We need wealth destruction. Not in the real sense, I don't mean destruction of actual assets, but of wealth NUMBER destruction. All of the numbers need to be cut 50-75%. If it could be an across-the-board change, there'd be no real cut in anyone's living standards, as ratios wouldn't necessarily have to be altered. Jeff Bezo's would STILL be the richest man in the world, just at a much lower level. But he'd STILL be able to buy the biggest, bestest house on the planet, his granite countertops and inground pool would just cost less.
But when you start artificially enlarging the numbers to 'pump up' wealth, it works the opposite way, in that those in the bottom half can't keep up with the inflating numbers, and fall behind.
Think of the saying "A rising tide lifts all boats.", and then imagine how that would play out if half of the boats were firmly ANCHORED at their current level when that tide rolls in...they won't be 'lifted', they'll be swamped.
Well, that is what has happened. The tide did come in, but half the boats in the harbor were unable to 'lift' because of all the anchors, like debt, keeping them in place...https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-06/market-earthquake-coming-icahn-warns-lot-people-will-pay-price-1929?sort_by=thread&sort_order=ASC&items_per_page=50&page=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1
........
BrigstockBoy MusicIsYou Feb 6, 2018 3:05 PM Permalink
Is it that or does he benefit from special information (and reputation) such that his 'bets' aren't really subject to the odds that others might face in the casino?
During the financial crisis, he was a profiteer, earning huge returns from the nearly extortionate deals with Goldman Sachs, General Electric and Bank of America. Were these agreements subject to the financial performance of these firms or did Buffett know the Federal Government (and American taxpayers) were going to be forced to step up? All three were given massive bailouts.
Who can forget Hank Paulson seeking personal immunity (i.e., Section 8) while reportedly on bended knee before Pelosi to beg for the bailout package.
I am Groot Feb 6, 2018 2:22 PM Permalink
I've been saying this like a broken record, buy physical gold and ammo. The only two currencies that matter or that will matter in the future.
Markets are being manipulated and artificially inflated. Stocks are selling for 100+ times what companies are worth. It's a total scam. Companies inflate their stock, sell it , then the companies CEO's and board members take huge cuts. Then when the markets tanks, the shareholders are left holding worthless stock certificates that are worth less than used tampons. It's a great scam.
Meanwhile, gold is being held down and manipulated with the Fed's foot on it's neck. Gold has barely fluctuated above $1300 in a long time.
1936ryer Feb 6, 2018 3:57 PM Permalink
It is not passive investing that is responsible for this bubble. We have never gotten out of the stagflation from the 1970's, all we have gotten is lower and lower interest rates and this has led to an economy that is completely financialized. Money is made by borrowing and specualting on housing, stock, bonds -- not by actually creating anything of value. Middle class worker hasn't gotten a wage increase since 1970's, just given more credit to live a live style he can no longer afford. Middle class has no savings and thinks they will retire on the equity in their homes, pension funds have been purposely underfunded, it will be a nightmare and there is one group of individuals that needs to be held accountable Central BAnkers and their partners in crime Wall Street private equity and hedge funds -- these are the destroyers of the world. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-06/market-earthquake-coming-icahn-warns-lot-people-will-pay-price-1929?items_per_page=50&sort_by=thread&sort_order=ASC&page=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C2
................................................................................................................................................
9-21-08 But Mr. Paulson insists that he wants a “clean” plan. in this context, means a taxpayer-financed bailout with no strings attached — no quid pro quo on the part of those being bailed out. Why is that a good thing? Add to this the fact that Mr. Paulson is also demanding dictatorial authority, plus
I’m aware that Congress is under enormous pressure to agree to the Paulson plan in the next few days, with at most a few modifications that make it slightly less bad. Basically, after having spent a year and a half telling everyone that things were under control, the Bush administration says that the sky is falling, and that to save the world we have to do exactly what it says now now now.
But I’d urge Congress to pause for a minute, take a deep breath, and try to seriously rework the structure of the plan, making it a plan that addresses the real problem. Don’t let yourself be railroaded — if this plan goes through in anything like its current form, we’ll all be very sorry in the not-too-distant future. -Krugman http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/opinion/22krugman.html
................................................................................................................................................
10-7-14 The big banks, on the other hand, were virtually all neck deep in the mortgage sludge that they had been warehousing, packaging and selling to investors. That changed things radically. When Citi's financial problems got so serious that other banks wouldn't lend to it and it had to be rescued, Paulson and his colleagues at the Fed feared that imposing harsh terms—eminently justified on moral-hazard grounds—would encourage short-sellers on Wall Street to attack the stocks of other big banks. And that, in turn, could have led to a generalized collapse.
