Seeking Alpha

Jeff Nielson's  Instablog

Jeff Nielson
Send Message
Jeff Nielson is from Canada and is a writer/editor for Bullion Bulls Canada (http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/#content). He has a personal background in law and economics. Bullion Bulls Canada provides general macro-economic and political commentary, since the precious metals markets are among... More
My company:
Bullion Bulls Canada
My blog:
  • U.S. “mass lay-offs” at RECORD high 20 comments
    Jun 25, 2009 10:16 AM

    Large-scale lay-offs in the U.S. (defined as lay-offs of 50 or greater at one time) hit the highest level since this statistic was created in 1995, according to an article from CNN. This is yet another indication that the U.S. economy is plummeting downward – with absolutely no signs of stability, let alone a “recovery”.

     

    Up to this point, the U.S. government has been very successful in duping market sheep (i.e. the “experts”) through publishing totally fraudulent monthly jobs reports. With the U.S. economy losing roughly 2 million jobs each month (see “U.S. economy to lose 20 MILLION jobs this year”), the government claimed that less than 400,000 jobs were lost in May.

     

    The fact that the unemployment rate continues soaring higher each month, that “mass lay-offs” are at record levels, and with state governments across the U.S. slashing spending to meet budget shortfalls (i.e slashing jobs) conclusively demonstrates that “official” government reports have absolutely no connection to reality.

     

    Even if this rate of decline is now linear (i.e. falling at the same rate each month), this does not imply “stability”. Jobs are being lost in the U.S. at least as fast as during the Great Depression – if not faster. To suggest that this implies “moderation” is simply stupidity, from people who have absolutely no understanding of basic arithmetic.

     

    Combine these employment numbers with falling wages, no access to (further) credit, and a belated desire by Americans to save a little money, and this is nothing short of catastrophic for U.S. retailers (see “The Death of the U.S. Consumer Economy”). This downward spiral of declining (real) spending, and massive job losses is so rapid and self-reinforcing that it would require “stimulus” spending at roughly ten times the level of Obama's puny “stimulus” package to arrest this vicious circle.

     

    At the same time, even with no real “stimulus” for the U.S. economy, the collapse in government revenues, along with massive hand-outs to the U.S. financial crime syndicate have the U.S. on pace to rack-up an annual deficit well in excess of $2 TRILLION. Thus, increasing “stimulus” to an effective level would create deficits three to four times as large as this – guaranteeing immediate hyperinflation in the U.S. (see “Rising U.S. interest rates signal hyperinflationary depression”).

     

    In trying to avoid both hyperinflation and a debt-implosion similar to the (former) Soviet Union, the U.S. government appears certain to create both. Failing to halt the downward spiral of the U.S. economy means exponential increases in government debt across the U.S. - forcing the government to “monetize” huge chunks of debt (i.e. printing new money to pretend to pay its bills). This has always been the first step on the road to hyperinflation, with few governments in history able to reverse this progression once it begins.

     

    Once hyperinflation begins to kick-in in the U.S., no foreign governments will lend the U.S. any money. Would you lend the government of Zimbabwe money – knowing that even if they paid you in full only a month later that you would lose at least 40% to 50% of what you lent (because of rapid currency depreciation)?

     

    The moment that the debt-dependent U.S. is cut off of foreign credit, then the choices are either “Zimbabwe” or immediate, national default. People who refuse to look at “the big picture”, and allow themselves to be lulled into apathy through listening to U.S. economic propaganda are setting themselves up for their own financial destruction.

     

    There is absolutely no comparison to be made between the current economic collapse in the U.S. and any other economic event of the last century – including the “Great Depression”. U.S. housing prices are falling more than three times as fast as during the worst of the Great Depression, while debt levels are at least ten times greater (for both individuals and governments).

     

    The United States currently has more than $57 TRILLION in public and private debt (see “A Tale of Two Economies – U.S. versus China”) – more than every other country in the world combined. In addition, just as tens of millions of U.S. “baby-boomers” begin to retire, the U.S. has close to $100 TRILLION in “unfunded liabilities”, with tens of trillions of those dollars supposedly being paid out to U.S. baby-boomers over the next decade.

     

    With these baby-boomers having totally inadequate retirement savings (see “U.S. Pension Crisis: the $3 TRILLION question”), when the U.S. government is forced to renege on these spending commitments, most of this huge demographic bulge will plunge into poverty – and virtually stop spending. This will be simply one more “nail in the coffin” for the U.S. retail sector.

