Sober Realist's Comments

What Stories Aren't Being Told?

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 23:48:25 -0400

AND THE #1 STORY IS:
We are on board a freight train to civilization's collapse due to entrapment in a consumption-based economic model based on unsustainable perpetual growth.

Lots of other stories, but they pale in comparison or are somehow related to the one I just mentioned. You mentioned one factor of the freight train story:
"Water shortages in China and India."

Here are the other major monsters bearing down on us:

-the 6th mass extinction ocurring right now:
www.austinchronicle.co...

-peak oil:
www.propertyinvesting....

-climate change
www.youtube.com/watch?...

-overpopulation:
globalextinction.org/E...

What Stories Aren't Being Told?

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 23:25:55 -0400

"MSM works on advertising revenue. MSM media copies formats which attract the most viewers. most viewers do not want real news. this is why we watch CNBC over Bloomberg, Fox over CNN, BBC over Al Jazeera."
...and all of them over Democracy Now/Link TV. I've found it to be a window into unvarnished truth.

China Becoming a 'Middle-Class' Nation

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:56:33 -0400

Jeff Nieson said
"ONLY Corporate America has a positive net-worth. And, as we have seen in the scams from Wall Street and the dismantling of the U.S. manufacturing sector, these multi-national corporations have ZERO allegiance to ANY government."
--- agree with this statement, but little else from your usual pom pom parade for China.

Don't Worry About Deleveraging

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:57:21 -0400

GS's view shows they are not interested in any structural changes to the economic model, just continued propping up of a failed system with more government stimuli and hoping emerging markets (namely Brazil, China, and India) will become hooked on debt like Americans have been over the last 3 decades. The government stimuli bridge won't take us there.

Consumer Deleveraging

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 01:06:15 -0400

And where will the jobs come from to pay the debt and consume. Look at this chart and see another big problem:
www.oftwominds.com/pho...

Greenspan: Another Crisis Is Inevitable

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:16:33 -0400

WE'RE A LONG WAY FROM CLEANING UP THE MESS HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN CREATING!

Has the Government's Effort Failed?

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:05:59 -0400

This is just amazing to watch--- a slow motion train wreck. How long can TPTB keep the charade going before the masses start laughing, like the Chinese at Geitner, everytime they see an Orwellian politico-speech on the boob tube.

Why I Predict No Economic Recovery

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 10:40:26 -0400

You have to look at all the factors that are squeezing the middle class : stagnant/declining wages, no real job security, no comprehensive health plan for the majority, a credit and housing bubble bust complements of Greenspan and the banking oligarchy, skyrocketing post secondary education, increasing food costs (Food prices are rising at an average of five per cent a year), rising energy costs. Lack of a strong middle class will doom this country into a developing world status with a two-tiered society, a small elite class and large underclass. No strong middle class = no sustainable recovery.

America: A Bona Fide Plutonomy

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 20:41:03 -0400

What nimrod gave you a negative on that remark? -- Obviously one of the Plutocracy which enjoys socialism for the rich subsidized off the backs of the middle class, i.e. Too-Big-To-Fail Bail-Outs.
Speaking of healthcare, here's a great trip down memory lane:
Hospital fees now 400 (to 800) times the cost in 1934
www.mountvernonnews.co...

On Sep 08 05:48 PM TraderMark wrote:

> That is a debatable subject. The general throwaway line is the middle
> class is better off or has the highest quality standard of living
> because of the most toys.
>
> One could make many arguments against it -
> is a situation where getting sick at the wrong time (no insurance)
> or with too little insurance, a good standard? i.e. your entire
> life savings can be wiped out by one stay in the hospital? is that
> a better situation than other countries?
>
> is a situation where to maintain the place in society as middle class,
> both parents have to work rather than the old standard where only
> the male had to (say 1950s, 1960s) "better"? Yes more toys now but
> what has it done for family and society?
>
> the previous example compared "today" to 50 years ago. What about
> versus 10 years ago? Do you honestly believe if you talk to the
> average Joe he feels he is better off than 10 years ago?
>
> Now let's be clear many average Joes got themselves in a serious
> pickle by spending far more than they have. But many others are
> just struggling to get by even by following the rules.
>
> I hang out in the middle class and maybe I'm on the wrong side of
> the tracks or live in the wrong state but many believe their kids
> won't have a chance to repeat the standard of living they did. And
> those are coming from people who are working 2-3 jobs to provide
> as much as their parents did with 1 job.
>
> Argument is not that the middle class deserve to be rich - the larger
> question that needs to be asked is what % of the population is going
> backwards or having to do 2-3x as much as in the past simply to stay
> in the same place. While a small sliver prosper no matter what.
>

