Quote from: iamback on March 17, 2015, 03:51:48 PM

Quote from: B.A.S. on March 17, 2015, 12:00:10 PM

Europe is partially screwed, but has a socialist net that will keep default states afloat because it's in the interest of all intertwined.

Illogical. In order to fund that safety net, it must tax expropriate from the productive sector, which is why Europe has no productive sector remaining, thus Europe will not be able to produce what it needs internally (will worsen in a negative feedback loop spiral flush into the toilet bowl) and thus it will rely on the Euro FX value to purchase for import its needs, but the Euro is collapsing in value as Euros are printed to bailout the safety net (indirectly via the banks who hold the sovereign bonds).

Quote from: B.A.S. on March 17, 2015, 12:00:10 PM

Nations in heavy debt are screwed (i.e. the US), but the US can self sustain with it's political power and military might in the world.

Correct the USA can expropriate from its productive sector and the productive sectors of the entire world with FATCHA, the military, and mostly importantly because the dollar is the reserve currency of the world's financial system.

The USA is the wounded Godzilla that can possibly drag the entire global economy down into a Dark Age, if we don't find solutions.

The solution I advocate is a bottom-up, grassroots technological anonymous crypto-currency and fledgling Knowledge Age. I also concur with Martin Armstrong's vision of a global restructuring (when and if it becomes viable), because this is a way to avoid sinking too far into a Dark Age while waiting for the Knowledge Age to grow and take over with anonymous crypto-currency which the USA can not expropriate.

Armstrong seems to misconstrue my debate with him as one of total disrespect or disagreement. Rather I very much appreciate Armstrong's models, his sharing, his insights. My disagreement with Armstrong only rests on him preaching EXCLUSIVELY on top-down solutions and not also recognizing the potential rise of Creative Destruction. In the past few blog posts, he has alluded to Creative Destruction, but he still denies that anonymous crypto-currency and anonymous internet systems could potentially rise. He paints his world view that only he has the Solutions and doesn't recognize that hackers are not also very important. Armstrong should recognize that he is also hacker, as defined correctly by Eric S. Raymond.

Note Armstrong may not realize that one of the reasons his site exploded in popularity since 2013, is because I have been quoting him with links to his site from this Bitcointalk.org forum. If he shuts off his sharing, this will only hurt his site's popularity. I do agree with him charging for some of the details of his model's predictions, because it makes the information more valuable. But if he thinks crawling into a shell because he feels defensive about debate and discussion, then he has really lost objectivity. Hey Armstrong, grow some skin on your back. Just because you've finally met your intellectual cohort, embrace it, don't wither away into a hole in the ground!

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/17/what-can-we-do-3/

He talks about "grassroots technological anonymous crypto-currency", I wonder if by this he means Bitcoin or a totally anonymous currency without a public ledger like Monero.