CDZ global collapse or U.S. collapse?

Not in the long run, you are simply wrong.

Define long run.

They need a devalued currency to boost exports and the overall economy.

Absolutely. And with that devauled currency comes less oil and other imports.

Austerity(spending cuts and tax hikes) has gutted their economy and since it was implemented unemployment has risen in a parallel fashion.

And a huge currency devaluation also leads to spending cuts.

They would be better off defaulting like Iceland did and taking the short term hit.

Iceland didn't need huge gifts from other countries to finance a bloated welfare state.
In a year or two.

Greece is dependent on their exports, most notably their shipping/maritime industry. There wasn't an energy crisis when they had a weaker currency before the Euro

Doesn't lead to spending cuts if you default on the debt agreement, which is what they should do.

Austerity isn't a gift, it has been the death of their economy. If investors don't like the default, tough shit, they made a bad bet and should have never let Greece into the EU to begin with.



They're dependent on borrowing.

What has their deficit been the last few years, excluding debt payments?
What's the projection for this year and next?


They'll have to cut spending to get into balance. Like I said, they'll look back on this austerity with nostalgia. The good old days.
Non-sequitur argument

Why don't you google it?

If they default, they won't have to pay off the debt or "balance".

If their budget was balanced already, they could default and not cut spending.
It's not. If austerity was tough when the EU was giving them money, it'll be worse when the EU stops.
That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

They had to implement austerity because their creditors weren't going to keep throwing more money at Greece. Screwing their creditors does not make more money available for their excessive social spending.
 
In a year or two.

Greece is dependent on their exports, most notably their shipping/maritime industry. There wasn't an energy crisis when they had a weaker currency before the Euro

Doesn't lead to spending cuts if you default on the debt agreement, which is what they should do.

Austerity isn't a gift, it has been the death of their economy. If investors don't like the default, tough shit, they made a bad bet and should have never let Greece into the EU to begin with.



They're dependent on borrowing.

What has their deficit been the last few years, excluding debt payments?
What's the projection for this year and next?


They'll have to cut spending to get into balance. Like I said, they'll look back on this austerity with nostalgia. The good old days.
Non-sequitur argument

Why don't you google it?

If they default, they won't have to pay off the debt or "balance".

If their budget was balanced already, they could default and not cut spending.
It's not. If austerity was tough when the EU was giving them money, it'll be worse when the EU stops.
That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

They had to implement austerity because their creditors weren't going to keep throwing more money at Greece. Screwing their creditors does not make more money available for their excessive social spending.
No one said more money would be available to borrow. The point is, they default and start borrowing less, to have a more sustainable budget.
 
They're dependent on borrowing.

What has their deficit been the last few years, excluding debt payments?
What's the projection for this year and next?


They'll have to cut spending to get into balance. Like I said, they'll look back on this austerity with nostalgia. The good old days.
Non-sequitur argument

Why don't you google it?

If they default, they won't have to pay off the debt or "balance".

If their budget was balanced already, they could default and not cut spending.
It's not. If austerity was tough when the EU was giving them money, it'll be worse when the EU stops.
That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

They had to implement austerity because their creditors weren't going to keep throwing more money at Greece. Screwing their creditors does not make more money available for their excessive social spending.
No one said more money would be available to borrow. The point is, they default and start borrowing less, to have a more sustainable budget.

The point is, their repayment terms were incredibly easy.
Their budget is not balanced now. After they screw their current creditors,
who will lend them the money to fund their deficit?
Looks like more austerity on the way, after they default.
 
Non-sequitur argument

Why don't you google it?

If they default, they won't have to pay off the debt or "balance".

If their budget was balanced already, they could default and not cut spending.
It's not. If austerity was tough when the EU was giving them money, it'll be worse when the EU stops.
That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

They had to implement austerity because their creditors weren't going to keep throwing more money at Greece. Screwing their creditors does not make more money available for their excessive social spending.
No one said more money would be available to borrow. The point is, they default and start borrowing less, to have a more sustainable budget.

The point is, their repayment terms were incredibly easy.
Their budget is not balanced now. After they screw their current creditors,
who will lend them the money to fund their deficit?
Looks like more austerity on the way, after they default.
but if they default, the deficit doesn't exist anymore, is that not the idea, to bring the debt to zero?
 
If their budget was balanced already, they could default and not cut spending.
It's not. If austerity was tough when the EU was giving them money, it'll be worse when the EU stops.
That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

That makes no sense, if there budget was balanced, they wouldn't have had to implement austerity to pay back their creditors.

They had to implement austerity because their creditors weren't going to keep throwing more money at Greece. Screwing their creditors does not make more money available for their excessive social spending.
No one said more money would be available to borrow. The point is, they default and start borrowing less, to have a more sustainable budget.

The point is, their repayment terms were incredibly easy.
Their budget is not balanced now. After they screw their current creditors,
who will lend them the money to fund their deficit?
Looks like more austerity on the way, after they default.
but if they default, the deficit doesn't exist anymore, is that not the idea, to bring the debt to zero?

but if they default, the deficit doesn't exist anymore, is that not the idea, to bring the debt to zero?

You're confusing deficit with debt.
 
U.S. Collapse. The U.S. Dollar is eventually going to go bunk and then the U.S. is really fucked.
Is there anybody who is still sure that our economics is OK?
When you have millions of unemployed managers, does society continue to pay them a 'welfare' of $50pa for doing nothing, or does society pay them realistic welfare for their non productivity !?
 
I have found a lot of talk about the devaluing of the dollar, and our ballooning national debt. i would like know is an imminent global collapse or if you believe it is isolated to the U.S. or perhaps you believe economies are so intrinsically linked that they will all go down with the U.S. should japanese people be stocking up on tin food and weapons? australians? this is a genuine thought and i'd like to know what you guys think.
68eebfcf5cd3f5dd3ef58ae73e634f0d.png

Because financial markets are interconnected, what happened in Greece affected the whole planet. If the US collapses, the whole world does.
 
"You can't really count a nations economics and criminal economics as different anymore."

The all powerful, legal fiction, Nation State crime began in American history when the slave traders closed and locked the doors, issued gag orders, in Philadelphia in 1787. That ended the fruits of winning the Revolutionary War as the defenders drove out the offenders for a short time. Since then it has been top down offensive (criminal) acts.

That may or may not be something worth pointing out to anyone.
 
Last edited:
I have found a lot of talk about the devaluing of the dollar, and our ballooning national debt. i would like know is an imminent global collapse or if you believe it is isolated to the U.S. or perhaps you believe economies are so intrinsically linked that they will all go down with the U.S. should japanese people be stocking up on tin food and weapons? australians? this is a genuine thought and i'd like to know what you guys think.

I think you need to define very carefully what you mean by a collapse event for these purposes. Would the Great Depression have been a collapse event?

If you mean a tough economic time period, then that could happen. But the probability of a collapse event in the sense of no functioning government, breakdown of infrastructure, power grids, basic law and order, supply chains, etc. That's not very likely, and I'd be willing to bet almost whatever you want on it not happening in 5 years (my preferred form of such bets is paying off in gold or some other preferred physical resource if it does happen and being paid off in USD if it doesn't). That said, in the very unlikely event that something goes badly enough to cause a collapse in the US, it is hard to see it wouldn't have an impact on other countries as well close to a collapse level.
 
I don't believe the U.S. going down without a fight. The country will drown taking the whole world to the deep. They will drag everyone down with them. Not because of economic policies, but military. Let's not forget the U.S. has the strongest military in the world. This military will finish the global peace.
 
I have found a lot of talk about the devaluing of the dollar, and our ballooning national debt. i would like know is an imminent global collapse or if you believe it is isolated to the U.S. or perhaps you believe economies are so intrinsically linked that they will all go down with the U.S. should japanese people be stocking up on tin food and weapons? australians? this is a genuine thought and i'd like to know what you guys think.
68eebfcf5cd3f5dd3ef58ae73e634f0d.png

Of course American crisis will influence upon the whole world but everywhere in different way and it mostly depend on the nature of this financial collapse - if it's just another local economical crisis in America all the rest countries will feel it too but id it's a dollar collapse so probably it could be profitable the Eurozone or Chinese region.
 
Granny kickin' back like dat Chinaman `cause she got her money in rickshaw stock...

UN Agency Warns of Global Economy's 'House of Cards'
October 06, 2015 — A U.N. organization that focuses on helping developing countries become better integrated into the global economy is warning that the world's recent financial turmoil highlights the need for new approaches to international trade and development.
The U.N. Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), in its annual report released Tuesday, called for reforming governance of the International Monetary Fund, strictly separating retail and investment banking, providing greater support for development banks, and making it easier for countries to pay for imports and exports in their own currencies without bringing in a third-country currency, such as the U.S. dollar. The group said that as the world’s debt has ballooned in recent years to nearly $200 trillion, many countries and their creditors need a better way to restructure unsustainable debt.

B2095F03-A0D6-4FF0-AEE9-0E5433E906CE_w640_r1_s.jpg

A Chinese investor monitors stock prices at a brokerage house in Beijing​

To emphasize its perception of a perilous global economy, the cover of the UNCTAD report is illustrated with a house of cards., “And that’s really the key message that we want to convey — is how to ensure that we’re not building a house of cards for an international monetary and financial system for the future, but to look at ways of maybe putting in more secure foundations,” Steve MacFeely, UNCTAD's head of development statistics and information branch, told reporters in Bangkok on Monday.

Continued slowdown

Developing countries' growth is forecast to decline to around 4 percent in 2015, continuing a slowdown that began in 2001. Developed countries, meanwhile, are expected to grow at about 1.9 percent, according to UNCTAD. Officials of UNCTAD, which is headquartered in Geneva and governed by its 194 member states, are trying to address fundamental issues with an international monetary system they contend is not functioning as it should. UNCTAD's officials and others in the U.N. family express frustration that major economies and lending bodies, such as the IMF and World Bank, have not instituted significant reforms in wake of the 2007-08 global financial crisis, from which there has not been a full recovery.

MORE
 
Global slowdown reflects Chinese slowdown...

World economic growth downgraded to six-year low amid Chinese slowdown
Thu, Oct 08, 2015 - China’s slowdown and tumbling commodity prices will push global economic growth this year to the lowest level since the recession year 2009, the IMF predicted on Tuesday.
The fund says the world economy will grow 3.1 percent this year, down from a July forecast of 3.3 percent and from 3.4 percent growth last year. “The risks seem more tilted to the downside than they did just a few months ago,” IMF chief economist Maurice Obstfeld told reporters.

RISK DOWNPLAYED

Still, Obstfeld downplayed the risk of a global recession. The US Federal Reserve last month cited economic weakness around the world — and especially in China — when it decided to postpone a long-anticipated increase in short-term US interest rates, which it has kept near zero since December 2008. Obstfeld said any rate increase in the US would be good news, reflecting the Fed’s vote of confidence in the US economy, the world’s largest. The fund predicts the US will grow 2.6 percent this year, up from a July forecast of 2.5 percent and from 2.4 percent growth last year.

ANOTHER DROP

Emerging market economies will likely grow 4 percent, which would mark the fifth straight annual drop. Among those hardest hit by the commodities bust: The Brazilian economy, forecast to contract by 3 percent this year; and Russia, forecast to shrink 3.8 percent because of lower oil prices and economic sanctions imposed by the West as punishment for Russian aggression in Ukraine. Collapsing energy prices are also hurting Canada. The IMF downgraded its forecast for the Canadian economy by half a percentage point to 1 percent this year. The IMF expects Chinese economic growth to drop to a 25-year low 6.8 percent this year, but that is unchanged from its July forecast. Chinese manufacturers are struggling, but “services seem to be booming,” Obstfeld said.

IMPROVEMENT

See also:

Fed awaiting evidence global chill not knocking U.S. off track
Thu Oct 8, 2015 - The U.S. Federal Reserve thought the economy was close to warranting an interest rate hike in September but policymakers wanted firmer evidence a global economic slowdown was not knocking America off course.
The minutes from the Sept. 16-17 meeting released on Thursday pointed to a deeply cautious Fed even before subsequent economic data showed a sharp slowdown in hiring by U.S. employers. "Most" policymakers, according to the minutes, thought the Fed's first rate hike in a decade should still come this year and that financial market turmoil had not "materially altered" the outlook for the U.S. economy. At the same time, U.S. central bankers appeared unsettled and discussed at length the possibility that the China-led slowdown could weigh on America. "The committee decided that it was prudent to wait for additional information," the Fed said in the minutes, referring to its policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee.

The Fed surprised much of Wall Street by keeping interest rates unchanged at the September meeting, and many analysts expected the minutes to show the decision was a close call. However, while some central bankers at the September meeting said the U.S. labor market was at full strength and Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker was ready to hike right then and there, worries about a global economic chill clearly extended throughout the central bank. In discussing the economy's health, "many acknowledged that recent global economic and financial developments may have increased the downside risks to economic activity somewhat," the minutes said. "It was pretty clear cut that they were in favor of holding off raising rates," said Gus Faucher, an economist at PNC Financial Services in Pittsburg.

Still, the minutes showed a committee seemingly convinced it was time to move as soon as it was sure the economy was not about to slip off course. Only a "couple" of policymakers felt the economy is at risk of seeing inflation expectations start drifting lower, an event that might precede a slide into deflation. "They see everything in pretty good condition, but they figured no harm in waiting," said Brad McMillan, chief investment officer for Commonwealth Financial in Waltham, Massachusetts. Even last month's slowdown in job creation should be viewed in the context of an economy that is at or near full employment, San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank president John Williams said on Thursday, holding to a position he has laid out in recent days.