America: A Bona Fide Plutonomy

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:02:33 -0400

Good comment Graham.
Emily Spencer makes the point more bluntly in her essay "The Widening Gap In America's Two Tiered Society"
08/25/09

"Americans, particularly ones from the middle class, need to realize that there are no core entitlements imparted by their government representatives, nor any other sources. They have none and should adjust their expectations accordingly.
If the U.S. populace somehow imagines that its members are viewed any differently than any other populations across the world that are used to produce maximal profits for the top economic class, there's a rude awakening in store ahead. Further, most legislators simply do not care whether middle and lower class interests are or aren't well served as long as they, themselves, can somehow make out well in the times ahead...."

A corporatocracy is the best label for our form of "governance."
A government which serves the desires and needs of corporations and special interest groups rather than those of its own citizens. A look inside the federal government right now, and especially during the last thirty years reveals a very cozy relationship between corporations and government. These relationships exist across all industries from defense and banking to medicine and agriculture.
www.chrismartenson.com...

“Make no mistake _ the status quo is corporate control and the government's agenda is not only to maintain corporate control but increase the grip of corporate special interests.”

On Sep 08 11:32 AM Graham and Dodd Investor wrote:

> In the attached instablog post, I pointed out that the American
> plutonomy was trying to make America's bottom 80% more like the world's
> bottom 80% by breaking down the barriers protecting them.
>
> seekingalpha.com/insta...
>
>
> The conclusion was that if an American percentile ranking became
> a GLOBAL percentile ranking, the bottom 80% wouldn't have much to
> cheer about.

Why Healthcare Probably Won't Generate Jobs for a Recovery

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 11:40:47 -0400

I think the author has put his finger on the problem of healthcare in this country: less bang for the buck. If anybody thinks we have better healthcare in this country compared to other nations, read this:
By T.R. Reid -- Five Myths About Health Care
www.washingtonpost.com...
Hospital fees now 400 (to 800) times the cost in 1934
www.mountvernonnews.co...

And also see this movie:
www.moneydrivenmedicin.../

The United States is the only developed nation that does not have a comprehensive national health care plan for all its citizens. And the middle class is paying the price for this, all for the crime of getting sick.
Unfortunately, the for profit insurance companies have already won. See here:
The Health Insurers Have Already Won
How UnitedHealth and rival carriers, maneuvering behind the scenes in Washington, shaped health-care reform for their own benefit
August 6, 2009
www.businessweek.com/m...
Why Are The Drug and Health Insurance Companies Smiling? August 21, 2009
www.americanchronicle....

And here for my personal take on the situation:
www.chrismartenson.com...

What if It Is a 'V' Recovery?

Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:49:35 -0400

36+ million American's on food stamps now and the middle class is still up to their eyeballs in debt. No real healthcare reform and, therefore, the medical-bill-induced bankruptcies will continue. I could go on, but I won't. These are facts. Unless we are expecting the top 10% to drive this consumption-based economy, there will be no recovery in this middle-class liquidating country, just bouncing along the bottom and readjusting to lower standards of living. Maybe these facts can be overlooked by the stock market since its a manipulated, propped-up market that is disconnected from reality.

Economic Change: Not from This Administration

Sun, 30 Aug 2009 12:06:48 -0400

A third party is needed to bring actually change from the two-headed single party we currently have. Until the masses realize this, the status quo will be maintained at our expense. "The status quo is corporate control and the government's agenda is not only to maintain corporate control but increase the grip of corporate special interests."

Reappointing Bernanke Is a Mistake

Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:26:34 -0400

The foundation of Rome cracks and crumbles as the oblivious emperors partake in orgies.

Reappointing Bernanke Is a Mistake

Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:21:31 -0400

Reappointing Bernanke was no surprise. Not reappointing him would be an admission that the Wallstreet Bailout was the wrong thing to do. You wouldn't expect the Whitehouse to commit that faux pas, would you?

