Is a Madmax outcome coming before 2020? Thus do we need anonymity?

[AnonyMint]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Math of interest, debt,  and debasement is a power vacuum that creates a globalist elite
From:    AnonyMint
Date:    Tue, May 20, 2014 8:32 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wrote this last year. Easier to read by clicking this link:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195275.msg3382108#msg3382108


=============================

...

The key to understanding the economics of debasement is that
money
supply inflation always goes to workers salaries[1], so it is not a
problem. The theft that occurs with fractional reserve banking is mainly
by periodically confiscating the capital of the population with an
economic implosion and a reset of the currency, e.g. bank failures in a
fractional reserve system or the coming bail-ins and retirement account
nationalizations for G7 nations. And without perpetual debasement, you
must have fractional reserve banking, because of the logic Etlase2 and I
discussed upthread.

An economy can't run properly without perpetual debasement because then
capital never has to move (because it never rots), it can just sit in a
hole forever. Nothing in the universe is forever, so to structure capital
to be forever introduces abnormality that can't be.

[1] A more direct link to the math,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=160612.msg2895021#msg2895021

Where I think you misunderstand is the relationship between "interest" and
debt.

You make a blanket assumption that all currency must expand because of the
principal of interest ?

We are getting off-topic of this thread, and I don't have any strong
disagreements with the rest of what you wrote. However, let me clarify
this one point. I agreed with Etlase2 that in theory interest could simply
be transferred, if not everyone is in debt, but mathematically it can't
occur. I provided two orthogonal (to each other) reasons for the
mathematical certainty that interest requires an expanding money supply:

1. If all base money is earning an interest, then the base money supply
must expand, otherwise there doesn't exist enough base money to pay the
interest.

2. Those who earn the interest are wealthy, and only spend a fraction of
their passive income, thus they don't transfer it back to those who are
paying interest. Thus, it is a mathematical certainty that eventually all
of the money supply will be transferred to them, if we don't debase the
money supply.


Note that with central bank control, the most wealthy and powerful
debase the money supply sufficiently to destroy those earning interest
(current ZIRP), and pass the debasement to themselves. These periodic
resets are how they take all the interest that was aggregated by
moderately wealthy who are less powerful including the disposable banking
corporations. A grotesque racket.

This is why they
are
going after the millionaires now, to confiscate (via their control
of the government) what was aggregated since the last reset 1929 - 1955.
This reset is 2007 - 2033. Every 78 years (3 x 26 reproductive maturity
generations).

You have to Think Like a Bankster to understand how the globalists play
the game:

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/01.10/thinklikeabanker.html

You see what Merkel did as soon as she was re-elected to her lame duck
term, she cooperates to supra-nationalize the German banks to transfer
control to the EU (Brussels), where the most wealthy and powerful have
even more control:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/09/26/one-day-after-german-elections-truth-comes-out/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/10/20/growing-concern-about-the-federalization-of-europe/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/10/14/european-banking-crisis-seizing-10-of-everyones-accounts-hello-cyprus/

[AnonyMint]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: If Armstrong can't answer this simple question,  then he should stop the nonsense
From:    AnonyMint
Date:    Wed, May 21, 2014 3:22 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/20/why-conspiracy-theories-give-way-too-much-credit-to-mythical-people/

Regarding the above illogic (i.e. no basis nor evidence is provided for
the concluded remarks), so then why don't the globalists conduct their
meetings with a full public record of what was discussed? Or phrased
another way, since when did cartels become legal?

Have all the globalists come on record, then we can't stop deluding
ourselves that they are not hiding illegal collusion.

Let's not forget these globalists own all multi-national corporations:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html


I am sick and tired of Armstrong's nonsense on this issue. I hope those
with the power to write to the public-at-large will call him out on this
question.

[peeveepee]

Global chess game at played.

Key players join in and kick out all the times.


Remember this, fundamentally, it is economic power and sound economic policy will prevail at the end.

Military regime do not last long.

[AnonyMint]

Cross-posting...

Those who are expecting dollar collapse and hyperinflation are clueless about history. Never in the history of the world, not even in Rome, has the global reserve currency collapsed. It doesn't happen. Only revolutionary governments which can't sell their own bonds collapse into hyperinflation.

Rather what is happening now is the "borrower is slave to lender". The USA is taking control of the globe now and the dollar will become very strong. They will track down all wealth globally and confiscate it. All the pawns of the USA (Europe, Japan, etc) and the fake antagonists (Russia, China) are on board this plan to share information to track down "tax evasion" which is a code word for Totalitarianism.

Again find the link in my prior post and read that entire Mad Max thread so you can re-educate yourselves.

