Global Depression 2022 - Time to do the Breadline Boogaloo!

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Not to be too tinfoily, but if I wanted to have a global currency, devaluing the US dollar would be a good start to getting it accepted. Then, it would be like "Why use this New Money? Because *item* costs 100 dollars but only 1 New Money. Which is the better deal?"

Replace it with what? Some people (okay, funny looking posts on /biz/ and /pol/) say a gold standard/silver standard/bimetallism, but I'm not so sure about that. Fiat currency is too damn useful for the elite because it's so easy to manipulate. There's a reason that it pops up over and over again throughout history, even after failing over and over. When it fails this time, I'm sure they'll try and reinstitute it again sooner or later.

Russia is never going to be some first rate economic power, even when the USSR was at its peak it was still inferior to the average Western nations. What I'm saying is that Putin has kept Russia quite lean so if the Biden admin does the sanctions it wont be as hard as a blow as the Dollar collapsing as the reserve currency will be for the US. Just within the past week a headline floated past that works towards this end. China and Russia signed some sort of agreement for Natural Gas, nothing unique there -- but at the end of the article the doomsday news was written, the gas was to be settled in Euros. The other powers are moving away from the erratic and irrational US led system. I'm almost certain that the Petrodollar will end this decade and the huge amount of inflation the US has exported abroad will come crashing down on the US citizenry.

Russia will never be a first-rate economic power because it's leadership won't let it. This is a problem that literally goes back to the Tsars who were more interested in engaging in militaristic dickwaving with the British Empire, Japan, and anyone messing around in the Balkans. Soviets obviously had communism holding them back (check the Virgin Lands campaign for some hilarity, the USSR seriously had to import food despite having the most arable land in the world), and modern Russia has had its economy alternate between being pillaged by oligarchs (Yeltsin) or back to militarism and pretending to be a great power (Putin).

 

[Inspector Rex]

China and Russia signed some sort of agreement for Natural Gas, nothing unique there -- but at the end of the article the doomsday news was written, the gas was to be settled in Euros.

The problem is this is the cheapest Natural Gas contract in Russia, in barely brings any money. I can't post sources because they're in Russian, but basically what China does is liquefies and resells this gas for much higher price - obviously, in dollars.

As for why Russian government and Gazprom (biggest Russian gas producer and exporter) have agreed for such terms - idk.

 

[Übertroon]

Russia will never be a first-rate economic power because it's leadership won't let it. This is a problem that literally goes back to the Tsars who were more interested in engaging in militaristic dickwaving with the British Empire, Japan, and anyone messing around in the Balkans. Soviets obviously had communism holding them back (check the Virgin Lands campaign for some hilarity, the USSR seriously had to import food despite having the most arable land in the world), and modern Russia has had its economy alternate between being pillaged by oligarchs (Yeltsin) or back to militarism and pretending to be a great power (Putin).

It's absolutely crazy that a nation with so much unsettled land as Russia has spent the better part of three centuries fighting against its neighbors for even more territory. A lot of Russian imperialism has been rationalized by the need for a warm water port, but truth is Russia has had access to warm waters since conquering Rostov and the North Caucasus in the 18th century. But Russia has just spent the last 300 years trying to grab already developed land rather than copying Peter the Great and building new infrastructure on undeveloped territory.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

It's absolutely crazy that a nation with so much unsettled land as Russia has spent the better part of three centuries fighting against its neighbors for even more territory. A lot of Russian imperialism has been rationalized by the need for a warm water port, but truth is Russia has had access to warm waters since conquering Rostov and the North Caucasus in the 18th century. But Russia has just spent the last 300 years trying to grab already developed land rather than copying Peter the Great and building new infrastructure on undeveloped territory.

