Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Swiss Finance Guru sees bankruptcy for the U.S
MINA Breaking News ^ | 11/07/08

Posted on 11/07/2008 7:38:30 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last
To: TigerLikesRooster

Great post.... You don’t have to agree with Marc Faber about everything. But he’s right about alot


61 posted on 11/07/2008 6:17:42 PM PST by dennisw (Never bet on Islam! ::::: Never bet on a false prophet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
This prediction is off about deflation---->>>

22 November 2007

Gold & Deflation/Inflation by Marc Faber

I am asked constantly how gold would perform in a deflationary collapse. With the propensity of the Fed and the ECB to flood the system with liquidity and to take "extraordinary measures" whenever problems arise, deflation is a remote possibility for the foreseeable future. So, before worrying about deflation, I would worry inflation accelerating strongly in the years to come - especially if the US economy stagnates. But let us assume that at some point in the future deflation follows. What then? In my opinion, deflation could only be triggered by one event: a total collapse of the existing global credit bubble. And the only event that I can think of that would trigger such a debt collapse would be a third world war. The failure of a large bank - say, Citigroup - wouldn't do the trick, because the Fed would immediately bail it out (unless Ron Paul is US President).

Now in a debt collapse, where would you rather have your money? In bank deposits, in CDs, in dubious commercial paper, in bonds, in money market funds - all of which would experience soaring default rates - or in physical gold, ideally in a safe deposit box? I think that, particularly in a debt collapse, physical gold would shine, as people the world over would become extremely concerned about, not the return on their money (interest), but the return of their money. This would be particularly true of Asian central banks, which now have less than 2% of their reserves in gold but hold massive quantities of all kind of debt securities.

Consequently, while I find the gold price to be currently somewhat overbought, I still think that gold will be one of the best investments over the next couple of years. In particular, I would expect demand for gold from individuals around the world to increase meaningfully - especially in Asia - at a time when production is unlikely to increase. I wish to add that I am not a "gold bug". I would much prefer to live in a world in which central banks' top priority was to safeguard paper money's purchasing power and its function as a "store of value". I would also much rather live in a world in which the US dollar was a strong currency, and where America was as free as it was in the 1960s, and the economic and financial imbalances weren't as extreme as they are today. As Steven Roach recently remarked, "no nation has ever devalued its way into prosperity". But the fact is, the time has come when we can no longer trust central banks. Therefore, each individual must be his own central bank and maintain adequate reserves for himself in the form of physical gold. The supply of paper money is potentially endless, whereas the supply of gold is very limited. (In fact, gold production from mines is declining.)

Marc Faber

excerpted from
The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report - Nov 2007

 

62 posted on 11/07/2008 6:29:00 PM PST by dennisw (Never bet on Islam! ::::: Never bet on a false prophet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig Von Mises

63 posted on 11/07/2008 7:37:08 PM PST by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; ex-Texan
Just in time for 'Herbert Obama Hoover'.


64 posted on 11/09/2008 12:14:09 AM PST by M. Espinola (Freedom is not 'free'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
Have you been in a coma for the last two years?

No, more like in a 30-year nightmare. During that time I have watched America, in the name of Free Trade (i.e. greed), de-industrialize and wipe out a large segment of the middle class in the process.

Before I retired I was a contract programmer who bounced around the country and saw first hand the damage NAFTA and its siblings have done.
In Georgia I saw a small one-industry town go completely on welfare when the broom factory left for cheap labor Mexico. I saw a HUGE beer brewing/cannery complex go empty as their respective companies headed for the border. I saw $18-an-hour millwrights go to mowing each others lawns trying to stay afloat, only to lose everything to the taxman as property taxes were raised to punitive levels since the industries went off the tax rolls.
I saw low-paid workers in Alabama get exploited even further when they asked management for some kind of health coverage and were told to shut up or the plant would go to Mexico. Vanity Fair in Monroeville, AL moved off-country and threw even those low-wage workers on the dole. This drumbeat went on, and continues even to this day.
In Indiana, Ohio and Illinois I saw abandoned factories one year. The next year I was back up there the factories were gone - bulldozed to bare ground to save on property taxes. Industries that will never come back even if the work does because the environmental laws make it too expense to rebuild.
In the Old Days, the North headed for the South's cheap labor, but at least the money stayed in this country, not to mention the national skills base. Mostly gone now.

Competition is good for business.
No, it is not good for business. "Free Trade" as now practiced is good for business. Tell me why a flannel shirt made in Bangladesh costs $15 at Wal-Mart or a Tommy Helfiger T-Shirt made in Honduras costs $60. Most all of the money saved in going to cheap labor countries was channeled into larger compensation packages for the business executives.
None of these incidents came about because of automation or innovation. It came about because companies could relocate offshore but still have access to the lucrative U.S. market - something tariffs would have prevented. The only competition good for the consumers is that against equally/higher-paid workers in Europe or any other industrialized country. I have no qualms about that kind of competition, for among equals, it lowers prices. Competition to see who will work the cheapest benefits no one, even the host countries, as China and Mexico are finding out.

65 posted on 11/10/2008 6:46:44 PM PST by Oatka ("A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." –Bertrand de Jouvenel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Oatka

So you are nothing more than a socialist. You want Government to tell businesses how to operate.

Free Trade is capitalism.
Protectionism is socialism.


66 posted on 11/10/2008 7:11:18 PM PST by Philly Nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Philly Nomad
So you are nothing more than a socialist. You want Government to tell businesses how to operate.
You are using the standard duck, dodge and weave Liberal defense. Don't answer hard questions, start making accusations. Wow - Gold AND Silver medals in Conclusion Jumping. What system were we under before "Free Trade"?

Free Trade is capitalism.
Boy, the gubmint schools have sure brainwashed you. The "Free Trade" you support, and is being practiced now, is one-sided. Have you read any of the provisions in NAFTA, for instance? It may be at your local library if you're in a city. Part One sounds reasonable. At the end of Part Two comes all the "modifications", which tilt the game in Mexico's direction. In almost all our trade agreements, we unilaterally drop our tariffs, the other side keeps theirs. Rather than spouting the standard propaganda, check out some of our so-called trade pacts, as I did, and see how we are taken to the cleaners. Real Free Trade means both sides drop their tariffs - "Fair Trade" if you will.

Protectionism is socialism.
Good Boy! You have learned well, grasshopper. Here's your biscuit. Keep repeating that while you're on the unemployment line because your job went to China or India, or any other place they could find somebody who would work cheaper than you. Then again, maybe you're a federal or state drone and don't have to worry about "competition".

67 posted on 11/11/2008 8:42:04 AM PST by Oatka ("A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." –Bertrand de Jouvenel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson