You will experience economic collapse in 2016. 100% guaranteed.
Be careful about calling things too early. Personally I don't think things will collapse by 2016 it is just too soon for collapse. There is plenty more "dry power" QE to be thrown at the world economy.Confidence in central banks is not yet broken and I doubt it will be by 2016. I am surprised that you as an INTJ would posit such without any factual basis at all. It would have been more logical for you to say you don't have any data but your gut feeling is such. Any way, real analysis of the data on QE should shock the fuck out of you. Make sure you click that link.  I think you posted this picture up thread somewhere or I saw it after following one of your links. I am remain skeptical of Armstrong being a big skeptic of prophets in general. Nevertheless, the time frame here 2033 seems more realistic to me. I can see the populace starting to lose faith after the next 19 years are filled with a full generation of QE. However, if the economy takes a dive in 2016 I think we will just see QE 5 and kick the can a little farther down the road. Armstrong is not a prophet. He is a scientist who created a model based on back testing all data since Mesopotamia and forward testing astoundingly precise correct predictions of the model since the 1980s. You really better click that link and review the facts on his model’s performance record. I don’t understand why any scientist would assert Armstrong is not applying the scientific method. The computer discovered the cyclical pattern from the historical data, not some numerology invented on a whim. The image you displayed above is for the global turn from a Private to Public wave. http://armstrongeconomics.com/models/7219-2/ Please understand that the model is out-of-phase for different sectors.  http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/11/will-the-usa-also-break-up-into-regions/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/12/26/224-collapsing-wave-structure-point-to-breakup-of-usa/ The Private wave will continue until 2032 and private assets will not likely peak in price until then: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/08/28/cycle-inversion-staging-ground-for-2032/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/16/commodity-prices-into-2032/Along the way of moving from Public assets (e.g. sovereign bonds) to the 2032 peak in the move to Private assets (e.g. gold, cryptocurrencies, off the grid real estate, Corporate bonds, stocks), there will come a point where the confidence in sovereign bonds breaks and the stampede into Private assets will accelerate. Note how the move into Private assets really accelerated with the dot.com bubble, then the commodity and gold bubbles (which peaked temporarily in 2011 due to QE which was predicted by the ECM model as you see it turned back up from 2011 to 2015.75). So QE was able to kick the can down the road and keep the sovereign debt alive a little bit longer, but as I showed on the prior page of this thread, this was at the cost of driving global total debt-to-GDP north of 313%. Thus 2015.75 is the ETA in the model for the next downwave of the sovereign debt contagion as it continues to succumb to the rising Private wave. And this next contagion in 2016 is going to be an order-of-magnitude worse than 2008 and it will also be qualitatively different. See the first link in this post for the detailed analysis on that. Note that means Private assets such as gold and cryptocurrencies won't move up again until after 2015.75. Note the stock market had been correlated with Public assets, but it may now be undergoing a likely phase transition and if so it will shift to align as a Private asset and continue to move up after 2015.75. Btw, the ephemeral resurgence of the Public sector from 2020 to 2024 (before the final phase transition to the blowoff peak in the Private wave) should scare the fuck out of you, because that will be the governments lashing out with war. I hope you also noticed his model predicts a global pandemic in full swing by 2019: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/07/31/ebola-virus-the-next-plague-due-2019/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/01/the-first-ebola-case-appears-in-the-us/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/03/will-the-demise-be-plague-or-economics/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/04/ebola-the-next-plaguepandemic/Again I reiterate, you will experience economic collapse in 2016. 100% guaranteed. |
|
|
|
|
I smile with a sense of achievement when socialist pigs throw hissy fits.
|
|
|
|
If it came to this, your problems would all be solved... by your death.
The ammo would run out within a year, so would the food. Assuming it is a worldwide loss of civilized society, billions would starve. The only monies that would matter are food and slaves. I can't see this happening by 2020, but if we have a nuclear exchange, it could look like this in a week or two.
