Here is how we breaks their backs and it's perfectly legal.

[old steel]

Brilliant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Uop5R7E314

[midnight rambler]

Of course he's right. The banks only exist due to the wealth and productivity of people. Cut that off and they die.

[DMac]

Organizing a bank run was deemed "terrorist" activity, IIRC, within the past few years.

Not that I keep more than 1 paycheck at a time in the bank. I practice what he is preaching every week.

[Spectrism]

Organizing a bank run was deemed "terrorist" activity, IIRC, within the past few years.

Not that I keep more than 1 paycheck at a time in the bank. I practice what he is preaching every week.


Removing deposits is an assault on fractional reserve practices. Only in the world controlled by banksters can removing your own money be considered terroristic.

[Sparky]

This is fantasy.

If there was a rampage of withdrawal requests, the government could easily step in and create the necessary "money" to meet the withdrawal demand, even if they had to shut the banks down for a week while they printed and distributed cash. (Technically, I think the banks have 30 days to honor a withdrawal request.) If every adult American were to withdraw $10,000 tomorrow (and most Americans don't have that much to withdraw), the government could easily create the $2 trillion to cover it. Remember, they have essentially pledged to back the FDIC to $Infinity.

What you would have is a brief run on cash (days to weeks) followed by an incredible cash flood. This is the ultimate deflation-to-inflation blowoff scenario. Adding $2T to a $15T money supply is an immediate 13% inflation burst. But it's not hyper-inflation, as it would be a short-duration event.

The banks and "the system" would remain standing.

Incidentally, you want to be holding some cash for the initial cash-shortage event that would last a week or so, and PMs for after the cash flood hits.

[Carl]

I beg to differ Sparky. A run on cash would kill credit as a medium of exchange and as a result the economy would crash. It would take years, if not decades, to print an economy back into existence.



.

[General of Darkness]

If I was in France I'd show a day earlier to make sure I got MY money. ;D

[Sparky]

I beg to differ Sparky. A run on cash would kill credit as a medium of exchange and as a result the economy would crash. It would take years, if not decades, to print an economy back into existence.



.


I guess that would depend on what they did with the money. If they would hoard it, it would not change the demand for credit, since they have simply moved the money from one place (the bank) to another (their mattress), without helping their cash flow. And it would also not impact inflation, since it would not be circulating.

I agree with you that this activity would not print the economy back to its feet. I'm just saying it wouldn't collapse the system, other than for a week's disruption.

An interesting thought exercise: If everyone who had the money were to withdraw $10,000, what portion of it would they still have on hand a month later? I know of people who have tried to hold some cash on hand for the emergency scenarios that we discuss here on GSUS, but they just can't do it! It slowly dwindles away. Insufficient self-discipline.

[Sparky]

If I was in France I'd show a day earlier to make sure I got MY money. ;D


And I'd show a day before you.

And so on, and so on, and so on...

;D

[palani]

Any deposit or withdrawal .... endorse each transaction with the comment "PER 12 USC 411". Then treat what you have received as lawful money (no debt attached).

[Uncle Salty]

Withdrawing from the bank kills their reserve requirements. No deposit, reduced ability to make loans.

They die.

[Book]

Americans don't have any money in the bank anymore.

[Spectrism]

Besides pulling cash, there is a need to stop borrowing. A signed note becomes their asset against which they are able to loan. The life blood of banks is borrowing and lending. If you don't borrow, they cannot lend. If they cannot lend then they are not banks.

The money system crashes when a) banks freeze up with no activity, b) no borrowers of new money arrive so no new money is created, c) government tax revenues decline with no prospect of growing and no reason for the banksters to hang any hopes on owning a nation of slaves.

[Trinity]

The people insist on keeping their money in the banks. It's a bad habit.

[FunnyMoney]

The problem is not where the money sits, it is what the money is and how easy it is to control and corrupt. All paper money is fully corrupt, never put trust in your fellow man to print and control the medium of exchange, it always ends in total corruption.

The real revolution is to take the money and buy real money with it (PMs). But more importantly, use the real money for transactions as the most desired medium of exchange.

It is true, the system must be destroyed, but the bank run method is only a first step. It is still required to:

Stop using their money; cut them out of the picture.

[solid]

And I'd show a day before you.

And so on, and so on, and so on...