Civilizations (problem solving societies) collapse because of the diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. Tainter's Law.

http://www.jayhanson.org/page134.htm

No they collapse because of socialism and collectivism when the private sector shrinks to for example 25% of GDP (and govt+regulation compliance is 75% of GDP as is the case in the USA and Europe now), which is an orthogonal property to knowledge formation. Here are a few examples of the cancer upon us now:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/how-bureaucrats-undermine-everything/

Don't conflate the perils of collectivism with the beauty of technological advance.

We already had this discussion in two other threads already and I am not going to debate you again, as I already shown the idiotic illogic of your conflation of the two:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=564097.msg6513193#msg6513193

[AnonyMint]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Eliminating career politicians doesn't eliminate the power vacuum   of democracy
From:    AnonyMint
Date:    Wed, May 21, 2014 8:24 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/return-of-corruption-sorry-lobbying/

it seems remarkable that companies would do anything but
lobby. A particularly vivid example was in 2004, when an aggressive
corporate campaign prompted Congress to grant a one-off tax holiday for
American companies to repatriate foreign earnings. The outright return on
lobbying costs, according to one of the various studies that served as
inspiration for the Strategas index, was $220 for each $1 spent. (see also
CNBC).

An you wonder WHY I say we FIRST need to get rid of career politicians –
one term only. Do that, and most else will start to fall into
place.

Martin, setting term limits won't resolve the perils of socialism and
collectivism.

You are naively expecting that if the people who are elected have no
incentive to remain in office then they will try to do what is best for
the citizens rather than appeasing lobbyists.

Again you fail to understand the deeper implications of the reference I
have sent you numerous times as follows.

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984

Some Iron Laws of Political Economics

Mancur Olson, in his book The Logic Of Collective Action,
highlighted the central problem of politics in a democracy. The benefits
of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular
special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic
growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the
entire population.

The result is a scramble in which individual interest groups perpetually
seek to corner more and more rent from the system, while the incremental
costs of this behavior rise slowly enough that it is difficult to sustain
broad political opposition to the overall system of political privilege
and rent-seeking.

Let me spell it out for you. The "special interest groups" are the
citizens. The citizens form groups that demand the government give them
benefits. For example, you documented this recently "Germany is promising
a Woman’s Mother’s Pension  for those mothers whose children were born
before 1992. They will be entitled to early retirement at 63":

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/18/german-politicians-promise-unfunded-pensions-just-to-win/

Politicians get elected when they promise everyone everything. Term limits
won't change the fact that citizens view government as a collective trough
from which each citizen should vote to get their fair share. Problem is
that to appease this it requires politicians to promise more and more
share, i.e. government becomes a larger and larger share of the GDP
crowding out the private sector and ultimately reaching Totalitarianism as
we are entering now with the NSA and the hunt for all wealth to fund the
for example $200 trillion of actuarial obligations promised by the U.S.
government.

Martin you are just masturbating with the term limits idea. In fact, you
play right into the plans of the globalists, because reform of the
nation-states is part of the globalist agenda taking us towards
"international cooperation and oversight for transparency" which is a code
phrase for global hegemony and enslavement of the global citizen in the
power vacuum of global collectivism.

The only solution to rising to periodic end game of collectivism (when it
reaches Totalitarianism) has always been for the intellectuals and
forthright to seek out frontiers. In fact, your masturbation delusion
about term limits as a nirvana is in direct defiance of the your own model
which tells you there must always be a cycle. The cycle has always been
and will always be an oscillation between rising socialism and rising
frontiers.

So now the frontier of geography and cash are gone. So what is the next
frontier? It is of course technological.

Sooner or later you will realize I am correct.

[AnonyMint]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: There will never be effective planning in government (not even in  China)
From:    AnonyMint
Date:    Wed, May 21, 2014 9:07 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/21188/

VA Scandal – More Evidence that Government is INCAPABLE
of Planning

...

Give the people FULL coverage in the private sector and that just may
spark a reality check that these wars are going to COST a lot more money
that people thought so perhaps they will not be so eager to wage war on
the world.

Martin, it is clear from your posts about China that you admire their 5
and 10 year top-down central planning. You've even written that when you
were in China you saw them observing the prices of everything (even 64
variants of tea) and you admired that they didn't intervene but just
collected data to understand the markets.

You think that government can be made to act rationally if for example
term limits are implemented in the West.

What you fail to understand is that China's planning is an abject failure.
China is rising only because their people were so undervalued relative to
the rest of the world, not because as you attribute to some brilliance of
Communist planning. It was just time (as you often say about your cycles
model).

