The Ultimate Destruction of the US Dollar and World Markets Will Not Happen

[bandicoot76]

Oh come on. Spare me this hysterical, sky-is-falling, conspiracy theory spit-fest. Do you read your own posts? You look like a lunatic. Do you even live in America?
Oh sorry, ) DO YOU EVEN LIVE IN AMERICA! BLAH BLAH THIS SENTENCE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE REALLY LONG ...... BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY SCARY AND IMPORTANT!!!

your very good at ad hominem attacks but very weak on substance to back up your big mouth little troll,

nothing i have posted on here cant be verified by a quick google search... hardly hysterical and by labelling everything a 'conspiracy theory' or 'lunatic' without ever bothering to do a little research shows how narrow minded and ignorant you are.

go tell the thousands of ppl in USA who lost their homes only to discover that their tax money was used to support the banks & not the mortagee's that they are conspiracy theorist nut-job sky is falling lunatics and see how long it takes them to wipe that smirk of your face, mr smarty-pants!

(not that its any of your business but i worked for a yank company for nearly 3 yrs & am still good friends with some of my old work crew... get them going on the subject and they'll burn your ears off with how bad the situation is in the US for the 'lower' classes....)

...so in summary.. you disagree with what ive posted...fine.. your choice! try to belittle my comments without actually adressing them tho & well you can just F*CK OFF

 

[bandicoot76]

i'm not saying what ive posted is the whole truth & nothing but the truth... i just believe there is enough evidence out there to suggest that things arent as they should be, look @ usa, look @ greece, portugal, spain, ireland... we are living in a fools paradise if we dont think it can happen to us too!

SO FOR LITTLE TROLLS I'LL PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS! DISPROVE THE POINTS IVE MADE IN MY PREVIOUS POSTS, SHOW THEM TO BE ALARMIST MADE UP B/S AND NOT COLD HARD FACTS & I WONT POST ANOTHER "LUNTATIC CONSPIRACY SPIT-FEST' POST ON ASF EVER EVER AGAIN!

STEP UP TO THE PLATE

 

[bandicoot76]

' my point being the taxpayer funded bailout money distributed by the fed at the height of the GFC...
1) the fed chairman WILL NOT disclose to anyone where the money was allocated nor how much... not even when directly challenged by ron paul in a sitting of congress
2) the fed HAS NEVER EVER been audited BY ANYONE... independant nor government body... since its inception in 1913... so how can you know where its profits go??? a MSM journalist!? give me a break!!!
3) the fact that the bailout money was used to bail out banks, and not used to help ppl being evicted from their homes to stay in them is the most dispicable, disgusting, immoral and unethical situation in american financial history! SHAME ON THE FED, SHAME ON DEPT TREASURY and SHAME ON PUPPET... sorry i mean PRESIDENT OBAMA!

if they had made those trillions of dollars into long term, low interest, govt backed loans to the mortagee's being evicted it would have:
1) saved thousands of ppl being thrown out of their homes and onto the street & living on welfare
2) stopped the real estate crash that followed the glut of houses being sold as a result of foreclosures
3)THE MONEY WOULD HAVE ENDED UP WITH THE BANKS IN THE END ANYWAY, IT JUST WOULD HAVE DONE SOME GOOD ON THE WAY AS IT TRICKLED THROUGH THE ECONOMY TO ITS END DESTINATION! PERHAPS EVEN STOPPING THE GFC FROM HAPPENING OR AT WORST LIMITING ITS EFFECTS ON THE LITTLE PPL

just out of interest, who (besides little troll, i know his opinion) thinks that the information i have posted (like the example quoted above) is complete bollocks, not true & just 'the-sky-is-falling' nonsense?

i'd like feedback both negative & positive (as long as its not just insults with no evidence to back it up) to see if the opinion i have reached/ interpreted from all the information that ive researched is so skewed from reality as mr troll says it is???

 

[LifeChoices]

You and konkon sound like nutbags to me. It wouldn't surprise me if you soon start ranting that 9/11 and the London bombings were conspiracies. It's entertaining to a point, but after a while I just switch off - which I guess most people also do.

 

[tothemax6]

Bandicoot, you are a lunatic.
This is not an ad hominem attack, it is an observation. Indeed, as if to provide proof of this lunacy, you spewed three more posts of the same bile.