You are thinking only in terms of dipolar extremes. There are many gradients of economic collapse scenarios that are less extreme yet extremely disruptive to our lives. You will experience economic collapse in 2016. 100% guaranteed.True, I was. I thought the scenario was "MadMax". That's about as extreme as it gets! Although a more realistic post-apocalypse movie is "The road". That is a depressing movie and a chillingly real look at life in a dying world. Not as extreme as Mel Gibson's movie. Expect something similar to 1929 and WW2 was Mad Max in my opinion, but with much more State control in the USA (see below for reason): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmfaKT0_frE#t=92shttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvDBeP9HkEhttp://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/11/04/judges-are-free-to-take-your-liberty-for-anything-didnt-cut-your-lawn-jail-time/http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=riots+in+Chinahttp://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=riots+in+EuropeThe reason why is before the collective society could afford FDR's New Deal, but this time we are bankrupt so these sort of socialist deals are going to result in hardship (state rationing via Medicare, Obamacare, 57 million on food stamps, etc.) which will lead to more rioting and spirals into uncontrollable chaos. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/08/15/pentagons-1033-program-is-preparing-for-war-against-the-civil-population/The assault on the veterans who defended the world in World War I and were treated like garbage moved the nation. That incident was the final straw that led the people to elect FDR with a majority in excess of 60%. This use of these very same tactics today is outrageous and quite frankly warrants criminal action against those in charge. This is not war games. But we have to realize, what you see in Ferguson is the attitude that has engulfed the entire civil police force throughout the nation. Top military generals led the assault against the veterans. It was the lowest point in American military history. Because of this incident, when World War II came, Congress had to pass the GI bill to promise veterans would never be treated that way again. Daniel in the Bible predicts the time based on the Abomination of the Desolation, based on historical events such as the Holy war in 1967 (google can help you find the detailed calculations). Now we have all the signs as reported by NASA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9euK-koV-8k |
|
|
|
If it came to this, your problems would all be solved... by your death.
The ammo would run out within a year, so would the food. Assuming it is a worldwide loss of civilized society, billions would starve. The only monies that would matter are food and slaves. I can't see this happening by 2020, but if we have a nuclear exchange, it could look like this in a week or two.
You are thinking only in terms of dipolar extremes. There are many gradients of economic collapse scenarios that are less extreme yet extremely disruptive to our lives. You will experience economic collapse in 2016. 100% guaranteed. Work on your blog - post a link here. That would be best all round.
Mr. Socialist Pig, I will write what I want, where I want. You may do the same. Sorry you don't control the individual. If you did, we would all die because the end game of centralized control is megadeath. |
|
|
|
I posted further explanation at China expert (Peking University economics professor) Michael Pettis’s blog: http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/09/what-does-a-good-chinese-adjustment-look-like/#comment-92792Let me explain this more carefully.there are no stable (non-volatile oscillation) proximate gradients of adjustment I am positing that China can’t find adjustments which can rebalance away from the financially repressed (centrally forced, non-market-based low-interest rates) debt-gorging, fixed capital investment model without creating intolerable volatility because the structural imbalances are too extreme. Real adjustment which would require massive institutional, structural, and cultural adjustment. I am unaware of any incremental pathways to such adjustment. Thus I posit that rebalancing will only come unwillingly with a Minsky moment collapse.
Relate this to Suvy’s astute point about volatility which is essentially the point of Nicholas Taleb’s anti-fragility which I related to my concepts.it was always about where to place excess capital Until readers understand there is an epochal paradigm shift underway, they will not understand anything about what is happening in the global economy.
Excess has a precise meaning. The system was designed to repress the development of the individual and concentrate capital to the few. The problem is that the more capital a person has to manage, the less optimally they can do so. During the fungibility of manual (menial) labor in the Industrial Age (e.g. not fully automated factories), concentrated capital expressed real efficiency gains in terms of economies-of-scale for highly capital intensive factories.Highly concentrated capital is dead capital But the capital in the Knowledge Age is not fungible thus economies-of-scale for stored monetary representations of capital are inherently regressive and insolvent! This renders the Industrial Age insolvent, irrelevant, and inapplicable.
In simple words, the Knowledge Age requires capital to be dispersed amongst the people, i.e. they and only they own and can act on their knowledge. The internet, 3D printers (i.e. localized prototyping and manufacturing), and numerous other technologies are rendering concentrated capital insolvent, because they are enablers that unlock the orders-of-magnitude higher value of the individual’s ingenuity.
So the problem for China is it gorged on the dying Industrial Age and debt-financed, fixed capital investment model. China’s real value lies in the incredible ingenuity of its people and it will probably require a collapse of the fixed investment hamster wheel in order to unlock China’s real potential.Henry Ford model of paying the workers enough to buy the cars the labored to create s/the labored/they labored/the slave labor model of economic developer was not invertible except by reverting all the dead capital s/economic developer/economic development/
Fixed capital investment is apparently a structurally, institutionally, politically, and culturally embedded model in China that had it roots in leveraging a predatory, mercantile model of trade along with a predatory local government model to drive development and full employment by concentrating capital among the Communist Party power holders. There was a trickle down effect and this is perhaps somewhat more widely distributed than Russia’s oligarchs, but nevertheless it is not an individual empowerment model that is compatible with the fledgling Knowledge Age.