;D


See, this is the problem. Lack of teamwork. We all need to withdraw together, to make this work. You are correct, in folks looking out for their own best interests, but by doing that we face a system that works together.

They have teamwork, we do not. They will win.

[cthulu]

If I was in France I'd show a day earlier to make sure I got MY money. ;D


And I'd show a day before you.

And so on, and so on, and so on...

;D


And I'd show up before...oh wait, dancing with the stars is on that night. Next night I've got the seinfeld marathon to watch. Then after that is friday which is shaniqua's baby momma partaaay, and I gotsta have me some of her famous purple drank and biscuits...ah fuggit. just leave my money in there.

[Hypertiger]

Actually the money supply is owned by the top and you all rent it...and the cost of the rent is hidden in the prices of everything...since you all at the bottom all have to pay the rent.

One way or the other.

The top know that it's impossible to inflate forever...so they know that the system is going to collapse.

Once the dust settles at the bottom and all the resistance is exhausted fighting to acquire what they never will or reacquire what they never had...the top hires the survivors to construct the next doomed to collapse system.

bankers are not the top...they are oblivious employees like you all...just higher in the hierarchy...

The top maintains their position by giving the bottom what they want.

If the bottom wants mountains of banker corpses in lakes of blood...the top will supply the bottom with that.

Of course when the bottom grows tired of the demolition operation and desires construction...the top will hire them for the construction operation.

The problem is not solidarity.

The problem is that the top are the only ones that know how to create what you all call civilization.

You all are just trained to be drones.

You are all specialized to perform a handful of tasks and programed with various mental blocks and ethical barriers that cause you to be unable to do what is required to construct what you all call civilization.

The top figured out and knows what you could spend your entire lifespan attempting to figure out...1000's of years before you were born.

Or you might choose fighting to the day you die trying to avoid figuring out.

The only way to "break the backs of the top" is to take over and become the top...then you will have do what it takes to keep your back from being broken by all those below who are sick of slaving day in and day out supporting you.

The top unfortunately can see threats rising from the bottom of the hierarchy long before the threats see the destroyers the top sends to annihilate the threats.

The system is already collapsing.

Not because you all have refused to supply the top with the power that is required.

Because you all at the bottom have reached the point where you can't anymore.

The top know that the system can not be sustained forever...The bottom always reaches the point where they can no longer sustain the required power the enterprise needs to avoid bankruptcy.

the previous global trade scheme went bankrupt in 1929-1933

1933-1945 was the bankruptcy reorganization of it.

the current global trade system is now entering it's inevitable bankruptcy period...to be followed by another bankruptcy reorganization.

At the current rates...it will take decades to hit bottom...You all will most likely be dead before the bankruptcy reorganization is over.

1933 is around 2016-17 or so.

The climax of the liquidation of unfundable liabilities process was called WW2.

It's a wave...

Inflation greater than previous inflation to maximum potential is followed by inflation less than previous inflation to maximum potential....when the maximum potential of inflation greater than previous inflation is reached.

while...

Inflation greater less previous inflation to maximum potential is followed by inflation greater than previous inflation to maximum potential....when the maximum potential of inflation less than previous inflation is reached.

The bottom is the surfboard the top ride the wave on.

Your backs have been broken everytime for 1000's of years.

[FunnyMoney]

Finally HT provides a post that makes sense.

Still, what you miss HT is that there is a way out of "the 1000's of years" system.

Get off the grid, trade with those around you, form community organizations to handle the needs of your community and your state, don't take out a loan and don't pay taxes, ever!... stop using their money; cut them out of the picture.

But agreed, HT, that's not likely to happen.

[BillBoard]

HT leaves out that rented currency are claims on wealth. He uses his analogy of chopping down trees, which does not truly represent the concept of claims on wealth.

But what happens is that as currency disappears, the providers of wealth cannot function and go out of business, destroying a supply of wealth.

So what to do? Create alternative money systems.

How do you create an alternative money system? Simple, stipulate a trusted bookkeeper and define a unit of account. That's it.

[chud]

If all of you who bank with the giant monster mega banks (BoA, WaMU, Wells Fargo, Chase, etc) were to just close your accounts and transfer your money to a well-run local bank or credit union (and convince 7 of your friends to do the same), we could lead a quiet revolution in this country.

