Karl, the only difference between you and me is that you think the clock is non-zero, and I do not.

This is a wonderful Ticker to basically play out what IS going to happen (you might say "if nothing is done") when TSHTF.

The problem with the thesis that wages have to be taken into account is simply because TPTB have decided that the presses will, and _MUST_, go infinite, to keep the current way of life going after Western Finance has already been destroyed.

You are going to see forced labor camps for the poor, and the wiping out of the poor (to the tune of that they will quickly run out of places to bury the dead)...

So the only question for most of us is whether to let them take us or let them shoot us first. The game IS up. But they're going to try to keep the game going -- that's been the whole point of what you've been talking about, Karl.

They can't, and mathematics shows they can't. There WILL be no USA -- very soon. Some of the tinfoilers might even say that was the point. Gold WILL be confiscated. That almost certainly IS a point.

Its possible the math is already starting. Isn't the Federal Reserve buying up tons of US treasuries now and then exchanging them for all sorts of securities to pump up the markets? Can't the Federal Reserve buy a nearly unlimited supply of US treasury notes/bonds? If the Federal Reserve were to print 250B per month to buy up US treauries and then increase this volume of purchases by 1% every month then we'd get the math you're talking about that'll lead to high inflation. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Federal Reserve lower the capital ratios from approx. 8% down to 4% for the long haul. If necessary we could even start seeing companies enter into deals that are Federal Reserve brokered to writeup the Goodwill on their balance sheets. Usually you are supposed to writedown Goodwill through amoritization. But just as they got Congress to get rid of mark-to-market when its convenient we could even start seeing companies do reverse amortization on their Goodwill, Intangible Assets, Property, Plant, Equipment, etc. Of course some of these ideas are totslly ethically wrong. And we can be sure that Karl Denninger will call them out on it. As a macro trend I don't see any other solution seriously untertaken except for "managed" inflation. The trouble with managing "managed" inflation is that it can easily get out-of-control and become hyperinflation.

"Pray that our nation's leaders aren't stupid enough to set in motion such a course of action either by accident or under the foolish belief that they can "keep the outcome under control"."

That is exactly what they will do.

I mean ****ing seriously, what the **** is it that make you think that all of a sudden they are going to start doing the right thing?

Cause they care about us?

****!

Ok show me an example of a 20th or 21st century government that was overthrown by poplular uprising because of hyperinflation. They can't even get rid of Mugabe.

Heres a list
Angola 1991-1999
Argentina 1981 – 1992
Belarus 1993 – 2008
Bolivia 1984 – 1986
Bosnia – Herzegovina 1992 – 1993
Brazil 1986 -1994
Chile 1971 – 1981
China 1948 – 1955
Georgia 1993 -1995
Germany 1919 -1923
Greece 1943 – 1953 At the high point prices doubled every 28 hours. Greek inflation reached a rate of 8.5 billion percent per month.
Hungry 1944 – 1946
Israel 1971 – 1985 (price controls instituted)
Japan 1934 – 1951
Nicaragua 1987 – 1990
Peru 1987 – 1991
Poland 1990 – 1994
Romania 1998 – 2006
Turkey 1990 – 2001
Ukraine 1992 – 1995
USA 1773 – not worth a Continental
Yugoslavia 1989 – 1994
Zaire 1989 – present (now the Congo)
Zimbabwe – 2000 to present. November of 2008 – inflation rate of 516 quintillion percent

maybe Nicaragua, but they had plenty of other motivation.

Wisc-xc posted:

For the hundredth time, we already had our hyperinflation.
And ours went on five times longer than Wiemar Germany's.

________________


Exactly.

Germany had hyperinflation, then deflation, then depression in that order.

America has already passed into deflation.

CBO Acting Director Robert Sunshine's recent Senate testimony on CSPAN showed a graph that indicated the Federal debt ballooning to 400 times the GDP by 2058. There's somebody that understands exponents.

I just don't see how the country can survive that. Jesus H, at what point does the Fed tell Treasury in an Erick Carman voice: 'Suck my balls!'

A part of me feels it would be better to buy metals and bury them in the ground, even if it only enriches an archeologist in the future. I'm tired of this bull****. Especially that Madoff and Rubin are unfettered.

We haven't had hyperinflation. That's where confidence in the currency is completely lost and people spend it immediately.

Americans have been spending all their money immediately...
and all their credit too... and this has been going on for
decades... spreading the inflation over decades only makes
it appear not as massive.

I think there is a difference. People don't loath money yet. They just want the shiny baubles, nice clothes and fancy cars. That's why they've been spending, not because the currency is worthless.

