Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

chk999 (99.98)

What Won't Happen This Year

Recs

44

March 22, 2011 – Comments (47)

With a lot of hysteria going on I am putting up a list of things that won't happen this year.

 

The US Dollar will not become worthless. It will still be accepted for goods and services.

There will not be hyper-inflation. Yes, there will be inflation, but it won't be Weimar Germany style. More like 4%.

The Federal Reserve will not be disbanded. A central bank of some flavor will still be around long after all our grandchildren are dead of old age.

We will not go back to a precious metals standard. That was getting creaky in the 1860's and was totally unworkable by the end of WWI.

We will not run out of oil. It will be more or less expensive, but it will be available.

We will not stop using coal.

Global Warming will not cause the sea level to rise any meaurable degree.

California will not have The Big One. If it does have a quake, it will not fall into the sea, the plate is moving north, not west. 

Ron Paul will not get higher elective office. (This is a permanent thing, not just this year.)

We will not have a civil war in this country.

The Yellowstone super-volcano will not errupt.

We will not be hit by a planet-wrecker class meteor.

Obama is not a foreign agent.  

There have always been scary times and bad events. But the sun keeps on rising and the breweries keep on making good beer and we will survive. Compared to The Great Depression, this is a walk in the park.

47 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On March 22, 2011 at 10:28 AM, PeteysTired (< 20) wrote:

Are you predicting the sun will come out tomorrow?  

Report this comment
#2) On March 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, cthomas1017 (39.66) wrote:

-1 Rec

Report this comment
#3) On March 22, 2011 at 10:56 AM, drgroup (68.63) wrote:

You went way out on a limb with these calls. Your statement about the Great Depression and a walk in the park is obviously stated from the viewpoint of one who has never been without employment or income. I suggest you find the target market of over 20% of the unemployed and try selling that line to them.

I don't think they give a sthi about the hysteria list.....

Report this comment
#4) On March 22, 2011 at 11:31 AM, EnigmaDude (95.73) wrote:

Wha?  You mean the sky isn't falling?  How dare you!

Report this comment
#5) On March 22, 2011 at 11:56 AM, chk999 (99.98) wrote:

drgroup - I work in a volatile industry and have unemployed/underemployed way more than was fun. I still stand by my words.

cthomas1017 - what specifically do you think will happen this year out of this list? 

Report this comment
#6) On March 22, 2011 at 12:11 PM, MegaEurope (22.68) wrote:

"California will not have The Big One."

 

If you were Japanese and making predictions last year, you might have said:

"Japan will not have The Big One." and "Japan will not have a nuclear meltdown."

Report this comment
#7) On March 22, 2011 at 12:19 PM, ETFsRule (99.90) wrote:

+1 rec

Report this comment
#8) On March 22, 2011 at 1:20 PM, kdakota630 (31.51) wrote:

The Yellowstone super-volcano will not errupt.

This is something that will probably happen in the not-too-distant future, geologically speaking, which of course means we will all be long, long gone by then.

Report this comment
#9) On March 22, 2011 at 1:23 PM, leohaas (91.57) wrote:

Excellent list. I cannot find a lot to disagree with!

Report this comment
#10) On March 22, 2011 at 1:39 PM, chk999 (99.98) wrote:

kdakota630 - an old friend is a professor of geology and his specialty is volcanoes. I asked him about Yellowstone a few years ago and he doesn't think it will errupt within our specie's lifetime. The recurrance interval is very rough and the error is hundreds of thousands of years.

Report this comment
#11) On March 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM, kdakota630 (31.51) wrote:

chk999

My guess was about 10,000 years.  Obviously, your professor friend is going to be more knowledgable on the subject as I, just a bit of a volcano buff.

However, I am willing to make your professor friend a bet.  For $1,000, I say it erupts within 10,000 years, plus or minus 1,000 years.

Report this comment
#12) On March 22, 2011 at 1:53 PM, kdakota630 (31.51) wrote:

Oops, I meant 10,000 years, plus or minus 1,000 years, so between 9,000 and 11,000 years.  I didn't want to hog all 11,000 years and give myself an unfair advantage on that bet.

Report this comment
#13) On March 22, 2011 at 1:57 PM, eldemonio (98.81) wrote:

I appreciate an off topic blog as much as the next guy - but I'd rather make money.  Check out the following link if your interested in how you can make money betting on natural disasters, political flusterclucks, financial doomsday, and other exciting world events.

http://intrade.com/v4/home/

Report this comment
#14) On March 22, 2011 at 1:59 PM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

One thing that will happen.

You will get most of your ionising radiation dose from sources not linked to nuclear power plants, including partially blown up ones.

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

Report this comment
#15) On March 22, 2011 at 2:01 PM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:



enlarge

Report this comment
#16) On March 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM, catoismymotor (72.81) wrote:

Portefeuille,

Darn you for putting things in perspective!

Cato

Report this comment
#17) On March 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM, EnigmaDude (95.73) wrote:

porte - do they sell bananaphones in Germany?

(I guess I should stop staring at this stupid CRT!)

Report this comment
#18) On March 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM, goalie37 (96.99) wrote:

+1 rec

I would also like to add to the list of things that won't happen this year "The Dodgers will win the world series."  Go Giants! 

Report this comment
#19) On March 22, 2011 at 3:20 PM, whereaminow (58.64) wrote:

Trying to End the Fed is not hysteria. It's a practical goal that takes years of hard work by a diligent minority that holds liberty above personal gain. We know how hard this task is. We know it won't happen overnight.

We also know that until we are successful, sunshine patriots of all stripes will ridicule us and say it's never going to happen.

Thankfully, we don't care.

We also know that the Cubs will not win the World Series next year. 

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#20) On March 22, 2011 at 3:41 PM, alexpaz (29.60) wrote:

My prediction for 2011 is that chk999 will continue to red thumb ultrashort etf's until the market collapses and his credibility will go along with his caps score... 

Report this comment
#21) On March 22, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jbay76 (< 20) wrote:

And there will not be a NFL Season

Report this comment
#22) On March 22, 2011 at 4:56 PM, chk999 (99.98) wrote:

alexpaz - I've been in the top ten for more than two years now. Which will happen first: I fall out of the top ten or you get a postive score?

Report this comment
#23) On March 22, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Pennyperson (< 20) wrote:

You have to give port some credit - he produced a super size chart this time around....   =)

Report this comment
#24) On March 22, 2011 at 5:35 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

All right, now run that same list for ten years out. Hopefully that will also matter to us.

Report this comment
#25) On March 22, 2011 at 5:44 PM, chk999 (99.98) wrote:

kdakota630 - A bet for $1,000 in 11,000 years has a tiny net present value. At a discount rate of .04% (.0004) it has an NPV of $12.29. At any much larger discount rate, it has an NPV of zero.

devoish - a prediction for 10 years out: There will be fewer socialists then than now. 

Report this comment
#26) On March 22, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Valyooo (99.81) wrote:

Ron Paul, despite whatveer you think about him, WILL NOT, EVER, EVER, EVVVVVVVVVER, be feared, nor become president.

Report this comment
#27) On March 22, 2011 at 5:49 PM, kdakota630 (31.51) wrote:

chk999

Do I need to raise the amount to make it worth your while?  LOL!

Report this comment
#28) On March 22, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Valyooo (99.81) wrote:

People far too often use emotions when making predictions...chk999 IMO made a very accurate list.  Regardless of if you hate fiat/bernanke/etc, doesn't mean your wishes will come true.

Report this comment
#29) On March 22, 2011 at 6:10 PM, whereaminow (58.64) wrote:

#26) On March 22, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Valyooo (97.09) wrote:

 

Ron Paul, despite whatveer you think about him, WILL NOT, EVER, EVER, EVVVVVVVVVER, be feared, nor become president.

