grey bearded invisible skyman just won't go away.

The bible is a curiously man made like artefact, uncannily so. The great grey bearded invisible skyman could have done so much better than that.

I could think of a thousand ways the great grey bearded invisible skyman could make its existence unambiguous and irrefutable but gosh darn that varmint, it just won't play along.

If anything the bibles and torahs and Korans are a sneaky trick played on humans by satan.

1000 splendid suns's picture

Jesus is a metaphor for the sun.

'The light of the world'

'Will rise again'

Crown of thorns, coronation, corona...


Rusty Shorts's picture

Jesus is a metaphor for Lucifer, the bright morning Star - Revelations 22:16

Keyser's picture

Save your breath... These "christians" have been programmed from birth to believe in their great heavenly space fairy... History doesn't matter to them...  The fact that the book of genesis has been repeated at least a dozen times down through history in a variety of religions... That, coupled with the fact that there are over 5200+ separate deities worshiped on this rock today only proves that no one is facing reality when it comes to religion vs fantasy... 

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

I'm pretty sure Jesus was a Starchild, when a smooth-talking, charming spaceship Captain passed himself off as God, and sagged some PYT from the ME.

"Our father who are in Spaceship Enterprise, blessed be thy name..."

Preposterous?  What, as opposed to the unverifiable lore from 2-3 k years sgo?

HopefulCynical's picture

I can completely see "Q" as YHWH.

jcdenton's picture

Dude, the burden of proof is on you ..



Not us ..


The natural, or gen. argument for God's existence rests on the fact that man knows that there is a God* even without the special revelation in the Bible, because God Himself inscribed this knowledge in his heart at creation (Ro 2:14–15). Hence the existence of God need not be proved to anyone of morally sound mind. The theological argument is this, that the Bible, without explanation, confronts man with the fact of God's being and sovereignty, which is at once acknowledged. Other arguments for God's existence are reasonably deduced from His self-manifestation in the universe, human hist., and conscience (Ro 1.19–20; Acts 14:17; 17:24–28): the cosmological argument reasons from the effect to the cause that this orderly world cannot be the effect of chance, but must have for its Creator an intelligent and omnipotent God; the teleological argument demonstrates God's existence from the t evidences of design, purpose, and adaptation in the world; the moral argument is based on man's moral nature and the moral order traceable throughout the world; the aesthetic argument is founded on beauty and comeliness in the universe, which must have as its Maker a loving God; the ontological argument reasons that the concept of a perfect and absolute divine Being must be founded on fact since it cannot exist in a vacuum. Atheism* denies the validity of all arguments for God's existence; unbiased reason must admit that they supply cumulative proof. See also Anselm of Canterbury; Apologetics, II A; Philosophy of Religion. JTM

The Existence of God, ed. J. H. Hick (New York, 1964).


And if you do need further clarification from the likes of say Sir Francis Bacon (father of modern Freemasonry, and master magician under John Dee) and George Romanes (Darwin's most promising student) ..


Denial of the existence of God. Term used in various senses, depending on definition of God. Pagans applied it to early Christians because they rejected heathen idolatry. In theol. controversies of early ch. contending parties at times called each other atheists, and the RC Ch. justified the burning of heretics by applying this epithet to them. — Aside from this improper use the term has been variously used in scientific literature. In its widest sense it denotes the antithesis of theism and includes pantheism and deism. In a more restricted sense it denotes the denial of the Deity above and outside of the physical universe. In the most commonly accepted sense it is a positive dogmatic denial of anything that may be called God. The term is also used to express a merely negative attitude on the question of the existence of God, such as agnosticism* and the so-called “practical atheism,” which is not based on scientific reasoning, but is merely a refusal to worship any deity.


