This page was last updated on Thursday, 29 January, 2015.
More Candid Questions for Analysts and Their Divergent Economic Models
5 January, 2015
5 January, 2015
Please allow me to be candid, as I am losing patience with the minions of the alternative press as well. I tend to like contrarians in general, but Armstrong has a ninety pound chip on his shoulder, and this can make a man blind, as he continues to build his theories in his own compartmentalized vacuum, its own variation of myopia. Even McCanney suffers from this, as his discussions and even books devote too much to rebuttal. A key issue for us is the evaluation of Armstrong's "everything is going to work out relatively smoothly" mantra, and on our own part, there is the question that our own dissatisfactions may bias our approach within the regime of wishful thinking, and potentially blind us to the possibility that all this wickedness may not receive its up-coming in our lifetimes. I see this bias in Dave Hodges, and the emotional incredulity of other analysts in the catastrophe camp, including the relatively mellow Chapman. I believe that these concerns are at the root of why the long emergency has been so aggravatingly stable. One remedy for this is to assign part of our wealth to long term foundations that will outlive us, which is exactly what the big families do, and live as if we had less money than we do. That is how families become rich - that, and learn how to do business with thieves. Of course, the American socioeconomic norms is spend, spend, spend - especially the women, but increasingly, the estrogenised men.
I still want to, for a little while, try to get a handle on the degree of latent instability of the economic picture, as avalanche predicting is its best model, or perhaps estimates on the status of Vesuvius. We cannot let ourselves become too hasty in philosophical anticipation of the downfall of corruption, but as well , not get lost in the pander of optimism on the trading floor on October 29th. Armstrong's defacto implication - that the massive corruption and leverage in the American institutions and markets will nonetheless prosper as the rest of the world falls - is apparently based upon his view of the strong dollar in relative terms, and sufficient intrinsic stability of the American side of business. Are we perhaps in fact seeing sour grapes of righteous indignation being swept aside in a world racing towards a vortex of pluperfect corruption? Armstrong does not seem to address the corruption, looking instead at his cyclic trends and ways to game the system - a pattern eerily commonplace among the unprincipled younger generation, but then again, he is a jailbird, although to be fair, so was John the Baptist. Armstrong complains about everyone elses' myopia, but I see his as well, all of them alike, as they each pound away at their drums separately, making music and, by the way, inevitably peddling their wares for profit. I do see the ultimate ecclesiastical equation that will bring our current path into terms with its iniquities, but the cosmic scales of such thinking often dwarf lifetimes. Just the same, what we need from Armstrong et al, are algorithms that track hydrodynamic instabilities in the markets and global monetary system, along with a better understanding of the degree to which the geopolitical arena is becoming either polarized or is being aligned under one master.
In more specific matters, it is an interesting question to estimate when the Fed will raise interest rates on a slope back to three and a quarter percent, as it cannot realistically begin this until oil decidedly turns back upward. This pressure is one indicator of self regulation besides the floor prices for fracking and shale oil extraction, and should serve as well to limit the downward potential of metals, that have been lagging the scale of oil falloff. Some models suggest that the debt and monetization curves for the US are approaching asymptotic conditions only resolvable by extreme devaluation of the currency or war, and we need from the Armstrong camp more precise quantification of the normalization of this issue if his model proves true. As I see it, the other currencies will rush into the dollar, as they already have done to a noticeable extent, and then the dollar will also collapse due to severe compromise, primarily through secondary effects of the derivatives structure, and by other traditional consequences of corrupt systems as the rats run from a burning house.
It is interesting to note the subjects featured on the History Channel, for instance. Today we have another round of asteroid disaster scenarios. This fits all too well with von Braun's four points, of which the asteroid ruse is the third, after the illusion of the Cold War and the Terrorism game. This view of the manipulation of public mentality, so well established in observed fact to question it much further, nonetheless implies that there is a design within the elite boardrooms that shall play out under the pall of a staged global disaster, to which the American economy and society is exquisitely vulnerable. Consideration of intrinsic paroxysmal instabilities in our socioeconomic system is one matter, but orders of magnitude more likely, and certainly precedented by the likes of JP Morgan and Rothschild, is the secret blasting of the avalanche. Thermonuclear war does not, in my view hold any advantage for these people, but economic chaos strategically timed and induced prior to the natural causes does. This model is consistent with the conspicuous apparent stability of the currencies and international affairs so far, as it is desirable to maintain order until a certain point. Then we must answer, and so do Armstrong and Dent, the rationale for two billion rounds of DHS ammunition, the massive internment camp system on American soil, and a nearly perfect storm of other developments consistent with an impending operation to suppress massive unrest in the US. I cannot reconcile this with the Armstrong-Dent charts and predictions, nor does World War II, and its possible sequel. We also cannot forget the more esoteric sources, most notably the terrifically accurate Stormberger, who predicted decades in advance specific details of WW-I, WW-II and most notably now, WW-III.
Somehow, I cannot disregard Armstrong's contrarian view, nor the consistency of his cyclic models. But he and the plethora of the other analysts I scarcely need to mention scrap and piss among each other like DaVinci and Michaelangelo and I, who am not peddling anything but a desire for the real answer, appear to have a better handle on what is going on than any of them, and that turns out to be almost nothing past complete confusion.
Personally, a composite conclusion in my investigation into Hawaii as a possible home is the realization that the continental alternative sociologies are become a scattered flock, and their alternative press universally appears to using its own head for a proctoscope, with no real coherency or leadership and command structure. My bohemian persona and existence must, out of a certain ironic necessity, seek its own level among suitably refined and worldly social circles and a no nonsense climate. The preppers, under their current state of affairs, can never amass enough food, water filters and firewood any more than Lhasa were sandbagged against the arrival of communists, and for precisely the same reasons, whether or not Armstrong's thesis plays out. No rebellion against wickedness and evil, nor any fruitful purpose of life, is ever achieved by men running separately for the hills to succor upon their buried treasures. Therein, I present the tragic unresolved dichotomy of the situation, that few will ever have the means and mind to break free.