Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

IGNORED

Credit deflation and the reflation cycle to come (part 3)


spunko

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DurhamBorn said:

Its also the way they can keep people working.If you have to lease rather than buy then you need a steady income because if you lose that you lose everything the next week.Once my old diesel Pugs were paid for they could sit on my drive for nothing until i needed them.I see little pushback from the young though,they seem mostly like lambs to the slaughter.

Exactly this. It's not just young people either. All around me are people spending the best part of a grand a month to park a brand new Merc/Tesla/Audi on the drive. They look down on our 11 year old Golf estate, but we all get where we need to go. I've just bought an Ifor Williams BV64e trailer for camping and tip runs rather than run a massive car. I rent it out for £100 a week (it cost me a grand). How's that for yield?!

I have friends who've spent thousands changing their car to avoid paying £12.50 ULEZ twice a month.

Without ZIRP, changing your car every year would never have been a thing anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
52 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

The young are mostly comatosed. Some are caught up in the environment or race baiting propaganda. Most just don't realise what is going on. Can't say I blame a lot of them. All I was interested in was going out and pulling women. Which is fair enough.

It is older people, maybe 30s plus, who should be complaining most. They can see that everything is going the wrong direction. They have reference points to how things were.

If I was young I would be furious about covid restrictions, especially pubs and clubs being shut. If I was paying for University but everything was online I would be apoplectic. Students should have kicked off all over the country last year. They haven't even had sit ins in the empty lecture theatres. Perhaps young people are doing things I'm not aware of. The apparent lack of workers suggests that at least some have sacked it all off as not worth the effort.

The flip side to your point about keeping people working is that it has to be worthwhile. There is increasingly fuck all difference between working and benefits. Many people are only working now to pay off the mortgage. If you're renting what is the point? No asset at the end of it to provide a higher standard of living. The whole "you'll own nothing" schtick is bullshit. Just fucking communism. No-one works hard under communism, just goes through the motions. Only motivation is fear and that just motivates you to cheat.

Exactly the point I was referencing to yesterday. They are being indoctrinated at every angle be it from MSM, political, educational, social, economical and societal level. They will know no different as that’s what’s been fed to them from the grass roots up.

They have no reference point to gauge anything different from, the narrative can be whitewashed into whatever direction has been chosen. Where past generations may have stood their ground when they saw what was on the horizon, current generations have just retreated further and further away to be left alone.

The younger generation won’t be having families of their own (economically and environmentally unviable), they will rent everything for instant access and won’t need physical assets (no ownership of space to keep anything anyway). That’s why UBI will happen and it will be welcomed and voted for by the younger generation.

We don’t need vaccines or viruses to depopulate ourselves as we’ll do a fantastic  job by ourselves within one generation!

You just have look at society today compared to even just a decade ago to see how rapid the change has spread. What will it be like in another 10 even 5 years?

History is written by the victors after all, our historical figures responsible for advancement of mankind may be vilified tomorrow. This is happening now, under our very noses and yet most are oblivious.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view is there is a certain amount of 

OPERATION : Find an external issue to focus attention from the failing internal economy.

Boris not doing well at this.

1. Strong on northern ireland. Strong on sub deal with AUS

2. oh crap, now I need France to stop border crossings, immigration becoming internal issue. Why is France actingly like they pissed off and not really trying now. I NEVER saw that coming

3. Oh crap, now US wont relax tariffs because of NI position, threat of loss of steel jobs becoming internal issue. I FORGOT ireland a good external issue for US after they involved in good Friday agreement and Biden like me wants to move focus away from internal issuesI

4. perhaps i should back up the US in some foreign policy so they become tariff free friends 

As for Ukraine, considering the position of afganistan after US withdrew, dont think anyone other thannUS really wants to commit to Ukraine in case US changes track in future and their forces looking like lemmings against Rus armour.

Imagine sending British army there and then the US changing minds cos they need Rus for Iran China or Oil imports, doing a rapid afgan type withdrawl. ONLY a prime minister completely tactless would consider it imho

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well my New Years Eve tradition is intact,Imperial have just sent me a very nice divi so we are off out down the town later.

Its been a great year for the thread,i think we nailed the roadmap and have navigated things very well.We have all learned and expanded our minds and resilience as well.Lets hope we can navigate this year ahead that could prove very interesting.

Tonight i dont care though,im more interested in admiring womens backsides in tight clothes.

Id like to thank you all for your input,thoughts and virtual friendship.The thread remains a place where everyone is welcome and everyones thoughts valid.

The threads role is to try to help ordinary people navigate the cycle and come out level or ahead.I think we are intact.

Il raise a glass tonight and a little smile to you all.

Cheers everyone.See you next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jamtomorrow said:

Russia certainly has the strongest geopolitical hand they've had in generations, thanks in large part to how Putin has steered them thus far. What's strange is how the hand is now being overtly *overplayed*, and in a terrific rush. Like you say, they are economically *very* far from "uncomfortable".

I maintain something's up. The swagger has gone, and leadership suddenly look and sound embattled. Which is madness, given the cards they're holding, and therefore worth trying to understand better.

The strongest part of Russia's hand is the dementia patient in the whitehouse! Perhaps their analysis is that this can't last long, and hence they wish to bank long-term gains while they can.

On the subject of long-term gains Nordstream 2 running at full capacity plus long-term gas contracts with western Europe would be a game changer for him, giving decades of unsanctionable forex and the EU under his thumb to some extent. His influence in the FSU countries would soon be unchecked. He could insist on a negotiated settlement or referendum in the "disputed region" of Ukraine, which would be a fig leaf for de facto annexation that would give him a warm water port. Geopolitically speaking everything is on the table.

3 hours ago, jamtomorrow said:

It's tempting to assume Putin himself is somehow unnassailable within and inseparable from the Russsian system of power, as it stands today.

His place within that system is certainly strong, but it is also fragile.

Apologies if you are a Russian national, or have lived there for many years in the past, but I wouldn't claim to know that one way or the other. Putin has ruled since the modern Russain state first existed as a viable entity, there is literally no precedent for what a change of leader looks like or how it happens. (Putin's experiment with a puppet President doesn't count, to my mind.)

3 hours ago, jamtomorrow said:

I'm no fan of Putin either, but I worry about how a post-Putin world looks because of how Russia's renewed vigour has usefully crowded out a slide towards US-China bipolarity.

I rather like Putin. When he described Omicron as a live vaccine for example, I considered that to be definitive and it appears to have been bourne out by events.

I would say we were sliding towards a Chinese monopolar world, with captured western elites selling out. This was why there was such a clamour against Trump opening relations with Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, marceau said:

Because the US is becoming increasingly agressive and irrational in Ukraine. The Russians aren't bluffing when they say they won't tolerate it, but there don't seem to be any adults at the controls in the US (or here) who recognise it. Like I said, it's insane behaviour.

As a result things that were previously being tolerated as part of the 'game' are now being cracked down on. Supposedly impartial NGOs, media organisations, charities, 'democrats' like Navalny, it's all being switched off. You can't play a delicate game of diplomacy when your opponent is a drooling gibbering lunatic, and that's what American (and by extension UK) foreign policy has become.

100%. Our media portrays everything in inversion. 

Crumbling empires and deeply unpopular regimes have a habit of reckless sabre rattling to impersonate strength, and the many provocations in Ukraine have that feel to them. Clinton seemed intent on a conventional war against Russia had she won, presumably with an eye to re-run the Afghan heist.

I read somewhere that throughout the cold war the USA was considered a mad dog by Russia, and capable of a pre-emptive strike seemingly at any time. The Cuban Missile crisis is always portrayed here as a provocation by Russia putting missiles on the USA's doorstep in Cuba, and then them backing down when stood up to. In fact the USA had put missiles on Russia's doorstep in Turkey the year before, and when they wouldn't reverse the escalation under diplomatic pressure Russia simply responded in kind. The missiles were withdrawn from Turkey some time after the ones in Cuba were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Axeman123 said:

I read somewhere that throughout the cold war the USA was considered a mad dog by Russia, and capable of a pre-emptive strike seemingly at any time. The Cuban Missile crisis is always portrayed here as a provocation by Russia putting missiles on the USA's doorstep in Cuba, and then them backing down when stood up to. In fact the USA had put missiles on Russia's doorstep in Turkey the year before, and when they wouldn't reverse the escalation under diplomatic pressure Russia simply responded in kind. The missiles were withdrawn from Turkey some time after the ones in Cuba were.

