Originally Posted by Brian Beecher

This carries on from conversations started many yesterdays ago. Today there is more urgency but still a lack of confidence. While there are things that need to be said and just can't wait, we nevertheless don't seem to have the balls to proceed. We seem to have given up hope especially when it comes to challenging the corporate-controlled establishment. Maybe after the Occupy movement failed to gain the necessary muster, so many feel that what's the use trying. Does any news on the global front echo these themes? Do you see any unprecedented agreements and exciting new liaisons taking us into new territory?

I think there are two things this year which might put done wind in some sails. One had already happened, and that's net neutrality. Kicking a few major corporations in the balls like that, especially when it was considered a foregone, in the other direction, issue last year prior to the election. The second will be if we manage to revoke the spying programs, which is coming up this summer.

One if the things I noticed from the President's speech at Selma this year was just how right on it would have been if so many of his policies, such as government spying and drone strikes, weren't such a direct contradiction to the spirit of the sentiment he conveyed with those policies. And the hypocrisy of the speech just kept ringing through to me, which is something that I find to be a common irritation with Boomer politicians (Obama being on the fence). If our narrative is that America's history is strengthened by allowing dissent, then why did you... (I'll just leave that proverbial you there, just imagine whatever litany of obscenity you prefer trailing after)... make squashing dissent an aspect of the coming of age for an entire generation of American adults? I dunno, the whole just makes me want to puke in the mouths of congressional democrats circa 2001 and hit them until they swallow it.

But yeah, those are 2015's big events that I think could go along way in getting those circa 2010-2012 expressed that needed to be instead of listening to inept leadership hand wringing about abortion and gun control as though those issues hadn't been decided decades ago. They'd also go a long way in ensuring that the inevitable backlash might not be bloody. Because I'm viewing an economic crash either this year our next as inevitable. If new ideas can't come forward by that time, trying to distract people with the same old stale social issues will likely result in a flaying. Or at least a bigger one than need be. I know I still want to see bankers swing, and I know I'm not the only one. I don't think there's much they could give that will save their hides in the end.

Originally Posted by Brian Beecher

Do you still feel as if the smelly brown stuff won't really hit the fan until after this decade is out?

That's right, although the smell will be increasing. Think: 1850s, 1930s.

I think it is very easy for people to be blinded by their own personal "team" when it comes to this. Many left leaning members of the board want to say 2008 because that fits the same narrative as the last crisis likewise many right leaning posters call for 2001 because they see the Terrorism issue to be the main problem we face.

I try my best to look at this objectively because weather the red team or the blue team win or not, whatever happens will be solidified in the next 1T that is the way the theory works.


We look back on Lincoln and Roosevelt in a vastly more positive light that people did at the time, hell half the country up and left over Lincoln and by today standards FDR would be considered a war-hawk and a fascist (as he was by many at the time). IF Hitler had won world war two he would be seen as a German National hero, and Stalin the butchering murderer that the Germans put to rest.

It really doesn't matter if the solutions we come up with are the best or most effective or moral. Once the crisis period is ended it will be seen as what had to be done, the way we got out of the crisis and will be looked on favorably.


As Chas was saying I could see the early 00's as a 3t crisis or the catalyst for a 4t high as he explained the crisis really exists for both times, it is a beginning and an end. The 30's and 40's were the end of the industrial revolution period (for america) and the beginning of our current era I don't think anyone doubts that, so 9/11 can basically function as the same thing on a smaller scale.

personally I still lean to 2001 because From what I see everything we are still dealing with internationally and domestically all links back to that event, government overreach, the manipulated economy, the Middle East etc...

It could obviously be a few years later but that is more or less irrelevant, 1930-1933 were still very much the "roaring twenties" in feeling as 2002-2003 still felt like the 90's things don't change on a dime.

Originally Posted by Debol1990

I think it is very easy for people to be blinded by their own personal "team" when it comes to this. Many left leaning members of the board want to say 2008 because that fits the same narrative as the last crisis likewise many right leaning posters call for 2001 because they see the Terrorism issue to be the main problem we face.

I try my best to look at this objectively because weather the red team or the blue team win or not, whatever happens will be solidified in the next 1T that is the way the theory works.


