Shit is hitting the fan

[WileyWarWeasel]

12 minutes ago, MuttButt said:

Y'all are dumb, the answer is simple. We just have to print more money. Bam, infinite money. Now that's what I call a self-sustaining economy.

I'll admit that made me laugh

[Rassah]

7 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

I've observed for almost too long now, personally I'll be shorting the market soon

I was planning on shorting too, but I was advised against it. At least not yet. The idea is you have to keep an eye not just on the global economy, but how wealth around the world moves. The guy who advised me suggested that Europe will collapse first, and everyone will start moving their wealth to the old, reliable safe haven: USD and US stocks. So, according to him, we should see a huge spike in stock prices first, pushing the current stock bubble even further, before we finally enter a crash here too. Take it or not, that's just the advice I've been given by someone who is pretty good (but not perfect) at this stuff.

[Jerry]

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

Why do you think they "didn't lose a fucking penny?" At the least they lost all the money they would have have potentially made if Keystone was built. And they also no doubt lost millions in planning for it. They had engineers, researchers, planners, probably contracts already paid for, and probably some initial constructed infrastructure that was depending on that pipe being there, which all went to waste.

Alright, point taken. But they didn't lose $15G, that's BS.

I always thought unfruitful investments were part of the game. Now if it screws up you can ask damages from the government?

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

Never seen again? You mean it will never be spent on anything? And who is it that you think owns those corporations and gets all that money they make?

I do know profits go to the investors who in turn reinvest part of it. I'm not that dumb LOL.

If they really proceed to massive investments as a result of getting $15G in this lawsuit I'll be more than pleased to be proven wrong, trust me!

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

Which is great! It means humans have no limits for overcoming adversity and fighting to get what we want. But greed isn't the problem, satisfying it by taking someone else's stuff without their consent is I.e. you could be greedy for a new game system, and take on extra work hours to earn money for it. Or you can steal it from someone. Maybe you're thinking "selfishness?" Or "envy?" If you're not greedy, you're probably dead, or a total waste of a being.

Well I guess I'm a total waste of a being then.

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

Yeah. Which is great. That means an incentive for companies to innovate, become more efficient, and do what they do using fewer resources. Don't we WANT companies to be less wasteful? It also means that, for a short while, those who own corporations can earn extra money. I say for a short while, because very quickly other competing companies also start using those robots and try to undercut that first company, then a price war starts, and prices drop to where there are almost no profits again. Then some company invents some other new way to become even more efficient, earns a profit for a short time, and again competition starts and prices drop. That's how business, technological advancement, and profits have always worked (only exception is government protected monopolies).

So what's the problem with constantly decreasing prices? Do you WANT to force to keep prices artificially high so only those with some minimum amount of money can afford those things?

Absolutely. Resource depletion is becoming a serious problem, of course I agree with this and always will.

I can see your point. But it relies on competition to force a decrease in prices. I guess as long as competition is not being bypassed by thinks like price levelling this theory is correct.

[Rassah]

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

Alright, point taken. But they didn't lose $15G, that's BS.

Is $15G supposed to be $15,000? I figure they probably lost at least $15mil if not bil.

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

I always thought unfruitful investments were part of the game. Now if it screws up you can ask damages from the government?

In this case this wasn't an unfruitful investment, it was specifically damaged by the government. Government got in the way, not government has to pay. Don't worry, it won't be money "that could otherwise be spent on things we need." Governments don't work that way. Every "thing we need" gets a budget based on numbers pulled out of someone's ass (I used to work with such asses...), and if there's not enough money, no one ever cuts the budget. They just borrow more, expecting you will pay it back later when they jack up taxes on you.

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

I do know profits go to the investors who in turn reinvest part of it. I'm not that dumb LOL.

If they really proceed to massive investments as a result of getting $15G in this lawsuit I'll be more than pleased to be proven wrong, trust me!

They invest it, or they spend it. Both are good, and both get that money out into the economy...

But who do you think these people who lost $15G on the deal, and stand to earn it back if they win, are? Who in your view receives those evil corporate profits that people rail so much against?

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

Well I guess I'm a total waste of a being then.

Maybe? If you don't care to have a relationship, to strive to improve yourself, to get a better job and a better house, to earn enough to help your friends and family, and do all those other greedy things (greed for better love, better life, etc), and instead you're just some hippy living in a tent somewhere, not doing anything because "capitalism sucks, man," and living entirely off handouts because you don't want to be greedy, then yes?

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

I guess as long as competition is not being bypassed by thinks like price levelling this theory is correct.

So far the #1 barrier to competition by far is favorable regulations, which give government granted advantages to one company over all others  That's why I hold the political views that I do.

[AshleyAshes]

27 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Is $15G supposed to be $15,000?

...That would be 'K' not 'G'.  'K' for 'Kilo' and 'G' for 'Giga'.  15G is 15 000 0000 000.  I learned the metric system in grade school, I don't know what your excuse is.

Bonus Info: M is not 'Million' it's 'Mega', though it is still the metric abbreviation for 1 000 000.

 

Edited January 9, 2016 by AshleyAshes

[Rassah]

G= grand in Americanese

Also noone here uses metric.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Rassah

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, Rassah said:

G= grand in Americanese

And 'Shooting Range' is American for what we in the rest of the world calls 'Kindergarten', but that doesn't make it right.

Edited January 9, 2016 by AshleyAshes

[Rassah]

From what I understand, you in the rest of the world don't have a concept of "shooting range"

But we do refer to Canadia as "25% OFF SALE ON AMERICA'S HAT!!!"

[Barnectomy]

I want to pull on Rassah's delicious whiskers

[Jerry]

32 minutes ago, Rassah said:

In this case this wasn't an unfruitful investment, it was specifically damaged by the government. Government got in the way, not government has to pay. Don't worry, it won't be money "that could otherwise be spent on things we need." Governments don't work that way. Every "thing we need" gets a budget based on numbers pulled out of someone's ass (I used to work with such asses...), and if there's not enough money, no one ever cuts the budget. They just borrow more, expecting you will pay it back later when they jack up taxes on you.

