The end is near!

From that site:

More or less what I said.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Man, all of you anti-doomsdayers are a bunch of buzzkills! Let's get back together on December 22nd and discuss this some more.

 

First I have no idea what the limits of your "pseudo-end" happens to be.for one to occur. Many might feel they have already been through pseudo-ends of their life already. Do I think MadMax syndrome will occur as most "survivalists" do , No, I don't. I realize many weapon enthusiasts and bullion accumulators seem to anticipate and perhaps welcome it, but I believe they are wrong. Only fools are certain about such things as "ENDS" or "pseudo-ends". of the world, and I didn't use that word in my previous statement. I think you are trying to reduce the idea of "END" of the world to a level you feel you can deal with, thus the "pseudo-end".

Jim

 

Now, here is something interesting. The history channel put up that article, re-confirming that the mayans did not predict our end, and yet they have the show "Brad Meltzer's Decoded" where they hiliight every possible conspiricy theory, and once began an episode with the "What if I told you" but it was an episode about end of the world, including the december 21st end of the world mayan "prediction". Pretty contradictory, at least from my point of view.:dead-horse:

 

It just seemed like your post made the process of preparing oneself for an uncertain future to be futile because the world is going to end and everyone is going to die.

There are different opinions of the possibilities for "The End of The World as We Know It" (TEOTWAWKI) and for the "Stuff Hits the Fan" (SHTF). I don't want to get into a religious discussion, but that is where some people get their theories from. I base my theories on history and my own personal experiences. So far, mankind has managed to survive every event that has been thrown at it. Wars, plagues, droughts, floods, famines, tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes, asteroids, etc.

Sure, there could come a time when we all die and in that case, all the preparedness in the world wouldn't make a difference. But that's no reason to not be prepared.

What I meant by "pseudo-end" was something that puts an end to life as we know it, but doesn't wipe out everyone. Think of some sort of disease or event that decimates the world population by 99%. That sounds like a lot, and it is, but there would still be 700 million people left. Would PM's be worthless? Were PM's worthless the last time there were 700 million people in the world? (1700's) Nope.

I'm not certain about anything, and that's why I like to be prepared.

 

The History Channel nowadays isn't one for telling history as it happened. It's about ratings, and shows like Pawn Stars and Ancient Aliens get watched. People are nuts for cryptozoology, pseudo-science, fringe medicine, and the like.
But I agree, it's goofy having contradictory ideas shown side by side.
They always qualify those statements with "Some people say" and wording like that.

 

Have You been to Detroit or Gary Indiana lately?

 

Ok, but it'll have to be about a different theory because the Mayan one will be kaput.

 

The comments I made were in reference to the Original post #1, where the "END" mentioned was just that the "END", not just 5% of the human population death as in 1918-20 Influenza( 28% were infected and faced the risk of death). but all. No asteroids large enough and killed humans has hit in the recorded history of humans, but will some day it will. I don't count the Tunguska event in 1918 in Russia as it was an airborne explosion.

Has no relevance in my opinion as the human population present had not experience a population bottle neck of 99% since humans left Africa to go to Asia and Europe, where some estimate that only about 1000-5000 fertile human couples were alive. If the 1% of humans were evenly divided over the whole world, there would be a good chance they would fail. If clumped in groups of 100 or more each, they might, but food, water, health would be primary to PM. IMO. of course. I have no problems about what others do as long as it doesn't infringe on others, but I do feel that if they are telling themselves PM will save them when the world as they know it ends are shortsighted rather than reverse.

Jim

​

 

You can find this elsewhere , but this url was convenient. I put my bet on an asteroid. this one missed the earth by about an hour. That is cutting it a little close, but people would just go beserk if they knew, so why tell if one is on target

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012...eroid-that-flew-by-earth-larger-than-thought/

 

The missed by 3.3 million miles sounds less threatening than missing by an hour.:smile
If we don't know that we're in the sights of one, how are we supposed to have a discussion on it?

 

Good read......I'm soooooo relieved.

 

Let's leave Detroit out of this. We are the way we are to keep the rest of you out.

 

Gold and Silver are money. Thus your thread is more than a little off base. Gold and silver are money. Gold and silver are money. Well at least for a few thousand years.

 

I didn't interpret the OP that way, so it seems we're splitting hairs.

 

I do not believe the Mayan calendar holds any significance for our society, and I am not waiting for a Mad Max scenario. However the simple fact of the matter is that with negative real interest rates, anybody who is holding fiat or bonds is being robbed by inflation. Even equities have not gained over the last 12 years and they are supposed to be the exception.

Monetary policy alone is more than enough reason to hold gold and silver, but if economic collapse does become a reality then you will need a medium of exchange external to the casino. Ammo is well and good, but what about on the other side when things calm down? Ammo's demand will be short lived, and in the long run you will want metals. Plus you might actually need that ammo for its intended purpose instead of money. Personally, I prefer to have both.

I doubt any thinking person would see this as being a nutjob. It's just being practical. Silver used to be face value too, and now look at it. Is it really so crazy to keep your copper pennies and nickels? Not in my book. There's plenty of upside and minimal downside. If you ask me what's crazy is holding pieces of paper and intangible electronic assets that only have value because people who've broken numerous promises said so.

 

No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it iNo, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. No, it is not. s not.

 

Historically, they have offered the best return on your investment. (Stocks that is)

But yes, it would be crazy to put all of your eggs into any single basket. Are we nutjobs for recognizing that while owning stocks in different sectors and various types of bonds is indeed somewhat diversified, they're all essentially paper assets and all 100% dependent on our economy and our currency? IMHO - Owning 100% paper assets is not diversified.

I think another reason people think we're nutjobs is because the US has been around and relatively stable for about three lifetimes. They get a false sense of security from assuming the US can't fail. Despite the fact that quite a few countries have suffered a political or economic collapse in the past two decades alone, I suppose we're somehow immune to their fate. I don't think we are...

 

Sure we are.

 

BTW 0- if you really want to protect yourself by Manhattan real estate.