Of course, you could be right and it doesn't matter the reason people are spending, it's still inflationary.

Here is something else to consider.

World population is beginning to decline.

The first world nations were hit first,
thus their negative demographics and
need to increase immigration from the
second and third world. But now, even
third world families are having fewer
children [due to cultural changes brought
about by industrial development, etc]

Bottom line is this - the current world order
is based on an ever expanding economy and an
ever increasing supply and demand. As the
global population decline progresses, that
world order will be turned upside down.

Hyperinflation and deflation are not mutually exclusive.

What happened in Weimar Germany (and is currently happening in Zimbabwe):
unlimited printing creates hyperinflation in prices,
but at the same time, printing destroys lending capability even faster (as nobody is interested to lend out money that will be worthless when debt is repaid, so all money is spent immediately).

In terms of real economy, it means the hyperinflation is just masking the effects of deflationary processes actually at work.

As for the thesis that hyperinflation needs workers being able to demand sufficient rises - this has been refuted everywhere hyperinflation actually has happened (Germany 1923, Hungary 1946, modern Zimbabwe, etc.). There have been pay rises, but they have never kept pace with prices, so the income in real terms has dropped significantly.

Given all that, there is no real difference in outcomes - except letting hyperinflation to happen will destroy not just the economy, but currency as well.

What is happening at the moment is not inflation or deflation. The printed money is given to the banks and it stays there. It therefore does not enter the real economy and does not affect real prices or wages. It does ease the deflation that had otherwise taken place (a bit). And it does affect future taxes, so lets call it taxflation.

God Inflam -- are you really that stupid? Are we in a democracy now? How can it be when our own govt has allowed the pigman to******and enslave the commoners. Are you blind?

Extrapolate the current facts and the three possible outcomes for our new leaders of our country. (edited due to someone thinking this is my opinion)

A) Wall St Pigman
B) Mob
C) True Military Leader (ps. Hitler was never a military leader)

I'll take C anyday

And as far as Julius Caesar, his initiatve allowed his son to begin the Pax Romana (the best period of Roman History)

"the Pax Romana was an era of relative tranquility in which Rome endured neither major civil wars, such as the perpetual bloodshed of the third century AD, nor serious invasions, or killings, such as those of the Second Punic War three centuries prior. During this time, Roman commerce thrived, unhampered by piracy or marauding enemy troops."

ps.. Why do you think the senators killed Caesar, because they were corrupt just like the Pigmen

"The Roman middle and lower classes, with whom Caesar was immensely popular and had been since before Gaul, became enraged that a small group of high-browed aristocrats had killed their champion."

PSS - I'm sorry for poluting this thread for everyone else -- I'll stop now, just had to provide a short history lesson to Inflam

When the starving masses with nothing to lose have a simmering resentment that the government is only serving the super rich all you need is a match to blow the keg.It could become like the French revolution because people tried peaceful means to change the Government( Barrack Obama)but realized peaceful means don't work will resort to more violent means.

Quote:

I'll give you three choices for our new leaders of our country.

A) Wall St Pigman
B) Mob
C) True Military Leader (ps. Hitler was never a military leader)

God? Is that you? Santa? The Tooth Fairy? Robin Williams as the voice of the Genie?

deleted, edited original

Pinpointing when hyperinflation starts may be difficult. However, there comes a point where there is no doubt at all, by anybody:

When you have to keep adding 0's and your currency has an expiration date, like Zimbabwe, you can be assured that it is hyperinflating.

Gen_maximus57:
McHugh says basically the same thing, or at least in my book it's the same thing. That a Grand Supercycle wave down means totalitarianism in the US (the loss of civilian control of the military being a step down that road IMHCO). But I think he and a lot of other folks are missing an important point. Namely, that power is most likely to devolve. From the center, where it's been concentrating for the entire wave up beginning in the 18th century, to the periphery.

I joke about secession around this joint, but if things get bad enough, it could be pursued by more states than just Texas. Witness the Soviet Union ... ur ... I mean ... the FORMER Soviet Union. The most totalitarian political system and the most centrally-planned economy in history didn't fall apart because the commies got religion all of a sudden.

In the US, after milk from the federal teets fails, who's going to want to keep feeding the sow? I pity the fool who tries to serve a federal writ on behalf of, oh, say, the IRS, after Social Security, Medicare, and the VA have all gone***** up. The fact is, under current conditions, it's like Princess Leia said, "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." That goes for the pigmen and their cronies in D.C./NYC too, whose actions are more and more being shown for what they actually are: a naked grab for power.

