[ritehook]

Guy is a friend of an 80-year-old friend of mine, whom I visited briefly over the holidays.

He's a multi-millionaire, who worked as a Hollywood technician but made his bucks with wise investments. He smokes but doesn't inhale, lives on the ocean in Baja and has ladyfriends 40 and 50 years his junior. Born 1917, and was a lad when the Great Depression hit, and remembers the run-up to it.

"It just like 1929. Inflation was all around then too. There was the same kind of irrational insanity in the stock market, crazy emotional swings on every rumor, that we see now."

He thinks it very likely a huge bust is coming. And that a culturally and racially fractured people will not hold together as they did in the 30s. "Crazy wildness and deep blood in the streets," is the shorthand way he describes the most probable scenario.

This isn't an old fart who thinks everything after 1950 is garbage. (He made his money after he turned 60) Rather, a cheerful, energetic old dude who hits Vegas regularly (drives his Lexus there, a new one every two years) and enjoys life.

But speaking his mind - and he may be right.

[ShamsWoof10]

I've thought about this "blood in the streets" deal... I don't know I think it will get worse but if things happen gradual enough it might not be so bad...

If you would have told people back in 02' that oil is going to $100 in 4-6 years (which I did) then most would reply with thoughts of "blodd in the streets" and "depression" with "doom and gloom" and all that other sh*t.. I was one of them that thought that too.... I was wrong... Oil hit $100 yes but the sky didn't fall.... There is no blood in the streets and people are still spending...

Studying the developing behavior of poor kids around here I would say there will be blood on the streets but in small numbers and it will be a trend towards "ultra-violence" by punk idiots/drug addicts on the streets...

Coach was telling me there is something kids or gangs (can't remember what he specified) do now to old people on the streets.. The beat them down but it has a name to it... I'll have to ask him again..

That being said...that's not to say the poor/drug addicts pool won't grow..

[ritehook]

Oil at a c-note a barrel isn't the Virtual Armageddon that the old guy was talking about. The ultimate outcome of many such things - which have a deeper cause - could cause the meltdown.

Despite the "graying of America," most citizens under 50 have never seen a true meltdown - prosperity seemed always there, despite a few trouble spots that were quickly taken care of. But as one example, in 1930 there were much less than a million illegal workers in the US, not the 12 to 20 million estimated now. The Depression and widespread hostility send most of them back across the border.

And most people today think that the govt or the Fed need only to do a little "fine-tuning" to right the economy.

Those who know history well understand that such thinking is puerile. Oh boy, are the American kiddies gonna be shocked when it comes . . .

[rugbybdyb]

I was an economics major in college so take this what its worth(not really that much) But I have to agree with the old guy to an extent...If you look at what caused the great depression it really was sparked by the roaring twenties where everyone was buying everything in site due to new technologies......which in comparison is much like what we went through with the internet craze then we had a huge dip in the market and then it has somewhat come back to normal...the major diff is that we have stop gaps in place now such as FDIC and the reserves the banks are required to carry on saving accts etc so the big run on the banks which was the nail in the coffin wont happen, at least to the extent we saw in the 30's

I dont think that we will be killing each other in the streets however I did work in New Orleans after Katrina and it was to the Marshall law point down there so who really knows.

[ShamsWoof10]

I was an economics major in college so take this what its worth(not really that much) But I have to agree with the old guy to an extent...If you look at what caused the great depression it really was sparked by the roaring twenties where everyone was buying everything in site due to new technologies......which in comparison is much like what we went through with the internet craze then we had a huge dip in the market and then it has somewhat come back to normal...the major diff is that we have stop gaps in place now such as FDIC and the reserves the banks are required to carry on saving accts etc so the big run on the banks which was the nail in the coffin wont happen, at least to the extent we saw in the 30's

I dont think that we will be killing each other in the streets however I did work in New Orleans after Katrina and it was to the Marshall law point down there so who really knows.