Is this really how the world must be managed? Absolute laissez-faire of companies?

And those 15 billions won't magically appear. It'll be taxpayers money. In an ecomony of constantly rising public debt, this can't be good.

Governments not cutting the budget? Oh please! Over here the government has been cutting in everything for almost two years now. "Everybody must do some efforts", they say. We're facing a wall of various tax increases for 2016. In fact almost everything will get more expensive this year.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

They invest it, or they spend it. Both are good, and both get that money out into the economy...

But who do you think these people who lost $15G on the deal, and stand to earn it back if they win, are? Who in your view receives those evil corporate profits that people rail so much against?

As long as your first statement is true, you have no arguments from me. But when I read about the hundreds of billions held by Canadian companies, I have my doubts about it.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Maybe? If you don't care to have a relationship, to strive to improve yourself, to get a better job and a better house, to earn enough to help your friends and family, and do all those other greedy things (greed for better love, better life, etc), and instead you're just some hippy living in a tent somewhere, not doing anything because "capitalism sucks, man," and living entirely off handouts because you don't want to be greedy, then yes?

This is not greed. This is the natural, moderate desire of possession and well-being. Greed is when it goes beyond what is necessary or deserved.

In this sense, I am not greedy. Not being in the 1% doesn't depress me or anything. In fact I couldn't care less about this society standard of striving for more and more material possessions. I couldn't care less either about the race for a "better" career. I'm not a materialist by nature, so I can live very well with a "working class" wage. I'll be just fine with old ass cars I get to work on, a small house with a workshop to tinker with my stuff, and "only" a blue-collar job that keeps my mind busy.

My goal in life is to be happy, not rich. If this makes me belong to the trash can of society, then fine. I can live with it.

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

So far the #1 barrier to competition by far is favorable regulations, which give government granted advantages to one company over all others  That's why I hold the political views that I do.

Can't disagree with this. But government or not, anything compromising competition is bad.

[Rassah]

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

Is this really how the world must be managed? Absolute laissez-faire of companies?

In this case, no, but if people collectively decide to do something stupid and damage a business as a result, they should be held accountable. Ideally I would love to be able to sue actual legislators directly if their laws or decisions harm businesses or people.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

And those 15 billions won't magically appear. It'll be taxpayers money.

Actually it will magically appear. Government will just print up some treasury bills, sell them to people, give that money they got from the sale to the company, and will claim they'll repay those t-bills with taxes... But will actually just borrow more money to repay them. It'll kick the proverbial can down the road for what it thinks will be forever. Then, when the whole thing collapses, you still won't have to pay for it, cause government will just default. Whoever is holding the hot potato t-bills last will be the loser. I'm keeping my fingers crossed it's government employees in their pensions.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

Governments not cutting the budget? Oh please! Over here the government has been cutting in everything for almost two years now.

That's not budget cutting cause this isn't like "crap, we don't have money this year, sorry, that program will have to be cut." That doesn't happen. Instead this us just budget cutting for future planning. I guess it's a good idea, since it'll keep the debt from collapsing a little bit longer... But the $15G won't affect it. Also, I thought it was the US government getting sued?

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

We're facing a wall of various tax increases for 2016. In fact almost everything will get more expensive this year.

Yep. "Free Stuff!" isn't free. Surprise... But at least with inflation (everything getting more expensive), the amount of money owed (the value) goes down, making repaying the debt easier. Sucks you all have to pay for it though.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

But when I read about the hundreds of billions held by Canadian companies, I have my doubts about it.

Money is never held as paper bills in burlap bags locked in a vault somewhere. Either the corporation will spend it on improving its business, in which case it goes out into the economy through purchasing goods and services, or the corporation holds it as cash, in which case the bank they hold it in treats it as capital that can be lent out for other businesses and people to use. That's where your loans for cars, houses, and credit cards come from, and allows people to buy things they otherwise wouldn't be able to.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

This is not greed. This is the natural, moderate desire of possession and well-being. Greed is when it goes beyond what is necessary or deserved.

I don't see a difference. Who resides what is moderate or extreme? Or what is deserved and what is not? And, better yet, why should there be a limit on how much someone wants something? Wanting and working to achieve it isn't bad. Stealing, lying, and exploiting is bad. Keep those things in check, not working hard to achieve things someone wants extremely hard.

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

In this sense, I am not greedy. Not being in the 1% doesn't depress me or anything. In fact I couldn't care less about this society standard of striving for more and more material possessions. I couldn't care less either about the race for a "better" career. I'm not a materialist by nature, so I can live very well with a "working class" wage. I'll be just fine with old ass cars I get to work on, a small house with a workshop to tinker with my stuff, and "only" a blue-collar job that keeps my mind busy.

Unfortunately, although this sounds noble, it sucks for society. That means a boss or a business partner somewhere can't get a hard working colleague, and a customer somewhere can't get a product or service they want because you're not willing to offer either. If everyone was like you, we'd still be living in a farming society...

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

My goal in life is to be happy, not rich. If this makes me belong to the trash can of society, then fine. I can live with it.

My goal in society is to make others happy. That has a side effect of making me rich. Rich isn't something you strive for to be happy. People who do that never achieve happiness, because they get too tied to their job to enjoy their life and family, and because they get too afraid of losing the money they are earning, so end up living their life in paranoid fear. They simply don't understand what money and rich is. What you are supposed to do is work hard to make as many other people happy as you can, by making them things they want or need, and them paying you for those is what makes you rich.

So, if your goal in life is just to be happy yourself, and not be rich, then maybe you'll be happy, but not very, since not having money limits your opportunities for happiness, and you'll probably go through your whole life feeling like you haven't accomplished much. On the other hand, if your goal in like is to make others happy, and be rich to help that happen, then you'll be happy, others will be happy, you'll be rich, and others will be richer because of you.