The coming Knowledge Revolution is going to shred these top-down planning
paradigms (the globalist agenda is a paradigm of passive capital being
defeated and the rise of the individualized capital in the Knowledge Age).
The people will rise to direct power via the power of decentralized
technologies on the network.

You are entirely missing the real trend at hand. Your mind is still stuck
in your political and high-end money manager connections. All of you are
going to become increasingly irrelevant.

I again refer you to the following threads to bring yourself up to speed
on the fledgling trend at hand:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg6078778#msg6078778

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.0

Educate yourself by reading carefully the above threads.

[AnonyMint]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Weary of irrational biases
From:    AnonyMint
Date:    Thu, May 22, 2014 11:53 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

This will probably be my last communication on these sort of debates,
because I can't convince someone who has an irrational bias and refuses to
be objective and based in fact and analysis.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-end-goal/

REPLY: I would like to see something like that happen.
However, we must keep in mind that we require the crash and burn. Society
moves through waves of Creative Destruction. We must see the system
collapse and that will then set the stage for a rebirth. The object is to
be there when that happens. This will be the moment of truth. Society will
swing either toward more authoritarian or toward real democracy.

We need the true checks and balance of the people divorced from career
politicians. Eliminating direct taxation will eliminate the corruption and
lobbying of politicians to carve out exclusions. Republics are the WORST
form of government for they ALWAYS become the most corrupt. Even a king is
better for he is either a madman or a saint – he cannot be bribed on the
whims of people or chance.

Eliminating direct taxation, which the founders of the US did originally,
it will eliminate the need to hoard cash offshore. Eliminate direct
taxation and you will lower the cost of labor. Eliminate unions that serve
no functional purpose and only promotes higher wages without improving
skills. To get ahead, people have to keep pace with technology or be
outdated in the workforce watching their labor value depreciate. If people
understand the technology cycle they will grasp the idea that they must
increase their value by expanding their skills.

You've observed history and seen that never once has any political system
been stable and they always devolve to Totalitarianism at the end game.
Yet you still come back for more sloppy seconds, thirds, and Nths.

You've observed history and seen that the technologies for global control
and the level of global control have radically increased. Yet you deny the
global hegemony that will result from your idealistic delusion above.

You've observed history and seen that the only escape and freedom has ever
come in the form of a frontier where the oppressed can compete against the
cancer and thus survival of the human race.

Yet now you say we can just burn without a frontier and reform.

You've fucking lost your mind.

Most people will masturbate like this, because they don't have the skills
to work on the information technology frontier so as to provide real
solutions.

You are too vested in the old school, in idealism about political
structure and top-down planning and organization.

You will be swept away by decentralization technology.

End.



http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-disinformation-hiding-truth-in-plain-sight/

This is standard operational procedure and it is why I am
very skeptical about conspiracy theories. Trace the origins and you will
find that they are generated as part of a plot to hide in plain view the
truth. Take 911. There are now people who claim that there were no planes
at all and it was all staged.

...

So how do you cover-up what is in plain sight? The oldest trick in the
book is disinformation. You create the controversy centered around the
Twin Towers and exaggerate the claims. The majority will begin to see
through the exaggerations as a conspiracy theory and stop there never
looking further.

Indeed, the truth is in detailed analysis of the material facts rather
than broad-brushed generalizations such as when you Martin refuse to
analyze and accept the detailed factual analysis of the likes of Anthony
Sutton on the existence and manipulations funded by the globalists.

[AnonyMint]

Over the cliff we go...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/24/income-tax-revenues-collapsing-in-the-states/

Personal income tax collections simply plunged for 2013 from a year earlier in 27 of 32 States reporting so far. That is the majority of the 43 states that levy income taxes to begin with. The collapse is ranging between 20% to as much as 50%. These States cannot print money so there is no chance of hyperinflation. This is the deflationary collapse of society. These States face hard decisions on either cutting spending or raising taxes. They will choose the raising taxes more than cutting spending that causes government to shrink in size.

[Trading]

If I recall well, the madmax situation was created by a Peak Oil, not a financial crisis.
No financial crisis will ever create a situation of society collapse.  Currently, Zimbabwe doesn't have a true national currency, it's economy is working on foreigner currencies. But society didn't collapse.

[nickenburg]

Have you guys ever seen the movie In time with Justin Timberlake.
Its actually a good movie, and I think the world they live in is actually how the world could be in a few decades.
The poorest people in that movie live in the most shitty city in the world, and all are workers in a factory and no one cares about them.
They are seperated from people that only live a class above them and you have like 5 different classes and every class lives in a better part of the world
If you want to go to from class 5 to class 4, you have to pay money to pass the gates. and from class 2 to class 1 costs alot.
Only the real rich lived there Seperated, from all the poor so they couldn't attack them or steal from them.