It is one thing to have a calm and rational debate about the causes of the 2008 crash, and to discuss the nature of the Federal Reserve. It is another to howl and shriek like a frenzied mad man. I enjoy the former, I will take no part in the latter. Ciao.

 

[Uncle Festivus]

5)fight fire with fire... watch what the bigwigs are doing and do the same... when the GFC was at its worst warren buffet was buying quality stocks in a frenzy at rock bottom prices, buy when other ppl are scared sell when other ppl are greedy & have forgotten their fear... then use that money to pay down debt youve accumulated while building up your other asset base... basically accumulate assets that you can fight tooth & nail to retain if the sh*t ever hits the fan big time

6) keep your pantry stocked (min 3months) and your powder dry

7)hope for the best but prepare for the worst!

... but thats just me

The GFC was just the 9pm kiddies fireworks before the real show at midnight.

Buffet lost big time on a lot of wrong bets, and only bought 'distressed' assets because he was fully 'informed' & backstopped by a large organisation ie something like the US Fed?

The strategy of step 5 (apart from paying down debt) will not be able to be enacted because when midnight comes the traditional markets will be frozen solid ie not tradable! First they will stop short selling, then apply limit downs then a range of other measures all the way to finally an indefinate market halt, a bit like the property trusts have been for the last 4 years.

So, the only real way to prepare is to have physical cash and assets worth exchanging goods & sevices for. What they are I will leave it to you, but they are metallic & shiny

I think we are closer to the start of the final show that we are to the end of the GFC?

 

[Uncle Festivus]

You and konkon sound like nutbags to me. It wouldn't surprise me if you soon start ranting that 9/11 and the London bombings were conspiracies. It's entertaining to a point, but after a while I just switch off - which I guess most people also do.

I thought we might have got the 'clock is right twice a day' thingy too but alas.....

From casual observance over the years, the above is to be expected when the future is uncertain - a human trait whereby bad or negative news is somehow wished away or ignored, and eventually repeated negative news becomes the morm and is in fact totally ignored, a bit like the global financial system now.

Five years ago if a country announced it was insolvent there would be a major market correction - now the markets actually go up because they know that big brother Bernanke and his Euro mates will continually print more money to bail out entire countries!

Until, that is, 1 country (ie Finland) decide not to pay their portion of bail-out funding because they can't see why they should support poorly run countries. It starts off slowly but then one after another, the funding dries up, while the number willing to buy the debt bonds (Pimco & China) say 'had enough'...........

BEIJING, April 23 (Xinhua) -- China should reduce its excessive foreign exchange reserves and further diversify its holdings, Tang Shuangning, chairman of China Everbright Group, said on Saturday.
The amount of foreign exchange reserves should be restricted to between 800 billion to 1.3 trillion U.S. dollars, Tang told a forum in Beijing, saying that the current reserve amount is too high.
China's foreign exchange reserves increased by 197.4 billion U.S. dollars in the first three months of this year to 3.04 trillion U.S. dollars by the end of March.
Tang's remarks echoed the stance of Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of China's central bank, who said on Monday that China's foreign exchange reserves "exceed our reasonable requirement" and that the government should upgrade and diversify its foreign exchange management using the excessive reserves.

Now, for the unbelievers, you have to tell us how the US will get the green line in the following chart back to or close to zero, while at the same time attracting the money to cover the shortfall. It's simple maths really - either the expense side has to reduce dramatically or the income side has to rise dramatically, or a combination of both.

I don't believe it's possible, under the current political system, for the humans resposible, to impose the conditions neccesary for a balanced budget to exist. You only have to observe what happens in the insolvent countries when austerity measures are enacted. The US is still in recession.

The Jaws Of Death

 

[professor_frink]

Uncle, the recession ended in 2009.

In the future, if you would like to stay up to date with business cycle dates, you can check the NBER's website:

http://www.nber.org/cycles/

Cheers

 

[konkon]

You and konkon sound like nutbags to me. It wouldn't surprise me if you soon start ranting that 9/11 and the London bombings were conspiracies. It's entertaining to a point, but after a while I just switch off - which I guess most people also do.

No. 9/11 and the London bombings were NOT conspiracies.

Switched-on or switched-off. Interesting.

 

[bandicoot76]

Bandicoot, you are a lunatic.
This is not an ad hominem attack, it is an observation. Indeed, as if to provide proof of this lunacy, you spewed three more posts of the same bile.

It is one thing to have a calm and rational debate about the causes of the 2008 crash, and to discuss the nature of the Federal Reserve. It is another to howl and shriek like a frenzied mad man. I enjoy the former, I will take no part in the latter. Ciao.

i suggest you look up the definition of an ad hominem attack 'an attack of the persons character to try to discredit his position' ... i posted alot of (probably too much) information that i have gathered over the years... not once did you attempt to discredit the evidence other than attacking me as a 'lunatic'.

if you had come out and said.. 'well that point is not correct or is only a half truth you've bent to suit your arguement' etc, then i would have engaged you in a debate... but you attacked me personally to belittle and discredit my position... then you have the nerve to act all offended when i reply in kind.

words such as 'spewed bile, howl, shriek, frenzied mad man, lunatic nutbag' all aimed at character assassination rather than addressing my points. that is the context that YOU decided to take my posts in...

its not the way i have tried to promote my position (and if that is how i do come across i apolagise to the ASF members reading my posts) they are meant to be informative & give ppl an alternative veiwpoint rather than be just another rant. i thought the info that i have provided would have shown that!

...anyhow no positive comments on the points i make in my posts yet so looks like your winning troll... i'll give it another couple of days but till then i'm outa here... sweet dreams...

 

[konkon]

Meanwhile closer to home, Australia continues down the "level playing field" delusion as industry after industry is smashed to pieces. We'd better hope the Chinese keep buying our rocks. That's about the only industry we'll have left if things keep going the way they are.

It's alarmingly like the US situation, the only real difference being that we've got some rocks to sell. But in terms of any other industry, we're almost as stuffed as the Americans these days.

Take a look around the "industrial" part of most Australian cities and there it is. What were once major factories are now nothing more than warehouses housing imports of the goods they once produced or have simply been demolished. The towns, cities and entire states that relied most heavily on manufacturing have struggled economically for years as factory after factory has closed its doors forever.

Port Huon, Electrona, the Stanley Works, ACI, Sheridan, Blundstone, Coats Paton, APPM, Tioxide, NW Acid, Southern Aluminium... All gone and never coming back. And that's just part of the list for Tasmania - there's far more in the other states.

All looks good if you're digging up rocks in WA and Qld or are involved in financial services etc in Sydney and Melbourne. But times aren't so good anywhere else with manufacturing stuffed and even tourism now suffering at the hands of the currency situation.

We'd better hope they keep buying those rocks. We're in much the same situation as the US if they don't...

So, so true! The so-called 'free-trade' ethos that governments, media etc love will cause more problems here in Australia, as it did in the US, Europe etc. How does one have 'free-trade' when the rules (wages etc) are different for trading countries?

Would the skeptics play a game like Monopoly if the rules were different for the players, but you still had to trade freely with other players? It would end up a very short game, anyway.

Here's another one they love: 'skilled labour' or 'skilled labour shortages'. Isn't this cheaper labour in Australia that will mean more demand for housing that's not in oversupply? I don't have a problem with more migrant workers, but where's the infrastructure (and manufacturing sectors) to meet demands? As Smurf1976 suggests, we no longer have a manufacturing force we once did in Australia.

 

[konkon]

i truly hope that they do do something but while they may not be actively involved in the scam, they take their orders from ppl who are... otherwise explain why have no prosecutions taken place when there is SO much evidence that blatant fraud was involved?

lets hope the FBI grows some balls and steps up to the plate! for our sakes as well as the yanks cos we just feed off their scraps in the big picture of things!

These organisations (through no fault of their own) were, at times, made to look the other way or even if they weren't their jurisdictional powers did not reach into protected and lawyered-up areas.

I bet organisations like the FBI, NSA etc have volumes of evidence but are unable to use it in courts. Well the NSA wouldn't.

I wonder what the public reaction would be like if leaked files, tapes etc would show how ruthless (and uncaring) CEOs etc are when they are in negotiations behind closed doors. This would go a long way to enlighten the public even further. Maybe some would then get switched-on!