I want to completely abolish fractional reserve banking as much as the next guy, but we have to start somewhere and do something that is feasible on a large scale; banking locally is a good start.

Btw, I bet that there are still quite a few people here on this forum who still bank with the blood-sucking mega-banks (hope I'm wrong though).

[Sparky]

I don't need to see the reorganization. I just want to see what the bottom looks like. How will it look like compared to the last bottom (1933)?

The last standard of living peak was in the 1920's. The standard of living peak during this current cycle is vastly superior. We could hit bottom, and still have a standard of living greater than the previous peak. The last peak had no jet airplanes, few automobiles and paved roads, no air conditioning or refrigerators, limited indoor plumbing, no antibiotics, no computers, no robots, no microwave ovens, no television, limited telephones and no cellphones, no color movies, no fresh frozen vegetables, no insulated windows and walls, no multi-gear bicycles, no velcro, no 12-inch mattresses, no multi-zone heating, no digital music with miniature portable speakers, no central sewage, no radar or satellite imagery, no dishwashers, no slam dunking, no Kahlua, no Disney, no hip replacements or heart surgery, no hair conditioner, no carbonated beverages, no contact lenses, no Watson-Crick double helix DNA model, no nuclear power, no aerosol spray, no Tupperware, no vending machines, no snow blowers, no invisible dog fences, no Glocks, no Doritos, no remote control, and no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?

[EE_]

So, you guys are saying that nothing short of complete devastation, complete collapse of the infrastructure and a mass die off...the rinse and repeat cycle will continue?
The top have the gold, almost complete control over the people, enabled by advanced technology/military...they will always control the rent.
Winning the game is impossible, so the next best thing would be desired.
Technology is the difference this time around.

[FunnyMoney]

...The last peak had no jet airplanes, no ... .... .... no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?



Yeah, the last peak had no RFID chips and tracking taxes was done with pencil and paper.

So, how bad can it possibly be? Are you sure you want the answer to that?

[old steel]

So then lets clarify something here that is probably common knowledge around these parts.

When HT talks about the top that means the R and R crowd, correct?

Or are we referring to all the 13 controlling families Fritz Springmeier wrote about that landed him in jail?

http://fritz-springmeier.dbs2000ad.com/

[FunnyMoney]

For the most part, we stick with "TPTB". This simply because we remember what went down at GIM1.

[EE_]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjicnb5aFG4&feature=player_embedded

Toxic Shadows lyrics by Lucifer's Friend

Blackness sliding everywhere
you took the train to come undaunted
Cause it can't be late
Toxic shadows in the air
you find your own with a compulsion
Now It's too late
Tell me how'd you'd like to be
then I'd listen and then I'd see
With nowhere left to go inside of you
would you know what should be done lying, dying in the sun
Praying for the rising of the moon
I smell coal dust in your hair
You who bakes in a house of fire
with your feeling finger
Take my hard rock, put it there
ooh baby just a little bit higher

repeat
Tell me you'd like to be
then I'd listen and then I'd see
With no where left to go inside of you
Wouldn't you know what should be done
as you lay dying in the sun
The ragged crows close in the afternoon

[Neuro]

I don't need to see the reorganization. I just want to see what the bottom looks like. How will it look like compared to the last bottom (1933)?

The last standard of living peak was in the 1920's. The standard of living peak during this current cycle is vastly superior. We could hit bottom, and still have a standard of living greater than the previous peak. The last peak had no jet airplanes, few automobiles and paved roads, no air conditioning or refrigerators, limited indoor plumbing, no antibiotics, no computers, no robots, no microwave ovens, no television, limited telephones and no cellphones, no color movies, no fresh frozen vegetables, no insulated windows and walls, no multi-gear bicycles, no velcro, no 12-inch mattresses, no multi-zone heating, no digital music with miniature portable speakers, no central sewage, no radar or satellite imagery, no dishwashers, no slam dunking, no Kahlua, no Disney, no hip replacements or heart surgery, no hair
conditioner, no carbonated beverages, no contact lenses, no Watson-Crick double helix DNA model, no nuclear power, no aerosol spray, no Tupperware, no vending machines, no snow blowers, no invisible dog fences, no Glocks, no Doritos, no remote control, and no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?
Turn off your electricity mains switch and see for yourself! ;D

[Awoke]

Withdrawing from the bank kills their reserve requirements. No deposit, reduced ability to make loans.