To be fair the Soviets were absolutely relentless agressors under Stalin. After that you see transition to countering the strategic effects of 'good guy' USA looting the collapsed imperial/colonial endeavours of the now destroyed European nations (including ours).

Once Kruschev is gone you see the emergence of a new breed of true believer, marinated in ideology from birth, who knows nothing but the politics and simply can't connect with practical reality. Then come the deranged foreign adventures and deranged domestic policies of an empire in decline. The end of the USSR looks a lot like the current US.

If Biden is Brezhnev there's 20 years left. If he's Chernenko it's 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, marceau said:

If Biden is Brezhnev there's 20 years left. If he's Chernenko it's 10.

Fascinating post.

Could you elaborate please, ie sign posts of Biden as Brezhnev vs Biden as Chernenko?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Axeman123 said:

Fascinating post.

Could you elaborate please, ie sign posts of Biden as Brezhnev vs Biden as Chernenko?

In both cases it's the gap between rhetoric and reality. Both guys who had never done anything practical in their lives, both disconnected from 'the real' by the perverse incentives of the ideological system, advanced on adherance to the party rather than any real life successes. Chernenko is literally senile, a complete joke and an obvious puppet (sound familiar?). 

The USSR presented them as strong, credible leaders when they were clearly powerless frontmen for a deranged ideological machine. Behind them are tens of thousands of equally useless appratchiks, fucking up everything they touch and, critically, using the party system to choke out anyone competant before they become a threat.

The whole system fell apart around them and nobody could do a thing. The USSR moves from being frightening because of its capabilites to being frightening because of it's stupidity. Black swans keep popping up with increasing frequency (again, sound familiar) and by the time Gorbachev takes over the situation is so bad he hands the kingdom's keys over to his enemies because he doesn't believe his own side can handle them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yadda yadda yadda
39 minutes ago, marceau said:

To be fair the Soviets were absolutely relentless agressors under Stalin. After that you see transition to countering the strategic effects of 'good guy' USA looting the collapsed imperial/colonial endeavours of the now destroyed European nations (including ours).

Once Kruschev is gone you see the emergence of a new breed of true believer, marinated in ideology from birth, who knows nothing but the politics and simply can't connect with practical reality. Then come the deranged foreign adventures and deranged domestic policies of an empire in decline. The end of the USSR looks a lot like the current US.

If Biden is Brezhnev there's 20 years left. If he's Chernenko it's 10.

Interesting comparison. Brezhnev was around for 18 years until 1982. So I reckon there are less than 20 years left if you compare with Biden and consider that the latter won't last nearly as long. In fact if Biden pegs out next year it would fit very well with Chernenko.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

Interesting comparison. Brezhnev was around for 18 years until 1982. So I reckon there are less than 20 years left if you compare with Biden and consider that the latter won't last nearly as long. In fact if Biden pegs out next year it would fit very well with Chernenko.

My thinking is Bush 2 = Brezhnev, Biden = Chernenko. Either way the front man is just a sign of decay, the real rot lies beneath due to the anti-reality nature of the apparatchiks. The human material required to maintain the system simply isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, marceau said:

 The human material required to maintain the system simply isn't there.

Hence the 'transhumanism' starting to get mentioned everywhere?  I do wonder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

Brezhnev was around for 18 years until 1982.

Taking that timeframe, I would think that Brezhnev could be characterised as the stealth collapse phase where the seeds of collapse were sown. The two leading candidates for what caused the collapse of the USSR are commonly claimed to be the Chernobyl disaster or the Afghan war. Both of these were set in motion in the later years of Brezhnev, by invading one and commisioning a large fleet of risky reactors. Likely US candidates for this historical role would be Bush2 or Obama, who both launched unwinnable and ruinously expensive wars. Obama was certainly far more damaging, hollowing out civil society and weaponising institutions like the FBI. With 16 years in the WH between them, perhaps they can share the position. This would put 2017 as 1982.

