j_b Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Good video Jay...damn libertarians.... odd how we hear a lot more about anti-war Libertarians today than during the run-up to the Iraq war ... I wonder where they were at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Both JayB and Billcoe's advice are instructive as to exactly what not to do right now. I'm on the phone on hold to my broker right now. Betting the farm that treasury bill interest rates will rise. Yes, you should do the reverse and go long on T-bills with every nickel you have. Whew....rolling the dice here. Risky business..... Oh man - not sure I'd jump on either wagon big time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Be scared when everyone else is greedy and be greedy when everyone else is scared. Both JayB and Billcoe's advice are instructive as to exactly what not to do right now. Yes. If you're 20+ years from retirement, the *last* thing you want to keep doing right now is maxing out your contributions to tax sheltered retirement vehicles, and continue making incremental investments in a diversified pool of indexed assets with super-low management fees within the said vehicles as part of a market-invariant strategy. Ergo - you should put everything you have in taxable accounts with high management and transaction fees, churn the hell out of it to maximize the tax-inefficiency, and put everything you have into one volatile asset at a time as part of a return-chasing strategy and leverage the hell out all of your bets. Tell me that you personally vow to do this until the day you retire and I'll be a happy guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Both JayB and Billcoe's advice are instructive as to exactly what not to do right now. I'm on the phone on hold to my broker right now. Betting the farm that treasury bill interest rates will rise. Yes, you should do the reverse and go long on T-bills with every nickel you have. Whew....rolling the dice here. Risky business..... Think Bill Gross made a big bet that the end of QE2 will result in rising yields a while ago. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262688/running-exits-jim-lacey Only obvious wild card in the near term is the simmering sovereign debt crisis in Euroland could go critical at any time, and that'd probably send an awful lot of cash into treasuries and crush the yields. Maybe go long on seeds, ammo, and whiskey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Can the Gadhaffi Retirement Plan work for Americans? Gold key to financing Gaddafi struggle Financial Times, March 21 2011 The international community has hit Muammer Gaddafi with a raft of sanctions and asset freezes aimed at cutting off his funding. But the embattled Libyan leader is sitting on a pot of gold. The Libyan central bank – which is under Colonel Gaddafi’s control – holds 143.8 tonnes of gold, according to the latest data from the International Monetary Fund, although some suspect the true amount could be several tonnes higher. Those reserves, among the top 25 in the world, are worth more than $6.5bn at current prices, enough to pay a small army of mercenaries for months or even years. While many central banks hold their gold reserves in international vaults in London, New York or Switzerland, Libya’s bullion is in the country, said people familiar with the country’s activities in the gold market. US and European governments have frozen billions of dollars in Libyan assets, as sanctions have hit the central bank, sovereign wealth fund and state oil company. But Libya’s gold reserves may provide Col Gaddafi with a lifeline – if he can sell them. To raise large amounts of money, bankers said, Col Gaddafi would have to transport the bullion out of Libya. Before violence broke out the gold was stored at the central bank in Tripoli. But since then it may have been moved to another location, such as the southern city of Sebha – within reach of the borders with Chad and Niger. The political turbulence in the Middle East – besides boosting the price of gold to a record $1,444 a troy ounce – has highlighted the property that has for centuries made gold so appealing to criminals, investors and dictators alike: it does not rely on a government for its value. Following the revolution in Egypt, the country banned gold exports for four months in order to prevent officials of the former government from moving their wealth abroad. At the same time, Iran has been quietly stocking up on gold in recent years, in an apparent attempt to shift away from the US dollar and thus protect its reserves from risk of seizure. Other significant buyers of gold include China, Russia and India. No international bank or trading house is likely to buy gold with any hint of a link to the Libyan regime, bankers said. “Physical trading houses are now quite reluctant to deal with countries that have been involved with conflict – they don’t know who’s on the end of the trade,” said one banker. But Col Gaddafi could transport the gold to Chad or Niger, where the gold could be swapped for currency transferred into a bank owned by the Libyan Foreign Bank – a branch of the central bank. “If a country like Libya wants to make their gold liquid it would probably be in the form of a swap – whether for arms, food or cash,” said Walter de Wet, head of commodities research at Standard Bank. In addition to the gold reserves, Col Gaddafi may also have hoarded some cash from oil sales outside of the traditional channels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Wow! I am in total agreement with that article Jay. I swear I didn't pen that:-) Being in a hedge fund that short sells the Treasury on margin is a stunning