View Full Version : Martin Armstrong's latest
Is it time to turn out the lights?
1.5MB 19 page PDF
http://www.nowandfutures.com/d2/armstrong_turnoutlights20090219.pdf
Some fascinating observations & a recommendation about the EC and Euro, based on both history and the N.Y. & D.C. Fed power/control grab.
Warning - strong and likely offensive opinions about the "Christian religious right".
Estimated tinfoil hat rank - 8.3.
Gloom/doom content in certain sections far from low.
Great paper bart. Thanks. I disagree with a few of his conclusions, especially with the assertion that China has no debt, but overall it's a great paper with a lot of very deep tidbits of thought.
Yes, he does go off a bit about the far right. I heard someone today say "The dollar is the tallest midget in the room." Thought that was pretty accurate. Maybe someday the Chinese Yuan will be the world reserve currency.
He misses the key point we made in In the Shadow of 1937 (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5505#post5505) in 2006, that we already had our 1934 to 1937 New Deal reflation this time around. It was called the Housing Bubble. It failed.
That explains the huge vol we're seeing today. We've never tried to New New Deal our way out of a failed asset inflation based New Deal after a credit bubble collapsed. Last time, we had WWII.
Oh no. Another trip into the bowels of Itulip. It's too late to take this link. But thank you. I will read it tomorrow and surely enjoy it.
Interesting timing thoughts re gold as an indicator of level of US crisis, gold denominated in $USD that is - what could become "interesting" is the interrelationship between the various potential crises, such as the eventual dissolution or preferably reconstruction of the eurozone, eastern europe.
strittmatter
03-14-09, 01:50 PM
Bart,
With Armstrong's Economic Confidence Model, he shows the next wave break at March 19, 2009.
Do you have any comment on this, one way or the other?
Thanks.
Just curious.
I don't see that date, the website is see is mar. 19, 2007.
Maybe i am looking i the wrong spot.
He misses the key point we made in In the Shadow of 1937 (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5505#post5505) in 2006, that we already had our 1934 to 1937 New Deal reflation this time around. It was called the Housing Bubble. It failed.
That explains the huge vol we're seeing today. We've never tried to New New Deal our way out of a failed asset inflation based New Deal after a credit bubble collapsed. Last time, we had WWII.
Yes of course he misses a lot of stuff... but that isn't the point in my opinion. His work does roughly align with iTulip's but approaches the markets and social factors in a very different way and of course with a substantial tinfoil hat element... and it did call *many* key turning points like the 1987 crash.
Bart,
With Armstrong's Economic Confidence Model, he shows the next wave break at March 19, 2009.
Do you have any comment on this, one way or the other?
Thanks.
Just curious.
The next peak per my understanding and calculations is approx. April 19, 2009.
The most difficult thing about using the Armstrong Model is that its subjective... as one might expect from something called an Economic Confidence Model.
It did mark a relative stock market and derivatives peak on 2/27/07, and did mark (among other things) a broad recognition of the S HTF on about 3/22/2008 of housing and bank issues... and both were not clear ahead of time just from knowing the date.
Here's a link to my chart from my forecast page showing the dates from 1972-2032:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/global_cycle1972-2032.png
I'm loathe to be very specific about what I expect for what I hope are obvious reasons, but will say that anyone without a substantial hard asset position (as in gold, silver, platinum and equivalents) is assuming a large risk.
The full article is excessively geeky for most since its heavy economics, but the long term chart in my Financial crisis tracking (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4662) thread shows that we're in the largest financial crisis since 1970, which is as far back as I have data that drives the model.
Armstrong does present some interesting ideas in this paper.
But - as was noted - he rambles. And is somewhat contradictory.
On the one hand, he says that empires are based on currency, and that the US is the present currency empire.
Then he talks about the 'waterfall' effect and how it will all end.
Like any good con man writing from jail, he sounds good.
But looking at his theory in more detail - while Rome was an empire, I don't accept the premise that the currency was the main prop.
Rather it was the legionnaire's turned into farmers that was the driving factor in the formation of the Roman empire.
Britain is another example Armstrong uses. But I would point out that it was British trans-oceanic trade which was the supporting base for the Empire along with (or because of) the British Naval control of the oceans - although it can be argued that the Royal Navy was a result of fiscal shenanigans a la fractional reserve banking and the like.
For the US, it is a similar trans-oceanic component with a twin World War starting boost, but more importantly the so called US dollar regime has failed multiple tests: going off the gold standard with FDR, going off Bretton Woods with Nixon, and now going off the deep end with Obama.
Hardly appears to be an empire from the currency sense!
If anything the American experience is more like the Spanish New World experience: despite being given a massive fiscal boost from New World gold and silver, the hollowing out of the Spanish economy and subsequent economic shenanigans not only negated the beneficial effects possible due to the New World cash infusion, but in fact set the stage for Spain's underperformance for centuries to come.
The massive fiscal boost the US received from WW I and WW II in rebuilding Europe twice and Japan 1.5 times is no less in scale than what Spain experienced.
To close I'll add in a favorite excerpt from 'V for Vendetta':
"Inspector Finch: I suddenly had this feeling that everything was connected. Like I could see the whole thing, one long chain of events that stretched back to Lark Hill. I felt like I could see everything that had happened, and everything that was going to happen.
It was like a perfect pattern - made out in front of my face. And I realized we were all part of it, and trapped by it.
Dominic: And do you know what's going to happen?
Inspector Finch: No, it was a feeling. But I can guess."
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GPfI9oxZuEo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GPfI9oxZuEo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
strittmatter
03-18-09, 08:45 AM
The next peak per my understanding and calculations is approx. April 19, 2009.
The most difficult thing about using the Armstrong Model is that its subjective... as one might expect from something called an Economic Confidence Model.
It did mark a relative stock market and derivatives peak on 2/27/07, and did mark (among other things) a broad recognition of the S HTF on about 3/22/2008 of housing and bank issues... and both were not clear ahead of time just from knowing the date.
Here's a link to my chart from my forecast page showing the dates from 1972-2032:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/global_cycle1972-2032.png
I'm loathe to be very specific about what I expect for what I hope are obvious reasons, but will say that anyone without a substantial hard asset position (as in gold, silver, platinum and equivalents) is assuming a large risk.
The full article is excessively geeky for most since its heavy economics, but the long term chart in my Financial crisis tracking (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4662) thread shows that we're in the largest financial crisis since 1970, which is as far back as I have data that drives the model.
Ah, I was off one month.
Thanks for the feedback.
idianov
03-18-09, 05:20 PM
Armstrong's It's Just Time cover implies Mar 23rd is the interim bottom of the USD with subsequent top on Mar 19th, 2009.
1279
1280
Armstrong's It's Just Time cover implies Mar 23rd is the interim bottom of the USD with subsequent top on Mar 19th, 2009.
1279
True, that's what the date is on that chart... but if you actually calculate what 2009.3 is, it turns out to be in mid to late April. One or the other is incorrect.
The mid to late April date also aligns with the actual 1/8 sub cycle length from the base 8.6 year Armstrong cycle.
idianov
03-18-09, 06:01 PM
True, that's what the date is on that chart... but if you actually calculate what 2009.3 is, it turns out to be in mid to late April. One or the other is incorrect.
The mid to late April date also aligns with the actual 1/8 sub cycle length from the base 8.6 year Armstrong cycle.
