# Economic collapse



## chester5731 (Jul 6, 2011)

How many of you have any faith in this article?

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/Ma...511043/?promo_code=13E5C-1&utm_source=taboola


I hop the link works.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

The article is 100% correct. Of course we cannot print and borrow our way to prosperity. The fact is that at some point, the bottom will fall out...but when? 5 years? 50? Nobody knows.


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

The article has truth in it, but beware their own agenda: Selling fear.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

MichaelZ said:


> The article has truth in it, but beware their own agenda: Selling fear.


Yep. I've gotten wise to the doom-peddlers.

"Home invasions are on the rise! And now a word from our sponsor, Liberty safes."

"And now for our detailed analysis of how a global economic collapse is in the near future, brought to you by our sponsor, a supplier of gold and silver."

Etc, etc. etc.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

If you read a variety of sources and use some common sense, you can't help but come to the same conclusion.


----------



## am1too (Dec 30, 2009)

Txsteader said:


> If you read a variety of sources and use some common sense, you can't help but come to the same conclusion.


Common sense is already on the very short list.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

am1too said:


> Common sense is already on the very short list.





am1too said:


> whoops, double post


Ah, but that bears repeating!


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

A review of just American History ( still a fairly young country) will show a series of boom times followed by recession/depression. So the prediction that the US will have a recession (sometime ) is a good bet. I predict there will be a tornado, a wildfire and an earthquake in California this year. 

American post WWII economic growth and prosperity of the 50 and 60 started to slow in the 70's though it continued. I lived in an economic boom time and am glad I did. Economic Growth will be very slow for a while and Americas standard of living will decrease in relation to the rest of the world though it will be very comfortable for the foreseeable future. 

A close look at our current economy shows a concentration of wealth with the wealthy getting wealthier while the poor remain poor and many in the middle class fall into poverty.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

I'm not a member of the Cult of Doom. The sheep always get slaughtered when things get bad but not everyone does.

I read this yesterday and found it particularly interesting. http://www.freemansperspective.com/money-issues-in-the-us/. I don't buy into the notion of zombie apocalypse but I do see the government defaulting on it's debt. They are already talking about partial default when they use keywords like Social Security Reform.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

*The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse*.'


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

There is, and has been for over a century, an unrelenting attack on capitalism.

I started reading an article last night written by Bertrand Russell in 1920 titled 'The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism'. It's a long but worthwhile read toward educating oneself, being able to see the signs & connect the dots. Interestingly, Russell admits that violent revolution is always unsuccessful. And, in a roundabout way, I think he's admitting that even under a communist system, there will be separate classes........a problem that they have yet to resolve.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

This is more of a general chat thing but. . .

Remove all the hyperbole and look at the facts. Let's stick to only the federal government.

Fact #1 A huge number of people today get their money from government. This includes welfare recipients but it also includes social security recipients, government workers (current and retired) and private industry employees working to fill government contracts (i.e. ship yard workers building Navy vessels).

Fact #2 The US is currently borrowing around 45% of every dollar it spends.

Fact #3 The number of baby boomers who are going to soon switch from being a tax asset to a tax liability is huge.

Fact #4 Government give away programs have increased dramatically and there seems to be more and more increase coming.


Now here's the problem. Once all those baby boomers become a draw on the system and all the new programs kick in the government will need even more money and have even less coming in. That means they will have to increase the borrowing.

At some point even the most stupid lender is going to realize that the US will NEVER be able to pay back the money they are asking to borrow *and* at some point the US won't even be able to make the payments on the interest on those loans. At that time no one is going to lend money to the government.

Now what? Even if the percentage of borrowed money doesn't increase (unlikely) w/o the ability to borrow the budget will have to be cut by *45%*. That means a lot of people are going to find out they no longer have money coming in, either free money or they will no longer have a job. Can you even begin to imagine what will happen then? Do you really, really, REALLY think people will peacefully go "Oh, hum. . .that's bad but what can I do. . ."? Or do you think a good percentage of them are going to be just a bit upset and take to the streets? And don't you think a lot of them might just deiced since you have something and they don't they'll just take it from you?

Be afraid people, be VERY afraid. I've been ringing this warning bell for at least 30 years but no one wants to hear it.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> \ Do you really, really, REALLY think people will peacefully go "Oh, hum. . .that's bad but what can I do. . ."? Or do you think a good percentage of them are going to be just a bit upset and take to the streets?


And what possible good do you think it will do for them to take to the streets other than to jump up and down and scream and holler? Streets will not provide them anything, and neither will taking what other people have.... which is basically nothing but a string of electrons flowing between computers.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> And what possible good do you think it will do for them to take to the streets other than to jump up and down and scream and holler?


You remember the Watts riot? How about the Roddy King riots? How about any of the riots after a sports team losing or even winning a championship?

You must not have studied mob psychology at all. There's a great line in the Men In Black movie which sums it up:

_A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. _





Yvonne's hubby said:


> Streets will not provide them anything, and neither will taking what other people have.... which is basically nothing but a string of electrons flowing between computers.


Really? You think the food in your frig is just " a string of electrons flowing between computers"? Do you think you home itself is just "a string of electrons flowing between computers"? Do you think the generator powering your light is just " a string of electrons flowing between computers"? How about the supply of gasoline you have to run said generator?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Yes, it has to turn around at some point. For me, it gives me a chance to anticipate the return of the small local communities. Should the bottom drop out then that means that the things that the corporations sell will go sky high in prices but for local communities, we might be able to return to a barter system and still find that the effort of just plain living and seeking to enjoy yourself and your family and friends is now heightened. Woe is the day that the control of fresh water is wrested away from the people, [wells, springs and such] this is something that is happening now and possibly the only fly in the ointment.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> You remember the Watts riot? How about the Roddy King riots? How about any of the riots after a sports team losing or even winning a championship?
> 
> You must not have studied mob psychology at all. There's a great line in the Men In Black movie which sums it up:
> 
> ...


Yes, I remember the Watts riots, and the Rodney King riots.... and I do not recall much good coming out of them.... mostly just a bunch of angry individuals jumping up and down, screaming and hollering with some looters tossed in for good measure. 

The amount of food in my freezer, the fuel for my generator and in my vehicles are but a tiny fraction of my assets and would not provide the needs of anyone for any length of time unless that person put forth some positive energy of their own to replenish those reserves on a regular basis. As with most people in todays society, my assets are set up to provide me with a monetary "reward" over a long period of time, I do not have gold stashed under my mattress for anyone to easily walk away with. My assets are primarily like most everyones in our country.... a flow of electrons between computers that keeps track of my investments. When/if the economy shuts down, there are actually very few usable assets available to the looters and thieves in this country, and very few of them would know what to do with tangible assets if they had them.

Oh, and as to your quoted movie line.... "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." It is the rare individual who is actually smart, most are like sheep, and will walk over the edge of a cliff if someone else does it. :shrug:


----------



## suitcase_sally (Mar 20, 2006)

Shouldn't this thread be over in "Politics"?


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Txsteader said:


> There is, and has been for over a century, an unrelenting attack on capitalism.
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Read The Platform of the 1928 Socialist Party. Nearly all of it has been enacted by both parties over time.
> ...


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

The article is for all intents and purposes correct, but very vague about timing and a little hysterical in overall tone. If you earned $23k, and spent $35K yearly while already owing $167k how long would your creditors continue to loan you money? How many Trillions has the Fed secretly "loaned" to the EU/Japan/England to keep their economies afloat, and to buy our own bonds? What would the Chinese balance sheet look like without including the worthless IOUs from the US?

The whole industrialized worlds' economy is a house of cards, with the US at its center. When the peripheral cards start falling they'll bring the whole mess down faster than anyone can rationally react. When you hear the words "Bank Holiday" it will be too late to react, you can only lock and load.

My prediction? We've got 6-7 months to get our personal houses in order. TPTB, for political reasons, can't let it go any longer.

Have a great day!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yes, I remember the Watts riots, and the Rodney King riots.... and I do not recall much good coming out of them.... mostly just a bunch of angry individuals jumping up and down, screaming and hollering with some looters tossed in for good measure.


That's the point. Once the government dollars stop rolling in don't you thing there's going to be a lot of angry individuals?





Yvonne's hubby said:


> The amount of food in my freezer, the fuel for my generator and in my vehicles are but a tiny fraction of my assets and would not provide the needs of anyone for any length of time unless that person put forth some positive energy of their own to replenish those reserves on a regular basis.


Think about it logically. Say I'm unprepared I have no food stored, no generator to run my frig to store food and no gas to run it even if I had a generator therefor my family is going hungry and may starve. Then I see you have all of that do you think I'm going to just sit back and say "Well I should have prepared when I had the chance." Or do you think I might just start planning on how I can take what you have so my family can survive a bit longer?

Put your mob hat on and think about it. There a group who don't have electricity nor food and they see you do. How long before someone in the mob starts talking about taking it from you? How long after that do you think it will be before they take action? Forget the fact your supplies would only supply the mob for a very short time. Today is what matters.




