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: sense who wrote (169755)	3/21/2021 9:24:16 PM
From: Rarebird	Respond to of 217671

Very well put. China is using capitalism as a means to an end, not as an end in itself, which is what the conservatives advocate in the USA. That is what I meant in spirit when I said China was going through a capitalist phase. I am more eclectic in spirit, incorporating themes from the liberal, progressive, Democratic Socialistic and even conservative ideologies. I do think when you push capitalism to the limit as the conservatives have done in the US, you get the disintegration of capitalism and individual freedom. Capitalism primarily benefits those with capital and the brains to employ that capital successfully. The worker for the most part gets the shaft and is used as a tool for the sake of profit. Those making 100K a year working for a company are making the company double or triple that amount or they are not worth their salary and will get fired. I understood this at a very young age and took a vow never to degrade myself and work for a corporation. In progressive terms, I am a petite bougeoise who has for the most part eliminated the middle man. Pure capitalism brings about massive income inequality and the law of greed. Is greed really necessary to produce innovation and life changing technology? Do internists have to earn 300K a year to bring the best minds into the profession? I think not. There are plenty of Asians in the USA who love medicine in its own right for the sake of helping others to cure their illness without the massive monetary benefit. NYU now accepts students to its medical school for free. Pure capitalism ends up destroying opportunity for most. Many have done well because they have detached themselves for the most part from the System.

To: sense who wrote (169755)	3/22/2021 4:05:59 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217671

China may just be reverting to the Tang or Ming dynasty but minus a hard-heredity-based governance system. These constructs are not about communism or capitalism or any other -ism, but on what proves to work and do more of that which proves to work, black or white cats, as long as good mouser, and such is not typically doable in any system, i.e. India, where anyone can champion anything and jam up the works. In some sense the China system is quite a bit more transparent than many systems, with discussion and announcement of plans, and mobilisation for implementation by all concerned, as opposed to no plan. No plan works for the free spirit on own without care or responsibility. Typically not for nation states and certainly not for civilisation states. All discussions re the shortcomings of the China system, especially when prefaced with the word '-ism', be suspect China is not about -isms. The problem USA has with China is less with -isms, because China does not export -isms, unlike the USSR. The issue USA has with China might be because China is starting to work, and as Napoleon intoned, "shall shake the world". What happened in Alaska was that China notified the USA that China does not care what the USA thinks. I often-enough read in Foreign Affairs and in many journals about how China due to systemic issues shall fail, to which I think, well, if that is so sure, than no reason for the writer to worry about China. The apparent zig and zag in China, from centralised to decentralised and back to ... is a feature, and a necessary one, and one exhibited overtime in all societies. The difference is that in China the zigs are called for and the zags are hailed, as the situation demands. China has been on war footing since declaration of war against China circa 2018, and wars call for centralisation. Above be my guesses based on more guesses and some observables and a smattering of history interpreted by more guesses. However, systemically, yes, decentralised systems are or should be robust, or more robust, and I trust the folks in charge realise the same, and at least they say they do.

To: sense who wrote (169755)	3/22/2021 4:14:59 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217671

