digg

Join DiggAbout

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

CNN Money: Williams Admits Great Depression Coming watch!

liveleak.com — Get ready for the price of gold to soar after this type of story in mainstream! John Williams discusses a coming financial depression. Explore these articles: FDIC Girds For Bank Failures & The FDIC Will Seek to Rehire 25 of It's Own Retired Members, Many of Whom Specialized in Bank Closings. http://www.thestreet.com/print

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -43/+159Count to ten and the Digg trolls will be here trying to say that anybody who doesn't think everything will be just fine is stupid. LOL

    Great video.
    • Jimbob200, on 03/02/2008, -42/+7I think you're a troll.

      A depression is coming. I've seen it in the Force.
      • bradbaxter, on 03/02/2008, -3/+17Headline should read "predicts" rather than "admits".
      • omnis, on 03/02/2008, -4/+2Good point.
      • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2This is on top of the headline.
        "Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
        Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate."
        Sarcasm
    • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -14/+28Its not the end of the world either. I love the fact that many digger hate CNN but also seem to agree with a negative piece, and it might not happen. our government has overspent but us Americans have also we are spoiled rotten. If we do have a deep depression it will not kill people like war does, and we will work our way out of it our grandparents did it before. we have had it good so far, my 43 years have been great. so if i have to sacrifice some things, I'm, way up on what this country has given me and what I've given back.
      PS are you saying people that disagree with you are trolls? why do i have feeling if i look through your comments(i haven't) you might do your fair share of trolling. peace!
      • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -12/+7No. I am referring to those who literally say that those who don't agree with them are spammers and stupid.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -3/+5OK, I got you now, I'm agreeing with you,Shh but don't tell anyone I still might be a little stupid.
        • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -5/+5LOL Disagreement and discussion is fine. I only refer to the ones that cry "spam" and "paultards" whenever they see an article like this. Most articles that make the front page are Obama related. There is no such thing as "Ron Paul Spam" on the front page of Digg.
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -3/+3I try to keep it level, because today we might totally disagree on something and tomorrow totally agree. And even losing a good argument is learning at its best. But hey I've also done my share of trolling over the years because sometimes you just want to be naughty , and its so easy on the Internet.
          • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1All of us have trolled one time or another. :)
      • luchid, on 03/02/2008, -4/+16So having to go though a recession because people voted for a jackass twice in a row that overspent in a pointless war and bled cash through the US' proverbial nose to pay for his corrupt corporate friends' dealings? Wow, I can't really argue with that logic.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -6/+5That's Life.
          When you're chewing on life's gristle
          Don't grumble, give a whistle
          And this'll help things turn out for the best...
          And...always look on the bright side of life...
          Always look on the light side of life.
          -Monty Python's Life of Brian-
        • DokGonzo, on 03/02/2008, -1/+8This has been happening long before the Bush presidency, hell it was happening before his fathers presidency as well. It can be argued that it all started when US started borrowing more money abroad than it could ever hope to repay. The US has been slowly slipping into this crisis for 30 years, and by the looks of it there is now no more way out. Worst case scenario - the US will have to declare bankruptcy like Argentina in 2001... The only difference is Argentina was 93 billion dollars in debt, while the US is 9.3 trillion. That's exactly 100x more. I'll let you figure out how that could affect the US and World economy.
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3At this place in time, we are not as popular in the over all picture as once.but our track record for helping other country's over the years stands alone. If America fell on hard times, Think of the ending of "its a wonderful life" Guaranteed!
          • curtisag, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1The 9.3 trillion isn't the worst of it. The primary problem is the $60 trillion in unfunded future liabilities for social security and medicare. The baby boomers are going to bankrupt this country as the young people attempt to pay for their checks and health care. Another problem is the trade deficit which is huge.
      • nycmac247, on 03/02/2008, -0/+11" Americans have also we are spoiled rotten."
        - incorrect; read Buckminster Fuller.
        Even without "socialism" there are enough natural resources to make everyone rich.
        (ex: ask yourself how much better things would be if instead of Iraq we spent the money on Public transportation and trade schools)
        • ernieoporto, on 03/02/2008, -12/+5Yeah, all that "stuff" would look great blown apart if we ignored the terrorists. Good ideas there about hiding your head in the sand. Seems like what everyone including Obama wants.
          • Waiting2awake, on 03/02/2008, -2/+3Have you always been a coward? Tell me why do you suppose people get to the point taking action? Heck - you have been anally raped for the last 7 years and I have yet to see Americans stand up to America....

            That isn't a fair comparison though - see you have been indoctrinated by the US propaganda machine - and they have not. You have eyes, but do not see.
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1No Comment.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -2/+3You really need to read from someone else that we are not spoiled? why does someone else have to make that opinion for you?, we have everything and want more, How much in debt are you?
        • diggduggjoe, on 03/02/2008, -1/+1Forget public transportation. Randal O'Toole had a great piece in Cato's Letter.
          http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8868

          We need the government to just stay out of everything, except defense and money. For the money issue, the Fed must be tamed.

          The most problematic issue is the inflation due to monetary expansion. The Fed complains that they cannot work their magic like in the past. The problem is the scale of the problem is bigger than can be fixed easily. It is much like having a thimble going to over flow, so you put into a cup, but you keep the flow going, in fact you speed it up to ease the transition, soon you have a stadium about to overflow and now finding a container (bubble) to contain it is harder to come by. We are at the point that the State of Texas is going to overflow and the Fed cannot build a bigger bubble fast enough. The Fed and it's easy credit fix to every economic burp, is a huge part of the problem.
      • lhbaker, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1I'm 44. So what? My kids are 3 and 8.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -2/+1Excuse me but i was speaking for myself, I don't know your situation so maybe you should figure your question out for yourself. and i hope you don't think that you having two kids makes you unique of different from millions of other people with kids. I have a five year old boy. "I'm 44. So what? My kids are 3 and 8." I bet your two kids ask better questions than that , I know my five year old does.
      • hayden.evans, on 03/02/2008, -3/+3Weren't we pulled out of depression by WWII?
    • Khannea, on 03/02/2008, -28/+11I am praying to the old gods that this will wreck the US. The US has totally destroyed all remaining goodwill with 7 years of the bush retard.
      • alk509, on 03/02/2008, -4/+16I'm praying to the old gods that you get stricken by uncontrollable coughing and explosive diarrhea on the same day.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -3/+1No need to pray, Just call Tom.
        • ratnacage, on 03/02/2008, -4/+1Im praying to the God of Ninjas that you ge
      • nVious, on 03/03/2008, -0/+0Yes lets all hope that us Americans suffer great money loses and starve to death. Did you even ***** think about what you said. You just said you want people to be in misery you *****. Your not better then the Islamic extremist, ***** you.
    • someuser90, on 03/02/2008, -13/+33The next president will get the blame for the current president's legacy. Clinton left Bush a booming economy, Bush leaves a depression.
      • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -4/+8I wont, will you?
        • Waiting2awake, on 03/02/2008, -2/+3 You won't blame this Admin? Why in gods name wouldn't you after all that has been seen? From fixing evidence to start illegal wars, to possibly fixing elections(Given what we know about the evidence today, can anyone say "he wouldn't do that" in regards to the election as was the mantra when that was discussion du jour?), to listening in on your phone conversations to secret prisons - and torture, lets not forget torture - which was only allowed because they ignored international treaties signed in good faith.....

          But I am all ears, if I understood you correctly - Why don't you blame this admin again?
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Dude I'm replying to, someuser90 statement and we are at digg.com.
      • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -8/+13Similar situation at the end of Bush Senior tenure. The country was already rebounding from the economic doldrums of the early 90's. Clinton got the credit.
        • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -2/+1Didn't Reagan get credit for that?
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1I'm not saying its true, but the GOP believes it is!
            http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/REAGANOMICS.HTM
          • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Regan preceded Bush Senior. The economy started slowing shortly after the Gulf War. Remember "It's The Economy Stupid"?

            Clinton won the election, by which time the economy had already started rebounding.
          • mal1964, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1"The economy started slowing shortly after the Gulf War." Yes but I'm not selling it, My stupid economy car might be slow starting but it always starts.Nice try though.
      • pyronik, on 03/02/2008, -18/+32bush inherited a recession, instituted tax cuts... economy flourished... the only reason its not doing so hot now is the credit crunch... not exactly bush's fault but then again this is Digg so u can basically say anything positive about liberals and socialist, and negative about bush and conservatives and its heralded as a nugget of wisdom passed on by god
        • RobotChicken1, on 03/07/2008, -1/+2I wouldn't really call it a booming economy or a recession - it was more like just kind of your average run of the mill economy, as if to say "Well I mean it's alright, could be better, though."
        • nevesis, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3Bush band-aided an economy, letting the wound enlarge and bleed, until he was out of band-aids.
          • Waiting2awake, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2 If you had Bush selling the blood siphoned from the wound, you'd be closure to the truth IMO.
        • pyronik, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Would you like to expand on the "band aide" argument? what do u mean by "out of band aides" .. if by band aides you mean this economic stimulus package, then I would agree with you its a horrible idea. But if you mean lowering taxes, thats not a temporary fix that can be a make or break change for a lot of businesses. I mean really if you could back your argument up with solid economic theory or anything relevant to economics than rhetorical metaphors that would be a start
        • SpacePoet, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Tax cuts are tax cuts for the wealthy. You can bet your ass that when he says tax cuts, you will be spending more in the end. Why couldn't he just let it be. It was pathetic and see through back then, in fact I thought the $300 tax break was hilarious, he got 10 fold back out of us. I would of rather gas stayed at 1.50 then have that $300.00 or what ever it is this time...
      • GoatMonkey2112, on 03/02/2008, -5/+13This is what is known as self-fulfilling-prophecy. When people say we're heading for recession or depression enough, it happens.
        • heypetray, on 03/02/2008, -1/+4Yes. Best to be ignorant.
          • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2Theres a big difference between being ignorant and not running around with a chicken little complex.