It isn't so much territory that Russia fights for, but a buffer against enemies. This goes all the way back to the time when the Poles captured Moscow and crowned their king as Tsar (after their attempts to rule Russia through random weirdos who claimed to be Ivan the Terrible's son failed), and was most famously confirmed as a viable strategy after Napoleon's miserable failure in Russia. The Soviet Union was their ideal foreign situation--a network of satellite states acting as Russia's buffer who repress their own people more efficiently than Russia could if they directly governed the place. But now the situation is the worst for Russia in centuries geopolitically, since thanks to NATO globalists, only Belarus is a reliable buffer state. That's why Russia needs to salvage something from Ukraine like some loyal allies in the borderlands of that country and Crimea. The last time Ukraine was an enemy to Russia, it was a lawless frontier (hence the name "Ukraine" which means "borderland") of cossacks and violent slavery-loving Tatars.

Russia's Black Sea ports aren't ideal either--they're blocked by the Turkish Straits which are subject to all sorts of international law and could be closed at a moment's notice if the Turks get pissed off enough (one of many reasons Turkey punches above their weight despite being an overpopulated shithole).

 

[Übertroon]

It isn't so much territory that Russia fights for, but a buffer against enemies. This goes all the way back to the time when the Poles captured Moscow and crowned their king as Tsar (after their attempts to rule Russia through random weirdos who claimed to be Ivan the Terrible's son failed), and was most famously confirmed as a viable strategy after Napoleon's miserable failure in Russia. The Soviet Union was their ideal foreign situation--a network of satellite states acting as Russia's buffer who repress their own people more efficiently than Russia could if they directly governed the place. But now the situation is the worst for Russia in centuries geopolitically, since thanks to NATO globalists, only Belarus is a reliable buffer state. That's why Russia needs to salvage something from Ukraine like some loyal allies in the borderlands of that country and Crimea. The last time Ukraine was an enemy to Russia, it was a lawless frontier (hence the name "Ukraine" which means "borderland") of cossacks and violent slavery-loving Tatars.

Russia's Black Sea ports aren't ideal either--they're blocked by the Turkish Straits which are subject to all sorts of international law and could be closed at a moment's notice if the Turks get pissed off enough (one of many reasons Turkey punches above their weight despite being an overpopulated shithole).

That's still geopolitically retarded though. China doesn't rely on buffer states, and has no need thanks to nuclear weapons and economic leverage.

The idea that Russia needs buffer states to defend against European aggression makes no sense considering no European nation considers it feasible as long as Russia remains a nuclear power.

It made more sense 100 years ago, but one has to also admit that Russia welcomed at least half of their wars by trying to conquer foreign lands

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

That's still geopolitically retarded though. China doesn't rely on buffer states, and has no need thanks to nuclear weapons and economic leverage.

That's because China is surrounded by mountains and desert and ocean and doesn't need buffer states. The two most vulnerable border regions, against Korea and Vietnam, were subject to Chinese intervention throughout history. Including in the 20th century when the ChiCom swarms nearly kicked the UN out of Korea, and in Vietnam where they trained and supplied the commies there (and sent some troops, but mostly as support). China also obsesses over the American Island Chain Strategy, which is a huge reason for why they try and keep other countries out of every half-sunken reef in the Sea of China.

Russia doesn't have that luxury, since the only natural barrier between Berlin and Moscow is some rivers and the sheer size of the land.

The idea that Russia needs buffer states to defend against European aggression makes no sense considering no European nation considers it feasible as long as Russia remains a nuclear power.

It gives NATO more targets to direct aggression at, and prevents a hostile buildup of forces on Russian borders. Although it's definitely not as important as it was before, a country needs more options besides "do this or I'll nuke you." North Korea isn't exactly successful at diplomacy, compared to Israel who gets away with whatever it pleases without threatening people with its nuclear weapons that totally, absolutely do not exist, (((we swear))).

It made more sense 100 years ago, but one has to also admit that Russia welcomed at least half of their wars by trying to conquer foreign lands

Yes, conquering lands as part of this strategy, usually to deal with the Ottomans given how they helped sponsor slave raids by their allies in Crimea, or the Central Asian khanates (more slavery-loving Turks).

 

[Kujo Jotaro]

 

[Knight of the Rope]

View attachment 2988937

"When even the Redditors are giving you stock tips, it's time to bail out of the market."
t. J.F. Kennedy (probably)

 

[z0mb0]

How many of them lost their shirts on GME again?

 

[Commodore 128]

How many of them lost their shirts on GME again?

I'm more curious how many of them are actually filing their taxes...

 

[z0mb0]

I'm more curious how many of them are actually filing their taxes...

Pretty sure the trade sites send that info to the IRS for you. You can write off some losses though so that's something

 

[teriyakiburns]

HODL!!!!

 

[K-Hole]

I'm not a poor person. That being said, I have many poor person habits. One I had not picked up yet was a love for cheap noodles. This fucking thread fucked all that: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/the-ramen-thread-instant-noodles-and-the-like.25422/

Turns out, when all is said and done, I like my noodles like I like my women: cheap and nasty! In fact the cheaper and the nastier, the better. TMI! I know.

Anyway, to the point -

I found some noodles a few months ago, were 65p (65 pence in UK terms). They went up to 75 p a bit later, but I could deal with that. Sometimes they had discounts and you could get them for the original 65 p. But then, something changed a week or two ago, they went up to fucking 95 fucking pence. that's nearly a whole quid, where as before they weren't much more than half a quid. That is fucking nearly double the price! From 65 p to 95 p in a matter of months... Mmmm....

Don't love them that much. Fuck it, won't even buy them when it's on a discount.

Also, another brand of noodles in another store went up from 45 p a packet to fucking 69 p a packet. That is some serious price increase. I expect when I go back in next week they will all be 10 p extra again on top. It wont' be long before it will be a tenner (10 quid) before you can buy a packet of noodles. That is when the fun will really start.

I tried to rationalise it and said to my self it's just price gouging because it's a cheap meal. Yeah, that's it. Fuck it, it's just a fucking small packet of noodles and you can buy a six-pack of them in Tesco's or Asda for not much more. But still.

That is a crazy price hike. Not the 5 percent figure of inflation we have been given here. Not even double that. Not 10 percent, but just about 20 percent. That is frightening in itself. It's real. It's happening. I can't justify paying a quid for a pack of low nutrition noodles with a bit of MSG thrown on top. At a little over 50p they were fun (even if they were just as un-nutritious), but for a quid I can get a few tins of beans from my super-shop when I get a big haul in from Tesco or Asda.

I don't skimp on food. I'm happy to treat myself and buy good stuff every once in a while. I love food. I love eating. I also like being healthy and slim. So I don't over-indulge. This is not about a lack of being able to stuff my face. It's about some very frightening price hikes that have taken place in the last few months, only.

 

[Blasterisk]

I'm not a poor person. That being said, I have many poor person habits. One I had not picked up yet was a love for cheap noodles. This fucking thread fucked all that: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/the-ramen-thread-instant-noodles-and-the-like.25422/

Turns out, when all is said and done, I like my noodles like I like my women: cheap and nasty! In fact the cheaper and the nastier, the better. TMI! I know.

Anyway, to the point -

I found some noodles a few months ago, were 65p (65 pence in UK terms). They went up to 75 p a bit later, but I could deal with that. Sometimes they had discounts and you could get them for the original 65 p. But then, something changed a week or two ago, they went up to fucking 95 fucking pence. that's nearly a whole quid, where as before they weren't much more than half a quid. That is fucking nearly double the price! From 65 p to 95 p in a matter of months... Mmmm....

Don't love them that much. Fuck it, won't even buy them when it's on a discount.

Also, another brand of noodles in another store went up from 45 p a packet to fucking 69 p a packet. That is some serious price increase. I expect when I go back in next week they will all be 10 p extra again on top. It wont' be long before it will be a tenner (10 quid) before you can buy a packet of noodles. That is when the fun will really start.

I tried to rationalise it and said to my self it's just price gouging because it's a cheap meal. Yeah, that's it. Fuck it, it's just a fucking small packet of noodles and you can buy a six-pack of them in Tesco's or Asda for not much more. But still.

That is a crazy price hike. Not the 5 percent figure of inflation we have been given here. Not even double that. Not 10 percent, but just about 20 percent. That is frightening in itself. It's real. It's happening. I can't justify paying a quid for a pack of low nutrition noodles with a bit of MSG thrown on top. At a little over 50p they were fun (even if they were just as un-nutritious), but for a quid I can get a few tins of beans from my super-shop when I get a big haul in from Tesco or Asda.

