Tweet
includes why de-constructing the Times is important....
-
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
I find it harder and harder to listen to these two these days.
Has anyone read the Trends Journal? Does Celente do more than just state the obvious in it? -
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Celente and especially Keiser are to a large extent; entertainers, but I do agree with the bulk of their views (especially Celente). These are after all incredible and troubling times.Originally posted by Chris View Post
No, the ones I am really sick of are the 98% of the populace who do not seem to care.Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
The entire thing in one go.
It is 23 min. so I think don, you missed a few segments (no harm done):
Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Agree with LargoWinch.
I regularly follow Gerald Celente - he is an absolute hoot to list/watch. Very very entertaining.
I find there is actual substance in what he says even though it can be very repetitive.
Referring to Mega's entertaining post complaining about "Where is the collapse" or essentially asking when will the dam ANGLO SAXON paradigm end?
One way to characterize the ANGLO SAXON paradigm has been the extremity of "rational thinking". Too much of anything is never good (?)
So perhaps the pendulum needs to swing back- to "irrational" modes of thinking?
This is where Celente's viewpoints become interesting.
I don't know what sources/inspiration Celente utilizes for his material nor the degree by which his Trends Research materials manifests as a result of hard number crunching, diligent and highly effective research (like iTulip).
But his blog contains an array of snippets ranging from paranormal activities to "far out there" conspiracy folks: areas one could call "irrational" within an ANGLO SAXON paradigm...
http://geraldcelentechannel.blogspot...wn-and-it.htmlLast edited by chedir007; August 21, 2010, 11:27 PM.Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Ilargi and Stoneleigh had a good take on Celente - August 21 2010: America's Corporate HeadquartersOriginally posted by LargoWinch View Post
Indeed, the "economic recovery" we've been fed for a year now, is, and was always, fake. We never left the first dip, and so we can't enter a second one. And no, this is not a recession, it's a depression, one that Celente labels "the Greatest Depression". Yes, things will get a whole lot worse than they are today. And yes, the way the US calculates its official unemployment numbers are a disgrace. Also, one thing that could and should be done now is to reinstate for instance Glass Steagall.
But it's not happening. As Celente says, corporate and political interests (of both parties) are so intertwined in America today that there's only one word that really fits the whole package, and that is "fascism" (or corporatism, if you like) . And that's a word that conjures up images of another aspect of our futures, one that Celente talks about and I leave mostly alone. That is to say, increasing violence. It's not that I don't share his fears on the topic, it is one of those things that we all have, that we don't talk much about, but that do keep us up at night.
Whether it’s random, wanton, gratuitous, or organized, and whether it’s domestic or international, violence will be -much- more a part of life for most of us than it has been in the past. The US today sends its troops to foreign lands in hopeless wars, and shows no signs of letting up. Tomorrow, it may scale up those efforts, and the government military apparatus may turn inward as well, in order to keep the people from starting a revolution of sorts.
Celente mentions that 20% of the people -will- mean to do good, in his opinion, a number he states in order to claim all's not lost, but that of course still leaves 80% of the people. Anywhere between 25% and 50%, if not more, will be unemployed in many places, and without any material means of existence. "Increasingly, people are going to lose it", says Celente. Does anyone doubt that? The Great Depression was remarkable in that the people alive then in the US largely remained peaceful, and accepted their sorrowful fates without lifting a finger against those who brought those fates upon them. Will the Greatest Depression evolve in the same fashion? It doesn't seem very likely.
There are a number of things the present US government is doing spectacularly wrong. Perhaps first and foremost is the complete failure to make good on its promise of more transparency in politics. Just a few days ago, both Washington and BP declared that “most of the oil" in the Gulf of Mexico was gone. But that statement was always ridiculous, and is now proven to be so. What were they thinking? Does anyone still realize that there was never any impartial research done into the amount of oil that was spilled? That all the numbers that are available come from BP and the government, both of whom have excellent reasons to hide the truth? As Celente puts it: "Let’s call a spade a spade, it's fascism".
Another issue that Obama and his men fail miserably in is economic numbers. Unemployment is far higher than they let on, simply because they don't care for looking all that bad. Home prices are artificially kept high, through subsidies and the wavering of mark-to-market accounting rules for loans and securities, simply because neither the government nor the corporations would remain standing if housing prices were left to the free market to deal with.
And also: last week in Ohio, Obama stated in a meeting with the public that the US economy "is on track". Is it, though? GDP numbers have been revised downward multiple times already this year. The present "official estimate" is a 2.4% growth, and expectations are that next week, this will be lowered to 1.4%.
The Consumer Metrics Institute begs to differ. Its Growth Index 91-day (one quarter) trailing figure now stands at -5.06%!! Which is 7.46% lower than the present government number, derived from the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis. I'll leave you with a few of the CMI's data and graphs from the front page of its website, as well as some accompanying explanatory text. You decide who you think is telling the truth.
NOTE: In the first graph you can see, if you shift the CMI Growth Index forward by a few months, that both it and the official BEA line up quite well; a simple time lag. Except at the very end, today. This can mean one of two things, neither of which are good news: either the BEA has started seriously fooling around with its data, or, and this is still possible, its GDP numbers are about to take a steep plunge. A very steep one.
Consumer Metrics Institute's Growth Index Past 4 Years(1)
Notes:
(1) The Consumer Metrics Institute's 91-day 'Trailing Quarter' Growth Index -vs- U.S. Department of Commerce's Quarterly GDP Growth Rates over past 4 years. The quarterly GDP growth rates are shown as 3-month plateaus in the graph. The Consumer Metrics Institute's Growth Index is plotted as a monthly average. Please see our Frequently Asked Questions page for a more complete description of our Growth Index.
Consumer Metrics Institute's Contraction Watch(2)
Notes:
(2) The comparison of the 91-Day Growth Indexes during the 'quarter' immediately following the commencement of a contraction. The contraction events of 2008 and 2010 are shown against the same scale of annualized contraction.
Notes:
(4) The average net year-over-year growth percentage of the Weighted Composite Index over the past 91, 183 and 365 Days (the daily value for the equivalent of a real-time Consumer 'GDP' for the trailing moving 'quarter', 'six months' and 'year').
(5) The percentile of the above among all GDP quarters, six months and years since the spring of 1947 in the BEA's GDP growth tables (i.e., the percentage of all comparable time spans in the BEA's data below the values in the '% Growth' line above).
Our Daily Growth Index has reached a year-over-year contraction rate of 5%, and it is rapidly closing the gap on the worst contraction rate observed during the 2008 Great Recession:
The current 2010 contraction is now over 215 days old. At the same point during the duration of the 2008 Great Recession, consumer demand was contracting at less than a 1% year-over-year rate. Additionally, during the 2008 Great Recession our Daily Growth Index had returned to net growth after 223 days. From the above chart we can see that the profile of the 2008 contraction and the 2010 contraction are substantially different. The 2008 event was a classic "V" shaped recession. So far this one is not. We have previously suggested that this contraction might be mild but prolonged. We are no longer confident about "mild".
We have previously gained some notoriety for having our Daily Growth Index lead the GDP by a relatively consistent 18-20 weeks during the Great Recession. Does this mean that we expect the GDP a couple of quarters from now to be contracting at rates similar to our current -5% rate?
- Our methodologies capture only on-line consumer demand for discretionary durable goods, the most volatile portion of the consumer's 70% contribution to the GDP. As a consequence we are not seeing the impact of most ongoing governmental stimuli. If governmental stimulus packages can successfully offset the 2010 drop in consumer demand, the GDP might never feel the full weight of the 2010 contraction event.
- However, as we have said before, we suspect that consumers are the "800 pound gorilla" in this recession, and their actions (or inactions) will ultimately be felt to a major extent in the GDP.
By analogy to (American) football statistics, we are only measuring the performance of the starting quarterback for the U.S. economic team. It is possible for a football team to win even though the quarterback is below average -- an overwhelming defense and a punishing running game can compensate for a journey-man quarterback -- but the performance of the starting quarterback is by far the best predictor of a football team's final results. The U.S. economy might grow without the U.S. consumer's support, but only with net exports and/or unsustainable governmental consumption. At the current time the likelihood of the U.S. becoming a net exporter is very low, and unsustainable governmental consumption is simply that: unsustainable.
It is also helpful to distinguish between "leading" and "predicting": we have deliberately decided to measure discretionary consumer demand data because it is highly leading, while fully realizing that the volatile data provides amplified signals. Fortunately during the 2008 recession the BEA's numbers for the full economy eventually matched the discretionary consumer demand portion (that we measure) with embarrassing accuracy. While we know that we are measuring only one portion of the economy -- the quarterback in the above analogy -- we still feel that those measurements reliably lead the economy as a whole. And they should not be expected to predict exactly what the BEA's 1937 based methodologies eventually measure -- for those portions of the economy that really mattered in 1937.
As the saying goes: our numbers are what they are. They are pure daily measures of on-line consumer demand for discretionary durable goods. If consumer demand decisions initiate 70% of all U.S. commerce, we think that there is merit in knowing that demand as far "upstream" as possible.
And Now We're Headed For The GREATEST Depression, Says Gerald CelenteComment
- Our methodologies capture only on-line consumer demand for discretionary durable goods, the most volatile portion of the consumer's 70% contribution to the GDP. As a consequence we are not seeing the impact of most ongoing governmental stimuli. If governmental stimulus packages can successfully offset the 2010 drop in consumer demand, the GDP might never feel the full weight of the 2010 contraction event.
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Thanks Rajiv, you are really a cross reference guru!
Is it a "one man" team or there are many of you sharing the same account?
Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
I seem to find only the full versions when what I want is only the second half interview.
Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Well here is one answerOriginally posted by LargoWinch View PostIs it a "one man" team or there are many of you sharing the same account?
Though I was never a Popeye fan and found the strip and cartoons far too violent and full of stereotypes.Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
A latest audio interview of Celente- an example of his dark humor- hilarious but sadly true: how everything has become too big.....
At 8min 50 secs, his comments on the recent eggs recall: 1/2 billion eggs (from only 2 farms) marketed under a variety of cheery names like "Sunny Acre farms etc". He calls them, amongst other things, nothing more than "chicken coup concentration farms"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkMZ5...ayer_embedded#!Comment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Rajiv --
In one sentence you have fully justified the spinach I planted in my garden this year. Being raised with Popeye, I do not negatively react to the stereotypes, but I do react to his credibility.Well here is one answerComment
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
[QUOTE Being raised with Popeye...[/QUOTE]
Hamburger Tuesdays
Comment
-
-
Re: Gerald Celente Speaks
Originally posted by don View PostHamburger Tuesdays[/QUOTE]
A child's first lesson in the creation and use of credit...Comment
Comment