            Everytime the economy starts to slow, the pundits all come out declaring depression, massive social upheaval, yadda, yadda, yadda. And when things are booming they're out there yapping about a new golden age, the new economy, blah, blah, blah.

            Economists are like hipsters, they just jump on the band wagon.
      • twomeyw23334, on 03/02/2008, -6/+7I was praying once Bush left office we could finally stop hearing the endless mindless complaints but it looks like I may be wrong. How many years will have to go by before those suffering from Bush derangement syndrome will finally let go. And if Clinton deserves credit for the tech boom, is he responsible for the crash? Or because the crash happened in Bush's term is it his responsibility? I find it odd that a) you would imply the tech boom / crash was a function of the president and b) in the case of Clinton / Bush the boom / crash is purely dependent on who was in office at the time, but in the case of Bush / (future elected Democrat) you are already preparing to blame future problems on Bush.
        • SpacePoet, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Hahahha, that's rich, especially after 5+ years of 'But Clinton's, and then you put a 'but Clinton' in there, wow...
      • ScottMitchell, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1And it's a real shame, isn't it? The President has so little influence on the economy, seeing as it's driven by the millions of people who power it (consumers, business folk, etc.). And regarding governmental spending, it's Congress that controls the purse strings, not the POUSA.
    • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -6/+15Not saying that everything is rosey, but things today are much different then they were at the time of the Great Depression.

      Economics follow their own cycle regardless of who's in charge and what the pundits preach. How many of these same doom and gloom sayers were out there championing the "new economy" in the late 90's?

      Economists always predict and are rarely accurate.

      • lhbaker, on 03/02/2008, -0/+4The fact that the administration has even admitted that there is going to BE a recession is huge.
        • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Why? Recessions are part of normal business cycles. Acknowledging it is like acknowledging it's raining.

          I'd much rather have a goverment that is aware.............
          • pyronik, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1recessions are built into long term return predictions of things like the s&p500, run a regression on it, and voila you have long term forecast

            ***** like this happens, people made mistakes with the credit thing, now everyone who made bad decisions has to pay for their mistakes... its as simple as that... if you lose your home because of a bad decision, well thats your fault, don't try and get people who do pay down their mortgages to bail you out with tax payers money.
      • paganize, on 03/03/2008, -0/+0The perfect example, for me, happened tonight. I went into Wally World (yeah, yeah, I live in the sticks and it's the only place open after 6) to get Dogfood; I looked around they were stocking and changing prices, I grabbed the last 50lb bag of Ol'roy, marked at $12.87. I noticed that they were changing prices, stocker said it was being marked up to $18.87. Looking at the other similar bulk dogfoods, I could see that they were all that price or higher. I'm on SSDI and VA benefits, have 3 kids and a car payment, and this scares the hell out of me.
        • ScottMitchell, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Perhaps it's time to stop feeding the dog, and start eating it. Tough times call for tough measures.
    • CroMag, on 03/02/2008, -7/+18Count to ten and the Digg trolls will be here trying to say that anybody who doesn't think everything is apocalyptic and doomy is stupid.
      • Barbosa, on 03/02/2008, -2/+2Ten! Actually I'm pretty sure the economy will tank, but how will Gold help us if the economy tanks? Are we supposed to bang it into nifty trinkets and trade it at the local bazaar? Are we supposed to drink it/ eat it? Gold was valuable in the long ago past because people used it for something. At this point without a viable economy gold will be almost as worthless as paper.
    • 0crabby0, on 03/02/2008, -2/+3Bet that beard (Bernanke) is fake
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u2qRXb4xCU
    • merm, on 03/02/2008, -3/+16He didn't say a "depression" was coming. He said it would be a recession that would be worse than anything SINCE the great depression.
      • kaelyiesta, on 03/02/2008, -2/+3Right. While I liked the video(if one can like bad news...) the sensationalist digg title is inaccurate.
        • ScottMitchell, on 03/03/2008, -0/+2Keep in mind that this was on a show named ***FEAR*** FACTOR. Kind of defeats the purpose if they make claims that all is rosy and fine.
    • vertinox, on 03/02/2008, -4/+11It won't be a depression overnight like it was in 1929, but a slow death depression. Frankly its already too late to invest in Gold or foreign currencies because we're about to hit peak oil in a few years which makes all the gold in the world kind of worthless when you can't buy anything with it because it can't be shipped.

      There is nothing you can do as a person other than try to get your expenses fixed as possible... Aka... Don't buy a new house. Don't buy a new car. Don't think about having kids for a bit. And for the love of god learn how to cook at home with cheap foodstuffs.

      If you can't do any of the above, then I'm sorry... You are going to be living in squalor for a bit because you couldn't stop spending money, keep it in your pants, and causing more expenses.

      The good news is that Bernake seems hell bent on ruining the dollar so if you did have thousands in credit card debt, it won't be worth a gallon of gas or a loaf of bread in a few years. Then again... I don't think that is good news.
      • cquinnd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Agree with almost everything... the part where we are about to hit peak oil is a bit off.
        Peak Oil is the point where the cost of developing new oil resources continues to increase beyond the previous value of those resources. The U.S. hit a "peak" in oil production back in the 1970s, when we noticed a significant amount of the oil in use had been cheaper to import than to drill for new wells at home.
        Hitting a Global peak in oil won't make gold or other valuables "worthless", it will just cause the banking and shipping companies to roll the cost of shipping into the value for those goods, just as they did in the ages of wind powered ships.
      • LetsGoHawks, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2Peak Oil isn't the problem. China & India competing with the US & Europe for global oil supplies is. That being said, as oil gets more expensive, society will adjust. Plus, you realize the US is in a better position than most if that transition is painful, don't you? We produce lots and lots of food, all over the country. Plus, most of us have back yards to plant gardens in. (Water problems will prohibit a lot of people from growing their own... but that's a different story.
        Anyway, our store shelves might not have the variety they do now, but ultimately, we can get all that food from our fields to our stores fairly cheaply.
        • ScottMitchell, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1What's better? An artificially high standard of living in the USA and a craptacularly low standard of living in the third-world, or a reduced standard of living in the US, but a higher average standard of living in the third world?
    • LeeSoong, on 03/02/2008, -15/+22RON PAUL.

      • satanatnmtedu, on 03/02/2008, -22/+13***** Ron Paul. Ron Paul would just ***** everything up worse than they would be.
        • diskit, on 03/02/2008, -14/+7I am honestly surprised the Paultards haven't already flooded this Digg with messages about how he would fix this or not let it happen with all the "only one man" *****.
          • tidu, on 03/02/2008, -9/+7they finally realized he has no chance
          • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -2/+2No. We are still here and alerting people to the same issues. We were here before Ron Paul, and we will be here after Ron Paul. Ron helped grow the libertarian movement, but he is not some demigod.

            I did vote for him. Ron Paul 2008
    • twomeyw23334, on 03/02/2008, -5/+2Every thing's not going to be OK. But with the oceans raising 9 meters and the government planing terrorist attacks against its own people and surge being a complete failure and the CEOs rapping the people and the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer and the elite controlling every aspect of our lives and the corporations taking over the Internet and Bush listening in on my phone sex conversations I just don't really care if the economy is also going to crap.
      • omnis, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1"That’s why people will never remember your name" - Achilles
      • SpacePoet, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1CEO's rapping?? Yo yo yo, what's up with this wo'?
    • Defuser, on 03/02/2008, -4/+1Oh yes, clearly you're VERY intelligent, Mr. "LOL". You and the geniuses who Dugg you Up are obviously some of the finest minds of our generation.
      • VikingoTJ, on 03/02/2008, -1/+1Defuser does not even have a shred of a sense of humor! I was making light of the political bickering on Digg. And again: LOL
    • SinfulSoul, on 03/02/2008, -8/+5This is a subject that has been making me really mad over the past few months ever since Bush gave out his speech in Chicago to address the issue. There he tried to say inflation was at 4% and went on to mislead people with a false sense of hope about future housing prospects. To me, it shows how blatantly broken this administration's advising team is when the voices of the mass majority and the visual failure of lending groups seem to play no role in decision making. How is it possible after so much atrocity both at home and abroad, that this continuous barrage of failure is allowed to continue? How do we expect to fix other countries' economic systems if we can't even fix our own? At what point do consistent unintentional mistakes become intentional domestic and international acts of tyranny, or dare I say it, terrorism? The domestic state of economics is what matters to me the most, because I'll admit it, I'm selfish and I happen to care about my future in this country and its ability to compete in the global market. I suspect the other 300 million Americans feel the same at least to some level under their false cover of humanitarian care for others.

