Author Topic: 2007 Redeux?  (Read 11826 times)

Offline hazmatt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1363
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #90 on: December 28, 2021, 11:52:42 AM »
I'm a prepare for the worst and hope for the best kinda guy but it's tough to prepare for unknowns.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18114
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #91 on: December 28, 2021, 12:17:02 PM »
To compare covid to the sinking of the titanic is silly at best

They would certainly die if they stayed on the ship..while millions live just fine not taking the shot

Too bad the globe doesn't hold China financially responsible for their leaked latest bioweapon experiment

But seeing the majority of the globe are Chinas customers/consumers of slave created products,  how can they?

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #92 on: December 28, 2021, 12:29:23 PM »
To compare covid to the sinking of the titanic is silly at best

You need to read that post a little more closely.

That analogy was referring to the complacency of investors not taking the scale of the current stock market risks seriously. 

The COVID comment was another separate, but more recent example of the dangers of Recency Bias.

But bother were referring to investors underestimating the current market risks.

Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #93 on: December 28, 2021, 02:56:23 PM »

A good sampling on different views.  Some I agree with, some I don't, but it's good to hear the counter argument if well argued.  I do agree there are a lot of unknowns. 



Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #94 on: December 28, 2021, 05:00:00 PM »
We've seen this movie before. 

Except this time it's going to be In IMAX. 

In 3D!


Quote
“The real danger comes from [the Fed] encouraging or inadvertently tolerating rising inflation and its close cousin of extreme speculation and risk taking, in effect standing by while bubbles and excesses threaten financial markets,” Volcker later wrote in his memoir.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/12/28/inflation-interest-rates-thomas-hoenig-federal-reserve-526177
« Last Edit: December 28, 2021, 05:14:09 PM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17345
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #95 on: December 29, 2021, 03:25:04 AM »
Long term, yes.

But housing and commodities are also entrapped in the current EVERYTHING BUBBLE.  When things pop, those are getting their heads lopped off too, IMHO.

Precocious metals and gems have some usefulness to store value through the storm, but only if you are taking physical possession of the asset.  If you are paying for storage, you are losing purchasing power from the overhead. 

If you are nearing retirement, you want to store a $mil of Kugerrands in your attic?  Bury it in your back yard? 

The only other option is buying gold options
, but then you are just back to a different kind of paper.  If I'm going to do that, then I prefer gold mining stock.  I don't have to risk storage or pay for secure storage.  The mining companies revenue would hopefully be very resilient as the thing they are generating revenue mining retains value.  In addition, they have significant physical assets like land, equipment, etc.  YMMV. 

Some people say crypto is the new gold.  I'm not buying it.  crypto seems more reliant on a constant stream of "Greater Fools" than most other investments.  Didn't we just have a bout of massive valuation swings?  20+ % over a weekend?  Does that sound like stable store of value?  Smells like Tulips to me.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

IMHO, if I can't pay my Federal taxes with it, then it isn't a currency. <Shrug>

A friend is walking me through options.  Not something I want to dabble in, but might be worth a smallish side bet.  Might could make some inverse return from the market crashing, enough to offset the inflation cost of the rest sitting safely in cash during the upheaval.  I haven't decided.  But I'd do that before buying any crypto. ;)


anything is worthless if people arent willing to buy it.  for example diamonds, they arent rare and they are plentiful.  it's just a gimmick.  sure spent 6 months of your salary to buy an engagement ring.  diamonds last forever. gold mining stock is just as worthless if people dont want to buy gold.  just like anything else.

in your way of thinking that we are gonna crash. only thing worthy buying is what you can sell, food stuff.  If you really believe that the economy is going the way you think, buy rice or beans and store them in buckets.  that would be worth more than your precious gold papers.  even if you dont sell it, you can live on it.  sure gold stock or bonds have plenty of fiber but you cant live on it.  or at least if paper toilet disappears like last year, you can still use it as toilet paper or maybe to cook the rice or beans.

semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #96 on: December 29, 2021, 08:25:55 AM »
in your way of thinking that we are gonna crash. only thing worthy buying is what you can sell, food stuff.

You are correct if you are predicting all out nuclear-winter, Mad-Max societal collapse.  That's not what I'm predicting. 

I have about 6 months MRE and such out at my cabin at land outside of the city.
Any total collapse that would be decades long, I have a 9mm for that.  I'll just eat a bullet.  Some games just aren't worth the candle.


I'm thinking of a economic scenario more along the lines of something halfway between 2007 and 1929 crashes.  Worse than 2007, not worse than 1929.
Devastating.  Retirement savings wiped-out.  Various bank, and pension fund collapses.  Significant business failures and home foreclosures.  Social/political unrest; perhaps some sporadic violence.  Someone might start a war somewhere; or two.

But I'm assuming it will be a scenario where there is still a banking system, a government, electricity, flushing toilets, internet and a stock market.



« Last Edit: December 29, 2021, 10:32:09 AM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18114
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #97 on: December 29, 2021, 08:58:30 AM »
Have to wonder how bad it would get and how fast...

I can see the evening news bugged eyed screaming at its audience stating it's the end of civility...

Imagine how that would inspire some...more peaceful protests..

Flash mob the sams, targets, Walmarts, grocery and liquor
 stores and we are all hurting quickly

I see a controlled crash quickly becoming an uncontrolled shift in society for the worse...

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18114
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #98 on: December 29, 2021, 09:31:26 AM »
This is the tie I am talking about...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/omicron-could-prompt-looser-fed-policy-analyst-145339454.html

Any excuse to manipulate...