Yvonne's hubby said:


> As with most people in todays society, my assets are set up to provide me with a monetary "reward" over a long period of time, I do not have gold stashed under my mattress for anyone to easily walk away with. My assets are primarily like most everyones in our country.... a flow of electrons between computers that keeps track of my investments. When/if the economy shuts down, there are actually very few usable assets available to the looters and thieves in this country, and very few of them would know what to do with tangible assets if they had them.


You think the rioters/looters though about any of that when they were burning their neighborhoods or stealing booze and tennis shoes?




Yvonne's hubby said:


> Oh, and as to your quoted movie line.... "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." It is the rare individual who is actually smart, most are like sheep, and will walk over the edge of a cliff if someone else does it. :shrug:


You average person is sort of smart and honest. When you put them in a group the average IQ and honesty drops.

Not quite what we are discussing but it shows it somewhat (full story at http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/soc_psych/latane_bystand.html)


_*Experiment 1. Where There's Smoke, There's (Sometimes) Fire*
They had subjects began to fill out questionnaires in a room to which they began to add smoke. In one condition the subject was alone. In another three naive subjects were in the room. In the final condition one naive subject and two confederates who purposely noticed and then ignored the smoke (even when the room became hazy from all the smoke).

75% of alone subjects calmly noticed the smoke and left the room to report it. But only 10% of the subjects with confederates reported it. Surprisingly, in the three naive bystander condition only 38% reported the smoke. 


_


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

.................A large % of retirees in the next ten years , have large amounts of Untaxed , invested income from their previous employment ! They are compelled to start receiving that income over a specified number of years and thus they will have to pay income tax on it as well . So , just because they are retired DOES NOT mean that they will have exited from the main body of working tax payers . , fordy:shrug:


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

suitcase_sally said:


> Shouldn't this thread be over in "Politics"?


Perhaps. But who better to survive such a calamity than homesteaders? 

IOW, it is pertinent to the homesteading ideology as many believe our particular skills will be especially helpful.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I've always felt the real disaster to prepare for was economic collapse.

Our whole financial system and most of the worlds is built completely out of cards. A lot of other nations have had money troubles, and we have here in the US.. think Great Depression.. 

I think though, when it does happen, it's going to make the great depression look like a holiday... It will effect the whole world. Eventually SOMEONE is going to lose faith in the US dollar, and from there it will be a fast spiral.. 

First things I did.. stock up on ammo, and the metal to toss it with.. 

Then I found a farm in the middle of nowhere, and there is only one way into it.. Unless fools want to hike miles and miles through the Appalachian foothills.. 

I've got some food stocked up... and I'd have enough to hunt... but I will have a lot more eventually, in the form of gardens and "pets" to eat.. 

I hope it doesn't boil down to that in my life time, but I think our financial system is the most unstable infrastructure we have in the US..


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

*"IMPORTANT NOTE:* Your subscriptions come with convenient automatic renewal. This means no chance of interrupted service. Thirty days before the end of each subscription period, Newsmax will notify you that your subscriptions are ending and will inform you of the renewal rates then in effect. Unless you cancel, your subscription will renew automatically and your credit/debit card on file will be charged $97.95 ($109.00 for print) for the first year (12 issues) of *Financial Intelligence Report*, $97 ($109 for print) for the first year (12 issues) of *Ultimate Wealth Report* and then the low renewal rate then in effect for each additional year of *Financial Intelligence Report* and *Ultimate Wealth Report*. If you want to cancel, just respond to the relevant notice *within 30 days, and you will not be charged.* You may also cancel by calling our Customer Service Call Center at 1-800-485-4350, or by completing our online Customer Service form. Please remember there is no risk, because you can cancel at any time for a full refund of the unused portion of your subscription."

As Paul Harvey used to say......."Now you know the rest of the story."

geo


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

fordy said:


> .................A large % of retirees in the next ten years , have large amounts of Untaxed , invested income from their previous employment ! They are compelled to start receiving that income over a specified number of years and thus they will have to pay income tax on it as well . So , just because they are retired DOES NOT mean that they will have exited from the main body of working tax payers . , fordy:shrug:


That is a very good point, but keep in mind those retirees will also be taking money right back out of the treasury via their Social Security and Medicare benefits. If we're lucky it will be a wash. I don't think we're that lucky - that enough people have saved enough money to pay more in taxes than their benefits.


----------



## o&itw (Dec 19, 2008)

Over the years people in general have become more selfish and less patriotic, letting the government take over for things that should be taken care of at the local level because it is "easier". It has happened in every advanced society in well recorded history. All those civilizations have fallen within 200 years or so. Great Britain did the best of getting through it, but one can see they are not much of a "world power" any more.

The possibility was discussed by several of our founding fathers, as they also paid attention to history. The government was designed to prevent that possibility as much as possible, which is why ours may last 250 years. Selfishness and laziness has been growing in this country for the last 60 years or so. We have been willing to "let the government take care of it" We have given control to the politicians and as time goes on there are fewer and fewer patriots in government just as there is in regular society.

We have sold ourselves out to the highest bidder. The very rich may escape the mess longer than the rest of us, but even they will not escape it in the long run.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Bernanke just testified before Congress that the fed IS printing money (although, "not _literally_" __) & that if monetary policy was tightened (rates rise), "the economy would tank". 

That means that he cannot exit QE. And the more they 'print', the worse it's going to get, until it collapses. 

IOW, as of now, there's no way out of the quagmire. And all the peachy economic news is nothing but an illusion.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

So what?

First off, these "fear mongers" have no more idea how things will turn out than anyone else. Some of those same "experts", probably were the ones, who said *America was done for*, during the *Japanese invasion* of the 1970's and 80's. What ever happend to that?

Who knows? maybe 1/2' the earth polulation will die off next year and the other half live one easy street?

As far a "preparing" we need to personally emass as much money as we possibly can and find ways to shelter from taxes. - Nothing new really, except that we can forget about any possibility of a Company pension.


If "everything collapses", nothing will matter, anyway. Everyone will be killing each other for food, medicine and fuel,.within two months.

Most of what is happening in the world is completely out of our control. Things will either get better, or they wont.

I'll sleep fine tonight - mainly because I'm so tired from working. worrying will accomplish nothing


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

The problem with stockpiling money is, you never know if it will be good or not.. 

There was a time when a wheel barrel full of money in Germany wouldn't buy you a slice of bread... 

I'd much rather have tangible items stockpiled that could be traded... ammo, honey, batteries, tobacco, liquor... you know.. all the things people REALLY put value on...


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Forbes' article about Bernanke's testimony. The Emperor has no clothes.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontev...ess-we-are-printing-money-just-not-literally/



> Where Bernanke completely flip-flopped, and did so constantly, was with the recent rise in interest rates. Asked by Colorado Congressman Ed Perlmutter why rates had surged from April to June, Bernanke pointed to improving economic conditions, along with the unwinding of risky speculative positions.
> 
> 
> A few minutes later, retorting to Stephen Fincher of Tennessee, Bernanke said the reason rates are low is &#8220;that the economy is weak and inflation is low.&#8221;
> ...


I don't know about y'all, but the flip-flopping and backtracking doesn't give me much confidence that we're going to come through this w/o a whole lotta pain........or that Bernanke eve knows what the heck he's doing.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

plowjockey said:


> If "everything collapses", nothing will matter, anyway. Everyone will be killing each other for food, medicine and fuel,.within two months.


This is the Zombie Apocalypse that I think is nothing more than a fairy tail. There have been plenty of economic collapses that don't suggest this will happen. 

IMHO, a collapse like the USSR is what we are more likely to see. The Federal Government will default and the states will no longer get their goodies or be able to borrow via the Federal Government. When that happens we will return to something more like the Articles of Confederation and the states will no longer be willing to throw money down the spiderholeof DC. 

Given the regionalism already displayed I think you will see more regional consolidation. There was a map the KGB put out a few years back of how they anticipated the US would break up and to me it seemed pretty accurate. I just don't buy into his notion of foreign influence. As a people we would probably not tolerate a foreign yoke.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Steve in PA said:


> This is the Zombie Apocalypse that I think is nothing more than a fairy tail. There have been plenty of economic collapses that don't suggest this will happen.
> 
> IMHO, a collapse like the USSR is what we are more likely to see. The Federal Government will default and the states will no longer get their goodies or be able to borrow via the Federal Government. When that happens we will return to something more like the Articles of Confederation and the states will no longer be willing to throw money down the spiderholeof DC.
> 
> Given the regionalism already displayed I think you will see more regional consolidation. There was a map the KGB put out a few years back of how they anticipated the US would break up and to me it seemed pretty accurate. I just don't buy into his notion of foreign influence. As a people we would probably not tolerate a foreign yoke.


Feel free to bury your head in the sand.

Shut off the EBT cards, Section 8, SSI, the ATM cards(banks have not money), the electricity grid, Government paychecks, Government pensions, oil/gas royalties and disrupt the food and fuel supplies, because no one is getting paid. No one can work, because they must stay home and guard their "stuff"

Watch how different - and fun, our *meltdown *will be.

BTW the Russian "collapse", was not economical, but political.

Also, their citizens, did not possess* 300 million guns.*


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

simi-steading said:


> I've always felt the real disaster to prepare for was economic collapse.
> 
> Our whole financial system and most of the worlds is built completely out of cards. A lot of other nations have had money troubles, and we have here in the US.. think Great Depression..
> 
> ...


