We need to keep simple issues simple. There are a host of things we need to do, including creating energy alternatives. Underlying all of those issues, we still have a need for liquidity and debt keeps getting in the way. The market (not gov't or banking) needs to wake up from its sleep and realize that the table has been set to use real-time (floating) gold-as-money. Debt-free store of value has now been married with instant global liquidity (restrained only by trade value which now floats). I hope this creates appreciation for why the gold-dollar FIXED peg of $35/oz had to be severed so that gold could be re-monetized in real-time at the point of the market's choosing. This real-time migration MUST be bottom-up and organic and cannot be top-down in consideration of the legacy system of the USD. We must be as wise as serpents.
…please do educate. You spent all this time trying to bitch slap me/us that I didn't hear your message. Tell us what we should do within your thread, and please remember you are talking to people who are more like you than not. That have made changes themselves… Personally I am all ears and have made many changes behaviorally to be a part of the solution.I meant all due respect with my response so please take it that way. I DO NOT however care to be preached to nor do I respond well to the self righteous.
Respectfully
BOB
[quote=funglestrumpet]The thing I find most confusing is the complete absence of any discussion of climate change. Can it really be that it is such a hot topic in America that it is in fact too hot to discuss? Surely not!
We can clearly see that the climate is changing, and changing in line with how the science says it will change. With a weakening jet stream that is now prone to meander, farmers - and resilient communities for that matter - will find it very difficult to produce food when they do not know if they are going to suffer drought or deluge.
Climate change is not something that only concerns future generations, it is upon us now and unless we have some dramatic event, such as WW3, it is only going to get worse. Surely articles such as this one should at least take it into consideration, oil is a fossil fuel after all. Or is it the case that it is not only the Fed and the other central banks that have blindfolds on when it comes to difficult issues?
[/quote]
I don't know if you are referring to this site or in general, but there is a very good and long thread on climate change here:
https://peakprosperity.com/forum/definitive-global-climate-change-aka-global-warming-thread-general-discussion-and-questions/71
The other day I was watching C-Span which was showing a Senate Agriculture Committee hearing with the Secretary of Agriculture and the Department's Chief Economist. I found it heartening that both had a very sophisticated understanding of climate change, particularly with regard to its effects on, not surprisingly, agriculture. The message they were delivering was that the dry regions of the country, particularly the plains states and the southwest, should be preparing for drier conditions. They have already experienced a couple years of drought and this year appears to be shaping up to be another one. Low snowpack in the Rockies, Mississippi levels still low and the Ogalalla acquifer draining were all on the drawing board. Many of these areas are facing a real dilemma as to whether to continue to rely on irrigation which is dwindling or to switch to "dry land" farming. The latter may be be forced on them, which means lower production and exports of ag goods. They are also looking at another possible dust bowl that many of the farmers heard about from their parents and grandparents. There is a great deal of concern and awareness out there.
Doug
Watch out. Cheering for a way out of our current mess is unpopular on PP. There will NEVER be a tech fix; we will NEVER find cheap fuels; technology will NEVER allow us to view our impending decline of resources as a small glitch LOL Efficiency, miniaturization, conservation - all are starting to make a difference.
…not fair Brother. We have reems, and reems of discussion where we know what we could be doing, and using all of the above alternatives and technology but we have 'NO PLAN'. Talk all you want about how we can do things, and it is likely we would all agree. Now what are you going to do? Yup, you'll shake your head as we all do.Regards
BOB
@ smb12321,
Wonderful news! I would like to hear more about how these things you are speaking of are making a difference in a meaningful way. Will you please provide us with some concrete facts backed up with the appropriate sources to support up your claim? That way we will know that you have some credibility, and are not a troll getting your jollies... Contrary to what you may think, I believe everyone in this PP community would like nothing more than to find some truly workable solutions. Most people have families and want nothing more than to be assured that their children and grandchildren will have decent futures. But until those solutions are presented as being credible and being implemented most of us are hedging our bets, which, when you think about it, is a really rational thing to do. When there are systemic risks, any prudent person would take steps to mitigate those risks. The problem is, prudent people seem to be few and far between. It is always great to have contrarian opinions to make us think. But if you are going to take that kind of a stance don't just lob it out there like a grenade and then head for the hills. Justify what you say, and if you can't then don't waste our time with your silly opinions. Jan
Efficiency, miniaturization, conservation - all are starting to make a difference.
On page 3
If unemployment is instead substantially structural, some worry that attempts to raise aggregate demand will have little effect on unemployment and serve only to stoke inflation.
Would someone be so kind as to provide examples of the difference between structural and cyclical (perhaps noting where the edge is between the two) and also what indicators exist to denote an issue of one or the other. Further, if cyclical (I assume this means iwth the context of supply and demand - basic stuff) is what policymakers have presumed to be the issue (find ways to increase demand, to solve) what structural components would be waiting to A. undercut this effort and B. directly feed an acceleration of whatever mistake QE might be taking us towards?
Thanks for your thoughts if this gets a response,
I constantly have discussions with my friends about the state of the financial system and whether or not it can be fixed but at the end of the day, it really seems like all that anyone thinks to do, is continuously patch it up. Our economy is pretty much an old car that we continue to take to the shop, as we refuse to get newer better models but really we all know, it's just that it is a very difficult task to pull off. One of my friends has been writing a huge book for months, about ways to fix the economy and while we all have been laughing at him all along the way, at least he's one of the few trying to take a stand.
I personally have taken a completely different path from my friend because while he has been researching models that shy away from the system, I've entrenched myself deeper into it. I've been investing more and more, in large-cap companies and penny stocks, that I find through penny stock newsletter sources, like Penny Stock Dream and various others. I guess I've taken more of the defeatist, "if you can't beat them, join them," outlook. Hopefully though, someone does find a way to change this all because as it stands now, it seems as though we always have a large portion of the world, left to suffer.