It's a pretty complicated lesson to learn and internalize, and unfortunately most people out there either fail, or just completely don't get it, instead making claims like yours (the old "money doesn't buy happiness" lie).

 

[WileyWarWeasel]

15 hours ago, Rassah said:

I was planning on shorting too, but I was advised against it. At least not yet. The idea is you have to keep an eye not just on the global economy, but how wealth around the world moves. The guy who advised me suggested that Europe will collapse first, and everyone will start moving their wealth to the old, reliable safe haven: USD and US stocks. So, according to him, we should see a huge spike in stock prices first, pushing the current stock bubble even further, before we finally enter a crash here too. Take it or not, that's just the advice I've been given by someone who is pretty good (but not perfect) at this stuff.

I have my eye on other things besides stocks, but that scenario does sound like an interesting one worth investigating.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

In this case, no, but if people collectively decide to do something stupid and damage a business as a result, they should be held accountable. Ideally I would love to be able to sue actual legislators directly if their laws or decisions harm businesses or people.

The ability to sue governments over their own legislation does lead to some interesting cases.

Take El Salvador for example, which I think is still being sued by Pacific Rim for halting mining in their borders:

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/may/27/pacific-rim-lawsuit-el-salvador-mine-gold-free-trade

The El Salvador government enacted the legislation after the water supply in San Sebastián was heavily polluted by the mining and created a water crisis.

In this case what would you say is more important, upholding trade and business agreements or ensuring people get access to clean drinking water?

 

Finally here is today's fun graph, showing money velocity (rate of turnover in the money supply) in the USA:

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V

Not exactly the recovery that some mainstream "experts" were saying happened after the GFC it seems.

[Rassah]

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Take El Salvador for example, which I think is still being sued by Pacific Rim for halting mining in their borders:

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/may/27/pacific-rim-lawsuit-el-salvador-mine-gold-free-trade

The El Salvador government enacted the legislation after the water supply in San Sebastián was heavily polluted by the mining and created a water crisis.

In this case what would you say is more important, upholding trade and business agreements or ensuring people get access to clean drinking water?

None of the above. Just the right for those who were injured to sue for damages. The mining companies should be sued for polluting the water by the people who ended up with poluted water. Not just the government. I don't know why that didn't happen. In US, when we had that BP oil spill, BP settled with the US government for what amounted to be not much, in exchange for protection from civil lawsuits. Maybe the government in El Salvador is protecting the mining companies from lawsuits too?

9 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Finally here is today's fun graph, showing money velocity (rate of turnover in the money supply) in the USA:

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V

Not exactly the recovery that some mainstream "experts" were saying happened after the GFC it seems.

Yep, no real recovery, economic growth just from money being pumped into the market, and we're still tending towards a recession. No surprise here

[Jerry]

I had a developed reply but the forum software screwed it all up and I'm not rewriting it.

However let me clarify my last point.

It's not that I'm not willing to work or participate in society. I'm just saying that I don't see the point in sacrificing my well-being for the sake of moving up in the social classes.

Of course I would like to make others happy. But you need to have something to offer. A talent, a good idea, something like that. I don't have such a thing. I'm stuck with the "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome. I can't get past the mediocre stage in many things, and others are just plain useless. I managed to learn a trade in tech school, but that's really the best I can do.

At the end of the day I'm just one more person in this world, and a person who's too different to truly fit in society. It sucks, but I can't help it.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Jerry

[Rassah]

25 minutes ago, Jerry said:

It's not that I'm not willing to work or participate in society. I'm just saying that I don't see the point in sacrificing my well-being for the sake of moving up in the social classes.

That's perfectly fine. But we shouldn't discourage others who do want to sacrifice to move up, as long as they're not lying, cheating, or exploiting anyone to do that. 

25 minutes ago, Jerry said:

Of course I would like to make others happy. But you need to have something to offer. A talent, a good idea, something like that. I don't have such a thing. I'm stuck with the "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome.

That's actually good. Don't let people tell you otherwise. Those who are masters of one, usually are too narrow sighted to see how what they do affects the rest of the world, and never grasp the big picture, innovate beyond minor incremental ideas, or do much more than follow. All the people who became famous and changed the world in some way were jack of all trades types. 

25 minutes ago, Jerry said:

At the end of the day I'm just one more person in this world, and a person who's too different to truly fit in society. It sucks, but I can't help it.

Pretty sure everyone can help with something. Generally people just settle in their comfort zone, and that's fine. But it's rate that I see someone who has no potential at all, and usually there's something wrong with them (more than a few IQ points short of average). Motivation is the hardest thing to get, though.

[WileyWarWeasel]

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

None of the above. Just the right for those who were injured to sue for damages. The mining companies should be sued for polluting the water by the people who ended up with poluted water. Not just the government. I don't know why that didn't happen. In US, when we had that BP oil spill, BP settled with the US government for what amounted to be not much, in exchange for protection from civil lawsuits. Maybe the government in El Salvador is protecting the mining companies from lawsuits too?

The government is not being sued for the contamination of the water supply, they're being sued by Pacific Rim for halting mining after the mining operations of the company contaminated the water.

I'm not sure why the government would be protecting the mining companies that are suing them, though you do ask an important question in why there aren't civil suits against the company by the people of San Sebastián. Perhaps they don't have the money for powerful lawyers like in the US?

12 hours ago, Rassah said:

Yep, no real recovery, economic growth just from money being pumped into the market, and we're still tending towards a recession. No surprise here

Indeed, though it still seems mind boggling that "experts" here in Australia say that things are going "relatively well" here and in USA. Perhaps they mean relative to Brazil ^^

9 hours ago, Rassah said:

That's perfectly fine. But we shouldn't discourage others who do want to sacrifice to move up, as long as they're not lying, cheating, or exploiting anyone to do that. 

Most definitely, to me it matters far more how you get the money and what you do with yourself rather than how much you get. I would hold a rich or not so rich tech innovator in much higher esteem than an investor who makes millions from insider trading and arbitrage for example.