I agree MA is inconsistent about the 2009.3 turning point. In one place he is referring to Mar 19, 2009 and in another to Apr 16th, 2009. The important thing is that his work rhymes with history of the financial markets. In his book, he refers to convergence of several down waves that bottom in 2011.45
1281
The Great Convergence of Rogue Waves:
1282
The Financial Monetary Crisis Cycle 37.33 years
1283
I read the PDF and found his perspective on history pretty interesting. I also share many of his views about the events surrounding the Depression -- which is not something I can say about most financial analysts.
strittmatter
03-18-09, 07:14 PM
True, that's what the date is on that chart... but if you actually calculate what 2009.3 is, it turns out to be in mid to late April. One or the other is incorrect.
The mid to late April date also aligns with the actual 1/8 sub cycle length from the base 8.6 year Armstrong cycle.
That's the slight contradiction with dates that I'd noticed before which was partly why I asked Bart for feedback.
Interesting correlative chart suggestion idianov.
Finster
03-23-09, 04:56 PM
He misses the key point we made in In the Shadow of 1937 (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5505#post5505) in 2006, that we already had our 1934 to 1937 New Deal reflation this time around. It was called the Housing Bubble. It failed.
That explains the huge vol we're seeing today. We've never tried to New New Deal our way out of a failed asset inflation based New Deal after a credit bubble collapsed. Last time, we had WWII.
I think the thirties analogy is about as on target as it gets, Fred. We can only hope that it breaks down with the WWII part...
marvenger
03-23-09, 06:38 PM
nice post. Spain's a pretty good example I think, at least the US doesn't have an official monarchy, should help a bit.
reallife
03-23-09, 07:13 PM
He needs a good editor....
The next peak per my understanding and calculations is approx. April 19, 2009.
I'm loathe to be very specific about what I expect for what I hope are obvious reasons, but will say that anyone without a substantial hard asset position (as in gold, silver, platinum and equivalents) is assuming a large risk.
Short term, or long term?
Short term, or long term?
Both.
My current WAG for a gold peak is in the mid 2014 area, which roughly defines long term in this context.
i was somewhat enamored of martin armstrong's writings in the late '90s. in sept 1999 he published "the business cycle and the future." it specifies the date as april 23, 2009. that paper also included the following:
At first, 8.6 seemed to be a rather odd number that just didn?t fit mathematically. In trying to test the validity of October 19, 1987 being precise or coincidence, I stumbled upon something I never expected. This is the first time I will reveal something that I discovered and kept secret for the last 13 years. The total number of days within an 8.6-year business cycle was 3141. In reality, the 8.6-year cycle was equal to p (Pi) * 1000. Suddenly, there was clearly more at work than mere coincidence. Through extending my studies into physics, it became obvious that randomness was not a possibility. The number of variables involved in projecting the future course of the business cycle was massive, but not completely impossible given sufficient computer power and a truly comprehensive database. The relationship of 8.6 to p (Pi) confirmed that indeed the business cycle was in fact a perfect natural cyclical phenomenon that warranted further investigation. Indeed, the precision to a day appeared numerous times around the world in different markets. Both the 1994.25 and the 1998.55 turning points also produced clear events precisely to the day. The probability of coincidence of so many targets being that precise to the day was well into the billions. Indeed, the relationship of p to the business cycle demonstrated the existence of a perfect cycle that returned to its point of origin where once again it would start anew. The complexity that arose was that while the cycle could be measured and predicted, precisely which sector of the global economy would become the focal point emerged as the new research challenge.
somehow the relationship to pi reduced my interest in his theories.
kartius919
03-25-09, 06:07 PM
Interesting cycle theory, but seems slightly slanted towards free markets/ Ayn Randian capitalism. Investment bankers are not a large part of Wall Street?
I don't understand why he blames the current calamity on Marx. Collapse of Marxism? Of course the global Marxist community of 10 needs to fall, damn labor is the root of all our problems.
Capital is a fascinating read with brilliant insight and clarity. Marx is always unjustly disparaged by our elites and the public is left dumber than a doorknob.
The Great Depression analogy is helpful. The US was the financier for WWI. Those Europeans could not pay after WWI so they defaulted on their debt. That collapsed the US banking system at home causing the Great Depression. Almost a century later, we have become indebted to the East and looking to default on our loans. That means we are the Germans and the Chinese are us.
Do we follow the German war path after the collapse and rebuild our unsustainable military economy, annex our neighbors, and enter ever escalating plunder expeditions?
metalman
03-25-09, 06:12 PM
i was somewhat enamored of martin armstrong's writings in the late '90s. in sept 1999 he published "the business cycle and the future." it specifies the date as april 23, 2009. that paper also included the following:
At first, 8.6 seemed to be a rather odd number that just didn?t fit mathematically. In trying to test the validity of October 19, 1987 being precise or coincidence, I stumbled upon something I never expected. This is the first time I will reveal something that I discovered and kept secret for the last 13 years. The total number of days within an 8.6-year business cycle was 3141. In reality, the 8.6-year cycle was equal to p (Pi) * 1000. Suddenly, there was clearly more at work than mere coincidence. Through extending my studies into physics, it became obvious that randomness was not a possibility. The number of variables involved in projecting the future course of the business cycle was massive, but not completely impossible given sufficient computer power and a truly comprehensive database. The relationship of 8.6 to p (Pi) confirmed that indeed the business cycle was in fact a perfect natural cyclical phenomenon that warranted further investigation. Indeed, the precision to a day appeared numerous times around the world in different markets. Both the 1994.25 and the 1998.55 turning points also produced clear events precisely to the day. The probability of coincidence of so many targets being that precise to the day was well into the billions. Indeed, the relationship of p to the business cycle demonstrated the existence of a perfect cycle that returned to its point of origin where once again it would start anew. The complexity that arose was that while the cycle could be measured and predicted, precisely which sector of the global economy would become the focal point emerged as the new research challenge.
somehow the relationship to pi reduced my interest in his theories.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L9ya6G5S8MA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L9ya6G5S8MA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
---
---
“I would rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey.”
-- Comment from an eminent physician in the 1820s when the great Dr. Harvey made the discovery in London that the heart functions as a pump for blood, which contradicted the prevailing wisdom from Galen, a Greek from around 200 AD.
i should add that, although this business with pi made me skeptical, i still read his latest to see if there was something interesting to glean from it, and i'll read the next one, too, if i see a link. i like input from diverse sources, even those i disagree with or think may have dubious bases.
i should add that, although this business with pi made me skeptical, i still read his latest to see if there was something interesting to glean from it, and i'll read the next one, too, if i see a link. i like input from diverse sources, even those i disagree with or think may have dubious bases.
Cool. Armstrong is certainly out there with his interpretations and cycles and all the rest, but considering how frequently the various dates end up marking something very significant I believe he's hit on some truisms... and whether its a relationship to Pi or not, I have no idea.
ThePythonicCow
03-25-09, 06:53 PM
somehow the relationship to pi reduced my interest in his theories.
My take from Armstrong's PI discussion was that we all, as humans (or many other animals) have a built in tendency to see patterns on minimal, even insufficient, basis.
That is, though I don't get excited about the 3141 days, I take it as another warning that I need to be skeptical of the patterns that I "see" rather than discrediting Armstrong. Whatever patterns I think I see might persuade myself more, but risk being at least as dubious.
metalman
03-25-09, 06:57 PM
i should add that, although this business with pi made me skeptical, i still read his latest to see if there was something interesting to glean from it, and i'll read the next one, too, if i see a link. i like input from diverse sources, even those i disagree with or think may have dubious bases.
yeh, i can't get enough of 12 monkeys either but am not basing investment decisions on it.
The 8.6 (or 1/2 of that or 4.3 in Conover's work below) number is not numerology, but a fractal law of nature, if you like.