position which I never believed I would find myself in. 1 year Treasury's at at .25%...how far can that rate go down and what will happen when the Fed stops buying? If the rate goes down I'll lose my bet, but I'm predicting a rise in interest rates and am acting on my beliefs. So to do the opposite, you should buy Treasuries Pat, cash in on that .25% interest rate and retire rich! It's a "safe" investment after all, everyone says so. Everyone flys to "safety" like US government T-bills when times are strange they say. This is as strange as it gets. Our country is in unprecedented and unusual times with as uncertain of a future as we have ever seen IMO. Get the booze, guns, stockpiled food, gas masks and potasium Iodine kind of things you mention covered soon everyone:-) Nice bed Prole, the top looks like a coffin though. Anyone else into eyeballing the future? Lay it down here for evaluation, love to hear your thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Our country is in unprecedented and unusual times with as uncertain of a future as we have ever seen IMO. I'm guessing every generation thinks that their times are unique... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Talk about going long! The energy card is the one different item now, however. Don't know when that one will come to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Nice chart....they were looking at the opposite of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil This one below better explains it for the US during that period to now. ..of course, there could be a magic potion invented any day now that will alleviate this concern....and all the US manufacturers that left the building will come home...and and and Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 ...and why would you want to live in the 'burbs and have a long commute? Hmmm. Startups in simple bicycle production? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Yeah, that is a nice chart as well, but I am not convinced with regard to peak oil relative to overall energy. We haven't even scratched the surface of conservation, vehicle efficiency, effective use of nuclear / solar / wind / wave, transmission efficiencies, etc. I more suspect peak oil will simply be about getting us out of the same old rut than a real threat of any kind. We did survive running out of whale oil... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 We haven't even scratched the surface of conservation, vehicle efficiency, effective use of nuclear / solar / wind / wave, transmission efficiencies, etc. I more suspect peak oil will simply be about getting us out of the same old rut than a real threat of any kind. We did survive running out of whale oil... Good points all. In fact I congratulated our new President on this board for doing the right thing and increasing the cafe standards not long after he'd gotten elected. Here's to hope! The WW2 time was a radically different time. Certainly darker and scarier in many regards. In many ways that was mandatory and this is voluntary, which makes the budget trend these days even crazier..to me. ...and why would you want to live in the 'burbs and have a long commute? Hmmm. Startups in simple bicycle production? Me? Everyone who knows me knows I do live about as close to inner city without actually being under a bridge as it gets in a house 3 blocks from a close in light rail stop. My wife walks 3 blocks to work and I'm not ridiculously far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 No, no, a generic "you". I'm with you. I always thougt that after reiterment the way to go was move out of the city and find some elbow room. Makes less sense as I get older. Plus there's likely more Bingo games in town anyway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Stop Bombing Libya by Marjorie Cohn [..] It is only when peaceful means have been tried and proved inadequate that the Security Council can authorize action under Chapter VII of the Charter. That action includes boycotts, embargoes, severance of diplomatic relations, and even blockades or operations by air, sea or land. The “responsibility to protect” norm grew out of frustration with the failure to take action to prevent the genocide in Rwanda, where a few hundred troops could have saved myriad lives. But the norm was not implemented to stop Israel from bombing Gaza in late 2008 and early 2009, which resulted in a loss of 1,400 Palestinians, mostly civilians. Nor is it being used to stop the killing of civilians by the United States in Afghanistan and Pakistan. There is also hypocrisy inherent in the U.S. bombing of Libya to enforce international law. The Obama administration has thumbed its nose at its international obligations by refusing to investigate officials of the Bush administration for war crimes for its torture regime. Both the Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Conventions compel Member States to bring people to justice who violate their commands. The United States is ostensibly bombing Libya for humanitarian reasons. But Obama refuses to condemn the repression and government killings of protestors in Bahrain using U.S.