I don't skimp on food. I'm happy to treat myself and buy good stuff every once in a while. I love food. I love eating. I also like being healthy and slim. So I don't over-indulge. This is not about a lack of being able to stuff my face. It's about some very frightening price hikes that have taken place in the last few months, only.

Salvage stores where they sell you the dented boxes of perfectly tasty noodles for half price is what you need to find, though I have no suggestion for such a thing in your local area.

Perhaps they too will eventually inflate their prices, but the going rate near me is a tenth of what you're (not anymore) paying.

 

[K-Hole]

I've got a good store of noodles. I like the ones you can get that you don't really need to cook very much. They are like 2 quid a packet, expensive. But I buy them at half price and BoGoF. I like them because they are quick to cook.

As for the dried noodles, I got loads of them. Buy them from the supermarket.

But this is how it starts: Convenience foods and Shops on the road where truckers themselves go.

Only fools or idiots with too much money buy their staple foods here. I was just pointing out a certain price hike that I noticed.

I can buy 6 packs of noodles for what someone would spend on one pack of noodles these days. Point being, they could have bought double that amount before. Margins are getting tighter.

As another exercise in cost cutting, I compared prices between a store up the road that is a real cheap shop (looks cheap but prices are not so cheap sometimes) and my local high class (can still be cheap for some shit) store.

Yoghurt is 1.40 in the local high class store, but only 1 quid in the cheap shop. It's worth the walk up the hill and it keeps me healthy. That is a massive difference. And the yoghurt tastes the same.

I'm trying to save every penny I can these days and this is a fun game to play.

I've got my eye on a new sampling drum machine that costs over 1K. I can't really afford it right now. But if I keep going like this, I might be able to afford it in six months. That's why I play this game.

 

[SheerHeartAttack]

View attachment 2988937

Is this the redditor version of that guy that used GameStop as a bank? It seems like a really dumb idea to put all of your money into stocks on they off chance they go to shit, tho considering the sort of financial fuckery people get into I wouldn't be shocked if stock investors actually used this advice.

 

[teriyakiburns]

That is a crazy price hike. Not the 5 percent figure of inflation we have been given here. Not even double that. Not 10 percent, but just about 20 percent. That is frightening in itself. It's real. It's happening.

It's a combo. The reported inflation rate is artificially manipulated for political reasons, while the real rate is nearly always significantly higher. On top of that, there's a big shock coming through the system now that inward border checks have started, which is slowing everything down and bumping up prices as processing costs increase. One irony emerging from this is, even though the big chains are operating on JIT supply for their stock, they have enough slosh within that system to play a bit of an arbitrage game, which means they can stave off price rises for a little while. Little corner shops don't have that; they're hit with the price rises from their wholesalers almost immediately.

 

[Glowie]

It's about fucking time, food shortages, nogs will nog, troon roping rate jumps 1488% and cities will burn.

I for one am prepared and wait in great delight watch soyfaces suffer. Cost of living across Europe is rising fast, tax hikes and extra cost, Asia screwed then some not to mention Americas.

 

[Socrates]

So can any of the bitcoin bulls in here explain what mechanism is meant to keep crypto safe from the same price crashes that are already affecting risky tech growth stocks in the NASDAQ? I just don't understand how a highly speculative and risky asset is meant to weather interest rate hikes that historically chase people into safer bets. This isn't even taking into account how hawkish the Biden admin has gotten about possible regulations, or rising energy prices possibly negatively affecting the mining industry. What exactly is going to convince people to continue buying internet funny money when they start having trouble feeding their families and heating their homes?

 

[Hippopatumus]

There is no such mechanism. That isn't how it works. And I would like to point out that Bitcoin's price is almost completely irrelevant to its utility. Folks sending money to their families in commie shitholes like Venezuala don't care if a BTC is $50 or $50,000.

Speculating on its future price is separate from utilizing its capabilities for cross-border money transfers or dodging currency debasement. Liquidity is what matters, and Bitcoin has a ton of it.