Now I haven't studied this recently, and do not have the mathematical knowledge fresh at my fingertips, as it were.
Armstrong discovered this "law of nature" on his own, and I believe he in some paper somewhere wrote that he later realized the connection after coming in contact with Mandelbrot's work.
All this means is that to the extent you think markets are fractal in nature, then the fractal mathematical model applies.
Personally I think it does apply to a large extent, but does not explain everything.
Quantitative Analysis of Non-Linear High Entropy Economic Systems Addendum
http://www.johncon.com/john/correspondence/020508170137.5425.html
" . . .
Fractals are self similar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_similar), meaning that the graph in Figure XIII does not change if the time scale is changed. The same probabilities hold true. For example, what are the chances that a contraction will last 10 years? About 31%. A hundred years? About one in ten. (That's why they are called fractals.)
Probably the best way to conceptualize asset values as fractals is to consider them made up of bubbles which are made up of smaller bubbles, which in turn are made up of even smaller bubbles, ..., without end, at all scales. For example, a contraction that lasts 100 years would be made of smaller expansions and contractions, which are made up of ... But the smaller expansions and contractions would not be sufficient to end the 100 year contraction, before its time. That's what the graph in Figure XIII illustrates-it is simply a probability distribution function of the duration of the expansions and contractions in housing prices.
The important concept is that if any time scale is chosen, (say years,) then half the contractions and expansions will last less than 4.3 years, and half more, (<CODE>erf (1 / sqrt (4.3) = 0.5</CODE>.) Further, the chances of a long duration expansion or contraction goes down, (approximately,) with <CODE>1 / sqrt (t)</CODE> where <CODE>t</CODE> is years, in this case.
. . . "
The 8.6 (or 1/2 of that or 4.3 in Conover's work below) number is not numerology, but a fractal law of nature, if you like.
Now I haven't studied this recently, and do not have the mathematical knowledge fresh at my fingertips, as it were.
Armstrong discovered this "law of nature" on his own, and I believe he in some paper somewhere wrote that he later realized the connection after coming in contact with Mandelbrot's work.
All this means is that to the extent you think markets are fractal in nature, then the fractal mathematical model applies.
Personally I think it does apply to a large extent, but does not explain everything.
Quantitative Analysis of Non-Linear High Entropy Economic Systems Addendum
http://www.johncon.com/john/correspondence/020508170137.5425.html
" . . .
Fractals are self similar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_similar), meaning that the graph in Figure XIII does not change if the time scale is changed. The same probabilities hold true. For example, what are the chances that a contraction will last 10 years? About 31%. A hundred years? About one in ten. (That's why they are called fractals.)
Probably the best way to conceptualize asset values as fractals is to consider them made up of bubbles which are made up of smaller bubbles, which in turn are made up of even smaller bubbles, ..., without end, at all scales. For example, a contraction that lasts 100 years would be made of smaller expansions and contractions, which are made up of ... But the smaller expansions and contractions would not be sufficient to end the 100 year contraction, before its time. That's what the graph in Figure XIII illustrates-it is simply a probability distribution function of the duration of the expansions and contractions in housing prices.
The important concept is that if any time scale is chosen, (say years,) then half the contractions and expansions will last less than 4.3 years, and half more, (<CODE>erf (1 / sqrt (4.3) = 0.5</CODE>.) Further, the chances of a long duration expansion or contraction goes down, (approximately,) with <CODE>1 / sqrt (t)</CODE> where <CODE>t</CODE> is years, in this case.
. . . "
It is a mathematical law and all life is mathematics." G. I. Gurdjieff
It is a mathematical law and all life is mathematics." G. I. Gurdjieff
Simple phenomena governed by simple natural laws can be successfully modeled with mathematics. But more complex phenomena with large numbers of variables render precise mathematical prediction impossible. Economics falls in that category.
Thus, you can accurately and consistently predict that mixing two particular chemicals together will produce a certain amount of a third chemical in N number of minutes. However, you cannot predict with any degree of certainty that gold will rise to 2500 on November 12, 2012.
Between these two extremes, there are many levels of achievable certitude.
Lukester
03-26-09, 07:48 PM
Cobben -
I commend your remarks, and Barts. Evidently the two more inquiring minds on this thread where this topic is concerned. JK sounds moderately open minded still also.
I would enjoy reading you discuss this with *T*, who's made some interesting comments about precisely what you mention here.
I was quite impressed by *T*'s comments on this topic and I think he's yet to find anyone here who can pose a serious rebuttal. Sounds like you would see "eye to eye" here with him.
Congratulations to Bart, for his far ranging agnosticism and ongoing curiosity on this question. Metalman comes across as the least intellectually curious with the comic references - I may be misunderstanding, but there is at least a hint of fear of being taken for a fool.
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=81811&highlight=mandelbrot#post81811
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=76674&highlight=mandelbrot#post76674
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=65700&highlight=mandelbrot#post65700
The 8.6 (or 1/2 of that or 4.3 in Conover's work below) number is not numerology, but a fractal law of nature, if you like.
Now I haven't studied this recently, and do not have the mathematical knowledge fresh at my fingertips, as it were.
Armstrong discovered this "law of nature" on his own, and I believe he in some paper somewhere wrote that he later realized the connection after coming in contact with Mandelbrot's work.
All this means is that to the extent you think markets are fractal in nature, then the fractal mathematical model applies.
Personally I think it does apply to a large extent, but does not explain everything.
Quantitative Analysis of Non-Linear High Entropy Economic Systems Addendum
http://www.johncon.com/john/correspondence/020508170137.5425.html
" . . .
Fractals are self similar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_similar), meaning that the graph in Figure XIII does not change if the time scale is changed. The same probabilities hold true. For example, what are the chances that a contraction will last 10 years? About 31%. A hundred years? About one in ten. (That's why they are called fractals.)
Probably the best way to conceptualize asset values as fractals is to consider them made up of bubbles which are made up of smaller bubbles, which in turn are made up of even smaller bubbles, ..., without end, at all scales. For example, a contraction that lasts 100 years would be made of smaller expansions and contractions, which are made up of ... But the smaller expansions and contractions would not be sufficient to end the 100 year contraction, before its time. That's what the graph in Figure XIII illustrates-it is simply a probability distribution function of the duration of the expansions and contractions in housing prices.
The important concept is that if any time scale is chosen, (say years,) then half the contractions and expansions will last less than 4.3 years, and half more, (<CODE>erf (1 / sqrt (4.3) = 0.5</CODE>.) Further, the chances of a long duration expansion or contraction goes down, (approximately,) with <CODE>1 / sqrt (t)</CODE> where <CODE>t</CODE> is years, in this case.
. . . "
Congratulations to Bart, for his far ranging agnosticism and ongoing curiosity on this question. Metalman comes across as the least intellectually curious with the comic references - I may be misunderstanding, but there is at least a hint of fear of being taken for a fool.
I think the Man of Metal is not curious, because he has something that works for him. He has hitched his wagon to the iTulip Clydesdale. It has served him very well. As the saying goes, dance with the one who brought you.
Lukester
03-26-09, 08:47 PM
We are all riding along on the iTulip clydesdale. There is no great space between Metalman's actionable themes and investment insights and those of the majority of us. Certainly no big difference with my investment insights. The topic discussed here, which Cobben, Bart and *T* reference open mindedly is something at the periphery - not the core consideration. It is how you greet the ideas at the periphery that denotes your level of curiosity.
I think the Man of Metal is not curious, because he has something that works for him. He has hitched his wagon to the iTulip Clydesdale. It has served him very well. As the saying goes, dance with the one who brought you.
