4 ms·

This is hilarious, or would be if the consequences were not so sad. It's listening to someone standing on the deck of the titanic talking about the complexity

This is hilarious, or would be if the consequences were not so sad. It's listening to someone standing on the deck of the titanic talking about the complexity of the design of the ship, how many great and esteemed members of the establishment signed off on it, and how crazy it is that anyone on the deck is pointing out that it's sinking because they can actually see it sinking, like anyone else can that actually looks at the horizon. This is not a rebuttal. Arguments from authority about why the masters of the universe have it all figured out and those who are pointing out that they have no clothes are just clueless barbarians at the gate are fundamentally invalid. Complexity, obfuscation and worship at the altar of authority do not actually make for solid fundamentals. This ship is going down, massively increasing the tokens for the representation of scarce resources so that the people who controlled the tokens back the last time they completely failed, does not make the people that controlled those tokens any more competent than they were at the actual game in question last time they failed. All the central bank moves, the macroeconomic obfuscation, lies, Keynesian nonsense, negative interest rates, cash ban proposals, underhanded capital controls, worldwide currency wars, geopolitical games with oil to back fundamentally worthless scrip, bail-ins, bail-outs etc, none of it changes the underlying fact that the presently dominant system ordering the allocation and distribution of scarce resources is, as you sit here on the deck of the ship dismissing that fact, sinking below the horizon.

spangry 11y ago
Yes that is exactly what I'm doing; you've cleverly seen through my subterfuge. I concede the argument to your superior reasoning and reading comprehension. EDIT: Well this is embarrassing. I apologise to the guy above and below me. I guess it was actually my superior reading comprehension...
- etherael 11y ago
  You seem to have missed the thrust of my commentary, I am saying that you are correct, it is appropriate to scream bloody murder, and that the person dismissing this as "some random Australian who couldn't possibly know better than the masters of the universe", to whom I actually replied, was hilarious.
  - Throwaway23412 11y ago
    Maybe I'm misinterpreting you or you're misinterpreting me, but I feel like I'm arguing against the concept of predicting the future. It's absurd that this is even an argument. And when I say the top 1% are significantly better at making predictions than the average person, I mean better in certainty and specificity. Look at yours and spangry's comments. Full of vagueness. "Appropriate to scream bloody murder". About what exactly? It's certainly appropriate to scream bloody murder about things that are happening. It would be nonsensical to scream bloody murder about something that isn't happening. "the economic depression that will occur in the next 5 years will be started by bubbles popping in residential property markets" What a huge range of uncertainty. So when is this economic depression occurring? Tomorrow? 2017? 2021? What kind of economic depression? Minor? Major? Capable of plunging the world into the Great Depression? Such vague predictions are fundamentally worthless to the average person.
    - etherael 11y ago
      But you're not actually arguing the concept of predicting the future, you're arguing that when you throw something up, you can't predict that it's going to come down. Look at the charts, the writing is on the wall, denying at this point because the talking heads on the television are telling you that everything is going to be alright while it's very clearly not is not taking a cautious stance and saying one cannot predict the future, it is ignoring the facts on the ground as they are. Baltic dry index, Deutsche Bank CDS spread on 60 trillion of derivative exposure, Sovereign Debt CDS', the leverage of gold on the primary exchange in the world for paper vs physical gold, the buckling price of oil, the desperate moves of the central banks in the previous 8 years coupled with begging from the too big to fail banks that even more reckless and wild moves need to be undertaken (Let the banks charge negative interest on deposits, ban cash so the consumers can't avoid it, allow the banks to make the spread, give us more quantitative easing, keep manipulating the roulette wheel so we remain on top despite our utter incompetence, pay no attention to the market moves that say we're about to be destroyed, except of course to the extent you need to understand that if we are it's the end of the world as we know it because we're too big to fail, etc). The systemic cancer needs to be destroyed for the actual effective allocation of scarce resources to be performed, the existing central banking system, its oversight, and basically everything about it, needs to undergo creative destruction.

spangry 11y ago

Yes that is exactly what I'm doing; you've cleverly seen through my subterfuge. I concede the argument to your superior reasoning and reading comprehension. EDIT: Well this is embarrassing. I apologise to the guy above and below me. I guess it was actually my superior reading comprehension...

etherael 11y ago
You seem to have missed the thrust of my commentary, I am saying that you are correct, it is appropriate to scream bloody murder, and that the person dismissing this as "some random Australian who couldn't possibly know better than the masters of the universe", to whom I actually replied, was hilarious.
- Throwaway23412 11y ago
  Maybe I'm misinterpreting you or you're misinterpreting me, but I feel like I'm arguing against the concept of predicting the future. It's absurd that this is even an argument. And when I say the top 1% are significantly better at making predictions than the average person, I mean better in certainty and specificity. Look at yours and spangry's comments. Full of vagueness. "Appropriate to scream bloody murder". About what exactly? It's certainly appropriate to scream bloody murder about things that are happening. It would be nonsensical to scream bloody murder about something that isn't happening. "the economic depression that will occur in the next 5 years will be started by bubbles popping in residential property markets" What a huge range of uncertainty. So when is this economic depression occurring? Tomorrow? 2017? 2021? What kind of economic depression? Minor? Major? Capable of plunging the world into the Great Depression? Such vague predictions are fundamentally worthless to the average person.
  - etherael 11y ago
    But you're not actually arguing the concept of predicting the future, you're arguing that when you throw something up, you can't predict that it's going to come down. Look at the charts, the writing is on the wall, denying at this point because the talking heads on the television are telling you that everything is going to be alright while it's very clearly not is not taking a cautious stance and saying one cannot predict the future, it is ignoring the facts on the ground as they are. Baltic dry index, Deutsche Bank CDS spread on 60 trillion of derivative exposure, Sovereign Debt CDS', the leverage of gold on the primary exchange in the world for paper vs physical gold, the buckling price of oil, the desperate moves of the central banks in the previous 8 years coupled with begging from the too big to fail banks that even more reckless and wild moves need to be undertaken (Let the banks charge negative interest on deposits, ban cash so the consumers can't avoid it, allow the banks to make the spread, give us more quantitative easing, keep manipulating the roulette wheel so we remain on top despite our utter incompetence, pay no attention to the market moves that say we're about to be destroyed, except of course to the extent you need to understand that if we are it's the end of the world as we know it because we're too big to fail, etc). The systemic cancer needs to be destroyed for the actual effective allocation of scarce resources to be performed, the existing central banking system, its oversight, and basically everything about it, needs to undergo creative destruction.