 

[konkon]

'control a nations money and i care not who makes its laws'... nathaniel rothschild

may not be word for word but close enough, its not about profits its about controling the financial system... i wont go on and on about it because theres enough info on public record about the corrupting nature of the 'fed' and the fate of those that oppose it (jfk being the last pres.. introducing exec order 111110 to shut the fed down)

anyhow i'm straying... my point... thats right! my point being the taxpayer funded bailout money distributed by the fed at the height of the GFC...
1) the fed chairman WILL NOT disclose to anyone where the money was allocated nor how much... not even when directly challenged by ron paul in a sitting of congress
2) the fed HAS NEVER EVER been audited BY ANYONE... independant nor government body... since its inception in 1913... so how can you know where its profits go??? a MSM journalist!? give me a break!!!
3) the fact that the bailout money was used to bail out banks, and not used to help ppl being evicted from their homes to stay in them is the most dispicable, disgusting, immoral and unethical situation in american financial history! SHAME ON THE FED, SHAME ON DEPT TREASURY and SHAME ON PUPPET... sorry i mean PRESIDENT OBAMA!

if they had made those trillions of dollars into long term, low interest, govt backed loans to the mortagee's being evicted it would have:
1) saved thousands of ppl being thrown out of their homes and onto the street & living on welfare
2) stopped the real estate crash that followed the glut of houses being sold as a result of foreclosures
3)THE MONEY WOULD HAVE ENDED UP WITH THE BANKS IN THE END ANYWAY, IT JUST WOULD HAVE DONE SOME GOOD ON THE WAY AS IT TRICKLED THROUGH THE ECONOMY TO ITS END DESTINATION! PERHAPS EVEN STOPPING THE GFC FROM HAPPENING OR AT WORST LIMITING ITS EFFECTS ON THE LITTLE PPL

you are trying to defend the undefendable mate! the fed is scum!

just out of interest, who (besides little troll, i know his opinion) thinks that the information i have posted (like the example quoted above) is complete bollocks, not true & just 'the-sky-is-falling' nonsense?

i'd like feedback both negative & positive (as long as its not just insults with no evidence to back it up) to see if the opinion i have reached/ interpreted from all the information that ive researched is so skewed from reality as mr troll says it is???

Your points are excellent but I have to disagree with some.

I personally don't see Bernanke himself as scum. I think he was used and perhaps ended up getting his job because of his expertise in the Great Depression and his strong belief that it could have been prevented if the Fed in the 1930s supplied banks with liquidity instead of cutting supply. So 'they' had someone in charge that would, under similar circumstances, keep the money-supply going at record volumes. And we know what happened.

I think that Bernanke is opening up the Fed to the world, because he probably now realises this and does care about the American economy and his own job. He has to now because there is a growing push to end the Fed, and the pressures are coming from all angles; The Tea Party, media, many in the judiciary (that see the Fed as unconstitutional). I know many will disagree but I think 'they' had their man in charge of money supply, and Bernanke was read like a book. I think that Henry Paulson etc played Bernanke like a fiddle during those crucial over-the-weekend meetings to 'save' the financial system. I think that Bernanke would have realised then that the X-CEO of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, negotiated moves that meant that Goldman Sachs would come out of the 'negotiations' a bigger and better future company.

The JFK reference is important, as he tried to use a silver-standard to bypass the Fed and go strait to Treasury to print legal tendered currency. 4 to 5 months later, Kennedy was assassinated. No link intended!!

Many believe the banks' failures shouldn't have been 'insured' by future tax-payer liabilities. However what choice did Bernanke have? If he allowed the financial system to collapse then you would have a worse situation in the US and around the world. The US will one day restructure or reset its economy and currency and it will be its creditors, like China, that will be left without a chair to sit on.

Bill Gross seems to think the US will not be in a position to pay its debt obligations, and he, to me, is as close to an economic oracle as we have. Most other leaders in the economic world are just sales-reps, pushing all kinds of products.

Obama inherited this mess. Bush and his entourage had so much more to do with the GFC.

 

[Plumber1]

Konkon,
I agree with every word that you have written. Well done. An excellent post

 

[Frank D]

Obama inherited this mess.

Yes he inherited a ‘mess’, but along the way he has made it much worse.

How does a President double the national debt in less than 1 term in office? And
shows no signs of trying to rectify the problem. Sorry, but I don’t believe in
increasing taxes is the answer

It’s his mess now, and it's deliberate.

Bush and his entourage had so much more to do with
the GFC.

Bush and his entourage might have been implicate, however, illogical policies
born out of freedie and fannie combined with the Fed feeding the bubble was the
main driver that contributed to the GFC.