We are all riding along on the iTulip clydesdale. There is no great space between Metalman's actionable themes and investment insights and those of the majority of us. Certainly no big difference with my investment insights. The topic discussed here, which Cobben, Bart and *T* reference open mindedly is something at the periphery - not the core consideration. It is how you greet the ideas at the periphery that denotes your level of curiosity.
It is how you greet ANY idea that denotes your level of curiosity.
Lukester
03-26-09, 09:01 PM
The core ideas we are all here to share on the "iTulip Clydesdale" cart, are all ideas we largely agree upon anyway. There is no scope to discern presence or absence of curiosity in the common ideas area. It is only the ideas at the periphery of what is "on the Clydesdale cart" that work like some sort of radioisotope contrast medium, where you can start to distinguish who remains curious and who exhibits declining curiosity. Those curious about the topics covered by Armstrong are every bit as much curious about the core ideas. The only distinguishing characteristic is that they don't stop being curious at the periphery.
It is how you greet ANY idea that denotes your level of curiosity.
"The topic discussed here, which Cobben, Bart and *T* reference open mindedly is something at the periphery - not the core consideration."
I would not agree with you that the fractal idea is something peripheral, on the contrary it is central to understanding many things which previously did not fit well in any mathematical models, and was a unique breakthrough in mathematics. How often do you suppose new natural constants or laws of nature are discovered?
Having said that, chosing the mathematical model that best fits the real world is what applied mathematics is all about, letting prestige in the least little bit kills it.
If the shoe fits, wear it, if not continue shopping around is my thinking.
Lukester
03-27-09, 11:23 PM
Cobben - what happened to Krakke? Has he finally cracked from the worsening stress, and gone and hid under a rock awaiting the Armageddon?
"The topic discussed here, which Cobben, Bart and *T* reference open mindedly is something at the periphery - not the core consideration."
I would not agree with you that the fractal idea is something peripheral, on the contrary it is central to understanding many things which previously did not fit well in any mathematical models, and was a unique breakthrough in mathematics. How often do you suppose new natural constants or laws of nature are discovered?
Having said that, chosing the mathematical model that best fits the real world is what applied mathematics is all about, letting prestige in the least little bit kills it.
If the shoe fits, wear it, if not continue shopping around is my thinking.
"Cobben - what happened to Krakke? Has he finally cracked from the worsening stress, and gone and hid under a rock awaiting the Armageddon?"
No idea, he was little on the distraught side, especially considering he is in Norway.
WildspitzE
03-30-09, 08:16 PM
The next peak per my understanding and calculations is approx. April 19, 2009.
The most difficult thing about using the Armstrong Model is that its subjective... as one might expect from something called an Economic Confidence Model.
It did mark a relative stock market and derivatives peak on 2/27/07, and did mark (among other things) a broad recognition of the S HTF on about 3/22/2008 of housing and bank issues... and both were not clear ahead of time just from knowing the date.
Here's a link to my chart from my forecast page showing the dates from 1972-2032:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/global_cycle1972-2032.png
I'm loathe to be very specific about what I expect for what I hope are obvious reasons, but will say that anyone without a substantial hard asset position (as in gold, silver, platinum and equivalents) is assuming a large risk.
The full article is excessively geeky for most since its heavy economics, but the long term chart in my Financial crisis tracking (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4662) thread shows that we're in the largest financial crisis since 1970, which is as far back as I have data that drives the model.
Bart - Thanks for posting the original link and the follow up graph. While I certainly approach these pieces with a healthy sense of skepticism, the mandelbrot/fractal stuff does get the creative juices flowing. If you have any more graphs or insight, such would be greatly appreciated. At least it's an interesting avenue to explore.
One other thing that I found interesting, is his comment re: laissez-faire/socialism.
People constantly tell me how they think what is happening now is the end of capitalism, when in my opinion laissez-faire capitalism has been dead for a long time... and that, in my opinion, what is going on looks more like a parasite (or parasites) facing a dying host.
I would submit though, that it is the beginning of the transformation from fascism (and not socialism) into something else, and that this transformation (because of how fascism works) will be dramatic - whether it happens all at once or over a protracted period.
"what is going on looks more like a parasite (or parasites) facing a dying host"
That sounds exactly like CA Fitts with her "Tapeworm Economis".
http://solari.com/archive/tapeworm_economics/
WildspitzE
03-31-09, 08:46 AM
"what is going on looks more like a parasite (or parasites) facing a dying host"
That sounds exactly like CA Fitts with her "Tapeworm Economis".
http://solari.com/archive/tapeworm_economics/
Not familiar with her work, will peruse it later on when I have some free time. Given the time constraints I'm under as of late, is there a piece in that link that you recommend and that works as an introduction or executive summary? Thank you.
I haven't read though all of that myself, most of the details are USA-specific of course, but the idea is general. This first line is as good a definitions as any:
"In a Tapeworm Economy, a small group of insiders consolidate political and economic power at the expense of people, living things, and our environment in a manner that destroys real wealth. "
WildspitzE
04-01-09, 07:41 AM
I haven't read though all of that myself, most of the details are USA-specific of course, but the idea is general. This first line is as good a definitions as any:
"In a Tapeworm Economy, a small group of insiders consolidate political and economic power at the expense of people, living things, and our environment in a manner that destroys real wealth. "
I didn't read it all myself. In what I read, she makes several very salient points amidst several paranoid ones. Interesting character.
(not at Contrahour. have not read it yet.)
http://jsmineset.com/index.php/2009/04/06/martin-armstrongs-most-recent-thoughts-on-gold-and-general-equities/
Bart. What do you make of Armstrong's predictions on gold below:
Minor technical resistance between 1,100 and 1,200 for 2009. That's looking like a pipe dream right now. I'm drying to test that resistance.
Bart - Thanks for posting the original link and the follow up graph. While I certainly approach these pieces with a healthy sense of skepticism, the mandelbrot/fractal stuff does get the creative juices flowing. If you have any more graphs or insight, such would be greatly appreciated. At least it's an interesting avenue to explore.
One other thing that I found interesting, is his comment re: laissez-faire/socialism.
People constantly tell me how they think what is happening now is the end of capitalism, when in my opinion laissez-faire capitalism has been dead for a long time... and that, in my opinion, what is going on looks more like a parasite (or parasites) facing a dying host.
I would submit though, that it is the beginning of the transformation from fascism (and not socialism) into something else, and that this transformation (because of how fascism works) will be dramatic - whether it happens all at once or over a protracted period.
You're most welcome... and while I'm at it, here's the most recent one that's also available elsewhere like on Jim Sincalir's site (3 MB PDF - image based, not text).
http://www.nowandfutures.com/d2/DestroyingCapitalFormation309.pdf
I don't have much else for public consumption that I haven't posted already, partially since I try to avoid political areas since they're so emotionally hot.
The fascistic trends are unmistakable in my opinion though, in the sense of this from an earlier Ben:
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.”
-- Benito Mussolini
And there sure aren't any guarantees about what the political or world future will hold, only moving targets and probabilities and possibilities.
Bart. What do you make of Armstrong's predictions on gold below:
Minor technical resistance between 1,100 and 1,200 for 2009. That's looking like a pipe dream right now. I'm drying to test that resistance.
My last public prediction of the next gold peak has a minimum target of $1087, but I don't have a time target - at least one that I have enough certainty about to go public on.