I have read about Citibanks restrictions that are not major at the moment but what could be... I believe but am not sure that they put a limit on how much can be wired out from a Citi account in a day ($2K).. I believe there won't be a bank run and people will just have limits on daily withdraws...

I think the Fed. is getting ready to throw the tax payers some money and they can keep doing that to keep things going but that will only make the end worse... Bottom line is Dollar will get close to collapsing and be replaced by the "Amero"...

Feel free to share any interesting experiences from N.O. You must be a wealth of info. from that event...

I saw this hearing on C-Span with some of the Katrina victims and one was called "Mamma D".. This old black women was something else... I was very proud of her testimony actually.. I felt for what she described but boy she told those Congressmen when they tried interupting her..QUOTE: "oh no mista' ..even if I wasn't in America I wouldn't let you cut me off like that.." and she finished her point...

She seems like one tuff hard working survivor... I have that impression of most black women over 50...

[DaveRabbit]

I have read about Citibanks restrictions that are not major at the moment but what could be... I believe but am not sure that they put a limit on how much can be wired out from a Citi account in a day ($2K).. I believe there won't be a bank run and people will just have limits on daily withdraws...

That's right Shams its $2k/day out, already went in effect on me.

[rugbybdyb]

Feel free to share any interesting experiences from N.O. You must be a wealth of info. from that event...

It would take me about twenty pages to go through it all, but just take everything you saw on tv and multiply it by 1000. I was there 15 days after the storm(Im an insurance adjuster) I never got shot at or ever felt threatened but I did have more than one person answer the door with a gun in their hand.......It was just like a war zone for the first few months. Every person had a terrible story about some one related or they knew well that did not make it and it goes on and on....just a bad deal all around....

[DaveRabbit]

yea that article is right, its for *************** transactions only

[pico]

the key is whether the US can keep china, japan, and saudi happy. if they stop buying US bonds, that is when the shit will hit the fan. the current market situation is totally different than the 1920s. As long as you yanks keep charging those CC to buy cheap mercandize from abroad, the US economy will hold up for a bit longer. This will make the problem worse, but it is your kids who will getting ****ed over....by then you'll be laughing in your grave

[ritehook]

Interesting replies. Of course, from a forum that is peopled by folk who engage in "radical speculation" (sports betting) you would expect more "out of the box" thinking than in the editorial pages of any given local daily rag. (No wonder newspapers are a horse-and-buggy industry, heading for oblivion)

While there are more "safeguards" in place now than in 1929 (unemploymeht insurance, welfare, FDIC, etc) it is also true that no govt can permanently insure against a Titanic iceberg - or escape permanently its own contradictions.

Free trade seemed like a panacea -- but as one poster noted it also has allowed foreigners and foreign govts to own most of the American debt. And flooded the country with garbage products that don't last - "cheap" is very expensive.

And politics, long-tern, will always trump economics. It always has in the end.

I was surprised to hear from this Methusalah that there was a lot of inflation leading up to the '29 crash. Just like we have now, if you ignore the official govt figures and look at the real world.

The Fed keeps cutting the interest rate to keep the economy going. But isn't this going to spur inflation - along with the plans to bail out the foolish folk who bought homes that they could not afford once their ARMs kicked into high gear?

Some economists think that the main cause of the '29 Crash was the Fed at that time (yes, it was there then, it came in with the 1912 Income Tax) was continually loosening credit. And so causing inflation.

Um, sound familiar? More dollars floating around, chasing fewer goods. Add to the mix crazy schemes to placate the farm vote, like ethonol - probably the worst energy-efficient fuel in the world - and the spiral seems self-perputating.

But all Ponzi schemes end sometime - even with all the alleged "safeguards" in place.

Oh well, look on the bright side. We won't need illegal aliens to fill the sh-t jobs - Americans will line up a thousand deep for them. I heard on the tube last nite that a new Walmart advertised about 300 of thier crappy jobs, and got thousands of eager applicants.

