Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

goldminingXpert (29.53)

Introduction to my book

Recs

34

October 07, 2009 – Comments (35)

I've been working on a book that seeks to predict the future for more than a year. I've written enough of it now to write an intro and present a reasonably coherent table of contents. I'd love to hear rational people's feedback and ideas of what I'm missing, etc. as it is much easier to fix a book before you've finished writing the first draft of the manuscript than later on in the editing process.

...

 

 

In the prelude to his classic text Just Yesterday, historian Fredrick Allen asked, “Do you remember what you were doing September 3, 1929?”1 On a similar note, I ask, do you remember what you were doing on October 9, 2007? On that day, the Dow would make its record high of 14,164, and then, echoing 1929, promptly crashed. Regarding September 3rd, Allen said, “If there was any single day when the wave of prosperity—and of speculation—which characterized the nineteen-twenties may be said to have attained its utmost height before it curled over and crashed, September 3, 1929 was that day.”2

Just as September 3, 1929 marked the end of a long and prosperous era in American history, October 9, 2007 marked the end of another era. While 1929 is associated with the end of the post-world war economic boom, it brought more than that. Ending the era of American growth and prosperity as a humble inwardly focused free-market economic power that began after the end of the Civil War, the transition America embarked upon following 1929 brought it into a new period of global supremacy as its economic might ran the world and its suddenly dominant military used the threat of overwhelming force to keep any and all potential enemies at bay. In the ashes of the economic depression following 1929, the great American leviathan state was born.

For decades, the federal government grew steadily larger, consuming more and more of its citizens' time and resources; Americans weren't solely effected, America became a huge drain on the world's economy, endangering the quality of life of many of the world's people. As the saying goes, a trend that can't continue—won't. Though there have been tremors—the crash of 1987, the Asian contagion of 1997, the tech wreck of 2000, the stock market crash of 2008 is the first direct shockwave we've seen originating from the giant earthquake that is about to hit.

Just as the fall of the British economy directly led to the worldwide Great Depression of the 1930s, the conclusive cessation of American economic supremacy is directly responsible for the coming period of global economic collapse. Just as the decline of both the value of and the trust in the British Pound led to the Great Depression, the fall of the American dollar will be the focal point that leads to the realignment of the international economy and political scene. While figuring out the precise timing of the oncoming economic depression is nearly impossible, it is imperative that the dollar be observed, as its further declines are the most obvious harbinger that the great change is occurring.

October 9, 2007 represented more than a mere apex for America's economic power, it also marked the end of the era of big government. From the 1980s onward, America's economic policies have largely been crafted with a focus on kicking the can as far down the road as possible when it comes to dealing with policy-maker's untouchable 1000-pound gorilla: the debt. America's governments have collectively done what they've could to keep the illusion of a strong economy by artificially increasing the monetary supply, lowering interest rates to absurdly low levels and by allowing the outsourcing of key American jobs through a badly misguided “free” trade policy that has sold off the core of American economic vitality in return for better relations with our trade partners and guarantees of more funding of our ever-increasing debt.

While it's never smart to bet against the federal government's ability to find crafty non-solutions that put off the day of reckoning until after the next election, it appears that America is just about out of time. With utterly unfundable entitlement time bombs ticking, America had no margin for error. Then the Iraq War happened, the banking system was backstopped with trillions of dollars of borrowed money and stimulus packages were passed without a prayer of funding. We've passed the Rubicon, the federal government is inarguably bankrupt, and with it, the era of American supremacy has ended. The world has entered a new era, an era of change and transformation in which we'll continue to see America rapidly lose its economic and political power. This book examines how this transformation will play out, and how we can prepare for its numerous effects.

-- Ian Bezek, October 2009.

 

Table of Contents:

 

Chapter 1: America's Decline: More Like Britain Than Rome

Chapter 2: So Long, Big Government: The Imminent Collapse of Global Socialism

Chapter 3: America: The World's Greatest Sub-prime Borrower

Chapter 4: Europe: ...And You Thought America Was Out Of Luck?

Chapter 5: China, The Great Red Mirage

Chapter 6: Globalzation Reversed: The World Isn't Flat After All

Chapter 7: Other Factors: Oil, Demographics and Global Scarcity

Chapter 8: The Next Five Years

Chapter 9: 2035: The World Through Your Children's Eyes

Chapter 10: What We Can (And Can't) Do

1Allen, Fredrick Lewis. Since Yesterday. New York: Harper, 1939, p. 1.

2Ibid.

 

 

35 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On October 07, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Predaking (29.80) wrote:

Americans weren't solely effected

Review the difference b/w effect and affect - it can change the meaning of the sentence (I think you actually meant affected here).

Not sure if you want a devoted chapter on American Monetary Policy or want it interwoven within other main ideas - but seems pretty important given your topic.

Also, what about discussing the perpetual cycle of using bubbles to boost markets and how new potential bubbles could influence your predictions.

Report this comment
#2) On October 07, 2009 at 7:00 PM, BravoBevo (99.97) wrote:

Agree with Predaking that, in the instance he pointed out, you should use "affected" rather than "effected." 

And at the end of the prior paragraph, you coin the term "the great American leviathan state." The leviathan was a mysterious sea creature, perhaps akin to what we typically refer to as "the Loch Ness monster."  It is an illustrative wordplay, but without elucidation it doesn't really go anywhere unless your intended implication is that US economic policy from that point forward would be submerged underwater.  With the picture drawn in that sentence to being "born," might the analogy be better with a reference to a "phoenix" perhaps?

I like the analogy to Great Britain's economic peak and decline. Personally, I think that there is another parallel analogy to the civilizations of the Romans (early history), England (as you mentioned) and the U.S. (now) when each of our respective societies have grown to become post-modern in the luxuries and decadence of the times. 

Keep up the good work. I'm looking forward to more of your writings. 

Report this comment
#3) On October 07, 2009 at 7:25 PM, GeneralDemon (21.79) wrote:

"Ending the era of American growth and prosperity"

I believe your premise to be baseless. If indeed you claim your book is about the future - you may want to review what makes you think the US is in decline. What, a correction in the normal business cycle? Everything looks bad at the bottom of the cycle. The derivatives won't all be unwound with losses on one side. The fractional reserve system is very flexible - too flexible to be successfully attacked by counterparties.

In case you missed it - the current miracle produced by the US for the world is the internet (70,000 new users per day). More great things to come (cloud, nano, biotech, etc.) - not your negative, short-sided view that is shared by all the other gloom and doomers.

But then again, people do love to read BS. 

Report this comment
#4) On October 07, 2009 at 7:51 PM, checklist34 (99.72) wrote:

I won't attempt to critique the writing nor fact nor opinion, but I will offer a thought as to the business/profit side of writing a book. 

A book with an anti-american-dominance tone will perhaps be recieved best in the marketplace at a time when panic is in the streets.  If the book was completed and offered in March it would likely have generated a bigger buzz than if it was offered today.  If it was offered, say, next July and we had crashed again next July, panic was rampant...  likely a better reception then than if next July saw a recovery in full swing.  Timing may be important.

Also, as a wild thought, a monotone, god-complexed (stating various matters such as the "inarguability" of the US Gov't being bankrupt that various people would have varied opinions on as material fact) write will attract primarily people who already feel the same way.  A sort of pep-rally effect. 

If you knew a meeting was going to occur and that the content of the meeting was going to be "damn the yankess, A-rod must die!" you'd be interested in going if you hated the Yankees and hoped the Twins would beat them in the first round,and you wanted to get drunk and yell and thump your chest.  If you were a Yankees fan who had posters of A-rod on your wall, you may want to go to argue or debate, but you may also be quickly put off if the tone was excessively chest-thumping.  If you were a Royals fan you'd probably just roll your eyes and not bother.

The kind of my-view-is-fact  / anyone-who-disagrees-is-an-idiot writing style that you have displayed from time to time here on CAPs may create a bit of a pep-rally sort of book that isn't recieved as broadly as something more neutral or point/counterpoint.  

And if your goal is to influence or change minds, I think you'd have much greater success with a point/counterpoint in which you presented the optimistic case and then poked holes in it rather than with a book that just repeatedly spouted severe negativity.  

I hope you sell a pile of books and make a pile of dough, and I don't doubt you're able to put together a hit.  And I'm certainly not saying I could write a better book, even if it was about cheese, but I offer, for your consideration, that you may find a broader audience with a non pep-rallyish tone.

good luck man

Report this comment
#5) On October 07, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Harold71 (22.97) wrote:

Cultural Dictionary

Leviathan [(luh-veye-uh-thuhn)]

A sea monster mentioned in the Book of Job, where it is associated with the forces of chaos and evil.

Note: Figuratively, a “leviathan” is any enormous beast.

 

I don't think that it is technically wrong (I would consider the US gov't to be quite a beast), but it's just one more grandiose word in an already pretentious introduction.  IMHO, of course.

 

"The world has entered a new era, an era of change and transformation"

 

BTW, keep that part.  Many people still don't get how massive (and long-lasting) the change truly is. It is a new era in how we use other people's money, a new era in big business, and certainly a new era in government.

 

Report this comment
#6) On October 07, 2009 at 10:08 PM, starbucks4ever (98.28) wrote:

I second checklist's opinion. You must strike the iron while it's hot, and I'm afraid that iron is now cooling really fast. We are entering a new decade that will bring a new type of economic discourse. 

Report this comment
#7) On October 07, 2009 at 11:00 PM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

*If the market doesn't go back down, my thesis is wrong and therefore there is no point to publishing the book at all.

*you are correct on affect vs. effect. Thanks.

* And if your goal is to influence or change minds, I think you'd have much greater success with a point/counterpoint in which you presented the optimistic case and then poked holes in it rather than with a book that just repeatedly spouted severe negativity.  Yeah -- the intro is shorter than the final one will be and the tone of the chapters I have written so far is more even-keeled. I will address the neutrality of this... thanks for mentioning it.

 

I like the analogy to Great Britain's economic peak and decline. Personally, I think that there is another parallel analogy to the civilizations of the Romans (early history), England (as you mentioned) and the U.S. (now) when each of our respective societies have grown to become post-modern in the luxuries and decadence of the times

The Roman analogy is, at this point, overused and cliche. I like the comparison to Britain as I feel it is a relatable apples v. apples comparison of the downfall of two primarily economic powers. 

Not sure if you want a devoted chapter on American Monetary Policy or want it interwoven within other main ideas - but seems pretty important given your topic.

I address this a good deal in Chapters 1 and 2. I may still reorder things a lot -- just trying to get a general idea of what I want in the book so that I don't miss anything. I've written bits and pieces of 8 of the 10 proposed chapters so far.

Report this comment
#8) On October 07, 2009 at 11:53 PM, XMFSinchiruna (27.83) wrote:

If you'd like help with editing at any stage, please let me know. :) It's something I enjoy doing and have done quite a bit of. :)

Sinch

Report this comment
#9) On October 08, 2009 at 12:05 AM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

Thanks.

Report this comment
#10) On October 08, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Option1307 (29.76) wrote:

Interesting introduction and I like what I see so far. I agree with what checklist mentioned above and think it is truely something that should be taken into consideration.

I definitely look forward to more of your writtings, they are usually thought provoking at the very least. Best of luck Ian!

Report this comment
#11) On October 08, 2009 at 12:23 AM, topsecret09 (35.84) wrote:

http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=268381&t=01009917921919779399

Report this comment
#12) On October 08, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Amsterdam101 (< 20) wrote:

Hey GMX,

 I'm one of your silent supporters - I'm sure there are many of us that appreciate your opinions and rec your posts without necesarily commenting or trying to flame you. This book is a big thing you are doing and I wanted to lend my support.

 Firstly, good luck with the book and I urge you to keep the momentum going and to see it through to the end. We are all witnessing history here and to be able to write about it as it is unfolding is a rare priviliage.

 Secondly, thanks for sharing your work so far with us fools, knowing that there will be some idiots out there to critisize and belittle anything you do... ignore them and keep the faith. I hope that you keep posting parts of your book here as you write them, many of us would be only too happy to assist. 

 Personally I think there should also be a chapter on Gold, the role it has played in America's currency, the apparent supression of it's true price and the reasons for doing this. But I'm a gold bug and a conspiracy nut so perhaps that's just something I'm interested in... but you can't talk about an economy without discussing money, and you can't discuss money without talking about the gold standard and fiat currencies.

 Good luck with the book and I'm sure many of us are looking forward to further reading!

Report this comment
#13) On October 08, 2009 at 1:37 AM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

gold will be a character in the book ... the fall of the gold standard in Britain precipitated the Great Depression, and since I'm a saying the era of dollar supremacy is ending, I'll obviously be examining what comes next. Since I think Europe and China are both in trouble, my future prediction is certainly not that the Euro or Yuan are going to become the world's leading currencies. What I do forsee is that there will be a competing marketplace of weak fiat currencies including the dollar, the european currencies, the yen, gold and oil.

Report this comment
#14) On October 08, 2009 at 1:38 AM, jstegma (29.25) wrote:

Some of your writings are interesting, but checklist has a point the arrogance problem that occasionally gets in there.  If you are going to write a book you don't want to take the tone of a know-it-all.  Then on the back cover they'll put your rather youthful picture and can talk about your career consisting primarily of high school and college.

"Inarguability" is probably a good word to avoid.  Anything that is inarguable is probably not worth writing about.  

Some of the chapters sound interesting.  However, they are HUGE topics that a whole book would probably need to be devoted to.  Chapter 2 for instance.  Covering that subject in a few pages just means that you did little or no research and you're just talking out of your *ss.  My blogs are like that.  I just make sh*t up and type it because I'm too lazy to do any research.  But books are held to a higher standard usually.  A book isn't just one giant blog dump.

The book is just too big.  Seeking to describe all the world's problems and tell us what we can and can't do and what the future for our children will be like - that's a lot.  But you've been working on it for over a year.  A whole year?  Wow.  What are you going to do next year as an encore?

I'd say you need a reality check.  If you are really knowledgeable about something, then write something worthwhile about it.  If you just want to BS, then write blogs.

Report this comment
#15) On October 08, 2009 at 1:59 AM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

If you just want to BS, then write blogs

I've written lots of blogs in the two years I've been here.

But you've been working on it for over a year.  A whole year?  Wow.  What are you going to do next year as an encore?

I'm not anywhere close to done.

"Inarguability" is probably a good word to avoid.  Anything that is inarguable is probably not worth writing about. 

Thanks for noting this ... this sort of observation is what I need to make things better. I've never written a book before, and the vast majority of books that get published suck ... there's no magic wand that makes somebody a good author. However, I'll never be a good author if I don't make copious amounts of mistakes.

The book is just too big.  Seeking to describe all the world's problems and tell us what we can and can't do and what the future for our children will be like - that's a lot.

It isn't that big. The central thesis is that the dollar has entered a long gradual decline that has brought an end to the American economic empire. The rest of the book then seeks to establish what will happen in the face of a gradual erosion of American power and influence -- as Great Britain experienced. The main results of this ... the reverse of globalization, the fragmentation of political power and so on are the effects of the thesis. The validity of the entire book rests on the idea that the sun is slowing setting on the era of American dominance -- particularly dominance of our currency, and while the dollar won't be toilet paper in the next decade or two, it will continue to lose value and legitimacy across the globe. If the central thesis is accepted, then it becomes a logical argument to say that the world will enter an extended period of hardship, as the fall of a dominant currency/economy has almost always led to political fragmentation/economic isolationism/warfare, etc.

Report this comment
#16) On October 08, 2009 at 4:55 AM, checklist34 (99.72) wrote:

GMX, I am not an economist nor a historian nor even a college graduate.  But I am willing to, drunk, take an IQ test against people who claim to be smarter than me (sober) and let that be the deciding test for whose opinion should matter most.  lol

And I am, in fact, currently drunk (well, tipsy) after a long and bizzare week that saw me get life-altering medical results (for the better, could have been the end of life as I know and have known it) last Friday, and I did in fact have a pretty good date tonight.

So whatever.  

But... in the long run the fate of the nation is defined by whether we continue or cease a policy of welfare/socialism or abaondon it.  It becomes a question of whether we continue to shelter everybody in our society from the consequences of their decisions or whether we return to being a darwinistic society in which the fittest survive.  Nobody realizes this, nobody ever talks about this, but what i'm about to say is preposterously true.

Rome, Britain... these are often looked at as precedents to the US today but there is an epic, sweeping difference in each case.  Epic, sweeping.  Several differences.

1.  Rome and Britain used their military dominance to transfer wealth to them, we don't.  We defeated germany and japan, but then we...  rebuilt them.  To our own harm.  We didn't exact 500 years of taxes from Germany or Japan (as Rome or Britain may have), we didn't enslave them, we rebuilt them at our own expense to our own harm.  

We didn't sieze Iraq's oil.  We just work for "the greater good" while the rest of the world doesn't worry much about our good.  We have more "drivers seat" power than anti-US persons like yourself wish to believe.  We could, after all, start seizing.  We could, after all, stop helping others.  

 

2.  Rome fell to welfare and nothing else, at the end of the day it was socialism and entitlements and "rome is rich, why should any roman go without?" that ended it.  Britain fell to more complex circumstances including, at the end, lack of population and lack of ability to continue a military-dominated reign with a substantial portion of a generation of their males dead from WW1.  

We can still win the wars, should they arise.  Britain no longer could, and THAT is what predicated Britains fall from power and said fall from powers contribution to previous economic calamities.

 

These are fundamental differences, fundamental differences.  

Additionally, the weakening dollar is not that bad of a thing.  Taken further it could bring about the long-needed end of union dominance (i.e., strangulation) of american industry, and reinvigorate america as a manufacturing power.  

If America begins to truly fall from grace, it may at that point rediscover its greatness and once again rise.  Allow me to explain.

The US of A, unlike any other country or empire in human history, is unique in one way:  it is a clear function of darwinism.  

Imagine you were living in Germany in 1850.  You are in a pub.  Jorge stands up and says "screw you guys, i'm going to america, i'm going to make my fortune, i'm leaving this dump".  His buddy stands up and says "you are crazy, why would you leave here hwere life is fine for that risk?"

Who came?  Who stayed?  Jorge came.  The buddy stayed.  We have, for 2 centuries now (well, up til a decade or 2 ago anyway) collected the best and brightest and most ambitious from around the world and brought htem here (by their own will) to live or die trying.  

The result?  The most ambitious and optimistic population ever assembled.  Sometimes this is brilliant (look at what we, a tiny fraction of the world population, have wrought upon this world.  What ISN'T our doing, our invention, our innovation, what DIDN'T begin here?  Truly, we are epic).   We collected, via our promise of freedom and opportunity, a vastly inordinate percentage of the best and brightest from around the world.  We are a collection of Jorges. 

Sometimes - mostly when combined with socialism (ie, anti-darwinism), this results in disaster.  Like California, the ultimatecollection of the best and brightest.  Prettiest state with the best climate the most people, hollywood, the most big cities, the most the most the most.  But soooooo liberal, soooooo anti-darwinistic.  Welfare for all, entitlements for all.  Everybody should have a house and be rich.  

But all we need to return, and stay, great, is to remain the place with the most OPPORTUNITY, let Europe be the place with the most GUARANTEE of wealth and happiness, let us be the place with the greatest OPPORTUNITY.  Taht will draw the Checklists, the Jorges, it will, I promise.  We couldn't care less if someone guarantees us free health care or life if we can't get a job.  We are willing to get rich or die trying.  And we are what this country was founded on and can regain dominance on again.  Its not even complicated and its hardly too late.

Eliminate socialism, make a live-or-die state wher eif you can't hold a job you can't live (literally) and this country becomes quickly again as great as it ever was and remains there eternally.  Make it a state where contributions to the greater good truly are rewarded (and I don't mean hedge funds or daytrdaers or personal injury attorneys, I mean inventors,entrepreneurs, manufacturers, organizers, and those. 

Like the US in 1900.  Who was rich?  People who had vastly benefitted the greater good.  Railroad tycoons, oil tycoons, manufacturing tycoons, inventores.  

Who's rich today?  Bankers?  Hedge funds?  People who quite probably harm the greater good.

It is socialism and the recent policies of favoring persons who do not produce over persons that do that create this rpedicament.  

And darwinism exists, my friend.  Each generation of Americans, once, was more productive and innovative than the previous because it was those who did something that oculd afford to live.  Today, we pay the lowest common denominator to breed.  We do, literally, we pay the worst of our pouplation to reproduce.  How would it go for a tribe of lions if they all hunted just to feed the weakest most worthless so the weak could breed?

We do that here.  Idiocracy is prophetic.  Watch the movie (idiocracy).  Prophetic, but far too subtle.  It wouldn't end nearly that well (everyboyd in the movie was ok).

Romes binge into welfare CAUSED the middle ages.  The dark ages, the regression.  How is italy today?  It was once, by far, the most advanced society on earth.  Today if the US didn't want to overpay for brand names would it even exist?

Darwinism is not a question of religion, the belief in God, Adam, Eve, the Bible, cannot refute nor rebuke its absolute power.  

American society has fallen deeply, deeply under the break-even point of Darwinism.  Deeply.

THAT can be its undoing.  Eliinate welfare and let those who refuse to help themselvse fail, and those whoc an help themselves succeed gloriously, and we would rapidly regain all of our past glory and retain it essentially eternally (at least until other socities caught on).

It has always been the few who have helped and led the many.  Every population of every species, ever, including humans, has been subject to Darwinian laws.  Except wildly wealthy societies who choose, by law of man, to violate them.

Each of those societies has ended badly.  Our will live or die by Darwinism, not by monetary policy or anything else.

All our national debt is is welfare.  700B a year paid to people not able to take care of themselves.  Add interenst, compound.  We're a vast creditor nation if we simply eliminate welfare.  Stop paying people to live when they do not contribute to the society around them. 

Why, please someone explain, does someone have the right to burden his/her fellow citizens to support them?  Why?  Why do some have to work and toil while others get to live for free?

There is no rational answer for htat.  none.  And that, and that alone, ultimately, stands at the core of our problems as a nation.

What is the housing bubble?  The function of 2 presidents in a row trying to get every american into a house.  Encouraging Freddy and Fanny to loan to people who just cna't.  Not everybody can.  Period.  

Quit coddling to those who can't.

And here we see how democracies rise and fall.  They rise on Darwinism, ... the freedom and equality they instill creates situations where previously-constrained talent rises, raising socity with it.  They die on "vote for me and i'll give you free stuff".  They die on everybody gets a vote, no matter how little they do, no matter how much harm they do.  They die on welfare.

The founding fathers allowed only landowners to vote.  Just allow only taxpayers and our society would change greatly.  

I could, and may, write a book on this, but for now I shall end the commentary.

Report this comment
#17) On October 08, 2009 at 5:25 AM, checklist34 (99.72) wrote:

democracy both rises and falls on darwinism.  Greece would never have become great w/o it, it would never have fallen w/o it.  Ditto rome. 

Ditto us? 

Britain is quite possibly the most successful empire of all time.  They never favored the weak, never favored welfare and socialism, did they?

They failed because, at the end of the day, ultimately, they just ran out of people.  They ran out of the MOST vital resource.

We are quite possibly the worst empire of all time because we never even used our dominance to transfer the wealth of the world to ourselves.  Why didn't we just sieze the middle east 50 years ago?  Thats what Britain would have done.  Or Rome.

We are far fairer than any other population that hs ever dominated, far, far, far fairer.  Far more decent and equitable.  

Indeed, we have spent more to rebuild those who we (necessarily, mind) than probably all of the rest of human history has ever spent on foreign nations combined, adjusted for interest.

tis darwinism that makes and breaks democracies, period.  tis darwinism (and our current apparently insatiable intent to violate it by promoting the lowest possible level of our population) that will break the US of A if/when it ever breaks.

Write that down, know it well.  It probably reads as an alien thought to most readers, because, frankly, I think most people live by what they'ver ead over and over (popular opinion) and this is not popular opinoin.  Indeed, I could get skewered for saying this I imagine, should I , say, run for office.

But i'm right.  Any population of any species ever in history, ever, and I mean ever, that focuses on paying the weak to thrive and live and make more weak for the next generation fails.  Period.

 

Report this comment
#18) On October 08, 2009 at 5:29 AM, checklist34 (99.72) wrote:

Andi am fascinated by the fact that liberals

A) are the ones promoting welfare, aren't they?  seems like it

B)  are the ones that promote themselves as "intellectual"

what it takes to be liberal in this socity is either

1.  contempt for said society, as in you want it to degernate and fail and hence you promote these policities or

2.  complete ignorance with respect to biology and how populations rise and fall, science, and anything resembling free thought

indeed, liberal may  as well, in 21st century america, = what "conservative" was in the 1960s.  

you

I.  do as you are told

II.  do not question what you are told

III.  believe, unquestioningly, that what you are told is "right"

IV.  believe that whoever doesn't believe as you is "wrong" or "bad" or "evil"

my, my, my, oh my, how this society has come full circle and done a true 180 from 40 years ago.  40 years ago "liberals" were freedom fighters. 

today, they are the opressores. 

amazing if you think about it.

