Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Box-By-The-Riviera™ who wrote (103679)	11/14/2013 4:24:14 PM
From: TobagoJack	2 Recommendations Recommended By dsv dvdw© Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

Watch n brief on the great taking ... The next crash is too much of an anticipated event, and the anticipatory seem convicted as to the ways & means of the lead up, i.e. high pricing and w/d of QE It is unclear to me which part of the fed's simple policy people fail to understand / appreciate, that prices shall not fall, employment must rise, and the fed is prepared to monetize every instrument of collateral, and all at cost of zero. Interesting experiment, let us watch. In the meantime, am wondering if this below is correct. If so, then the taking just got enhanced, from those expecting to inherit from others 55 and over as they obamacare medicate and then die ... http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/ Medicare is Seizing Estates of anyone over 55. Posted on November 13, 2013 by Martin Armstrong Submitted by Glen Downs: “So here’s the deal: since 1993 there has been a federal law requiring states to recover at least some of the costs of Medicaid-covered medical care for anyone 55 years old and up, from the estates of those covered. States enforce this law, with their own laws and policies added in, differently in every state. But the general principle is there. Up until now the usual consequence has been things like this: Medicaid puts a lien on the house of someone in a nursing facility who has run out of money, and after they die, the heirs find they have to buy the house back from the state if they want it. We haven’t had lots of people younger than 65 on Medicaid, because in most states simply earning less than the Federal Poverty Level did not qualify one for Medicaid. And we haven’t had many people with lots of assets on Medicaid, because in most places you have to have less than around $2400 to your name before Medicaid will cover you. You can keep your house and your car, but Medicaid reserves the right to put liens on them and take them when you die. But now we have the Affordable Care Act, and its expectation that everyone in the lower tier of income will end up in the Medicaid system. To accomplish this, they have dropped the asset test. So now we will have lots of people ages 55-64, who have assets but not a lot of income right now, for whatever reason, on Medicaid. The kicker of it is, if you make the right amount to qualify for a subsidized health insurance plan, your costs are going to be shared and subsidized by the government. But if you go on Medicaid, you owe the entire amount that Medicaid spends on you from the day you turn 55.”

To: Box-By-The-Riviera™ who wrote (103679)	11/14/2013 4:38:42 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

.

To: Box-By-The-Riviera™ who wrote (103679)	11/14/2013 4:39:32 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217764

We may well hyper inflate if the fed is in truth absolutely intent on preventing deflation, before we inevitable deflate in nominal terms unless a monetary reset is tee-up and new currency unveiled. Else we be savaged by diaper deflation then be saved by hyper inflation. On average, I anticipate 75-80% of all current convicted capital holders to be wiped out. first 50% by getting the sequence of destruction wrong (diaper followed by hyper, vs hyper preceding diaper), and the next 20% by overstaying at the victory line of getting the first round correct. The final 5-10% gets smeared across the windshield by not watching the regulatory backside and would be knifed in the back at the point of destination we know as final victory point. This is the point where some additional % would overstay and fail to recommit to the arena on good time, and where others would emerge into the arena too early and be ambushed. Much to look forward to ...