Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

CokeSnortingTory

Members
  • Posts

    2,667
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CokeSnortingTory

  1. So we're going back to what has been normal human existence for the last 40,000 years.
  2. No, he's right. Machines are only efficient in the perverse, marginal world of modern industrial capitalism (soon to be deceased). Even then, it's only really accounting tricks (depreciation etc.) that make them efficient even there. Humans don't need a hugely complex technostructure in order to back them up, don't require specialised materials, don't required precisely ampered power wired in from hundreds of miles away, can be easily redeployed to other tasks etc. etc. That said, I'm surprised he's been taken in with all that SynBio ********.
  3. Honestly, it's easier to offer convincing post-hoc rationalisations of the behaviour of the next-door neighbour's cat than it is of the stock market. It just does what it does, people.
  4. Hey, I'm not the one who's going back to re-edit their posts, and claiming that the words they used are supposed to represent completely different words.
  5. One more post on here that agrees with me by trying to sound as though they disagree with me, and I will go apesht.
  6. I see you've edited your post and put inverted commas around the word "cleverly".
  7. It's not them who are panicking though. They're still oblivious. It's those sandwiched between them and the boomers who are panicking.
  8. You are ascribing agency here to an arbitrary, abstract category of people that encompasses millions. It's impressive if they managed to co-ordinate this even before the fax was invented, let alone the internet.
  9. Taleb's video reminds me of an old Dmitry Orlov essay:
  10. This is in poor taste, I know, but I do wonder if he shaved his head into a mohican.
  11. I thought it was very good. I think a lot of the hostility towards it is because it goes against one of the implicit assumptions of Western culture - that man is innately competent and can control the future. A lot of people hate being told that that isn't true.
  12. There won't be a war between generations - families will have to do what they did for millions of years up until sometime in the mid-60's - have all the generations living together under one roof. And share burdens, pool resources, make and grow more of what they need, and get on each other's nerves and stuff. Just like nature (and Galton & Simpson) intended. Amazing how the return to normal after a 30 year Ponzi puts so many people into a panic.
  13. I'll check that out. Gurdjieff thought we have a conscious mind, btw - he just considered that we rarely, if ever, use it.
  14. I prefer the Gurdjieffian explanation that his writing of the words 'printy printy' is an entirely automatic action unconsciously programmed via the human habit of imitation.
  15. There's no rhyme or reason for most of this shit. It's like the weather and stuff. It's good fun to come up with post-hoc reasons, though.
  16. Monbiot's article on Ridley is a clear example of a twit writing about another twit. Neither of them know what is going to happen to the climate over any future period prior to the sun achieving red dwarf status (because nobody can). Neither of them are able to offer realistic ideology-free prescriptions for state/private sector interactions in a period of declining resources or disappearing credit. They're just people who due to their own class-upbringing or egotism feel the requirement to pontificate to other people how they should conduct their lives.
  17. What you are doing here is gambling. You're gambling that you'll know that it's topping out, and then you're gambling that the appreciating asset class that you transfer to will continue to appreciate. I just wish people would acknowledge that they're gambling, and not try to sound so wise/smug about what they're doing.
  18. I think the problem really is that all "investment" is essentially gambling on relative outcomes, and some people don't like to gamble, or acknowledge they're gambling, so they choose a particular category (gold, property) and infuse it with mysterious gobbledygook in order to assure themselves that they're onto a sure thing. They then fall into the time-honoured trap of emotionally identifying with their "investment" against all sense and logic. I'm happy for people to promote gold as a gamble (who knows, they might be right over a given time period) but this kind of secret-property-of-gold-unknown-to-the-masses type spiel just makes them sound weird.
  19. I always think it is a good idea to mentally picture market commentators wearing John McCririck-style deer-stalker hats.
  20. He thinks the goldbugs are being taken for a ride: http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/2361-Listen-To-The-Hucksters,-Lose-Your-Ass.html (You'll need to copy and paste the above url, rather than just click it) Salient points: i) Gold is not an effective inflation hedge, but is an effective geopolitical instability hedge ii) It functions as credit, but not as money iii) It offers less utility, and thus price stability, than silver iv) The last time there was an inflation scare in the early '80's, gold holders were wiped out when the price crashed v) The only free lunch is the sun Obviously, I can't be arsed to debate the article, because I think goldbugs are loons who are not able to be debated with, but it's worth a read for its contrarian standpoint, if nothing else.
  21. Interesting perspective from Dmitry Orlov: http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2010/05/lost-leaders.html I agree with his basic analysis that we are being run by morons.
  22. That "buying British" is fairly problematical in actually finding a product that's meaningfully British-made is largely down to the fact that patriotism nowadays is fairly ersatz and focussed on symbolic entities (e.g. football teams) rather than on a deep sense of identity and belonging. This is partly because this kind of sense of identity and belonging is both obstructive to global capital, and partly because since World War 2, serious patriotism is seen as a fairly dubious gateway to blood-and-soil nationalism and things even worse. So you therefore have companies who simply see "Britishness" as a Union Jack sticker that can be applied when advantageous, but will happily outsource operations to China when other circumstances prove advantageous. If British industry and the UK Government can't take production in the UK seriously, and apply to it some meaning above and beyond the profit margin*, why do they expect consumers to do otherwise? *no ******** from free-traders about profit being the only reason to be in business, please. The Germans don't see it this way, and are vastly more successful
  23. That's a good point, but I was thinking more from the fuel consumption point of view rather than the initial investment.
  24. Ah yeah, this one: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=143991&st=0 OK, my next prediction is lots of people selling their cars and travelling on cheapo mopeds.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.