PDA

View Full Version : How Long Will It Be Before We Hit Bottom?




sevin
12-12-2010, 12:00 AM
Right now the U.S. and the rest of the world are on a steady decline in many areas. Not just economically, but politically and spiritually. At some point, the people and even the rulers will realize the system isn't working and change things. How long do you think it will be before we hit bottom and the world starts getting better?

pcosmar
12-12-2010, 12:13 AM
I don't think it will be long.

Don't stand in front of the fan.
:(

sevin
12-12-2010, 09:42 PM
Well, I'm going to be optimistic and say 5-20 years. The next couple decades will probably parallel the 30's and the 40's in many ways. And after WWII society basically said, "Enough already." Taxes were cut, government backed off, and the people rebuilt.

However, if the NWO wins, I guess it will just depend on how long they can maintain control. 50-100 years maybe.

TCE
12-12-2010, 09:47 PM
5-20 years. Just look at how a few money injections stalled this thing without a hitch for two more years. A few more of those will bring us probably to 7 or 8 years. People think Rome collapsed overnight, it didn't. Just like all empires, it's a slow collapse.

RonPaulGetsIt
12-12-2010, 09:56 PM
When they stop trying to fix the economy we can begin the process.

Probably 2-4 years after they begin to leave it alone.

Until then all they can hope for is another boom bust courtesy of the Fed.

Teaser Rate
12-13-2010, 06:34 AM
Right now the U.S. and the rest of the world are on a steady decline in many areas. Not just economically, but politically and spiritually. At some point, the people and even the rulers will realize the system isn't working and change things. How long do you think it will be before we hit bottom and the world starts getting better?

I disagree with the premise of your question. World GDP reached its peak in peak in 2008 and has barely taken a hit (went down from 61 to 58 trillion) despite the worst economic turn-down since the Great Depression.

In 2000, the World GDP was only 32 trillion, which means that the world has experienced a economic growth of over 80% in the last 10 years.

Politically speaking, there is less war or less of a chance of a big war erupting right now than at almost any other point in history; less than 25 years ago, the world was on the brink on nuclear war and today countries are signing treaties destroying their nuclear arsenal. There are also more stable democracies and countries entering the realm of prosperity than ever before. Whatever political problems the world faces are less serious than the ones it has faced in the past.

I’m not sure how to quantify the spiritual level, so I’ll say this instead; we live in the world where billions of people are currently exiting poverty, medical breakthroughs are allowing us to live longer lives and better lives and technological growth is making a relatively high standard of living more accessible to more people than had ever before.

Yes, we have a bad economy and some political problems, but that doesn’t mean that it’s the end of the world. Things are infinitely better than they were even a generation ago, don't mistake a bump in the road for total meltdown.

GunnyFreedom
12-13-2010, 06:57 AM
I disagree with the premise of your question. World GDP reached its peak in peak in 2008 and has barely taken a hit (went down from 61 to 58 trillion) despite the worst economic turn-down since the Great Depression.

In 2000, the World GDP was only 32 trillion, which means that the world has experienced a economic growth of over 80% in the last 10 years.

Politically speaking, there is less war or less of a chance of a big war erupting right now than at almost any other point in history; less than 25 years ago, the world was on the brink on nuclear war and today countries are signing treaties destroying their nuclear arsenal. There are also more stable democracies and countries entering the realm of prosperity than ever before. Whatever political problems the world faces are less serious than the ones it has faced in the past.

I’m not sure how to quantify the spiritual level, so I’ll say this instead; we live in the world where billions of people are currently exiting poverty, medical breakthroughs are allowing us to live longer lives and better lives and technological growth is making a relatively high standard of living more accessible to more people than had ever before.

Yes, we have a bad economy and some political problems, but that doesn’t mean that it’s the end of the world. Things are infinitely better than they were even a generation ago, don't mistake a bump in the road for total meltdown.

Things always appear better than they are during a bubble. Today, we are inflating a currency bubble in the US Dollar. The US Dollar bubble affects the entire planet, having been the world's reserve currency for the last century. When the currency bubble collapses, things will go from looking good to horrifying in very short order.

torchbearer
12-13-2010, 07:28 AM
I try looking at like this- figure out what national debt amount would be too much for bond holders. maybe 25 trillion?
how long will it be before we hit that figure?
at a defecit of 2 trillion a year, you are looking at an agonizing decade before default.

JohnEngland
12-13-2010, 07:29 AM
Depends on what you mean by bottom. Morally, the West in general is in decline. Economically, it's in decline. Politically, it's in decline. But technologically, it's ascending.