We look back on Lincoln and Roosevelt in a vastly more positive light that people did at the time, hell half the country up and left over Lincoln and by today standards FDR would be considered a war-hawk and a fascist (as he was by many at the time). IF Hitler had won world war two he would be seen as a German National hero, and Stalin the butchering murderer that the Germans put to rest.

It really doesn't matter if the solutions we come up with are the best or most effective or moral. Once the crisis period is ended it will be seen as what had to be done, the way we got out of the crisis and will be looked on favorably.


As Chas was saying I could see the early 00's as a 3t crisis or the catalyst for a 4t high as he explained the crisis really exists for both times, it is a beginning and an end. The 30's and 40's were the end of the industrial revolution period (for america) and the beginning of our current era I don't think anyone doubts that, so 9/11 can basically function as the same thing on a smaller scale.

personally I still lean to 2001 because From what I see everything we are still dealing with internationally and domestically all links back to that event, government overreach, the manipulated economy, the Middle East etc...

It could obviously be a few years later but that is more or less irrelevant, 1930-1933 were still very much the "roaring twenties" in feeling as 2002-2003 still felt like the 90's things don't change on a dime.

I agree with a lot in this post, especially with you indicating that 1930 to 1933 still had the feel and roar (even if it wasn't the reality) of the 20s. By looking at the entertainment world it doesn't really seem like things change because the party still went on with "It Girl" fascination and the Jazz Age/ Harlem Renaissance has 1935 as soft end date. Dance Marathons didn't face it's tragic "They Shoot Horses" reality yet.

I've also noticed that the view of the turning date depends upon ones politics and Generation I might add. I definitely do not lean Republican, but go with a 2001/03 start date because I think the entire first term of Bush is the catalyst... not just 9/11 per say. But it's his administration's reaction that may have put us into Crisis mode early, when it naturally could have started around 2005.

Generationally, I was out of college by 2008 so I didn't exactly graduate into a horrible job economy and I wasn't established enough to be hurt by the crash, so 2008 didn't directly effect me. However, the reaction to 2008 did later, around 2012 when i was laid off because my company needed to sell off the network I worked for and make money, to maintain business.

I very much agree that a 4T is the end and beginning at the same time. I hold onto an early start date because the theme of this 4T seems to be that our Global Power government is not as big and bad as we thought (Post the last 4T). IMO, most of our problems and cultural wars center around the fact that Big Brother has overextended itself, domestically and internationally. Now we are paying for it and have to decide on if this pattern will continue, especially when we can't even come together on disaster and infrastructure issues (this pattern started with Katrina in IMO.)

Gov can't save us from outside threats= 9/11

Gov can't fight wars like they used to and mission was NOT accomplished 2003-2005

Gov lies about that war

Gov can't save us from natural disaster.

Gov can't mobilize the people after every tragedy and horrific shooting.

Lastly I believe the themes really focused on during a 4T actually stem from the themes focused on during the 2T. Consider how the New Deal era dealt with Progressive era issues.

This go round, social, racial and economic equality still seem like hot buttons that we need to work out and will. Drug culture of the 2T has overcome part of the 3T war on drugs and now we are talking about Pot being legal in many areas of the country. Gay marriage is winning across the board and everyone is talking about how much women and people in general are getting paid at work.

Those sex and social issues won't go away.

Wage is still an issue and we have not seen the Great society along with our late 70s Middle eastern/ Iran/ Russia and oil issues returning as if the last 3T was just a band aid taking care of wound.

But in order for that wound to properly heal, the infection and shit needs to come out and be cleared up.

I'm not really libertarian, but some form of Libertarian (left and right) may be incorporated by the Millennials to allow everyone to figure out how to get through this for themselves since big brother is unfortunately flawed.

1T tech may solve some of our energy issues and maybe countries will compete with a new and better here like they did when trying to enter space.

Our surveillance and police state issues may go into the 1T and that actually seems normal for a late 4T. I predict more shaming in our culture and possible witch hunts for home grown terrorist and protestors (going into the 2T). But people persecuted by the above may inspire the next Prophet generation.