The structural, institutional, political, and cultural ‘imbalances’ appear to be too extreme and path-dependent such that reversion to an individual empowerment model can not occur with any smooth transition. This is precisely Taleb’s anti-fragility. We could delve into the math of this in the proper venue.no two events are very exactly the same because the external conditions can never be duplicated exactly s/very exactly/ever exactly/
Every event is path dependent on the events leading up to it. Thus no event can ever be duplicated, because for example the subsequent event has path dependency on the prior event even if not directly via the Butterfly effect. More concretely, China’s embedded ‘imbalances’ are path dependent thus can’t be unwound incrementally analogously to that single noodles of spaghetti can't be untangled without impacting their entangled brethren.
Michael appears to focus most of his analytical effort on ratios and gives less weight to the critical issue of path dependencies. With my example of the 18 times income overvaluation of housing, I am pointing out how ratios can reveal the path dependencies if we look carefully.where I going with this line of though s/line of though/line of thought/but State owns all in PRC as should be the USA case Rob Carter, collectivized ownership is entirely insolvent in the Knowledge Age. In fact, we know from the Mythical Man Month, that the communication load of collectivizing knowledge production does not scale and the only known positive scaling law of software engineering is open source, i.e. autonomous developers (skip to 3min 45sec into the linked audio file, where the progenitor of the term ‘open source’ Eric Raymond defines Linus’s law).
Also to gain the squared network effects of Reed’s and Metcalf’s laws, requires the nodes (i.e. the individuals) to be able to interact with autonomy. For example, the market capitalization of Bitcoin grows proportionally to the square of metrics of individual users, so the reason for Bitcoin’s decelerating value growth is because the users are being cordoned off from each other by the rise of centralized exchanges to store their balances and execute transactions, thus for example a user on Coinbase can't do any genre of imaginable Bitcoin transaction with a user on Blockinfo.
I predicted all these things well in advance because I am in possession of the correct generalized model of nature. http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/10/should-beijing-raise-subway-fares/Michael the only way forward is to privatize the Chinese economy, but this will probably require a Minsky moment collapse to remove the structural, political, cultural, and economic barriers.
Political centralization as a means to the end goal of decentralizing and privatizing the economy, is not feasible unless (per your theory) there are ways to reward the general population at the expense of the (local and central) party members who have concentrated control over the economy. I argue at the link above that there is no way to reward the general population without collapsing the fixed investment corruption model which holds the economy up, because the imbalances are too great. I used for example the housing being 18 times average income as an example that lowering house prices 50% does not change the dynamic from fixed investment Ponzi to a renting model (housing is too expensive to rent out profitably and -50% drop in housing prices does not change this fact).
Another obvious fact from your writings is that the consumer share is a small minority of the economy, thus fixed investment dominates the financial status of the general population. You have argued that there are incremental adjustments that can be made which boost the consumer more than they deduct via losses on the fixed capital sector, but I have not yet to read a very detailed analysis from you on this with data. Can you point me to one? The housing price drop example appears to reveal (in that case) that the path dependencies are too great for incremental adjustment. |
|
|
|
|
Who ever doesn't understand that iCEBREAKER is an idiot, deserves to fail miserably along with him (within about 12 to 18 months).
|
|
|
|
I posted the following comment: http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/09/what-does-a-good-chinese-adjustment-look-like/#comment-80662Michael, how would a resurgent global sovereign debt collapse in 2016 worse and more prolonged than 2008 factor into your calculus?
Couldn't the loss of aggregate demand for Chinese exports tip the balance towards the down spiraling scenario or wouldn't the real estate (fixed investment) sector need to be stimulated again further exacerbating total debt (which has skyrocketed to 250% of GDP)?
China not only financially repressed its own citizens, but it also repressed the global economy being a key cog in driving global total debt levels to 313% of global GDP and climbing.
Also Vinezi astutely implies a potential cultural problem—Chinese are culturally savers and investors not spenders. Heck even here in the Philippines, the Chinese are known to incredibly stingy, although perhaps that is a filtered demographic of Chinese that bother to migrate here to take up business.