     

    There is no U.S. “economic recovery”. There will be no U.S. “economic recovery”. Stop listening to the liars and idiots, and protect yourself from what lies ahead.

     

    Precious metals are the only asset-class with the ability to protect Americans from hyperinflation in the cost of basic necessities (i.e. food and clothing) as well as the continued depression for U.S. assets like real estate, equities, and bonds – which are currently grossly over-supplied, grossly over-valued, or both.

     

    Meanwhile, for those outside the U.S., the massive flood of liquidity into the global economy guarantees soaring inflation for years to come. The need for the rest of the world to protect against this inflationary “tidal wave” with precious metals is even more self-evident.

     

    Thanks to the desperate manipulations of the anti-precious metals cabal (i.e. bankster oligarchs), precious metals – particularly silver – are currently priced at only a fraction of their current, fair-market value. This year represents the last chance to load-up on the ultimate form of financial protection, before the Manipulators permanently lose their grip on this market in the months (weeks?) ahead.

Back To Jeff Nielson's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (20)
Track new comments
  • Right on, Jeff. "Mass layoffs" mean massive "disintermediation" 1930s style.
    25 Jun 2009, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • Author’s reply » Thanks G&D. I really get the urge to just bang my head against the walls these days. The U.S. economic propaganda is now so totally outlandish that it doesn't even qualify as PLAUSIBLE fiction.

     

    Yet most of the sheep are now so totally brainwashed that they are apparently incapable of "seeing" anything which contradicts that brainwashing.

     

    The U.S. economy is clearly in MUCH worse condition than during the Great Depression, while talking-heads spew nonsense about a "recovery"!

     

    On Jun 25 10:19 AM Graham and Dodd Investor wrote:

     

    > Right on, Jeff. "Mass layoffs" mean massive "disintermediation" 1930s
    > style.
    25 Jun 2009, 11:58 AM Reply Like
  • Author’s reply » Awake09, my sincere sympathies to yourself and all Americans who have been betrayed by your own government. However, as long as the majority of Americans (like yourself) continue to pretend you have a REAL 'democracy', and actual "choice" in your elections, you are doomed to more of the same.

     

    The whole point here is that the Obama regime is virtually IDENTICAL to the Bush regime (neither better or worse), with the ONLY difference being that Obama is a better liar than Bush was/is.

     

    The only hope for Americans to is to SCRAP your entire political system, DISSOLVE the two (thoroughly corrupt) political parties who have destroyed your country, and create an (admittedly imperfect) "democracy" similar to other Western nations - to replace your two-party fascist dictatorship.

     

    On Jun 25 01:41 PM awake09 wrote:

     

    > As long as our celebrity president makes his prime time giveaway-themed
    > pitches, bounces his girls on his knee and talks nice to Iran, we
    > are not going to change. But, soon enough the public will get what
    > it brought on itself. It's a shame that I too will pay. My home is
    > already $200,000 under water, and layoffs happen at work regularly.
    > But what good did it do to warn people last year? Nooo, they wanted
    > their funny-eared president, he's just "so cool" as one coworker
    > expressed to me. Do any of these drones EVER think for themselves,
    > or does Oprah do that for them too?
    >
    > God, flush the toilet already, it stinks in here.
    25 Jun 2009, 01:47 PM Reply Like
  • If Bush really was the same, why did the media work overtime to destroy any and everything he did? Was it a play for the left to fall in line for the next criminal? If it's all the same, why is the same media slavishly propping up this latest act? I don't see it, the reactions are too dissimilar to say they are just two peas in a pod.

     

    I now just believe the worst, and have all-but given up. My layoff is imminent and foreclosure will ensue. I believe this will happen far sooner than any political rehabilitation. You know our media-duped robotic culture-- they will do what Oprah says to do. This is a judgment on the nation, as it turned its back on the morals and limitations its fathers tried to instill.
    25 Jun 2009, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • Jeff,

     

    I have come to this realization gradually over the past 2-3 years which saddens me greatly because I am only 23, fresh out of college, and hiding in the sheltered world of graduate school. Unfortunately, I think our country is in a thoroughly unfixable situation. Can we really dissolve the two political parties? I don't think so. Would I like to, yes. It is necessary, yes. Is it going to happen? Absolutely not.

