Does the World Actually NEED another "Great Depression"?

Well, the real question is how hard this crisis will hit the US's competitors compared to the US. The locus of the whole maelstrom in this case is the US (with Britain just behind). The other countries are really only suffering the domino effects of America's problems.

The open question is whether those knock on effects will cause more or less devastation to those countries than to the US. That is altogether contingent upon their dependence upon the US, and there is no way of telling right now.

My prediction is that those countries I have mentioned - Europe, Russia and China - will survive the storm, and by the time America's economy recovers to former levels (which may be never), the playing fields will have dramatically shifted. And they could become a triumvirate of economic and military strength that constitute a real challenge to America's admittedly significant capabilities.
 
PeterCH said:
Perhaps. I just think people are understimating the United States.

You don't become the only superpower out of the blue
and a global economic crisis will probably hit your competitors
harder than you anyway, so I think the US will still remain
in its top position. :)
Click to expand...
..., Greeks, Romans, Ottomans, ..., English, US... ;)
 
BigAl-sa said:
..., Greeks, Romans, Ottomans, ..., English, US... ;)
Click to expand...

The reasons why the US is strong haven't disappeared and no-one else
comes close. Its not the time for US collapse yet.

Eg command of the seas, own private continent, no significant trouble spots
or land borders to control, increasing population (while rest of industrial
world's population ages) and so on. There is a link about this too,
in this subforum.
 
But these articles are three years old and don't even mention the incipient threat of a US credit crisis. Don't you think that this fact might cause them to revise their bullishness a little? They talk of future recession in very generic terms of natural cyclicality but this is not a predictable cyclical shrinking of the economy, it's a total stock market panic.
 
Last edited:
cerebus said:
But these articles are three years old and don't even mention the incipient threat of a US credit crisis. Don't you think that this fact might cause them to revise their bullishness a little? They talk of future recession in very generic terms of natural cyclicality but this is not a predictable cyclical shrinking of the economy, it's a total stock market panic.
Click to expand...

A drop in the bucket in comparison. My money's on the US staying on top.

Who's moaning now about the Euro and the British/German economies contracting?
 
Last edited:
rubbish! And we are nowhere near the bottom of the barrel with this one. The article admitted that previous predictions were nullified by a 'drop in the bucket' like the twin towers event - predictions are only as good as predictable events will permit.
 
cerebus said:
rubbish! And we are nowhere near the bottom of the barrel with this one. The article admitted that previous predictions were nullified by a 'drop in the bucket' like the twin towers event - predictions are only as good as predictable events will permit.
Click to expand...

Admittedly they did f-up a little, however the US fundamentals are there
(stuff I mentioned) while the rest of the industrialised world,
with its aging population and lack of energy security, so dependent
on the US, what will happen to them? I don't know. I think everyone
else will have it harder.

You should see what local papers say about the prices of basic
food products and the poor.
 
It's not that they messed up in their predictions, it's that unpredictable events disrupted necessarily smooth calculations. Which is exactly the same as is happening with this situation. What do you think happens when a megacompany with $600 billion of equity, leveraged at 14:1 ratios, goes under the water? How do you possibly build that into your forecasting models?
 
cerebus said:
It's not that they messed up in their predictions, it's that unpredictable events disrupted necessarily smooth calculations. Which is exactly the same as is happening with this situation. What do you think happens when a megacompany with $600 billion of equity, leveraged at 14:1 ratios, goes under the water? How do you possibly build that into your forecasting models?
Click to expand...

That does not affect the underlying positives the US had (always) going for
it. You read that the rest of the world is 1. Worse of. 2. Incapable
of matching the US. 3. Will be hit too. What happened on the
Russia stock exchange yesterday then?
 
Another unpredictable factor is that the companies who are currently folding under are the very ones who were meant to be cushioning the retirements of these 'debt-free' middle classes you talk about. How's that for a ripple effect?
 
Yes, you're correct that the rest of the world suffers along with America because of their dependency on American investment. But I said before that the eye of the storm is America, and the rest of the world is caught in the peripheral chaos. The debris will clear up from them much faster than from the US, which has yet to really feel the effects of the current turmoil. And they will have some time to learn to survive apart from dependency on US investment, which could possibly in turn alter the financial landscape significantly.
 
cerebus said:
Another unpredictable factor is that the companies who are currently folding under are the very ones who were meant to be cushioning the retirements of these 'debt-free' middle classes you talk about. How's that for a ripple effect?
Click to expand...

That's all temporary. Long term US prognosis has not changed, I can't
say for the rest of the world.
 
cerebus said:
Yes, you're correct that the rest of the world suffers along with America because of their dependency on American investment. But I said before that the eye of the storm is America, and the rest of the world is caught in the peripheral chaos. The debris will clear up from them much faster than from the US, which has yet to really feel the effects of the current turmoil. And they will have some time to learn to survive apart from dependency on US investment, which could possibly in turn alter the financial landscape significantly.
Click to expand...

I'm also mentioning reasons not related to this temporary crisis.
You can see a country by country breakdown why things suck
elsewhere more.

US = self sustained (if need be), vast local market, safe and secure,
command of everything militarily. If push came to shove,
US could just devalue its currency and the rest of the world
would suffer. Who'd invade the US to get their money back?
Where would we get our pharmaceuticals and electronics
from? This is like the worst case scenario I mentioned.

But as we saw in 1929, US recovered faster and became stronger
than ever before.
 
The US had the same meltdown in the 1920’s.

They also had an advertisement on their tv that suggested everyone to get their cash and keep it (the same cause then).

In my opinion the US has never returned to an actual glory they just advertise they are. The speculation and chaos on their stock market just shows the fake advertising of tangible products or produce. The US is n a depression, recession and falling down the mineshaft where they should be due to their lack of moral values.

Everyone is getting tired of the US’s complex bulsh** marketing campaign and it seems economies are returning to invest in actual resource production and sustainability.

Regarding Europe, I understand that the potential exist for another WW3 type treaty, however this time it would be for economic growth and stability rather than lebensraum.

BTW, the US are going for lebensraum with their financed war. Regarding energy, we are not dependant on the US, and neither the world. We can buy our own oil from Venezuela and the rest of the world can negotiate their own.

Cerebus, you are right with the rest of the world needing US investment and money, and I’m sure as soon as the US can they will stop funding the UN and Africa just for “giggles”.

Regarding Russia, I think everyone is underestimating them, I would like to know what is happening with their stock exchange?...
 
Let's focus on Russia, China, Europe and Japan then.
Pls refute the points given under those headings in cited report.
 
The losses of the retirement incomes of millions of Americans is definitely a long term problem. The ones who were meant to be financing the future expansion of US economic domination by your models are reduced to subsistence incomes.

The thing is, the rest of the world never had a long term prognosis; only America has a stable and consistent enough economy to be able to make confident forward looking statements. But these events have disrupted that possibility. They make forecasting America's economic prospects as difficult as any other country.
 
cerebus said:
The thing is, the rest of the world never had a long term prognosis; only America has a stable and consistent enough economy to be able to make confident forward looking statements. But these events have disrupted that possibility. They make forecasting America's economic prospects as difficult as any other country.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that things like aging population in JAPAN and CHINA
while increasing population (incl WHITE) in US mean nothing?

Please explain how you think Japan will survive over the next 20-30 years
especially if having to provide own security (if US backs off).
 
Well, what I'm saying is I agree, you're right that the rest of the world's countries have a number of factors that historically have prevented them from equalling America's economy, and they have a number of problems going forward that will individually make it difficult for them to gain clear dominance in the way America has.

In fact if America really suffers, it is highly unlikely that any one superpower will be able to gain economic supremacy because none of them as you say have America's historic confluence of felicitous situations. However, some powers are on the ascendancy, who collectively may have the capacity to elbow the US off its throne.

An uncomfortable hegemony of power could therefore arise between these superpowers, and it is possible that when America's economy rose again, it would no longer hold its overweening pre-eminence on the world stage. And in fact given that it has always tended towards isolationism and self-sufficiency, it may be content to become a sovereign, militarily powerful but not necessarily economically global presence.
 
China is the new super power and I’m confident the Russia's military investment will suggest a treaty between them.

In my opinion the US only grew due to picking up the pieces from joining the war after it was basically finished.

Their interest in oil also sustained them for very long during the 20th century but that bubble burst in the 70’s.

They are also a bunch a pansies. :) lol.
 
vxv said:
China is the new super power and I’m confident the Russia's military investment will suggest a treaty between them.

In my opinion the US only grew due to picking up the pieces from joining the war after it was basically finished.

Their interest in oil also sustained them for very long during the 20th century but that bubble burst in the 70’s.

They are also a bunch a pansies. :) lol.
Click to expand...

I don't think you know what you're talking about. China and Russia
are enemies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X