However, compare it to many other places in the world. It's still better to live in the West than anywhere else.

But it could be so much better...

Sola_Fide
12-13-2010, 07:50 AM
I disagree with the premise of your question. World GDP reached its peak in peak in 2008 and has barely taken a hit (went down from 61 to 58 trillion) despite the worst economic turn-down since the Great Depression.

In 2000, the World GDP was only 32 trillion, which means that the world has experienced a economic growth of over 80% in the last 10 years.

Politically speaking, there is less war or less of a chance of a big war erupting right now than at almost any other point in history; less than 25 years ago, the world was on the brink on nuclear war and today countries are signing treaties destroying their nuclear arsenal. There are also more stable democracies and countries entering the realm of prosperity than ever before. Whatever political problems the world faces are less serious than the ones it has faced in the past.

I’m not sure how to quantify the spiritual level, so I’ll say this instead; we live in the world where billions of people are currently exiting poverty, medical breakthroughs are allowing us to live longer lives and better lives and technological growth is making a relatively high standard of living more accessible to more people than had ever before.

Yes, we have a bad economy and some political problems, but that doesn’t mean that it’s the end of the world. Things are infinitely better than they were even a generation ago, don't mistake a bump in the road for total meltdown.

You sound eerily like the econohacks from 2003 that said we were going to be fine.

You're delusional dude....central planning and monetary manipulation never works. It always ends in disaster.

fisharmor
12-13-2010, 08:07 AM
Gas stations around my house have been sharply increasing prices.
One of them raised price on 87 octane by 19 cents yesterday (in one day).
It's not the cheapest place, but the rest of them sure as hell aren't going down.
It's going to be winter in eight days. Gas is supposed to be cheaper than it is in the summer.

I think we're starting to see serious results from QE2.
I think the 3.3 trillion dollars we're now finding out the fed gave away isn't going to be without consequence.
I think Assange is waiting until after the new year to make his bank announcement to allow the world to have one last Christmas before everything collapses.
I think not a single person in government is ever going to discuss federal deficit reduction and porno scanners in the same paragraph: I think they're going straight for our mortgage interest deduction and not swerving.

I think 5-20 years is wishful thinking.

Teaser Rate
12-13-2010, 09:15 AM
Things always appear better than they are during a bubble. Today, we are inflating a currency bubble in the US Dollar. The US Dollar bubble affects the entire planet, having been the world's reserve currency for the last century. When the currency bubble collapses, things will go from looking good to horrifying in very short order.

Can you present some data which supports the claim that there is a dollar bubble?

Considering that the interest rates on short and long term treasury bonds are both very low, I have trouble seeing how, or why a dollar collapse would occur.

I guess the market could be wrong assuming that US treasuries are the safest store of wealth, but I don’t see the systemic reasons which would cause such a wide-spread mistake.


You sound eerily like the econohacks from 2003 that said we were going to be fine.

You're delusional dude....central planning and monetary manipulation never works. It always ends in disaster.

Can you please provide some evidence which backs up your claim that I'm delusional ? Nothing annoys a delusional person more than being called delusional without being provided with the proper details explaining why they're nuts.

pcosmar
12-13-2010, 09:27 AM
Can you present some data which supports the claim that there is a dollar bubble?


Can you present some data that proves that history does not repeat.
Several economies have crashed for the dame reason. Devalued Currency.

As far as "interest rates" or other "indicators",, does the term Cooking the Books have any meaning?

Madly_Sane
12-13-2010, 09:41 AM
I believe the collapse is in the next 20 years, possibly within the next couple. Either way, it's time to start hardcore prep, imo.

Vessol
12-13-2010, 10:54 AM
The way that the system is set up so large currently, it will be 50-100 years after the collapse before Statism arises again.

I don't see the parallel between this and the "Dark Ages" though. I'd say that the time between the Fall of the Roman Empire and the High Medieval Period was much better for individuals than it was in those other two eras. I'm not saying it was perfect, but Statism on the grand level it was before and after was certainly much less prevalent.

Personally, I'd prefer a worldwide economic collapse that then turned into 50-100 years of State fragmentation and more localized government.

nobody's_hero
12-13-2010, 11:02 AM
I give it one-five.

We're one more empire-extending invasion and/or welfare experiment away from a collapse. Come hell, high-water, North Korea or Obamacare—it won't be long, I think.