In the mean time, watch what you write via social networking because that will be used against you (especially first wave millennials) in our 1T's version of McCarthyism.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I think there are two things this year which might put done wind in some sails. One had already happened, and that's net neutrality. Kicking a few major corporations in the balls like that, especially when it was considered a foregone, in the other direction, issue last year prior to the election. The second will be if we manage to revoke the spying programs, which is coming up this summer.

One if the things I noticed from the President's speech at Selma this year was just how right on it would have been if so many of his policies, such as government spying and drone strikes, weren't such a direct contradiction to the spirit of the sentiment he conveyed with those policies. And the hypocrisy of the speech just kept ringing through to me, which is something that I find to be a common irritation with Boomer politicians (Obama being on the fence). If our narrative is that America's history is strengthened by allowing dissent, then why did you... (I'll just leave that proverbial you there, just imagine whatever litany of obscenity you prefer trailing after)... make squashing dissent an aspect of the coming of age for an entire generation of American adults? I dunno, the whole just makes me want to puke in the mouths of congressional democrats circa 2001 and hit them until they swallow it.

But yeah, those are 2015's big events that I think could go along way in getting those circa 2010-2012 expressed that needed to be instead of listening to inept leadership hand wringing about abortion and gun control as though those issues hadn't been decided decades ago. They'd also go a long way in ensuring that the inevitable backlash might not be bloody. Because I'm viewing an economic crash either this year our next as inevitable. If new ideas can't come forward by that time, trying to distract people with the same old stale social issues will likely result in a flaying. Or at least a bigger one than need be. I know I still want to see bankers swing, and I know I'm not the only one. I don't think there's much they could give that will save their hides in the end.

Kepi, I think we are close to being cohorts and it seems like our cohorts and some younger Millennials care most about net neutrality, anti corporatism and Gov. spying. Hopefully we will encourage the Prophets to fight against the post 9/11 era conformity.

However, I do believe the next era will favor the fiscal RIGHT and social LEFT, which is the opposite dynamic of how we were leaving the last 4T. So will the next 1T feel like the 80s? LOL

I think we get what Boomers (our visionaries) paid attention to most and politically speaking the Boomer Right focused on fiscally RIGHT issues while the LEFT focused on the social ones.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

If you look at the candidates running, unless we get a Paul or Warren type I think that the more likely response to a meltdown would be a Military Keynesianism expansion. The Republicans aren't losing the House, at the very least, and military spending is one of the few big expansions of federal funds I could see them approving, along with an infrastructure program with big give aways for the oil/gas industry (keystone, export terminals, maybe rail, etc). I think that's more likely, given the nature of the political consensus, but I could see scenarios where what you're talking about happens. Russia expanding in plodding, round-about 1T fashion is already here and a given. We still disagree on the China thing (and I really do mean to respond once midterms is over), and I think the China/Taiwan dynamics are such that that situation will be the crux of their 4T. India/Pakistan situation is unstable, and I'm waiting for the next Pakistani government to take them on a collision course with Modi's India. The Middle East is going through a 30 years war equivalent, and borders will be drastically different in 20 years. Pretty sure the death of Jong il and accession of Jong un marks the start of the NK 4T, so we'll see how that turns out. Don't think there is a force in the ME that can best the Israelis this saeculum, and I bet the Palestinian issue gets resolved when the Israeli right uses the chaos globally to shove them out of the West Bank into Jordan, which is already majority Palestinian anyways. Latin American countries are going to be going through their 2T during this time period, so nothing to dramatic (though I'm looking for some cool cultural products). The EU is probably not willing to be a German financial colony indefinitely, so I'm expecting anti-system forces on the right and left to break the common market/currency right when their aging demographics and peak oil fry their economies. So, once again, minor quibbles in interpretation, but basically seeing the same things. I don't expect the dust to really settle until 2030 globally, though I am willing to entertain notions of an early exit for this or that country, like the US.

You are correct but unfortunately most Americans cannot get their arms around the notion of something this horrible. They are still living off the fumes of the 3T and it's globalist, "new economy" chimera.

Hey, everyone's on Facebook, no one's gonna nuke anyone! We're all friends! / sarc

Originally Posted by millennialX

Kepi, I think we are close to being cohorts and it seems like our cohorts and some younger Millennials care most about net neutrality, anti corporatism and Gov. spying. Hopefully we will encourage the Prophets to fight against the post 9/11 era conformity.

I doubt that we're going to encourage much. I think, however that this not voting thing works in our favor. If the conservatives don't knock out the spying, we're more likely to vote, meaning they're out the door. If they make us happy, we might not again. Progress, for us, means being the hammer on the playing field everyone is afraid of. Boomers, kinda by definition, don't listen. I expect a few to fall in line with the way things are going to be, a few more Xers, but I think it's going to be Millennials in general leading the charge, and they're going to have to do it by saying to Boomers how it's going to be, because otherwise, they'll just quibble about the birth control rights of unborn genetically modified Burmese python-gorilla hybrids.

The issues we care about, the boomers decided to trade those off in exchange for feeling like they're doing something relevant when they're actually not a decade and a half ago. I really don't think that the people who okayed torture as the new fair play are going to change their minds. I don't think that the people who decided that fighting a very small rabble, in relative terms, with a military force that is intended to rain hot death indiscriminately across two continents at a time and can't understand why that makes us look stupid and feeble is going to take a step back from anything they've done and look at it from a critical eye. The people who spent a trillion dollars on bailing out bankers who tried to ruin us with debt so they can keep pushing an economic growth agenda in a time where true growth isn't an option aren't going to turn back.

At this point we're just going to have to over power them, one way or another.

Originally Posted by millennialX

However, I do believe the next era will favor the fiscal RIGHT and social LEFT, which is the opposite dynamic of how we were leaving the last 4T. So will the next 1T feel like the 80s? LOL

I think we get what Boomers (our visionaries) paid attention to most and politically speaking the Boomer Right focused on fiscally RIGHT issues while the LEFT focused on the social ones.

I don't know that right and left ate the right way to describe these necessarily. I think you're sort of leaning the right direction, but I think it needs fleshing out.

Like in terms of leaning left on social issues, I think it's going to be geared towards "I don't care, and further, I don't have the right to care," as opposed to the current model which is based on celebrating how different we all are. So where as your 2T was all about letting that freak flag fly, and the 3T was about the exploiting the weird (think Springer, early Oprah), and the 4T was about victory over the conformist opposition, the 1T will be all about leaving people alone to do their own thing "you do you" is going to go from a mantra for those that can't be bothered to the ethos of how we all interact despite our differences.

On the fiscal side, I think that's where things get interesting, mostly because the right and left have become such a bastardization of the original intent that I can't really say right or left. First off, I think we're going to take a whole different approach to lending, banking, and government budgeting because we can now (because currency is no longer primarily a physical commodity) that can't be called right wing, but definitely doesn't match up with the left's agenda for the past 80 years. Meanwhile, the new crop of innovations, such as self driving cars, are going to be heavily infrastructurally dependent. Couple that with the amount of decay that our present infrastructure is under and the inevitable need for greater energy efficiency, and that part of the 1T is going to be the late 50's-early 60's part deux. That's really neither left nor right, but it's definitely not libertarian. Where I do think there will be a strong right wing streak is in terms of regulation on your standard fare consumer items. I expect to see lots of those drugs you have to go to the doctor to get to go over the counter, I expect to see a lot of government regulations related to moral principal to be gone (liquor laws? Hah). In tends of law, I expect to see the lawsuit culture and warning labels for everything to erode because we'll have a culture that assumes the consumer is educated and informed. I also think that a lot of copyright laws will be rolled back to much older standards and for us to apply much more stringent criteria before something is considered in violation, simply because we don't have enough lawyers in the world to handle every copyright suit that's going to come from a world where the primary medium is computer code. And of course, if 3D printing gets big banning and regulating anything becomes a joke. If we want to say that the world is one where the consumer will be unrestricted, I'll go with that.

"I don't care" sums it up perfectly. I know everyone is looking for this grand regeneracy and consensus, that they don't believe is here yet, but honestly...I think that's it. I think we will arrive to a giant mobilization behind the phrase, "Whatever...I don't give a fuck..."

