Economist Caution: Prepare For 'Massive Wealth Destruction'

[RDS]

Is it going to be that gloomy. Your thoughts?

Take immediate steps to protect your wealth . . . NOW!

That’s exactly what many well-respected economists, billionaires, and noted authors are telling you to do — experts such as Marc Faber, Peter Schiff, Donald Trump, and Robert Wiedemer. According to them, we are on the verge of another recession, and this one will be far worse than what we experienced during the last financial crisis.

Marc Faber, the noted Swiss economist and investor, has voiced his concerns for the U.S. economy numerous times during recent media appearances, stating, “I think somewhere down the line we will have a massive wealth destruction. I would say that well-to-do people may lose up to 50 percent of their total wealth.”

When he was asked what sort of odds he put on a global recession happening, the economist famous for his ominous predictions quickly answered . . . “100 percent.”

Faber points out that this bleak outlook stems directly from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s policy decisions, and the continuous printing of new money, referred to as “quantitative easing” in the media.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/Ma...0/id/511043/?PROMO_CODE=13EF5-1#ixzz2cteXpoNm
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

 

[imagep]

As soon as I saw names like Marc Faber and Peter Schiff in the article, I pretty much dismissed it. These are people who look for publicity to sell their books and products by promoting doom and gloom. Not much different that a publicity stunt done by any celebrity. They could care less about the accuracy of their predictions, or who they cause harm to by making outragous claims. They are only interested in benefiting themselves financially.

Howard Ruff's books were my first introduction to doom and gloom economics, about 35 years ago. There will always be people devising apocalyptic economic predictions, trying to appeal to the "dark side" of our population who thrives on negativity and fear, to make a fast buck for themselves.

 

[ttwtt78640]

As soon as I saw names like Marc Faber and Peter Schiff in the article, I pretty much dismissed it. These are people who look for publicity to sell their books and products by promoting doom and gloom. Not much different that a publicity stunt done by any celebrity. They could care less about the accuracy of their predictions, or who they cause harm to by making outragous claims. They are only interested in benefiting themselves financially.

Howard Ruff's books were my first introduction to doom and gloom economics, about 35 years ago. There will always be people devising apocalyptic economic predictions, trying to appeal to the "dark side" of our population who thrives on negativity and fear, to make a fast buck for themselves.

Yep. As with AGW, you must first sell your definition of the problem to more easily sell your solution.

 

[justabubba]

where were they six years ago?

 

[ecofarm]

Are they invested in Glen Beck gold?

The article needs a new title: "Celebrities urge: "buy gold!""


Everyone needs to buy gold immediately!
Thank you. (Sell...)

 

[Fisher]

Is it going to be that gloomy. Your thoughts?

Maybe eventually. It is kind of in inexact prediction like saying we are in the end times when every day that passes is one day closer to the end of humanity.

Some of the bigger concerns out there which you would have to google to get a better feel for rather than me trying to explain it are the potential bond bubble (as in likely bond bubble) that is being created by today's policies; the fear by some that the price to earnings ratio on stocks have become so out of kilter that some fear that the recent stock price growth cannot be maintained as it is already artificially high; and a confluence of financial problems that will happen when the global baby boomers start hitting retirement all at the same time, particularly in the US and Japan hitting about the same time China's One Child policies start coming home to roost.

It is definitely a Rocky Road in front of us, but who knows.

 

[Dittohead not!]

If you lined up all of the financial experts end to end, they'd all point in different directions.

 

[CalGun]

Actually they nailed it six years ago. They were spot on. Of course they continuously say the very same thing daily so eventually they had to nail it.

Sadly they will once again be right someday, just not today.

where were they six years ago?

 

[imagep]

If you lined up all of the financial experts end to end, they'd all point in different directions.

Which just goes to prove that no more than one of them are truly experts.

I figure if I am an expert about something, then I must possess nearly all the current knowledge about that subject, thus virtually all experts would have 99% or so of the same knowledge, and if their knowledge was basically the same, then they should pretty much be in lock step with each other. But they aren't inn lock step agreement, thus they must have very different knowledge sets, and to have such radically different sets of knowledge, then no individual one of them could be anywhere near to possessing most of the knowledge about that subject, ergo they cant be true experts.

 

[justabubba]

Actually they nailed it six years ago. They were spot on. Of course they continuously say the very same thing daily so eventually they had to nail it.

Sadly they will once again be right someday, just not today.

as i recall, the donald was out trumping up the economy immediately before the meltdown

i will acknowledge schiff not only had negative premonitions but laid them out for all to read. the donald, not so much

 

[imagep]

Actually they nailed it six years ago. They were spot on. Of course they continuously say the very same thing daily so eventually they had to nail it.

Sadly they will once again be right someday, just not today.

Schiff predicted for years that "hyper inflation is just around the corner" at first is was "within six months", then it was "within a year or two", then it became "no later than the end of 2012". Last time I saw him discuss inflation, he backtracked and said that he wasn't really talking about hyper inflation, that he meant "rampant inflation", and he then "proved" that it had happened by cherry picking a few individual items (after the fact), and creating his own "basket of goods" that had significantly increased in price during a specific time span.

 

[Fisher]

as i recall, the donald was out trumping up the economy immediately before the meltdown

i will acknowledge schiff not only had negative premonitions but laid them out for all to read. the donald, not so much

The Donald has a lot of real estate to move. You will probably never hear him say, "Yeah you shouldn't be buying real estate right now."

 

[justabubba]

The Donald has a lot of real estate to move. You will probably never hear him say, "Yeah you shouldn't be buying real estate right now."

but he was one of the characters cited in the OP as having the expertise to warn us about the impending implosion of the economy
the donald, being cited as an expert about anything other than being an 'entitled' asshole ... now THAT's rich

 

[Dittohead not!]

Which just goes to prove that no more than one of them are truly experts.

I figure if I am an expert about something, then I must possess nearly all the current knowledge about that subject, thus virtually all experts would have 99% or so of the same knowledge, and if their knowledge was basically the same, then they should pretty much be in lock step with each other. But they aren't inn lock step agreement, thus they must have very different knowledge sets, and to have such radically different sets of knowledge, then no individual one of them could be anywhere near to possessing most of the knowledge about that subject, ergo they cant be true experts.

Yes.

I should have put "experts" in quotes.

 

[mbig]

Yep. As with AGW, you must first sell your definition of the problem to more easily sell your solution.

Terrible analogy.
Schiff, Faber, etc., are the 'Doom and gloom" Extreme.. AGW is a scientist/published-paper Justified Overwhelming Majority/95% Opinion.
In fact, your analogy is so bad it's Opposite of the truth.
It's the Climate Deniers/Warming denier fringe who are truly comparable with the Schiff/Faber.

To some, EVERY string/Every section is just another opportunity for Partisan Hackery points.
Now it's justifiably backfired.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Terrible analogy.
Schiff, Faber, etc., are the 'Doom and gloom" Extreme.. AGW is a scientist/published-paper Justified Overwhelming Majority/95% Opinion.
In fact, your analogy is so bad it's Opposite of the truth.
It's the Climate Deniers/Warming denier fringe who are truly comparable with the Schiff/Faber.

To some, EVERY string/Every section is just another opportunity for Partisan Hackery points.
Here it justifiably backfired.

OK, say that we agree with the conclusion that the "world" is warming and that man has a hand in that trend. Just what is likely going to change that?

 

[mbig]

OK, say that we agree with the conclusion that the "world" is warming and that man has a hand in that trend. Just what is likely going to change that?

At this point; probably nothing IMO.
We've waited too long. Even if we were to cap CO2/CH4 emissions at yr 2000 (or even 1990) levels it would still be too little/too late, if helpful in the longer term; (2100 out).
Greenhouse gas concentration (and warming) has/have been rising since the Industrial revolution started.

What could we do to mitigate?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/envir...165359-question-warmers-8.html#post1062017838
USA CO2 emissions are already dropping very significantly due to substitution of NG for Coal. (!)
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...al-gas-promote-independence-pickens-says.html

and I assume by the preface of your question you've come off comparing Mainstream AGW with Fringers Schiff/Faber etc.
PS: I kinda like Faber, author of the 'gloom and doom' report. Schiff also seems smart but really Whacked.

 

[Dittohead not!]

OK, say that we agree with the conclusion that the "world" is warming and that man has a hand in that trend. Just what is likely going to change that?

Nothing will change that.
The only change would be on this forum: No more absurd "scientists are all wet" sorts of threads.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Nothing will change that.
The only change would be on this forum: No more absurd "scientists are all wet" sorts of threads.

I guess that my real point is of the stated two problems, the state of the U.S. economy and the state of global climate change which is more likely to be solved by making U.S. policy changes?

 

[CalGun]

No different then Barney Frank telling everyone there were no concerns about freds and fannie a month or two before they needed like 180 billion.

as i recall, the donald was out trumping up the economy immediately before the meltdown

i will acknowledge schiff not only had negative premonitions but laid them out for all to read. the donald, not so much

 

[head of joaquin]

I guess that my real point is of the stated two problems, the state of the U.S. economy and the state of global climate change which is more likely to be solved by making U.S. policy changes?

The defeatism of libertarianism is always telling. The idea that you study a problem, gather actual facts, and propose rational solutions somehow strikes them as impossible. That's why if libertarians had their way (at least the extremist types) we'd all be back in the 12th century in no time.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The defeatism of libertarianism is always telling. The idea that you study a problem, gather actual facts, and propose rational solutions somehow strikes them as impossible. That's why if libertarians had their way (at least the extremist types) we'd all be back in the 12th century in no time.

What is your favorite rational solution to AGW?

 

[justabubba]

No different then Barney Frank telling everyone there were no concerns about freds and fannie a month or two before they needed like 180 billion.

i do believe you are mistaken in that argument. but show us exactly what barney frank said and when he said it

hopefully, you do accurately remember mccain insisting the 'the fundamentals of the economy are sound' as the meltdown was beginning

 

[Fisher]

but he was one of the characters cited in the OP as having the expertise to warn us about the impending implosion of the economy
the donald, being cited as an expert about anything other than being an 'entitled' asshole ... now THAT's rich

Well the Donald is one of the few people I have seen who essentially owned up to using bankruptcy as a business financial planning scheme, so you get what you pay for :3oops:

 

[CalGun]

Democrat quotes about the health of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac | From the Right

His first ignorant comment was in 03 when Bush attempted to regulate Fred and Fannie, and he again lauded Bush for the same effort as chair of the Fin committee in 07.

Leftist love to ignore a frank, Dodd, and RINO Graham kept the Bush admin from trying to head off the housing fiasco at least 3x in 8 years repeatedly saying "there is no crisis" just like those who think $85 billion a month in money creation for oblunders spending spree won't hurt us in the future either.

i do believe you are mistaken in that argument. but show us exactly what barney frank said and when he said it

hopefully, you do accurately remember mccain insisting the 'the fundamentals of the economy are sound' as the meltdown was beginning