Uncle Emanuel Watkins
12-13-2010, 11:18 AM
Naturally, we are born thinking that we aren't part of the problem and that we aren't part of the tyranny. Instead, we consider ourselves as being part of those who consider themselves belonging as members of the so-called "commoner" people. Likewise, we think that the government needs to do something in order to solve our problems. That the people need to be manipulated towards that which is in their best interest: In order for us to be happy in paradise, we all need to suffer unfathomable pain.
The workers of inequity are those who don't work (pray) at forgiving others and are those who don't understand that it is natural for people to have contempt towards those who shepherd fairly by way of the lowly task of parenting.

fisharmor
12-13-2010, 11:19 AM
I don't see the parallel between this and the "Dark Ages" though.

I see parallels, but not the way the OP put them.
We Eurocentric types might remember that the dark ages only happened in barbarian Europe. At the same time, Byzantium was at its height - the longest lasting empire in the history of the world. Africa continued doing its thing. The middle east was setting up caliphates - there were entire civilizations on the steppes at that time that we know literally close to nothing about.

Western history courses have almost nothing to say about Vercingetorix, Caratacus, and Boudica.
They have equally little to say about Atilla and Alaric.
So they'll never stop to ask whether Rome actually turned Caratacus into Atilla.
It's certainly possible that they changed the character of the barbarian leaders, and then simply disappeared.

Who are our opponents? Are they truly Atillas, as we're being force-fed to think? If not, perhaps the dark age isn't going to happen.

Sola_Fide
12-13-2010, 11:31 AM
Can you please provide some evidence which backs up your claim that I'm delusional ?


You have questioned why an elite of central planners is neccessarily bad for an economy.


You don't need data or graphs at this point buddy, you need a complete conversion of your fundamental presuppositions about human behavior in the market. You could read Human Action by Mises to realize how ridiculous it is to think that any elite could control behavior and subjective human decisions in the market.


I don't have to pull up examples of the many failures of paper money. I don't have to show you data that prices remained stable from 1776 all the way to 1910 under a commodity-based currency in America.


YOU have to prove the ridiculous, insane idea that a far-off group of government agents in Washington can control and manipulate decisions in the market without disasterous consequences.

Start with the basics.

Travlyr
12-13-2010, 12:10 PM
If the debt ceiling is not raised at the next vote, the world's reserve currency will lose its value rapidly as Bernanke described on 60 Minutes.

If the Federal Reserve is allowed to engage in QE3, QE4, ... QE57, then the dollar will slowly move toward hyperinflation and that could take several more years. It is up to us. If people do not mind the elite oligarchy stealing more wealth, then we will get QE3, QE4, ... QE57.

Revaluation will eventually happen because fiat money systems always collapse. The fiat dollar is doomed either through inflation or deflation. Deflation is a virtual immediate collapse. Inflation takes longer (97 years and counting) and transfers more wealth.

Travlyr
12-13-2010, 12:22 PM
A lot of people are not currently employed. A sufficient number of well paying jobs are not being created, so the bottom is already here for many people. I'm not sure how it is around the country, but we have more people holding cardboard signs than ever before here on our streets.

Brooklyn Red Leg
12-13-2010, 12:28 PM
I disagree with the premise of your question. World GDP reached its peak in peak in 2008 and has barely taken a hit (went down from 61 to 58 trillion) despite the worst economic turn-down since the Great Depression.

In 2000, the World GDP was only 32 trillion, which means that the world has experienced a economic growth of over 80% in the last 10 years.

I have to ask. Do you understand what the word Inflation means?

fisharmor
12-13-2010, 12:35 PM
The fiat dollar is doomed either through inflation or deflation. Deflation is a virtual immediate collapse.

I would like someone, anyone, to explain why deflation is worse than inflation.
Mass deflation would result in debtors getting shafted. But those in small or no debt would be unaffected or vastly benefit from it.
I don't understand how mild deflation is bad for the economy - I don't understand why deflation is treated like the spawn of hell.
It seems to me that if I have money, and my money is worth more tomorrow than it is today, then that's a good thing.
Inflation is bad. Why is deflation not good?

Madly_Sane
12-13-2010, 12:39 PM
The vast majority of the population has more than enough debt for it to cause great impact.
Also, inflation and deflation are neither good because you don't want to be on a roller coaster when it comes to economics, you want it to be a straight shot (stable)

Madly_Sane
12-13-2010, 12:42 PM
Btw, if you look at the choices for the poll, it seems as if there are multiple questions.
From choices 'Things will never get better' and 'Centuries ( A new Dark Age)' it seems as if you're asking either when will things get better or how long will it be before we get out of this slump.

Travlyr
12-13-2010, 01:01 PM
Deflation in a commodity money system is good.

Deflation with our current system of debt based money essentially means that everybody defaults. Nobody can pay anybody back.

mconder
12-13-2010, 01:40 PM
Damn this is a pessimistic bunch.

mconder
12-13-2010, 01:43 PM
I would like someone, anyone, to explain why deflation is worse than inflation.

I have no clue. I kinda like the idea of having money in the bank today that's going to have more buying power tomorrow.

mconder
12-13-2010, 01:45 PM
Mass deflation would result in debtors getting shafted.

Possibly less people would take out loans thereby prompting lenders to make it more attractive to borrow?

MelissaCato
12-13-2010, 01:48 PM
I give it one-five.

We're one more empire-extending invasion and/or welfare experiment away from a collapse. Come hell, high-water, North Korea or Obamacare—it won't be long, I think.

I agree 1776%

I'm just glad to be a part of it all.

Ron Paul 2012 !!

Promontorium
12-13-2010, 01:48 PM
I think the world is too much to ask for sir. Can't you ask how long it will be before some people get their shit together? The world... I don't know, after we have galactic space ships? Uhhhh 15,000 years.

Travlyr
12-13-2010, 02:01 PM
Damn this is a pessimistic bunch.
A realistic bunch.

A Federal Reserve Note is a debt instrument. The more FRN's you have in your wallet the more money you have, right? Which means that the more debt we have the more money we have. If we continually go deeper in debt (raise the debt ceiling), then the money supply keeps expanding (inflation). Unfortunately, what happens is that eventually you get the Zimbabwe type of money expansion. QE57.

To stop going deeper in debt means less money (deflation) which means that fewer people can pay their obligations because there is less money. Then defaults happen rapidly because we pay month by month. The domino effect.

Promontorium
12-13-2010, 03:54 PM
Damn this is a pessimistic bunch.

Not according to the poll.

Teaser Rate
12-14-2010, 06:00 AM
You have questioned why an elite of central planners is neccessarily bad for an economy.

You don't need data or graphs at this point buddy, you need a complete conversion of your fundamental presuppositions about human behavior in the market. You could read Human Action by Mises to realize how ridiculous it is to think that any elite could control behavior and subjective human decisions in the market.

What elite of central planners? One of the main reasons why the world economy has grown so fast in recent times is because most countries have gotten away from central planning and have embraced de-centralized markets. There were far more “central planners” a generation ago when China, India and the Soviet Union were planned economies.


I don't have to pull up examples of the many failures of paper money. I don't have to show you data that prices remained stable from 1776 all the way to 1910 under a commodity-based currency in America.

YOU have to prove the ridiculous, insane idea that a far-off group of government agents in Washington can control and manipulate decisions in the market without disasterous consequences.

Start with the basics.

If I had a nickel for every time I needed to bring up this chart to refute the myth that the Fed made the dollar unstable, I’d be rich enough to be bailed out by the feds.

http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/6995/c52c2800pxushistoricali.png

Teaser Rate
12-14-2010, 06:15 AM
Damn this is a pessimistic bunch.

I think pessimism is common among activists with non-mainstream points of view. I’m sure that if you started a similar poll in a communist or socialist website, the response would be of course the system will collapse soon, capitalism is unstable.

I guess the pessimism comes from the urge to find a consistent narrative; we fight for things we believe in because we want to make the world more prosperous, more just or more safe. As such, it’s hard to reconcile the fact that the world is getting more prosperous, more safe and more just despite the injustices we perceive and fight.

Admitting that world is getting better despite its many failures is essentially admitting that we can’t really change much; and it’s something activists can’t really go along with because their actions revolve the idea that they can make a big difference.

I never met a campaign volunteer who said the following “vote for X president because he’ll be marginally better than other candidates when dealing with the financial, political and military constrains of the office and might be able to pass minor reforms if everything goes right” what they all say is “vote for Y and he’ll change everything”.

Of course, those people always end up being disappointed because the world is more complicated than a campaign slogan and real change only happens in painfully slow increments. All we can do as individuals is make them happen a tiny bit faster than they otherwise would have.

…which is why there is no collapse coming anytime soon. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep fighting to keep non-violent drug offenders out of jail or to remove the implicit guarantees in the financial markets which allow banks to gamble with tax payers' money, but we shouldn’t go so far as to believe that we’re fighting to save to world from some great evil.

The best we can do is make a few things a tiny bit better for a few people.

sevin
12-14-2010, 07:20 AM
Damn this is a pessimistic bunch.

It's hard not to be if you pay attention to what's going on in the world.


I think pessimism is common among activists with non-mainstream points of view. I’m sure that if you started a similar poll in a communist or socialist website, the response would be of course the system will collapse soon, capitalism is unstable.

Excellent point. The pessimism in America cuts across all ideological lines.

Travlyr
12-14-2010, 07:37 AM
What elite of central planners?
United States of America, Federal Reserve, Bank of England, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays, BNP Paribas, European Union, IMF, World Bank, UN, etc.


One of the main reasons why the world economy has grown so fast in recent times is because most countries have gotten away from central planning and have embraced de-centralized markets. There were far more “central planners” a generation ago when China, India and the Soviet Union were planned economies.
Now if the United States could break the bonds of central planning, then perhaps we too would become prosperous again.


If I had a nickel for every time I needed to bring up this chart to refute the myth that the Fed made the dollar unstable, I’d be rich enough to be bailed out by the feds.
It's not worth a nickel.

This drawing you call a chart would be more convincing if there was a link to the data. Does your drawing represent actual increase and decrease of money supply? Or is this CPI? Who kept track of this data? Link?

http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/6995/c52c2800pxushistoricali.png

Sola_Fide
12-14-2010, 08:21 AM
Originally Posted by Teaser Rate
…which is why there is no collapse coming anytime soon. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep fighting to keep non-violent drug offenders out of jail or to remove the implicit guarantees in the financial markets which allow banks to gamble with tax payers' money, but we shouldn’t go so far as to believe that we’re fighting to save to world from some great evil.

Are you serious?

Are you so blinded by Keyensianism that you really believe what you are saying? Do you know how evil it is to defend instutitions that steal from the American people without any representation at all?

I still have yet to see you defend monetary manipulation as good for an economy.

What do you think got us into the situation that we are in today? Are you one of those deluded nuts who thinks "the market" failed us, and that is why we are in the shape we are in? LOL

Travlyr
12-14-2010, 09:16 AM
I think pessimism is common among activists with non-mainstream points of view. I’m sure that if you started a similar poll in a communist or socialist website, the response would be of course the system will collapse soon, capitalism is unstable.
We know for a fact that the fiat system is going to collapse. The Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke (http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20101004a.htm) tells us it is unsustainable. Last week, he said on 60 Minutes that the economy would have already crashed if the Fed had not acted, and then he went on to admit that they didn't see it coming. Maybe you don't believe him, but he knows what he is talking about. That's not pessimistic; that's reality.


I guess the pessimism comes from the urge to find a consistent narrative; we fight for things we believe in because we want to make the world more prosperous, more just or more safe. As such, it’s hard to reconcile the fact that the world is getting more prosperous, more safe and more just despite the injustices we perceive and fight.

Admitting that world is getting better despite its many failures is essentially admitting that we can’t really change much; and it’s something activists can’t really go along with because their actions revolve the idea that they can make a big difference.
What do you mean by more prosperous? More prosperous for whom? Homelessness is on the rise. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/2991742/Tent-cities-of-homeless-on-the-rise-across-the-US.html) The American economy is losing jobs faster than they are being created. How is that better?


I never met a campaign volunteer who said the following “vote for X president because he’ll be marginally better than other candidates when dealing with the financial, political and military constrains of the office and might be able to pass minor reforms if everything goes right” what they all say is “vote for Y and he’ll change everything”.

Of course, those people always end up being disappointed because the world is more complicated than a campaign slogan and real change only happens in painfully slow increments. All we can do as individuals is make them happen a tiny bit faster than they otherwise would have.
We know that an honest sound monetary system promotes liberty. We also know that central planned economies promote social control, and they enrich the well connected elite at the expense of the taxpayer. Why are you supporting a dishonest system?


…which is why there is no collapse coming anytime soon.
The collapse has already happened in America for a lot of people. Many people are not as fortunate as you apparently are. I know people who have no home, no job prospects, do not qualify for welfare or unemployment, and are feeling hopeless. I wish I could help more.


This doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep fighting to keep non-violent drug offenders out of jail or to remove the implicit guarantees in the financial markets which allow banks to gamble with tax payers' money, but we shouldn’t go so far as to believe that we’re fighting to save to world from some great evil.
Is it not evil for one to count their $billions in mansions that they acquired through theft while watching others starve on the streets?


The best we can do is make a few things a tiny bit better for a few people.
Free markets using honest sound money such as the gold standard approaches full employment. That is a lot better for most people than what we are getting today. People who care will make it happen. History is on our side.

It is disheartening to read your posts. You and others seem to be insulated from reality. It is like you are living in a bubble. Do you not care?