Lately, people are like dogs before an eartquake.
I find one line from Bill Bonnder kinda funny. He predicted all sorts of stuff accurately over the last several decades. But he predicted a terrible meltdown lately that never happened. He’s adamant that it will but confesses he grossly underestimated “their” ability to continue to kick the can down a neverending road. And he, almost embarrassed, says the end of the road IS coming, and it’s coming soon. I think “they” will put it off as long as possible, but it will eventually be out of “their” hands.
He has interesting comments about what almost happened in the spring of 2008. I even started a post about it at the time. Our leaders had a “closed door” session and some appeared to be “scared sh**less” on exiting the meeting. It turns out that two of the attendees had been quoted on record telling their wives to get as much cash as they possibly can get their hands on.
And if you remember, that is when QE was started. QE has run its course and it will be interesting how the next attempt to “kick the can” works out.
But this simply can not last. And as he points out, when it does happen, it will reach international crisis proportions in a couple of HOURS. The key is that most of our economy is based not on money, but on credit. We started this death spiral in the 1950’s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PqFYMZpBxw
We did have a terrible melt-down (still ongoing); instead of reflecting on paper it is being reflected by negative birthrates. We are trafficking Third Worlders into the West to mask it, but it is very real and visible to all.
Let’s see, banks are in trouble because they have a certain amount of bad loans that probably won’t be repaid. Banking regulations may force them to write off those bad loans possibly leading to bank insolvency. This writing off of bad loans is analogous to burning money.
In a fiat money system, money can be easily replaced - the fed can print it and give it to the banks that are in trouble, i.e. “kick the can down the road” and in that scenario it’s the right thing to do. The cost of doing this is “moral hazard”, the benefit is saving millions (not just the bank) from misery.
The moral hazard, (irresponsibility on the part of the people who run the banks) can be taken care of by instituting some type of punishment for the people involved, so that it’s an example to others in the future to be more careful about who they loan money to.
Is there a link to an article to what Bill Bonnder had to say? Watching video is somewhat problematic for me.