According to everything I have read the great depression was world wide too. Funny thing is, most folks living here in the Appalachian hills were mostly unaffected. They had never enjoyed the bounty of the big money, and didnt miss it when it was gone.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

The feds are printing billions of dollars each month to prop up the economy , it's all fake to keep everyone subdude until everything is set up. then the collapse will happen. Things are being done and said to get the people to trust certain political leaders-the very same ones that are doing this final act upon us.
Beware the man on a white horse.


----------



## Appalachia (Jul 11, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> According to everything I have read the great depression was world wide too. Funny thing is, most folks living here in the Appalachian hills were mostly unaffected. They had never enjoyed the bounty of the big money, and didnt miss it when it was gone.




"Well somebody told us wall street fell, but we were so poor that we couldn't tell."


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> And what possible good do you think it will do for them to take to the streets other than to jump up and down and scream and holler? Streets will not provide them anything, and neither will taking what other people have.... which is basically nothing but a string of electrons flowing between computers.


 Ah...did you see the riots in Europe? Were you around in '92 after the Rodney King incident? When large numbers of people dont get what they want they take to the streets and riot. Thats just what they do.


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

7thswan said:


> The feds are printing billions of dollars each month to prop up the economy , it's all fake to keep everyone subdude until everything is set up. then the collapse will happen. Things are being done and said to get the people to trust certain political leaders-the very same ones that are doing this final act upon us.
> Beware the man on a white horse.


Swan who is the man on a white horse ?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

7thswan said:


> The feds are printing billions of dollars each month to prop up the economy , it's all fake to keep everyone subdude until everything is set up. then the collapse will happen. Things are being done and said to get the people to trust certain political leaders-the very same ones that are doing this final act upon us.
> Beware the man on a white horse.


What's being "set up"? Just curious.

Why not let things "collapse" now, verses later?


----------



## plowhand (Aug 14, 2005)

Death rides a white horse, I'se believe that's what I read, anyway


----------



## LonelyNorthwind (Mar 6, 2010)

Detroit filed bankruptcy today. And so it begins.


----------



## sweetmusicj (Mar 5, 2008)

Everything in moderation I suppose. If you want to learn a lesson from the Russian collapse the main one is booze is great currency when the official curreny crashes! They started paying in bottles of vodka. If you drink, everytime you go to the liquor store buy a pint of the cheapest vodka and start building a supply. I heard that suggested somewhere (probably on this board) and it made a lot of sense for an EOTWAWKI situation. Easy to trade for goods.

***I say vodka because it's the cheapest booze you can buy and in that situation no one is going to care.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> Swan who is the man on a white horse ?


Obama. He has so far, been able to distance himself from all the distructive things he has been implementing/doing. This is to keep himself clean and trustworthy in the eyes of his follwers, for the future. When things go bad, he'll be right there saying," Here,I'll show you the way".If people knew his past, well, for one we would not be dealing with him right now,two, they would never trust him when things get bad. It's why his past is hidden and another one was written for him. People need to watch the doc/movie 2016 Obamas America.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xCajT_JKhfU


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> What's being "set up"? Just curious.
> 
> Why not let things "collapse" now, verses later?


 All kinds of laws are being put in place to control both people and business. The powers that be do not want capitalism.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

plowhand said:


> Death rides a white horse, I'se believe that's what I read, anyway


Yes, Death comes in many forms. Death of a Nation.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

GrammasCabin said:


> Detroit filed bankruptcy today. And so it begins.


Detroit died 40 years ago. They no just longer can pay to run the life-support.

IN has a budget surplus, as does some other states.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

plowjockey said:


> Detroit died 40 years ago. They no just longer can pay to run the life-support.
> 
> IN has a budget surplus, as does some other states.



The whole country is on life support. Thats what QE is.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

7thswan said:


> All kinds of laws are being put in place to control both people and business. The powers that be do not want capitalism.



It does seem that they know the country has collapsed and, of course, they cannot continue the artificial life support indefinitely. The swift action they have taken in the last few years to change the laws and rearrange the system does seem to suggest that they are preparing to step back, allow the facade to end and contain the damage.


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

plowjockey said:


> Feel free to bury your head in the sand.


That's one way to look at I guess. I see it another way and the world of disaster porn is not one that I believe in. I choose another vision of the future and neither of us knows for sure which is right or wrong. The source whose vision I choose to believe tells me I'll be just fine and that all the storing and worrying is for naught.



> 22 Then Jesus said to his disciples: &#8220;Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothes. 24 Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! 25 Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to your life * ? 26 Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?*


*




18 &#8220;Then he said, &#8216;This is what I&#8217;ll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain. 19 And I&#8217;ll say to myself, &#8220;You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.&#8221;&#8217; 20 &#8220;But God said to him, &#8216;You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?&#8217;

Click to expand...

*


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

I do not believe either of those passages to infer that we are to be idle in any fashion, nor trusting after the systems of men, nor imprudent as to where we next place our foot on the path.

Those verses have merit, but we are coming rapidly into a time of cleansing and judgment, from which I believe none will be immune.

"A prudent _man_ foreseeth the evil, _and_ hideth himself; _but_ the simple pass on, _and_ are punished." Proverbs 27:12

From Proverbs, ch. 6......
6 Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:
7 Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler,
8 Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.


Neither are intended by me to lay blame or accusation, but only to balance that carefree attitude that some profess in their walk.


Worry ? No.


Be prudent and always prepared, however, both to serve others in need and to ......

"......be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear." 1Peter 3:15


----------



## Johnny Dolittle (Nov 25, 2007)

Revelation's Apocalyptic Horsemen .... a white horse, a red horse, a black horse, and a pale horse.

Christ returns on a white horse with a sword in his mouth and He is wearing many crowns. The apocalyptic rider of a white horse is wearing one crown and carrying a sword.

The antichrist deceives by mimicing Christ ! .... so maybe this white horseman represents the antichrist's rule. He will rule with a sword. No one can buy or sell unless they wear his mark ..... the antichrist has complete economic control !!!!!! (after a collapse)

:hobbyhors


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Moved this to General Chat as it has become way out of the realm of Homesteading Questions and is now more a General Chat 'discussion'.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Darntootin said:


> Of course we cannot print and borrow our way to prosperity.


What, you never heard of Keynesian economics? The fact is that massive government spending during WWII is what pulled this country out of the Great Depression. So why can't we print & borrow our way to prosperity?


----------



## Steve in PA (Nov 25, 2011)

Forerunner I certainly didn't mean for those verses as an excuse to be a layabout. I just choose to not believe in the future of disaster porn. There will come a time when I will have to give an accounting of what I did with this life and when that judgement comes I am quite confident in the outcome.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Johnny Dolittle said:


> Revelation's Apocalyptic Horsemen .... a white horse, a red horse, a black horse, and a pale horse.
> 
> Christ returns on a white horse with a sword in his mouth and He is wearing many crowns. The apocalyptic rider of a white horse is wearing one crown and carrying a sword.
> 
> ...


 There is a movie, don't know if it's out yet. Think it's called" Upon a Pale Horse". I need to see this one.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

7thswan said:


> All kinds of laws are being put in place to control both people and business. The powers that be do not want capitalism.


Is government regulation, over businesses something new?

What is their end game? If our economy collapses, they will lose everything, also.

"The powers" will be ruling a broke, civil warring, massive, third world country.

Again, what the upside?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Steve in PA said:


> That's one way to look at I guess. I see it another way and the world of disaster porn is not one that I believe in. I choose another vision of the future and neither of us knows for sure which is right or wrong. The source whose vision I choose to believe tells me I'll be just fine and that all the storing and worrying is for naught.


Sounds almost like JC is promoting socialism. People can and should look out for themselves and their families. That's a big part of today's poverty.

I do agree that worry is fruitless.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

There is a vast difference between voluntary cooperation in a community, such as that prescribed by the Messiah, and a blind faith in a political body thousands of miles off that sucks up the resources of the people and dictates their every move such as you prefer, PJ. 

....... a vast difference.

ETA..... the former concept was prescribed by the Messiah for the very fact that it's implementation is the historical safeguard against "economic collapse". 

The latter concept has been warned against, time and again, for the very fact that it inevitably ends in, you guessed it.........economic collapse.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> What, you never heard of Keynesian economics? The fact is that massive government spending during WWII is what pulled this country out of the Great Depression. So why can't we print & borrow our way to prosperity?


Because at some time those loans have to be paid. 

I could go out even now and borrow my to prosperity. Bernie Madoff did quite well doing it until it was discovered he owed more than he had or was going to bring in. Christian Gronet did alright too, until it was discovered he wasn't selling enough solar products to pay the bills. 

As I have said over and over its going to reach a point even the most stupid lender is going to realize any money lent to the US government may as well be flushed down the toilet. I can't believe people were stupid enough to keep lending Detroit money for as long as they did. The ONLY reason I can think of is they thought the federal government would step in and make the loans good. 

Would you invest in a company which has been losing money for the past 20 years, has NO prospect of even breaking even for the next 20 years and is currently having to borrow 45% of its operating budget just to keep the doors open?