I sure won't exclude it happening in 2009 though - the massive problems with the financial system and the dollar, etc. are still very much alive & well. My chart showing the gold '70s parallel does allow for another run at a peak this year too, for what its worth.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14227076/Behind-the-Curtain4909
I think this is Martin Amstrong's latest ;)
http://www.nowandfutures.com/d2/LookingBehindTheCurtain20090409Armstrong.pdf
About 700k, 19 pages and a direct download that needs no login like scribd requires.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14227076/Behind-the-Curtain4909
I think this is Martin Amstrong's latest ;)
Wow. That's good reading. I'll be busy for a while. Thanks;)
ThePythonicCow
04-14-09, 07:06 PM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14227076/Behind-the-Curtain4909
I think this is Martin Amstrong's latest ;)
D*mn -- scary stuff. :eek: The paranoid tin-foil-hat conspiricist in me vibrates at high energy after reading one of Martin Armstrong's papers.
I hope to live long enough to see this cancer of corruption self-destruct. In my more optimistic moments, I imagine that there is great underlying strength in the people, commerce, cultures, and ethics of us afflicted humans that will endure past this plague. In my more pessimistic moments, I imagine that it will take 500 years for that strength to reappear. My health is good, but I won't live that long.
I had to come back when I finished the part about silver. I have a friend who used to trade silver for his own account. He told me the Hunts were broken on purpose. He was a witness to the rule changes and limit downs when they couldn't get out.
I had to come back when I finished the part about silver. I have a friend who used to trade silver for his own account. He told me the Hunts were broken on purpose. He was a witness to the rule changes and limit downs when they couldn't get out.
I was trading at the time too, and remember it well.
Here's a silver chart from an old CRB subscription that shows the limit moves very well:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/download/crb_silver_chart_198006.png
OMG. I just finished reading. I didn't know anything about Martin Armstrong. I had only read what Bart had posted earlier in this thread. After reading this I don't know what to say. Someone should maybe back him up on his Wiki Page.
vibrates at high energy
Interesting. That statement speaks to a knowledege of other matters you never seem to comment on. Or am I reading into things that aren't there?
strittmatter
04-14-09, 08:09 PM
Just finished it. He repeated some things from earlier writings, but still very interesting, namely the prison attack.
I'm wondering if a more in-depth roster of the "club" membership is to be found?
I also wonder if the recent Barron's artilce giving Jim Sinclair a hard time (sorry no link) could be attributed to the same strategy methods by others that Armstrong speaks about?
OMG. I just finished reading. I didn't know anything about Martin Armstrong. I had only read what Bart had posted earlier in this thread. After reading this I don't know what to say. Someone should maybe back him up on his Wiki Page.
From what I know and have read and also recall from listening to folk in the mid to late '70s, my best guess is he has at least 50% of it (if not 80%+) close enough to correct so as not to make a lot of difference in the broad scheme of things... and as usual, BWTFDIK applies too - as well as noting that my full & complete opinions won't be public in the foreseeable future, other than that Armstrong has some serious major cojones and is certainly in the planetary top 10 in tinfoil hat land.
I'm sure not privy to the lofty levels that he used to traverse. I'm also not comfortable with a few of his broad generalities.
I also can't confirm that his model called the gold peak in Jan. 1980 for what its worth - none of my reading and research of his various models and cycles has shown any evidence of them having called it... and that doesn't mean they didn't, just that have no hard evidence or facts in the area.
I'm wondering if a more in-depth roster of the "club" membership is to be found?
Having been there & done that, you can pretty easily find hundreds of names... but its a bit of a dead end in the sense that the most important thing by far is to understand how the "club" works and what their footprints look like - just my $.02 worth.
I also wonder if the recent Barron's article giving Jim Sinclair a hard time (sorry no link) could be attributed to the same strategy methods by others that Armstrong speaks about?
I think there's little doubt in the area. A search will turn up more than a few firms that specialize in almost any kind of "public relations" that you can pay for.
ThePythonicCow
04-14-09, 08:57 PM
Interesting. That statement speaks to a knowledege of other matters you never seem to comment on. Or am I reading into things that aren't there?You honor me with having more knowledge than I deserve. All I know is what I read on the same web pages and in the same books as many of us read.
WildspitzE
04-14-09, 09:04 PM
Thanks again for the follow up articles. Read the first one, and will read the second one tomorrow. At least they make for some interesting reading while I watch the screens.
All this "club" talk made me think of the following quote [a buddy of mine emailed to me due to an analogous discussion]:
"And the prophecy I make is this. To nine out of ten of you the choice which could lead to scoundrelism will come, when it does come, in no very dramatic colors. Obviously bad men, obviously threatening or bribing, will almost certainly not appear. Over a drink or a cup of coffee, disguised as a triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still -- just at the moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naif, or a prig -- the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which is not quite in accordance with the technical rules of fair play: something which the public, the ignorant, romantic public, would never understand: something which even the outsiders in your own profession are apt to make a fuss about: but something, says your new friend, which "we" -- and at the word "we" you try not to blush for mere pleasure -- something "we always do." And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world. It would be so terrible to see the other man's face -- that genial, confidential, delightfully sophisticated face -- turn suddenly cold and contemptuous, to know that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude: it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. But you will be a scoundrel." - CS Lewis.
Having been there & done that, you can pretty easily find hundreds of names... but its a bit of a dead end in the sense that the most important thing by far is to understand how the "club" works and what their footprints look like - just my $.02 worth.
I think there's little doubt in the area. A search will turn up more than a few firms that specialize in almost any kind of "public relations" that you can pay for.
You honor me with having more knowledge than I deserve. All I know is what I read on the same web pages and in the same books as many of us read.
Well okay. Still, this is the best place around. I hope we can set a date, and many of us meet up. I like the name Jessie's cafe. It connotes a familarity that we share here as well.
Thanks again for the follow up articles. Read the first one, and will read the second one tomorrow. At least they make for some interesting reading while I watch the screens.
All this "club" talk made me think of the following quote [a buddy of mine emailed to me due to an analogous discussion]:
"And the prophecy I make is this. To nine out of ten of you the choice which could lead to scoundrelism will come, when it does come, in no very dramatic colors. Obviously bad men, obviously threatening or bribing, will almost certainly not appear. Over a drink or a cup of coffee, disguised as a triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still -- just at the moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naif, or a prig -- the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which is not quite in accordance with the technical rules of fair play: something which the public, the ignorant, romantic public, would never understand: something which even the outsiders in your own profession are apt to make a fuss about: but something, says your new friend, which "we" -- and at the word "we" you try not to blush for mere pleasure -- something "we always do." And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world. It would be so terrible to see the other man's face -- that genial, confidential, delightfully sophisticated face -- turn suddenly cold and contemptuous, to know that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude: it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. But you will be a scoundrel." - CS Lewis.
Great quote, just added it to my quotes page in the political section.
Here's two that may be new to you:
"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day."
-- Theodore Roosevelt, April 19, 1906
"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
-- Benjamin Disraeli, 1844
WildspitzE
04-15-09, 11:43 AM
Great quote, just added it to my quotes page in the political section.
Here's two that may be new to you:
"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day."
-- Theodore Roosevelt, April 19, 1906
"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
-- Benjamin Disraeli, 1844
Thanks, I like the second one best. Teddy Roosevelt, in spite of himself, does have some interesting quotes.
BTW - Just read the second Armstrong paper, and realized how apropos my quote is. :D
BTW - Just read the second Armstrong paper, and realized how apropos my quote is. :D
That's some quality serendipity. :D
Here's some brighter quotes to help counter balance some of Armstrong's darkness:
"Freedom is actually a bigger game than power. Power is about what you can control. Freedom is about what you can unleash."
-- Harriet Rubin
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"Even men who were engaged in organizing debt-serf cultivation and debt-serf industrialism in the American cotton districts, in the old rubber plantations, and in the factories of India, China, and South Italy, appeared as generous supporters of and subscribers to the sacred cause of individual liberty."