They die.


Banks don't need fiat reserves to base their loans on for fractional reserve lending.

As I understand it, when a bank makes a loan, they consider it an asset "because you will pay it back in the future because you're a good customer", so therefore they can loan out even more based on that "asset" (which is actually a liability, and nothing more than a digital ledger entry that was entered in the BLACK column instead of the RED column).

[Trinity]

1933 is around 2016-17 or so.

Smart move HT! Calling for the "everything gonna go poof" in 7 years gives you a lot of time to continue on with your missives. Your earlier call back in 2003 for a "poof" collapse in 2004 "the latest" was too tight and friggin wrong by a mile. But with this new 7 years away prediction it gives you a chance to look wise and gather a new flock of poof goofs again. Good luck.

[Spectrism]

Withdrawing from the bank kills their reserve requirements. No deposit, reduced ability to make loans.

They die.


Banks don't need fiat reserves to base their loans on for fractional reserve lending.

As I understand it, when a bank makes a loan, they consider it an asset "because you will pay it back in the future because you're a good customer", so therefore they can loan out even more based on that "asset" (which is actually a liability, and nothing more than a digital ledger entry that was entered in the BLACK column instead of the RED column).




Close. The promissory note that you sign is put into their vault as the asset.

[Sparky]

...The last peak had no jet airplanes, no ... .... .... no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?



Yeah, the last peak had no RFID chips and tracking taxes was done with pencil and paper.

So, how bad can it possibly be? Are you sure you want the answer to that?

This brings up an interesting point. I think the standard of living in terms of "comforts" will remain higher through the next bottom. However, the intrusiveness and control could be a more significant detriment. That may be more offensive than lack of material goods.

[Filthy Keynes]

Close. The promissory note that you sign is put into their vault as the asset.


...and then packaged up as a Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO) and sold to international investors.

[Book]

Actually the money supply is owned by the top and you all rent it...and the cost of the rent is hidden in the prices of everything...since you all at the bottom all have to pay the rent.



Notice how HT always says "you" and never "us"? As if he actually believes he wasn't and isn't also down here at the bottom with us...lol.

:oo-->

[G2Rad]

he

I thought he was she ???

[G2Rad]

So, how bad can it possibly be?


http://mises.org/images4/WorldPopulation.jpg

[G2Rad]

So, how bad can it possibly be?


http://mises.org/images4/WorldPopulation.jpg


http://www.global-warming-truth.com/images/World-Population-Growth-to-2050.JPG

bubble areas:

1. China
2. India
3. Africa
4. Latin America

[Spectrism]

Actually the money supply is owned by the top and you all rent it...and the cost of the rent is hidden in the prices of everything...since you all at the bottom all have to pay the rent.



Notice how HT always says "you" and never "us"? As if he actually believes he wasn't and isn't also down here at the bottom with us...lol.

:oo-->


For some, the coming situations are so fearful that they dare not see themselves as part.

For others, the alter ego speaks the truth but the ego does not act in wisdom to avoid a coming disaster. This internal dichotomy is a form of denial.


Please name for me someone born before 1890 who did not "go poof". We all are part of this human condition with death in our frames and failure in our characters. We MUST appeal to a pure and holy authority who does promise to cover our needs.


Money supply. Hmmm... what is money? Is it possible for the top to own all the money? When you play monopoly, if one player wins all the money, do you go poof? Whois the top when you walk away from the board game? Does that monopoly money have value outside the game?

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

Close. The promissory note that you sign is put into their vault as the asset.


...and then packaged up as a Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO) and sold to international investors.


...who then enter into credit default swaps (CDS) to speculate on the synthetic positions.

[Hypertiger]

Money is a tool the top created to make the power acquisition easier.

The enterprise the top owns is food powered.

Money is a food substitute

Food is power.

The medium of exchange is power.

Allow me to take more of another's power than I supply and I care not who makes the rules of the game you are all playing.

Eventually the power will sucked from the hands of the many into the hands of the few or one...

Then those with the power will make and break the rules of the game you are all playing.


All money is decreed money...fiat...

The top says this is money...Or else...period end of story....

You Farmer are on the Land owned by the LORD of the land and will pay tribute to the LORD of 1 Gold coin a year...

