URGENT UPDATE:
I recently went to all cash and US "Junk" or low numismatic value high silver value (Pre 1964 90% Silver USA Coins) and a nice collection of proof and mint state sets. Idea is to be in cash to take advantage of special opps when the real SHTF - a really big fan that spreads the you know what all over the place.
Greece has done it - it has shuttered its banks and told its citizens to live on $67 a day from ATMs... I am astounded that Greek people actually still keep their cash in Greecian Banks and have not hoarded bug out bag stashes of Euros, Swiss Francs and GBP and even Dollars at home buried in plastic cash stash containers.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/recessi...eid=yhoof2
Yes, the clock’s ticking louder, louder, warns the Economist, “only a matter of time before the next recession strikes.” Unfortunately, the “rich world is not ready.” America’s not prepared. You are not ready.
Get it? America’s 95 million investors are at huge risk. Remember the $10 trillion losses in the crash and recession of 2007-2009? The $8 trillion lost after the dot-com technology crash and recession of 2000-2003? This is the third big recession of the century. Yes, America will lose trillions again.
Especially with dead-ahead predictions like Mark Cook’s 4,000-point Dow correction. And Jeremy Grantham’s warning of a 50% crash around election time, with negative stock returns through the first term of the next president, beyond 2020. Starting soon.
Why is America so vulnerable when the next recession hits? Simple: The Fed’s cheap-money giveaway is killing America. When the downturn, correction, crash hits, it will compare to the 2008 crash. The Economist warns: “the world will be in a rotten position to do much about it. Rarely have so many large economies been so ill-equipped to manage a recession,” whatever the trigger.
And;
RMM's MS or Monetary Sovereignty blog recession countdown charts at the bottom of every blog post
http://mythfighter.com/2015/02/02/canada...t-the-u-s/
The charts at the bottom show that the Recession clock is about to strike and a crash (above) is likely 50% or greater...
And;
Putins new Hiroshima/Nagasaki strategy revisted - that local tactical nukes can de-escalate a regional conflict by forcing instant and unconditional surrender (of Ukraine, Belorus, Uzbekistan, Dagestan, Afghanistan, Georgia etc...)
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/42...timidation
Putin has taken a page from Nazi Germany’s playbook of the 1930s and early 1940s. He claims responsibility for ethnic Russian minorities in neighboring countries. We saw this gambit in Russia’s war against Georgia in 2008, in the military occupation of Crimea in 2014, and in its ongoing military operations in Eastern Ukraine. “Ethnic cleansing” and “Russification” of key areas have followed some of these military operations. But Putin has what Hitler lacked: nuclear weapons. With these, he attempts to pressure neighboring states to timidly accept Moscow’s desires, including the redrawing of European borders and “Russification.” Russia now wields nuclear weapons and threats not only to protect its territory but also to intimidate and coerce its neighbors into submission.
Moscow’s crude nuclear threats to its neighbors, including American allies, vividly demonstrate its aggressive nuclear strategy. Those threats are intended to stoke such fear in the U.S. and its allies that all will hesitate to respond strongly to Russian military aggression. For Putin, the fruits of this grand strategy include approval ratings within Russia that are the envy of the world: 89 percent. In short, Russia’s strategy is now one of nuclear coercion, not stable mutual deterrence. How far Putin will push this strategy remains an open question, but recent history does not suggest a comforting answer. As Secretary of Defense Ash Carter observed in a speech to American allies this month: “Moscow’s nuclear sabre-rattling raises questions about Russia’s commitment to strategic stability and causes us . . . to wonder whether . . . they share the profound caution . . . that world leaders in the nuclear age have shown over decades to the brandishing of nuclear weapons.” Precisely so, which is why Russia’s nuclear policies are now so dangerous.
Claims that Russia, or any rational country, could use nuclear weapons and strategy in this manner — that they are not merely Cold War relics — continue to be dismissed in most Western quarters as the musings of Cold Warriors. The dangerous reality, however, has been obvious for several years. As the U.S. National Intelligence Council observed in 2012: Nuclear ambitions in the U.S. and Russia over the last 20 years have evolved in opposite directions. Reducing the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security strategy is a U.S. objective, while Russia is pursuing new concepts and capabilities for expanding the role of nuclear weapons in its security strategy. The evidence since 2012 is that Putin’s nuclear moves are becoming even more dangerous, including a reported doctrinal innovation that ironically envisions Russia’s first use of nuclear weapons as a form of nuclear “de-escalation” — that is, if Russia uses nuclear weapons in a local conflict, opponents will cease resistance, thus de-escalating the crisis. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work rightfully stated this month in open testimony before Congress that with this doctrinal innovation, Russia “is literally playing with fire.” These are not Cold War musings; they are a description of contemporary reality.
