reply to post by Cloudsinthesky
Do you have any comments about what he has put on his web-site?
Well, he has had the countdown of death leading up to February 9th for over a month, so his "I told you so" is obviously in reference to his
Nostradamus predictions which he says were made possible as a result of the advances of the internet (not to mention his background in economics and
law). But saying 6 for 6 underneath this message is only right if you just count the number of times you have been spot on
I don't think he has
to be 100% correct, though, so his incorrect assumptions haven't really bothered me so much. And for sure, if the market nose dives next week (more
than likely) he will be all over the net and his 720 dollar a year subscription charge will probably be a lot more popular.
I know I'm not paying, though. He admitted not knowing jack about retail--and to me, that means he also doesn't know jack about selling his blog
entries at a reasonable price. And right now, he seems to be kind of confused. If he starts HIDING all his entries behind a login given to those who
paid, and he reveals it only to those who pay, he will lose his audience completely. And who the hell is going to plunk down 720 bucks when they're
afraid they won't be able to buy food by the end of the year? Why, for instance, say there is only '12 shopping days left' and then say 'give me 2
dollars a day'? Massive unemployment, the death of the dollar...yet still charge 720 bucks a year? It makes absolutely no sense. I think this has
more to do with his inexperience in 'retail'...or he is used to charging people a hell of a lot of money while he sues the medicare industry for
fraud. So the only people who can afford it are already people who have 720 bucks a year to spend--e.g. the rich. In that case, the rich stay 'rich'
because they have insider knowledge from Reinhardt....but he claims he is doing this to create a 'peasant revolt.'
So now he seems torn. And, in my opinion, he should be, because he's made a mistake here. Or he's taking money from people he shouldn't.
What he is really trying to do, however--which is a good thing--is change people's world view. Personally I think he was burned somehow by Enron (or
deeply involved with it) as he has bragged that he knows more about it than Dick Cheney. Not sure if that is raging obsession...or insider knowledge.
But his rebranding of history through the eyes of Enron, it seems a lot like obsession.
At one stage he said it sucks that you have to predict market movements just so you can change people's perceptions on how the world works. And how
does it work? By failing. Mass failure. Governments fail their people, kings fail their people, and the media is there to pretend that government is
looking out for the people's best interest, when it is there ONLY for the king's best interest. And what fills the king's coffers? Fraud. Through
Like, right now, this weekend, watch these headlines:
'Tentative Deal Reached'
'Just About There'
'Oops! Hidden Pork! One more Minute...'
'One or Two More Signatures'
'Oops! Hold on...Gotta Fix This Clause...'
'Signatures Are Right About Signed'
Monday: 'Oh no! It Totally Failed! Jesus Someone Pull Some Lever Somewhere!'
They are doing it to freak out the market place. And those who shorted the market get what they wanted.
I would not have been able to see this version of reality without Reinhardt's blogs. But at the same time....there are other versions of reality
It's what makes me love conspiracies and the paranormal in the first place.