Where do I get this GOLD coin?

You can take one short ton of grain to the grainery of the LORD and there you will be given a GOLD coin for it and then you can give the gold coin to the servant of the LORD...

What if I refuse?

Then the LORD will drive you from the Land that the LORD is the LORD of...

There you go an abundant supply of virtually free food to power your wildest hopes and dreams...Lies and delusions...

22 And The LORD said, Behold! The man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand and also take from the Tree of Life, and eat, and live forever,
23 The LORD sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground out of which he was taken.
24 And He drove the man out. And He lodged the cherubs at the east of the Garden of Eden, and the flaming sword whirling around to guard the way of the Tree of Life.

Well what is done with all that Food the tillers of the LORD's land give the LORD as Tribute?

It powers the Absolute capitalist Hierarchical food powered make work enterprise...

The city state...Or Civilization...the thing you materialized into.

The thing you are in right now.

The sword is a lie...that guards Truth...It is whirling around and opposing your attempts to reach Truth no matter what angle of the approach.

GOD did not put it there...The LORD did.

The top.

Legal?

Human beings have no ability to make or break LAW.

All that Human beings have the ability to do is make and break rules and call the rules LAW.

But if the rule attempts to break LAW...LAW will break the rule.

Within the Universe you can manipulate the Universe however you desire...As long as you don't attempt to break LAW or get caught breaking a rule.

Committing a crime and being caught is illegal according to the rules of the game you are all playing.

Committing a crime and not being caught is legal according to the game you are all playing.

The top created the rules of the game you are all playing.

The game the top designed so that the top wins by default.

[BillBoard]

The top created the rules of the game you are all playing.

The game the top designed so that the top wins by default.

Blah, blah, blah.............. Ad infinitum!



THE SUCCESS SECRET OF THE JEWS:

For the Master Class (jews) there is only one rule: There are no rules.

And for the slave class (Goyim) they must be held to a higher standard, they must be strictly held to follow the rules that the Master Class promulgates.

[FunnyMoney]

Money is a tool the top created to make the power acquisition easier.

....

The top created the rules of the game you are all playing.

The game the top designed so that the top wins by default.



And thus I refer you back to post #14.

[Uncle Salty]

Withdrawing from the bank kills their reserve requirements. No deposit, reduced ability to make loans.

They die.


Banks don't need fiat reserves to base their loans on for fractional reserve lending.

As I understand it, when a bank makes a loan, they consider it an asset "because you will pay it back in the future because you're a good customer", so therefore they can loan out even more based on that "asset" (which is actually a liability, and nothing more than a digital ledger entry that was entered in the BLACK column instead of the RED column).

From Wikipedia:

Central banks generally mandate reserve requirements that require banks to keep a minimum fraction of their demand deposits as cash reserves. This both limits the amount of money creation that occurs in the commercial banking system, and ensures that banks have enough ready cash to meet normal demand for withdrawals. Problems can arise however, when depositors seek withdrawal of a large proportion of deposits at the same time; this can cause a bank run or, when problems are extreme and widespread, a systemic crisis. To mitigate these problems, central banks (or other government institutions) generally regulate and oversee commercial banks, act as lender of last resort to commercial banks, and also insure the deposits of the commercial banks' customers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

[Awoke]

Withdrawing from the bank kills their reserve requirements. No deposit, reduced ability to make loans.

They die.


Banks don't need fiat reserves to base their loans on for fractional reserve lending.

As I understand it, when a bank makes a loan, they consider it an asset "because you will pay it back in the future because you're a good customer", so therefore they can loan out even more based on that "asset" (which is actually a liability, and nothing more than a digital ledger entry that was entered in the BLACK column instead of the RED column).

From Wikipedia:

Central banks generally mandate reserve requirements that require banks to keep a minimum fraction of their demand deposits as cash reserves. This both limits the amount of money creation that occurs in the commercial banking system, and ensures that banks have enough ready cash to meet normal demand for withdrawals. Problems can arise however, when depositors seek withdrawal of a large proportion of deposits at the same time; this can cause a bank run or, when problems are extreme and widespread, a systemic crisis. To mitigate these problems, central banks (or other government institutions) generally regulate and oversee commercial banks, act as lender of last resort to commercial banks, and also insure the deposits of the commercial banks' customers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking





I hear you, Salty, but what you're talking about is a bank run. I'm just saying that for fractional reserve lending, banks use digital ledger entries instead of cold cash fiat bills.
If everyone tried to pull their savings out of the banks in actual fiat, yes, they would close. There probably isn't enough printed paper money on the entire earth to back up the digital savings of just the USA population alone.

