August 6, 2017 at 8:26 am #35349Raúl Ilargi MeijerKeymaster
Giorgio de Chirico Piazza d’Italia 1913 • The Bursting of the China Credit Bubble (Crescat) • The Swamp Is So Undrainable It Will End Up Making
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle August 6 2017]August 6, 2017 at 11:19 am #35351
“Verizon’s market share is about 30%, thus the total spending increase on wireless services is close to $150 billion.”
Baseless assumption that *every* company increased proportionally. Hey, Ilargi, how about doing a piece on the degradation of quality in the overly ‘productive’ words (cuz is it really anything more than that?) sector of the economy?August 6, 2017 at 11:25 am #35352
“And according to the World Population Prospects 2017, a recently updated UN report, the world population will hit a staggering 9.8 billion by 2050.”
Not likely. I still think it’ll peak closer to 2035 than to 2050 and (obviously) at a lower number.August 6, 2017 at 11:35 am #35353
More “perspective” on that population piece:
“Demographic growth presents a global challenge: In 13 years (2030) the world population is projected to grow more than one billion people, reaching 8.6 billion people. It will reach 9.8 billion in 2050, and 11.2 billion in 2100.”
I suspect that’s the author projecting the trend forward with no basis.
“But they underestimated the human ability to innovate and solve problems.”
Okay, maybe that’s the basis: an active imagination, ignorance, and ‘hopium’.
Cristina Casabón, Digital Content Specialist
The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.”
Gee, can I get a piece published too?August 6, 2017 at 12:27 pm #35355Dr. DiabloParticipant
“A hostile White House…” “…is part of an unprecedented assault on the State Department”
This article and approach is truly bizarre. It’s like saying “the decommission of the F150 assembly line to make F250’s is part of an unprecedented attack on Ford. Will they survive?” Newsflash: the State Department is the exclusive playground of the Executive. Then can fire 100% of all men there, hire circus clowns, and be in their rights. The Neocons + the opposing party have been there for a minimum of 16 years. Entire careers have been established on the basis of illegal intervention, theft, mass-murder, extortion, and war. The election presumably happened to put in something new. (Of course the last 4 elections were too, but…) Is Tillerson supposed to do something new, something he was elected for, by keeping the people positioned and promoted by his enemies, firing no one and changing nothing? You know, like Obama did when he kept the entire pro-bank, pro-war Bush team in place? Or do we somehow believe that entire departments of the government, put in during the last 16+ years of intense acrimony, are entirely non-political?
That’s why this is so bizarre it’s almost notes from a parallel universe where apparently the State Department and Washington insiders are deeply caring, non-political patriots, while the voters are dirty reprehensibles trying to topple the state, and Presidents and elected officials are traitors and rebels to be ignored, stymied, opposed, blackmailed, and brought to heel by the real government: the kind, wise, benevolent insiders. That the government is for them, not for us? It does what they say, not what we say?
Or, perhaps, that really IS what we believe? What this employee, what this reporter, even what so many readers believe? That we voters, we citizens are nothing, and our lord and master is groupthink, is bureaucracy, is government and we are but poor subjects to their eternal will?
Maybe this article is not as far off in reporting as first appeared; it’s just that we –and apparently a tiny majority of the people — have wildly differing views of the relationship between people and government.August 6, 2017 at 5:10 pm #35356Diogenes ShruggedParticipant
With respect to the Pilger article, consider this. We’re accustomed to thinking of world wars as conflicts between nations, not wars between civilian populations. The common man in Russia or China isn’t chomping at the bit to kill Americans, and vice-versa. Wars between superpowers begin as wars between governments.
But WWIII will be different. In effect, the coming world war will be waged by globalists against the civilian populations of the developed world. If you peek in advance at the outcome, it will effectively be a war waged by the .01% against the 99.99%, whether intentionally or not. It will be represented to us as a war between governments, but that might only be a ruse.
The underground bunkers and bomb shelters are already prepared — luxury retreats for the .01% — as are the open-air FEMA camps for American civilians.
Then, after the radioactive dust settles, elites on every continent will emerge from their hideaways victorious. Is that what it’s going to take for people to finally realize that governments -per se- aren’t a good idea in the first place? The biggest genocides of history involved governments killing off their own civilian populations, but with wars, governments kill off each others’.
Please, Lord, be merciful and let me (and mine) be well within the blast radius of the first bombs to drop.August 6, 2017 at 5:11 pm #35357Diogenes ShruggedParticipant
On the other hand, if WWIII results in an American nuclear “victory” over Russia and China, then we already know what happens after that. As in Kiev, the U.S. will put Nazis in charge. Which makes WWIII a continuation of WWII, but with the twist that the Nazis win. Nazis with names like Nuland, Kagan and Soros (Schwartz György). Which makes me think. With all the brouhaha over Confederate flags and monuments, are Americans still fighting the Civil War, too?August 7, 2017 at 5:47 am #35358V. ArnoldParticipant
Russia and China have a far better chance of detroying the U.S. than vice versa; but, it’s a moot point because; very few (if any) humans will survive the aftermath. For many, it will be a relatively slow death, aka, On The Beach. The movie is poignant, to say the least.
Humans, especially the U.S. variety, have lost the ability to actually think; critically, rationally, and logically.
The wealthy who put in their expensive bunkers are fools. The U.S. “leaders” (sic), are even bigger fools with a huge disability; they’re insane.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.