Oh, he's definitely feared. Whether it's William Lacy Clay, Fed economist Stephen Williamson or Fed Research VP David Andolfatto. (Check those last two links to see economist Robert Wenzel absolutely crush these tools.)

Now, to whether or not he can win. That depends. First, the two party system was put in place by the two parties, so anyone who runs Independent has no chance. They can't even get into a debate anymore, since no Republocrat wants a repeat of the Perot Smack Down. 

So he has to win the Repub primary. Unfortunately, there is still a large portion of Repubs who are little more than neo-conservative Trostkyites, Islamophobes, and Keynesians. They don't know they are, since Fox News didn't tell them that yet, but that's what they are.  

But it matters little to him if he wins. He doesn't plan on winning. He plans on getting in the face of young people. They are what matters. When they get all growns up, it's up to them. And there will one day be more of them than the naysayers.

And then it will happen, and someone with liberty in his heart will win, and the rest will be history. And all along people will mock us and say that it could never happen. Until it does. And they'll claim that they supported us the whole time. Such is the way of the world.

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#30) On March 22, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Gingerbreadman55 (31.75) wrote:

I think the better thing to say is this:

You shouldnt be planning (or investing, for that matter) on anything where you want to assume something on that list happens.

There is always a chance, no matter how small, that one (or ALL!) of those things happen this year. The chance is just so low that it doesnt effect decision making.

Report this comment
#31) On March 22, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Gingerbreadman55 (31.75) wrote:

effect? affect?

one of those two words...

Report this comment
#32) On March 22, 2011 at 6:59 PM, ChrisGraley (31.45) wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we've already seen bursts of radiation over 400 msv. That is the amount that causes radiation poisoning.

Japan has also been less than forthcoming about the actual amount of radiation released and those burst levels may have been higher than 400 msv.

The reactor complex is still leaking and Japan officials are not certain where the leak is coming from.

Last, the situation is still not under control and even if there are no further aftershocks and accompaning tsunamis, that still doesn't doesn't mean that the possibility of melt-down is now zero.

Is this Chernobyl? No.

Could there have been a few bursts of at least 1 Sv already?

Probably.

I really feel for the workers and people in the surrounding areas if that is the case.

I'll put the reactors in perspective when we get all the info and not a moment sooner. 

 

Report this comment
#33) On March 22, 2011 at 7:29 PM, RRobertsmith (48.27) wrote:

A little odds by each prediction would be nice...like chance of a hurricane hitting NOLA again this year 1 in 5 ...or year where oil will hit 200 a barrel...(present day dollars)  2015....number of 3 giga watt power plants to replace 80% of imported oil ...(researching that now actually,  we use tetra watts of energy every year!?)  thousands...

Report this comment
#34) On March 23, 2011 at 12:38 AM, checklist34 (99.79) wrote:

i lvoe this thread.

I know it angered at least someone, and at least someone else found it in poor taste, but I hope my recent raillings against panic and eternal bearishness ...  

change 10 blog posts at CAPs and cause 1 person to not get scared out of the marke tht enext time we have a "for the rest of your life" buying opportunity.  

I think it will.  hehe

Report this comment
#35) On March 23, 2011 at 8:46 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:



enlarge

from here.

Radiological quality of drinking water (pdf)

Report this comment
#36) On March 23, 2011 at 8:47 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

------------

Tokyo Warns on Water as Radiation Hampers Nuclear Cleanup

...

Tokyo residents should avoid giving tap water to infants after radioactive iodine was found in the city’s supply at levels twice the allowable limit for infants, the metropolitan government said.

Iodine-131 was detected at 210 becquerel per kilogram at the Kanamachi purification plant in Tokyo’s Katsushika district, compared with a limit of 100 becquerel per kilogram for infants, the water department said in a statement today. The recommended limit for adults is 300.

...

------------

(from here)

Report this comment
#37) On March 23, 2011 at 8:52 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:



enlarge

(from here (pdf))

Report this comment
#38) On March 23, 2011 at 9:02 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

#15,37 There appears to be a slight mismatch between the "normal yearly background dose" of 3.65 mSv given in the figure shown in comment #15 and the "dose equivalent to that arising from background radiation" of 20 mSv given in the table shown in comment #37.

Report this comment
#39) On March 23, 2011 at 9:14 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

So to get the equivalent of those 3.65 mSv from the Iodine-131 you need around 3.65 mSv / 2.2 * 10^(-5) mSv / Bq ≈ 1.66 * 10^5 Bq / (300 Bq/l) ≈ 553 l / (3.785 gallons/l) ≈ 146 gallons of "Tokyo tap water" ...

Report this comment
#40) On March 23, 2011 at 9:15 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

the equivalent of those

those

Report this comment
#41) On March 23, 2011 at 9:24 AM, portefeuille (99.78) wrote:

------------

GUIDELINE VALUE FOR DRINKING WATER

Based on the above, it is recommended that a guideline dose of 1 mSv per year should be applied for radioactivity in drinking water. When the existing or potential dose from the radionuclide content exceeds this guideline dose, a decision on the need for and the degree of remedial action (intervention) should be based on advice from the relevant state health authorities, and should include a cost-benefit analysis.

There may be some circumstances where there is no practical alternative but to accept a dose that exceeds the guideline dose of 1 mSv, together with a potential slight increase in the risk to health as a consequence. However, if doses from the use of a particular water supply will exceed 10 mSv per year, immediate action must be taken to reduce the existing or potential exposures.

------------

(from here (pdf))

 

I think I would quit drinking tap water at around 100 Bq/l from Iodine-131 ...

Report this comment
#42) On March 23, 2011 at 11:32 AM, NajdorfSicilian (99.88) wrote:

#42) Ron Paul will still be a gigantic loser a$$hat on Dec 31, 2011.

You could possibly convince me to vote for Rand. Maybe. 

US Inflation won't be remotely close to 4% in 2011 - either headline or core.

 We will always have a Fed. But go ahead and mint your own silver coins if you like....

Report this comment
#43) On March 23, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Valyooo (99.81) wrote:

David,

I don't think him getting in the face of young people is working.  Everybody that I know my age besides me and my girlfriend is a borderline socialist.

Report this comment
#44) On March 23, 2011 at 4:23 PM, whereaminow (58.64) wrote:

Val,

That's a shame but I will never give up.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#45) On March 23, 2011 at 7:28 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

chk999,

Sea level rise is averaging 3 mm/year. The sea level runs in seasonal cycles of about 12mm/year from its high to its low, but the purple crayon says up (higher highs and higher lows).

But unless conservatives promote bliss through ignorance by cutting funding to NOAA and NASA, the amount the sea level rises will be measured.

Seriously though, how about predicting the same items for ten years out? 

Best wishes,

Steven

Report this comment
#46) On March 25, 2011 at 6:35 PM, USNHR (36.92) wrote:

The Yellowstone super-volcano will not errupt.

That is most certainly a relief to me as I live about 350 miles from it.

Report this comment
#47) On March 28, 2011 at 5:10 PM, guiron (24.18) wrote:

But it matters little to him if he wins. He doesn't plan on winning.

LOL

How devious and cunning! Just like H. Ross Perot, another ornery Texan who didn't care about winning but did care a lot about putting his graphs in front of young people. And his son is nothing more than a shill for corporate power and quickly cashed in his principles for a turn as US Senator, just like all the other politicians. Let's face it. If you and your son both are nationally known politicians, you're not political outsiders, but it's a nice bit of entertainment watching them cling to that illusion- along with the flock of followers who all think they're doing something much more independent and meaningful than following a pied piper.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement