America is Going to Crash Big Time

reply to post by Tardacus


I have provided a brief explanation of why states invest in gold above, it is quite a simplistic explanation.

The idea of food as a commodity is feasible but if we are just talking about economics it would never come to that. What is more likely that all states would default and start over in a worst case scenario then they would all return to the Gold standard, it would probably cause a few wars and what not but the existence of paper money would and probably will always exist.

reply to post by Panic2k11

The processed had really been on the cards before, it started with the moves of the US industry to Mexico and Latin America. The results were pretty obvious then, I find it idiotic that some still say that the opening the markets to China was to permit a social reform there...

I understand you view regarding the energy issue but global peak oil is now it was mostly unplanned and it has yet to be felt, but some alternatives makes the issue less dramatic (there will be changes, especially in the flow of merchandise and some artificial distortions) but for the next 20-50 years I do not see much changing (beyond a continual rise in price). I would soon worry about food prices and potable water issues than energy. But yeah that could be a factor but not the main motivation...

Peak oil was understood way back in 1970. Moving manufacturing to Mexico and China was the result of that understanding. OPEC formation and the consequent rise in oil prices was to speed up the search for alternate energy sources before peak oil hit. Of course, the hope then was that something would be discovered to replace oil and hence the US and other Western economies were allowed to continue to grow despite rapid deindustriailisation.

What is being implemented now, is Plan B, if we hit peak oil without an alternative in place.

I don't agree with this, the UN is mostly a geopolitical tool of the US and old great nations to enforce international law that secures their interests (not the interests of all) if the US collapses the UN will collapse also. Your idea for maintaining security and stability provided from the global economy is an interesting idea nevertheless, but such a thing would have to be very well timed to be pulled out and I doubt that the UN can be called to act in such a coordinated way in a moment of crisis that will permit avoiding unilateral actions by the strongest members.

Note that the US "world policing costs" are in policing its own interests (well at least of the 1% that controls government).

I believe that the disagreement stems from a mistaken assumption that those that control the US government all necessarily reside within the borders of the US. Also a collapse of the US economy will not mean a collapse of the US military might, when the same is financed from outside.

When I said the UN will control, I meant the discussions will be conducted at the UN and no justifications of US national security interests need be offered for those actions. They will be completely outside the control of the US Congress, since even the funding for those operations will come from outside and not the US government's internal revenue. This is nothing new or revolutionary. Most UN peace-keeping operations already operate under the same terms. The UN has a budget for different peace-keeping operations (the budget coming from the contributions of the member states) and those countries willing to spare their troops for the operations do so and get paid the amount budgeted for it.

Remember, Gulf War I was financed by a huge number of countries and according to some estimates the external finances exceeded US costs.

At the moment the US navy by its very presence on the high seas ensures safe passage for merchant vessels. In other words, all the merchant vessels regardless of country enjoy the safety of high seas provided by the US navy. US Navy will simply get paid for doing the same. Have you noticed the increasing incidents of piracy on the high seas of late? These are being allowed to happen to justify the payments in future for preventing similar incidents on a large scale. Safety of the high seas is an absolute must for global trade.

Originally posted by dave_welch
Can someone explain why buying gold/silver/other precious metals would ever be a good idea if an economical collapse is imminent? You can't eat or wear it, don't know why you would hunt for it (assuming werewolves are myth), so why would anyone want to barter for it?


By the way, these are serious questions, I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that.

Precious metals were historically used as units of monetary exchange because

1. They are rare
   
2. They do not degrade under normal conditions
   
3. They are used in jewellery (for the above two reasons) and hence hold an intrinsic value
   

When other units of monetary exchange lose their value these can be expected to resume their historical role. In other words, you can expect to exchange your gold/silver for other things you value, like food, that another has. Of course, they are useless unless a large percentage of people believe them to be of intrinsic value and exchange other things of value for them.

reply to post by Tardacus


It depends on how bad it will get, I would certainly not trade for gold myself if no alternative economic system was in place that would recognize it.

If you do that, abolish income tax and put a tax on purchased good other than rent, food and utilities you would make things worse. To make up for the reduction in taxation incomes from income tax the government would need to massively increase the value added tax on goods making them more expensive which would reduce the ability of consumers to pay for these goods even if they are getting more pay through less tax. Also by excluding food, rents (and I assume mortgages as well) and utilities you are taking out the three biggest means of VAT revenue so your plan would not work.

False premise.

Eliminating the huge burden that the income tax places on the productive members of society would create a huge *stimulus* to the economy (people would be much more willing to start small businesses or expand, large companies too, and many other things), which in turn would create a huge *increase* in tax revenues. It is simple math. I'd rather have 1% of a million people's efforts, than 50% of 1000.

This was proven when Reagan did it - he dramatically reduced the income tax rates, and revenues went up - as did charitable contributions (when people have more, they give more) - and no, I'm not a Reagan worshipper. Spending also increased dramatically under his watch, which is why we didn't reap the benefits of the tax cuts, so the trick is to also *reduce spending* at the same time as eliminating the income tax, and I'd start with eliminating all of the non-constitutional crap the government spends money on now (eliminate the non-constitutional Depts of Energy, Commerce, Education, etc etc ad nauseum), bring the troops home and end the 'war on terror', end the 'war on drugs' and tax it, turning a huge expense into huge revenues).

"Require all U.S. Companies and Corporations to bank inside the USA. No more hiding money offshore, no more offshore call center either"

Again another reasonable idea but very flawed, this would lead to all businesses eventually moving outside of America which would only be compounded by your idea of increasing VAT.

Better would be to simply require any company that sells products in the USA to abide by all of the same rules and regulations (including but not limited to minimum wage laws, environmental laws, etc) that companies based in the USA have to abide by. The hard part of this (as with anything) would be enforcement...

reply to post by tanstaafl


It is not a false premise atoll I am looking at what would happen to the state as a whole rather than just the individual

If you abolish all income tax and put an increase in value added tax on products other than rent, food and utilities the government would be out of pocket. Say it was to happen, it might make the individual better off but it would make the state worse off and the overall economy would suffer as it whole. Say for arguments sake you put a 10% VAT on top of all products other than utilities, food and rent (including mortgages) by excluding those three you have cut off a massive source of potential revenue. Now the only taxation revenue form citizens would come from what they pay on top of the products they buy (other than food) while they may have slightly more in their pay packets this would not necessarily mean they are going to go out and buy a new car because it now costs 10% more. When you take into account inflation then you could have a much bigger problem, it may add another 5% on top of that cost or even more. Then it also increases the cost to people to pay for goods who don’t have a job pushing them further into poverty and increasing their reliance on the state.

The result would be that the government would not be able to make up the loss in taxation form an abolishment of income tax for VAT alone. As a result there would be less money for the state to use to pay of its debts and maintain services which would undermine the economy. The solutions would be to increase borrowing but it would be at higher rates as the state’s ability to pay off the debt is limited with a taxation deficit and as such inflation would rise again.

When Regan done it he don’t it in a very different American economy. Nobody likes paying taxes but they are needed in times of economic hardship, when the state is struggling financially the last thing you want to do is cut of its big source of taxation in come.

Also what you are talking about is very specific to the American economy, which is only part of the problem the global economy is what really needs to be fixed.

reply to post by Observor


I fallow you on almost every aspect but in the causes I disagree that all those we already talked about would justify collapsing the system if as you predicate they have a stake in it (they care about the outcome and that they are jocking to a specific end game), I do not believe that as is the system can undergo a controlled collapse, even worst the longer it is left into this perilous downfall the bigger the chances something unexpected happens.

I agree that there are forces working to create controlled events, but those events still fallow the old pattern of the US neocons and the expansion of the Anglo-American interests, that benefit the 1% and if anything are contributing to the continual undermining of the social fabric of the US mostly due to the economic costs of those actions (We have yet to see some large anti-war movement), with the added risk of putting the US under increasingly danger of reprisals and escalation of blowbacks.

I fail to see a concrete pattern that benefits the present power structure, even if I would agree to your vialed implication, that the power is now mostly in the hands of a small group of economic groups that may (or may not be from outside of the US). Here we start to enter into speculation, since I doubt that any power centered outside of the US would get primacy in what we see, some influence sure, but not a command and control structure.

I don't see the Western economies rapid deindustrialization as a planed event but as a response of the economic agents to the model of globalization that was pushed by the US. I absolutely think that Europe was dragged into this mess, especially due to corruption in a mirroring of the political evolution of the US. Note that presidents as a product was largely a new trend that was imported from the US, of course that political power was already corrupt but the corporatization and the increasing influence of economic interests in the shaping of policy is mostly a recent development in Europe (last 10-15 years) and a direct result of the fall of the Soviet block.

I doubt that the US military complex could be co-opted into any UN control structure, some private sector probably but the pentagon could never be put outside of the existing control structure of the US congress and the President (especially in actions against their wishes), a military coup probably but that would not solve the funding issue.

Yes there will be a crash. Therefore society's best defense will be to push the food supply chain now while it is running toward stocking up personal stores. They will not need to push us at gunpoint onto the FEMA trains. Most will go of their own accord for something to eat, once the store shelves have been stripped bare and the on-average of two weeks worth of food that most people keep around has been gone for a while.

Take it from the best. Kissinger said, 'you control nations with oil. You control people with food.' The Evil One knows what he is talking about.

Spend a couple hundred bucks now for peace of mind, a half dozen 20 pound bags of rice, half as much beans, and boxes of powdered milk. There is a reason they are demonizing the "preppers." Think about it: how does it harm anyone to store food? The answer is it breaks dependency on the grid, the one we have now and the one which will replace it. The banksters hate that.

They know if we are not spending all our time looking for something to eat, we will be organizing against them.

In this broadcast of the Cybertribe News Network, a North Carolina Police Lieutenant calls in to give his first hand knowledge of preparations being made within his own department to train and prepare for martial law in the United States, possibly in the coming year.

Many similar reports are starting to trickle in from all across the country, through various independent media resources and even organizations like Oath Keepers.



The consensus is that a major economic event is expected, and that it will be used to provide cover for the institution of draconian policies being readied behind the curtain.

www.secretsofthefed.com...

Originally posted by RoninMD
In this broadcast of the Cybertribe News Network, a North Carolina Police Lieutenant calls in to give his first hand knowledge of preparations being made within his own department to train and prepare for martial law in the United States, possibly in the coming year.

Many similar reports are starting to trickle in from all across the country, through various independent media resources and even organizations like Oath Keepers.



The consensus is that a major economic event is expected, and that it will be used to provide cover for the institution of draconian policies being readied behind the curtain.

www.secretsofthefed.com...

Oath Keepers would know. many members are active duty LE. They also might save this country yet.

reply to post by manmental

What a crock - have you been living buried in the sand. Have seen the countries that their citizens are fighting their government with sticks and stones. They should be so lucky to be able to defend themselves. Like I said - what a crock of a statement.

American's this just isnt a title, it a an anointment. The Darkness will be purged, and the anointed will come together and quickly reboot America. There will be less people and lots of resources. Now in the hands of givers and not takers.

The rich, the bankers, Money handlers will sink the ship before handing it over to another..Getting rid of these people will be easy... afterwards... (well the ones that have yet to jump off a bridge. )

the sad part is; it always takes hardship to get people's head screwed back in the right direction.

reply to post by manmental


The New World Order needs more ''useful'' Idiots like you ,i suggest you sign up

Originally posted by cornucopia
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts thinks there is "an impending collapse of the exchange value," and the U.S. dollar could unexpectedly plunge in buying power. Dr. Roberts contends, "All of a sudden, people walk into Walmart, as usual, and they think they've walked into Neiman Marcus." Dr. Roberts says there are no quick fixes to the bulging debt because "there's no way to close this deficit when corporations are moving the tax base off-shore." Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

www.youtube.com...

i'm shocked too that this economy is going...

keep pumping out the money, lol...

money is an illusion...

paper with ink on it..

lol


numbers on a computer screen...

This doctor must not have hisDoctorate in economics! We're at 100% debt to GDP with an economy growing faster than the debt, percentage wise. On top of that, we're improving vs most other currencies. This guy is either ignorant, insane, or just a liar.

Doing sll they csn to get u into gold st the top

I don't think a sudden collapse will happen. There's a big difference between post WWI Germany and Zimbabwe, and the United States. There is a world economy deeply dependent on US consumerism. The US goes under and everyone is going with it, I'm sorry.

I think it will be more gradual of a change, where you see the modern economic model slowly degrade over time as people begin to seek alternative lifestyles. This can't go on forever is what I'm getting at. Perhaps we'll see the modern economic model continue by accommodating environmental damage as a sector for profit, but we would have to change world views from a materialistic perspective to an environmental perspective, and we're pretty far into this whole thing already so I don't really know about that.

I feel like the collapse of the US is the collapse of the lifestyle everyone has. Of working to make money so that you can pay your bills and live your life. It would just completely change things for everyone in the world if the US went under. That's why I think it'll be gradual, where people begin to seek alternatives to a self destructive lifestyle.

Maybe this is why the IRS is farting around with getting the tax return season off the ground?

Originally posted by Observor
reply to post by manmental

 

If you are gloating about the destruction of the USA/its economy, you may be little early.

The list of tricks remaining in the book is not empty. The collapse of the US$ may be followed by an introduction of a global trading currency, on whose creation and supply the USA may have as much control as it has on the US$ today. While the US economy will suffer huge losses, it can still be salvaged if the US has preferential access to the new global trading currency to be created.

I don't see any scenario where the USA would have as much control over a global currency as they have over the US$. The whole reason for the introduction of a global trading currency would be because of the US's incompetence managing their own currency. No way the world would make that mistake again. At the end of the day, it'll come down to who has the most gold. China has been buying up gold left and right. Could the US stand up to an audit of Fort Knox?

Originally posted by dogstar23

This doctor must not have hisDoctorate in economics! We're at 100% debt to GDP with an economy growing faster than the debt, percentage wise. On top of that, we're improving vs most other currencies. This guy is either ignorant, insane, or just a liar.

Do you have a doctorate in economics? Our real GDP (GDP adjusted for inflation) growth rate in 2011 was 1.8%. And the increase in debt? 9%. In 2012 real GDP increased a respectable 3%, but that still isn't even close to the debt growth rate of 8%.

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by Panic2k11

 

Yours is the best, succinct and honest appraisal of our current situation...

Americans better start learning how to live in a 3rd world country, that's where our gov't has been leading us for decades.

The whole world will be 3rd world countries in the endgame.

The evidence is all around us. For most of the middle class it's beating us over the head financially, yet they elect this guy again? But hey, some folks made a quick buck. So what if we are accelerating into the world's largest global bankruptcy in all of history? It's going to be just like 2008 again, isn't it? Bernanke isn't out of paper yet! This time the financial implosion will be a 10 instead of a 7 on the Richter Scale. As Dr. Roberts said, it could happen overnight. Spin the wheel, when will they lose confidence in the dollar? $20 trillion in debt, $30 trillion in debt, or is it already happening?