-- H. G. Wells, The Shape of Things to Come - (1936)
"Men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all the other alternatives."
-- Abba Eban (1915-2002)
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else."
-- Winston Churchill
Well we got a new one:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ucjxvcj0xrc
I think this was written in a hurry. Mr Amstrong probably is overwhelmed by the news of his theory spreading on internet.
This piece, IMHO opinion is not as good as the previous work on cycles although he raises some good points. I would give it only a 60% mark.
By the way, a detail for goldbugs. Quite a few years back I red in a paper on monetary history that Emperor Trajan's stunning and successful economic reform was possible only after acquiring as a result the Dacian wars about (if I remember correctly) 375 tons of gold and approximately 700t of silver and access to very rich gold mines. That is a lot even according to the modern standards for an economy of 30-40 million people (including the slaves). So no miracle here...
WildspitzE
04-16-09, 07:03 AM
Well we got a new one:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ucjxvcj0xrc
For some reason, the firewall where I'm at doesn't let me access that site.
Sucks. Will check it out later.
Also, too bad that it's on the crappy side. Hope he reverts to more of the mandelbrot/model discussions. While the stories are entertaining, the other stuff appeals to my sense of curiosity.
Via Sinclair's site:
Armstrong's "Financial Panics = Political Change"
http://economicedge.blogspot.com/2009/04/martin-armstrong-financial-panics.html
(apparently there were some problems with uploading the file or similar)
WildspitzE
04-16-09, 04:34 PM
Via Sinclair's site:
Armstrong's "Financial Panics = Political Change"
http://economicedge.blogspot.com/2009/04/martin-armstrong-financial-panics.html
(apparently there were some problems with uploading the file or similar)
Thanks Cobben.
I agree, this wasn't his best piece (FWIW, this is based on my newbie experience :cool:).
Good long exposition of his modeling practice & theories, no short-term predictions.
He is in the "expert systems can solve everything" camp that I thought had gradually died out after the first AI intoxication. (Ever read a book called "The Art of Prolog"?) But I would agree with him that expert systems can be very usefull, just please! do not put one in charge of guvm'nt.:eek:
Apparently written in Feb., but as far as I know not previously made
available, and even now not Armstrong's original but only the "slightly
edited by Contrahour" version has been published.
Why Models Are Our Only Hope?
Should we create a model to manage our social-economy?
http://www.contrahour.com/contrahour/2009/04/martin-armstrong-using-the-scientific-method-to-model-the-economy.html
"We need to create an Expert System that records all events, the response taken by government, followed by the result. Why do we respond always the same, when the result is never tracked? We cause history to repeat and amplify the boom bust cycle causing more pronounced swings. Why do we constantly repeat the same mistakes? "
WildspitzE
04-17-09, 07:37 PM
That's some quality serendipity. :D
hmm...
T minus 4 (or 2, depending on the chart) days and counting...
Rampant optimism... spring is in the air... :rolleyes:
hmm...
T minus 4 (or 2, depending on the chart) days and counting...
Rampant optimism... spring is in the air... :rolleyes:
*rimshots*, as needed... ;)
Keep in mind that I doubt that Armstrong's work is unknown on Wall St. and in D.C.... and that there has been some truly massive pumping via POMOs ( They do ring a bell (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9453) ) in the last two weeks. The percentage jump in the SOMA balance last week was by far the largest since WWII.
There are also four more POMO auctions scheduled between now and the 30th, which us highly unusual.
Translation - there are no guarantees of a small or large imminent drop in the stock market.
kartius919
04-20-09, 12:59 PM
April 19 he said. Interesting coincidence or maybe more?
WildspitzE
04-20-09, 01:26 PM
April 19 he said. Interesting coincidence or maybe more?
queue: x-files type spooky music.
The next peak per my understanding and calculations is approx. April 19, 2009.
I think Martin Amstrong calculates 2009.3 as April 23 as detailed here (http://www.contrahour.com/contrahour/2006/06/martin_armstron.html), but this is the business confidence model. That doesn't mean the Dow or S&P will necessarily have a sharp turn smack on April 23, 2009 at 12:00 pm. The precision of this date is necessary to calculate the next cycles.
Anyway it seems we have a new release in html format:
http://www.contrahour.com/contrahour/2009/04/martin-armstrong-using-the-scientific-method-to-model-the-economy.html
This one I find very interesting and raising challenging questions at least with respect to one issue:
Whatever I am like, no one can manipulate the world economy - not even the Government or all of them together. At the very best, if everyone followed the model, one of two possibilities emerges. (1) The amplitude may be increased, or (2) the wild amplitude could be reduced.
[...]
The driving force behind the business cycle is what we call the bullish/bearish consensus. In other words, the majority must be wrong. Why? The fuel behind the cycle is the imbalance in supply and demand. There is no equilibrium, any more than there is an Easter bunny laying chocolate eggs in your garden. If there was the utopian idea of equilibrium in reality, we would be in the dark ages. No nation would become rich for it would be impossible for one nation to gather greater wealth than another.
The cycle requires that the majority is always wrong because that is the fuel that then makes it work. With every stock market crash, government tries to find the culprit who overpowered the market and forced it down. Shorts are attacked as if they were sane sort of traitor. Short selling was even declared a criminal act with the 1907 Crash.
[...]
But it is never the short sellers that cause a decline. A major decline only occurs when the majority are all on one side. If you reach the point that 85-95% of investors are bullish, you have sucked in the last guy. All you need is to spook that herd, and it will turn and run collectively. When you scare the majority, you have 85-95% sellers and no buyers. Never will you find that many shorts at the high. Those who sell the high against a bullish consensus of 85% - 95%, are a slim minority
[...]The dark side of the business cycle is the perpetual loss of civil rights. With every crisis, we lose more and more of our freedom, no different than it was in the primitive ancient times. The reason for this is quite simple. If you do not under¬stand how and why the business cycle works, then individuals can be misled easily into a witch-hunt to grab someone and punish them. When Rome burned, Nero (54-68AD) blamed the Christians starting the Persecutions that lasted until Constantine. But after Constantine, the Christians got even and Persecuted pagans under the same principle of being a non-believer called "heresy" punishable by death. Virgins were sacrificed to the gods to make crops prosperous or to volcanoes to quiet their spirits. We may believe we are modern, but we act the same way as countless generations before us.
There is some quite powerful stuff here.
And another set of interesting questions:
Why the Government as a whole does not fund the construction of a model for managing our social-economic world remains a mystery. But why the Executive branch seems to go out of its way to prevent any models from being created is even stranger. At hearings before the House Oversight Committee, a very interesting exchange took place, illustrating how the SEC for one deliberately obstructs technological advancements regarding the managing of our economy and nation.
When the SEC Chairman Cox was called before Congressman Waxman’s Oversight Committee, he was asked about models and remarkably gave the precise and very clear definition of the core structure of the model I devoted my life to create. He stated precisely the broad scope of what was necessary. Mr. Cox pointed out that the model would have to incorporate all economies and map the complexity of the global economy.
"With respect to modeling all of the risk in the system, I suppose at some point you run up against the problem of trying to create such a level of exactitude that you rebuild the whole world in all of its complexity. That is probably an aspiration that we ought not to have."
If we think a little bit, in the early agrarian societies, a small group of high priests of the solar cults figured out the cycles of the seasons, and they were the only ones able to predict with extraordinary precision when is the best time for planting the seeds.