     

    So, I am left banging my head against things and contemplating moving North. We have allowed our government to lie to us for so long that they have become so powerful that the people in our country will blindly accept the most obvious fabrications (e.g. unemployment figures) even among the well-educated. It is distressing, depressing, and most of all, enraging.
    25 Jun 2009, 02:11 PM Reply Like
  • Jeff, I usually agree with you- but to think DEMOCRACY is a better choice is completely INSANE. When we actually operated as a Constitutional Republic, the country was in decent shape. Things like direct election of senators, universal suffrage, and media-accessible politicos were supposed to be Progressive Improvements. They are an unmitigated failure. The IQs of our Congress and Presidents have steadily deteriorated since around 1900- when the first Progressive Socialist Pigs arrived in DC. When states decided who could vote, usually landowning males, times were better. Don't get me wrong- women and all races should be able to vote; there is nothing sexist or racist here. BUT ONLY STAKEHOLDERS. This is the problem. When someone on the government take gets to have a say in the allocation of tax dollars, you have a major CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Social Security would not be the Third Rail, if you had to cede your voting rights to receive it...

     

    On Jun 25 01:47 PM Jeff Nielson wrote:

     

    > Awake09, my sincere sympathies to yourself and all Americans who
    > have been betrayed by your own government. However, as long as the
    > majority of Americans (like yourself) continue to pretend you have
    > a REAL 'democracy', and actual "choice" in your elections, you are
    > doomed to more of the same.
    >
    > The whole point here is that the Obama regime is virtually IDENTICAL
    > to the Bush regime (neither better or worse), with the ONLY difference
    > being that Obama is a better liar than Bush was/is.
    >
    > The only hope for Americans to is to SCRAP your entire political
    > system, DISSOLVE the two (thoroughly corrupt) political parties who
    > have destroyed your country, and create an (admittedly imperfect)
    > "democracy" similar to other Western nations - to replace your two-party
    > fascist dictatorship.
    25 Jun 2009, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • Author’s reply » Whippet, now we're hitting on another one of my pet peeves: a deficient electorate. It's universally accepted that we need a license to DRIVE - because the alternative is road-carnage.

     

    Virtually all members of a society are "stakeholders" in one way or another. But when you allow people to vote without any requirement for them to demonstrate ANY comprehension of the issues, then the result is automatic: the best liar wins.

     

    Requiring voting licenses, even if the bar is set very low would automatically remove most of the idiots and the totally apathetic. With even a semi-informed electorate, these circuses we call 'elections' would be replaced with more issues-oriented contests - rather than sleaze-fests.

     

    On Jun 25 02:48 PM Whippet wrote:
    25 Jun 2009, 07:55 PM Reply Like
  • With billions of dollars of Porkulus money going to ACORN and its allies, we'll continue to have not only uneducated voters but more and more DEAD voters on the rolls. While I agree all members of society are "stakeholders", there is a difference between jobless-Section 8-dwelling-food-stamp-... and taxpayers. It's like having your elementary school kids participate in financial decisions because they receive an allowance. No, it's far worse than that. I do think some sort of "voter's license" is a good idea, but we'd have better luck simply eliminating gubmint transfer payment recipients from the rolls. With exceptions, like veterans.
    Neither will ever happen, of course- we're closer to having aliens vote and deferring to the United Nations on all matters of import. The Republic has died a death from a thousand cuts.
    26 Jun 2009, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • Jeff, what are you talking about? Didn't you watch CNBC last night? Dennis Kneale said the recession ENDED yesterday. Man with that call and Cramer's call of a housing bottom last week, can't you see that things are all good now?
    26 Jun 2009, 05:55 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks Jeff, I understand where you're coming from now, as a card carrying Precious Metals Advocate.
    26 Jun 2009, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • Do you think electing McCain or anyone else would have made a difference? GW Bush was president when the USA began falling apart. I don't see Obama as the solution, nor do I blame him for the US fall.

     

    On Jun 25 01:41 PM awake09 wrote:

     

    > As long as our celebrity president makes his prime time giveaway-themed
    > pitches, bounces his girls on his knee and talks nice to Iran, we
    > are not going to change. But, soon enough the public will get what
    > it brought on itself. It's a shame that I too will pay. My home is
    > already $200,000 under water, and layoffs happen at work regularly.
    > But what good did it do to warn people last year? Nooo, they wanted
    > their funny-eared president, he's just "so cool" as one coworker
    > expressed to me. Do any of these drones EVER think for themselves,
    > or does Oprah do that for them too?
    >
    > God, flush the toilet already, it stinks in here.
    27 Jun 2009, 09:09 AM Reply Like
  • Not a troll, just curious why you're so sure hyperinflation is in the future. I know a guy (who knows a guy...) who says that deflation is actually more likely for the coming decade. I acknowledge the experts touting that line are pulling their numbers from the official statistics. But I wonder if your stats (20 million) will affect which way the ecomony will go in the toilet (deflation vs. inflation)?

