Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

John and Higgy,

Long time reader and lurker. Interested in financial advice. I understand nobody here is a "financial advisor".

Suppose you are working for a company that has a good 401k match - what would you do? Contribute nothing?

Invest in companies that will be producing in a crisis war against China?

I understand GD theory and that the DOW will fall to 3000 and stay there for years.

Maybe investing in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, etc is better than doing nothing? Or is it not even worth thinking about knowing every nuke will be launched? Would the money be better spent in preps?

I'm a millennial and following GD has given me the mindset "If you can't hold it you don't own it"

tim wrote: > Long time reader and lurker. Interested in financial advice. I
> understand nobody here is a "financial advisor". Suppose you are
> working for a company that has a good 401k match - what would you
> do? Contribute nothing? Invest in companies that will be
> producing in a crisis war against China? I understand GD theory
> and that the DOW will fall to 3000 and stay there for years.
> Maybe investing in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, etc is better than
> doing nothing? Or is it not even worth thinking about knowing
> every nuke will be launched? Would the money be better spent in
> preps? I'm a millennial and following GD has given me the mindset
> "If you can't hold it you don't own it"

As you say, I'm not a financial adviser, but what I personally would
do is take the option where all your money is invested in US Treasury
bonds.

tim wrote:John and Higgy,

Long time reader and lurker. Interested in financial advice. I understand nobody here is a "financial advisor".

Suppose you are working for a company that has a good 401k match - what would you do? Contribute nothing?

Invest in companies that will be producing in a crisis war against China?

I understand GD theory and that the DOW will fall to 3000 and stay there for years.

Maybe investing in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, etc is better than doing nothing? Or is it not even worth thinking about knowing every nuke will be launched? Would the money be better spent in preps?

I'm a millennial and following GD has given me the mindset "If you can't hold it you don't own it"

Based on the information you provided, since you are young (presumably wouldn't have a lot of money to invest) and you think a nuclear war is probable, I would suggest you first "invest in yourself" and your survival. One idea for consideration in that regard is to set yourself up to be able to get to a safe haven outside the US. A couple countries that come to mind are Chile and Namibia. One way to do that would be to try to meet a woman in a country you determine to be a safe haven who has a reputable and well connected family. Know how you are going to get to her family's home within 24 hours and have the money set aside to do that, your bags packed and an idea of what news would make you ready to act.

Regarding your question about your 401K, unless you have a keen interest in investing, I would invest in it and take the company match.

I'm answering this based on the information you provided. My answer might be completely different given another set of facts.

Recently heard arguments against bitcoin because it is owned by ~90% males. Left is probably realizing it is a threat to its governmental power and now is going to start politicizing it. Sure has been booming lately.....

tim wrote:Maybe investing in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, etc is better than doing nothing?

At Amazon Web Services you will progress your career while working with the brightest technical minds.
Interested in working for a commercial company and supporting the US Intelligence community?
AWS is hiring Data Center Engineers and Technicians for our Washington, DC; Columbus, OH; Denver, CO; and Seattle, WA locations. These IT roles require the ability to obtain and maintain a US Government Security Clearance.

https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/datacenter

This has been under the radar for some time, but I suspect that one of the biggest defense companies right now is Amazon and I also suspect this directly relates to an effort to prepare for war.

I wouldn't advise somebody to invest in Amazon but there are other ways to invest in the coming data center build-out.

Amazon Plans Epic Data Center Expansion in Northern Virginia
BY RICH MILLER - NOVEMBER 6, 2017

Amazon Web Services continued its massive expansion this year, as reflected in these new facilities in Virginia. (Photo: Rich Miller)

Amazon’s development ambitions are described in SEC filings from Corporate Office Properties Trust (COPT), which has been AWS’ primary data center developer in Northern Virginia. COPT is selling stock to fund the construction of up to 11 new data centers in Northern Virginia in 2018 and 2019. The developer laid out a schedule that would bring 1.9 million square feet of capacity online for AWS in an eight-month period from Oct. 2018 through June 2019.

https://datacenterfrontier.com/amazon-p ... -virginia/

You don't hear much about this, but there are companies that supply equipment to these data centers, and you don't hear much about these suppliers either.

tim wrote: > Long time reader and lurker. Interested in financial advice. I
> understand nobody here is a "financial advisor". Suppose you are
> working for a company that has a good 401k match - what would you
> do? Contribute nothing? Invest in companies that will be
> producing in a crisis war against China? I understand GD theory
> and that the DOW will fall to 3000 and stay there for years.
> Maybe investing in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, etc is better than
> doing nothing? Or is it not even worth thinking about knowing
> every nuke will be launched? Would the money be better spent in
> preps? I'm a millennial and following GD has given me the mindset
> "If you can't hold it you don't own it"

Higgenbotham wrote: > Based on the information you provided, since you are young
> (presumably wouldn't have a lot of money to invest) and you think
> a nuclear war is probable, I would suggest you first "invest in
> yourself" and your survival. One idea for consideration in that
> regard is to set yourself up to be able to get to a safe haven
> outside the US. A couple countries that come to mind are Chile and
> Namibia. One way to do that would be to try to meet a woman in a
> country you determine to be a safe haven who has a reputable and
> well connected family. Know how you are going to get to her
> family's home within 24 hours and have the money set aside to do
> that, your bags packed and an idea of what news would make you
> ready to act.

Really? That's your advice?? Go meet a rich girl in Chile or Namibia
and move in with her?

Last month in another thread, "psCargile" said, "Time to move to
southern Chile."

My response was: Watch out! Like South Africa and Singapore, southern
Chile is likely to be an important crossroad, and may be occupied by
someone's navy.

John wrote: Really? That's your advice?? Go meet a rich girl in Chile or Namibia
and move in with her?

Last month in another thread, "psCargile" said, "Time to move to
southern Chile."

My response was: Watch out! Like South Africa and Singapore, southern
Chile is likely to be an important crossroad, and may be occupied by
someone's navy.

"rich"
A girl whose family is reputable and well connected. Example - I saw a situation outside the US where the daughter of a politician was at an ATM and handed a large bag of money to another woman. I asked the woman who was in possession of the money why she had been given the money. She said she was going to take it home for safe keeping. She said the politician's daughter trusted her family. While the woman in possession of the money was not rich, she and her family were reputable and well connected.

"Chile or Namibia"
The assumption in my response is that a person considering such an option is operating on the belief that there will be an all out nuclear war. In that case, Chile and Namibia are countries to consider as safe havens and far better than being in the US when the nukes hit. I prefer Namibia over South Africa (and Chile actually, though my reasons for that are different than yours) but under this scenario South Africa would surely be better than the US. There are drawbacks with every country, but I picked 2 countries that I think have fewer drawbacks for a typical US based Millennial male than most others and that are less obvious choices than those many cite.

The general idea of my post is that a young US based male has many options to open his mind to if he believes an all out nuclear war will happen and he wants to survive it. Another option would be to join the Peace Corps and take the longest stint in Namibia that he can get. I hadn't thought of that option but I think it's a great option. Then that opens the door to a job or the original option posted.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201801050394.html


5 January 2018

Namibia Among '22 Hot Destinations' During 2018

Windhoek — Namibia is among the Bloomberg's "22 destinations that will
be especially hot this year" and recommended during 2018. The others
are St. Kitts, Jordan, Dundee Scotland, Georgia, Cambodia, Chilean
Patagonia, Abu Dhabi, Borneo, Singapore, Slovenia, Los Angeles,
Florence, Fiji, South Korea, Salvador in Brazil, Washington in USA,
Los Cabos of Mexico, New Orleans in USA, Southern Tanzania,
Copenhagen, and Tunisia.

Editors for Bloomberg Pursuits, in a piece published on 2 January,
recommend that visitors to Namibia consider going in the period
starting "from June to October, [when] game viewing around Namibia's
waterholes is some of the best in Africa".

"There's more to Namibia than the otherworldly dunes of Sossusvlei or
the scorched plains of Deadvlei you've seen in National Geographic.
But with little tourism infrastructure in this vast, final frontier of
Africa, it's been difficult until now to see it all," editors Nikki
Ekstein, James Gaddy, Justin Ocean, and Chris Rovzar wrote.

"Plenty of cities are always worth a visit. But when destinations are
in the midst of an evolution--bursting with new, standard-setting
hotels and restaurants, or chock-full of new cultural attractions--you
can expect a spark of electricity in the air," wrote the editors. "The
alchemy of being in the right place at the right time is exactly what
transforms a good vacation into a great one. You've got the vacation
days. Here's how to use them," they wrote.

These are some of the country write-ups: ...

Chilean Patagonia: Antarctica may get all the attention, but the
southern Patagonian ice fields are gradually melting, too. Luckily,
there are several new avenues for travellers who want to get there
sooner rather than later. On the shores of Lake Llanquihue is Hotel
Awa -- a marvel of concrete and glass that adds to the country's
collection of remote, contemporary luxury hotels. It makes a great
home base for fly fishing, hikes up snow-capped Osorno volcano, and
authentic cultural encounters with indigenous communities. ...

My reasons for mentioning Namibia are:

1. Relatively unknown.
2. Low population.
3. Relatively clean and orderly capital city.
4. No oil to fight over (unlike Angola, for example).
5. Southern hemisphere location.

I became aware of Namibia because Windhoek was the first city in the world to purify sewage for use as drinking water.

I haven't looked into this in any detail.

Swakopmund Namibia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EG8THEeQHy8