Re gold, what is require to save the world is either
(i) add two (2) zeros to money of all nations of this galaxy, or
(ii) subtract (2) zeros from debt of everybody in this universe
So, either gold at 160,000 or 16.
In other sentences, either we smash all creditor / savers, or
We wreck all debtor / wastrels.
I hope the electorates deliberate wisely, and choose with due care.
I am not indifferent between the two extrem choices, and am biased toward option (i), because even as I am a saver, I favor bailing out the debtors. I am truly altruistic.
Notes to self:
1. Am figuring that voluntary austerity talks everywhere are mostly talk, and altogether non-actionable.
The math imperative shall eventually impose involuntary actions of austerity, and such involuntary math-imposed actions would make social cracks out of political fissures, so compelling nominally-independent central banking quantitative patches to bandaid wounds.
2. My alarm is that within the zirp all-risk / no-return zig-zag / to-fro / up-down / on-off market arena dominated by technical and algo-trading, increasingly the 'human-market' is not only only expressing its feel per risk on/off through the market but more than usual taking 'algo-market' hints as expressed by the devolving market place. The alarm is simply that we are playing in an increasingly devolved market - ala, the times, they are changing, calling for us to change as well, but not hinting at how to change.
Quitting is not an option for everyone with any asset / savings or not, because under zirp, all, including cash and jobs, are wagers.
3. One clear and present danger, that which can strike at any moment and must strike at some point per fiat money inflation script is that
(3-i) the script calls for every larger tranches of 'easying' (a/k/a print up another batch, the proverbial last batch) with ever less efficacy over a progressively shorter period of elapsed time at ever increasing frequency
(3-ii) one must-happen outcome is just that at some juncture some central bank would make the natural mistake of 'not doing enough and in time' allegedly, resulting in a flame-out of the particular market even soon or immediately after a prayed-for-n-widely-expected easing
(3-iii) when so, imagine the news headline on that awful day, but
(3-iv) also think about the counter-action by the authorities assuming they are still functioning.
Sunday morning rumination completed. |