Banks runs can happen, but banks don't need physical fiat bills to loan out more digital credit.

[Joe King]

This is fantasy.

If there was a rampage of withdrawal requests, the government could easily step in and create the necessary "money" to meet the withdrawal demand, even if they had to shut the banks down for a week while they printed and distributed cash. (Technically, I think the banks have 30 days to honor a withdrawal request.) If every adult American were to withdraw $10,000 tomorrow (and most Americans don't have that much to withdraw), the government could easily create the $2 trillion to cover it. Remember, they have essentially pledged to back the FDIC to $Infinity.

What you would have is a brief run on cash (days to weeks) followed by an incredible cash flood. This is the ultimate deflation-to-inflation blowoff scenario. Adding $2T to a $15T money supply is an immediate 13% inflation burst. But it's not hyper-inflation, as it would be a short-duration event.

The banks and "the system" would remain standing.

Incidentally, you want to be holding some cash for the initial cash-shortage event that would last a week or so, and PMs for after the cash flood hits.


Hi Sparky.

While I agree that there isn't enough cash in existence to allow everyone to ask for cash instead of making a deposit, but how does people demanding cash instead of making a deposit add anything to the money supply when the cash they're getting is nothing more than the physical representation of the private bank credit itself?
i.e. FRN's are nothing more than evidence of someones debt.

Afterall, the only way anyone can get cash out of a bank, legally anyways, is to hold a Right to draw on an account in the first place.


BTW, if most everyone did demand cash, it would be like 1933 all over again, and the banks would close and we'd all be forced to go electronic for transactions.
Same as there were more receipts for gold than the amount of gold held by the banks in 1933, there's more electronic claims to "Dollars" today than there are physical FRN "Dollars" to pay them off in.

I'm kinda thinking that the ptb would like to see a bank run.

[Sparky]

Yes, Joe, I pointed this out in Reply #7. It would only be inflationary if they were more inclined to spend it once it was out of the bank, because that would be adding to money velocity, which is inflationary.

It is interesting to think what a "run" on cash would really do, since so few transactions require cash any more. If the banks ran out of cash, it would really only matter if retailers stopped accepting credit cards.

Now technically, it could be a problem if everyone were to empty their bank accounts by using up all their available credit. Then the banks couldn't even cover the deposits electronically. But as I said before, this would only be a temporary problem, as the government would step in and extend the banks unlimited credit. This would be one more step toward pushing the real problem down the road, which is a bankrupt government dependent upon the faith of everyone to whom they owe money. The system won't break down until that faith goes away. This is why China owns us, because they hold the cards. But they won't do anything until they are in a position to defend themselves against our military. They can do this by improving their military, while forcing our military to starve monetarily. This is a long process, which is why we are probably a full Kondratiev cycle (80-100 years) away from the demise of the U.S. empire. This cycle will just be a lowering of living standards, and not a system collapse.

[JohnQPublic]

...The last peak had no jet airplanes, no ... .... .... no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?



Yeah, the last peak had no RFID chips and tracking taxes was done with pencil and paper.

So, how bad can it possibly be? Are you sure you want the answer to that?

This brings up an interesting point. I think the standard of living in terms of "comforts" will remain higher through the next bottom. However, the intrusiveness and control could be a more significant detriment. That may be more offensive than lack of material goods.


I think one problem could be that we are running out of petroleum, without with 99% if your list goes "poof".

[Neuro]

I think somehow, if you start to look at how you can break their backs "legally", you are limiting yourself too much, since they define what is legal. It is better to ask how you can break their backs and get away with it regardless of the legality... Morality is probably a better yardstick, it is not immoral to break the chains of the oppressor, but it is immoral to kill or injure an innocent person in the process...

[Neuro]

So, how bad can it possibly be?


http://mises.org/images4/WorldPopulation.jpg
95% population reduction?