Here is a centralised system, and an unelected one at that, that might first cause one sort of issues, followed by another type, and none of any issues would have much to do w/ -isms. Decentralised response, even if tee-ed up rapidly, might afford chance of sailing through. Panic is one of those rapidly tee-ed up decentralised responses where all run in different directions so that some directions might turn out okay. zerohedge.com Biggest Squeeze Since 2014 Sends Hedge Funds Long The Dollar For First Time Since Last July Entering 2021, one of the top consensus trades was to be short the dollar because it was common knowledge that the Fed would be injecting liquidity as far as the eye can see, far beyond the ability of any other central bank to match it, while covid still remained a looming threat to the economy. However just a few months later, with over 3 million Americans vaccinated daily putting covid in the rearview mirror and amid a burst of volatility and rising inflation expectations which sent both rate and risk vol surging... [url=][/url] ... being short the USD became a risky proposition, especially in the aftermath of the massive running short squeezes across various assets, from low-float meme stocks such as GME to silver which threatened to hammer shorts in what was one of the biggest consensus shorts in the world. So perhaps it was the recent surge in the dollar, or perhaps it was just fear of continued market turmoil, but whatever the reason, In the week ending March 16, the squeeze in the dollar accelerated and non-commercial traders purchased a net $10.3Bn USD,after purchasing $5.6Bn net in the USD in the week priod. According to Goldman, this is the largest amount of net USD purchases over a week by non-commercial traders since June 2018, with leveraged funds driving the net purchases, turning net long USD while asset managers - who usually take the other side of non-commercial specs - extended Dollar shorts. [url=][/url] A separate analysis of the CFTC COT data by ANZ's Khoon Goh finds an even more aggressive squeeze: he calculates that the dollar buying was worth US$7.2Bn in the past week, the most since August 2014. And so, with the DXY still struggling to break cleanly above 92, it now appears that momentum has flipped for the USD and the question is now that the short side in the dollar has capitulated, "how much do hedge funds want to pile into the long dollar bet", and just how badly will risk asset suffer if the USD surges from here.

To: sense who wrote (169755)	3/22/2021 4:24:44 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By SirWalterRalegh Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217671

I am just absorbing this chart I do not know what if anything to make of it just yet I believe the number of wealthy in China, Ultra or just regular, is under-counted, just as the wealthy are under reported in China Towns across the planet, because the reporters know the secrets of life w/r to reportees Per zerohedge.com The Top 20 Countries For Ultra-High-Net-Worth Individuals I note that - China has no old-money, for that is a consequence what to some might be satisfying systemic reset by way of rapid decentralisation followed by centralisation, but with a different crew in charge on some fateful morning All done since 1991, post TianAnMen zig, but was going too wild by 2010 and badly needed a zag or all go asunder. - India has a lot of old-money, and at some juncture likely shall experience decentralisation. - The -isms just take turns. - China, over 5-6K years, took a lot of turns. - Little HK is essentially on par with Russian and on down the list. Unsure where NYC stands, except equivalent in population, or close enough. - Provincialist Taiwan does not make the table cms.zerohedge.com

To: sense who wrote (169755)	3/22/2021 4:40:47 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217671

here is a decentralising system, as far as social media is concerned unclear the effects on robustness, time shall tell it could be a permanent election done by a capitalist who tried to tee-up national socialism by the looks back then when in charge, perhaps sensing that socialism's time has come as the electorates wanted more happiness and less capitalism scmp.com

To: sense who wrote (169755)	3/22/2021 4:52:00 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217671

China experienced a clarifying moment that was the TianAnMen event circa 1989, and the centralised governance system decided best to decentralise, rapidly, to save the governance system Hindsight says it was a wise call, to decentralise, and rapidly, to create 100K UHN individuals and their attendant HN, and N tag-alongs. Once the decentralisation got too wild, the same governance system called for centralisation and swatted flies, trapped foxes, and hunted down tigers. Hindsight says that move was also astute. Because the governance system was not wrong, all turned out, so far, okay, to better than okay. Whatever the case, the governance system was neither ossified not frozen by slogans, and got on with what needed doing, command performance, ala start to middle of both Tang and Ming dynasties, per 'just do it' Might just be a cycles thing, ala forest / prairie fires that enables new growth, but note that revolutions and gymnastic changes are not tea parties, and only okay once every so many hundred years Unclear to me if the Capitol Hill insurrection or something-happening was supposed to be a clarifying moment. If not, no problem until another no-issue something-happening takes place and give better signal, but if yes, unclear the governance construct can resolve by adjudicating 49/51 until 2022, and if not 2022, then 2024, ... etc To the external observer, the folks are debating on what it all meant edition.cnn.com Top Senate Republican says Americans don't need 'alternative versions' of January 6 Capitol attack