LOL

That's so Libertarian. So Nomad. So MEGA UNRAVELING.

I'm almost disappointed you guys' last two posts don't really have anything I disagree with.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

I'm almost disappointed you guys' last two posts don't really have anything I disagree with.

This old Disco-wave Boomer is down with your vision, Kepi. That is, everything except your demonizing we Boomers.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

This old Disco-wave Boomer is down with your vision, Kepi. That is, everything except your demonizing we Boomers.

Demonizing? By talking about what you all, in the macro sense, have done? By saying precisely what the legacy of the generation will be? I don't think I've said anything unfair. As a generation, in aggregate, this is precisely what one failed generation passes on and the reality is that no matter what I do or say our what you do or say, that's precisely how it's going to happen. I mean, I wish I didn't have to spend almost 15 years after 9-11 with post 9-11 stupidity still being relevant, but here we all are, and while yes I acknowledge "not every Boomer", the theory's only relevance us in the macro sense. Sorry for those of you in the minority, but this is how it happens.

Hey, MX.

Originally Posted by millennialX

"I don't care" sums it up perfectly. I know everyone is looking for this grand regeneracy and consensus, that they don't believe is here yet, but honestly...I think that's it. I think we will arrive to a giant mobilization behind the phrase, "Whatever...I don't give a fuck..."

LOL

That's so Libertarian. So Nomad. So MEGA UNRAVELING.

I believe there's a big difference between "I don't care", and "I'm not tied to a specific outcome".
Personally, I seldom(if ever) use the phrase: "I don't care" ... because there's plenty of stuff that
I care very deeply about. Let me put it this way: I care that certain things are not done, but
otherwise: "Eh, Whatever"!

It really depends on what is occurring or being proposed, IMO.


Prince

PS: So anyway, how's it goin'? The wife and kids doing alright?
Man, those boys must be a handful(ie: a great learning experience).

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

I care very deeply about. Let me put it this way: I care that certain things are not done, but
otherwise: "Eh, Whatever"!

Uh, how about Congress and state legislatures spending a few sessions repealing stupid laws instead of making new ones?

You know, chucking the following, but not limited to:

1. 3 strikes , you got to the clink for a long time for shop lifting.
2. Weed prohibition
3. If big banks do something dumb, just let 'em fail and do nothing to save their sorry hides. After all, they're just a waste of office space.
4. Abolish Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other house builder giveaways.
5. Eh, for that matter, chuck all tax breaks including mortgage deductions.
6. Oklahoma needs to chuck the movie making tax break. It's dumb.

You see, there's just so much cruft that needs chucking that our law books look like a scene from Hoarders, Buried Alive

7. Here is some more local cruft.
http://oklahomawatch.org/category/pu...ney/taxbreaks/
http://oklahomawatch.org/2014/11/13/...ss-tax-breaks/

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Uh, how about Congress and state legislatures spending a few sessions repealing stupid laws instead of making new ones?

You know, chucking the following, but not limited to:

1. 3 strikes , you got to the clink for a long time for shop lifting.
2. Weed prohibition
3. If big banks do something dumb, just let 'em fail and do nothing to save their sorry hides. After all, they're just a waste of office space.
4. Abolish Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other house builder giveaways.
5. Eh, for that matter, chuck all tax breaks including mortgage deductions.
6. Oklahoma needs to chuck the movie making tax break. It's dumb.

You see, there's just so much cruft that needs chucking that our law books look like a scene from Hoarders, Buried Alive

7. Here is some more local cruft.
http://oklahomawatch.org/category/pu...ney/taxbreaks/
http://oklahomawatch.org/2014/11/13/...ss-tax-breaks/

Well, my Brother Man, I believe we've gone over your 'anti-cruft'-thingy
before, and I'm really not that interested at this time to attempt to address
how that might be operationalized with 'damage minimization' in mind.


Prince

PS: Personally, I wouldn't mind less conversations
involving(ie: obsessing-over!) 'Politics and Economics',
but you know: Whatever!

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Well, my Brother Man, I believe we've gone over your 'anti-cruft'-thingy
before, and I'm really not that interested at this time to attempt to address
how that might be operationalized with 'damage minimization' in mind.


Prince

PS: Personally, I wouldn't mind less conversations
involving(ie: obsessing-over!) 'Politics and Economics',
but you know: Whatever!

Tax breaks are good to encourage people to do things
If you want more people to get married, give them a tax break
If you want more people to use alternative energy, give them a tax break
Tax breaks make things more affordable

Originally Posted by decadeologist101

Tax breaks are good to encourage people to do things
If you want more people to get married, give them a tax break
If you want more people to use alternative energy, give them a tax break
Tax breaks make things more affordable

... Tax breaks make people who don't do what is in
[list of tax breaks] shoulder more of the tax burden.

Originally Posted by decadeologist101

Tax breaks are good to encourage people to do things
If you want more people to get married, give them a tax break
If you want more people to use alternative energy, give them a tax break
Tax breaks make things more affordable

Well, I did say "Whatever", so I guess I had that comin' to me!

Ok, Dec. How about I give you a 'tax break' to
not bring-up 'Politics and Economics' with me?

I mean, seriously, is that really what you're interested in? 'Tax breaks'?
I figure you'd be more into eating pizza, playing video games, chasin' tail,
getting drunk, etc.


Prince

PS: How about this? What kinda music do you like?
How about Zeppelin? Do you like Led Zeppelin?

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Well, I did say "Whatever", so I guess I had that comin' to me! <snip smiley>

...

I mean, seriously, is that really what you're interested in? 'Tax breaks'?

Shit yeah!

Originally Posted by POC

PS: Personally, I wouldn't mind less conversations
involving(ie: obsessing-over!) 'Politics and Economics',
but you know: Whatever!

Eh, more of a crusade. Damn, core Xer's just don't understand it.

PS: How about this? What kinda music do you like?
How about Zeppelin? Do you like Led Zeppelin?

Heh.

Originally Posted by Debol1990

I think it is very easy for people to be blinded by their own personal "team" when it comes to this. Many left leaning members of the board want to say 2008 because that fits the same narrative as the last crisis likewise many right leaning posters call for 2001 because they see the Terrorism issue to be the main problem we face.

I try my best to look at this objectively because (whether) the red team or the blue team win or not, whatever happens will be solidified in the next 1T that is the way the theory works.


We look back on Lincoln and Roosevelt in a vastly more positive light that people did at the time, hell half the country up and left over Lincoln and by today standards FDR would be considered a war-hawk and a fascist (as he was by many at the time). IF Hitler had won world war two he would be seen as a German National hero, and Stalin the butchering murderer that the Germans put to rest.

It really doesn't matter if the solutions we come up with are the best or most effective or moral. Once the crisis period is ended it will be seen as what had to be done, the way we got out of the crisis and will be looked on favorably.


As Chas was saying I could see the early 00's as a 3t crisis or the catalyst for a 4t high as he explained the crisis really exists for both times, it is a beginning and an end. The 30's and 40's were the end of the industrial revolution period (for america) and the beginning of our current era I don't think anyone doubts that, so 9/11 can basically function as the same thing on a smaller scale.

personally I still lean to 2001 because From what I see everything we are still dealing with internationally and domestically all links back to that event, government overreach, the manipulated economy, the Middle East etc...

It could obviously be a few years later but that is more or less irrelevant, 1930-1933 were still very much the "roaring twenties" in feeling as 2002-2003 still felt like the 90's things don't change on a dime.

Remember though, the Left has won every Crisis ever since there has been a "Left." It should be expected of us, if we have any awareness of history, that it is the blue team's perspective that needs to be taken. FDR was never seen as a fascist; he was the most progressive president we ever had, and to look at him otherwise is to totally miss what he was. If Hitler had been allowed to win, then we would have entered a Dark Age, and he may have been able to force people to look on him favorably for a while, but history would not have. Because the arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. Stalin at least had an idealistic vision behind his murders; Hitler did not. To oppose and fight him was the progressive action.