      The Fed is just printing money out of thin air. Why do you think our interest rates keep going down? Why do you think everyone says this method is only a short term fix? Not understanding this VERY HIGH SCHOOL ECONOMICS system is what determines whether a presidential candidate understands the economy or not. Unfortunately there is only one Presidential Candidate left that understands these concepts, and no one will ever vote for him. Lowering interest rates IN THE BEGINNING makes banks want to lend more money out to people because more people will be able to afford a lower interest rate, therefore banks will be more likely to get paid back and make money through interest. However in the long run, eventually inflation catches up because when you increase the supply of money in the market, you decrease the value of that money. Eventually inflation becomes much higher than the interest rate. If a bank loaned $1000 to someone with an interest of 10%, in one year if that loan was paid off the bank would receive $1100 and make $100. However, if inflation is 12% during this time, in that same year the buying power of that $1100 would be less. In this year, to buy something that was worth $1000 in the previous year, you would actually need to spend $1120 to get the same item. This means the bank LOST $20 in buying power by giving out that loan. Now the banks don't want to give loans anymore. This is why the FDIC is preparing for Bank Failures, because it was this unanticipated rapid devaluation of the US dollar that makes banks lose money IN THE LONG RUN, less than three years after the housing bubble collapse in 2005.

      So what does this mean? This means in the years 2001-2005 people were getting loans like crazy and when you have more disposable money, people buy houses. In 2005 the market hit a breaking point where houses were at all time highs, but the interest rates had been decreased so much and our inflation went up so high that our banks lost faith in the money (as well as many foreign investors). In 2005 Alan Greenspan formally declared a collapse on the housing bubble, and all of a sudden prices dropped to the floor. People were trying to sell to pay off their debts and the banks were no longer giving as many loans out, so people had much less money despite such a huge supply in money available. Very few people wanted to buy homes driving prices even more into the ground, and you have what we have today - a collapsing economy where foreign investors have no faith in American currency. We are approaching hyperinflation and any reports that try to show what is going on immediately get snubbed out. See the St. Louis Missouri Federal Reserve report on the Economic State of the country if you want REAL numbers instead of the ***** numbers. 4% inflation my ass, inflation is much closer to 12% when the report was released, and most positively higher by now.

      Of course... No one cares about History, because this is the EXACT same thing that happened during the Great Depression. And we're making the EXACT same mistakes we did back then. Any economist (and the vast majority) who disagrees with the current administration is ignored and other economists who agree with the administrations view are supported despite faulty credentials or bought-for-and-paid-by-Bush-Admin history.

      In short, lending companies are not to blame for "***** business practices" as some seem to say, unless you want to call the Federal Reserve "big business" (which it is). Then I would agree that the Federal Reserve is very much to blame for "***** business practices." This is just what the government forced on the American business system, business practices have been generally the same for something like 40 years, and even back then the changes were very small from the previous business system before that. Governmental changes were massive though, as they pulled off of the Gold Standard (again) around 1973. It is the government's fault for messing around in the business models so much. I demand more transparency from corporations just like everyone else, but there is no reason for government to go much beyond keeping business' honest. Government should NOT mess with business prices or try to manipulate demand. Time and time again Economics has shown that competing businesses always provide better results to both business and consumer through free market than through a forced government standard market. CAPITALISM REALLY ISN'T THAT BAD! Could be better, but considering the alternatives there isn't much to loathe. Just as long as the government doesn't ***** it up. Even Ludwig Von Mises said that Capitalism is fully compatible with democracy. The information has been out there for so long, we should learn more from Ludwig Von Mises and his Austrian Economics.

      It's amazing how the Gold Standard gets snubbed by people who think the economy will magically die and go to hell when history has proven so many times in so many different economic systems that it works. Steven Forbes released an article sometime last week that described the Five Principles of Economic Growth: Rule of Law, SOUND MONEY, Low Taxes, Ease of Entry to Doing Business, and Removing Barriers to Doing Business. Unfortunately we only follow one of these principles at most with our current level of government intervention.

      Oh, and get rid of the Federal Reserve too. That would be nice.
      • happyseamonster, on 03/02/2008, -2/+1Sheesh. Did you copy/paste from a blog? /just sayin'
  • bohemianowl, on 03/02/2008, -14/+137everything will be just fine, where is my cookie?
  • NeoConned08, on 03/02/2008, -18/+61just make sure you digg it and add to favorites to stop the bury brigade from doing their dirty work.
    • brad3378, on 03/02/2008, -23/+8This is one case where I believe propaganda can be a good thing. This sort of news has the potential to be a self fulfilling prophesy. Yes, we do have serious problems with our economy, but if everybody panics and quits spending their money, our problems will only get worse. We have an economy based on consumption. Our economy is greatly dependent on buying crap we don't need, but if we slam the flood gates shut, it will only make our problems worse.

      On one hand, I am a big believer in educating people and spreading truth, but on the other hand, there's certain things we should avoid talking about - It's like opening your mouth about a pitcher in the 9th inning about to have a no-hitter game. It's bound to be bad if you talk about it. In my opinion, the "D" word is one of those things we should avoid talking about even if we see it coming at us like a freight train. Inflation & Stagflation are serious problems, but the "D" word is something that absolutely scares the ***** out of me. The "D" word had a major influence on Germany and WW-II and I hate to say it, but another "D" could cause enough conflict & strain in the world to start a 3rd world war. Let's all just hope that I'm crazy and that none of this will ever happen.
      • keeling0ver, on 03/02/2008, -6/+21We can't "buy" our way out of this. That type of thinking is just insane. This market correction has been a long time in coming, we have already put it off for far to long (since at least 2001), and it needs to happen so we can then get on with making meaningful changes instead of these little stopgap measures.
        • DiggzDE, on 03/02/2008, -2/+4A depression isn't going to help anyone.
        • NeoConned08, on 03/02/2008, -3/+4yes, a depression is going to wake arrogant ass america up to the fact that the rest of the world doesn't need it. They can grow their own domestic economies once the parasitic US finally crashes and the dollar loses its world reserve currency status. Sorry, it's been a long time coming and it's high time America woke up to the fact they aren't the only people on the planet, nor are they the *best, most prosperous* nation.
    • EgaoNoGenki, on 03/02/2008, -5/+1Great Depression II, it's called?
    • satanatnmtedu, on 03/02/2008, -7/+4I bury ***** articles, like this one.
      • mdonato, on 03/02/2008, -1/+4Yes. You bury your head in the sand also I assume.
      • happyseamonster, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3It's a video.
  • JordanTW90, on 03/02/2008, -11/+126A depression is the only fix to an already inflated money supply.
    • DesignEx, on 03/02/2008, -4/+16And/Or actually backing your currency with silver/gold.
      • veri745, on 03/02/2008, -6/+6Let me guess... Ron Paul '08?
        • RationalXubrnce, on 03/02/2008, -5/+14 Probably, it seems all the people talking economic sense support him.
      • nakani, on 03/02/2008, -3/+6Not to mention other valuable commodities. Also, legalize competing currencies.
      • nickstang, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3I bought some shares of ETF's, specifically gold on Etrade and I've already made a couple hundred bucks. Gold is going to shoot up in price. Be careful though.. gold is highly volatile. watch part II of http://zeitgeistmovie.com/
      • happyseamonster, on 03/02/2008, -1/+1They rather borrow and promise the future labor of US workers.
    • mdonato, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3You could also replace the income tax with a VAT (value added tax). It could be 4 or 5% on every monetary transaction made. This could work because M3 (the amount of money in circulation) is at an all time high. You would be only taxing people who were spending money, not the savers. I also wish we could go to a gold/silver standard, but a 5% VAT tax might give us some short term relief.
    • swiftekho, on 03/02/2008, -2/+7American Dollar has dropped 31% in 7 years... Gold has risen in value 200% in 7 years... Hmmmm. Tough choice... Brb, buying gold.
    • mesmeriffic, on 03/02/2008, -2/+4We're headed towards stagflation, not a depression and deflation of the currency.
    • throop77, on 03/02/2008, -0/+320 million foreclosures will help.
  • rilla825, on 03/02/2008, -16/+67We're in a whole lot of trouble here people!
  • xerigen, on 03/02/2008, -15/+210Buried. If the President thinks everything is fine, that's good enough for me.

    /sarcasm
    • keeling0ver, on 03/02/2008, -5/+49It really pains me to think that Bush and his people are just going to walk away from this. I doubt that the coming problems can be lain solely at his feet, but a portion of the blame certainly can, and he and the Republican rubber stamp congress were on watch when a lot of this went down. Now, as he leaves office its just going to be out of sight out of mind for the American people thanks to our short attention span. Honestly, good luck to the next president who has to inherit Bush's legacy... there will certainly be some collateral damage.
      • saxreturns, on 03/02/2008, -5/+8Man, that's so depressing... we have to make sure people don't forget! If the current administration is not held fully accountable for all the downright idiotic and highly destructive things they have done, I don't see how the good people of America would be able to live with themselves.

