The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

[llanlad2]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

One of the main reasons is that very few civilians can be brainwashed by propaganda to kill anyone in cold blood anymore (at least not in Europe). The internet has put paid to that.

Civilians can very quickly become uncivil. As for"" very few civilians being brainwashed etc." The problem with the weapons we have now is that only a very few willing civilians are needed to cause mayhem. I am a close acquaintance of a 30 year old woman who was a refugee from Vukovar in the serbo-croat war. Some of the stories she has told me are gobsmacking. An example how one nutter can have a big influence is Arkan. Oh and all this was in Europe by the way.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

yes, that's how i understand it, and why i raised the issue as a question, just to be sure. i think there is a cohort of -especially- workers over 50 years old who will never work again. they are trying to get by on their savings and their cashed-out 401k's and ira's and occasional part-time work if they can get it. they are holding out until they reach 62, when they will start collecting social security "early." and then they will try to get by on that. while the baby boomers made uneconomic promises in the name of the country to themselves re social security and medicare, a subgroup of that generation will endure decades of sharply lower living standards and poverty.

Three of the groomsmen at my wedding and one brother-in-law are in that cohort. I saw a term for this recently - "NQR" - Not Quite Retired. All four are 51 to 61 years old, all masters in trades like building and paving with 30+ years of diligent hard work on their resume, all doing what you describe to get by.

[jk]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

and the younger people are more likely to eventually find work at some point. they also don't have the "opportunity" to hang on until they can collect social security.

[cjppjc]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Many of them may have moved back in with their parents.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

yes, that's how i understand it, and why i raised the issue as a question, just to be sure. i think there is a cohort of -especially- workers over 50 years old who will never work again. they are trying to get by on their savings and their cashed-out 401k's and ira's and occasional part-time work if they can get it. they are holding out until they reach 62, when they will start collecting social security "early." and then they will try to get by on that. while the baby boomers made uneconomic promises in the name of the country to themselves re social security and medicare, a subgroup of that generation will endure decades of sharply lower living standards and poverty.

But there are also many many younger people who also are 99ers.

[jk]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

does that mean that when we see the mainstream unemployment statistic touted - its not actually clear whether unemployment went up or down because more people (99ers) could have just fallen off the count?

The Trend in Long-Term Unemployment and Characteristics of Workers Unemployed for More than 99 Weeks
Gerald Mayer
Analyst in Labor Policy
December 20, 2010

yes, that's how i understand it, and why i raised the issue as a question, just to be sure. i think there is a cohort of -especially- workers over 50 years old who will never work again. they are trying to get by on their savings and their cashed-out 401k's and ira's and occasional part-time work if they can get it. they are holding out until they reach 62, when they will start collecting social security "early." and then they will try to get by on that. while the baby boomers made uneconomic promises in the name of the country to themselves re social security and medicare, a subgroup of that generation will endure decades of sharply lower living standards and poverty.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Unfortunately, our present rulers are our creditors so that it isn't going to happen. In fact, I'm glad that this crisis has happened as it has shown the whole world who really pulls the strings and governs things and it ain't the politicians.

I agree with the premise of this article. It's obvious what the real solution is to anyone who thinks.

However I disagree with a few conclusions at the end to do with the world wars. I would postulate that it was the mounted machine gun that killed millions of men in the first world war. It was actually oil that gave them protected from it in the form of a tank. A LOT more men died in WWI than WWII.

Also, Germany's problem wasn't a lack of oil, but a lack of manpower as to the reason it lost. It bet on superior technology over manpower to the Russians and lost. Once it had lost all its men on the Eastern front the war was technically over.

I'm not 100% convinced on a future WWIII as I was before. One of the main reasons is that very few civilians can be brainwashed by propaganda to kill anyone in cold blood anymore (at least not in Europe). The internet has put paid to that.

If there is to be conflict it will be internally and it will be between the citizens versus the government, not between countries. For the first time I actually see a possibility of the US breaking up into states. Europe will most definitely have "marriage" issues. I am glad as I see who our real owners are and I don't like them and I don't (and never have) liked the debt system. Good riddance. We are going to see local societies make their own rules between themselves sans government... for better or worse...

Everything I see on the net says WWII had far higher total death toll than WWI!

[ST]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

That is correct. If you stay unemployed long enough, you're not unemployed anymore and don't show up in either the mean or the median rates.

does that mean that when we see the mainstream unemployment statistic touted - its not actually clear whether unemployment went up or down because more people (99ers) could have just fallen off the count?