-made tanks and weaponry because that is where the U.S. Fifth Fleet is stationed. And Yemen, a close U.S. ally, kills and wounds protestors while Obama watches silently. Regime change is not authorized by the resolution. Yet U.S. bombers targeted the Qaddafi compound and Obama said at a news conference in Santiago that it is “U.S. policy that Qaddafi needs to go.” The resolution specifically forbids a “foreign occupation force.” But it is unlikely that the United States, France and Britain will bomb Libya and leave. Don’t be surprised to hear there are Western forces on the ground in Libya to “train” or “assist” the rebels there. Defense Secretary Robert Gates pegged it when he said that a “no-fly zone” over Libya would be an “act of war.” Although the Arab League reportedly favored a no-fly zone, Amr Moussa, Secretary General of the Arab League, said that “what is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone.” He added, “What we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.” He plans to call a new meeting of the league to reconsider its support for a no-fly zone. The military action in Libya sets a dangerous precedent of attacking countries where the leadership does not favor the pro-U.S. or pro-European Union countries. What will prevent the United States from stage-managing some protests, magnifying them in the corporate media as mass actions, and then bombing or attacking Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, or North Korea? During the Bush administration, Washington leveled baseless allegations to justify an illegal invasion of Iraq. [..] Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past President of the National Lawyers Guild, is the deputy secretary general for external communications of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurist http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Yeah, that is a nice chart as well, but I am not convinced with regard to peak oil relative to overall energy. We haven't even scratched the surface of conservation, vehicle efficiency, effective use of nuclear / solar / wind / wave, transmission efficiencies, etc. I more suspect peak oil will simply be about getting us out of the same old rut than a real threat of any kind. We did survive running out of whale oil... "The stone age didn't end for lack of stones." If you allow prices to coordinate supply and demand, then increasing scarcity drives increasing efficiency, conservation, and substitution. If oil does start to get extremely scarce relative to effective demand, we'll switch to something else to fuel transport before we come anywhere close to exhausting every last oil-field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 right, because urban sprawl, lack of rail infrastrcuture, intensive agriculture, etc ... will allow us to turn on a dime when demand and conflict drive the price of oil through the roof (way before we even approach exhaustiung the resource btw) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) "The stone age didn't end for lack of stones." retarded analogy if I ever saw one. The result of denialism, I suspect. Edited March 23, 2011 by j_b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Yeah, that is a nice chart as well, but I am not convinced with regard to peak oil relative to overall energy. We haven't even scratched the surface of conservation, vehicle efficiency, effective use of nuclear / solar / wind / wave, transmission efficiencies, etc. I more suspect peak oil will simply be about getting us out of the same old rut than a real threat of any kind. We did survive running out of whale oil... "The stone age didn't end for lack of stones." If you allow prices to coordinate supply and demand, then increasing scarcity drives increasing efficiency, conservation, and substitution. If oil does start to get extremely scarce relative to effective demand, we'll switch to something else to fuel transport before we come anywhere close to exhausting every last oil-field. I'm hoping for so much - least for my kid and her cohorts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 especially since "allowing prices to coordinate supply and demand" has worked out so well for the Gulf economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 It's comforting to know that in these turbulent times some folks can rely on their religious faith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Is there a single instance of a bulk mineral resource that we dig out of the ground that we've actually used every last bit of before the price became prohibitive, consumption declined, conservation/efficiency increased, and we wound up using something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Nope, but it has never been the Anthropocene before. Human societies have become geophysical forces capable of changing the earth environment. Among fossil resources that we depend a lot on and the shortage of which would threaten a hard landing for human societies are water, oil, soils, .. Shortages and escalating prices would not allow many communities to adjust quickly enough without much hardship ensuing. Not that you would care as long as your market ideology rules. Anyway you'd be certain to invoke the ensuing ruin as motivation to further pursue the race to the bottom as you are accustomed to doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Anthropocene I shouldn't worry too much about the threat of resource shortages of stuff we pull out of the earth, they are likely the very least of our problems going forward. At the current rate of habitat destruction and species extinction I would personally be way, way more concerned about emerging pandemic threats (if I were a worrying sort). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Is there a single instance of a bulk mineral resource that we dig out of the ground that we've actually used every last bit of before the price became prohibitive, consumption declined, conservation/efficiency increased, and we wound up using something else? Link. Go blow yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Being worried or not has nothing to do with limits to growth: [video:youtube]RIqCdxW-KNY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.