The high priests could not influence the succession of the seasons, neither if there was a drought next year or a very long winter. The only source of their power was their ability to predict the best timing for the maximum probability of success for an agricultural enterprise. And in early neolithic agriculture was the economic engine and source of power of all early human societies.
The power of those high priests of the solar cults was awesome (and we see Europe littered with megalithic monuments that were designed to measure solstices or equinoxes dates) and it could stay in their hands only as long as the knowledge on how to determine precisely the calendar remained only in the hands of the priesthood elite.
Knowledge is power and restricting access to knowledge is equivalent to restricting access to power...
I can imagine the high priests of the early neolithic being quite upset when a pesky peasant called Martinus Amstrongus, by simply studying the cyclical evolution of temperature and the blooming date of flowers figured out that there are exactly 365.24 days and the vernal equinox allways falls on or about March 21 (91.2 days after the winter solstice) without having to build a megalithic solar observatory.
It the same pesky peasant started talking with other peasants about his model, the plebes would figure soon that the source of power of the priesthood elites has nothing to do with magice and is nothing else than simple knowlege about natural phenomena. The pesky peasant could not be allowed to become a Prometheus, and tell to the rest of the plebes how can they determine for themselves the best time for planting crops and harvesting. Nobody would pay they dues to the Temple if that happened.
These days looking at how the Wall Street Temple works and how we all have to pay our dues to the elite of financial high priests, I don't find it surprising that guys like Kondratieff and Amstrong ended up in jail.
I posted this & commented here a few days ago:
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=92487#poststop
He is in the "expert systems can solve everything" camp that I thought had gradually died out after the first AI intoxication. (Ever read a book called "The Art of Prolog"?) But I would agree with him that expert systems can be very usefull, just please! do not put one in charge of guvm'nt.:eek:
Have you ever heard of the World Model of System Dynamics (Limits to Growth, Club of Rome), or expert systems which are usually considered a part of AI, or business process simulation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth
Ventana has a free software version with several models, quite interesting to run:
http://www.vensim.com/resource.html
"An interesting and controversial work, World Dynamics by Jay W. Forrester (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1971; second edition, 1973) discusses growth in a finite world. This model is supplied with Vensim. "<!--mstheme--><!--msthemelist-->
But I would agree with him that expert systems can be very usefull, just please! do not put one in charge of guvm'nt.:eek:
You think software could do a worse job? :rolleyes: ;)
Have you ever heard of the World Model of System Dynamics (Limits to Growth, Club of Rome), or expert systems which are usually considered a part of AI, or business process simulation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth
Ventana has a free software version with several models, quite interesting to run:
http://www.vensim.com/resource.html
"An interesting and controversial work, World Dynamics by Jay W. Forrester (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1971; second edition, 1973) discusses growth in a finite world. This model is supplied with Vensim. "<!--mstheme--><!--msthemelist-->
Oh the trials and tribulations of AI and modeling... and yes, I am familiar with the quite poor track record of the Club of Rome and GIGO still applies (Garbage In, Garbage Out) too.
I did fiddle with Verdana for a short time a few months ago, and it sure is interesting. I'd probably pursue it more if my back order for another 12 hours per day ever comes in.
Apart conspiracies, the flu is right on time for Armstrong's prevision, don't you think?
Apart conspiracies, the flu is right on time for Armstrong's prevision, don't you think?
The thought sure has occurred to me, but I think it's still too early to say what this cycle turn is all about. I thought, for example, that the 2/27/07 turn was about the US stock market soon afterward... and was wrong.
The thought sure has occurred to me, but I think it's still too early to say what this cycle turn is all about. I thought, for example, that the 2/27/07 turn was about the US stock market soon afterward... and was wrong.The use of the flu as a excuse ,at least here in Brazil, comes in a nice hour for our politicians, since they are running out of money to do goodies without mess up the economy and production. I think USA has a small area to maneuver too besides printing the Dollar. So the flu come right on time.
"it's still too early to say what this cycle turn is all about"
My candidate is now the $USD index, though a lot of other stuff should be implicated if it continues on down.
"Would you buy this if it were a stock?"
1494
"it's still too early to say what this cycle turn is all about"
My candidate is now the $USD index, though a lot of other stuff should be implicated if it continues on down.
...
That was my best guess too as I noted on my blog a few days ago, and I've followed up with a short position today (that may only last until the FOMC meeting minute release).
I had been looking at other stuff, noteably real estate.
I only noticed the $USD because I was watching the USDSEK which was being bought up sharply going into the Swedish Riksbank "FOMC" meeting on April 21, whereafter it was promptly sold down just as sharply, and I put on a reasonably sized short position as a short-term trade. Now I'm thinking about keeping it as an intermediate term trade if it continues down into May.
I had been looking at other stuff, noteably real estate.
I only noticed the $USD because I was watching the USDSEK which was being bought up sharply going into the Swedish Riksbank "FOMC" meeting on April 21, whereafter it was promptly sold down just as sharply, and I put on a reasonably sized short position as a short-term trade. Now I'm thinking about keeping it as an intermediate term trade if it continues down into May.
Here's a normally non public chart which shows some interesting trend lines - for what its worth.
http://www.nowandfutures.com/d2/t_pomo_usdx.png
thanks, that was interesting.
the Chaikin indicators (which I tend to trust for equities, not sure about how well they work for currencies or something like the DX) on my chart indicate that this might have been a significant top, and everything else I have taken a look at does also. Just have to wait & see what happens . . .
Indeed... and that's also why the trading gods invented stops...
and options, with limited risk, which is how I am short the USDSEK.
It's just that the "gods" keep a mean spread on their "services", which hampers my style, but that is I suppose all for the better.
I'm one of those nutty futures traders, partially to avoid the option premium... and already got stopped out of half my short almost right after the FOMC statement.
Good trading to you.
A new paper from Martin Amstrong: "One world Currency" (http://www.mediafire.com/?tumi1ngd2bm)
I don't agree with everything said there and generally I'm not a big fan of the Amstrong's papers that are not directly related to economic cylces, however this one is extremely interesting IMHO.
Reading Amstrong's paper and after that the blueprint of the Steil-CFR (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070501faessay86308-p50/benn-steil/the-end-of-national-currency.html) plan, leads to some extremely interesting conclusions. After reading this latest Amstrong paper, I finnally figured out what Steil wanted to say about the future global gold currency, and I don't like at all the implications.
ThePythonicCow
05-10-09, 02:34 AM
I don't like at all the implications.What are the implications you see, and why don't you like them?
A new paper from Martin Amstrong: "One world Currency" (http://www.mediafire.com/?tumi1ngd2bm)
I don't agree with everything said there and generally I'm not a big fan of the Amstrong's papers that are not directly related to economic cylces, however this one is extremely interesting IMHO.
Reading Amstrong's paper and after that the blueprint of the Steil-CFR (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070501faessay86308-p50/benn-steil/the-end-of-national-currency.html) plan, leads to some extremely interesting conclusions. After reading this latest Amstrong paper, I finally figured out what Steil wanted to say about the future global gold currency, and I don't like at all the implications.
Armstrong sure didn't pull any punches in the new one, and in my opinion he also seemed to be way more out there than usual in the sense of utopian concepts & ideas.
Here's the summary paragraph of that CFR Steil article you lined, so that folk see the connection.
The End of National Currency
Global financial instability has sparked a surge in "monetary nationalism" -- the idea that countries must make and control their own currencies. But globalization and monetary nationalism are a dangerous combination, a cause of financial crises and geopolitical tension. The world needs to abandon unwanted currencies, replacing them with dollars, euros, and multinational currencies as yet unborn.
