John notes in his blog that he has gotten significant resistance from people as of late in his e-mails saying that he is too gloomy (edit--Now I have to eat these words because I read back through it and the last reference to any resistance is "a tiny bit of criticism" received in advance of the inauguration).Gordo wrote:There is "big picture" and then "BIG picture". You are obviously alluding to comments I have made, but I think mis-characterizing them. In the "BIG" picture - the Great Depression itself was a "minor speed bump" along the path of relentless, exponential, unending, technological improvement. So there is no reason to believe that GD2 (great depression 2.0) would be anything otherwise. Furthermore, I think there are MANY reasons to believe that GD2 will NOT be anywhere near as devastating as GD1. If you'd like to rehash those arguments I'm game...Higgenbotham wrote: What I find really ironic is that the more John logically lays out the future of economic collapse, genocidal wars, pandemics, starvation, and homelessness, and the more that actual events show this future to be taking shape, the more strongly people resist. They would rather believe that Helicopter Ben can just print more money and lead us triumphantly into the shiny new age of information, biotech, and nanotech with just a few minor speed bumps along the way.
As for little "big" picture - I've always maintained that I think the market is heading lower - I just don't think its going to go straight down. No one here knows. A 40% down year could be followed by a 30-40% up year (which is no where near recovering the previous year's losses) and then another 40% down year. Or maybe we just get 40% down years for 3 years in a row. Who knows. But one thing I do know is that the market isn't going to plunge every time earnings or this and that economic numbers are bad. The biggest rallies will start when "news" is the worst.
If you were the only one highlighting the Helicopter Ben argument it wouldn't really be notable, but that is a mainstream argument and the way I characterized it is how the mainstream does--Helicopter Ben can just create another bubble, or print money. The guys over at financialsense.com are a good example--their claim last year being that people just don't understand what the Fed can do and why deflation is impossible. Jimmy Rogers and Marc Faber are two more. Malleni would have fallen into that category and there are probably a couple dozen lurkers here who believe that too.
But of course since you are the only one here who is highlighting it, that comment does seem to be directed toward you and I would have thought that too if I had read it. When I have a direct coment on what somebody says, then I quote whatever they said, but it was an indirect comment. As far as your characterization, I would call that a significant speed bump within the lifetime of an individual and was aware of your stance on that.
Most people that I know are still expecting minor speed bumps within their lifetimes, are still invested in stocks for the long run, are foaming at the mouth over the inauguration and prospects for the reincarnation of FDR in a much better form, and so on. The few people I have pointed to this site will not read it. When I echo something that can be read here, I am usually treated like a lunatic.