I have this theory of Asian culture that they are prone to mercantilism. It seems throughout history they've always want to invest in external trade in order to boost their retained balances, e.g. even Rome was importing from Asia, next the British lost all their silver to China from doing it so had to addict them to opium to get it back (thus the existence of Hong Kong). For example, the filipinos who have 1/3 of their population working abroad to remit balances home. The new innovation I see from China is DHgate.com and Aliexpress.com for selling direct from exporters to consumers (formerly was only Jack Ma's Alibaba for B2B direct) sort of an international Amazon.com. This is innovative but still a mercantilistic culture.
I am not seeing China as a equitable participant in a global consumer economy (surely they cheated the global economy to get where they are now), rather similar to Japan and wanting to export more than it imports unless the government will run up a huge debt to subsidize consumption (as Japan has done).
Sorry I am not optimistic. But perhaps you can convince me that my concerns are unlikely. Falling housing prices, however, have two separate wealth effects. Those who own speculative property will feel poorer, but those who are short real estate (young people, poor people) will feel richer. But with houses at 18 times annual income (versus 4.3 at the peak of the USA 2007 subprime bubble), the decline in prices and or rise in wages needs to be much greater than 50% to really make a difference for those buyers if they acting alone, thus house purchase will remain even with a -50% drop in prices a loan from someone wealthy (perhaps a relative) who views it as an investment.
Thus my logic is that China is trapped in its fixed income investment model and can only escape with a crash and reset.
Co-inductive nature of time, i.e. irrevertible path dependencies, and China's prognosisI am pondering if the Chinese political, economic, and social system is a Ponzi scheme in the sense that the fixed capital investment has to be continually recycled into new fixed capital investments along with a subsidy of new debt expansion in order to prevent implosion. I am visualizing that the imbalances are so great, e.g. housing at 18 times average annual income, that it is impossible to smoothly rebalance because (per the example in my prior post) there are no stable (non-volatile oscillation) proximate gradients of adjustment. I am contemplating that the system evolved from the 1980s to maximize the gains of the fewest people (under the pretense of providing full employment), thus it was always about where to place excess capital. It apparently evolved such that as the middle class grew, they piggy backed on that Ponzi system. I am contemplating this is because the manufacturing system did not evolve from the Henry Ford model of paying the workers enough to buy the cars the labored to create, but rather from a slave labor, predatory mercantile model to concentrate capital.
Years ago on this blog, I pointed out that simulated annealing (e.g. less cracks in ice when cooled slowly because the localized molecules are not as top-down coerced) is the only known generalized model of optimization in nature. This requires that the local actors be empowered with freedom. Highly concentrated capital is dead capital. I explained why in my seminal essays on knowledge and the inability to finance knowledge.
So my theory has always been that the slave labor model of economic developer was not invertible except by reverting all the dead capital. Whereas, Michael analyzes in terms of balances and ratios, I am analyzing in terms of co-inductive nature of time, i.e. time and path-dependencies are not invertible because no two events are very exactly the same because the external conditions can never be duplicated exactly. Since Michael has a Physics background, I think he may see some merit where I going with this line of though in terms of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
I think China's economy can grow greatly if the dead fixed capital Ponzi is allowed to implode and to the ingenuity of its people can become the major component of the GDP. The problem is that the status quo doesn't want to go there pronto, the imbalances are worsening, and thus the prospect of external aggression against Japan as scapegoat is rising.
So sad that society gets stuck in such forms of negative inertia. Again simulated annealing explains why collectivized systems can't optimize and do get stuck in negative inertia until the crash.
My contribution to the world is to try to create technology to subvert these collectivized inertia. It is only technology that has ever saved mankind of his own destruction via collectivism. That is my opinion which I could argue quite convincingly given a proper forum and sufficient preparation. |
|
|
|
IMF One World Currency Lender of Last Resort After 2016 Collapse  In the video interview Obama Ending Alliance with Saudi Arabia and Killing the Petrodollar, Jim Rickards makes the astute and salient point echoed by Martin Armstrong that a reserve currency requires CONFIDENCE and the deep liquidity provided by it being dominant. Armstrong makes the point that it is not the pricing of oil in dollars, that is the sole cause of the reserve status of the dollar, but rather a confluence of that along with the dollar never being canceled whereas Europe has regularly canceled its currencies, and the USA having the world's largest consumer market thus exporters needing to recycle their earned dollars into dollar investments. The book Colder War argues that Putin is successfully attacking the USA's superpower status by outmaneuvering on energy and natural resources: http://www.colderwar.com/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zwxpRPb_M0http://as.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118799941.htmlhttp://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmauldin/2014/10/29/book-review-the-colder-war-by-marin-katusa/http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/the-colder-war-and-the-end-of-the-petrodollarWhile you can verify from my prior post that Russia (and former Eastern Bloc and developing countries such as India, Indonesia, and the Philippines) have significantly lower total debt ratios thus are poised to be more resilient in the coming sovereign debt collapse (after 2015. 75, i.e. Sept 2015), there are several reasons it is impossible for a replacement reserve currency to the US dollar to come about within the next decade: - There is no politically viable pathway to transition away from the status quo Dollar-Euro-Pound dominant trilogy without bankrupting the pension and social system of the Western civilization. A real solution would require the developing world to take some responsibility for boomers, boomers downsizing, and thus with globalized coordination.