Whether the questions of do we end up with some kind of two tier currency as Armstrong thinks, and whether it involves some kind of "super" SDR, and how much gold will be backing it sure is getting interesting - in the sense of the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". :rolleyes:
What are the implications you see, and why don't you like them?
Actually, I think a careful read, reveals the Steil plan is very similar to Amstrong's idea of a two tier currency system in order to force cross border trade balance. Here are some interesting quotes from Steil's article:
In fact, capital flows became destabilizing only after countries began asserting "sovereignty" over money -- detaching it from gold or anything else considered real wealth.
[...]
A new gold-based international monetary system surely sounds far-fetched. But so, in 1900, did a monetary system without gold. Modern technology makes a revival of gold money, through private gold banks, possible even without government support. <style type="text/css"> <!-- @page { size: 21.59cm 27.94cm; margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } --</style>In my reading the Steil plan is brilliant and relies on the introduction of two tier currency systems, but not like in Amstrong vision, designed to forster the development of the economies of the countries adopting it. IMHO opinon the Steil plan would benefit only the private banking cartels perpetuating their intense rent extraction priviledge from the rest of us.
I believe that the Steil two tier plan is based on a small set of regional currencies (dollar, euro, the next asian currency and maybe a GCC-islamic currency) and a gold based currency controlled by private banks which will deal only with clearing of trade imballances (a revival of the original idea of the Morgan-Lamont plan presented at the Baden Baden conference in 1929 which was abandoned due to the Great Depression. This is what originally the BIS was designed to do).
History repeats in slightly different ways.
(I've attached to this message the Steil paper in PDF format. It's worth reading to understand in which direction some interested parties want to push us.)
With respect to Amstrong, his concept is very interesting, but it will kill any form of globalization designed exclusively for maximizing corporate and banking profits.
Armstrong sure didn't pull any punches in the new one, and in my opinion he also seemed to be way more out there than usual in the sense of utopian concepts & ideas.
Yeah, this paper is different.
Here's the summary paragraph of that CFR Steil article you lined, so that folk see the connection.
The paper cannot be viewed on the CFR site anymore fortunately it can still be found on many public sites
Whether the questions of do we end up with some kind of two tier currency as Armstrong thinks, and whether it involves some kind of "super" SDR, and how much gold will be backing it sure is getting interesting - in the sense of the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". :rolleyes:
I think the Steil plan, although it is not explicitly stated in the paper. sees the super regional fiat currencies as domestic currencies (lower tier) and a gold backed super-SDR (upper tier) to control them... And he who controls the super-SDR will control all the money of the world
One ring to rule them all ... ;)
I think the Steil plan, although it is not explicitly stated in the paper. sees the super regional fiat currencies as domestic currencies (lower tier) and a gold backed super-SDR (upper tier) to control them... And he who controls the super-SDR will control all the money of the world
It reminds me of various rumors circulating for years about the greenback US dollar only being used in the US, and a US "redback" that would only be used elsewhere - and the two would be valued independently.
By the way, I can still access the Steil paper directly.
One ring to rule them all ... ;)
Indeed... but Frodo lives... ;)
I am attaching the Steil paper - The End of National Currency
1563
New one from Martin Armstrong dated 5/15, 31 pages, about an 8MB image based PDF
http://www.nowandfutures.com/large/Understanding_the_Real_Economy_51509_armstrong.pdf
New Armstrong piece in which he gets into fractals amongst other things.
His idea of "dimensions" I find confused, one way of understanding fractals is as fractional dimensional constructs.
Sinclair claimed recently that Armstrong is the "master timer", meaning that is the only thing he is the master of, and implied that all his other ideas should be taken with a grain of salt, as no-one can be the master of everything.
Understanding the Real Economy 5-15-09 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/15475184/Understanding-the-Real-Economy-51509)
http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/10432015-kris
Armstrong sure didn't pull any punches in the new one, and in my opinion he also seemed to be way more out there than usual in the sense of utopian concepts & ideas.
Here's the summary paragraph of that CFR Steil article you lined, so that folk see the connection.
Whether the questions of do we end up with some kind of two tier currency as Armstrong thinks, and whether it involves some kind of "super" SDR, and how much gold will be backing it sure is getting interesting - in the sense of the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". :rolleyes:
What's up with this thread? It doesn't go any further than page 5 last post I can see is #95:eek:
... Sinclair claimed recently that Armstrong is the "master timer", meaning that is the only thing he is the master of, and implied that all his other ideas should be taken with a grain of salt, as no-one can be the master of everything.
Thank you and Bart for getting my attention on this (I have already been watching the current fall of the dollar). There is a new post at Sinclair's webiste that fits right in.
Dear Extended Family,
This is without a doubt the most important piece of information we will present to you this year. What you will read ahead addresses the pivot point of the literally thousands of missives we have posted here on www.JSMineset.com (http://www.jsmineset.com/) telling you this is coming. It is happening here and now. Be prepared and stay strong.
We are approaching the beginning of the final drama in this unfolding OTC derivative meltdown. This is the beginning period for the 5th leg of Alf Field’s correct analysis.
More at: http://jsmineset.com/2009/05/20/it-is-now/
Thank you and Bart for getting my attention on this (I have already been watching the current fall of the dollar). There is a new post at Sinclair's webiste that fits right in.
More at: http://jsmineset.com/2009/05/20/it-is-now/
My pleasure.
It's my belief that the recent Armstrong turn marked a dollar and fiat currency purchasing power peak, but it remains to be confirmed.
strittmatter
05-20-09, 04:39 PM
My pleasure.
It's my belief that the recent Armstrong turn marked a dollar and fiat currency purchasing power peak, but it remains to be confirmed.
Thanks bart.
I was wondering if/when you would weigh in with your opinion on that.
Thanks again.
WildspitzE
07-20-09, 01:39 PM
heeeee's baaack. :D
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/17502333-The-Goldman-Sachs-Conspiracy-The-Real-Dark-Pool.pdf
And the one before it:
The Irrational Free Markets that Are Never Wrong
http://www.nowandfutures.com/large/17281739-The-Irrational-Free-Markets-that-Are-Never-Wrong-709(armstrong).pdf (http://www.nowandfutures.com/large/17281739-The-Irrational-Free-Markets-that-Are-Never-Wrong-709%28armstrong%29.pdf)
WildspitzE
07-20-09, 02:58 PM
you were holding out! hahaha
and here I thought he had gone awol for a while....
thanks for posting.
you were holding out! hahaha
and here I thought he had gone awol for a while....
thanks for posting.
:D
I cheat ;), and visit http://www.scribd.com/kzuur58 once a week to see if there are any new ones - wish there was a common repository but it works reasonably well.
Have not read this yet, but there are it seems increasingly predictions of "bank holidays" and other TEOTWAWKI events to come later this fall or winter.
Maybe it's just crazy paranoid season, and who really needs a "sudden stop" ala iTulip?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17880556/How-ALL-Systems-Can-Collapse-Overnight-709
Shakespear
10-09-09, 09:21 AM
Bart. What do you make of Armstrong's predictions on gold below:
Minor technical resistance between 1,100 and 1,200 for 2009. That's looking like a pipe dream right now. I'm drying to test that resistance.
<!-- / message --> <!-- controls -->
Are you still following the accuracy of Armstrong's predictions ? :)
Are you still following the accuracy of Armstrong's predictions ? :)
Well it did seem like a pipe dream back in April. By all means let's test that resistance between 1,100 and 1,200.
And how come I can see the whole thread now?
babbittd
10-10-09, 09:44 PM
Armstrong mentions Red Mafiya which is an excellent book about the organized criminals that came over from Russia. Highly recommended.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.