Notes from the Fully-Subsidized Market

Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:56:39 -0400

Amazing interview here on corruption at the highest levels in our government, the SEC, the FED.
www.kingworldnews.com/...

The Yuan as a Reserve Currency, And a Word from Henry Kissinger

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:22:01 -0400

Tradermark said:
"One of my core thesis is this Earth cannot handle so many "well off" people - as said as that sounds. Perhaps Americans in their kind hearts will, as 5% of the world's population, drop from using 20-25% of the world's resources which then WILL allow another 10% of the world to move into middle class without destroying the eco-system. But I doubt it :)

I think you meant to say "as SAD as that sounds."
Tradermark, You are absolutely correct. The problem is that America's consumption-based economic model is not sustainable here or anywhere else in the world. It's been calculated that right now we have a global footprint of 1.4, meaning that we consume 1.4 times what the earth can produce in a year.
Here's a fast-paced video that beautifully explains how our economic model can't go on forever in a closed, finite system:
www.storyofstuff.com/

How Will We Be Effected If China Is Planning To Restrict Or Eliminate The Export Of "Heavy" Rare Earths?

Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:22:05 -0400

Excellent example of nations scrambling for the Earth's depleting resouces
--- POPULATION OVERSHOOT.

Why Did We Bail Out the Banks?

Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:09:11 -0400

Harry,
You question of why we bail out these criminal banks and preserve their failed model is a rhetorical one. There is no logical reason for why we would prop up a failed system. So the question whould be what is causing the government to do this. It is that they are captured by the financial industry and mainstreet America is the tragic victim. The only way out is to bring down the American financial oligarchs and change our government from the corporatocracy that it is. They're supposed to work for us, the U.S. citizen, not the big pigs of Wallstreet.

The stock market has too many renters and not enough owners, says Chris Mayer, noting that the NYSE's average holding period is less than a year - all too reminiscent of the Roaring '20s.

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:43:50 -0400

Who wants to lose money to a big skimming operation like Goldman Sachs? I'm in and out of there within days or weeks.

A Granular Look at the Stratified U.S. Consumer

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 21:15:27 -0400

Your views are the result of the tens of billions of dollars spent by the 0.1 percenters in order to propogandize the "virtues" of deregulation, privatization, and wealth worship. The wealth disparity in America is already so vast, and you want to push it even higher.
Read this from the George Washington Blog:
Friday, August 14, 2009
No Wonder the Poker Game is Ending: The Wealthiest Have Taken All of the Chips
A new report by University of California, Berkeley economics professor Emmanuel Saez concludes that income inequality in the United States is at an all-time high, surpassing even levels seen during the Great Depression. The paper, which covers data through 2007, points to a staggering, unprecedented disparity in American incomes. On his blog, Nobel prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman called the numbers "truly amazing."
The report shows that:

Income inequality is worse than it has been since at least 1917
* "The top 1 percent incomes captured half of the overall economic growth over the period 1993-2007"
* "In the economic expansion of 2002-2007, the top 1 percent captured two thirds of income growth."
* As others have pointed out, the average wage of Americans, adjusting for inflation, is lower than it was in the 1970s. The minimum wage, adjusting for inflation, is lower than it was in the 1950s. See this.(www.pbs.org/moyers/jou...)
On the other hand, billionaires have never had it better.(www.commondreams.org/v...)

As I wrote in September:

The economy is like a poker game . . . it is human nature to want to get all of the chips, but - if one person does get all of the chips - the game ends.

In other words, the game of capitalism only continues as long as everyone has some money to play with. If the government and corporations take everyone's money, the game ends.

The fed and Treasury are not giving more chips to those who need them: the American consumer. Instead, they are giving chips to the 800-pound gorillas at the poker table, such as Wall Street investment banks. Indeed, a good chunk of the money used by surviving mammoth players to buy the failing behemoths actually comes from the Fed...

This is not a question of big government versus small government, or republican versus democrat. It is not even a question of Keynes versus Friedman (two influential, competing economic thinkers).
It is a question of focusing any government funding which is made to the majority of poker players - instead of the titans of finance - so that the game can continue. If the hundreds of billions or trillions spent on bailouts had instead been given to ease the burden of consumers, we would have already recovered from the financial crisis.
As Marc Weisbrot writes in the Guardian:

John Schmitt and Nathan Lane showed that the United States is not the nation of small businesses that it is regularly dressed up to be for electoral campaign speeches and editorials. If we look at what percentage of our overall labour force is self-employed, or what percentage of manufacturing workers or high-tech workers are employed in small businesses – well, the US ranks at or near the bottom among high-income countries.

As economist Paul Krugman noted after reading the study: "One more American myth bites the dust."

In other words, the idea that America has more small businesses than other countries is false. More small businesses would be good, as it would mean that more of the "little guys" would have poker chips to play the free market game with.
www.cepr.net/documents...
Similarly, breaking up the big banks would lead to more competition and allow smaller banks to fill the lending needs of individuals and small businesses.
www.washingtonsblog.co...

On Aug 16 06:54 PM RonaldReagan wrote:

> WOW. Fantastic work Tyler. I say cut the tax rate for the top 10%
> drastically. They will spend and pull us out of this disaster. They
> are our only hope. Then we should thank them for creating jobs. We
> need to stop villainizing the rich. I'm not rich, but I aspire to
> be.

A Granular Look at the Stratified U.S. Consumer

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:24:37 -0400

How about the old war-time distraction:

"As the economic crisis escalates and the debt-based central banking system shows it can no longer re-inflate the bubble by creating assets out of thin air, an economic and political rationale for war is easy to come by; for if the Keynesian doctrine that government spending is the only way to lift us out of an economic depression is true, then surely military expenditures are the quickest way to inject "life" into a failing system. This doesn’t work, economically, since the crisis is only masked by the wartime atmosphere of emergency and "temporary" privation. Politically, however, it is a lifesaver for our ruling elite, which is at pains to deflect blame away from itself and on to some "foreign" target.

It’s the oldest trick in the book, and it’s being played out right before our eyes, as the U.S. prepares to send even more troops to the Afghan front and is threatening Iran with draconian economic sanctions, a step or two away from outright war. "

On Aug 16 10:03 AM yellowhoard wrote:

> This country is being groomed for class warfare.
>
> We are all being manipulated into pointing fingers at each other
> so the people in power can redirect the anger of the people away
> from Washington and toward one and other.

A Granular Look at the Stratified U.S. Consumer

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 09:36:48 -0400

Interesting post.
Now the "Upper Class seems to be the only fragment of US consumption that is propping up the economy."
The rich wanted all the marbles and they got them over the last several decades. Henry Paulson and the financial oligarchy have made sure that they've kept all of them too. But in doing so, they left none for the middle class. Rolling back the tax cuts for the wealthy that have been implemented over the last 30 years is assumed to be an inevitable swing of the pendulum with Obama. The decimated middle class can't afford any tax increases or they'll revolt.
***Checkmate***

Marc Chandler's Compelling Perspective in 'Making Sense of the Dollar'

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 09:02:39 -0400

"It has been technology, not globalization, that has contributed to the declining number of American manufacturing jobs."
---- So the technology must lie in China. Is that why manufacturing is being offshored there by American MNC's?

Trade Deficit with China Continues to Expand: Why?

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:56:39 -0400

Your right. The Americans and Europeans can't compete with slave labor. It's not about being able "to compete" as you put it. It's about how massive the profit margin is to the corporations. It's about GREED.
Globalization has made corporations very rich at a huge cost to the western consumer. Many of the good manufacturing jobs in America have been shipped overseas and replaced with low end service jobs. The MNC's have by and large overlooked quality issues in their foreign manufacturing plants because of the cost-savings reaped from the exploitation of cheap foreign labor. With retail prices just marginally less than they would have been were they manufactured domestically, the profits to the distributors are massive.

On Aug 15 04:36 AM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> Sober Realist:
>
> With all due respect to your view of me, I think you've tossed me
> into the wrong ballpark.
>
> I'm an investor and I have to go where I'm forced to go. The opportunties
> are in China, and that's where I've invested over the last several
> years.
>
> If I had my way I would abolish the world bank, IMF, et al. I abhor
> globalism and internationalism, and I don't at all like the idea
> of the US merging with any other nation. Or relinquishing its sovereignty
> for any reason.
>
> I'm not at all interested in 3rd World Poverty, so I don't understand
> all the sites about that. I certainly don't think "globalism" is
> going to cure world poverty. I try to help people close to me that
> I can see, touch, and talk to. I can't be concerned about people
> who've been living in huts in Africa, Asia, Mexico, and South America
> for thousands of years.
>
> You wrote: "The problem as I see it is that MNC's have no allegiance
> to any people or nation. They also are big compaign contributors."
>
>
> I agree with you that our businesses have no allegiance to America
> other than to sell their goods here as they do elsewhere, but I'm
> not anti-business. This nation won't let you become a Nationalist.
> If you mention that you'll get demonized quickly, as did Pat Buchanan
> a few years back. Or Ross Perot, who was made out to be a fool when
> he spoke of "that big sucking sound you hear."
>
> Hollywood is much the same way and they're also huge campaign contributers.
> Would you bar those Marxists from contributing, as you would evil
> Big Business. What about unions; they're even bigger contributers.
>
>
> After all this I'd like for you to show me how US manufacturing companies
> could compete with Asian companines that do not have the onerous
> burdens placed on them that US companies do.
>
> You then get right back to the $150 pair of drawers, which is hyperbole
> (but just a little) to make a point.
>
> If I had my way, the propaganda I would have put out over the last
> seventy or so years would have had business leaders satisfied with
> what they could earn here in the states. The government would not
> be promoting globalism for the purpose of eventually merging with
> other nations.
>
> But I can't control any of these things. So I must put my money where
> I think I have the best return for the least amount of risk.
>
> I assume you are an investor, even though you don't mention it, but
> I wish you well anyway.

Trade Deficit with China Continues to Expand: Why?

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 18:39:08 -0400

ArtfulDodger,
The MNC's are happy to hear you comment. They have you beautifully brainwashed. $150 drawers? LOL!

My intention is not to be rude, but can I suggest a little more reading for you?

Does Globalization help the poor:
www.thirdworldtraveler...

The Polarised World of Globalisation
www.globalpolicy.org/c...

Globalization and free trade – wonders of a past era, now enemies of America
fabiusmaximus.wordpres.../

Flaws in the theory of globalization
p2pfoundation.net/Flaw...

Serious About Green Jobs? It's Time to Throw 'Free Trade' out the Window
www.alternet.org/envir.../

The Race to the Bottom: Why a Worldwide Worker Surplus and Uncontrolled Free Trade Are Sinking American Living Standards
With the 1990s economic boom over, The Race to the Bottom deftly explores how the United States has entered a no-win global competition in which the countries with the lowest wages, weakest workplace safety laws, and toughest repression of unions win investment from the U.S. and Europe. Tonelson analyzes how the entry of such population giants as China, India, and Mexico into the global market have accelerated the erosion of wages and labor standards around the world. He describes how an ever larger share of this low-wage competition is hitting not just sectors such as apparel and toys, but many of America's highest wage industries such as aerospace and software. Tonelson explains why the reeducation and retraining programs touted by many political leaders offer only false hopes to most U.S. workers, and outlines the real decisions Washington needs to make to ensure long-term prosperity for America and the rest of the world.
www.powells.com/biblio...
Globalization's cheap labor policy
www.europe-solidaire.o...

The Wealth Gap and the Collapse of the U.S.
seekingalpha.com/insta...

Juliette Beck & Global Exchange
www.ecoworld.com/busin...

On Aug 14 10:33 AM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> I am definitely long several stocks on the Shanghai index, but it's
> not because I'm a globalist or because I love China. It's because
> of the very things HR is speaking of in this article.
>
> When people complain to me about our trade imbalance with China,
> I ask them would you rather pay $150 a pair for your underware?

>
> That's pretty much what it amounts to. We either buy at reasonable
> prices from some "emerging nation," or we have to pay the high prices
> that it would take to pay for workers compensation, EPA rules and
> regulations, social security, medicare, medicaid, maxicare, welfare,
> union wages, and steep corporate taxes.
>
> I can't see that if makes any difference whether it's Mexico, Indonesia,
> or China that makes the products. I don't like it mind you, but the
> American people are not going to want to pay $150 for a pair of drawers.
>
>
> Thank you for the article, HR.

The Wealth Gap and the Collapse of the U.S.

