take this article, for instance.
while most american news sources tend to pussyfoot around an issue (if they even address it at all), the new york post, once its attention is drawn, can reliably be counted upon to go for the jugular with pithy headlines such as the one they ran yesterday:
and if macro-economics is suddenly pushing celebrity peccadillos off the front page of the post, what should that tell you, my children?
that's right--read the article, cash in whatever useless dollars you have left, buy gold and thank me later.
[or silver--your choice]
________________
sober update: i hope it goes without saying that, before acting upon this or any other financial advice that drunken bloggers throw at you, you should do your homework and make an informed decision.
1 comment:
OK, let's say that the dollar continues to lose value....so what?
Unless there are real world implications to that, it just makes it more expensive for you or I to make that weekend trip to London or Paris.
Most Japanese manufacturers have continued to squeeze profits rather than raise profits with the increasing value of the Japanese Yen.
It is possible that if prices increased rapidly, a declining dollar could lead to inflation, but in the guttermorality world, a declining dollar is an effective of rather than a cause of inflation.
All told, we see very little inflation yet. That does not mean that six months from now inflation may increase substantially. But core inflation this year to date has been virtually nill....
Oil is the exception. In the past year, oil decreased by 80 percent and now has doubled back. It is still down significantly from last year's highs. But oil is certainly high be historic standards.
Guttermorality, however, continues to miss the point about all of this economic data: that so much economic activity is based upon assumptions of trust and stability.
The events of 2008 undermined the psychological trust and faith people had in markets and that happens rarely.
There does not appear to be much on the horizon that is going to repeat that awful confluence of events.
The problem is that you are looking for depression as an unavoidable consequence of economic forces instead of what it is: an all together avoidable confluence of human psychological forces versus economic ones.
I posted a long reply to your last economic post.
Basically, I just think your analysis is not likely. I also think your view of what would have happened without federal intervention in the markets in 2008 ignores the real world.
You have bought in to the fundamentalist view of economics that people will always act rationally. Basically, there are no credible economic libertarians left after the events of 2008.
Post a Comment