Biden certainly seems more like he will preside over what could be characterised as the open collapse phase, like Chernenko. Things certainly seem like @marceau describes, with the system so stuffed with incompetents that it cannot function to even maintain stability. The increasingly frequent black swans certainly fits the mood of the times.

I am personally giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, of having valliantly stalled the innevitable. If we do this we can say today is ~1983, otherwise 1987. In the later case we can expect the final collapse before the scheduled end of the current President's term.

41 minutes ago, marceau said:

the real rot lies beneath due to the anti-reality nature of the apparatchiks. The human material required to maintain the system simply isn't there.

Profound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Loki said:

Hence the 'transhumanism' starting to get mentioned everywhere?  I do wonder

I believe this is what is being attempted, also with AI and machine learning. Our dullard rulers want a system that runs without the input of people (including, due to lazyness, themselves), so they can shut out inconvenient reality to an even greater extent. Of course they fail to realise that the more complex the 'automated' system, the far higher the human standards required to maintain it. I'd imagine they will fail at this just as hard as they fail at everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, marceau said:

I believe this is what is being attempted, also with AI and machine learning. Our dullard rulers want a system that runs without the input of people (including, due to lazyness, themselves), so they can shut out inconvenient reality to an even greater extent. Of course they fail to realise that the more complex the 'automated' system, the far higher the human standards required to maintain it. I'd imagine they will fail at this just as hard as they fail at everything else.

Also energy input costs/efficiency, probably why they want to control totally the energy systems/market.  

(And reduce energy abundance? Hence the nuclear shutdowns? Sorry plebs there's just no spare electrons anymore, now say a thousand Hail Gretas)

There's a word for it....oh yeah, disempowerment 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Loki said:

Also energy input costs/efficiency, probably why they want to control totally the energy systems/market.  

(And reduce energy abundance? Hence the nuclear shutdowns? Sorry plebs there's just no spare electrons anymore, now say a thousand Hail Gretas)

There's a word for it....oh yeah, disempowerment 

To them narrative is everything. So there's no limit to the scale or type of power they think they're entitled to. 

On the flipside, to them tangible = terrible. So these end states see them reaching ever farther and higher with their ambitions and rhetoric, while attacking what little is left of their own (and unfortunately, our own) foundations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, marceau said:

To them narrative is everything. So there's no limit to the scale or type of power they think they're entitled to. 

On the flipside, to them tangible = terrible. So these end states see them reaching ever farther and higher with their ambitions and rhetoric, while attacking what little is left of their own (and unfortunately, our own) foundations.

I'm hoping the Pareto principle means that 80% will end up owning nothing and being happy, and that's the limit the system is able to enforce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Loki said:

I'm hoping the Pareto principle means that 80% will end up owning nothing and being happy, and that's the limit the system is able to enforce

It is not really an ownership issue or an enforcement one, it's an operational one. The system cannot maintain itself and degrades, eventually critical areas break down. 

The Soviet system couldn't enforce anything. 'Ownership' post Gorbachev was settled with tanks, AKs and assassinations. External powers installed the oligarchs and the assets were sold off for a handful of roubles while people starved or fled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, marceau said:

It is not really an ownership issue or an enforcement one, it's an operational one. The system cannot maintain itself and degrades, eventually critical areas break down. 

The Soviet system couldn't enforce anything. 'Ownership' post Gorbachev was settled with tanks, AKs and assassinations. External powers installed the oligarchs and the assets were sold off for a handful of roubles while people starved or fled. 

In that case what I mean is to be able to escape it for long enough until it collapses, so ~80% perish with the system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Loki said:

In that case what I mean is to be able to escape it for long enough until it collapses, so ~80% perish with the system

If the US falls over, I'm not sure it will be possible to escape the impact anywhere on earth. Plus most people will still be there afterwards, it's the ambitions and the ideology that perish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, marceau said:

If the US falls over, I'm not sure it will be possible to escape the impact anywhere on earth. Plus most people will still be there afterwards, it's the ambitions and the ideology that perish.

