US ponzi scheme - growth problems

clacy · Feb 24, 2010

Quote from El Guapo:

Bloom Energy - Bloom Box
1. Almost nobody has it.
2. Cheap energy for all. Enviro friendly. Cool, must have gizmo to show off at your next BBQ.
3. For a while at least, then it will be made in India.
4. Perhaps?

Have you researched the validity of this technology? I'm wondering because I have not had a chance to, but heard the 60min headline and it sounded promising. Obviously a new energy technology such as this would revolutionize our world completely and would advance the standard of living throughout the world.

Of course, 60min often overhypes these types of things, so I'm a little skeptical.

I remember hearing about a great new cancer treatment (microwave treatment of tumors) on that show and they made it sound like a slam dunk for cancer. A year or so later, I had a business dinner with the main surgical oncologist that was interviewed he said their research was actually not promising at all, but CBS cherry picked the comments/quotes and painted an entirely different picture of the research.

Scataphagos · Feb 24, 2010

Quote from Scataphagos:

"... The other place growth could come from...

If the USA adopted tax and business friendly policies. Then foreign manufacturers would BEAT OUR DOORS DOWN to manufacture their goods here... and thereby employ American workers.

Anybody watch Glenn Beck today? I didn't send him an email, but he said EXACTLY THIS!!

It's obvious to some of us... and it's our ONLY hope...

schizo · Feb 24, 2010

"History was created to be repeated!"

--Saliva

I ain't no prognosticator but the only way to get out of this entire mess is to be engulfed in another world war. In the last century, that was the only cure that healed us from the scourges of the Great Depression. I say it will happen again within the next 10 years.

TGregg · Feb 25, 2010

Quote from schizo:
. . . the only way to get out of this entire mess is to be engulfed in another world war. . .

Quote from The Godfather
I don't like violence, Tom. I'm a businessman. Blood is a big expense.

Scataphagos · Feb 25, 2010

Quote from schizo:

the only way to get out of this entire mess is to be engulfed in another world war.

People keep saying that, but never offer an explanation of how that will solve anything. It's not like "we go to war, then confiscate our defeated enemy's assets and/or enslave their populace to pay taxes"...

Here's a hint... STOP SAYING "GOING TO WAR IS THE SOLUTION TO OUR MESS". IT ISN'T. IT'S A STUPID NOTION!

The only possible reason to start a war is to somehow provide an excuse to default upon our debt. I don't see the mechanism for that just now.

clacy · Feb 25, 2010

Yes, going to war used to mean mass producing (in the US) ships, planes, tanks, jeeps, etc

Now it means producing lots of missiles, drones and a few humvee's and contracting out with French companies for cafeteria services.

Not quite the same effect on GDP.

Scataphagos · Feb 25, 2010

Quote from clacy:

Yes, going to war used to mean mass producing (in the US) ships, planes, tanks, jeeps, etc

Now it means producing lots of missiles, drones and a few humvee's and contracting out with French companies for cafeteria services.

Not quite the same effect on GDP.

Doubt it. Worked last time because it was the catalyst which enabled the transition from the USA being primarily an agrarian society to an industrial one. No such transition possible this time.

Anyone believe WWIII will be fought with conventional weapons? With all the nukes around?

Like I said... "WWIII TO SOLVE THE WORLD'S ECONOMIC PROBLEMS IS A STUPID, STUPID NOTION."

Misthos · Feb 25, 2010

Quote from Scataphagos:

Doubt it. Worked last time because it was the catalyst which enabled the transition from the USA being primarily an agrarian society to an industrial one. No such transition possible this time.

Anyone believe WWIII will be fought with conventional weapons? With all the nukes around?

Like I said... "WWIII TO SOLVE THE WORLD'S ECONOMIC PROBLEMS IS A STUPID, STUPID NOTION."

I agree it's a stupid notion. So was WWII. However, I don't see a future war being planned as much as being a natural progression of the global system.

There are a tremendous amount of financial imbalances in the world. There is also a tremendous demand for resources. Who gets what, who pays, who defaults, and who takes a hit? All these questions will need to be addressed.

The question is, will they get addressed peacefully? Will there be an orderly unwind or re-calibration of power and wealth? Just as I don't see war being a solution, but somehow I don't see these questions being addressed peacefully either. History tells me that it will get messy - what that means today with nukes, terrorism, and global conflict resolution bodies set in place such as the IMF, World Bank, UN.... I don't know. It's up in the air for me. But I don't rule out war either.

buylo · Feb 25, 2010

Quote from cmdtytrdr:

actually enjoyed this post a lot and agree with most of your points. i'm with you that none of this should be too personally depressing in general - and i wouldnt be even if we went into a period of deflation/slow growth or even depression. i am just completely bearish on the economy in the US and disgusted with its leadership.

it's true though that regardless of what happens to the market at least we haven't seen a major war in 40 years with heavy US casualties. that, in and of itself, is an amazing thing. we don't have it that bad at all...thats actually partly my case for what huge pussies we've become that we can't take the pain of a bad economy for even a couple years without going into complete denial and creating new laws and building massive deficits to basically save a bunch of people who spec'ed their buns off. watching hank paulson during the bank bailouts, you'd think we were hit by a nuke and lost millions of people. i guess for his cronies, losing their g5's and yachts wouldve been the equivalent.

If I had a G5 and a yacht, I wouldn't want to lose it either.

chrisjs87 · Feb 25, 2010

Anyone believe WWIII will be fought with conventional weapons? With all the nukes around?

If WWIII is a war bent on the total annihilation of mankind and the planet, then yes absolutely. Otherwise, probably not. Nuclear weapons don't have many practical applications anymore.. The downsides completely outway any potential benefits.