To think it makes no difference which side wins a 4T, but it's only the winner who determines what is best, is blatant, relativist bunk. Genocide was not "what had to be done," and no-one would have looked upon it favorably; and even if the Germans and his conquered peoples were forced by Hitler to do so, the people secretly would have opposed him and eventually would have risen up and thrown out his Third Reich; that is, if history's arc bends toward justice. Which it manifestly does.

No, 1930-33 did not feel like the roaring 20s; you're obviously not seeing things correctly. That was the depth of the Depression, and 2002-03 were nothing like that at all; it was more like the 20s, especially regarding the out of control speculation, and the kind of national leadership we had (totally clueless on both occasions). And Bush's wars were obviously 3T wars, just as WWI was a 3T war; and both led into the 4T wars; one now history (WWII), and one yet to come in the 2020s-- but revving up now.

9-11 was nothing but the beginning of a period of mass delusion, and unnecessary wars driven by old-fashioned, out-of-date imperialist ambitions that did not involve many people. I don't know what you mean by "government over-reach" and "the manipulated economy," unless you are parroting right-wing propaganda. What we had up to 2008 was out-of-control private enterprise and hands-off trickle-down laissez faire economics; I don't see how you can call that "government over-reach." The result was the same as last time; return of the Great Depression-- barely stopped in time from leading us off the cliff to total ruin. 2008=1929, without question. And since the saving measures came so soon this time, they were inadequate, and pretty-effectively resisted; so "the manipulated economy" remains a conservative's ever-present slogan of fear and a socialist liberal's unrealized hope.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I think a market meltdown will actually be what takes us out of major foreign conflict.

What market meltdown was due in our 4T, is past. Bet on it!

We melt down and get bogged down with the resulting problems, leaving room for the foreign players to make big moves, fragmenting the economic world into smaller chunks with 3 or 4 different cores.

There are already several centers of power, and more to come. What is developing is one world economy; inexorably and irreversably. What matters is how we manage this to the benefit of the people instead of a few.

The US crashes.

If so, it will be due to domestic unrest, revolution and/or civil war, and NOT economics.

Russia takes Europe and finally gets the spoils of victory (they won the Napoleonic Wars and World War II and got the shaft both times).

Won't happen, but Russia will likely be aggressive; requiring a response.

Meanwhile the US is reworking it's finances and basic governmental structure.

This will likely happen. It may not take us out of world politics as a major player though.

The Middle East reorganizes, possibly taking out the Zionist government in Israel. The US is too preoccupied to back Israel.

Israel is too powerful to be taken out, with or without US backing.

Asia reorganizes (I know you and I disagree on this, but it's where I put it) around South Korea and India as China is crippled economically because the US is basically seizing on the table and unable to funnel billions of dollars in interest into China, causing massive internal problems (in lieu of South Korea, it could also be a newly independent Hong Kong, Taiwan, or even possibly Singapore, but I'm really thinking it's going to be a small but powerful nation strapping India to their backs like diesel powered jet pack).

China has become too powerful economically; trade with the US gave it a boost, but it trades with everyone and itself now. It is due to continue to grow, although not as quickly. Internal dissension and possible revolution is due in the mid-2030s.

Meanwhile in Latin America, with the US occupied, criminal cartels take total run of the place. So once the US gets itself back together, getting Latin America back in order is the first order of business and that becomes the US's new primary sphere of influence.

Fin.

That's where I think things are going.

Latin America is moving out of its criminal past. It's a gradual process, but it's moving forward. Colombia is a good example. There's little the USA can do about it, except to clean up its own act. That means gun control, and drug treatment instead of drug wars. In the 2020s, more sane policy could arrive in the USA on these matters, and this would help enormously. WA and CO have shown part of the way.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Heh.

<snipped cool-smiley>

Ok, Rags. Ya got me. I've got a soft-spot for In Rock We Trust.
I used to listen to Side-1 religiously when it first came-out.
(although, I must admit I was hooked with Black Tiger! )

Originally Posted by Rags

Eh, more of a crusade.

Boy, you really are a Boomer/Sooner!
Actually, I guess you're a Boomer/Sooner-Boomer!

So, anyway you wanna go on a crusade?
(Oh, goody! I just love a crusade!).

So, what do ya have in mind, Paul Revere?

Are the British marching towards Concord?
The Nazis occupying France?
You wanna retake the Holy Land?

Do tell.


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Rags

Damn, core Xer's just don't understand it.

Yeah, they suck. They don't care about anything.
(good thing I'm an Early-Xer(1965-1970)! )

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Remember though, the Left has won every Crisis ever since there has been a "Left." It should be expected of us, if we have any awareness of history, that it is the blue team's perspective that needs to be taken.

Eric, I'm disappointed! Would you forsake victories for the illusory promise?? Tell me that the left hasn't made progress fighting back the encroachment of social conservatism. Tell me with a straight face that the "moral majority" is anything other than its own freakshow these days, that they're only tolerated because we tolerate all the other atypical social orientations.

Unfortunately, in the financial world, the left has not really put together a coherent and competitive model to neoliberalism. At the political level, Democrats are still champions of the neoliberal model. So even if left wing politicians are victorious, they will institute a system that progressives see as conservative.

But everything existing in the now is going to look conservative to progressives because progressives are already looking ahead to the next thing. It's just that the new thing is still fuzzy and not quite ready for prime-time. We're not even sure what it is, yet, but I'm starting to think it looks like MMT and borrows heavily from the originally-libertarian ideas of universal basic income (back before Rand infected libertarianism and hijacked it for the right).

In the meantime, don't ignore the very real victories of the left on social issues. Another way to look at 4Ts is to view it as the inclusion of previously excluded groups: The revolution allowed colonists full citizenship; The Civil War gave slaves full citizenship; The New Deal saw retirees and pensioners as excluded from society, so sought to bring them in; and the current crisis has normalized most of the awakening's subcultures, sexual, and social identities. Although symbolic, Obama's election also goes to show that the elite can include minorities, too (you don't HAVE to be a WASP, it just helps!) Violations of social norms and gender/race roles that used to be career-killers are just... pretty typical individualism these days.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Eric, I'm disappointed! Would you forsake victories for the illusory promise?? Tell me that the left hasn't made progress fighting back the encroachment of social conservatism. Tell me with a straight face that the "moral majority" is anything other than its own freakshow these days, that they're only tolerated because we tolerate all the other atypical social orientations.

Unfortunately, in the financial world, the left has not really put together a coherent and competitive model to neoliberalism. At the political level, Democrats are still champions of the neoliberal model. So even if left wing politicians are victorious, they will institute a system that progressives see as conservative.

But everything existing in the now is going to look conservative to progressives because progressives are already looking ahead to the next thing. It's just that the new thing is still fuzzy and not quite ready for prime-time. We're not even sure what it is, yet, but I'm starting to think it looks like MMT and borrows heavily from the originally-libertarian ideas of universal basic income (back before Rand infected libertarianism and hijacked it for the right).

In the meantime, don't ignore the very real victories of the left on social issues. Another way to look at 4Ts is to view it as the inclusion of previously excluded groups: The revolution allowed colonists full citizenship; The Civil War gave slaves full citizenship; The New Deal saw retirees and pensioners as excluded from society, so sought to bring them in; and the current crisis has normalized most of the awakening's subcultures, sexual, and social identities. Although symbolic, Obama's election also goes to show that the elite can include minorities, too (you don't HAVE to be a WASP, it just helps!) Violations of social norms and gender/race roles that used to be career-killers are just... pretty typical individualism these days.

Facebook like.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Hey, MX.



I believe there's a big difference between "I don't care", and "I'm not tied to a specific outcome".
Personally, I seldom(if ever) use the phrase: "I don't care" ... because there's plenty of stuff that
I care very deeply about. Let me put it this way: I care that certain things are not done, but
otherwise: "Eh, Whatever"!

It really depends on what is occurring or being proposed, IMO.


Prince

PS: So anyway, how's it goin'? The wife and kids doing alright?
Man, those boys must be a handful(ie: a great learning experience).

Hey Prince!

We should be worried about those who really don't care at their core. But the general statement, "I don't care" could mean that i don't care about the circus act in Washington.

Boys are great. Learning experience, of course but expected for most parents with toddlers. Thankfully I'm surrounded by similar families to not feel alone or anything like that.