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #99 on: December 29, 2021, 09:54:09 AM »
Any excuse to manipulate...


It is a possible scenario that excuses are found to stop the tightening before a stock collapse (I don't think it will be Omicron driving that).  If they could hold inflation down to no more than 10% and not collapse the stock market for now, they might try for that.  Sucks hard for average families, but that doesn't mean they won't do it to protect big banks and Wall Street.

That doesn't mean a collapse won't happen eventually, but they might decide to start printing again postpone the inevitable for a while longer.  The threat doesn't go away, just grows bigger then, and will be even worse when it eventually comes. 



Still, I'm not sure that any real tightening won't collapse this teetering circus by accident, and once it gets a head of steam going, the Fed might not be able to stop it until it's run it's course by any amount of printing.

Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17345
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #100 on: December 29, 2021, 12:10:51 PM »


I'm thinking of a economic scenario more along the lines of something halfway between 2007 and 1929 crashes.  Worse than 2007, not worse than 1929.
Devastating.  Retirement savings wiped-out.  Various bank, and pension fund collapses.  Significant business failures and home foreclosures.  Social/political unrest; perhaps some sporadic violence.  Someone might start a war somewhere; or two.

But I'm assuming it will be a scenario where there is still a banking system, a government, electricity, flushing toilets, internet and a stock market.

stil in your possible scenario, with tens of millions out of work,  gold or whatever precious gems even in paper will lose value faster than anything else.

somethings in this thread are way far out. like we just keep printing money, we don't, it needs to be backed up by gold or bonds. also the money is not spent in one year, it's over a number of years. most of the money will be well spent. infrastructure and health.  and that's money well spent. unless you listen to Facebook.


semp

you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18114
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #101 on: December 29, 2021, 12:18:55 PM »
They have been printing trillions of dollars that are not backed by anything for decades now...

Do you think bad orange man and potato head thought hmm lets print a trillion for all that gold sitting in some vault somewhere?

The dollar has been based off oil since the 70's

That agreement is dead and so is the dollar unless we go to war to prevent it from being replaced as the reserve currency by another country's currency that is actually backed by gold

Eagler

"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #102 on: December 29, 2021, 01:21:41 PM »
gold or whatever precious gems even in paper will lose value faster than anything else.


Have you actually researched how gold performed during the Great Depression, Great Recession and the DotCom Bust?

Gold tends to be inversely correlated with the stock market.  It is seen as a safe-haven in times of market turmoil and/or rising inflation.  Sometimes during the crash it will drop a little because people are selling their gold (which held value well) to pay off margin.  But that is after a run-up before the turmoil.  If the stock market crashed, it will usually be nice to be holding some position in gold assuming you bought some before it zoomed.

I would never go all in on gold, but it is a useful hedge in a diversified portfolio, especially at scary times.  I consider it a hedge rather than an investment.  I wouldn't hold a lot in boom times.  Maybe just hold a little, again as a hedge.


If you disagree, that's ok with me.  We all make our best guesses and place our bets and live with the results.  If you have a better game plan for a crash, I wouldn't mind hearing it.

In any case, good luck.     
« Last Edit: December 29, 2021, 01:36:16 PM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18114
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #103 on: December 29, 2021, 01:42:36 PM »
somethings in this thread are way far out. like we just keep printing money, we don't, it needs to be backed up by gold or bonds. ...
semp

Please see here who is the largest holder of the debt created by printing money out of thin air...psst it's the fed themselves...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/201881/holders-of-the-us-public-debt/

That's what happens when you lower interest rates so low there is not a decent payback for the investor

It's been a rigged game for a while now..

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline CptTrips

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8262
Re: 2007 Redeux?
« Reply #104 on: December 29, 2021, 02:08:34 PM »
somethings in this thread are way far out. like we just keep printing money, we don't, it needs to be backed up by gold or bonds.



U.S. dollar is no longer backed by gold.


"Printing money" is a euphemism.  Treasury prints the actual physical currency, but that is only a tiny fraction of the total money supply.

And yes, the Fed just creates it out of thin air.


My understanding:

1.  When Fed wants to "create" money they call up one of their primary dealers  (mega-banks, Goldman's, ect) and tells them the Fed would like to "buy" a trillion dollars of U.S. treasuries. 

2.  The bank says OK and transfers the assets they are authorized to sell. 

3.  The Fed says thanks and types in some numbers that just appear in the banks reserve account.  They could have picked 2 trillion or 3 trillion.  or 100 trillion.  They just make up what ever they want.  It's simply a matter of typing more digits.

4.  The bank then has excess reserves they can lend out for profit or buy assets, thus injecting that magically created digital money into the economy.

5.  The Fed can then hold that government debt on their balance sheet. 

6.  The government either pays it off from tax revenue or issues more debt to cover it.

The Fed "prints" money by telling the primary dealer how much government debt they want to buy.  They just make that number up out of thin air depending on how much liquidity they think they want to inject into the economy.  There is no limit other than the Fed's discretion.

New "money" is created in exchange  for new government debt.  How much money/debt is completely at the arbitrary discretion of the Fed.


[Edit]  Sorry, I think the above is how QE works.  And to add insult to injury, they are also buying mortgage backed securities.  Private citizen's home loans.  And other central banks (Japan?) are even buying private company stocks.  Insane. 

Here is a better description of the normal Fed mechanism: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/081415/understanding-how-federal-reserve-creates-money.asp





 
« Last Edit: December 29, 2021, 02:34:35 PM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.