        Over here in the UK we've already seemingly let Blair ride off into the sunset without holding him fully accountable for the many low down, dirty things he's done, so I have an idea of how bad it feels - although admittedly our economy is looking reasonably healthy, all things considered (although if this great depression happens I imagine we'll get a bit of an economic shafting also).
        • kazamx, on 03/02/2008, -2/+5You notice though that Blair is scared stiff to do anything in the UK. The moment he stepped down, he was GONE. He is praying to his god that people will forget about him and blame Brown when the ***** hits the fan.
        • cquinnd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Blair can't be held fully accountable any more than Bush can. Both had a lot of help along the way, or at least had a lot of powerful people make it easier for them to go down the path.
          History may judge them both, depending on how much of what they actually did (and who helped them do it) gets recorded into historical record.
    • ...---..., on 03/02/2008, -5/+18There could be an elephant in the room - and Bush could face the people and calmly state that there is no elephant in the room - and 19% of the public would wholeheartedly agree with him - and that 19% would call us tinfoil hat wearing libtards for pointing out the elephant.
      • Kyan, on 03/02/2008, -3/+6Dugg for presenting the image of an elephant wearing a tinfoil hat.

        Funny thing is, in light of republican mascots, one could reasonably say that Bush himself is the elephant in the room.

        Damn, now I see Bush wearing a tinfoil hat.
    • EgaoNoGenki, on 03/02/2008, -3/+4Is it a good time to leave for Japan? =-O
  • BrandonMills, on 03/02/2008, -12/+28Gold? More like Oil.
    • Jimbob200, on 03/02/2008, -2/+14try both
    • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -2/+4Oil is risky as a global slowdown will sharply curtail demand.

      Remember is was only a few short years ago that prices hovered around $10 a barrel. True demand hasn't changed that much, just they hype surrounding it.

      • shuffle, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3Huh? Oil prices somewhat approached that price in 1998 - $11.91. Adjusted for inflation that is about 15 bucks a barrel. Before that you would have to go to 1974 to find a price around $10 a barrel. Neither of those are a 'few short years'.
        • grrrrrrrrrrrrrr, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2With only 2 Oil Bourses on the planet accepting USD and British pounds, in NY and London respectively until recently, (Iraq threatened to go to the Euro and was invaded and occupied and Iran is slowly converting to Euros now...hmmmm, what will happen to that country?) the increase cost for oil in USD is not so much scarcity (Peak Oil per se is a bit of a scam...there's endless supplies but the ME's shallow crust make it an easily accessible and proven reserve) as it is a reflection of the drop in value of the USD itself because of its endless and unregulated M3 supply (no records provided in the last 2 years).
          The US occupation of Iraq and threat to Iran are the last throes of propping up both these currencies which have been used themselves as instruments of debt proliferation and economic control through their private central banks.
          So yeah, backed by oil but as an unraveling Ponzi scheme, the currency will be backed by no other financial players...that's a primary reason for its current evaporation.
      • BrandonMills, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1I think there is a huge difference with oil, though. In the US, there are many rural families that have to use oil to survive. Without a method of transporting themselves to and from work or the store, they can't live. Mass Migration to cities would be expected, but not at nearly a rapid enough rate to matter for decades.

        Oil is a sure bet still.
    • CrudeDarkness, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3during a depression, oil prices go down because of the shortage in demand created by the depression. Oil prices go up during a disaster, like a war, because the supply of oil goes down which raises the price.

      It is much better to consider buying gold now.
  • unlawflcombatnt, on 03/02/2008, -4/+21Here's a link to John Williams' site, Shadow Stats:
    http://www.shadowstats.com/
    • gypsi, on 03/02/2008, -10/+4"shadow stats". sounds legit
      • Amadeus2490, on 03/02/2008, -2/+5John Williams is such a talented composer. . .didn't care for his work in Episode 3 as much, though.
    • podperson, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1His website is really interesting, but he seems to be a little whacky.

      He dismisses academic economists of not grasping the real world, dismissing the concept of factoring in the rent a home owner would have to pay to live in their own home, and complains about hedonic deflation of prices (i.e. not only is today's computer cheaper than one you might have bought ten years ago, but it's a lot better, and this needs to be factored in). Here's what he says:

      "According BEA deflators, $1,000 computers bought in 1990, 1995 and 2000 would cost $48.63, $95.84 and $526.58, respectively, today. I bought computers in each of those time frames and could not replicate any one of them for the suggested proportionate price in deflated dollars, regardless of free memory enhancement."

      Well, guess what? A Nintendo DS is a pretty good approximation of a computer you couldn't have bought for $5000 in 1990 -- it has two RISC CPUs, each more powerful than any high end desktop of the time, two flat panel screens (one of them a touch screen), a lithium ion battery, wireless networking... the list goes on. In 1990 a stick of 4MB of RAM cost over $100, and you can buy 64MB USB sticks at supermarket checkouts today.

      He's very well-informed, but his suspicion of economic theory, while not unjustified, in many cases undermines his claims.
  • motiontomove, on 03/02/2008, -166/+6ok u ppl sumething needs 2 b made cleaer & that is that this is CAPITALSISM ok ppl we have differnet competeitors marketing there product and u know comments like thees r going 2 b made cuz the point is 2 win in capitailsim so just reliax u cant controlanything were just customers WE VOTE when we buy stuff so leave it 2 us k this is just some duded making a coment so again relax its not going 2 affect anything k? goodok u ppl sumething needs 2 b made cleaer & that is that this is CAPITALSISM ok ppl we have differnet competeitors marketing there product and u know comments like thees r going 2 b made cuz the point is 2 win in capitailsim so just reliax u cant controlanything were just customers WE VOTE when we buy stuff so leave it 2 us k this is just some duded making a coment so again relax its not going 2 affect anything k? good sigh u ppl let me expalin halo 3 is a game and yes i no that its an epic game tahts for sure (i havent played it yet but im sure its epic) anyway wii is a console now lets think the ps2 sold like 120 miloin units and its best selling game sold like 14 million or something i dunno but something lkie that ratio so u have 2 be absurd if u think halo 3 is going 2 kill the wii a game cant kill a video game system y woud u want that anyway hello this is capitalsism??? we need compeition in order to stay alive this reminds me of 1 time back in the 90s i remember being excited for this one new gel coming out at this store near my huose and i bouight it why caues i actually listened to the comerical snad hype well it wasnt as good as i tought it would be i elarned my lesson from taht:) am i saying its same as halo 3 and wii no different strokes for different fokes HELLO R U LISTENING??? wii is a fun console maybe i dunno and same with halo3 is it fun i dunno but ppl seem to enjoy it. halo 3 sold some xbox 360 but wii is still selling well why well let slook wii is cheaper has controler that appleas to many ppl and it seems to get that lil following that ppl dont seem to know y remember the gamecube it sold the worst compared to xbox and ps2 so nintendo tried therior best and came up wit sumething different so i thinkt aht whoever wins the console market this time wont matter cuz ppl can just try again its not like u fail once u fail forever if someone fails a test they fail school???? well most cases not lol;) but u get my angology i no ppl that have wiis but also want halo 3 yes ppl its possible not every1 is a fanboy in this sociaty i no im not a fanboy i like 2 play a little bit of everything cuz i no i dont want 2 miss out of onfun stuff so wii is a console halo 3 is a game games are made 4 console so a game wont killa ssytem remember that ok;) and so ya thats wat i tihnk BUT BE WARNED u never no wat can happen in the gaming market!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this is captialsism folks!!!!!!! u never no whena company cna emerge out of nowhere and make a great product (console or game) and suprise every1!!!!!!!! sigh this reminds me of all the TIMES IN THE BEGGINING OF THE CONSOLE MARKET WHEN WE HAD GAME CRASH AND ALL THE CONSOLES CAME OUT WHO CAME OUT FIRST IT WAS NINTENDO so dont understimate any1!!!! halo 3 im sure will be fun but i doubt it is PERFECT CUZ when u think about it 4 a game 2 be called perfect U R saying their r no flaws in it but im sure halo 3 has one flaw here and their so im taking this review w/ a grian of salt i know that i will eventually play it and ya i probably will like it but where any of the other 2 games perfect no of course not halo and halo 2 have their flaws and ppl have diferent opinions about the two as for me personally i liked halo and halo 2 but i would not call either one perfect i know for one that i would have liked a longer campaign on both because i buy ganmes for campaign not multipkayer multiplayer is just bonus to me :) but they were fun overall so yeah i think something like a 9 or 9.5 is more reasonable cuz there is now ay u can say the game is PERFECT
    • WeirdEdsel, on 03/02/2008, -9/+21tl;dr
      • SquigglyP, on 03/02/2008, -11/+2too lazy to read it, not lazy enough to ignore it?

        You and the troll can both go ***** yourselves.
    • makkaveli19, on 03/02/2008, -7/+62i will NOT take you seriously when you type with no punctuation, don't write in paragraph form, use U, 2, b, ect. try spelling and coherent sentences.
      also Wtf were you even talking about?
    • EwMo, on 03/02/2008, -3/+63I read this much - "ok u ppl" If you ever want to be taken seriously in an adult world, expand your vocabulary, become literate, and don't start out accusing "ppl" of something, even though I honestly don't know what you said next, it just sounded accusatory.
    • masterm1nd, on 03/02/2008, -1/+11Lol, it kindof made my brain hurt reading that... I sped read it and it was about gaming consoles? Lol, that's a weird paragraph you got there.
    • mCanada, on 03/02/2008, -1/+16This inane babble was duplicated from another thread from the games section. GTFO kid.
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/02/2008, -3/+29Go back to myspace.
    • jnguyen0819, on 03/02/2008, -1/+7buried because your post is too long to read.
    • Wartz, on 03/02/2008, -1/+12Its people like you who are ruining (or will ruin in the future) the world.
    • tehxen3, on 03/02/2008, -14/+3This is a SOCIALIST, trolling on purpose and posing as a supporter of capitalism to make people who support free market look bad.
      Please jump off a cliff sir.
      • alk509, on 03/02/2008, -5/+8A SOCIALIST?!?! BURN HIS HOUSE!!!
      • tehxen3, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Yeah as opposed to...
        "A CAPITALIST?!?! BURN HIS HOUSE!!!"
        - average Digger
    • ritter99, on 03/02/2008, -7/+2It's ok to write like that. IT IS capitalism, and there's PGA Golf Championship for the ones sensitive to grammar, and there's X-Games for the CamelCaseKidz. Cool it down people, there's plenty of discspace for everyone!
    • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -8/+1Cool an economist who is fluent in 7334
    • fightforyou, on 03/02/2008, -1/+2"different strokes for different fokes"
    • mdude85, on 03/02/2008, -1/+0wait wut???
    • pbd1637, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2This is what happens when you only converse using text messaging. Damn shame. Try reading a book or a magazine and give your thumbs a rest.
    • Kronos6948, on 03/02/2008, -2/+15English, *****, do you speak it?!?!
      /Samuel L. Jackson
    • lamprey187, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1wall of text with crappy spelling and punctuation. learn to consolidate your thoughts and not build walls of text.
    • twomeyw23334, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Why are people killing this comment. This man bought gel in the 90s and found out it wasn't as good as the commercial. He is a victim of capitalism (I think) so give him a little respect.
    • bwdd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1The enter key, it's a great invention.
    • iPsyko, on 03/02/2008, -0/+4That comment will (should) go down in infamy.
    • Jeffler, on 03/02/2008, -0/+14(( I actually translated this into English, but be warned this is a Halo 3 rant and has nothing to do with the subject. ))

      Okay, you people, something needs to be made clear, and that is capitalism. We have different competitors marketing their product and you know comments like these are going to be made because the point is to win in capitalism. Relax, you can't control anything.

      We're just customers, we vote when we buy stuff. So just leave it to us, okay? This is just some dude making a comment, its not going to affect anything, okay? Good.

      Let me explain.

      Halo 3 is a game and yes, I know that its an epic game (I haven't played it yet but I'm sure its epic). Anyway, Wii is a console. Now let’s think the PS2 sold like, 120 million units and the best selling game sold 14 million copies, or something, I don't know. But something like that. So you have to be absurd if you think that Halo 3 is going to kill the Wii, a game can't kill another system. Why would you want that anyway? Hello, this is capitalism?

      We need competition in order to stay alive. This reminds me of one time back in the '90's, I remember being excited for this one new gel coming out near my house. I bought it. Why? Because I actually listened to the commercials and hype. Well, it wasn't as good as I thought it would be, I learned my less from that. Am I saying it’s the same as Halo 3 and the Wii? No. Different strokes for different folks.

      Hello, are you listening?

      Wii might be a fun console, I don't know. And the same with Halo 3. It is fun and people seem to enjoy it. Halo 3 sold some Xbox 360's but the Wii is still selling well. Why?

      Well let’s look.

      The Wii is cheaper, has a controller that appeals to many people, and it seems to get that little following that people don't seem to know. Why, remember the GameCube. It sold the worst compared to the Xbox and PS2 so Nintendo tried their best and came up with something different. So I think that whoever wins the console market this time won’t matter because people can just try again and it’s not like you fail once, you fail forever. If someone fails a test, will they fail school? Well, not in most cases. But you get my analogy.

      I know people that have Wii's but also want Halo 3. Yes people, it’s possible. Not everyone is a fanboy in this society. I know I'm not a fanboy. I like to play a little bit of everything because I don't want to miss out on fun stuff. So, Wii is a console. Halo 3 is a game. Games are made for consoles so a game will NOT kill a console. So yes, that’s what I think about that.

      BUT BE WARNED! You never know what could happen in the gaming market! This is CAPITALISM folks? You never know when a company can emerge out of nowhere and make a great product and surprise everyone!

      This reminds me of all the times in the beginning of the console market when we had the game crash, and all the game consoles came out. Who was the first? Nintendo. So don't underestimate anyone!

      Halo 3 I'm sure will be fun but I doubt it is perfect, because when you think about it, for a game to be called perfect you are saying there are no flaws in it. But I’m sure Halo 3 has one flaw here and there, so I'm taking this review with a grain of salt. I know that I will eventually play it and I'll probably like it but were the other two Halo games perfect? No, of course not.

      Halo and Halo 2 have their flaws and people have different opinions about the two. As for me personally, I liked Halo and Halo 2 but I would not call either one perfect. I know for one I would have liked a longer campaign on both, because I buy games for campaign not multiplayer, as that’s just a bonus to me. But they were fun overall. So yes, I think something like a 9 or 9.5 is more reasonable because there is no way you can say a game is perfect.
      • jakefloyd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+4Wow that was different. Still dumb, annoying, and untrue.
      • EwMo, on 03/03/2008, -0/+0I'm sure there was a well intended, maybe even good, thought in there, but it was such an unorganized stream of consciousness that I couldn't find it.
      • jetcombo15, on 03/03/2008, -0/+2Huge ***** props for actually translating all that.
    • whoaohh, on 03/02/2008, -1/+6Holy *****.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3IDIOCRACY IS NOW!
    • ComeOutSwingin, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1I read the whole post. I think its a joke. At least I hope so, it was funny regardless.
    • Treason, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Where do you get your weed bro?
    • Nuggstein, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Wow. My ass just laughed. Oh wait...no, it was a fart. What the hell are you talking about motiontomove?
      • Jeffler, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Basically, he's saying that capitalism exists, Halo 3 won't kill the Wii, and that Halo 3 shouldn't get a 10/10. AKA, a bunch of BS thats unrelated to the article.
    • hydroplane, on 03/04/2008, -0/+1EPIC FAIL
    • fuzzybeard, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1CATLIKE TYPING DETECTED yup, looks like Garfield's been dropping acid again.
  • allowners, on 03/02/2008, -17/+33I really think this was forced to happen or at least encouraged to happen. Anybody following along could see that the extreme deregulation of corporations coupled with rampant militarism would lead to a loot and plunder mentality. These policies were put into place because the folks running the show are aware of peak oil and unprecedented demand on natural resources fueled by exporting the neo-liberal economic system when we should have been reigning it in. Realizing that exponential growth will not and cannot go on much longer, people in the know have resorted to an economy of liquidation with insiders rapidly siphoning off wealth as the system teeters on the brink. This sort of insanity was not sustainable in the U.S. and it has been exported to an overpopulated world, just one last bubble before we go
    • ciaran036, on 03/02/2008, -4/+14You should read some of David Icke's books. He keeps mentioning and explaining about the government's power to make economies go up or down and explains how a depression can actually be a GOOD thing - but only the people at the very top. Imagine if lots of important service providers like food and fuel providers started to lose money very fast or go bankrupt because of a depression. The only solution is nationalisation, where the government takes control over the companies. And if the value of the dollar dropped low enough, then the government would have complete control over everything. We can already clearly see our governments gradually taking away our liberties and exercising more control over more and more things. They create a problem, such as 9/11 or an economy crash or something, then they wait for our reaction, then they come up with a solution - the solution being the thing that keeps the government having more and more power and us feeling more and more helpless and dependent on our leaders .
      • mastameezy, on 03/02/2008, -2/+5The immediate purpose of this is the introduction of the North American Union and the Amero. Without the economy totally crashing, no reasonable American would allow it, but with this crisis they will welcome it.
        • ciaran036, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1oh yeah, I forgot about the Amero.... :)
      • DogBotherer, on 03/02/2008, -2/+6David Icke? The man who believes our world's leaders are some alien reptilian uber-race? I'll pass if you don't mind...
        • wakananda, on 03/02/2008, -3/+3"Reptillian" or not, they take great care to interbreed: Bush and Kerry were cousins (as well as members of the same small, elite, quasi-masonic death-cult) - what are the odds? The Bushes and Al Gore can both trace their liniage directly to William "Longshanks" of England. Most of the heavy-hitters in politics and international finance are related to eachother, and to the royal houses of Europe, and they take great care to remain so. Why? "Bloodlines" are a private *obsession* with them. THEY know who they are, and it shows in their geneology; but this is not for the scrutiny of lowly, common people. Reptiles? They increase the money supply and then dry up credit, to profit obscenely and ram through legislation that gives them even more control over the masses. They plan and instigate global warfare, and fund both sides - again, to draw profit from rivers of human blood, and reinforce their financial control over nations. Reptiles? They might as well be.
    • tgc1, on 03/02/2008, -3/+6What worries me, is that there may in fact be no such thing as "peak oil" and these fuel companies are artificially limiting supply to drive up the cost. They already do this to some extent, but I wonder if they aren't just using this "peak oil" label to justify even higher prices. It's like the deBeers cartel with diamonds. Same principal, only we REALLY need fuel.
      • Kyan, on 03/02/2008, -1/+8Well, I'm affiliated with the oil industry and it's kind of a "both ways" scenario. It goes a bit like this:

        1. A lot of fields really are producing less than before.
        2. There are still a lot of proven fields that have not been exploited.
        3. These other fields tend to be in places like under the arctic ocean or trapped in oil shale, meaning the oil is there but it is more expensive to get it out.
        4. Technology is growing to make it cheaper and hence profitable to actually produce oil from these other sources.
        5. Demand is growing so fast that even if the tech makes it cheaper to get this oil, the demand is outpacing supply anyway.

        Peak oil is a fun doomsday scenario, but it's based more on acknowledging points one and five while ignoring everything in between.
        • OrangeCrush, on 03/02/2008, -0/+4Peak oil is hardly a doomsday scenario. It isn't that oil is on the brink of running out, just that we've taken all the lowest hanging fruit. Simply put, peak oil is the situation we're in when despite there being plenty of oil left on the planet for years, we just can't pull it out of the ground fast enough. Demand exceeds supply, prices go up up up.
        • cquinnd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1I don't see why you got dugg down.
          > 1. A lot of fields really are producing less than before.
          Which has prompted the development of new technologies to produce oil from those reserves, which in turn helps improve production on fields that are still considered "fresh"

          > 2. There are still a lot of proven fields that have not been exploited.
          And a couple of areas of energy research that have the potential to find other sources to exploit, not just in the area of Oil fields.

          > 3. These other fields tend to be in places like under the arctic ocean or trapped in oil > shale, meaning the oil is there but it is more expensive to get it out.
          Or placed on deliberate reserve like the ANWAR fields in Alaska.

          >4. Technology is growing to make it cheaper and hence profitable to actually produce oil > from these other sources.
          And the higher price of crude oil (and oil futures) makes it easier to justify investment in those new technologies. I remember an interview with a company converting coal to gas a few years ago... Where the CEO of that company had to admit that the coal to gas process was really not worth looking into unless the cost of oil was over 60 dollars a barrel.

          >5. Demand is growing so fast that even if the tech makes it cheaper to get this oil, the >demand is outpacing supply anyway.
          Unless ways are found to reduce (or divert) demand to make more efficient use of existing supply.
          Peak Oil is not a doomsday scenario, its just an indication of economic change that we should be aware of and have to deal with - in a world that was raised to believe and act like the oil would last forever.
        • allowners, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2 Kyan, peak oil theory doesn't ignore anything and it is verifiable to a high probability. Peak oil is nothing more or less than the point where actual oil production has peaked and subsequent actual production declines. Oil production peaked in the U.S. back in the early seventies, just as predicted by the theory. Many people think global production peaked in the last year or so. The only way that prognosis will be proved wrong is if production increases again some year. Bringing large new oil fields online does not disprove the theory either if overall production continues to decline. Even if we see increased production at some point, that would not prove the theory wrong, it would only push back the date for the peak.
        • ciaran036, on 03/02/2008, -0/+5Kind of off subject here, but why the hell are we wasting oil on fuel for cars? There's already a dozen other different ways we can fuel our cars. We need the oil for plastic more importantly. You only have to look around yourself right now to see it everywhere. And even then, plastic is wasted a lot. Look at plastic bottles for example! Every 1 litre bottle of water you buy is equivalent to driving a car 1km, because of the oil used in the plastic and for the vehicles used for transport. Its hard to believe that we can so easily get water out of the tap but instead we pay vast amounts to get it into a bottle (although in saying that they do put fluoride into our water in many countries, and this has been linked with brain damage).
      • JohnFromChicago, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Great comment. I've been thinking the same thing for a while now - to understand geopolitics, wars, and oil, you need to look to South Africa. Oil is quite plentiful, and if free market forces were in play on it, it would be cheap. But the World Bank/IMF/Fed crowd aren't interested in free market oil any more than the Oppenheimers are interested in free market diamonds. Ever wonder why there have been no new refineries built for over 20 years? We've got enough oil in Alaska to supply America for generations if we had the refinery capacity to process it. But it's much more profitable for them to wage wars on those who don't play by cartel rules (Iraq, Iran, Chavez) and enrich the defense industries among others. We foot the bill both at tax time and at the pump. The net effect is they're taking the vast majority of American's wealth and transferring into the hands of a few very rich men. They're not Americans, and they don't give a damn if you live or die much less have health care. They' don't care if they wreck the US economy, or anything else. All they care about is the success of their cabal. These people have got to go!
    • unreg, on 03/02/2008, -9/+2Tin Foil FTW
      • ciaran036, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3You are ridiculous. Tin Foil? You have no idea...
  • allowners, on 03/02/2008, -31/+3dugg down by a libertarian fundamentalist, no doubt. :-)
    • djdedeo0, on 03/02/2008, -6/+1i dug this one down because your comment made me laugh and your above comment is great. I'd digg you up but then your comment would lose it's significance. This is the first time I've dugg down in a positive sense.
    • Firgof, on 03/02/2008, -3/+2Libertarian fundamentalist, on site right now. Article: Dugg up.

      In short: Shush your inane babbling so the rest of us can have peace for once without your wall of cliche-filled words bashing into us ever 4.22 seconds.
  • jmpeagle, on 03/02/2008, -12/+44great depression? seriously?

    If you whole heartily believe tht 100% then you could easily makes yourself a multi-millionaire over the next few years by routinely taking short positions or writing call options you know will never be exerised.
    • brokenspatula, on 03/02/2008, -2/+6I be buying up all puts available!
      • theinept, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1The thing to understand about options is that the key factor in pricing them is VOLATILITY. The price of the underlying matters a lot less than people are inclined to believe, although it does matter. Options with high implied volatility compared to statistical/historical volatility can be considered overvalued whereas options with low implied volatility compared to statistical/historical volatility can be considered undervalued. Just take a look at the VIX: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EVIX&t=my&l=on&z ...
        You'd ideally want to go short on options with high implied volatility (as the author suggests) and go long on options with low implied volatilities, and that's factoring in your expectation for the performance of the underlying. You must further consider the implications of time decay which seriously impact the value of options as they get close to expiry.
        A lot of people are surprised whe the price of a the underlying on options they hold floats up or down over time but the option does nothing or loses value. It's not as simple as buying puts on a company that you think will fall in price. There's more to consider.
        As jmpeagle suggests, you might be better off selling volatility (i.e. writing overvalued (covered) calls and collecting the premium) than buying it (i.e. buying overvalued puts).
        • CaveatCanine, on 03/03/2008, -0/+0No, the underlying stock would probably decline more than the premiums you'd receive from selling covered calls. Sell naked or short the stock at a brokerage that allows you to collect some interest.
    • kazamx, on 03/02/2008, -1/+7Thats how I made a lot of money as the dot com boom went bust. Ahhhhh Marconi I loved you so much.
    • krazikamikaze, on 03/02/2008, -6/+28Seriously. I'd love to see how many people screaming great depression are willing to put their money where their mouth is. It's funny to see all these people posting here with absolute certainty one way or the other, like they can predict the future.

      The truth is we're dealing with probabilities here. Recession is looking most likely at this point, but anything can happen. I'm not saying he's wrong, but he's clearly fear mongering. If you don't like it when Bush uses fear to strip us of our freedom, you shouldn't like it when this guy uses it to get himself on TV.
      • unknownpoltroon, on 03/02/2008, -1/+1I am. I was saving up to by a house, it is now all in proshares ETF short leveraged funds. I have seen swings of 10% a day in some of these. Its scaring the crap out of me. If I'm right, I double my money and maybe survive the depression relatively unscathed.. If I'm wrong, the economy is great, and I lose some, but hey, great economy.
      • mutiger, on 03/02/2008, -3/+1go to any reputable site and create a chart for the last three years; then create a chart for the year before, of and after the great depression; superimpose one over the other. ;)
        • allengeer, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3You know, to have some sort of chart..... you need to be plotting some sort of value.
      • mutiger, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Pick any 'general stock' chart; pick gold, or oil or anything else. Sorry, didn't think i had to spell it out in letters three feet high and shove it under your nose. ;/
    • encrypteduser, on 03/02/2008, -3/+2do it like Kennedy!
    • fightfreedom, on 03/02/2008, -5/+6I've bought $240,000 of put options on CMG (CMGRP) and IYR (ZPEMU) - currently I'm down $50,000 because I bought them too soon after the Jan-21 correction, but I think there is a chance that I will become a millionaire (although probably not a multi-millionaire) by the end of 2008.

      CMG = Chipotle. People seem to like it, but it's way, way overpriced and has virtually no international exposure.

      IYR = Commercial real estate index. This domino will fall before the end of the year - more than 1,000 store closings have been announced already, and there are reports of rising office vacancies.
      • 955701, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3hehe, I LOVE Chipotle. Heck, I've probably spent $50k there by now....
      • mnocket, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2What's the expiration on your options? Seems like a VERY risky strategy to me. You could easily lose the entire $240K. Also, I don't see how you're down $50K since soon after Jan 21st. CMG is way off the price at that time and IYR seems about flat. If you bought put options, you should be up. Something doesn't smell right here.
        • boxybrzown, on 03/02/2008, -0/+8...like a digger with 240 grand to speculate on stocks with?
        • fightfreedom, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1The expiration is end of June for CMG, and end of JAN-2009 for IYR. They are risky, and I've had 100% - TOTAL - losses in the past (on the homebuilders - KBH, BZH). But I've also had 400-700% returns on the financials (IMB, CFC, C, WM), and good returns on retailers.

          The reason I'm down so much is because I (stupidly) bought too soon after the JAN-21 correction, so the premiums were very high. Even though CMG is about $20 down from when I bought it, the option is still about 20% down (but rising). It has been up 10% above the price I bought for, on two days so far. The price of this one is very volatile, and the bid-ask spread is high, because it's far out of the money (so not much demand at the moment).

          IYR has rallied since I bought options on that, but I think it will collapse in the months ahead - ask yourself if companies like GGP (massive short term debts to rollover in a frozen credit market), SPG (hundreds of shopping malls) will be doing well with the US plunging into a severe consumer led recession.
    • kosmoss, on 03/02/2008, -1/+14Now is the time to buy stocks - "Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy only when others are fearful" - Warren Buffett.
    • pstroll, on 03/02/2008, -1/+1Yes, if there is a deflationary depression as Livermore and Kennedy did in the 30s. If there is a hyper inflationary depression then long commodities (food and energy futures) would be the strategy.
    • lamprey187, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2I tend to agree with your take on this. Recession yes, great depression not so likely. I am willing to admit the economy is very vulnerable right now, times are tough, but I think we are quite a ways from full blown depression. That being said, much needs to be done to regain value of the US dollar. I'd argue we are in much more of a global economy now than in 1929, and our friends and foes realize that if our economy tumbles so does theirs. If you take China for example, we are the biggest consumer of their goods, they might want to strengthen their position in the world, but also realize if our economy collapses so does theirs.
      • jnadke, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Not really, China has been deflating their dollar and therefore pressing down the ability of their own population to consume their goods.

        As soon as our economy falls, they can easily float their dollar on the world market. Watch it rise, and then let their population start buying their own goods. The US has essentially industrialized China at the cost of the core US manufacturing market.
        • Railz, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1They haven't deflated it. They have pegged their currencyso that it can't change in value versus the dollar. It is something that is unfair in the eyes WTO. Even on a personal note, China is playing dirty. I like having another country step up to the plate as much as the next fella, but what china is doing now is going to make for a much bigger burst. Stock Market and currency bubble bursts are the growing pains the world felt in '29
    • rromanchuk, on 03/02/2008, -4/+2Yaaay! Dollar denominated equities! Digg is so stupid. We have the FDIC duhhh. We have super duper smart PhD economist running perfect econometric models on how to engineer the market to make Amerikuh the best!#% ZOMG Ben Stein is sooooo smart! Stock market! 8% 8% 8% 8% everyone loves 8% returns, safer then grandmas apple pie! Gold is stupid, it's not "liquid" enough to make our government bigger. Anyone who bought gold four years ago is stupid, 40% ROI is nothing compared to my Google equities. OH I almost forgot! China won't ever dump the dollar because their economy depends on it!! Don't worry they don't have a regime that is loyal to communism. Don't listen to fear mongers diggers, EVERYTHING will be AOK. The FDIC is buying new HP laser printers, customer service will "A++ Great printer!!! Got the dollars two weeks after my bank collapsed..good communication!!!!!! Will use again next trade cycle"

      EPIC FAIL
  • jjive, on 03/02/2008, -11/+34Yes the all knowing CNN has proclaimed it. I will bow before the oracle of blitzer.
    • Arcueid01, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3CNN SUCKS
    • endustry, on 03/02/2008, -1/+4Oh, but it's not just CNN...they're interviewing the guy from SHADOW STATS DOT COM!!!!!! BWUHAHAHAHAHAHA! Who do they hire? Ninja accountants? Those ghoulish demons from the movie Ghost? I've taken stats and it's hard enough in daylight. Maybe this guy just needs to turn a light on or sumthin'?
    • jjive, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1The crippled child said to seek the Wolf for enlightenment... and so I shall!
    • joe8pack, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2cnn did not proclaim it, they merely reported it. John Williams et al said it was highly likely- These sources quoted make a lot of money advising investors, and corporations - I would not lightly belittle them. If you feel they are wrong, explain why you feel this way. I like people like you, they let people like me make a lot of money. You don't think, you just react. It costs very little to begin to prepare for the problems ahead, and it is usually better to be prepared and not need it than the other way around.
    • jjive, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Join me friends, and together we will unite the "Rings of Sanity".
    • Hangly, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1The fact that CNN doesn't seem to be lying to me makes me suspicious.
  • daxsymbiont, on 03/02/2008, -3/+54In such talk, beware of scums trying to rob you.

    A pathetic thing about the average person is that they think that ***** up someone else economically is "good" for the overall economy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Wealth of a group (such as a country or in extension the world) does not come from robbing others but from *production of goods* and healthy economies. Sitting all day doing nothing robbing people is exactly the opposite: no production, no health of economy.

    That extends to countries and generally groups, ***** up another group does not make you richer in the long term. Everyone is richer if the economy in healthier and if *everyone* is richer.

    Any economist that isn't trash knows that.
    • allowners, on 03/02/2008, -3/+4It appears the scums are already robbing us. "Production of goods" is much different than pyramid schemes to siphon off wealth into the hands of the few at the expense of the many. Such pathetic individuals think that ***** over the public good for obscene personal enrichment is good for the overall economy. Sitting all day scheming to rob people destroys the health of the economy as productive people are robbed of their wealth and society begins to break down because people lose faith, whether it be in groups or countries. Once society breaks down things get ugly all around. Any human that isn't trash knows that.
      • Outdoor83, on 03/02/2008, -1/+2The great thing about Capitalism is that it, in general, aligns the good of the economy with the good of the individual as strongly as possible. You need to have some checks on this obviously (Sherman Antitrust Act, etc), but in general it's pretty close.

        When we all go to work, we all *do something* that helps the economy roll. Do some research, write some webpages, code some open source, heal patients, uphold the law, grow tomatoes, and oversee all of these operations to the best of our ability. If we all keep heading to work and doing that, we're producing real things.

        Your point is that people at the top take a bigger piece of the pie, but that's because they took on a whole lot of risk to get in that position -- and, as humans, we freaking *hate* risk. So, they get rewarded for it. There are exceptions, but in general, it works.
    • Dumbledorito, on 03/02/2008, -3/+6America hasn't been in the "production of goods" business since cargo ships started crossing the Pacific, it seems.
      • minoss, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Providing services and research and development is also "production" of goods. Just not in the physical sense.
        • jeff303, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Yep - that's why services are part of the GDP
    • dildoolielly, on 03/02/2008, -4/+5Well your post would make sense if the richest 1 percent of Americans didn't own 40 percent of US wealth

      And you're an "economist"?
      • InorganicMatter, on 03/02/2008, -3/+1Yeah, we also pay almost all the taxes for you. ;)
  • mark076h, on 03/02/2008, -15/+60waiting for foxnews to connect this with terrorists.
    • saisumimen, on 03/02/2008, -3/+2Those damn terrorists started buying suits and started sneaking into the stock exchange.
    • Bamont, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3Oh, man. I was waiting for Digg to connect this with Fox News. Thanks!
    • Raiderkid6, on 03/02/2008, -2/+1And Im waiting for Digg to somehow tie this with Obama

      HE WILL SAVE US
    • calon9, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Since it's near election season, they will connect it to the democrats.
    • Railz, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1CNN is a terrorist organization. MSNBC is allowing them to operate them within their borders. Now is the time for action.
  • vince916, on 03/02/2008, -1/+32I dont understand economics that well, but wouldnt holding cash during inflation be bad also? During inflation the best path would invest in something stable like gold or another currency?
    • CrazedLeper, on 03/02/2008, -0/+9That took me by surprise, too. There could be a run on the dollar if the banks start failing. Maybe there is no "safe" haven.
    • mCanada, on 03/02/2008, -0/+6inflation willl erode away at your savings, however if you rate things in terms of liquidity zero being cash, 1 being bonds , 10 being say a house in a "business cycle downturn" as my prof's like to term it or as others like to call it "a fiiresale" you want to have relative stability in your finances with as little relative volatility hitting you as possible. Yes, gold / oil seems like the easy route, however even those are going to be in for a ride for the foreseeable future. Every person out there is trying to time the market like that ATM. Cash while you may even be loosing some money for a while, may be the best worst case scenario for many. When the dust settles, collect your coins and go buy something of value at the "firesale" when opportunity shows itself. Note that he said keep mainly cash and some gold as a hedge. Not the other way around, liquidity is good in this market.
    • athrasher, on 03/02/2008, -3/+1At lower levels, the only way to really combat inflation is to save, to take money out of circulation. Unfortunately, this has to become a widespread idea for it to really be effective or other people will just borrow the money that you have in the bank..

      With larger sums of money(i.e. millions or billions), the best way to combat inflation would be to invest your money domestically to try and make progress in evening out our trade deficit. Unfortunately, unless we somehow luck into a country full of executives who act beyond their own self-interests(which you can't rationally expect them to do) or cease dealing with nations where the economy is completely run by the government(China), it's going to be tough to get any widespread investment in the US. We might just have to wait it out until the dollar is so devalued that Europeans and Asians can't afford not to invest in our economy, but hopefully it doesn't come to that.

      Regardless of whatever scenario plays out, there will be no Great Depression, for the simple reason that the mild economic plight of the US != Great Depression.
    • synthpop, on 03/02/2008, -1/+4during inflation, if you're holding dollars then basically you will see your money evaporate from week to week. you can try gold but thats a very volatile market. last year I put most of my savings in foreign currency and today they are worth 30% more when you convert to dollars. this is more a testament of the sad state of the dollar rather than the strength of other currencies. if you do go for foreign currency then countries that are rich with resources (like canada and australia) are better for long term.
    • vertinox, on 03/02/2008, -2/+2True, gold would be the better bet but you should have invested a few years ago. The problem is that although gold is considered valuable, its not a consumable. People don't need to put gold in their gas tank nor can you eat it. Its shiny and pretty and its good for wires in space program but its still a fiat commodity in a sense and you could still easily loose a lot of money if someone reverse the current trend.

      And if things got so bad... Gold isn't as valuable as commodities and bartering would come back into play. Do you think the average person would trade you his food for a bag of gold coins or bullets to hunt with or maybe seeds to grow more food?

      But I don't think it would get that bad though... Or at least hope not.
      • TheTyrant63, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1A recession is possibly coming. Not the end of civilization. Gold has stood the test of time as a currency for many centuries. To exclude it now makes now sense what so ever.
      • skipdog172, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1Isn't gold needed for electrical components as well?
    • cheeseron, on 03/03/2008, -1/+1investing your money in something like gold actually worsens inflation, as evidenced by germany post wwi and a few other nations
  • JoeFelice, on 03/02/2008, -4/+29"Admits" is a misleading title. More like preaches, insists, or at least announces.
    • chuckDontSurf, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3He also didn't say the Great Depression is coming. He said the worst financial cycle since the Great Depression.
  • saxreturns, on 03/02/2008, -15/+100Williams: "I wouldn't want to be the president, in the uh, 2012 election, because whoever wins this upcoming one is gonna take the blame for a real bad economy"

    ***** no. The current administration MUST be held accountable for this mess. Surely everyone knows this is their fault by now.
    • dildoolielly, on 03/02/2008, -5/+22"Everyone"?!!

      Never forget who supported this failure, don't let them distance themselves from him. Whining about Libs and Dems and Clinton and Kerry and gay sex, while offering nothing of substance - and most notably - no defense for the lying little sack of ***** from Texas they shackled us with!

      America's enemy is the idiot who IGNORED that Bush lied to us about Iraq, IGNORED that Bush defends treason, IGNORED that Bush was asleep at the wheel on 9/11, IGNORED that Bush had already blundered our war effort in Iraq, IGNORED that Bush still tries to link Iraq and 911, IGNORED that Bush was going to run amok with our Constitution, IGNORED his continued policy that fuels extremist groups and floods intelligence agencies with "false positives" from illegal wiretapping operations—among other things and still voted to re-elect this miserable failure.

      The enemy from within has perpetuated this death and devastation. Don't forget it.

      It is because of a bush voter that the country is in the atrocious position it is in today.
    • misconstrued, on 03/02/2008, -1/+4It's not entirely their fault. What do you think they did to cause these problems?
    • themonkman, on 03/02/2008, -2/+13How exactly can the presidential administration be responsible for a private corporation's actions (The Federal Reserve) who has no in depth government oversight or power to force particular decisions? That is the problem, people. You put the value of our dollar in the hands of a few powerful men who are beholden to only their share holders, and look what happens.

      I hate to say it, but Ron Paul had been talking about this for well over a decade, and in the recent presidential campaign. People just laughed at him. At least I know I voted the intelligent choice. These fools running for president can't fix the problem because they won't look at the core issue at hand: the Federal Reserve's stranglehold on our currency.
      • cquinnd, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2You think that the various lobbying and political action groups that influence (and are influenced by) the administration have no influence on the financial markets as well?
      • Whatwedo, on 03/02/2008, -0/+1That said, Bush did get together with Greenspan and pursued an inflationary policy in the early '00s to "soften" the dot-com bubble burst, preventing a full market correction by lowering interest rates, commencing this long run of inflationary policies and encouraging debt.
    • citizen782, on 03/02/2008, -1/+3This thing started with NAFTA long before GW. He just stood there and threw gas on the fire.
      • Railz, on 03/03/2008, -1/+1Why do people insist that NAFTA is cause for all our problems. NAFTA is doing much more good then harm. Do you have ANY clue how much Canada and the USA trade.
    • TheSeptimHeir, on 03/02/2008, -0/+2The very fact that you're blaming Bush proves the point: the current President always takes the blame/credit. While Bush has certainly made the issues worse, the root of the problems pre-date him. And while Clinton certainly maintained the rising economy, the real credit pre-dated him as well. Nature of the beast: if you're in office, you get the responsibility whether you deserve it or not.
      The next President will be blamed if the economy collapses, and cheered if the economy rights itself. Whether it's fair or not. Because people like you will always be here to just blame the current incumbent, disregarding everything that came before.
      • lpse2000, on 03/02/2008, -1/+2I think he'd blame a republican president for a bad economy and credit a democrat president for a good economy, no matter what order of events take place.
    • Hangly, on 03/03/2008, -0/+2Every president since FDR is responsible for this mess. This had been decades in coming, and NO ONE has adequately addressed it.
    • JohnFromChicago, on 03/03/2008, -0/+1Yes this goes back to the creation of the fed. FDR did a good bit of damage, they killed JFK for trying to fix it early on, then LJB and Nixon made huge strides in destroying anything resembling a free America. HW set the agenda, Clinton passed NAFTA, and put the "New Economy" in place ... new CPI, etc. GW has just run a lot harder and faster than his predecessors, but it's come from both parties and it's been building for quite some time. Ultimately it's the American people's fault for allowing it to get this bad before even thinking about holding our leaders accountable.
  • indicas, on 03/02/2008, -5/+18Anyone know a good place to purchase gold from? And AK47 assault rifles?

    Kidding about the latter of course, but I would like to get some gold.
    • Qtip42, on 03/02/2008, -2/+6ajpm.com for gold........now where do i get that second thing?
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/02/2008, -5/+35Some digger made a really funny joke a few months back about Ron Paul supporter's hinding in their basements with their gold and weapons stockpile screaming "Were all gonn diiiiiiiieeeeeeee!".

      That was funny at the time, but *****, it keeps looking more and more like they were right.
      • Firgof, on 03/02/2008, -1/+14Ron Paul supporters: Not as crazy as you want to believe we are.
        • ShogunWarPig, on 03/02/2008, -0/+6That would make an awesome bumper sticker.
      • allengeer, on 03/02/2008, -5/+1gold and weapons stockpiled hiding in your basement seems... realistic?
        do ron paul supporters believe that the zombies are coming?
    • j0313971, on 03/02/2008, -2/+11Easy. Buy ticker symbol GLD. It is an ETF that tracks the price of gold, so you buy it the same way you would buy a stock. 1 share represents ownership of 1/10 of 1 troy ounce of gold. the only catch is they'll take off about 0.5%/year to pay for operation expenses and it is taxed at the collectible 28% rate on profits if you make enough money. if you don't believe the gold is there, they have pictures of it for you and they have a list of the weight and id # of each individual gold bar in their vault. they use the money you deposit into the fund to buy more gold. it is now the world's 7th or 8th largest gold owner (that includes governments). I bought this a couple years ago and i have now made 45%. it has been going up faster recently due to increased inflation and higher oil prices. what was most surprising is that it is so stable. back in the 80's the price of gold was very volatile, but now it is probably one of the safest investments out there.
      • themonkman, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3I don't know why your getting Dugg down. You made the intelligent and wise choice of diversifying your investments, and you made 45% return on it. That's amazing! That's way better than most high risk growth stocks, and with extremely little risk. Your cash is liquid, too. If the dollar crashes, people will be wanting something solid that holds it's value in return for services. I feel that gold, historically, has been this medium.