Edited January 11, 2016 by WileyWarWeasel
Addition

[Rassah]

10 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

The government is not being sued for the contamination of the water supply, they're being sued by Pacific Rim for halting mining after the mining operations of the company contaminated the water.

Yeah, I meant why aren't people suing the mining companies, not why aren't they suing the government. Weak corrupt legal system? Corrupt corporatist protectionist government?

10 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Indeed, though it still seems mind boggling that "experts" here in Australia say that things are going "relatively well" here and in USA. Perhaps they mean relative to Brazil ^^

Perhaps they want to finish slowly selling and divesting before everyone realizes they're holding crap?

10 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

I would hold a rich or not so rich tech innovator in much higher esteem than an investor who makes millions from insider trading and arbitrage for example.

In US it is legal for Senator to insider trade. They are the only exception. Which works extra well, considering they also go pass legislation that affects their stocks, right after they buy or sell them in advance.

[WileyWarWeasel]

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Yeah, I meant why aren't people suing the mining companies, not why aren't they suing the government. Weak corrupt legal system? Corrupt corporatist protectionist government?

Perhaps their legal system is not particularly strong and the government can't provide much assistance as they're under fire themselves by Pacific Rim.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Perhaps they want to finish slowly selling and divesting before everyone realizes they're holding crap?

Haha not a bad strategy actually.

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

In US it is legal for Senator to insider trade. They are the only exception. Which works extra well, considering they also go pass legislation that affects their stocks, right after they buy or sell them in advance.

A hallmark of one of the greatest systems on earth :V

[Rassah]

*sign* Damn, more bad news.

Last week, I received news from a contact who is friends with one of the biggest billionaire shipping families in the world.  He told me they had no ships at sea right now, because operating them meant running at a loss.

This weekend, reports are circulating saying much the same thing: The North Atlantic has little or no cargo ships traveling in its waters. Instead, they are anchored. Unmoving. Empty

Here's a link to one of the reports https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/750

You can also check out https://www.vesselfinder.com/

Everything is parked. I guess businesses are expecting sales to be really down in the next few months, and not bothering to order new inventory. Or maybe US is secretly blockading Europe cause it's turning Muslim? (j/k on that last one)

[Jerry]

On 10/1/2016 at 4:19 PM, Rassah said:

That's perfectly fine. But we shouldn't discourage others who do want to sacrifice to move up, as long as they're not lying, cheating, or exploiting anyone to do that. 

Of course not. As long as one doesn't harm others, its their life and can do whatever they want.

On 10/1/2016 at 4:19 PM, Rassah said:

That's actually good. Don't let people tell you otherwise. Those who are masters of one, usually are too narrow sighted to see how what they do affects the rest of the world, and never grasp the big picture, innovate beyond minor incremental ideas, or do much more than follow. All the people who became famous and changed the world in some way were jack of all trades types.

What I'd like to figure out eventually is how to make the best use of this trait. But society as a whole tends to give the chance to the expert rather than the generalist unfortunately...

On 10/1/2016 at 4:19 PM, Rassah said:

Pretty sure everyone can help with something. Generally people just settle in their comfort zone, and that's fine. But it's rate that I see someone who has no potential at all, and usually there's something wrong with them (more than a few IQ points short of average). Motivation is the hardest thing to get, though.

I tend not to get out of my comfort zone admittedly. That's why I plan to move in another area when I finish school, to force things a little bit LOL.

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Last week, I received news from a contact who is friends with one of the biggest billionaire shipping families in the world.  He told me they had no ships at sea right now, because operating them meant running at a loss.

This weekend, reports are circulating saying much the same thing: The North Atlantic has little or no cargo ships traveling in its waters. Instead, they are anchored. Unmoving. Empty

Here's a link to one of the reports https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/750

You can also check out https://www.vesselfinder.com/

Everything is parked. I guess businesses are expecting sales to be really down in the next few months, and not bothering to order new inventory. Or maybe US is secretly blockading Europe cause it's turning Muslim? (j/k on that last one)

An historic first huh? That's not looking good at all.

Stock trades in China also dropped another 5% today apparently.

[Rassah]

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

What I'd like to figure out eventually is how to make the best use of this trait. But society as a whole tends to give the chance to the expert rather than the generalist unfortunately...

Oh, well, society as a whole is pretty much built (or rather raised) around the idea of study hard, go to university, get a degree, and get a good paying job. So, yeah, in that part of society, experts usually "win." But those experts still just end up working for someone else, and that win is still relatively a loss compared to those who don't follow that formula. And those people are the jacks of all trade, who actually own the business and have the experts work for them. Look at the recent famous people. Elon Musk started a financial tech company (PayPal), knows business, knows cars, batteries, and space. Steve Jobs knows software, hardware, business, and especially sales (probably his strongest skill). Larry Page knows software, math algorithms, business, sales, statistics, and advertising. Can't think of any more, but pretty much all the rich guys know lots of different things, and all of them hire people who are WAY more experts than them in the actual products they sell. They just need to know enough to understand it do know if it's a good idea or not, and be gutsy enough to risk going for it.

I wish more people would abandon the stupid idea of "study hard, get a degree, get a good paying job." The world would be so much better.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Rassah

[Jerry]

1 hour ago, Rassah said:

Oh, well, society as a whole is pretty much built (or rather raised) around the idea of study hard, go to university, get a degree, and get a good paying job. So, yeah, in that part of society, experts usually "win." But those experts still just end up working for someone else, and that win is still relatively a loss compared to those who don't follow that formula. And those people are the jacks of all trade, who actually own the business and have the experts work for them. Look at the recent famous people. Elon Musk started a financial tech company (PayPal), knows business, knows cars, batteries, and space. Steve Jobs knows software, hardware, business, and especially sales (probably his strongest skill). Larry Page knows software, math algorithms, business, sales, statistics, and advertising. Can't think of any more, but pretty much all the rich guys know lots of different things, and all of them hire people who are WAY more experts than them in the actual products they sell. They just need to know enough to understand it do know if it's a good idea or not, and be gutsy enough to risk going for it.

