To play devils advocate - suppose I were to say
“If everyone’s broke, then no one’s broke”.
Where’s the logical fallacy?
I don’t have the answer - I’m truly just asking the question.
The farce will keep going for quite some time because, as the author states, ALL the Central Banks are playing the same game. The Powers-That-Be all have the same fundamental goal: stave off social upheaval.
• For the West (including Japan): Too much debt, too many promises, and too high a standard of living. Aside from Germany and Japan, there is not enough industry to provide a living for everyone. So the Government has a bigger and bigger role in employment and entitlements keep the rest of the population fed & docile. They play along because if there will be massive social upheaval if Government spending is actually cut to sustainable levels.
• For the East (particularly China): They need to grow, so they need to export. They play along because the alternative is massive unemployment and, likewise, social upheaval. Also, even while its Monopoly $$, it helps them catch up with the West from a military/technological standpoint.
• For the Oil Producers: They are in the same boat. The minute the petrol dollars stop, they will have to contend with their own restive populations
Well, we're past being able to bum money from others and now we're using wooden nickels. How long do you think we're going to be able to get away with that until we have to start stealing from those who still have something of value left?
Be sure to check out the chart of the coming tax increase!
You need falling water to turn the mill wheel -- unless there are people out there gathering up wealth it can't flow back out to the rest of us.
>>>“If everyone’s broke, then no one’s broke”<<<
Aye, but there’s the rub.
When I’m broke, I still have a pretty good store of useful items and tools that I purchased before I was broke. I built a root cellar. I have several greenhouses (essential here in Alaska). I have rifles and ammo. I have a boat with good paddles, and so forth. My broke looks a lot different than the guy whose broke consists of nothing more than that hazy feeling you get after a night of beer and bong hits.
Then the real crisis begins. Do I share my potatoes with all my neighbors, therefore starving both myself and them, or do I feed my family and let the others starve? Up here, out in the Alaska Bush, I can tell you that the wildlife would be slaughtered in a frenzy, which would last one season, since despite what you see on Animal Planet, Alaska’s fish and game is widely scattered and scarce even in good years. (I already live with people who consider the fish and game to be “theirs,” and “they” would feel quite righteous for a while taking what is “theirs” at the start of a crisis.)
What I’m saying is that there are different degrees of broke. What I think you’re pointing out is that we’d all be equally desperate.
God help us.
So, nobody was "broke" during the Great Depression?
I prescribe a viewing of the first 30 minutes of "The Grapes of Wrath" or the more modern (and very good) movie "Cinderella Man".