I agree the impact will be felt worldwide, but I think it's exactly because the ambitions and the ideology went a long time ago.  Like with macro-economics for example, the scale of things.  I don't think Europe ever recovered from the world wars.

You can't just send the best and bravest off to die in a mechanised killing machine and arbitrarily declare a victory. 

This goes for both 'sides'.  There were no winners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AWW said:

Exactly this. It's not just young people either. All around me are people spending the best part of a grand a month to park a brand new Merc/Tesla/Audi on the drive. They look down on our 11 year old Golf estate, but we all get where we need to go. I've just bought an Ifor Williams BV64e trailer for camping and tip runs rather than run a massive car. I rent it out for £100 a week (it cost me a grand). How's that for yield?!

I have friends who've spent thousands changing their car to avoid paying £12.50 ULEZ twice a month.

Without ZIRP, changing your car every year would never have been a thing anyway.

Your yield on renting out your trailer is very good especially without having any business overheads. I think rental companies operate on similar margins tbh - however they have all manner of costs to absorb on top.                                                                Anyway if 'xxx as a service', renting/subscription model instead of actually owning is to become more pervasive from now on, it got me wondering if people on the thread have ideas on what similar items/products could be bought then rented out? Perhaps some here are doing this already. Plus I'm thinking choosing the 'right item' could be very lucrative to rent, and not necessarily with a big hassle factor attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JMD said:

Your yield on renting out your trailer is very good especially without having any business overheads. I think rental companies operate on similar margins tbh - however they have all manner of costs to absorb on top.                                                                Anyway if 'xxx as a service', renting/subscription model instead of actually owning is to become more pervasive from now on, it got me wondering if people on the thread have ideas on what similar items/products could be bought then rented out? Perhaps some here are doing this already. Plus I'm thinking choosing the 'right item' could be very lucrative to rent, and not necessarily with a big hassle factor attached.

Houses.  Can't go wrong with bricks and mortar 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bobthebuilder
2 minutes ago, JMD said:

Your yield on renting out your trailer is very good especially without having any business overheads. I think rental companies operate on similar margins tbh - however they have all manner of costs to absorb on top.                                                                Anyway if 'xxx as a service', renting/subscription model instead of actually owning is to become more pervasive from now on, it got me wondering if people on the thread have ideas on what similar items/products could be bought then rented out? Perhaps some here are doing this already. Plus I'm thinking choosing the 'right item' could be very lucrative to rent, and not necessarily with a big hassle factor attached.

Not hassle-free, but one of my old schoolmates rents out tractors, ploughs, bailers etc to farmers and small holders. He's been doing it most of his life, he used to collect the Dinky model ones when he was a kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Loki said:

I agree the impact will be felt worldwide, but I think it's exactly because the ambitions and the ideology went a long time ago.  Like with macro-economics for example, the scale of things.  I don't think Europe ever recovered from the world wars.

You can't just send the best and bravest off to die in a mechanised killing machine and arbitrarily declare a victory. 

This goes for both 'sides'.  There were no winners.

Europe didn't recover from the World Wars, and neither did we. What replaced it (and the UK) were US or Soviet vassal states subjected to heavy ideological conditioning. Most European cultural & ideological elements of Russian life were destroyed by Bolshevism. The asiatic ideology of the USSR then went the way of the dodo with Gorbachev.

The ambitions and ideology of the modern US have been in near 100% control ever since. This is not the same as the Europe-oriented US that fought for independance, wrote the constitution, or fought the civil war; that died at Ellis Island. The new US ideology is all the horrible political, economic, racial and social trash everybody on this site despises.

That is the sytem that may no longer be able to sustain itself. Perhaps if it falls over, the other side might see the remergence of Europe & Britain, or perhaps we go Mad Max and I spend my remaining years driving round the British wastelands in arseless leather chaps. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...