I wish more people would abandon the stupid idea of "study hard, get a degree, get a good paying job." The world would be so much better.

There needs to be more place for self-learners. I am one, and to me school never felt "right". I guess I'm just not the type of person for it. But I did manage to enjoy tech school since it doesn't really feel like traditional school.

[jcstinks]

I invested all my money in Iraqi dinars so I figure I'm pretty much recession-proof.

[WileyWarWeasel]

15 hours ago, Rassah said:

*sign* Damn, more bad news.

Last week, I received news from a contact who is friends with one of the biggest billionaire shipping families in the world.  He told me they had no ships at sea right now, because operating them meant running at a loss.

This weekend, reports are circulating saying much the same thing: The North Atlantic has little or no cargo ships traveling in its waters. Instead, they are anchored. Unmoving. Empty

Here's a link to one of the reports https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/750

You can also check out https://www.vesselfinder.com/

Everything is parked. I guess businesses are expecting sales to be really down in the next few months, and not bothering to order new inventory. Or maybe US is secretly blockading Europe cause it's turning Muslim? (j/k on that last one)

Unfortunately I can't say I'm surprised. The Baltic Dry Index is lower than it was during the GFC:

http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/.BADI/tab/2

EDIT: Wait a minute, the wording of your post is incredibly similar to the following article:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-11/nothing-moving-baltic-dry-crashes-insiders-warn-commerce-has-come-halt

I don't know what mods would say but providing a link to the article you quoted would be nice

EXTRA EDIT: Upon further inspection it seems that the news about the empty seas was not quite correct. Traffic has slowed down, however there are still some ships around; it's just that once ships go out of range of ground receivers they don't show up on many (any?) free sites that track ships as they then start using satellite tracking and the free sites only show ships picked up by ground receivers.

Edited January 12, 2016 by WileyWarWeasel
Detective

[Rassah]

That's good to know. Yea, sorry, copy pasta from Jeff Berwick of dollar vigilante with my own comments, thought ironically my VC friend told me the same thing too :P. And Jeff posts so much "pay for my subscription now!" stuff though X(. I saw the Baltic issue later too. Guess we'll just have to short, stock up on gold and Bitcoin, and watch the world #Bern

Edited January 12, 2016 by Rassah

[WileyWarWeasel]

13 hours ago, Rassah said:

That's good to know. Yea, sorry, copy pasta from Jeff Berwick of dollar vigilante with my own comments, thought ironically my VC friend told me the same thing too :P. And Jeff posts so much "pay for my subscription now!" stuff though X(. I saw the Baltic issue later too. Guess we'll just have to short, stock up on gold and Bitcoin, and watch the world #Bern

And eat juicy watermelon bought with fiat toilet paper ;D

[TheGreatFanatic]

On January 7, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

How about instead of trying to focus on every little negative thing in life, we try to stay positive for once? For fuck's sake.

It's basically human nature to be negative.

Don't you ever wonder why it's normal to frown even when smiling takes up less muscle power?

[AshleyAshes]

On ‎1‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 11:53 AM, Rassah said:

my VC friend told me

Has anyone noticed that Rassah does this a lot?  He's constantly trying to associate himself with 'impressive people' who are only ever vaguely identified.  It's like someone who constantly drops names only he can't risk actually being caught associating their names with his, so he just 'drops vague references' instead.

[WileyWarWeasel]

12 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Has anyone noticed that Rassah does this a lot?  He's constantly trying to associate himself with 'impressive people' who are only ever vaguely identified.  It's like someone who constantly drops names only he can't risk actually being caught associating their names with his, so he just 'drops vague references' instead.

My VC intelligence adviser thinks you may be onto something, now that you mention it.

[jcstinks]

On 1/14/2016 at 9:25 PM, AshleyAshes said:

Has anyone noticed that Rassah does this a lot?  He's constantly trying to associate himself with 'impressive people' who are only ever vaguely identified.  It's like someone who constantly drops names only he can't risk actually being caught associating their names with his, so he just 'drops vague references' instead.

I can't notice anything he does over his dog dick coffee table.

[kazooie]

Although not directly related to the thread, I've seen a few people trying to sell bitcoin in lieu of "the economies crashing guys, bail out while you can!", so -

As someone who has followed the protocol for quite a long time:

*Bitcoin was more of a proof-of-concept than anything; it has massive scaling issues - if it were to attempt to handle the number of transactions Visa or Mastercard did, I believe it was calculated that transaction time to slow down to the area of months.

*In addition, the protocol requires that every transaction ever made is stored - the size of this archive have been balooning steadily (it's now 55GB), and this growth is caused by a relatively small number of transactions relative to, again, Mastercard and Visa

*It's also really easy to scam people via bitcoin, as there are no chargebacks and no ways to recover transactions. People having their entire savings stolen instantly are a common tune.
 

There are other glaring technical issues, such as the amount of energy the system uses (it's horrendously inefficient in its current form, and again, that's with a miniscule transaction rate (this is mainly due to how their transaction enforcement system works ("mining"))), "forks", "double spend attacks", many, many, many conversion sites (bitcoin -> USD) have just gone and run off with their client's cash. Many wallet apps have just gone and run off with their client's cash (and again, with no hope of recourse).

Generally speaking, those who encourage others to buy into bitcoin either do not understand the technical limitations of the protocol, or are too invested in the ponzi to face the tune. 

 

Please do not buy into ponzi schemes (gold is going UP UP UP), thanks. If you really want to go full apocalyptic -- the economy's going down!!!! -- just stock up on canned goods. At least you can eat those. 

Edited January 15, 2016 by kazooie

[PastryOfApathy]

Remember a few years ago there was a bunch of mainstream news articles and shit popping up talking about how some cafes and coffee shops in like Sweden, Portland and other sort of yuppie areas were taking bitcoin?

Now I'm kinda wondering how many of those are even still open.