Report this comment
#19) On October 08, 2009 at 8:55 AM, kaskoosek (85.49) wrote:

Checklist

What you wrote is very interesting. Though I believe that some form of socialism does not impede creativity.

 

I would subscribe to the ideas of Jeremy Bentham, whereby the ultimate goal is happiness for the largest number of people. If at the end of the day total socialism impedes standard of living then we should not go that route.

 

Some thing like Norway or Canada would be ideal. 

Report this comment
#20) On October 08, 2009 at 10:10 AM, outoffocus (22.91) wrote:

My only comment at this time (until I have more time to look into this) is that the title of chapter 7 is pretty dry compared to the other chapters.  Maybe instead of "Chapter 7: Other Factors: Oil, Demographics and Global Scarcity" you can say something like "Global Scarcity: Oil, demographics, and natural resources". 

Report this comment
#21) On October 08, 2009 at 10:17 AM, jstegma (29.25) wrote:

GMX -

Your explanation of you thesis in your reply to me sounds a lot more reasonable and grounded.

I'd say try writing the book in that tone first and then if you want try to jazz it up with some big words later on.  

Are you planning to write this as a well-researched legitimate academic book or more as entertainment like a Rush Limbaugh book or something like that?

Report this comment
#22) On October 08, 2009 at 11:22 AM, USNHR (32.73) wrote:

I bleieve GMX gets the reference to Leviathan State from the book by Thomas Hobbes. Wikipedia has a brief overview of it. Using Leviathan to describe the U.S. since the beginning of the great depression is arguable, I would argue that we are now more rightly entering a leviathan state in the present with the controls the government is increasingly exercising over the U.S. population.

That is my two cents.

 

Report this comment
#23) On October 08, 2009 at 11:38 AM, jddubya (37.36) wrote:

GMX - godspeed and good luck on your book!  Putting it out here for Fools to comment on may cause you more grief than not.  I'd hope that you wouldn't have to spend much time sifting through the worthless comments....um... like this one(lol).

The only advice I would offer is to write it as you want to write it... ignore the comments about arrogance and such... and let Sinch help with the editing.

You certainly don't want to look back at the book and say, "I shouldn't have done what [so and so] said..."

Report this comment
#24) On October 08, 2009 at 11:40 AM, jsneesby (94.17) wrote:

I don't know if car culture is a cause or an effect of America's decline, but it could be worth mentioning.  (Car culture may be an effect of the wide-open-spaces geography.)  City cores have suffered with redlining, white flight, and the growth of suburbs made possible by the automobile.  This has set in motion a dependence on expensive resources, including land (parking lots), oil (SUVs), freeways (quality of life / pollution), and the cost of infrastructure (deferred maintenance of bridges & levees).  The underclass has come to see the automobile as a necessity rather than an option; rather than ditching their money hogs, they line up for payday loans while their cars are idling outside.

Report this comment
#25) On October 08, 2009 at 12:10 PM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

Checklist -- that's a lot of food for thought. Thanks. I do believe we've passed the point where the government can no longer expand socialism due to fiscal currencies, and instead, we'll see social programs begin to contract.

 Outoffocus -- good observation, I've taken that into consideration.

Jstegma -- thanks for addressing concerns with the tone. Most of my friends are hard-core liberals, and once I get a little further along, they're going to help me read it -- if I'm making them too upset, then my tone is too strong. For now, I'm writing as honestly as I can, and then I'll work on fixing it later. I've got about 20,000 words done, and this the first anybody else has read of it. This is a serious book, not a Limbaugh-esqe book. So far, my citations span 7 pages from 31 sources and there's a lot more to come...

Report this comment
#26) On October 08, 2009 at 12:15 PM, goldminingXpert (29.53) wrote:

jsneesby: I may mention this in passing in the chapter that deals with oil among other issues, but it really is outside the scope of my book and has been covered by the likes of Kunstler very well.

Report this comment
#27) On October 08, 2009 at 12:32 PM, 4everlost (29.48) wrote:

GMX

Bravo for putting your thoughts out here for critique as you have done.

I know you are going to address gub'ment - big gub'ment.  Will you delve into how cronyism and corruption have contributed to the demise of the dollar?  The "you scratch my back and I'll line your wallet" philosophy that permeates Washington has contributed to the destruction of our economic infrastructure.    

I'll keep up with your writings as they develop.  I hope you sell a lot of books.

Rec #23 here... 

Report this comment
#28) On October 08, 2009 at 12:56 PM, bothisellhigher (28.96) wrote:

There is a point to publishing your book even if the market does not go down and crash immediately.  I like the idea of a book of predictions based on the observations and educations and ruminating of the observer-and how some of those predictions could possibly morph into something else, and how some of those predictions could change completely given what may be contained in Chapters 9 and 10 and yes, of course the world continually enters new eras and undergoes change-who wants a stagnant pond festering in the heat for a world?

You have pissed me off more than once with your arrogant tone but I remain fascinated by what you have to say and truly enjoy uncovering the knowledge and inspiration you do have to offer, and would gladly buy your book in a quest for more.I wish you only the best of luck in your efforts ...and admire those efforts. 

Bravo and go for it young man!

P.S.  And look what you have done with this blog...apart from the reality of your intention...given me yet another source of joy with the discovery of yet another personally inspiring wordsmith ...Mr. Checklist34-who I shall also follow in the future and buy his book as well...thank you again my boy!

Report this comment
#29) On October 08, 2009 at 3:48 PM, EnigmaDude (95.14) wrote:

I'm sure it will be inarguably a Leviathan effort of arrogant proportions that will have no effect whatsoever on my future.  But hey, good luck with it.

(When checklist34 writes a book, then I might be interested)

Report this comment
#30) On October 09, 2009 at 3:25 AM, APJ4RealHoldings (33.07) wrote:

GMX, longtime fan here despite those pesky triples ;)

Best of luck on teh book.  Looks really good so far, thanks for the look into the rough beta beginings!  Let us know when closer to completion, you have a lot of fans here including myself.  I also echo earlier thoughts on the tone & keeping away from the pep-crowd & be targeted for converting teh curious. 

CHECKLIST (of ur last 3 posts here, man that 1st one was something else!).  I offer my favourite excerpts which I found quite thoughtful & inspiring that I just had to note it down in blog format which I'm just putting up. 

Report this comment
#31) On October 09, 2009 at 11:00 AM, cthomas1017 (93.96) wrote:

Excellent discussion!  Your comments, check, have a wonderful thread of optimism underlying the realistic view of the situation.  There is that darwinian aspect that is political in nature.  Perhaps, GMX, just as important in describing why Rome or Britian or the US fell, it is just as important to acknowledge why those same societies grew to the dominance that they did.  For the US, I would start with the fundamentals of why the country became the world's superpower:
     a) the principals & values upon which our country was founded
     b) the demographics that evolved from the people who were attracted to become a part of the American Dream
     c) the leaders that emmerged at critical junctures in our history
     d) the geographic characterisitics of our land that gives us the most naturally resource & distribution-friendly layout of any on earth

Outstanding first-pass, GMX!  Anything that I can lend to your effort, don't hesitate to ask! :)

Report this comment
#32) On October 14, 2009 at 3:23 PM, DeerHunter73 (73.00) wrote:

Gmx You said for months, the market was going to plunge/crash. Calling for 500 on the S&P and 5000 on the dow. you changed your story lines all summer. I said on MANY of your blogs the dow would top 10000 before the end of the year and the S&P would top 1000 if not 1100. You said several times no way that was going to happen. I was nuts a troll whatever. Point is I made 2 predictions both have happened. YOU made several and none of happened. Im just glad I never took your advice on selling in the Spring and Summer. Good Luck on the BEAR book!

Report this comment
#33) On October 15, 2009 at 2:59 AM, uclayoda87 (29.26) wrote:

Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff provided some historical thoughts about money, the rise of various European contries prior to the US dominance and the future.  Since their books were fairly accurate and interesting to read, they may be of some help to you in developing your vision of the future, especially in comparison to what they have already written.

Report this comment
#34) On October 19, 2009 at 10:55 PM, rexlove (99.43) wrote:

Very nice GMX. Looks interesting so far. Be sure to heed Checklist's advice about not being so arrogant. If not you'll come across as some cocky arrogant kid who doesn't know what he's talking about. Be sure to back up your arguements with facts.

Report this comment
#35) On October 20, 2009 at 4:02 PM, jed71 (33.89) wrote:

GMX,

I am not sure if this has been mentioned in the plethera of previous responses but....

Have you considered adding a chapter on the rise and fall of the Fiat Currency system... I think that would be fascinating...

 

 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement