Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

[jk]

[LargoWinch]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

this clip cannot be seen by isp users in Canada :mad:

[jtabeb]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

This is funny, but his dow targets are believable:eek::eek:

[cjppjc]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

That was great. I could go for a few Warewolves in Congress, instead of the pirates that are there now.

[D-Mack]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

this clip cannot be seen by isp users outside the US.

Works fine in Germany

[jk]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

this clip cannot be seen by isp users in Canada :mad:

you can always go to the comedy central website. it was from - i think- wed 3/4.

[Verrocchio]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

Thanks for posting Colbert, Fred! He's at his best when mocking flakes. This was a timely post, too, because as we have now entered the middle innings of this ball game (Inning 4 or 5 now, I suppose), more and more postings reflect a belief among us that preparedness includes silver, gold, food stores, a bunker, and personal firearms -- often in reverse order. I'm not critical of anyone making such preparations. It may be one of the more prudent moves one can make.

But, I am uncomfortable at the similarity of the message from Beck and his guests, including Celente, and many of the posts on iTulip. Have the views of iTulip converged with those of the mass media? If not, what are the differences? We should eat Colbert's prediction peyote, and develop a more refined scenario than the ones conjured up in Beck's War Room.

[Guest]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

Glenn Beck is most certainly a prize twit, but the rest of Colbert's spoof ought to be framed for posterity, for the antithesis it hints at, which is that any extreme in the DOW or extreme of social disintegration are equally signs of an overwrought imagination. What if the DOW winds up at 30K within the next five years instead? It's presently laughed off. Yet implicit in Colbert's spoof is the assumption that astute people today don't imagine it moving to any extreme, up or down.

Colbert is clever and I like his style and viewpoint. However this spoof itself may unintentionally wind up being quaint to the extent it winds up spoofing all the wrong points, as the DOW soars to 30,000, to A) accomodate a future decade which has global hyperinflation written all over it, and B) reinstate the "largest commodities boom in history" which has so recently been rudely interrupted by a financial collapse.

Don't smile - this is actually looking like the likeliest evolution, given the largest underpinnings of the next decade. Commodities relative to globes population going into critical depletion (an event approaching us at some speed), and the monetary mayhem that is being sown today and that will be exacerbated by the transition from fossil fuels. In sum, the DOW 30,000 scenario has "probable" written all over it.

A renewed bull market in oil ignites a bull market across all commodities exporter nations and industrialising nations, and those industrialising nations have been interrupted in the middle of a very substantial boom anyway. Don't buy into all the tripe that the recently elapsed boom was purely a financial bubble.

The demographics underpinning the recently interrupted commodities boom have not gone anywhere. It's just the popular wisdom today, after the truncation of the first leg of the commodities boom, that regards a DOW at 30K as being just as absurd as a DOW at 250. Colbert's spoof was a send up of the depiction of any "market extremes". But that instills in us the notion that as long as one rejects extremes one is being astute.

That's arguably the wrong message for the next decade.

This was quoted by Don Coxe at the recent PDAC convention:

QUOTE:

When Chris Patten (who had been the final governor of Hong Kong) was installed as Chancellor of Oxford, he said:

“For the first 18 centuries, of what we call the Christian or Common Era, the two biggest economies on earth were China and India.”

“They didn’t experience the Industrial Revolution.”

“In the first half of this century, we will revert to normalcy”, he said—and that’s what’s happening!


The point being that "normalcy" in a mature industrialised world where the population has increased to 7 billion, will not look anything remotely like the "normal" which Colbert emphasises is the mark of sanity. It will very likely look to us to be entirely "ab-normal". And the kickoff date for the flowering of that abnormality will be the very first signs of global recovery from this financial accident. My guess is we are just months away from the kickoff.

[Verrocchio]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

I appreciate your comments, Luke. But, doesn't it bother you, too, that the MSM (at least in the form of Beck at Fox) seems to have now come in step with our commentaries here?

[Guest]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

Yes that convergence has bothered me too Verrocchio. And actually I have noted a marked change of tone in the general run of iTulip (participant) comments here in the past year - as you note, it's reverted more often to a "silver, gold, food stores, a bunker, and personal firearms" type of discussion than it ever used to. To be quite frank, I'm not sure whether the general discussion has been improved by that. You can certainly note that the iTulip survivalist posting is converging rather than diverging with the general run of alarmed talk out there.

More to the point, there seems a powerful consensus here that the only option in the immediate future is a summary flush down the toilet for all economic participants. But that event can occur in a half dozen different ways at a global level as the US evolution is not the only economic story in the world that's going to have a say on the general global economic complexion - but we are all drifting over to the "Gerald Celente" school of thought here ("all fall down") without any contributors posting any markedly different alternatives. Seems an alarmingly uniform consensus.

I second your observation. When you find your own community sounding often like the dire chatter emanating from forums like Glenn Beck's, it's time to take a determined and permanent step back and away from all of that stuff. I have seen him interviewing journalists reporting from around the world - smart, capable and insightful journalists from developing countries, and he cuts them off constantly with opinionated trumpeting which merely serves to evidence what a solid piece of hardwood Beck is, when measured between the ears.

I appreciate your comments, Luke. But, doesn't it bother you, too, that the MSM (at least in the form of Beck at Fox) seems to have now come in step with our commentaries here?

[metalman]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

well put! had the same reaction. yes, beck's a nitwit. no, we're not all going back to the farm. but no, that does not mean the dow can't be 2700 in year 2026 in parallel to japan/nikkei after the bubble there.

[cjppjc]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

You can certainly note that the iTulip survivalist posting is converging rather than diverging with the general run of alarmed talk out there.

Certainly. You would expect as much, wouldn't you?

[Verrocchio]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

Certainly. You would expect as much, wouldn't you?

Actually, not. The attraction of this site (and EJ's original iTulip site, as well) was that it wielded a sharp knife of original, well-grounded thought that sliced through much of the sensationalism that has come to typify the mainstream media (MSM). Discussions held here have generally followed the example set by EJ's posts.

Until lately the iTulip thesis and the MSM have been sharply different. That's why I enjoy browsing here, and I want to continue doing so. I feel we should push our thinking out past the Glenn Becks. Don't you? Why would you expect convergence?

[cjppjc]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

Actually, not. The attraction of this site (and EJ's original iTulip site, as well) was that it wielded a sharp knife of original, well-grounded thought that sliced through much of the sensationalism that has come to typify the mainstream media (MSM). Discussions held here have generally followed the example set by EJ's posts.

Until lately the iTulip thesis and the MSM have been sharply different. That's why I enjoy browsing here, and I want to continue doing so. I feel we should push our thinking out past the Glenn Becks. Don't you? Why would you expect convergence?

I would expect convergence in this matter the way you can expect convergence in almost anything. When events continue for a period, people do get it. We sometimes make light of the fact and say that people are sheeple. But they do see what is happening. Just because iTulip was one of the first to the party, does not mean the party can't get crowded.

As far as the "survivalist" go, I'm not stocking up yet. Although I've made note about how the LDS prepare. To prepare for something that might not happen is not wrong.

[jk]

Re: Stephen Colbert's doom bunker!

gresham's law applies to public fora.