     

    Anyway, I hope it'll be deflation. It's great for those that have savings and not so much for those with debt. And I want the economy to shrink a bit too; I think the US has gotten a bit too big for its britches.
    27 Jun 2009, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • From our Declaration of Independence: That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

     

    On Jun 25 02:48 PM Whippet wrote:

     

    > Jeff, I usually agree with you- but to think DEMOCRACY is a better
    > choice is completely INSANE. When we actually operated as a Constitutional
    > Republic, the country was in decent shape. Things like direct election
    > of senators, universal suffrage, and media-accessible politicos were
    > supposed to be Progressive Improvements. They are an unmitigated
    > failure. The IQs of our Congress and Presidents have steadily deteriorated
    > since around 1900- when the first Progressive Socialist Pigs arrived
    > in DC. When states decided who could vote, usually landowning males,
    > times were better. Don't get me wrong- women and all races should
    > be able to vote; there is nothing sexist or racist here. BUT ONLY
    > STAKEHOLDERS. This is the problem. When someone on the government
    > take gets to have a say in the allocation of tax dollars, you have
    > a major CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Social Security would not be the Third
    > Rail, if you had to cede your voting rights to receive it...
    27 Jun 2009, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • Although I agree with the sad state of affairs re: the US economy, I fail to see the ultimate wisdom in precious metals. A far better solution would be to invest in self-sufficiency: power, food, etc. Gold may have a quite limited value of exchange in a state of total chaos. Plus, if things don't go down the crapper, you still receive real value for your investment by reducing/eliminating utility and food bills.
    27 Jun 2009, 08:16 PM Reply Like
  • Both/and.

     

    One needs to have overlapping levels of preparedness. Paper investments that anticipate a "normal" future. Metals-in-hand for dollar disintegration. The ability and knowledge to grow your own food, regardless (just read up on the nutritional value of commodity agriculture). The lead to defend your loved ones. The means to produce electricity, or at the very least a manual pump to access water.

     

    Hope for the best. Expect the worst.

     

    On Jun 27 08:16 PM mrottersman wrote:

     

    > Although I agree with the sad state of affairs re: the US economy,
    > I fail to see the ultimate wisdom in precious metals. A far better
    > solution would be to invest in self-sufficiency: power, food, etc.
    > Gold may have a quite limited value of exchange in a state of total
    > chaos. Plus, if things don't go down the crapper, you still receive
    > real value for your investment by reducing/eliminating utility and
    > food bills.
    29 Jun 2009, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • I think the gov't wants hyper inflation. If the dollar is only worth ten cents, then the acculated 15 Trillion in debt is only 1.5T in today's money, so they can start the party all over again....
    30 Jun 2009, 04:46 PM Reply Like
  • Whippet - Only tax payers should be allowed to vote ( not neccesarily land owners). One of the reasons land owners were the only ones allowed to vote is so that people couldn't migrate over to districts and just vote themselves benfits ... now look at us. Why should people who pay nothing into the system have a say in who and how to run the system? You obviously see the byproduct. A politican promising to take money/resources from the few, to give to the many. The guy that promises the most stuff to the most people wins ( in our case Obama).

     

    If you are 18 and get sent to Vietnam ... then you are still a tax payer.

     

    If you are a 19 year old college student, paid for by ma and pa and never worked a day in your life, never paid a cent more in the system then you take out... you do not deserve to vote. These newbies get swept up by celebrity and catchy phrases like " hope and change". That's not say say these people won't change over time... Very often they start paying taxes, see that the've been lied to and they just aren't so liberal anymore... Voting yourself other people's money is fine for them once you are a receiver, but not as fun when you are a payer.
    2 Jul 2009, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • Wow, "billions" going to ACORN?
    Um, what color is the sky on your planet? If you can manage to twist your brain into thinking that 9 months of Obama has somhow created all these problems, I wish you luck.
    No, this mess took 20+ years and true bi-partisan cooperation to bring about.
    You might say that the Founding Fathers had a hand in it, they set up a system that made sure that the status quo was preserved (their status quo, as rich farmers, that is...). 2 Senators from each state? and now 60 votes required to avoid a filibuster? That means podunk states like Wyoming and Oklahoma (not exactly bastions of higher thinking) can team up and control the nation. So less than 20% of the population controls our destiny. These are people who don't even believe in evolution, fer chrissakes, how are they supposed to manage things like global financial systems...

     

    On Jun 26 09:20 AM Whippet wrote:

     

    > With billions of dollars of Porkulus money going to ACORN and its
    > allies, we'll continue to have not only uneducated voters but more
    > and more DEAD voters on the rolls. While I agree all members of society
    > are "stakeholders", there is a difference between jobless-Section
    > 8-dwelling-food-stamp-... and taxpayers. It's like having your elementary
    > school kids participate in financial decisions because they receive
    > an allowance. No, it's far worse than that. I do think some sort
    > of "voter's license" is a good idea, but we'd have better luck simply
    > eliminating gubmint transfer payment recipients from the rolls. With
    > exceptions, like veterans.
    > Neither will ever happen, of course- we're closer to having aliens
    > vote and deferring to the United Nations on all matters of import.
    > The Republic has died a death from a thousand cuts.
    27 Sep 2009, 04:36 PM Reply Like
  • I'd rather have Progressives, who actually care about people, than greedy Republicans who only care about their pocketbooks. Just look at the town halls where people in wheelchairs and people who are dying are booed.

     

    As for our economy, the average American knows it is in shambles. These jobs are not coming back. And the government has no real plans for dealing with our many problems--other than helping Wall Street find new ways to screw us. The answer is to not play the stock market but put your money into something of real value.

     

    On Jun 25 02:48 PM Whippet wrote:

     

    > Jeff, I usually agree with you- but to think DEMOCRACY is a better
    > choice is completely INSANE. When we actually operated as a Constitutional
    > Republic, the country was in decent shape. Things like direct election
    > of senators, universal suffrage, and media-accessible politicos were
    > supposed to be Progressive Improvements. They are an unmitigated
    > failure. The IQs of our Congress and Presidents have steadily deteriorated
    > since around 1900- when the first Progressive Socialist Pigs arrived
    > in DC. When states decided who could vote, usually landowning males,
    > times were better. Don't get me wrong- women and all races should
    > be able to vote; there is nothing sexist or racist here. BUT ONLY
    > STAKEHOLDERS. This is the problem. When someone on the government
    > take gets to have a say in the allocation of tax dollars, you have
    > a major CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Social Security would not be the Third
    > Rail, if you had to cede your voting rights to receive it...
    1 Oct 2009, 10:41 AM Reply Like
  • Hello Jeff,

     

    I hope you can and don't mind answering the following questions.

     

    Why do we need to be lent money if we can just create it?

     

    Whats 'real' spending?

     

    How would more stimulus spending 'fix' the economic problem we currently face?

     

    Wouldn't more stimulus spending lead to inflation?

     

    Whats 'real' stimulus?

     

    Are you referring to the fact that you think a bulkier stimulus would fix the economic problem?

     

    Could you explain this paragraph?
    "At the same time, even with no real “stimulus” for the U.S. economy, the collapse in government revenues, along with massive hand-outs to the U.S. financial crime syndicate have the U.S. on pace to rack-up an annual deficit well in excess of $2 TRILLION. Thus, increasing “stimulus” to an effective level would create deficits three to four times as large as this – guaranteeing immediate hyperinflation in the U.S. (see “Rising U.S. interest rates signal hyperinflationary depression”)."

     

    I understand the next paragraph in reference to inflation. The more money you print the more inflation you will have because the purchasing power of the money in circulation diminishes. Right?

     

    I don't understand this paragraph either.
    "Once hyperinflation begins to kick-in in the U.S., no foreign governments will lend the U.S. any money. Would you lend the government of Zimbabwe money – knowing that even if they paid you in full only a month later that you would lose at least 40% to 50% of what you lent (because of rapid currency depreciation)?"
    What do you mean by rapid currency deprecation?

     

    In the next paragraph what is foreign credit? Is it money lent from other countries with interest?

     

    Whats the difference between public and private debt?

     

    What are unfunded liabilities?

     

    Is it money that the government has promised to give but doesn't have the money to do so with?..even though we just create money?

     

    To make sure I am comprehending correctly are you suggesting that the U.S. will back out of it's spending commitments on Social Security?

     

    Why are precious metals the only asset soon to be capable of purchasing necessities within the U.S.?

     

    What do you mean by massive flood of liquidity into the global economy mean? what is liquidity?

     

    Why are you suggesting people buy precious metals? Why are they precious? You can't eat them.

     

    Sincerely,
    Alex
    5 Feb 2010, 03:50 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

  • Fixed-income investments are totally insane in the current environment, and we can't hold all our wealth in gold and silver bullion.
    May 5, 2009
More »

Latest Comments


Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.