I might not agree with everything you and Bandicoot have posted, but
commonsense tells me that it stinks, & it’s deliberate.

 

[konkon]

Yes he inherited a ‘mess’, but along the way he has made it much worse.

How does a President double the national debt in less than 1 term in office? And
shows no signs of trying to rectify the problem. Sorry, but I don’t believe in
increasing taxes is the answer

It’s his mess now, and it's deliberate.



Bush and his entourage might have been implicate, however, illogical policies
born out of freedie and fannie combined with the Fed feeding the bubble was the
main driver that contributed to the GFC.

I might not agree with everything you and Bandicoot have posted, but
commonsense tells me that it stinks, & it’s deliberate.

I think increasing wages (the minimum wage especially in the private sector, of around 25%) and not increasing taxes is the right move. Just reset the economy.

I am watching something right now on Goldman Sachs on CNBC. They seem to be paying Goldman out (criticising them) about the way they operated. Too right!

How deliberate is what is happening in the US? Does everyone believe in the 'united' in the United States? I'm sure most (nearly all) do. But I don't believe the so called NWO do. A part of this shadow organisation must operate outside of the US.

I don't see this happening but, I wonder if some states in the US might eventually want to break-away from the unity even if it's in the monetary sense; by legally creating and using their own currency. I hear this is occurring in some areas already. Not really a good idea though.

 

[tothemax6]

I think increasing wages (the minimum wage especially in the private sector, of around 25%) and not increasing taxes is the right move. Just reset the economy.

Really. Just 'reset the economy'.

Konkon, where exactly did your economics education come from? I can see no logical cohesion between any of your sentences.
You are to coherent, correct economics as a mosh pit is to a ballet.

I suggest you read Hazlitts 'economics in one lesson'.

 

[konkon]

Really. Just 'reset the economy'.

Konkon, where exactly did your economics education come from? I can see no logical cohesion between any of your sentences.
You are to coherent, correct economics as a mosh pit is to a ballet.

I suggest you read Hazlitts 'economics in one lesson'.

Really? Where were all the academics and their text books before the GFC? Most are still trying to pigeon-hole their beliefs and theories and while they're at it, everything else too.

I can jump from one position to the next and why should I structure statements in a paragraph (on a forum) with a premise leading to a conclusion, every single time? It doesn't have to be this way. Some of my previous posts suggest a possible restructure of the US economy and it may involve a reset of the currency. Maybe. But we're all just speculating.

Best to stick to your text books and their 'logical' cohesion. They will tell you about the real world and what might come next.

 

[tothemax6]

Best to stick to your text books and their 'logical' cohesion. They will tell you about the real world and what might come next.

They do, so long as you pick the right textbooks. One has to have a theoretical foundation, upon which to base ones 'real world' insight, yes?

This guy for instance, has been educated by reading quality economics from the likes of Hazlitt and von Mises. It allowed him to clearly see the sub-prime crisis approaching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj8rMwdQf6k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU4o

 

[konkon]

They do, so long as you pick the right textbooks. One has to have a theoretical foundation, upon which to base ones 'real world' insight, yes?

This guy for instance, has been educated by reading quality economics from the likes of Hazlitt and von Mises. It allowed him to clearly see the sub-prime crisis approaching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj8rMwdQf6k

But I did see a crash coming even as early as 2007; I still have the correspondence between friends and I, and I saved these on my other computer literally telling them to get out of the markets back then. The numerous telephone calls were not recorded by me though, but they all remember them. I was selling my own stock August of 2007 after the up-tick rule was lifted in the US. Now did I need to read about so-called quality economics then? No. There are always opposing views by scholars anyway and like I suggested before, they can pigeon-hole their views as much as they like. It doesn't matter to me. I'll pick what ever I see as useful whether it be on a finance 'show' or an article. My day job etc doesn't allow me the chance to follow or read about economics like a scholar might. I won't change my methods either as I see advantages to the way I think and go about things.

Now how about the large percentage of so called experts that missed the GFC, even after the clear warnings in 2007 (and before)? Economists on 'shows' like CNBC and Bloomberg got it wrong repeatedly and so did large corporations that kept piling large borrowed funds into risky markets.

I guess you and all those 'experts' can trade and formulate opinions any way you like. It makes no difference to me. I'll keep doing it my way. Hope that's alright with you?