The materialism of the 18th and 19th c. and biological evolution have given strong impetus to atheistic trends of thought. In Fr. the 18th c. produced many antitheistic writers, among them the Encyclopedists D. Diderot,* P. H. D. d' Holbach,* and Voltaire.* The latter called Holbach's Système the Bible of atheism. F. K. C. L. Büchner,* L. A. Feuerbach,* E. H. P. A. Haeckel,* K. H. Marx,* and K. C. Vogt,* Ger. materialists of the 19th c., were aqually outspoken. A. Comte's* Positivism,* Eng. secularism (main exponents include G. J. Holyoake* and C. Bradlaugh*), and continental socialism* are essentially atheistic. Of the great religions of the world, Buddhism,* Jainism,* and the Sankhye system of Brahmanic philosophy (see Brahmanism) deny the existence of a personal God.


It is not possible for a man to be an atheist, in the commonly accepted sense, in his innermost conviction. No amount of reasoning will erase from the human heart the God-given conviction that there is a Supreme Being; those who theoretically deny God's existence replace Him with something else. Likewise, no people has ever been found entirely devoid of religious belief. The difficulties that atheism involves are expressed by Bacon: “I had rather believe all the fabulous tales in the Talmud and the Koran than that the universal frame is without mind.” The hopelessness of antitheism is apparent in the confession of Romanes, who speaks of “the appalling contrast between the hallowed glory of that creed which once was mine and the lonely existence as now I find it.”


For me, really what does it matter what I think? But if I am forced to answer that, then I will answer via such .. (Read Me First)


Good day, sir ..

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

A few philosophers can be as deluded about god as a million christians.

The above extracts mean nothing. Interesting only in so far as the construct of the sentences and combination of words used.

You see how you take the written word and because it agrees with your viewpoint in your mind must be sacrosanct.

We are funny animals we human beings.

If the bible is the best god has got then you guys really need to raise the bar a bit and call your god out for being a bit of a bloody dickhead.

TheReplacement's picture

What makes your words any more enlightening?  I see you all presenting nothing but dismissal and anger as your evidence.  Since the christian God is love this makes sense that you would take such a tact.

If you were simply stating an opinion (I don't believe) then fine.  But you present your view as fact without the slightest of anything to back it up and then you will ridicule believers (by definition they don't have proof otherwise they would be called something else like evidence presenters) for the very thing for which you are guilty.

I just don't get why you people who think you know everything cannot prove what you know.  What am I missing here?

Al Tinfoil's picture

"Dude, the burden of proof is on you .. Not us .."

Um, no.  The burden of proof of the existence of your invisible God is upon you who assert the existence of "God" and "Heaven" and all the other mystical beings and paradise reserved for the believers somewhere up in the sky.  For all the religious texts and chanting by the faithful, there is no empirical evidence of their existence.  If you want to believe in all this mystical stuff that is your choice, and no doubt people of childish minds take great comfort in the idea that they will be "saved" and admitted to "Heaven" for a life of eternal joy and comfort, while they enjoy the smug satisfaction that non-believers will be condemned to burn in Hell-fire forever.  Oh, and you get to contravene all the the moral dictates of your religion and go about killing, cheating, fornicating, and enjoying yourself selfishly as long as you go to your church building regularly to "confess" your sins and put some money onto the plate, and get your licence to sin renewed.  The hypocrisy  of it all need never trouble you, but that is the whole point of joining a church is it not?  .

But if you want people of inquiring and mature minds to adopt your beliefs, the onus is upon you to provide relevant evidence to support your position.  Citing  religious books is about as convincing as citing Star Trek and Star Wars as proof of the existence of aliens and "The Force" - entertaining fantasy, but not convincing.

For your enlightenment, I suggest you do some research into false logic, including "Appeal to authority" and "Appeal to the crowd".

Welcome to Fight Club.

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

Just comtemplate for a moment the amount of man hours pissed up against the wall throughout history of humans standing inside churches and synagogues and temples listening to men in skirts prattle on about invisible grey bearded skymen. You could be out in the community working with the disadvantaged or doing any other fucking voluntary work, but nooooooooooooooo, your personal salvation is more important.

You just could not make this shit up if you tried.