The Trend in Long-Term Unemployment and Characteristics of Workers Unemployed for More than 99 Weeks
Gerald Mayer
Analyst in Labor Policy
December 20, 2010

[labasta]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Why not just cancel the debt instead? No inflation + debt canceled. Problem solved!

Unfortunately, our present rulers are our creditors so that it isn't going to happen. In fact, I'm glad that this crisis has happened as it has shown the whole world who really pulls the strings and governs things and it ain't the politicians.

I agree with the premise of this article. It's obvious what the real solution is to anyone who thinks.

However I disagree with a few conclusions at the end to do with the world wars. I would postulate that it was the mounted machine gun that killed millions of men in the first world war. It was actually oil that gave them protected from it in the form of a tank. A LOT more men died in WWI than WWII.

Also, Germany's problem wasn't a lack of oil, but a lack of manpower as to the reason it lost. It bet on superior technology over manpower to the Russians and lost. Once it had lost all its men on the Eastern front the war was technically over.

I'm not 100% convinced on a future WWIII as I was before. One of the main reasons is that very few civilians can be brainwashed by propaganda to kill anyone in cold blood anymore (at least not in Europe). The internet has put paid to that.

If there is to be conflict it will be internally and it will be between the citizens versus the government, not between countries. For the first time I actually see a possibility of the US breaking up into states. Europe will most definitely have "marriage" issues. I am glad as I see who our real owners are and I don't like them and I don't (and never have) liked the debt system. Good riddance. We are going to see local societies make their own rules between themselves sans government... for better or worse...

[EJ]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

i assume that NEITHER of these measures accounts for discouraged workers who have exceeded their 99 [or fewer] weeks of unemployment compensation and have given up on finding work. is that correct?

That is correct. If you stay unemployed long enough, you're not unemployed anymore and don't show up in either the mean or the median rates.

[bart]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

...

Personally, the League of Red-Headed Conspirators has my vote.....

...

The Tin Foil Hat enabled shall rule, as they always do... alien invaders όber alles...

[quigleydoor]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

In this case the Mean Duration of Unemployment is interesting because it has never been higher and is still rising. . . .

I find the mean duration of unemployment data interesting because it shows that a large increase in the number of long-term unemployed outliers and fewer short-term unemployed is responsible for the difference between the steady high level of the median and the still rising level of the average.

Very nifty. I see now that the relationship between mean and median tells a lot about the population, especially when we know that individuals in the population all increase in their duration, at the same rate, until they exit the population. Thanks for shedding light on your method.

[jpatter666]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Not arguing with (most) of your response. What I had issue with is your statement that the Jews control Wall Street and the US Government. Certainly there *are* Jews in Wall Street, the Government, and my local barbershop. I could likely just as easily come up with a list of Russians, Germans, Irish or red-heads.

Personally, the League of Red-Headed Conspirators has my vote.....

So far as Japan was concerned, Yamamoto had no illusions: "I shall run wild considerably for the first six months or a year but I have utterly no confidence for the second and third years." That didn't stop Tojo though. Thinking on how both sides really blundered into war, I have to give EJ's latest commentary more thought. What he claims is to come is *exactly* how the Pacific war came to be last time.

Of course, history never repeats -- but it often rhymes.....

[touchring]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Oh touchring, don't tell me you're a believer in Zionist conspiracies.....

I'm pointing out how the current trend will eventually lead to disaster in the Middle East. To put it bluntly, the reason why Israel exists is because of American power. So who has the most to lose if American power wanes? Not Americans because America is protected by the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, and there's plenty of food anyway, no need to starve.

A balance of power is good for everyone, even for the rising power. World wars occur because some country rises too quickly and becomes big headed. In WWII, it was Japan that started the war in 1937. The Japanese people were sold on the idea that Japan had the moral objective to civilize then backward China, and to chase the white men out of South East Asia. Germany followed in 1939.

To put things in perspective, the Japanese economy was only a tenth of the US just before Pearl Harbor, but because Japan rose so quickly, they were over confident, and believed they could achieve anything. Sounds familiar?

[jiimbergin]

Re: The Next Ten Years – Part I: There will be blood - Eric Janszen

Oh touchring, don't tell me you're a believer in Zionist conspiracies.....

+1