[Trading]

There are some promising studies on cell regeneration, but eternal youth (as more or less seen in that movie) is still faraway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_immortality

[peeveepee]

There are some promising studies on cell regeneration, but eternal youth (as more or less seen in that movie) is still faraway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_immortality

Cancer has the characteristic of living beyond its lifespan, that create a problem for the host and usually kill the host if it spread fast enough.


In the unlikely event we find a way to live beyond our lifespan, that can also create the same kind of problem for the host (planet/universe).

[Rassah]

You know, all our fuel would be renewable and leave a negative carbon footprint if we grew hemp biodiesel.  But that's illegal.

Except it wouldn't be, because when a plant grows, it pulls stuff out of the ground, and when it dies and decomposes, it puts stuff back into the ground, but if you remove that plant, you basically just end up pulling stuff out of the ground untill there is nothing to pull. We would essentially switch from oil based energy to fertilizer based energy.

year if you remove that plant, you basically just end up pulling stuff out of the ground. this is true.

The plant pulls stuff out of the ground, and then doesn't put it back if the plant is removed. Know that saying that matter/energy can't be created or destroyed? Where do you think the stuff that makes plants come from? Sand and clay?

Is AnonyMint, Martin Armstrong? His posts are practically just reports of that blog.

[Ruthful]

You know, all our fuel would be renewable and leave a negative carbon footprint if we grew hemp biodiesel.  But that's illegal.

There is a very good reason why no environmental and bio diesel scientist /engineers considers  hemp as viable bio-diesel material,hemp is a terrible plant for  for bio diesel production.The yield is pathetically low when compared to other candidates,the fact is there are plants that easily outclasses hemp both in oil production(via hemp seed) or plain biomass production readily available in every growing climate and region.Furthermore large scale  hemp cultivation  is just as damaging to the soil as   corn and cotton .

[wenben]

Burning food resource to serve as energy isn't really a good idea.


Madmax will probably arrive before 2020.

[Ruthful]

Burning food resource to serve as energy isn't really a good idea.

Hence why biofuel researchers  likes to focus on non food source plants as their candidates (e.g. switchgrass,energy cane ,black locust ,willow etc).

[Rassah]

Burning food resource to serve as energy isn't really a good idea.

Hence why biofuel researchers  likes to focus on non food source plants as their candidates (e.g. switchgrass,energy cane ,black locust ,willow etc).

All of it is still taking matter from one location, applying the sun to it, and dispersing it in another location as you withdraw energy. So, if it won't be Big Oil, it'll be Big Fertilizer, or Big Algae, or whatever. It's great to strive for more efficiency, just don't think that growing our fuel will somehow give us unlimited free energy without any oligarchs

[Trading]

The source of the energy in the plant isn't the "stuff" it takes from the soil, but the Sun.
Anyway, until now, all attempts to extract biodiesel from corn and other plants has been a transfer (with some loss) from energy spent growing the plant (mainly, electricity, based on natural gas) to biodiesel.

[Ruthful]

will somehow give us unlimited free energy without any oligarchs

We'll need to radically alter the laws of physics first before we can even start to talk about free energy. .

The source of the energy in the plant isn't the "stuff" it takes from the soil, but the Sun.
Anyway, until now, all attempts to extract biodiesel from corn and other plants has been a transfer (with some loss) from energy spent growing the plant (mainly, electricity, based on natural gas) to biodiesel.

One the most promising of these endeavours  are research into bio-cellulosic fuel, potentially this could be one of the more efficient ways of converting the suns',s energy into a more compact ,readily available and easily transportable  energy source.Unfortunately, there is yet to be any breakthrough that would make this process practical or commercially viable.


BTW, I think we're drifting quite well away from the thread title.

[AnonyMint]

Over the cliff we go...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/24/income-tax-revenues-collapsing-in-the-states/

Personal income tax collections simply plunged for 2013 from a year earlier in 27 of 32 States reporting so far. That is the majority of the 43 states that levy income taxes to begin with. The collapse is ranging between 20% to as much as 50%. These States cannot print money so there is no chance of hyperinflation. This is the deflationary collapse of society. These States face hard decisions on either cutting spending or raising taxes. They will choose the raising taxes more than cutting spending that causes government to shrink in size.

More confirmation in the Retail Death Rattle:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/bad-trend-breaking-retail-results-not-better-than-expected-but-worse-than-ever/