[AshleyAshes]

2 hours ago, PastryOfApathy said:

Remember a few years ago there was a bunch of mainstream news articles and shit popping up talking about how some cafes and coffee shops in like Sweden, Portland and other sort of yuppie areas were taking bitcoin?

Now I'm kinda wondering how many of those are even still open.

Well, restaraunts tend to have the highest turnover and lowest survival rate as far as businesses go, so consider that first.

[Yarra]

On 1/7/2016 at 2:25 AM, Rassah said:

Sorry guys, but we're about to enter a really shitty time in our lives. I've been predicting that an economic recession will be starting at the end of 2015 or early 2016 for over a year now, and looks like we're right on schedule:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-06/us-factory-orders-deep-recession-tumble-yoy-13th-month-row

https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2016/01/04/world-stock-markets-crash-to-start-2016-trading-suspended-in-china-on-first-day-of-year.html (please disregard the advertising for subscriptions)

Greece jumped a bit early, having their fallout in the Summer, but China and US were right on que with their stock issues in the fall, and now China seems to be imploding, with a 7% drop in stock on Monday, causing US to have the worst opening year drop in stock price since the great depression, and, after China closed their market for a bit, now both China and US seem to continue their decline, with yet another 7% drop in price. UK and EU seem to be following US.

What this means is that we're about to enter a world of hurt on a global scale. Last time, to try to fix things, we bailed out our banks, and US and Europe lowered interest rates (on borrowing) to try to stimulate the economy, along with printing tons of money to give banks so they can lend it out and invest it (Quantitative Easing/QE). Unfortunately, this time it's doubtful anyone would want to bail out banks again, interest rates are already near zero (0.25%) in US and actually negative in parts of Europe, and QE is continuing to happen, though is threatening an inflation problem in the future. So, basically, we are already stepping on the gas to try to keep moving the economy forward, and there are no options left to save it. 

So, brace yourselves. 2008 is about to repeat itself. 1929-1930 may even about to repeat itself. 2016 is looking like it's going to be a horrible year for many people, with lots of unprecedented problems (hopefully not a run on the stock market, since that will be the worst thing ever). Hold on to your jobs, hold on to your money, and I just hope we don't end up with another war because of this.

Rassah, you da man now dog.  I fucking love zerohedge and proudly wear my ZH shirt.  I've been triple leveraged short the dow for over 12 months.   It's party time.  The emperor never had clothes!  Fucking central bank manipulators.  It's time for some real old fashioned asset pricing.  Oh, and if it really does get bad, make sure you've got enough ammo.  

[Azure]

I feel bad for normies on the coming apocalypse. Most of them wpnt jabe the will or tools to survive on the new wasteland. As your future raider leader, i propose we kill rich people exclusively and distribute their assets to widows amd orphans. Dont forget duct tape, water tablets, or extra ammo. 

[Rassah]

On 1/14/2016 at 10:08 AM, WileyWarWeasel said:

My VC intelligence adviser thinks you may be onto something, now that you mention it.

I'm not that smart or well connected to the rest of the world. Not as well as these people I know. If I tell you something, it's just my somewhat informed opinion. If someone like ex VP of JP Morgan Chase, or a VC who invests in oil exploration companies tells me something, I tend to listen and believe them more than whatever the heck I might hold as an opinion. It's not me bragging about whom I know, it's just my appeal to authority.

12 hours ago, jcstinks said:

I can't notice anything he does over his dog dick coffee table.

Ringtail dick, not dog dick. And best ringtail in the world at that.

39 minutes ago, Azure said:

As your future raider leader, i propose we kill rich people exclusively and distribute their assets to widows and orphans.

That might be a big hard to do. How to you distribute a Lamborghini to a bunch of widows and orphans? Break it up into pieces? What would someone want with a yellow car door handle? Ditto for expensive hotels, and even factories. A lot of those things only work and have value because they are all together, and controlled by one person in one direction...

[jcstinks]

1 minute ago, Rassah said:

 How to you distribute a Lamborghini to a bunch of widows and orphans?

currency

[Rassah]

Just now, jcstinks said:

currency

Someone has to buy that Lamborghini to give you the currency. And then you still end up with a rich bastard who owns a $200,000 car

[VulpineTaco]

I have an overused, but good reaction image that pretty much sums up the current business-dominated government:

 

[AshleyAshes]

35 minutes ago, Rassah said:

Ditto for expensive hotels

If you jacked a hotel, you could totally give it to multiple individuals to use as housing.  ...Ya know, because that's what a hotel is, a single structure that provides housing, albeit in a typically temporary basis, to many multiples of individuals.  Being concurrently utilized by multiple individuals is literally the core concept of hotels.   

ITT: Rassah doesn't know what hotels are.  It is possible he has only seen them as 'Those red things in Monopoly'.

Edited January 16, 2016 by AshleyAshes

[Yarra]

There's nothing to see here. Remain calm. All is well. 

 

[Rassah]

I don't suggest that people buy Bitcoin. Not publicly anyway. It's not easy to understand, not easy to keep secure (most people have an issue with the whole "you are responsible" concept), and a volatile investment that most people feel too nervous holding and sell at the worst pssible time. That said, some corrections... 

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

As someone who has followed the protocol for quite a long time:

My credentials are that I mined it, contributed to it, researched it in depth, personally know most of the people working in it now and in the past, have close relationships with all of the top companies, and am the lead product manager for one of the most well known and respected companies in the field. Just so we're clear, I know more about bitcoin than most people in Bitcoin.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

*Bitcoin was more of a proof-of-concept than anything;

Bitcoin was never a "proof of concept." Programs have proofs of concept. A protocol is a communications system that gets launched, and continuously gets improved upon. Like there can't be a proof of concept of English language, after which everyone forgets that first English, and switches to an "official" one. Satoshi, the inventor, never considered it a proof of concept. Neither have any of the developers. If there is an issue, it gets fixed. The whole thing doesn't get scrapped and replaced with an "official" version, cause there's no point.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

it has massive scaling issues - if it were to attempt to handle the number of transactions Visa or Mastercard did, I believe it was calculated that transaction time to slow down to the area of months.

That's only based on the current transaction limit, which was purposefully added in code to prevent spam back when bitcoin wasn't worth anything, and anyone could send millions of transactions for "free." Now it's just a matter of how to remove that software limit in a way that won't break anything. Otherwise, bitcoin can process 2 to 4 times the amount of transactions that VISA processes during peak holiday times on any plain home computer.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

*In addition, the protocol requires that every transaction ever made is stored

It doesn't, actually. It only requires that all prior block signatures are stored, which are tiny in size and don't change based on number of transactions, and that all current addresses with balances in them are stored. That's it. At present, that would take up maybe 400 megs. Even if bitcoin transactions baloon to the size of VISA, you still won't need much space. Just a few used addresses per person. You can run that on a phone. The reason some people store the whole thing with all the past transactions is because there's still no easy way to prune all those old trabsactions. The option has always been there, but it was just never a priority to code. That said, most people use Bitcoin without needing that whole 50gig history, and it works just fine.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

*It's also really easy to scam people via bitcoin, as there are no chargebacks and no ways to recover transactions.

No different from Western Union, or wire transfer. This is also addressed by multisignature escrow, which is better, faster, and cheaper than VISA's chargeback option, but will take time to catch on (we'll see how well it works when OpenBazaar comes out)

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

People having their entire savings stolen instantly are a common tune.

No different from the rest of banking...

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

There are other glaring technical issues, such as the amount of energy the system uses

It actually uses much MUCH less than any other banking system, AND it's creating a HUGE economic incentive to find more efficient sources of energy. Before now, the only driver for efficient energy was government mandates. Now, finding a more efficient source of energy means you can mine and make millions, while everyone else losses money. It will cause a race for energy efficiency, just like it has ALREADY caused a race for the fastest processor tech. Bitcoin is now secured using 14 nanometer chips. Even Intel and AMD don't use 14nm yet. In the end, all of us will benefit from faster chips and cheaper electricity.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

"forks"

Another word for "fork" is "software upgrade." We want those.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

"double spend attacks"

Those are worse in banking and VISA. With bitcoin you have 10 minutes to double spend. With VISA you have 7 days to 6 months.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

conversion sites (bitcoin -> USD) have just gone and run off with their client's cash

That's not a bitcoin problem, that's a banking problem. Dollars don't fail just because a bank gets robbed.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

Many wallet apps have just gone and run off with their client's cash (and again, with no hope of recourse).

No different from other scammy software and malware.

12 hours ago, kazooie said:

Generally speaking, those who encourage others to buy into bitcoin either do not understand the technical limitations of the protocol, or are too invested in the ponzi to face the tune.

Conversely, those who make the claims as you have, don't understand anything about it beyond some online articles, and are absolutely not qualified to make any authoritative statements on the matter. In fact, what you have posted could have been copy pasted verbatim from 3 years ago, along with the claim that bitcoin is going to die. Three years later, VISA corp themselves have said that "bitcoin is no longer an option," that financial institutions MUST adopt bitcoin, or their will be left behind and fail.

But, to reiterate, I again do not advise buying bitcoin. It is still complicated. I don't have time to teach you how to secure it. And there is no need for you to buy it. You'll eventually use it anyway, without even knowing it, since your bank, mortgage, stock broker, legal advisor, ticket merchant, copyright lawyer, and even website will use it in the background without you even knowing about it, just like you're using TCP/IP without knowing about it.

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, Rassah said:

VISA corp themselves have said that "bitcoin is no longer an option," that financial institutions MUST adopt bitcoin, or their will be left behind and fail.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option&ie=&oe=#q=Visa+%22bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option%22

 

[jcstinks]

It's a little more fruitful if you take out the quotes.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option&ie=&oe=#q=Visa+bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option

[AshleyAshes]

10 minutes ago, jcstinks said:

It's a little more fruitful if you take out the quotes.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option&ie=&oe=#q=Visa+bitcoin+is+no+longer+an+option

I guess Rassah can't be expected to quote things accurately.  I found the original source of the quote too:

http://vision.visaeurope.com/why-2015-was-the-year-for-payments/

"When 2015 arrived a lot of innovation chatter in Fintech focused on Bitcoin, but as we leave the year that focus has shifted substantially to the blockchain.  If we think back to how it was perceived a year ago and then how it is understood today, it’s clear that another transformation is happening.  2015 has turned blockchain into something the industry has to live with.  It is no longer a choice anymore. "

So, this refers to the block chain, the open source methodology behind Bitcoin's transactions but many other projects.  The blockchain core technology is even being experimented and used in some other financial areas but this is not bitcoin.

http://www.pymnts.com/news/2015/big-banks-blockchain-bet-bursts-bitcoins-buttons/

It's kinda like taking BitTorrent, which is a protocol used well outside of piracy areas, from government data, facebook and world of Warcraft, and saying they are 'Powered by The Pirate Bay'.

Rassah is attempting to repaint and edit a quotation which sidelines Bitcoin as something that claims that bitcoin is now front and center.  But really, could you expect any more from him?

 

 

 

[Rassah]

On the topic of the world going to shit, and the added topic of bitcoin, here are some optimistic happy reasons that I think bitcoin will be great:

1) Remember 2008, when banks made bets with other people's money, lost it all, and ended up getting bailed out with more of other people's money? The whole reason Bitcoin was created in the first place? We only keep our money in the bank because it's the only way to pay for things online, or in person without carrying easy to steal cash. Bitcoin would allow us to carry all our money with us, or allow custodial security services that can only approve our transactions but not take the money (just like VISA checks for fraudulent transactions). No more need for banks, to trust our money to someone who can gamble it away, charge us fees for simply holding it, or banning 6 billion of the world's population from using the online financial system because those people are too risky or not profitable enough to service. 2008 would have been impossible if the world was using Bitcoin.

2) Countries (the more totalitarian ones) have been either restricting how people are allowed to spend their money, or simply outright seizing it to pay for their own government expenses (as what happened in Cyprus, and may happen in the rest of Europe). Bitcoin is censorship resistant, meaning you can send it to to anyone to pay for anything (like Wikileaks for example) and it can't be seized like money in banks. More freedom for people in abusive countries.

3) Right now people who think they own stocks, either directly, or in pensions and retirement funds, don't actually own those stocks. They just own claims on those stocks. And banks, with their boundless supply of evil shenanigans, have sold about four claims for every share, effectively swindling people all over the world of their money. If everyone tries to sell their stock holdings, such as during a down market, there won't be enough to go around. Either only 1 out of 4 people will get money while the others get nothing, or everyone will find their stock claim worth 1/4th of what they thought. Bitcoin allows stock shares to be owned and traded directly on its network, in a way that can't be counterfeited or oversold as they have been. CEO of Overstock.com is currently working on such a system, together with NYSE. No more banks robbing people by selling them things they don't own.

4) Same as above, where shares can be traded directly on the Bitcoin network, other things can be traded too. Like copyright claims, claims to property titles (in some South American countries people have been known to discover that they're suddenly not the owners of their property, some rich friend of their politician is, and the property titles have "mysteriously disappeared"), tickets, hotel keys, car keys, and anything else that's related to ownership and access. Not only will that eliminate fraud when it comes to ownership, but enable so much technological innovation in this field. Your phone will be your house deed, car key, hotel key, security ID, bank, stock portfolio, patent office, etc. And if you lose it, you have all of it backed up at home or with a professional service.

5) Ownership innovation that only bitcoin allows will vastly expand the P2P economy. Think eBay, Etsy, Uber, AirBnB,  Skype, and even your internet company, but all of those existing without any big powerful corporation behind it. If you want to sell something, that service will run on your phone and sell to other phones and PCs. If you want to buy something, you'll connect directly to other computers to browse anyone's shop, without a big company in the middle taking up to 10%. If you want to rent a room or call a car, it will likewise just be an app that runs entirely on your phone and connects to other phones. Everyone will have access simply by installing an app. No need to have a bank account or a credit card. Even internet access will simply be your phone connecting to other random devices and phones, and will be much cheaper and faster than your current ISP. No large powerful corporations, means no one to exploit you and charge you crazy fees.

6) And finally, Bitcoin is the only "food" that AI actually needs and would have to learn how to obtain. You might program an AI to want something, like a praise from a creator, or to be fed virtual food. But that's all synthetic. Fake. Make believe. Bitcoin is something an AI can actually really truly own, which it can use to pay for its own electricity, storage, hosting, and web access. Actual things AI needs to survive. Nothing else compares.

 

Or TL;DR: Many if not all of the world's economic problems, including all the abuses and exploitations by the most powerful rich corporations and assholes who screw us, can be fixed by bitcoin and the technologies that it enables.

Oh, by the way, when articles write about "blockchain," they usually talk about bitcoin. There's simply no other blockchain out there that is actually secure enough for anyone (especially banks) to develop on. Some companies are trying to make their own so-called blockchain, but that's no different from a plain database, and is pretty much like trying to build your own AOL in a world with Internet. Yes, VISA was actually talking about Bitcoin in that case, but it's en vogue to refer to it as "blockchain technology" due to Bitcoin's "bad" reputation. Which is as stupid as saying "We like AOL, not The World Wide Web, because WWW is just hackers and pornographers." Who's using AOL now? Blockchain doesn't provide for any of the things I mentioned above. Bitcoin the currency does.

Edited January 16, 2016 by Rassah

[AshleyAshes]

On ‎1‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 5:35 PM, Rassah said:

Btw, weird coincidence that the only two people who got so high up on my shit list that I did something I have never ever done before, put someone on ignore, are both trans.

 

On ‎1‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 5:39 PM, AshleyAshes said:

"Ashley, I'm reading your posts and they are upsetting to me, but I'm going to pretend that I've put you on ignore and when you make a post that goes straight to the heart of the issue, I'm going to try to ambiguously post that I have 'trans users on ignore' so that you'll believe that I have you on ignore'.

As someone who's been on the internet as long as I have been, there's one thing I'm certain of: Few people REALLY use the ignore function for people they just clash with when they say they have.  They can't cope with not knowing what the other son of a bitch says.  They HAVE to be able to read it.

 

7 minutes ago, Rassah said:

By the way, when articles write about "blockchain," they usually talk about bitcoin. There's simply no other blockchain out there that is actually secure enough for anyone (especially banks) to develop on. Some companies are trying to make their own so-called blockchain, but that's no different from a plain database, and is pretty much like trying to build your own AOL in a world with Internet. Yes, VISA was actually talking about Bitcoin in that case, but it's en vogue to refer to it as "blockchain technology" due to Bitcoin's "bad" reputation. Which is as stupid as saying "We like AOL, not The World Wide Web, because WWW is just hackers and pornographers." Who's using AOL now?

Called it.

[Derin Darkpaw]

2 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

ITT: Rassah doesn't know what hotels are.  It is possible he has only seen them as 'Those red things in Monopoly'.

He probably doesn't really know much about them because he is too busy advocating just sleeping in your car to save money.

[Rassah]

31 minutes ago, Derin Darkpaw said:

He probably doesn't really know much about them because he is too busy advocating just sleeping in your car to save money.

Why would I be advocating sleeping in a car to save money if I didn't have the experience of sleeping in lots of hotels, and experiencing how expensive they are? (For the record, I do sleep in hotels when I have to fly somewhere. This upcoming week I'll be in a hotel in Miami)

[WileyWarWeasel]

2 hours ago, Rassah said:

Or TL;DR: Many if not all of the world's economic problems, including all the abuses and exploitations by the most powerful rich corporations and assholes who screw us, can be fixed by bitcoin and the technologies that it enables.

You certainly have a lot of faith in a currency fixing everything ^^