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:32:56 -0400

I posted my article over at Chrismartinson.com and it's gotten over 1200 viewings. Amazingly popular and already in the top 20 most viewed postings after only 3 days.
Here's the link:
www.chrismartenson.com...

Chris echoed my feelings days later with this post:
"Revolution coming with next meltdown"
Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 11:24 am, by cmartenson
The title of this blog is not mine, it belongs to Paul Ferrell of CBS Marketwatch who used it in a piece penned and posted yesterday to one of the largest financial websites in the business.

I am reposting a portion of it here because I find it interesting as an indicator of social mood. Let's face it, a growing swath of people are not comforted by the V-shaped return of the stock market but instead see a continuation of the policies and power structures that got us into this mess in the first place.

More and more people are simply fed up with the financial and economic looting that has already taken place and downright angry to see that it is continuing unabated.

To the list of looted items tossed onto an already well-lit bonfire we can now add "the future" and "time" because the various stimulus programs and bailouts have done nothing to get us onto a sustainable path of repair.

But seeing such things openly in print in the mainstream media reveals a profound shift in attitudes....

Read the rest here:
www.chrismartenson.com...

Trade Deficit with China Continues to Expand: Why?

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 01:38:24 -0400

Howard,
I appreciated this article. You have to remember that people critisizing you here are all invested in China. So why would they support your views?
However, answer me this. Why is the U.S. government allowing American MNC's to set up shop there. They are the ones shipping our jobs overseas. I just read recently that an S&P report showed that for the first time in history, American MNC's are paying more in taxes to foreign governments than to America.
A recent article sheds light on this problem:

"The globalization knowledge gap began flummoxing policy-making in the 1980s, when large companies from all countries began greatly increasing their production of goods and services outside their home countries, as well as the foreign content of their individual products.

The companies reaped big cost savings and other efficiencies. But policy-makers and voters confronted new difficulties in gauging the domestic effects of surging global trade and investment flows. The companies themselves, of course, knew everything about their new worldwide production chains. They couldn't make money otherwise. But although Washington gathered much of this information, the U.S. government released little.

The costs of this secrecy first appeared in the 1980s. Skyrocketing U.S. trade deficits and foreign-investment inflows raised the question of whether it mattered, and if so, how to respond. Many economists insisted that neither mattered in the emerging, allegedly borderless global economy. Others responded that knowing "Who is us" mattered crucially....

The companies oppose full disclosure by arguing that (a) detailed reporting would boost production costs and (b) the information has great strategic value. But with all businesses participating, none would realize cost or strategic advantages. And higher costs passed on to consumers could well be offset by better jobs saved or created by better globalization policies.

The companies are probably more worried that exposing their full economic record would create a public relations and political nightmare. But why should their sensitivities shape U.S. policy - especially when coddling them forces the rest of Americans to fly blind?"

TONELSON: In the dark on globalization, trade policies
www.washtimes.com/news...

The problem as I see it is that MNC's have no allegiance to any people or nation. They also are big compaign contributors.

Paulson and Goldman Sachs, The Plot Thickens

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:25:29 -0400

This all comes down to what has been called the corporatization of our government. We no longer have good government which would actually work in the best interst of its citizens. We now have a government which exists at the behest of American multinational corporations. There exists a revolving door between the elite who sit on big corporate boards and positions in our government. MNC's have no allegiance to any country or people. To see what this has done and is doing to our country's ordinary citizen, read "The Wealth Gap and the Collapse of the U.S."
seekingalpha.com/insta...

The Federal Reserve Is Immoral

Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:21:51 -0400

Hello chap08,
What are the ramifications of defaulting on our debt? This would make a good SA article. For starters I think we should allow China to nationalize all the American MNC assets in China as part of the U.S. debt owed to that country. That will teach those American MNC's a lesson for hollowing out America's industrial base in order to exploit cheap Chinese labor.
I have more to say, but my work is calling me.

Good Afternoon.
Mike

On Aug 13 04:55 PM chap08 wrote:

> Hello Sober Realist
>
> Let's agree to loan each other $1 million. I will default on my debt
> to you immediately, as that is what you say that you prefer. I think
> you call it "the more honest way". I will allow you to default through
> inflation at say, 5% pa, even though you say that would be "dishonest".
> Ofcourse, I will expect you to keep up your interest payments.

>
> Let's settle up after 10 years. OK?