I also think we will see a resurgence of town-hall and county-seat types of governance. The reason is simple. As crime surges, security will become more of a block-by-block and neighborhood-by-neighborhood proposition than ever. Which means, since the primary role of government is to provide protection, that local politics are going to become far more important than anything that happens in faraway Washington. Or Austin for that matter.

Gen Maximus - Pax romana is a THEORY put forth by gibbon in the 1700's - "pax romana" was 27 BC to 180 AD roughly, and included rule by dictate, and HORRENDOUS rule at home, including the reign of nero and others who ruled without concensus, killed those who opposed them, and generally weakened the internal political foundations of the empire.

The reason there was "peace" on the home front was that opposition to the dictator emperors was murdered. And appealing to the mobs in rome is NOT good government. Any student of political history knows that pandering to a mob is a faustian bargain that inevitably MUST lead to repression to retain control.

NO ****HEAD, NONE OF US SHOULD EVER HAVE OUR LIVES LITERALLY IN THE HANDS OF ONE PERSON WHERE WE HAVE NO RECOURSE. MILITARY RULE HAS HISTORICALLY ALMOST ALWAYS BEEN A DISASTER. POWER SIMPLY VERY VERY VERY RARELY RETURNS TO CIVILIAN HANDS ONCE THE MILITARY IS IN CONTROL. REPUBLICAN RULE IS ALWAYS PREFERABLE TO ONE MAN RULE. ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS.

As Ben Franklin said, those who would trade their freedom for security deserve neither.

I can easily go on, but I'm trying to respect the thread.

But again, **** YOU for proposing or supporting a military takeover of the government of the United States of America. **** YOU

Congress is the ultimate authority and the people elected those asshats so this isn't runaway government. We are getting the government we have voted in. Nothing is preventing people from voting in constitutional conservatives.

We need the rule of law. This is what we're lacking at all levels, with the exception possibly of the prosecution of black armed robbers of 7-11's, who always go to jail.

Thinking back, the last time we had this was in the 1950's, when people who committed heinous murders were executed within months of their conviction, tradesmen and professionals (including bankers) were doing business in their own neighborhoods/towns and government was probably a quarter the size it is now. Or smaller. Families were intact. There was far less narcissism - which, in my opinion, is the underlying cause of all our problems.

A President (Eisenhower) cared enough about what he saw to warn us about the growing power of the military-industrial complex.

Even the criminal element - the mob - had rules they followed.

A crazed military dictator is WORSE than what we have now.

But frankly, I don't see ANY leader on the scene who isn't corrupt and inthrall to the culture that is killing us.

What will change that, I don't know yet. But something will happen and it will change.

All the narcissists will mourn their lost corruption.

My gut tells me that the problem is TOO MANY PEOPLE.

When this country was founded, there were only 3 million people in the WHOLE COUNTRY.
Think about that.
For every ONE person in the country back during the founders' time, there are 100 people now.

IMO, individuals now have a feeling of learned helplessness about their government. It is "the powers that be" running everything, and "we can't do anything about things".

When you can take a 100 person posse to the tax collectors office and protest in a city of 30,000, you WILL be heard, noticed and responded to by the local government.

Now a crowd 10 times that in NYC is ignored.

Inflam:
Williams has a column along the lines you're talking about:

Quote:

Political monopoly power
Oct. 16, 2008
By Walter Williams

The Federalist Papers, written by James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, is the document most frequently referred to when trying to get a feel for the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. One such intention is found in Federalist 56 where Madison says, "...it seems to give the fullest assurance, that a representative for every thirty thousand inhabitants will render the (House of Representatives) both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it."

Excellent research, found at http://www.thirty-thousand.org/index.htm.... shows that in 1804 each representative represented about 40,000 people. Today, each representative represents close to 700,000. If we lived up to the vision of our founders, given today's population, we would have about 7,500 congressmen in the House of Representatives. It turns out that in 1929 Congress passed a bill fixing the number of representatives at 435. Prior to that, the number of congressional districts was increased every 10 years, from 1790 to 1910, except one, after a population census was taken.

We might ask what's so sacrosanct about 435 representatives? Why not 600, or 1,000, or 7,500? Here's part of the answer and, by the way, I never cease to be amazed by the insight and wisdom of our founders: James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, argued that the smaller the House of Representatives relative to the nation's population, the greater is the risk of unethical collusion. He said, "Numerous bodies ... are less subject to venality and corruption. " In a word, he saw competition in the political arena as the best means for protecting our liberties. If Madison were around today to see today's venal and corrupt Congress, he'd probably say, "See, I told you so!"...

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/wi....