MORE

Related:

Asia stocks shine as Fed minutes confirm no urgency to tighten policy
Thu Oct 8, 2015 -- Asian shares rose on Friday, taking their cue from a jump in oil prices as well as gains on Wall Street after minutes of the Federal Reserve's latest meeting led investors to further pare bets that the central bank will hike interest rates this year.
Asian shares rose on Friday, taking their cue from a jump in oil prices and Wall Street gains after minutes of the Federal Reserve's latest meeting damped down expectations of an imminent Fed rate hike. The Fed minutes revealed the extent to which policymakers are concerned that a global economic slowdown might threaten the U.S. economic outlook. Though they said overseas turmoil had not "materially altered" economic prospects, they opted to hold interest rates steady last month. Riskier asset markets, which had risen when the Fed held off raising rates in September, got a further boost on confirmation policy makers won't rush to tighten policy at a time of slackening global growth. "The speculation about an imminent U.S. rate hike was a risk that investors had been dealing with for a long time. Because such concern is fading now, investors are willing to take risks," said Hiroyuki Nakai, chief strategist at Tokai Tokyo Research Center.

r

Passersby are reflected on a stock quotation board at a brokerage in Tokyo, Japan​

MSCI's broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan .MIAPJ0000PUS was up 1.6 percent, on track for a robust weekly gain of 6.7 percent. The S&P 500 SPX closed at a seven-week high on Thursday, though S&P 500 e-mini futures ESc1 edged down about 0.1 percent in Asian trading. Japan's Nikkei stock index .N225 added 0.8 percent, poised to gain 3.1 percent for the week. An unexpectedly weak jobs report for September had led many investors to speculate that the Fed will not deliver its first hike since 2006 until 2016.

Data out on Thursday showed the number of Americans filing new applications for unemployment benefits fell more than expected to near a 42-year low in the week ended Oct. 3, keeping alive the view that improving labor conditions will prompt the Fed to eventually act. Still, the dollar withered in line with fading near-term rate-hike expectations, with the dollar index .DXY down about 0.1 percent in Asian trade at 95.269, on track for a weekly loss of 0.6 percent.

MORE
 
This idea of Global Collapse is a standard fiction based upon the Zero Sum Game concept. There was a power to produce more than needed for a high quality and low cost life for everyone (other than victims of criminals) over 2000 years ago; otherwise Pyramids would not have been possible. Today there are exponentially greater powers to produce hundreds if not thousands of times higher quality and lower cost life sustaining processes, including free market defense services (true government), and the same qualification applies: except those who are currently victims of criminal activity, and especially victims of criminals perpetrating crimes under the (false) color of law.

So where does all that surplus wealth go as each unit of surplus wealth is produced and either consumed, invested, or used to finance criminal activity, and especially used to finance criminal activity under the (false) color of law?



All throughout history there have been those who use available economic power to invent, produce, and maintain higher quality and lower cost methods of increasing available economic power and do so while avoiding some of the transfer of wealth often transferred to criminals (under the color of law) in the form of (false taxes) extortion payments.

So the question is not a Global Collapse according to the Zero Sum Game conspiracy theory, the question concerns which groups (non-criminal, criminal, or criminal group hidden behind false authority of government) collapsing more so than the other group, and which group gains the power to go in one of two directions.

1. Employ available surplus wealth toward increasing available surplus wealth which leads to increases in the quality of life and reductions in the cost of life for all EXCEPT the criminals whose power depends upon extorting (under the color of law or regular old crime out in the open) surplus wealth from those who produce surplus wealth.

2. Steal available surplus wealth and employ the stolen power in the work of making sure that the Zero Sum Game remains in force; whereby those who produce surplus wealth are not allowed to gain more power than those who steal surplus wealth.

Global Collapse of the criminal government network?

Is that a problem? Is that a problem for who?


The problem is a bit different now as new technology is of almost zero help like it has been through most of the modern age. The maturity and capitalization of new tech is so fast now, what once gave us new careers for generations now is nearly 100% automated within a year of being introduced.

This means that jobs are going shrink for a very longtime to nearly zero availability and people will subsist on independent micro-production and locally generated power making their own products for barter in a largely cashless economy.

What we are seeing is just the beginning of a long economic contraction as barter is off the books and not counted in GDP.
 

Forum List

Back
Top