Paulson didn't say right out that the banks were untouchable, but that was clearly what he meant. Because of the risk of creating a domino effect, he and other regulators had to go easy on the likes of Citi and Bank of America. Paulson said that he advocated “fairness to the extent you can have fairness,” but “to me, stability trumped moral hazard.”
This, surely, was one of the most telling admissions to have come out of the financial crisis, and it illustrates afresh why too-big-to-fail banks are an abomination. Thanks to legislation introduced by the Obama Administration, the federal government now has the legal power to wind up stricken mega-banks and other big financial institutions, supposedly at no cost to the taxpayer. But that doesn't really resolve the problem. In a genuine crisis, the regulators will always be afraid that issuing a winding-up order will cause panic elsewhere. The Paulson principle will once again apply, with the need to preserve stability trumping concerns about fairness.
As long as too-big-to-fail banks are allowed to exist, they will be in a position to extort the government and the taxpayer in a crisis. The only options are to break them up, so that the failure of one of them no longer represents a systemic risk to the financial system, or to regulate them so stringently that they can never pose a public danger. Neither is an easy option, though. Cutting the banks down to size appears to be beyond the American political system. And regulation, while essential, can never be perfect. -Cassidy https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/hank-paulson-testimony-aig-bailout
(The most real option is for people to rise in awareness and sharper perspective. -r, mt. shasta)
............................................................................................................................
11-26-08 "Investment banking is not capital; it's relations and ideas."
Many businesses, Prokhorov said, were in denial about the depth of the (2008) financial crisis and the toll it will take. He urged troubled businesses, particularly those in the property sector, to cut their losses in order to ensure survival.
"They are fighting for prices. They are crazy -- there are no buyers," he said of the real estate sector. "It's not enough to keep 25 buildings and end up bankrupt. Keep five, save your core team, and at least you will receive a small cashflow."
The crisis, said Prokhorov, was hitting people at all levels of society and the government's $200 billion-plus rescue package would have only a limited effect as cash gets trapped in the banking system.
"The banks will never pass this liquidity to the real economy," he said. "If I were a banker, I would do the same. Why? Because the banks' losses are much bigger." http://mprokhorov.com/media/inthenews/90/
(Maybe he meant "because the banks' potential gains are much bigger." -r)
...............................................................................................................................................
When the news is managed by governments, as it always is and has been, the people do not have the truth. And without the truth we cannot be at the helm of our destiny.
The events and the facts themselves are the indicators of prophecy. When you put them together with the keys that God and the ascended masters have given us you will no longer be forced to accept the conclusions of leaders, pundits and the evening news.
In my book The Astrology of the Four Horsemen I predicted “the destruction, disintegration or dismantling of our armed forces.” I said that this could happen between December 16, 1990, and October 13, 1991. The most recent fulfillment of this prophecy occurred on September 27, when President Bush announced sweeping unilateral military cuts.
Bush announced that he was ordering the military to do the following: (1) withdraw our 450 Minuteman II intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) from strategic alert, (2) remove our B-52 and B-1B bombers from alert, (3) remove our short-range nuclear weapons from U.S. ships, submarines and naval aircraft, (4) destroy the short-range surface-to-surface nuclear missiles deployed in Europe and elsewhere, (5) cancel the program to develop a single-warhead mobile ICBM.
My prophecy concerning the dismantling of our armed forces had already been fulfilled by numerous other cuts in 1990 and 1991....Our alliances have already been disrupted. NATO has lost its cohesive force and the Philippines has refused to allow us to renew our base leases....
In 1990 we imported over 200 million pairs of shoes manufactured in China. This was made possible in part because George Bush renewed China’s most-favored-nation status. That’s how George Bush repays the Chinese government for the massacre in Tiananmen Square. He gives them American jobs! The middle class has always been the backbone of a stable society, and the middle class is being hurt the most by this recession....
Of greatest importance, Soviets started to replace their fleet of SS-18 MOD 4 missiles with the MOD 5. The SS-18 MOD 4 was the deadliest weapons system in the world. Each missile carries at least 10 warheads and perhaps as many as 30. With the MOD 4 alone the Soviets could target all U.S. silo-based ICBMs and nuclear submarine bases. But at great expense they developed and produced the MOD 5, which is even deadlier–it is more accurate and 20 percent larger than the MOD 4. They are currently developing the MOD 6, which is deadlier still!
The SS-18 is a first-strike weapon by definition. It has the power and accuracy needed to destroy U.S. ICBMs and other high-priority military targets. Most U.S. long-range nuclear weapons are neither powerful enough nor accurate enough to be called first-strike weapons. Remember that.
If the Soviets have no intention of launching a first strike, why are they building more first-strike weapons? We’ve got to demand that our President and Congress start asking questions like this.
..........................................................................................................................