[gunDriller]

exactly how much silver do we need to buy, to break the bank ?

it would be helpful to get a number. if it's an extra 10 million ounces a year, that's 200,000 ounces a week ... so if 10,000 ex-GIM'ers bought 20 ounces a week ... etc.

i wonder if such a program would be considered "financial terrorism".

not that the banks don't spread their own brand of terror, by seizing homes that are owned free & clear ...

[Joe King]

Yes, Joe, I pointed this out in Reply #7. It would only be inflationary if they were more inclined to spend it once it was out of the bank, because that would be adding to money velocity, which is inflationary.
Sorry, guess I missed that post. :D I've been kinda busy lately, but had been wanting to respond to your post since I'd first read it.


It is interesting to think what a "run" on cash would really do, since so few transactions require cash any more. If the banks ran out of cash, it would really only matter if retailers stopped accepting credit cards.Or if there were further reductions in peoples lines of credit and putting everything on the card simply wasn't an option for larger numbers of people.



Now technically, it could be a problem if everyone were to empty their bank accounts by using up all their available credit. Then the banks couldn't even cover the deposits electronically.
If people were to spend their accounts empty by making purchaes electronically, the banks would just shuffle the digits around between all the banks same as they do now and someone elses account would end up with the digits that used to represent your credit.
It would be no skin off the banks butt unless everyone who sold something asked for cash as opposed to making a deposit. Which would just be a bank-run, but from the opposite direction.


But as I said before, this would only be a temporary problem, as the government would step in and extend the banks unlimited credit.This would be one more step toward pushing the real problem down the road, which is a bankrupt government dependent upon the faith of everyone to whom they owe money. The system won't break down until that faith goes away.This is point at which we are already at.
i.e. it's all a matter of faith in the gov's ability to tax to a sufficient degree in order to make their promise to pay at some point in the future, good.

That faith will be lost when it becomes readily apparent that they will not be able to levy taxes sufficient to cover their promises, and are seen as merely "printing" the "money" with which to make the debts good with.
We seem to be getting close to that point in a lot of the Worlds eyes


This is why China owns us, because they hold the cards. But they won't do anything until they are in a position to defend themselves against our military. They can do this by improving their military, while forcing our military to starve monetarily. This is a long process, which is why we are probably a full Kondratiev cycle (80-100 years) away from the demise of the U.S. empire. This cycle will just be a lowering of living standards, and not a system collapse.

That's what they're hoping for anyways. A "soft" landing as opposed to a hard one.
But I certainly do not see any way it'll last another 80 years at the rate it's going.

[Sparky]

...The last peak had no jet airplanes, no ... .... .... no digital mass storage devices that have archived a century of knowledge and learning.

So, how bad can it possibly be?



Yeah, the last peak had no RFID chips and tracking taxes was done with pencil and paper.

So, how bad can it possibly be? Are you sure you want the answer to that?

This brings up an interesting point. I think the standard of living in terms of "comforts" will remain higher through the next bottom. However, the intrusiveness and control could be a more significant detriment. That may be more offensive than lack of material goods.


I think one problem could be that we are running out of petroleum, without with 99% if your list goes "poof".


That's a valid point. But since you can't really "uninvent" technology, I think it would mean that these things would become more expensive and less available to the middle class. Because even with peak oil, we're not running out of petroleum, it's just far more expensive to extract.

[Sparky]

This is why China owns us, because they hold the cards. But they won't do anything until they are in a position to defend themselves against our military. They can do this by improving their military, while forcing our military to starve monetarily. This is a long process, which is why we are probably a full Kondratiev cycle (80-100 years) away from the demise of the U.S. empire. This cycle will just be a lowering of living standards, and not a system collapse.

That's what they're hoping for anyways. A "soft" landing as opposed to a hard one.
But I certainly do not see any way it'll last another 80 years at the rate it's going.


I think that we're heading for something harsher than a soft landing, but not a collapse. More like "hard times". But a collapse is not out of the question. Preps are good for both scenarios.

The media claims these are already hard times because so many people are on food stamps, or need assistance. It'll be real hard times when there isn't enough food to honor the stamps.

[FunnyMoney]

The media claims these are already hard times because so many people are on food stamps, or need assistance. It'll be real hard times when there isn't enough food to honor the stamps.

As Richard Russell said recently, " ... there's a hard raing coming....".

20 to 40 percent inflation for a few years and very high inflation for a decade or two afterwards is enough to create the scenario you mentioned.