- Investors aren't going to trust some currency managed by dictators, which is essentially what Russia and China's Communist Party are now, because this is too vulnerable to the whims of a few leaders and isn't free floating. The cure would be worse than the current illness. Russia and China are still largely top-down controlled economies with the entire Russian economy controlled by oligarchs close to Putin and China dominated by fixed capital investment (construction and exports) that favor the elite at the expense of the consumer (household) share of GDP. China will need a long period of time to rebalance their economy to norms of openness, and given the explosion of China's total debt to 250% of GDP documented in my prior post it looks like China will first run debt up high and crash and burn for reset and that reset will facilitate political change, i.e. domestic upheaval and external aggression against Japan (to divert public attention from the failure of the ruling elite).
- I argued in the Economic Devastation, the Dark Enlightenment, and the Bitcoin adoption slowing threads that we are moving away from a resource driven economy to a Knowledge driven economy. Thus we won't be able to restore economic growth and confidence with some resource backing of the currency, as for example backing with land. Fundamentally technological unemployment is destroying the resource-based, fixed capital, finance-based global economy and nothing is poised to fulfill the demand for a currency compatible to the fledgeling non-financed, Knowledge-based economy which has great confidence. Even Bitcoin adoption fell short as I predicted.
- Interim electronic currencies such as Apple Pay, Paypal, and Hong Kong's Octopus card, are merely payment systems and have very little network effects that would cause investors to hold reserve balances.
What this means is we headed into an abyss collapse because nothing can derail the mismanagement of the Dollar-Euro-Pound trilogy. Out of the ashes can arise some global coordination for one world currency solution circa 2032 when the current Private wave ends in Armstrong's ECM model. The one faint hope interim is for a Private wave solution of a decentralized virtual currency to rise that did have the network effects to serve the Knowledge Age and drive investment balances.Armstrong is incorrect to assert that the powers-that-be can merely turn off the internet, electric power, or otherwise easily stop some viral network effects technology. There are ways around all such threats. Bitcoin didn't scale because it wasn't designed to, and it wasn't designed to be adopted as a widespread currency.
I posted the following comment: http://blog.mpettis.com/2014/09/what-does-a-good-chinese-adjustment-look-like/#comment-80662Michael, how would a resurgent global sovereign debt collapse in 2016 worse and more prolonged than 2008 factor into your calculus? Couldn't the loss of aggregate demand for Chinese exports tip the balance towards the down spiraling scenario or wouldn't the real estate (fixed investment) sector need to be stimulated again further exacerbating total debt (which has skyrocketed to 250% of GDP)? China not only financially repressed its own citizens, but it also repressed the global economy being a key cog in driving global total debt levels to 313% of global GDP and climbing. Also Vinezi astutely implies a potential cultural problem—Chinese are culturally savers and investors not spenders. Heck even here in the Philippines, the Chinese are known to incredibly stingy, although perhaps that is a filtered demographic of Chinese that bother to migrate here to take up business. I have this theory of Asian culture that they are prone to mercantilism. It seems throughout history they've always want to invest in external trade in order to boost their retained balances, e.g. even Rome was importing from Asia, next the British lost all their silver to China from doing it so had to addict them to opium to get it back (thus the existence of Hong Kong). For example, the filipinos who have 1/3 of their population working abroad to remit balances home. The new innovation I see from China is DHgate.com and Aliexpress.com for selling direct from exporters to consumers (formerly was only Jack Ma's Alibaba for B2B direct) sort of an international Amazon.com. This is innovative but still a mercantilistic culture. I am not seeing China as a equitable participant in a global consumer economy (surely they cheated the global economy to get where they are now), rather similar to Japan and wanting to export more than it imports unless the government will run up a huge debt to subsidize consumption (as Japan has done). Sorry I am not optimistic. But perhaps you can convince me that my concerns are unlikely. Falling housing prices, however, have two separate wealth effects. Those who own speculative property will feel poorer, but those who are short real estate (young people, poor people) will feel richer. But with houses at 18 times annual income (versus 4.3 at the peak of the USA 2007 subprime bubble), the decline in prices and or rise in wages needs to be much greater than 50% to really make a difference for those buyers if they acting alone, thus house purchase will remain even with a -50% drop in prices a loan from someone wealthy (perhaps a relative) who views it as an investment. Thus my logic is that China is trapped in its fixed income investment model and can only escape with a crash and reset. |
|
|
|
Global debt has continued to rocket up beyond egregious nose-bleed levels, while non-debt based commerce is free-falling into the abyssAnonyMint,
You are obviously a very smart guy with a very broad range of interests and an unusually creative and flexible mind. Your trust in Armstrong is a harmless eccentricity in my eyes.
