The Extent of the Economic Crisis: Potentially World Changing

November 15th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Via Hot Air come two videos that should be watched by those interested in the nature of this year’s economic crisis, the severity of it, and the potential consequences.

One of the videos stars Peter Schiff, former adviser to, among others, Congressman Ron Paul.

Back in 2006, Schiff was warning investors, the public, pundits and politicians that a severe economic crisis would hit in 2007 or 2008, which would start with sub-prime mortgages, which would then hit mortgages and real estate in general, and which would proceed to do tremendous damage to the U.S. economy as a whole. In the end, the only truly strong economy left standing, after years of a severe recession, potentially worse than the Great Depression, would be China, which would take America’s place as the number one economy in the world with regards to impact, influence and strength.

Back in 2006, Schiff argued that financial institutions were weak, and that the housing bubble would break, taking the entire economy with it. His fellow experts said he was overly negative, and encouraged people to buy stocks from financial institutions. Schiff argued they should not buy those stocks for these institutions would be in tremendous trouble within one, maximum two years time.

Then in 2007, Schiff argued that the recession would truly hit everyone at the end of 2008, especially around November it would “be clear to everyone,” Schiff said, that America’s economy is in trouble. He argued that tax increases would likely be forthcoming in the years ahead, because local, state and federal governments would try to get as much money as they could in order to save what could possibly be saved.

And the main problem? “Phony wealth.” The U.S. became big, the U.S. economy became big in recent years by borrowing money, he warned in 2006 and 2007. The irrevocable result? A major collapse. U.S. wealth did not increase due to more production, etc. but by rising stock markets which rose only because people lived on borrowed money.

Note that Schiff warned against “artificial loaning standards,” and that the other “experts” laughed. They laughed then. But who was right?

Watch it:

YouTube Preview Image

Most fascinating to me is how the other “experts” reacted, while every single thing Schiff said has already come to pass. The others were talking about how “the worst is over,” Schiff said “the worst is yet to come.” Who was right? Schiff was talking serious, trying to warn people, the others laughed him off stage. But who was right?

The experts even told people to buy Merrill Lynch stocks. Merrill Lynch. One expert calling the stocks of financial institutions “cheap.” Schiff’s response: “Stay away from the financials, they are toxic. They are not cheap, they are expensive…” They asked him whether he had heart problems due to his negativity. But who has heart problems now?

Schiff is the president of Euro Pacific Capital. You can read more about his views on the U.S. economy there. What he is arguing, and has argued for years, is that this crisis will be very severe indeed, and that it will fundamentally change the U.S. economy. Note that he continues to believe that the best way to deal with this crisis is for the government to cut spending. Stop borrowing, stop pumping the economy up artificially. Let it fall back to healthy standards.

The other video is of yet another ‘negative’ expert who warned about a major recession for years. He now says that the crisis will be worse than the Great Depression.

YouTube Preview Image

My advise: take these two men very, very serious. Listen to what they say, and act on it. Buy stocks in gold, etc., stop living on borrowed money. Don’t spend more than you produce, and demand the government to do the same.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. shm224
    November 16th, 2008 at 02:20
    Reply | Quote | #1

    No surprise here. I also remember the other bear Nouriel Roubini being ridiculed by other wall street folks on Bloomberg.

    Most folks had the same attitude toward Ron Paul – I think most conservative agreed with him on economic issue; nonetheless dismissing him on his foreign policy without realizing that they are tied together.

  2. Jay_C
    November 17th, 2008 at 05:30
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Schiff and his crew are very knowlegable in this area. For years he has been maliciously belittled, but has been right up until know. For mine and every one else’s sake, I hope he is wrong going forward, but my gut says hes probably not. This is one area where I would be “shout fron the rafters” enthralled at being wrong..and I’m sure he would be as well.

  3. Jay_C
    November 17th, 2008 at 17:28
    Reply | Quote | #3

    another voice to add to the crowd..

    http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/111708Lendman.shtml

  4. Jay_C
    November 20th, 2008 at 16:35
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Add to this more food for thought…The entire financial economy that brought us out of the last recession by securitizing products, mortgages, CDO’s, CLO’s, etc… and moved financials to 30+% of S&P is gone… finished… never to be heard from again. Most of the financials contained years of “fake earnings” from those securitizations and are now paying the price for it.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.