[ShamsWoof10]

Holy shit! Are you serious? Does this apply to cash withdrawals as well? Are they really having the audacity to say you are not allowed to withdraw more than $2000 of your own money on any day? If so, then Christ almighty they're worse than the online books!

Yeah DL that is correct it is just for ***************'s but they have also limited their ATM's in a couple cities as well... The point is I believe if a bank like Citi has liquidity issues then they will set limits ALL AROUND on how much can be withdrawn in a given day/month... I think it will be not just Citi in the near future and not just ***************'s... There will NOT be a bank run they will make sure of it...

It would take me about twenty pages to go through it all, but just take everything you saw on tv and multiply it by 1000. I was there 15 days after the storm(Im an insurance adjuster) I never got shot at or ever felt threatened but I did have more than one person answer the door with a gun in their hand.......It was just like a war zone for the first few months. Every person had a terrible story about some one related or they knew well that did not make it and it goes on and on....just a bad deal all around....

It didn't look pretty on TV and I can only imagine how bad it was down there... I read about some things and of course the testimony from the victims on C-Span but that was about it... A friend of mine was also in the National Guard that was there... He said it was pretty bad too and there was looting going on all over the place... It's amazing how we as humans to go from humans to animals in no time...

Anyone ever heard of "MAMMA D"..? "BA-BOOOM! MISTA... I'll neva' fa'get it.."

[curious]

There is one big difference between '29 and now. That is government spending. In '29 the federal budget was very small as a % of GDP. So, there was little that the federal government could do in terms of cutting the budget, lowering taxes, giving businesses incentives to create jobs, etc.

Now, the federal government could, in the face of a complete socio-economic collapse drastically cut federal spending and give drastic tax cuts and strong incentives for companies to repatriate overseas profits and repatriate jobs to the US.

Would this be enough? I don't know, but the federal government could cut federal spending by 1 trillion dollars a year. Yes, the bleeding hearts would scream, but in the face of a total meltdown of the entire country, who would care at that point?

Take 1 trillion dollars out of the expense column and give tax breaks to match and that might be enough to save the country.

The equivalent of this simply wasn't possible in '29 because the federal government's budget was so small, it could have been cut to 0 without making any impact.

It is difficult for Congress to cut any spending now because no matter what they try to cut someone will scream "we agree with budget cuts but not MY part of the budget".

Yes, cutting the federal budget drastically would require making some tough choices, but in the face of a total meltdown there wouldn't be much option.

Some places where cuts would be made would have an immediate positive impact. Take the war on drugs. It is a complete failure. More people are in prison in the US (mostly on drug charges) then were in the gulag archipelago at the height of the Stalin era. The federal government's policies on requiring local law enforcement to be "partners" in the war on drugs in exchange for getting federal dollars has turned local law enforcement in many areas from being policemen to being storm troopers. So, scrapping the war on drugs would save billions of dollars, get local law enforcement out of the storm trooper business and stop the seemingly endless stream of people into the Amerikan gulag for petty drug beefs. Drug use should be a health issue, not a criminal issue. Drug trafficking should be a serious felony on the level of mass murder. But, law enforcement doesn't go after the traffickers they go after the users and the petty street level dealers (for the most part). The war on drugs has also ravaged countries like Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, etc., etc. It has turned entire populations against the United States and created and supported Gestapo type organizations in small countries. With a meltdown crises the war on drugs could and should go.

The US would have to rethink its policy on being the world's policeman. We currently have troops in 107 countries. (That the US government admits to, the true number is higher). In the face of a meltdown the troop would have to be brought home, military aid would be cut off to the rest of the world. This would save billions and get the US out of the business of meddling in the affairs of the rest of the planet.

[curious]

Yeah DL that is correct it is just for ***************'s but they have also limited their ATM's in a couple cities as well... The point is I believe if a bank like Citi has liquidity issues then they will set limits ALL AROUND on how much can be withdrawn in a given day/month... I think it will be not just Citi in the near future and not just ***************'s... There will NOT be a bank run they will make sure of it...