How much would you wager that Armstrong's model will be incorrect? I trust science. He has done all the science, meaning the model has been extensively back tested since Mesopotamia and forward tested from 1970s to current. I haven't immersed myself in his work as you have. What specific event would you deem to be a falsification of his model? There have been so many historically (ancient and recent) thus I consider the model already falsified. The next big turning point in the ECM (Economic Confidence Model) is 2015.75. If we don't see a shift from the ability to use debt to kick the can down the road towards collapse in global nominal GDP, the model failed. I will make an explosive post in the Mad Max thread today. (click this link if images below don't display) Collapse of Commerce Driven Growth (i.e. velocity-of-money, instead massive loans create new money to barely sustain small GDP growth)  Declining Marginal Utility of Debt ($ of nominal GDP gained per $ increase in debt)   Total Debt as % of GDP (2008)  And Still Growing... (debt increasing much faster than GDP) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tipspd10http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tsdde410      China Rocketed to 250%https://www.google.com/search?q=china+total+debt+250http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/china-surpasses-u-s-as-largest-corporate-debt-issuer/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0 (Corp. 150% of GDP) http://www.forbes.com/sites/jackperkowski/2014/01/21/chinas-debt-how-serious-is-it/ (Household 31%, Govt 54%)      Exceptions: USA, UK, & Australia Reaped Safe Haven Capital Ingress (as Armstrong predicted, haven't significantly deleveraged, & ingress isn't sustainable)   Fed Covertly Buying Treasuries (?) To Delay Collapse  Contagion Time Bomb of Mass Destruction Lurks IMF One World Currency Lender of Last Resort After 2016 Collapse 
|
|
|
|
Proof that Martin Armstrong predicted in 1998 all the major economic events of the 21st Century (thus far). Proof that his computer model predicted in 1980, events that are transpiring today. Proof that his computer model predicted in 1985, the exact day of the top of the real estate bubble in 2007. Recent proof that his model predicted the exact number of Senate seats won by the Republicans. You can add the predictions for the gold and silver top in 2011 and the decline to under $1200, as well the continued rise in the USA stock market since 2011 and rise in the dollar. I was reading his blog when his model made those predictions. |
|
|
|
he's the kind of person who remove all his posts after a failed attack on ltc. do you think he'll come here and be humble about everything ? i assume he lost a lot of money due to ltc plummeting and has just spent every bit of reputation he had left to buy himself a big enough xmr position
the irony is that due to risto and friends holding the price up for the dumpers - it's less now than it was when under his threat so likely bcx has lost money. lol And they are all likely going lower to make lows before or on 2015.75. Individual alts can buck the trend for bursts, but unless they are not targeted to investors, they are not going to avoid the trend. |
|
|
|
You didn't read all the links linked in the above linked post. I think what I'm wondering is, were these barriers to international exchange more designed to stunt transactions of financially non-empowered people, or were the barriers more designed to cultivate multiple international debt issuance systems?
What does SDR stand for? Regardless, are you saying that agglomerating the debt into one unified fiat could allow the debt issuance to continue, without the previous international barriers of transaction between people? I'm sure the answer to why this is lies in the economic devastation thread, as possibly the collapse of retail/industrial economies could cascade into the implosion of a local fiat economy, but not immediately lead to the implosion of a global one?
Could I take this further, and say that individual fiat economies, through excess debt issuance, will tend to take the value of everything to zero in relation to its fiat worth? And, as an attempt to subvert that occurrence, somehow combining them into one unified fiat will prevent that temporarily, and one unified cryptocurrency will prevent that permanently?
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/14/so-when-will-we-know/This shift from Public to Private assets is WHY we could see the US share market extend into 2017-2018. The traditional business cycle decline you have the flight to quality with capital fleeing back to government bonds selling stocks. But what happens when it is government bonds that crash and burn? This is when the capital flows reverse and will shift back into private assets. For this immediate correction, cash is fleeing back to government bonds. This may be the last rally in bonds setting the stage for the extension. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/14/dow-2015-75/We MUST realize that a collapse in confidence with government that is clearly underway in Europe, is the requirement for a cycle inversion. Under this scenario, everything [all private assets] will rise [after 2015.75] but [except public assets, i.e.] government debt – that is corporate debt, shares, gold, and commodities as well as real estate. This is what happens in a meltdown of confidence that is brewing everywhere from Hong Kong to Italy. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/14/dow-for-10-14-2014/A rally into the end of the week would still warn we may see the low the first week of November. If we were to make new lows and fall to test the 15900-16000 level this week, then a rally back into November 3rd week is possible with a turn back down into January. That would be the shifting of the cycle warning we are dealing with a cycle inversion that would extend the high into 2017-2018. That would be VERY VERY VERY bearish for government.
We would most likely see a strong dollar rally breaking most other currencies. The high dollar would set off another round of sovereign defaults since everyone issued debt in dollars and are thus short. That would push the talk of moving toward some one world reserve currency and then we may see gold come into its own at last.
Obama’s former chief economist has already suggested the US should abandon making the dollar the reserve currency. That is nice to say, but there is no alternative until the dollar rises and bankrupts many [nations]. [After that, ]the US national debt will then rise in real terms and that will turn the [global and USA] economy down even harder as the high euro wiped out Greece. For details on the bolded phrase, read these posts: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/29/latin-america-dollar-loans/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/09/the-dollar-the-greatest-short-position-perhaps-in-history/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/historic-trade-deal-russia-china-will-this-dethrone-the-usd/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/05/08/dollar-trade-reserves/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/29/the-short-dollar-the-debt-bubble/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/01/26/the-paradox-of-the-dollar-the-crash/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/05/beware-the-dollar-rally/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/12/15/yuan-the-death-of-the-dollar-good-one/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/07/15/killing-the-dollar/ So let me spell this out for you. Different private assets rallied when the ECM model[1] rose or declined, e.g. stocks rising during ECM rises from 1997-1998, 1999-2000 (dot.com), gold, silver rising during ECM declines 1998-1999, 2005-2006, 2007-2008, 2009-2011, and Bitcoin rising during ECM declines 2013-2014. Government bonds rose in the intervening periods. But as of 2013, stocks started to invert and continued rising with the ECM decline 2013-2014. Nasdaq (dot.com):  (notice in addition to correlation with turns on the ECM, that the entire bubble rise & fall was 8.6 years perfectly fit to the model) Government bonds should rise now while all private assets are starting to align with the 2015.75 inversion of the ECM (due to the impeding failure of government worldwide) thus all will make lows around 2015.75. After 2015.75, the government debt contagion will go over the cliff and the short dollar positions all over the world will create contagion that has never been seen before in the history of the world. After Oct. 2015, the dollar will rally hard, along with all private assets (stocks, gold, real estate, commodities, collectibles, Bitcoin). Before private assets were separated by risk as to how they performed differentially during ECM rises and declines, but as government debt goes into default globally, all private assets will be seen as less risky than government debt after the BIG BANG on Oct. 2015. The ECM declines which occur every 4.3 years have been correlated with increasing worse contagion, i.e. the Long Term Capital Management scare in 1998, the 2008 global debt contagion, and so the debt contagion after 2015.75 is going to be much worse than 2008. The private assets are now all aligning with that reality and thus while ECM (business cycle confidence move up), the private assets are all moving down to make a low by 2015.75 at the latest. Before stocks were viewed a positively correlated to confidence because they were valued on their dividends, now all private assets are being increasingly valued on their lack of direct default exposure to government debt thus they start to move up on ECM declines and move down on ECM rises. But the governments with their police states, taxes, and capital controls (KYC, AML, bail-ins, etc) will be confiscating private assets left and right. So commerce will collapse. War, riots, massive unemployment, worldwide pandemic, petulance, etc.. will ensue. We need that decentralized crypto-currency that is really a currency. Horror lies ahead. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Confidence_Model |
|
|
|
|
Crypto-currency can do something that fiat can't. People all over the world in theory could signup for a bank account immediately without needing to give blood samples and locks of their hair. The key point I've always made it is all about distribution. It is a chicken and egg problem of people need a fiat account if the coin isn't a unit-of-account, yet the coin can't scale to unit-of-account if people don't join the coin by buying some on an exchange with fiat. That has been the bottle neck up to now, because what is the point of using Bitcoin if you already have a bank account and Paypal (also Bitcoin is more difficult to use, less consumer protection, slower transactions, etc).