IMO, anyone who "invests" long term in the US is a fool. I might, just might, be willing to buy a 5 year bill/bond from them but it would have to pay a lot more than the 1.25-1.50 they are offering. Anything longer than that you'd have to offer me at least 10 times the current inflation rate and I'd still only do it on a bet with money I found laying in the street.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Is government regulation, over businesses something new?
> 
> What is their end game? If our economy collapses, they will lose everything, also.
> 
> ...


A warlord over a thousand acres of near useless land in Africa still has power. And to some people power is all that matters.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Nevada said:


> What, you never heard of Keynesian economics? The fact is that massive government spending during WWII is what pulled this country out of the Great Depression. So why can't we print & borrow our way to prosperity?


Keynes himself said "In the long run we are all dead" when asked how his ideas would shape up 'in the long run'.

Massive spending did NOT in any way 'pull us out of the depression', in fact FDR's secretary of treasury lamented that they had spent all that money and it didn't do a thing to pull us out. The spending deepened the depression.

Forget Keynes, his ideas have been a disaster, read Von Mises, and Hayek instead.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Darntootin said:


> Keynes himself said "In the long run we are all dead" when asked how his ideas would shape up 'in the long run'.


Actually that's correct. No economic strategy is effective in the long run. There's a time for supply-side economics and a time for demand-side economics. A deep recession is the time for demand-side economics.

This is not the time to cut government spending. Dong so will not only hurt struggling Americans, but will hurt the economy overall. A lot of private businessed rely on government contracts.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> Actually that's correct. No economic strategy is effective in the long run. There's a time for supply-side economics and a time for demand-side economics. A deep recession is the time for demand-side economics.
> 
> This is not the time to cut government spending. Dong so will not only hurt struggling Americans, but will hurt the economy overall. A lot of private businessed rely on government contracts.


If they were spending money we actually have, such as reserve funds, I could agree with that logic. But since the money is borrowed as well as printed out of thin air, all they are doing is making the problem bigger and the cliff we will eventually go over, higher. Like Will Rogers said, When you find yourself in a hole the first thing to do is quit digging.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> If they were spending money we actually have, such as reserve funds, I could agree with that logic. But since the money is borrowed as well as printed out of thin air, all they are doing is making the problem bigger and the cliff we will eventually go over, higher. Like Will Rogers said, When you find yourself in a hole the first thing to do is quit digging.


The fact that the money might be borrowed is irrelevant to the question of whether the economy will be improved. Your argument was not that the money spent on public works projects and social programs might be borrowed. Your argument was that we can't borrow our way to prosperity. I suggest that it's possible to cure a recession through borrowing.


----------



## Hollowdweller (Jul 13, 2011)

I think the Debt in the long term is a problem but that the policies of the Fed are actually going to reduce the debt in the long term.

However as far and the vast majority of Americans I feel like we will experience our own collapse if companies are allowed to pay workers less and keep more for themselves.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

watcher said:


> A warlord over a thousand acres of near useless land in Africa still has power. And to some people power is all that matters.


Sorry, not in America.

Money has to go with it and there will be none left, in an economic collapse.

Warren buffet and George Soros, will probably be worse off that the rest, because they don't have a security force large enough to thwart of the gangs of armed robbers, taking whatever they have left.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Forerunner said:


> There is a vast difference between voluntary cooperation in a community, such as that prescribed by the Messiah, and a blind faith in a political body thousands of miles off that sucks up the resources of the people and dictates their every move such as you prefer, PJ.
> 
> ....... a vast difference.
> 
> ...


A vast difference indeed. 

In the world of scripture, things always turn out the way we want them to. In the real world, not so much

LOL "Blind faith"?

You are on a ship at sea, taking on water, weathering a very fierce storm.

You don't like the option, of trusting the skills of your shady Captain, to pilot you to safe harbor, but the only other options you have, is either mutiny, or abandon ship, both of which have their own consequences.

Which option will _you_ choose?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I suggest that it's possible to cure a recession through borrowing.


A lot of politicians make the same claim, but to my knowledge its NEVER worked! Recessions are "cured" by productive measures, not destructive ones. Painting over rust may look good on the surface temporarily, but its not a good solution.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Nevada said:


> Actually that's correct. No economic strategy is effective in the long run. There's a time for supply-side economics and a time for demand-side economics. A deep recession is the time for demand-side economics.
> 
> This is not the time to cut government spending. Dong so will not only hurt struggling Americans, but will hurt the economy overall. A lot of private businessed rely on government contracts.



Not so. 

Remember, money is not wealth. Goods are wealth and some services are wealth. When government prints more money they have not increased the amount of goods in existence...they have simply increased the medium of exchange. More money chasing the same amount of goods means the price of those goods goes up.

Printing only works for a time, when the market figures out that there is not more wealth, but simply more paper to represent wealth, thats when inflation hits.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> The fact that the money might be borrowed is irrelevant to the question of whether the economy will be improved. Your argument was not that the money spent on public works projects and social programs might be borrowed. Your argument was that we can't borrow our way to prosperity. I suggest that it's possible to cure a recession through borrowing.


It's possible to mask the symptoms of a recession through borrowing, printing and pumping extra money into the economy. In the short term. But that isn't the same as a cure. 

Two years after the "buy a house tax credits" ended, many areas are seeing a real recovery in real estate. It might have come sooner if they hadn't meddled with it in the first place.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> Sorry, not in America.
> 
> Money has to go with it and there will be none left, in an economic collapse.


Probably the most precise teller of economic collapse today is Peter Schiff. His idea of the impending economic collapse is hyperinflation. That's a problem of too much money in circulation, not a problem of no money left. I think you're simply throwing out any alarmist claim in the hop that it will stick to the wall.

I totally bought-in to Schiff's prediction that the real estate bubble would collapse, but I'm not so sold on his current predictions. His prediction depends entirely on lenders refusing to buy US government debt, then the Fed funding the debt with printed money. He believes that hyperinflation will result from the Fed printing money to run the government with.

I don't see investors losing faith in the US government that way.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> It's possible to mask the symptoms of a recession through borrowing, printing and pumping extra money into the economy. In the short term. But that isn't the same as a cure.


The massive government spending on WWII seemed to be a pretty solid cure for the Great Depression.



MO_cows said:


> Two years after the "buy a house tax credits" ended, many areas are seeing a real recovery in real estate. It might have come sooner if they hadn't meddled with it in the first place.


Real estate prices are beginning to consolidate, but there is no recovery yet. People who believe we're in a meaningful recovery ignore some fundamental facts, 1) that the banks still have the toxic assets on their books, and 2) that there is an enormous ghost inventory of available residential real estate currently held by banks.

The housing inventory and the toxic assets will both have to resolve themselves before we see a meaningful real estate recovery. I don't expect to see that for another 4 or 5 years.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Probably the most precise teller of economic collapse today is Peter Schiff. His idea of the impending economic collapse is hyperinflation. That's a problem of too much money in circulation, not a problem of no money left. I think you're simply throwing out any alarmist claim in the hop that it will stick to the wall.
> 
> I totally bought-in to Schiff's prediction that the real estate bubble would collapse, but I'm not so sold on his current predictions. His prediction depends entirely on lenders refusing to buy US government debt, then the Fed funding the debt with printed money. He believes that hyperinflation will result from the Fed printing money to run the government with.
> 
> I don't see investors losing faith in the US government that way.


The Fed is _chomping at the bit_, to curtail QE and raise interest rates a tad, as to keep inflation in check.

But, they don't want to jump too fast, as to throw the frail economy, back into a tail-spin. A little bad new, goes a long way, any more.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Darntootin said:


> Not so.
> 
> Remember, money is not wealth. Goods are wealth and some services are wealth. When government prints more money they have not increased the amount of goods in existence...they have simply increased the medium of exchange. More money chasing the same amount of goods means the price of those goods goes up.
> 
> Printing only works for a time, when the market figures out that there is not more wealth, but simply more paper to represent wealth, thats when inflation hits.


I see conservatives saying this like this, then it concerns me that there are people who think that way who want to be in charge. It's ok to believe what you want, but ideas like those can't be implemented in the real world.

But I don't think you really believe that. Republicans in congress are still in favor of feeding the defense contractor beast, regardless of debt. They understand the dangers of cutting federal spending.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> The Fed is _chomping at the bit_, to curtail QE and raise interest rates a tad, as to keep inflation in check.


I'm not the least bit concerned with inflation. I own my home mortgage-free. Enough inflation could make me rich.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I see conservatives saying this like this, then it concerns me that there are people who think that way who want to be in charge. It's ok to believe what you want, but ideas like those can't be implemented in the real world.
> 
> But I don't think you really believe that. Republicans in congress are still in favor of feeding the defense contractor beast, regardless of debt. They understand the dangers of cutting federal spending.



What can't be implemented? The realities of economics? This has nothing to do with conservatives or liberals, its about economics. Do you believe that printed money is wealth? If so, then I recommend reading Von Mises, Hazlet, and Hayek even more strongly.

Printing money leads to inflation, and devaluation of the dollar. As inflation and debt grow, the interest rates are pressured upward. That is already happening despite the Fed applying its full influence downward. When interest rates rise, the cost of borrowing will rise as well. If interest rates reach a mere 5%, the interest on the debt will rise a trillion dollars per year...we are printing money to pay 4 trillion in spending now. Will we print to pay the other trillion? Then interest rates will rise more, and we will need two trillion. Its like eating your own tail, the more you eat quicker you die.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

plowjockey said:


> A vast difference indeed.
> 
> In the world of scripture, things always turn out the way we want them to.


What Bible have _you_ been reading ? 



plowjockey said:


> LOL "Blind faith"?
> 
> You are on a ship at sea, taking on water, weathering a very fierce storm.
> 
> ...


Ever see the movie, "Overboard" ?


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Nevada said:


> Nonsense. Conservatives want to cut taxes and social program spending regardless of economic conditions. That's politics, not good economic policy.
> 
> Of course it's always possible that you don't know enough about how the economy works to judge good economic policy. I really don't know anything about your background or whether you follow economic indicators.
> 
> One thing I know for sure, we don't talk much about the indicators in this forum. When I bring them up conservatives are less than interested.


This country was at its strongest when the People were not taxed, but the foreign traders and importers were. 
The power to tax is the power to destroy, and, once power is in place, it follows it's own lead. The planks of communism, which modern liberal economists embrace, are all instruments of the destruction of a nation, and not foundations upon which a wise people allow their "government" to build.

Go ahead and throw me in the clueless boat with Darntootin, if it makes you feel better.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> I'm not the least bit concerned with inflation. I own my home mortgage-free. Enough inflation could make me rich.


You don't eat, buy gasoline, pay tax on anything, have your car worked on, get medical care, hire a roofer, etc. etc.?

People are actually worse off, if they are on a fixed income.




> The most immediate effects of inflation are the decreased purchasing power of the dollar and its depreciation. Depreciation is especially hard on retired people with fixed incomes because their money buys a little less each month. Those not on fixed incomes are more able to cope because they can simply increase their fees.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_effects_of_inflation


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I don't see investors losing faith in the US government that way.


Do you see it as a good investment? We are borrowing 45% of every dollar we spend and with each dollar we borrow we increase not only the amount of debt we owe but the amount of interest we must pay each year to prevent default on that debt. At some point the amount of debt is going to be so large all the funds we take in will be going to pay for nothing but that debt.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> The massive government spending on WWII seemed to be a pretty solid cure for the Great Depression.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The banks are trickling the foreclosures into the market for multiple reasons. One, to avoid depressing prices further. Two, because it's cheaper to hold them and trickle them out than to gear up with enough staff to resolve them all in a short time. Three, to spread them out thin enough that they won't post a huge loss and get the stockholders in an uproar. They trickle out enough foreclosures each period that it won't erase the profits they made elsewhere. 

These "toxic assets" are actually creating a great business opportunity for others. Houses are on sale. If you ever wanted to build up a portfolio of rentals, now is the time.


----------



## Scott SW Ohio (Sep 20, 2003)

watcher said:


> We are borrowing 45% of every dollar we spend
> 
> 
> > Watcher, what is this statistic based on? The CBO estimates a $642 billion deficit for the current fiscal year.
> ...


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I'm not the least bit concerned with inflation. I own my home mortgage-free. Enough inflation could make me rich.


Making statements like that loses you a lot of credibility for your understanding of economics.

If your house is now worth $100k, and you could trade it for 10 used cars at $10k each, under hyper-inflation your house might be worth $1 million but those cars would be worth $100k. You haven't made a dime.

The only people who prosper with hyper-inflation are those who can increase their prices higher than the rate of inflation. Due to competition, that's nobody.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> The banks are trickling the foreclosures into the market for multiple reasons. One, to avoid depressing prices further. Two, because it's cheaper to hold them and trickle them out than to gear up with enough staff to resolve them all in a short time. Three, to spread them out thin enough that they won't post a huge loss and get the stockholders in an uproar. They trickle out enough foreclosures each period that it won't erase the profits they made elsewhere.
> 
> These "toxic assets" are actually creating a great business opportunity for others. Houses are on sale. If you ever wanted to build up a portfolio of rentals, now is the time.


Yeah, but here's the deal. The toxic assets would make the banks insolvent and have to close their doors if the Fed hadn't changed the rules to basically allow insolvent banks to operate. But the banks have pulled-in their horns and aren't lending a lot in the meantime. Until those toxic assets are off the books we won't be seeing easy credit. Without easy credit, the economy will remain slow. As I said, I expect it to take another 4 or 5 years.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Ozarks Tom said:


> Making statements like that loses you a lot of credibility for your understanding of economics.
> 
> If your house is now worth $100k, and you could trade it for 10 used cars at $10k each, under hyper-inflation your house might be worth $1 million but those cars would be worth $100k. You haven't made a dime.
> 
> The only people who prosper with hyper-inflation are those who can increase their prices higher than the rate of inflation. Due to competition, that's nobody.


I'll have a lot more than people who lost their homes. I think that home ownership is becoming a thing of the past. This mortgage crisis may have spelled the beginning of banks becoming slumlords, like in London. We'll see...

On top of that, my social security will be adjusted for inflation -- by law.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Shine said:


> Yes, it has to turn around at some point. For me, it gives me a chance to anticipate the return of the small local communities. Should the bottom drop out then that means that the things that the corporations sell will go sky high in prices but for local communities, we might be able to return to a barter system and still find that the effort of just plain living and seeking to enjoy yourself and your family and friends is now heightened. Woe is the day that the control of fresh water is wrested away from the people, [wells, springs and such] this is something that is happening now and possibly the only fly in the ointment.


There are lots of flies in the ointment. The biggest is we now have a government that wants to track every move you make and know all your financial and health dealings.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

poppy said:


> There are lots of flies in the ointment. The biggest is we now have a government that wants to track every move you make and know all your financial and health dealings.


I don't like the new revelations about government spying on Americans, but I don't know that it will stunt the economy.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Scott SW Ohio said:


> watcher said:
> 
> 
> > We are borrowing 45% of every dollar we spend
> ...


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Nevada said:


> I don't like the new revelations about government spying on Americans, but I don't know that it will stunt the economy.


Never said it would. I was responding to a post about going to a barter system after a collapse.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

"Russell admits that violent revolution is always unsuccessful."

I'll have to say that statement wins the cigar for funniest on this thread, since it was, presumably, made from somewhere in the USA, a nation that led the world for a very long time after such an action.

Thank you! It's been a hard day, and I needed a good laugh........Joe


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Bertrand Russell was British and was writing his personal observations about post-revolution Russia, having toured and met w/ Lenin, Trotsky, et al.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Scott SW Ohio said:


> watcher said:
> 
> 
> > We are borrowing 45% of every dollar we spend
> ...


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I'll have a lot more than people who lost their homes. I think that home ownership is becoming a thing of the past. This mortgage crisis may have spelled the beginning of banks becoming slumlords, like in London. We'll see...
> 
> On top of that, my social security will be adjusted for inflation -- by law.



And we all KNOW laws never change, right. Then neither does the way governments figure the inflation rate.

IIRC, the 'Big Mac' index shows real inflation is much higher than what the government is telling us.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

Txsteader said:


> Bertrand Russell was British and was writing his personal observations about post-revolution Russia, having toured and met w/ Lenin, Trotsky, et al.


But it was POSTED from within the US as though it was gospel when Russell said it and still gospel today, and applied universally. I love this stuff. I "toured" the US and met with Johnson in the lobby of the Albert Pick in Washington in 1964.

The fact that I was on my senior class trip or that I was 17 years old notwithstanding, it's true, but that would not make anything I said at that time especially valid today, the more so since it's been proven to be false over and over both before and since.........Joe


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

"Successful, violent revolution", is very likely determined in the eye of the beholder.

Government payroll hacks who write history books aren't likely to share, nor promote such a sentiment.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "violent revolutions are seldom successful in the interest of the oppressive government who leave the people no other choice". :shrug:


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Nevada said:


> Nonsense. Conservatives want to cut taxes and social program spending regardless of economic conditions. That's politics, not good economic policy.
> 
> Of course it's always possible that you don't know enough about how the economy works to judge good economic policy. I really don't know anything about your background or whether you follow economic indicators.
> 
> One thing I know for sure, we don't talk much about the indicators in this forum. When I bring them up conservatives are less than interested.


From what I gather from your posts, I question whether you have a very good grasp of economics. That is why I recommended the previous authors to help. What indicators would you like to discuss? The job growth, that contain ZERO manufacturing increases? Or the GDP, the calculation of which has been altered to add 3 percent ( now calculated by the US in a way no other country on earth calculates it ) ? http://www.investorsinsight.com/blo...0/us-economy-to-get-a-hollywood-makeover.aspx


Or should we discuss the CPI which has been changed and manipulated to under-report inflation for decades?


Bottom line, we have a fed that has to pump printed up/borrowed money into the system to keep it afloat. There is no 'good' way to view that. We are borrowing to pay our debts, tell me what economic theory or use of common sense can condone that?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> IIRC, the 'Big Mac' index shows real inflation is much higher than what the government is telling us.


The Big Mac Index doesn't show inflation at all. The Big Mac Index is a measure of purchasing power between two foreign currencies, showing the difference in price for a Big Mac in the two countries. It was developed as a means to compare purchasing power to the actual currency exchange rate to see if the exchange rate is over or under valuing the currencies.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

Someone mentioned this, but it is worth repeating: Every one of these doom and gloom articles is written by folks with either something to sell, or an asset they need to pump.

Now, with that disclaimer out of the way......

I believe the general premise at the link enough that I bought 85 acres of rural land and several thousand dollars of additional hand tools in 2010. 

Then in 2012 I retired(at 54, and probably 4 years earlier than my otherwise ideal timing) so as to gain full access to my lump-sum retirement, so it would not merely be US dollars on a computer screen, but could be diversified. The record low PBGC from last fall made my lump sum increase by over $100k as well, and this made the timing all the more beneficial.

Then in early 2013 I went back to work (at the same company), so as to be able to leave the retirement pile untouched for now.

So, I made some pretty significant life moves, not because of this article per se, but because I believe the premise of the article is essentially plausible.

I am fortunate in that I am old enough to have a significant retirement, but young enough to continue working...what I did would not work well for most folks in their 40s or late 60s.

I am surprise by one thing at the link...the date on the article is current, but they mention $16 trillion in debt. We are at almost $16.9 trillion now. Oh well, what's $900,000,000,000 among friends? 


Tim


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> The Big Mac Index doesn't show inflation at all. The Big Mac Index is a measure of purchasing power between two foreign currencies, showing the difference in price for a Big Mac in the two countries. It was developed as a means to compare purchasing power to the actual currency exchange rate to see if the exchange rate is over or under valuing the currencies.



Look at the index for the US for the past few years and you see the cost for a BM, in US$, has gone up. Use that change of cost to figure the inflation.

Or pick almost any other product you have tracked for the last while and you'll see you are spending more than 1.5% to 2.5% the government is saying you are. I can tell you the price of a loaf of bread has gone from $0.98 to $1.38 (that's a 40% increase), spaghetti sauce has gone from $1 to $1.35 (35% increase). Those I can remember off the top of my head. I could check quicken to find more but you get the point.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

tarbe said:


> Someone mentioned this, but it is worth repeating: Every one of these doom and gloom articles is written by folks with either something to sell, or an asset they need to pump.


Yes, you have to take profit motive into account. That doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong, but you have to take the advice for what it is.

Sometimes advice isn't even from someone who has any knowledge about investment at all. For example, real estate agents have no particular training in giving investment advice, since they are only licensed to show and sell properties, but they give investment advice all the time. I know a realtor who is always insisting that now is the best time ever to invest in real estate, but she always says that regardless of market conditions. Not being licensed in giving investment advice, her advice is technically just idle discussion that she doesn't have to stand behind.

Filtering your sources of information is important in understanding economic conditions.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Yes, you have to take profit motive into account. That doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong, but you have to take the advice for what it is.
> 
> Sometimes advice isn't even from someone who has any knowledge about investment at all. For example, real estate agents have no particular training in giving investment advice, since they are only licensed to show and sell properties, but they give investment advice all the time. I know a realtor who is always insisting that now is the best time ever to invest in real estate, but she always says that regardless of market conditions. Not being licensed in giving investment advice, her advice is technically just idle discussion that she can't stand behind.
> 
> Filtering your sources of information is important in understanding economic conditions.


Good point.

Maybe that's why I see so many people ignoring this economic "hogwash" and attempting to make better lives, for themselves.

Personally, I think people had rocks in their heads, for not - somehow scraping up the money, to buy up a $24,000 home. Even with 0 down ( which could be done), they be looking at a whopping monthly payment of about $120.(taxes/ins includied)

the $24K homes are all about gone now.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

Maybe I only feel this way because mine's been paid off for several years, now, but the "chance" to buy a home for 24k often is no bargain at all. Whole neighborhood abandoned in many cases, bad area with little economic opportunity, city you don't care for at all, lots of reasons to turn away from a "chance" like that.

On the other hand, there is still raw land for sale on contract in places where one can build without hassles from anybody. I am equally mystified why people will go a lifetime without owning a home when one can build one quite cheap by watching for bargains and doing the work one's self.

A friend is equally mystified by our building in a rural area where our heirs will never be able to get top dollar for it when my wife and I make the team and no longer need it.

It's all a matter of perspective, and everyone's is different. Looking back, we could have made a lot more money in this lifetime, but we would have missed some of the best parts. We have no regrets, especially not over failing to buy a house we didn't like in a place we didn't want to live because it was cheap.

Security is an elusive thing. I think I'm still young enough to build another house if this one burns down. Prob'ly.

I wonder what those whose main assets are dollars will do when the dollar burns down?

Not throwing rocks..........Just saying...........Joe


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> For example, real estate agents have no particular training in giving investment advice, since they are only licensed to show and sell properties, but they give investment advice all the time. I know a realtor who is always insisting that now is the best time ever to invest in real estate, but she always says that regardless of market conditions.


Well now, I have never seen a time when investing in real estate wasnt a good investment. This of course depends upon which piece of real estate one is looking at, along with many other variables, but as of the last couple hundred years, real estate has surpassed every other mode of investment going. Please bear in mind that real estate is not buildings and other structures, those things are often liabilities rather than assets, but the land they sit on is an entirely different matter. Your real estate agent knows this, and a lot of other things that perhaps you are not taking into account. One of the biggest factors is there is constantly more demand being created, and very little land being created. Yep, the old adage is still as true today as it ever was.... Land... they aint making any more of it. Another point with investing in real estate.... what else can you buy and own literally "forever"? Buildings deteriorate, autos depreciate, inflation eats up the value of cash, land keeps right on becoming more valuable the longer you own it. I tend to agree with your realtor... NOW is the best time to invest in real estate. And I dont care when "now" happens to be.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Well now, I have never seen a time when investing in real estate wasnt a good investment.


I forgot you are a real estate agent. Yes, property was a particularly bad investment around here in 2006, yet my realtor friend insisted that there had never been a better time to buy. In fact he went one step further, telling me that if I didn't buy then that I would never be able to afford a home for the rest of my life.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

If the money hoarders would stop trying to fulfill the endless need for MORE MONEY MORE MONEY and pay a living wage the economy would blossum again but until they do I see it continue to spiral downward. That money would flow into the local economies again and create jobs.

It's said that the Walton family heirs have hoarded as much wealth as the bottom 40% of Americans.

http://walmart1percent.org/family/

"Six members of the family rank among the top eleven on Forbes&#8217; list of wealthiest Americans,[2] with a net worth of about $93 billion."


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

If the "poor" want the right to property, the "rich" must be afforded the same.

Liberty and justice for _all_. 

If you want something belonging to the rich, you're going to have to negotiate that on your own merits.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I forgot you are a real estate agent. Yes, property was a particularly bad investment around here in 2006, yet my realtor friend insisted that there had never been a better time to buy. In fact he went one step further, telling me that if I didn't buy then that I would never be able to afford a home for the rest of my life.


I was an active real estate agent from 1996 until I let my license expire after becoming disabled, that is true. You appear to be somewhat short sighted when it comes to investing... sure, there are dips in local markets from time to time, but in the long haul I still maintain that land will increase in actual value more than any other investment one can make. Does this mean that anyone can buy any land anywhere for any price and double their money next week, without using any common sense whatsoever with their purchase? of course not, but with a little bit of common sense and prudence most people will come out far further ahead with real estate investments than just about anything else going. This holds true on short term investments usually, and long term is much better. As I recall, Manhatten was once purchased for less than 30 bucks. Demand for property has pushed that investment to considerably more..... even during the most depressed economic times. Even these hillside farms here in Ky have increased drastically in value over the years. One farm I was involved with was "bought" in 1920 for 20 dollars and a mule, when we sold it brought over a thousand dollars per acre.... not a bad return on investment.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

fishhead said:


> If the money hoarders would stop trying to fulfill the endless need for MORE MONEY MORE MONEY and pay a living wage the economy would blossum again but until they do I see it continue to spiral downward. That money would flow into the local economies again and create jobs.
> 
> It's said that the Walton family heirs have hoarded as much wealth as the bottom 40% of Americans.
> 
> ...


And of course you believe that the Walton family have stashed every dime of that 93 billion in their mattresses. All those Walmart stores must have simply grew up out of the ground for free, not a penny paid to contractors and laborers to build them, those trucks are being donated by the factories, all that inventory is never paid for, and those employees are all working for free... right? That money is not being "hoarded", it is being invested, put right back into the economy providing jobs and opportunities for millions of folks everywhere. Ok, so some of it is put back into the economy via taxes which the government then recirculates, but lets not bad rap the Waltons quite so much. They provide an awful lot of folks with jobs and keep their money moving.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Now if those Waltons would go back to and stick with an all American-made merchandise base..........


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Forerunner said:


> Now if those Waltons would go back to and stick with an all American-made merchandise base..........


People would then whine about the outrageous prices they would have to charge. Seems the Waltons just cant win. :shrug:


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Agreed.

Perhaps if Americans took it upon themselves to purchase only American-made.......... :thumb:

Therein lies the crux of the thread;

Americans sold their economy down river, and they are about to reap the reward.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

fishhead said:


> If the money hoarders would stop trying to fulfill the endless need for MORE MONEY MORE MONEY and pay a living wage the economy would blossum again but until they do I see it continue to spiral downward. That money would flow into the local economies again and create jobs.
> 
> It's said that the Walton family heirs have hoarded as much wealth as the bottom 40% of Americans.
> 
> ...


Utterly ridiculous.

The Waltons are rich because of the value of Walmart stock, not because they have been funneling profits, directly into their bank accounts.

Walmart stock does well *because* they are competitive in the marketplace.

Pay their ambitious employees $25/hr and give them Blue Cross. WM can't compete any more and goes belly up, making the Waltons poor(er).

Apparently that what everyone wants for America..


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Forerunner said:


> Now if those Waltons would go back to and stick with an all American-made merchandise base..........



They'd be out of business, in a heartbeat.

People would shop elsewhere and WM would lose money, on what they _did_ sell..


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> You appear to be somewhat short sighted when it comes to investing... sure, there are dips in local markets from time to time


The 2007 real estate crash wasn't just a dip in the local market.

I still know people who owe a lot more than their homes are worth. My house sold for $158K in 2006, then I bought it for $30K in 2009. It's only up to about $42K today. It could take a long time to see $158 for this house again.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

I don't know of an investment where "you can't lose" money, but for the average couple who have just a bit of common sense and a desire to prosper, real estate is a very good long term plan to get ahead.

We were always either blessed or cursed with a wanderlust, and until the start of this century, every 7 to 10 years we moved, either across the country or one or two states. The sale of our previous real estate always allowed us to do this and start the business over again elsewhere. In that sense, what others look upon as a ball and chain, we always looked upon as the means to achieve freedom of movement at pretty much any time we wanted it.

It usually showed a great profit percentage, plus it was an enforced savings account. We were always motivated to leave it better than we found it, and nobody had a say as to what we did there, so early on we quit leasing business locations in town and began working from home. Add the tax advantages, and much of this allows one to see a profit far beyond the simple buying and selling prices.

I would also add that home ownership creates better citizens in ways too numerous to mention, allowing the country to profit from it as well. This only applies, of course, when it's done properly. "Properly" meaning that they actually can and do make the payments, allow the equity to accumulate instead of borrowing it monthly to feed a crack or race track habit, etc.

Homeowners are invested in their community, and that makes the community more willing to invest in them in the form of jobs, social support, etc.

If it's done right, my feeling is it's ALWAYS a good deal, but it dang sure can be done wrong, and then it's a curse....Joe


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

The last song J Cash wrote:
WHEN THE MAN COMES AROUND
And I heard as it were the noise of thunder
One of the four beasts saying come and see&#8230; and I saw
And behold&#8230;a white horse
There&#8217;s a man going around taking names,
and he decides who to free and who to blame.
Everybody won&#8217;t be treated all the same.
There&#8217;ll be a golden ladder reaching down,
When the Man comes around
The hairs on your arm will stand up,
at the terror in each sip and in each sup.
Will you partake of that last offered cup?
Or disappear into the potter&#8217;s ground,
When the Man comes around.........


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

joebill said:


> Maybe I only feel this way because mine's been paid off for several years, now, but the "chance" to buy a home for 24k often is no bargain at all. Whole neighborhood abandoned in many cases, bad area with little economic opportunity, city you don't care for at all, lots of reasons to turn away from a "chance" like that.


A run-down farm house on 3 acres sold for $24k near my home. The new owner are already fixing it up. We almost though about just buying it ourselvs, for the investment, but do not have the time to work on it.

Not even talking about Detroit, but when a lot of people buy cheap, run down houses on a street, and fix them up, it's no longer a run down neighborhood and usually the home start appreciating in value again.

We have become a nation, that if we can't have that brand new awesome house, a _home of our dreams_, then we'd rather not have one at all.. I call it the _new toilet seat syndrome._

Quite sad, IMO.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> A run-down farm house on 3 acres sold for $24k near my home. The new owner are already fixing it up. We almost though about just buying it ourselvs, for the investment, but do not have the time to work on it.
> 
> Not even talking about Detroit, but when a lot of people buy cheap, run down houses on a street, and fix them up, it's no longer a run down neighborhood and usually the home start appreciating in value again.
> 
> ...


Yes. Investing is all about buying low and selling high. The buying low part can be accomplished for a number of reasons, but the Michigan rust belt is mostly for two reasons.

* Property located in a distressed area.
* Property in poor condition.

There isn't a lot you can do to change the fact that a property is located in a distressed area. What you can do is buy a property when you forecast a re-purposing of the area, anticipating an increase in property demand. In that case you buy the property and wait for market conditions to improve.

Improving property condition takes knowledge and skill. You need to know which things can be wrong with a home that can be repaired inexpensively and which can't. If you have the skill to fix it yourself you are that much farther ahead.

If you have a use for the property then time is on your side. If you are retired or work for yourself online then you already have an income. You can live virtually anywhere. If the house meets your needs then you have found the perfect place to wait out the recession. Of course of you need to find work then moving to an economically depressed area might not be a good idea.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

No argument with any of the above, but my preferrance is to build cheap instead of buying cheap. I can get it where, how and when I want it that way......Joe


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

joebill said:


> No argument with any of the above, but my preferrance is to build cheap instead of buying cheap. I can get it where, how and when I want it that way......Joe


That was my strategy back in 2006 when I built my homestead in northern Nevada. I was concerned enough about the economy to leave Las Vegas to build a depression shelter where I could live rent and mortgage free. I bought two acres for $800 and built a little house for about $5000. This is now it looked the day I moved in, but it was eventually sided properly.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22059150/house_600.jpg

After living there for about 4 years I had the opportunity to buy cheap in Las Vegas. I got the house for a lot less than the materials would be. I figure that as long as the purchase price is less than it can be built for that it's a safe purchase in any economy. I'm glad I did it for a lot of reasons.

But the prices here are nothing like they are in Michigan, assuming they will really sell for the listed prices. You'll never buy a lot and build a house for $1000, but you might find a house in Flint or Detroit for $1000.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I was an active real estate agent from 1996 until I let my license expire after becoming disabled, that is true. You appear to be somewhat short sighted when it comes to investing... sure, there are dips in local markets from time to time, but in the long haul I still maintain that land will increase in actual value more than any other investment one can make. Does this mean that anyone can buy any land anywhere for any price and double their money next week, without using any common sense whatsoever with their purchase? of course not, but with a little bit of common sense and prudence most people will come out far further ahead with real estate investments than just about anything else going. This holds true on short term investments usually, and long term is much better. As I recall, Manhatten was once purchased for less than 30 bucks. Demand for property has pushed that investment to considerably more..... even during the most depressed economic times. Even these hillside farms here in Ky have increased drastically in value over the years. One farm I was involved with was "bought" in 1920 for 20 dollars and a mule, when we sold it brought over a thousand dollars per acre.... not a bad return on investment.


www.iowaworkforce.org/trends/farmhist.html

Interesting reading on farmland values. Bubbles and bursts and not great long term returns.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> I don't know of an investment where "you can't lose" money, but for the average couple who have just a bit of common sense and a desire to prosper, real estate is a very good long term plan to get ahead.


I sold a house in Metropolitan Detroit to a bright-eyed young couple in 2002. They paid $113,000.

Today, Zillow pegs the value at $64,000.

Ouch. Just ... ouch!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> I sold a house in Metropolitan Detroit to a bright-eyed young couple in 2002. They paid $113,000.
> 
> Today, Zillow pegs the value at $64,000.
> 
> Ouch. Just ... ouch!


Sure, but I don't think it's a stretch to think we might be at the market bottom right now. That's makes it a good time to buy.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

willow_girl said:


> I sold a house in Metropolitan Detroit to a bright-eyed young couple in 2002. They paid $113,000.
> 
> Today, Zillow pegs the value at $64,000.
> 
> Ouch. Just ... ouch!


yeah, but I specified common sense in the formula. Obviously, they lacked that requirement. I have been buying and selling property every few years since 1966. Nobody's genius, and not even one to really pay that much attention to anything except what I like and don't like and what I can or can't afford, I never lost a cent on real estate and have often doubled my money or better in 10 years or less.

On the other hand, nothing in me ever called to me to buy a house in metro Detroit. if it had, I would have stopped listening to my inner voice forever, and probably started going to the dog track instead, because it couldn't be any worse.

You can lose money on almost anything if you have a knack for it, and obviously, some folks do......Joe


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

joebill said:


> yeah, but I specified common sense in the formula. Obviously, they lacked that requirement. I have been buying and selling property every few years since 1966. Nobody's genius, and not even one to really pay that much attention to anything except what I like and don't like and what I can or can't afford, I never lost a cent on real estate and have often doubled my money or better in 10 years or less.


A lot of people didn't foresee the mortgage crisis. You can't hardly blame them. The prevailing wisdom from financial experts and even the president was that we were in a sustained bull market with no end in sight. Other than the lone voice of Peter Schiff, listen to what experts were saying in 2006 & 2007.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw


----------



## sss3 (Jul 15, 2007)

It's not just Det in trouble. Flint is just as bad. People call it a ghost town. Most of the state is in real financial trouble. DB pointed out; the reason Det will not be allowed to do bankruptcy, is cities across the country, will want to file bankruptcy.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Sandra Spiess said:


> It's not just Det in trouble. Flint is just as bad. People call it a ghost town. Most of the state is in real financial trouble.


One man's trouble is another man's opportunity.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

I wouldn't invest in an area that has been going downhill for an extended time, I would question the infrastructure that is in place, how well it had been kept up.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

Ambereyes said:


> I wouldn't invest in an area that has been going downhill for an extended time, I would question the infrastructure that is in place, how well it had been kept up.


My point exactly. The fall had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis. At least nothing major. That city has ben dying for a very long time, and everybody who took a look could see it. 

During the same timespan Detroit was beginning the process of giving up the ghost, a friend of mine bought 700 acres in SW Arizona for less than $200 per acre. That was at the BOTTOM of the cycle, when mines were closing, etc. He can now get out whenever he wants with a minimum of a million.

We have not done as well as him, because we had 5 kids to support and were more risk-adverse, but real estate has been kind to us, and a lot kinder to a lot of friends and family, and those days are not over.

The silliness that went on during the bubble had little to do with investment. An awful lot of people were just using property to borrow increasing amounts of money every time the market lost another bit of common sense. Many of them knew up front that they could never pay off what they owed on the property, and couldn't care less.

Whether one is a buyer of bargains or a builder, it's still a fine way to have a place to live, do business, and increase one's net worth all at the same time, and I have no regrets.....Joe


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

joebill said:


> My point exactly. The fall had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis. At least nothing major. That city has ben dying for a very long time, and everybody who took a look could see it.


Oh, without a doubt the overbearing factor for the fall of that region is the auto industry contracting. I don't think anyone questions that. The recovery will be dependent on the region reinventing itself, not the recovery of the real estate crisis. But that region can reinvent itself.

You are assuming that the area will never recover from the fall of the auto industry. But remember that Pittsburgh recovered from the fall of the steel industry and Akron recovered from the fall of the tire industry.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> remember that Pittsburgh recovered from the fall of the steel industry and Akron recovered from the fall of the tire industry.


When do you reckon East St. Louis will recover or as you put it "reinvent" itself?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Oh, without a doubt the overbearing factor for the fall of that region is the auto industry contracting.


And what caused the auto industry to contract? More new automobiles are being sold in this country... and overseas.... now than ever in history.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> And what caused the auto industry to contract? More new automobiles are being sold in this country... and overseas.... now than ever in history.


New auto sales in the US were slightly under 15M in 2012. This is better but still considerably off the peak of 17.8M in 2000 and behind the pace of sales through the early 2000's. In fact, more new cars were sold in the US in 1977 than last year. The contraction coincided with the economic collapse. Only 10.8M new cars were sold in 2009. This contraction did have the effect of companies closing older, less efficient factories and retooling in more modern facilities. These new efficiencies have also led to a reduction in work forces as automation replaces people.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mmoetc said:


> New auto sales in the US were slightly under 15M in 2012.


New auto sales is only a part of the equation. Foreign competition, and even the foreign manufacture of American brands, are bigger factors.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Nevada said:


> New auto sales is only a part of the equation. Foreign competition, and even the foreign manufacture of American brands, are bigger factors.


And, while US manufacturers have rebounded, much of the growth is overseas with vehicles manufactured in those countries for those markets. I was just pointing out that domestic sales have not rebounded completely and the financial collapse had a great affect on car sales.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> When do you reckon East St. Louis will recover or as you put it "reinvent" itself?


The dispute here is whether taking a chance on cheap real estate in a particular distressed area is a good investment. I don't know that SE Michigan will recover any faster than other distressed areas, but when you can buy a house for $1000 the potential for good returns exists. The only way we'll know for sure is to wait for 5 or 10 years to see what happens.

Of course is makes a big difference of someone really needs a place to live inexpensively. Some people are facing forced retirement because of conditions but can't afford it. Living mortgage-free is a great boost into retirement. Others are facing homelessness, and living in a home in Flint or Detroit is better than living on the street. If you don't really need the house and are investing then it's a much bigger risk, since I doubt that there is a big rental market in that area.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> The dispute here is whether taking a chance on cheap real estate in a particular distressed area is a good investment. I don't know that SE Michigan will recover any faster than other distressed areas, but when you can buy a house for $1000 the potential for good returns exists. The only way we'll know for sure is to wait for 5 or 10 years to see what happens.
> 
> Of course is makes a big difference of someone really needs a place to live inexpensively. Some people are facing forced retirement because of conditions but can't afford it. Living mortgage-free is a great boost into retirement. Others are facing homelessness, and living in a home in Flint or Detroit is better than living on the street. If you don't really need the house and are investing then it's a much bigger risk, since I doubt that there is a big rental market in that area.


I was attempting to point out to you that East St. Louis "collapsed" many years ago, and has never recovered. Yet, basically a stones throw to the west, with only the river and a state line to separate the two cities, St. Louis is thriving, growing and doing quite well. Politicians can and do play significant roles in the financial well being of any area. Corrupt officials in Chicago are the main problem faced by East St. Louis, while just across the river, business is booming. At least one of those corrupt officials have managed to find a parking space in D.C. and I have a hunch he has been planning the same nonsense for the entire nation.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I was attempting to point out to you that East St. Louis "collapsed" many years ago, and has never recovered.


Are you suggesting that people shouldn't invest in distressed real estate? You're no talking like a real estate agent. Investing in real estate is all about buying distressed property and then selling it in a better market.

It's true that some investments are a lot better than others, but that's the speculative nature of investing.


----------



## joebill (Mar 2, 2013)

Detroit's main illness is liberalism, and all the new car sales in the world will not cure it. I guess you can take that system just a bit further and force people at gunpoint to live there and make cars by government edict, but it will take either that additional bit of government or a whole lot less, one or the other, to make it happen for Detroit again.

The general rule of thumb is that socialism always kills that which it tries to save, be it cities, nations, black families, forests, neighborhoods, healthcare systems, whatever.

I guess when the last ultraliberal leaves Detroit, they'll be coming soon to a city near YOU.........so be prepared to be "improved" to death......Joe


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Are you suggesting that people shouldn't invest in distressed real estate? You're no talking like a real estate agent. Investing in real estate is all about buying distressed property and then selling it in a better market.
> 
> It's true that some investments are a lot better than others, but that's the speculative nature of investing.


The trick is to know which property to buy, and how much to pay for it. I dont care much for distressed properties myself, I prefer good property, that is in current high demand. It sells much easier and quicker than swampland or rock piles in the desert. When I was active in the game most of the property I bought doubled in value by the time I sold it.... which was usually within a month or so of purchase, occasionally I had it sold prior to my owning it! ahhhh yes, thems was the good old days, when I could still work the numbers!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The trick is to know which property to buy, and how much to pay for it. I dont care much for distressed properties myself, I prefer good property, that is in current high demand. It sells much easier and quicker than swampland or rock piles in the desert. When I was active in the game most of the property I bought doubled in value by the time I sold it.... which was usually within a month or so of purchase, occasionally I had it sold prior to my owning it! ahhhh yes, thems was the good old days, when I could still work the numbers!


Buying in Flint or Detroit for a quick-flip profit would be a mistake. If you have a use for the property as a home then great, because you'll have to sit on it for awhile.

But property can be distressed for a number of reasons; some temporary and some permanent. I bought my home in a distressed condition. Property values cratered on Las Vegas, so I got my home for 15 cents on the dollar for what it sold for 3 years prior. No question that I got a better value than the person who bought it before me.

But there nothing wrong with the house, it's just that the housing market is distressed. That will pass in another 5 years and I'll be sitting pretty. In the meantime I'm living here. This house has already paid for itself in saved rent and I've only been here for a little over 3 years.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Buying in Flint or Detroit for a quick-flip profit would be a mistake. If you have a use for the property as a home then great, because you'll have to sit on it for awhile.
> 
> But property can be distressed for a number of reasons; some temporary and some permanent. I bought my home in a distressed condition. Property values cratered on Las Vegas, so I got my home for 15 cents on the dollar for what it sold for 3 years prior. No question that I got a better value than the person who bought it before me.
> 
> But there nothing wrong with the house, it's just that the housing market is distressed. That will pass in another 5 years and I'll be sitting pretty. In the meantime I'm living here. This house has already paid for itself in saved rent and I've only been here for a little over 3 years.


As I recall you got your house for considerably less than 15 cents on the dollar.  But thats neither here nor there. The overall point is this.... NOW is the best time ever to invest in real estate.... always has been, always will be. The question becomes only "which real estate?". For my money I will still latch onto these hillside farms when I can find one priced right, and wouldnt put a plug nickel into the entire city of Detroit or East St. Louis. Both of those towns are going to be nothing but liabilities to the owners thereof for decades to come.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

my husband and I invested in real estate as a backup plan to provide an income in the event of job loss, illness, and to supplement retirement accounts and Social Security. So far, the plan has worked. Though a financial crash wasn't part of our considerations, the rentals have been a helpful shield for our family. Don't get me wrong... I still complain about the high cost of gas and all the other stuff that everyone else moans about. If I had it all to do over again, I would have bought a few more cheap rentals. In our market, most return about 1/3 of their purchase price in rent each year.


----------