It didn't look pretty on TV and I can only imagine how bad it was down there... I read about some things and of course the testimony from the victims on C-Span but that was about it... A friend of mine was also in the National Guard that was there... He said it was pretty bad too and there was looting going on all over the place... It's amazing how we as humans to go from humans to animals in no time...

Anyone ever heard of "MAMMA D"..? "BA-BOOOM! MISTA... I'll neva' fa'get it.."

Well, when people are treated like animals it is not too hard for them to start believing it themselves. Have you ever BEEN to a neighborhood where the people live at the mercy of the "government"? Farm animals are treated better. The poor in this country are more highly regulated than nuclear power plants. Try being poor and dealing with the Manchus who work in the government agencies that you are forced to deal with. You will quickly become filled with anger and rage over how you are treated. Public housing is a travesty, the welfare and food stamp rules make the poor person a criminal if they try to work and save enough to get out of the situation. It is disgraceful.

[ShamsWoof10]

There is one big difference between '29 and now. That is government spending. In '29 the federal budget was very small as a % of GDP. So, there was little that the federal government could do in terms of cutting the budget, lowering taxes, giving businesses incentives to create jobs, etc.

Now, the federal government could, in the face of a complete socio-economic collapse drastically cut federal spending and give drastic tax cuts and strong incentives for companies to repatriate overseas profits and repatriate jobs to the US.

Would this be enough? I don't know, but the federal government could cut federal spending by 1 trillion dollars a year. Yes, the bleeding hearts would scream, but in the face of a total meltdown of the entire country, who would care at that point?

Take 1 trillion dollars out of the expense column and give tax breaks to match and that might be enough to save the country.

The equivalent of this simply wasn't possible in '29 because the federal government's budget was so small, it could have been cut to 0 without making any impact.

It is difficult for Congress to cut any spending now because no matter what they try to cut someone will scream "we agree with budget cuts but not MY part of the budget".

Yes, cutting the federal budget drastically would require making some tough choices, but in the face of a total meltdown there wouldn't be much option.

Some places where cuts would be made would have an immediate positive impact. Take the war on drugs. It is a complete failure. More people are in prison in the US (mostly on drug charges) then were in the gulag archipelago at the height of the Stalin era. The federal government's policies on requiring local law enforcement to be "partners" in the war on drugs in exchange for getting federal dollars has turned local law enforcement in many areas from being policemen to being storm troopers. So, scrapping the war on drugs would save billions of dollars, get local law enforcement out of the storm trooper business and stop the seemingly endless stream of people into the Amerikan gulag for petty drug beefs. Drug use should be a health issue, not a criminal issue. Drug trafficking should be a serious felony on the level of mass murder. But, law enforcement doesn't go after the traffickers they go after the users and the petty street level dealers (for the most part). The war on drugs has also ravaged countries like Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, etc., etc. It has turned entire populations against the United States and created and supported Gestapo type organizations in small countries. With a meltdown crises the war on drugs could and should go.

The US would have to rethink its policy on being the world's policeman. We currently have troops in 107 countries. (That the US government admits to, the true number is higher). In the face of a meltdown the troop would have to be brought home, military aid would be cut off to the rest of the world. This would save billions and get the US out of the business of meddling in the affairs of the rest of the planet.

What's up "curious" where have you been bud..?

I actually would agree with the exact opposite.. I think one of the ways the government will assist will be to employ people... As BCrude pointed out a lot of new jobs are government jobs... If they totally scrapped this "war on drugs" then they would have to lay off all those judges, cops, lawyers, prison guards, clerks, and everything else that makes up the process of inditing someone....

I think they will EXPAND these government jobs a great deal to give people jobs... We may become a total "police state" but people will have work... Their job will be to watch each other... This is worse then digging holes to stay busy ehy BC..? What is most odd is we contribute to what we DO NOT want... Let's not forget about the wars... There will be plenty of work to do there and pay for people who want it... After all they just have to print the form of pay...