Gaining a bank account is getting more and more onerous even in the developing world. The SOBs can't control the world if they can't control your accounts, so they have no choice but to make this process more and more difficult. They are trying to unifying at birth biometric and national id systems to make the process more automatic, but they won't get there any time soon.
So for the moment you will need your bank account with Paypal and Apple Pay, or they might try instant signup with low volume limits not needing KYC. But that can be quickly leveraged to hide money from their control by moving everything though numerous accounts.
So there, I've alluded to one my secret strategies.
But I have many more I won't share. Sorry I won't tell you everything.
You will know when Bitcoin has been replaced, because you will see adoption of the new thing skyrocketing. Then you will jump on the train as it is leaving the station.
EDIT: crypto-currency is a battle for the "last mile", i.e. who is going to scale out to those who don't have bank accounts or those business models that are unable to use Paypal effectively because of its (often chaotic) KYC and AML policies, transaction fees, or technology. On the latter two, for example how well (fast and fees) do micro payments work on Paypal?
|
|
|
|
Q: Why are there so many alternative cryptocurrencies?A: Because all crypto-currencies to-date are speculative "investments" (gambles), not currencies. The demographics of crypto-currencies are currently speculative gamblers, not currency users. Thus there is always a demand for a new speculation which can be purchased earlier and cheaper. If someone ever creates a currency, then the users will demand there only be one, because having one unit-of-account means currency users aren't stressed with exchange volatility. Exchange volatility actually decreases currency use, because users have an incentive to not spend when the price is lower than their entry price, and not sell when the price is going higher. Btw, the reason we are moving to a global currency is because currency users are beginning to transact globally more often, e.g. ordering online from Alibaba or DHgate, migrant workers remittances, etc.. Admittedly, your point about the move toward a global currency because of increasing global transactions has merit, but maybe more than just that can help me understand the proliferation of hundred's of different fiat currencies to date, in the face of exchange volatility? I don't recall any prior discussion. I believe I am first to state it that way, at least from everything I've digested over the internet over the past 8 years. The national fiats existed because each government wanted to write its own debt (that comes from Armstrong) and because its citizens didn't need to do international exchange. The next global currency might just be for importers and exporters to hedge with, unless we move to full blown global transactions between individuals. And the other political selling point is to have a currency which is not beholden to the corrupt politics of any nation (which will become so evident and hated as we descend into the economy abyss after 2015.75), so the BIS, WorldBank, etc.. can regulate its supply. So that begets my bifurcation of the global economy concept. I have argued in the threads such as Economic Devastation and Dark Enlightenment that the retail and industrial (physical goods) economy is dying (the governments will tax it to death, profit margins near 0 due to China, etc) and the virtual (downloadable goods, e.g. 3D printer designs) is the fast growing future. Thus the coming fiat global units (e.g. SDRs) could be for the dying economy. Thus any paradigm shift crypto-currency must target the new economy and create the new global unit-of-account. We need to race out ahead of Paypal and Apple Pay. The latest flurry of Armstrong links explain the transition underway towards the above outcome. |
|
|
|
It is BS to claim that Zerocoin is not analogous to mixing. The anonymity set is reduced by the timing of coining and destruction of each zerocoin. Otherwise you put the entire block chain into a mix as Zerocash does, but then (I think but I'm not 100% sure) you have the problem that double-spends can't be reverted individually (i.e. afaik there is no coin id to associate two spends on two forks), you have to revert entire blocks which means a 51% attack is an all-of-nothing affair and I speculate that my solution to the selfish-mining attack (otherwise only 25% of hashrate needed to attack a coin) doesn't work for something like Zerocash. Also my calculation is that neither Zerocoin nor Zerocash can scale to global transaction volume, especially when you factor in micro payments over social networking. Also I don't think cryptographers would agree that such a new and complex cryptography is proven until it has been vetted for a decade or so. I didnt fail anything
Correct knowledge is more valuable than useless pride. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