I recently went to all cash and US "Junk" or low numismatic value high silver value (Pre 1964 90% Silver USA Coins) and a nice collection of proof and mint state sets. Idea is to be in cash to take advantage of special opps when the real SHTF - a really big fan that spreads the you know what all over the place.
Greece has done it - it has shuttered its banks and told its citizens to live on $67 a day from ATMs... I am astounded that Greek people actually still keep their cash in Greecian Banks and have not hoarded bug out bag stashes of Euros, Swiss Francs and GBP and even Dollars at home buried in plastic cash stash containers.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/recessi...eid=yhoof2
Yes, the clock’s ticking louder, louder, warns the Economist, “only a matter of time before the next recession strikes.” Unfortunately, the “rich world is not ready.” America’s not prepared. You are not ready.
Get it? America’s 95 million investors are at huge risk. Remember the $10 trillion losses in the crash and recession of 2007-2009? The $8 trillion lost after the dot-com technology crash and recession of 2000-2003? This is the third big recession of the century. Yes, America will lose trillions again.
Especially with dead-ahead predictions like Mark Cook’s 4,000-point Dow correction. And Jeremy Grantham’s warning of a 50% crash around election time, with negative stock returns through the first term of the next president, beyond 2020. Starting soon.
Why is America so vulnerable when the next recession hits? Simple: The Fed’s cheap-money giveaway is killing America. When the downturn, correction, crash hits, it will compare to the 2008 crash. The Economist warns: “the world will be in a rotten position to do much about it. Rarely have so many large economies been so ill-equipped to manage a recession,” whatever the trigger.
And;
RMM's MS or Monetary Sovereignty blog recession countdown charts at the bottom of every blog post
http://mythfighter.com/2015/02/02/canada...t-the-u-s/
The charts at the bottom show that the Recession clock is about to strike and a crash (above) is likely 50% or greater...
And;
Putins new Hiroshima/Nagasaki strategy revisted - that local tactical nukes can de-escalate a regional conflict by forcing instant and unconditional surrender (of Ukraine, Belorus, Uzbekistan, Dagestan, Afghanistan, Georgia etc...)
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/42...timidation
Putin has taken a page from Nazi Germany’s playbook of the 1930s and early 1940s. He claims responsibility for ethnic Russian minorities in neighboring countries. We saw this gambit in Russia’s war against Georgia in 2008, in the military occupation of Crimea in 2014, and in its ongoing military operations in Eastern Ukraine. “Ethnic cleansing” and “Russification” of key areas have followed some of these military operations. But Putin has what Hitler lacked: nuclear weapons. With these, he attempts to pressure neighboring states to timidly accept Moscow’s desires, including the redrawing of European borders and “Russification.” Russia now wields nuclear weapons and threats not only to protect its territory but also to intimidate and coerce its neighbors into submission.
Moscow’s crude nuclear threats to its neighbors, including American allies, vividly demonstrate its aggressive nuclear strategy. Those threats are intended to stoke such fear in the U.S. and its allies that all will hesitate to respond strongly to Russian military aggression. For Putin, the fruits of this grand strategy include approval ratings within Russia that are the envy of the world: 89 percent. In short, Russia’s strategy is now one of nuclear coercion, not stable mutual deterrence. How far Putin will push this strategy remains an open question, but recent history does not suggest a comforting answer. As Secretary of Defense Ash Carter observed in a speech to American allies this month: “Moscow’s nuclear sabre-rattling raises questions about Russia’s commitment to strategic stability and causes us . . . to wonder whether . . . they share the profound caution . . . that world leaders in the nuclear age have shown over decades to the brandishing of nuclear weapons.” Precisely so, which is why Russia’s nuclear policies are now so dangerous.
Claims that Russia, or any rational country, could use nuclear weapons and strategy in this manner — that they are not merely Cold War relics — continue to be dismissed in most Western quarters as the musings of Cold Warriors. The dangerous reality, however, has been obvious for several years. As the U.S. National Intelligence Council observed in 2012: Nuclear ambitions in the U.S. and Russia over the last 20 years have evolved in opposite directions. Reducing the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security strategy is a U.S. objective, while Russia is pursuing new concepts and capabilities for expanding the role of nuclear weapons in its security strategy. The evidence since 2012 is that Putin’s nuclear moves are becoming even more dangerous, including a reported doctrinal innovation that ironically envisions Russia’s first use of nuclear weapons as a form of nuclear “de-escalation” — that is, if Russia uses nuclear weapons in a local conflict, opponents will cease resistance, thus de-escalating the crisis. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work rightfully stated this month in open testimony before Congress that with this doctrinal innovation, Russia “is literally playing with fire.” These are not Cold War musings; they are a description of contemporary reality.