Keep in mind in 20-30 years we won't need all these jobs... Maybe that's why the US and soon to come the Global Economy are being consoladated... They might be thinking the same thing as they are with the schools they rebuilt around here.. The "State" said for funding you have to rebuild all the schools OUR WAY... We don't have much space now in these schools and they are building the new ones (which will REPLACE the old ones) with MUCH LESS capacity... Why would they do that..??? They know something... It may be tight.. AT FIRST!!!

If the POPULATION curve were a stock all of you would be yelling SHORT IT!!! Rightfully so... Someone please post the curve and look at this f*cker... Fokes we are going back to 2 Billion in the not to distant future and it's engineered that way... Google "depopulation" and you'll find my ***** Henry Kissenger in charge of one.... He makes "The Prince of Darkness" look like one of God's angels...

Note to Willie: I don't want to see a PM about that word either Willie... Since I used it I have seen is used 7 times and not one has changed it also "The HG" was one of those so I don't want to hear it...

[ShamsWoof10]

Well, when people are treated like animals it is not too hard for them to start believing it themselves. Have you ever BEEN to a neighborhood where the people live at the mercy of the "government"? Farm animals are treated better. The poor in this country are more highly regulated than nuclear power plants. Try being poor and dealing with the Manchus who work in the government agencies that you are forced to deal with. You will quickly become filled with anger and rage over how you are treated. Public housing is a travesty, the welfare and food stamp rules make the poor person a criminal if they try to work and save enough to get out of the situation. It is disgraceful.

Yes I have been and yes I do agree with everything in this post...

[goldengoat]

Originally Posted by curious
Well, when people are treated like animals it is not too hard for them to start believing it themselves. Have you ever BEEN to a neighborhood where the people live at the mercy of the "government"? Farm animals are treated better. The poor in this country are more highly regulated than nuclear power plants. Try being poor and dealing with the Manchus who work in the government agencies that you are forced to deal with. You will quickly become filled with anger and rage over how you are treated. Public housing is a travesty, the welfare and food stamp rules make the poor person a criminal if they try to work and save enough to get out of the situation. It is disgraceful.

Yes I have been and yes I do agree with everything in this post...

to be fair, i would not want to deal with people b|tchin about their welfare all day.

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by curious
Well, when people are treated like animals it is not too hard for them to start believing it themselves. Have you ever BEEN to a neighborhood where the people live at the mercy of the "government"? Farm animals are treated better. The poor in this country are more highly regulated than nuclear power plants. Try being poor and dealing with the Manchus who work in the government agencies that you are forced to deal with. You will quickly become filled with anger and rage over how you are treated. Public housing is a travesty, the welfare and food stamp rules make the poor person a criminal if they try to work and save enough to get out of the situation. It is disgraceful.

to be fair, i would not want to deal with people b|tchin about their welfare all day.

This is my point though... They are "B*TCHING" as a by-product of their enviornment... As I said I have been and I do understand... It does breed anger and frustration...

[curious]

Originally Posted by curious
Well, when people are treated like animals it is not too hard for them to start believing it themselves. Have you ever BEEN to a neighborhood where the people live at the mercy of the "government"? Farm animals are treated better. The poor in this country are more highly regulated than nuclear power plants. Try being poor and dealing with the Manchus who work in the government agencies that you are forced to deal with. You will quickly become filled with anger and rage over how you are treated. Public housing is a travesty, the welfare and food stamp rules make the poor person a criminal if they try to work and save enough to get out of the situation. It is disgraceful.



to be fair, i would not want to deal with people b|tchin about their welfare all day.

That isn't the point. The original purpose of welfare was to help a family get by until the bread winners could go back to work. The original program allowed the bread winner to work for a while until they could get their family out of a bad situation, then the assistance tapered off.

This common sense approach was changed. Now if you are a welfare recipient it is ILLEGAL for you to work, or receive money in any way. It is illegal to have a savings account. It is illegal to own property. The list goes on. So, instead of helping a family get by until they can help themselves get back on their feet, welfare now makes it almost impossible to do better. The reporting requirements are very burdensome. There are endless forms to fill out, twice a month you have to "prove" everything all over again. If you are stupid enough to admit that you received any money outside of the welfare stipend you are treated like a criminal. The attitude from the Manchus is "you are a thief until you prove otherwise" and if you do prove otherwise then the Manchus just think you were smart enough to pull one over on them.

It is not a matter of "complaining", it is a matter of being trapped in a system which purposely has rules that make it impossible to better your position in life.

[thebigguy]

Curious you are on the money.

[curious]

What's up "curious" where have you been bud..?

I actually would agree with the exact opposite.. I think one of the ways the government will assist will be to employ people... As BCrude pointed out a lot of new jobs are government jobs... If they totally scrapped this "war on drugs" then they would have to lay off all those judges, cops, lawyers, prison guards, clerks, and everything else that makes up the process of inditing someone....

I think they will EXPAND these government jobs a great deal to give people jobs... We may become a total "police state" but people will have work... Their job will be to watch each other... This is worse then digging holes to stay busy ehy BC..? What is most odd is we contribute to what we DO NOT want... Let's not forget about the wars... There will be plenty of work to do there and pay for people who want it... After all they just have to print the form of pay...

Keep in mind in 20-30 years we won't need all these jobs... Maybe that's why the US and soon to come the Global Economy are being consoladated... They might be thinking the same thing as they are with the schools they rebuilt around here.. The "State" said for funding you have to rebuild all the schools OUR WAY... We don't have much space now in these schools and they are building the new ones (which will REPLACE the old ones) with MUCH LESS capacity... Why would they do that..??? They know something... It may be tight.. AT FIRST!!!

If the POPULATION curve were a stock all of you would be yelling SHORT IT!!! Rightfully so... Someone please post the curve and look at this f*cker... Fokes we are going back to 2 Billion in the not to distant future and it's engineered that way... Google "depopulation" and you'll find my ***** Henry Kissenger in charge of one.... He makes "The Prince of Darkness" look like one of God's angels...

Note to Willie: I don't want to see a PM about that word either Willie... Since I used it I have seen is used 7 times and not one has changed it also "The HG" was one of those so I don't want to hear it...

Congress will be forced to cut federal spending when the rest of the world refuses to buy US federal government debt. When that happens Congress will be faced with two options: 1) make real spending cuts at the federal level, or 2) monetize the deficits (just print more money). If Congress tries to monetize the deficits then inflation will take off (you think we have inflation now, wait until Congress starts printing 1 trillion dollars a year in "extra" money and using that to fund the budget).

I think that Congress will attempt to simply print more money for a while. Since the mainstream media no longer does any real reporting, they won't expose this con. So, the public will be fooled for a while. As inflation takes off (with inflation rates of 20, then 100, then higher) it will finally sink into the voters that printing more money is going to wipe out their savings. Then the Congress will be forced to make real budget cuts.

One government job destroys 3 private sector jobs, so government hiring actually has a negative impact on the economy and actually creates more unemployment, not less.

Federal spending is currently 22% of GDP. Prior to Woodrow Wilson's establishment of the Amerikan Empire, federal spending only exceeded 3% of GDP during times of war. Congress has established many "entitlements" in order to buy votes over the years. Spending programs which are "untouchable" but which grow year to year. Projections into the future show federal spending reaching 50% of GDP during our lifetime. This is only federal spending, when you add state, county and city spending the total will be more like 70% of GDP. No society can sustain such a level of government spending.

Congress will be faced with two choices, watch the nation collapse into chaos and ruin, or drastically cut federal spending and federal taxation.

I only hope that the voters wake up before it is to late and make the choice for Congress because Congress won't make this choice willingly.

The Congress will never undertake reforms of this magnitude willingly, it will require a crisis that threatens our survival as a nation to force them to undertake the necessary reforms to avoid total disaster.