Could 2015 See The Real Crash Peter Schiff Predicted? (Audio)

[NACBA]

Peter Schiff had a very honest conversation about his predictions in his best-selling book The Real Crash with Wall Street Daily founder Robert Williams.

Williams started the interview by reminding the audience that while Peter is widely acknowledged for accurately predicting the 2008 financial crisis, few people remember what Peter’s bigger prediction is – that the ’08 crisis was just a foreshadowing of the real crash that is yet to come. Could 2015 be the year that crash happens? Peter thinks it might be.

Here are a few highlights from the interview:

If the government allowed the recession, banks would fail. People would default on their debts… But that is more healthy, allowing that natural, free-market restructuring. That process is healthier and more conducive to a return to legitimate growth than what the Fed is doing… But the Fed is going to continue to fight this battle until it loses the war. That means the dollar collapses, and I think that’s ultimately where we’re headed…

Listen here to the entire show

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2792895-could-2015-see-the-real-crash-peter-schiff-predicted-audio

 

[Zippyjuan]

Like the one he predicted for 2009? And 2010? And 2011? And 2012? And 2013? And 2014? Coming soon! He promises!

 

[Schifference]

I don't think a real crash will come. I think there is a masterfully thought out plan in place that is designed to squeeze every last drop of cash & independence from citizens around the world. One day we will all wake up with nothing and not even realize it. Maybe this it the actual meaning of trickle down economics. If a crash occurred it would be too abrupt causing riots and massive problems. Let the balloon deflate until there is nothing left and people won't even realize it was deflated and just accept it for what it is.

 

[cocrehamster]

I don't think a real crash will come. I think there is a masterfully thought out plan in place that is designed to squeeze every last drop of cash & independence from citizens around the world. One day we will all wake up with nothing and not even realize it. Maybe this it the actual meaning of trickle down economics. If a crash occurred it would be too abrupt causing riots and massive problems. Let the balloon deflate until there is nothing left and people won't even realize it was deflated and just accept it for what it is.

That sounds pretty scary but unlikely... do you have any evidence?

 

[Schifference]

That sounds pretty scary but unlikely... do you have any evidence?

No.

Just the fact that people had more disposable money, paid less taxes, and had more liberty prior to the turn of the century. I don't think the government will allow a major crash and all out panic. They want to orchestrate and manipulate the economy so they inevitibley gain total control and the citizens are totally dependent on government for their existence.

Is the economy controlled by the government? Taking over health care was not about providing health care to the poor people that could not afford it or making it more affordable for the rest of us. It was about controlling that huge portion of the economy and mandating that everyone pays and having all your health information at their disposal. Maybe some day in the near future when you go for you annual check up and the doctor wants to check your cholesterol and other blood work, they take a few drops and profile your DNA.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Even allowing for taxes, personal purchasing power is much higher than it was 100 years ago. Look at how much stuff everybody has. Only the rich had a car or even their own phone. Now even the poor have cars and almost every individual has their own phone. "More liberty" only applied to basically white men. Women and minorities certainly had less of it.

 

[NACBA]

Like the one he predicted for 2009? And 2010? And 2011? And 2012? And 2013? And 2014? Coming soon! He promises!

Right on

 

[NACBA]

That sounds pretty scary but unlikely... do you have any evidence?

What happened to people who took Schiff's advice in 2010?

 

[Schifference]

Even allowing for taxes, personal purchasing power is much higher than it was 100 years ago. Look at how much stuff everybody has. Only the rich had a car or even their own phone. Now even the poor have cars and almost every individual has their own phone. "More liberty" only applied to basically white men. Women and minorities certainly had less of it.

This thread is more about the future than the past. However, 100 years ago you could get by with much less and many people were more independent. They did not need to rely heavily on purchasing everything. I would imagine that a person with survival skills would have had much more at their disposal in the wilderness and much better access to that wilderness and those resources than you could find today. People had more mechanical ability and could fix their own equipment. People worked to survive. Now people work to get a paycheck so they can go to Walmart and buy what they need. I know many people that I work with that make like $12hr and work 2 full time jobs to afford a car and phone. I wish I didn't need a car or phone. Automobiles are very expensive. First pay income tax before buying car. Then pay sales tax. Then property tax. Then insurance & maintenance so that you can go to work to be able to afford to pay for your car. Seems like the dog chasing the tail.

 

[TheCount]

I think you're romanticizing something that never really existed. The late 1800s were not about survival in the wilderness for 90% of Americans. That friend of yours with 2 full time jobs? That would have been 1 full time job 100 years ago, because workers put in 60-80 hours, for less real after tax pay. Those that were barely scraping by were concerned with food and basic medical care, not luxuries. They didn't have or need automobiles because they lived within polluting, er walking distance of factories in the city. If you lived outside major cities, you were probably either a sharecropper or lived in a 'company town' of one form or another where you had very little economic freedom or mobility.


Also, there are plenty of places where you can go to abandon your phone, car, job, and/or all three. My guess is that you aren't willing to move because none of them are particularly nice.

 

[osan]

Here are a few highlights from the interview:

If the government allowed the recession, banks would fail. People would default on their debts… But that is more healthy, allowing that natural, free-market restructuring. That process is healthier and more conducive to a return to legitimate growth than what the Fed is doing… But the Fed is going to continue to fight this battle until it loses the war. That means the dollar collapses, and I think that’s ultimately where we’re headed…

First, these thread titles are ridiculous. May as well as whether this could be the year an asteroid strikes the earth.

More significantly, there's an 800# gorilla on the couch and nobody seems to be asking about it. Either the fed are a bunch of idiots - not seeing where their "battle" must lead, are intentionally leading us to that conclusion, or the stated inevitability is not what people say.

If they are idiots, then heaven help us all.

If they are intentionally leading us there... well, then what?

But what if the existence of electronic currency means that they can stave off this collapse for a very long time, as in decades or even centuries more?

Something to think about, from the people at Getty.

 

[Schifference]

I think you're romanticizing something that never really existed. The late 1800s were not about survival in the wilderness for 90% of Americans. That friend of yours with 2 full time jobs? That would have been 1 full time job 100 years ago, because workers put in 60-80 hours, for less real after tax pay. Those that were barely scraping by were concerned with food and basic medical care, not luxuries. They didn't have or need automobiles because they lived within polluting, er walking distance of factories in the city. If you lived outside major cities, you were probably either a sharecropper or lived in a 'company town' of one form or another where you had very little economic freedom or mobility.


Also, there are plenty of places where you can go to abandon your phone, car, job, and/or all three. My guess is that you aren't willing to move because none of them are particularly nice.

Are you saying that a survivalist would have more opportunity to live off the land today than in 1900?

As for moving to a place that doesn't require a car/phone and all that. I don't have a phone. Problem is I am married and have 2 teenage kids, not to mention 2 adult kids and a couple of grand kids. There is more to the equation than what I want or would do.

 

[osan]

Even allowing for taxes, personal purchasing power is much higher than it was 100 years ago. Look at how much stuff everybody has. Only the rich had a car or even their own phone. Now even the poor have cars and almost every individual has their own phone. "More liberty" only applied to basically white men. Women and minorities certainly had less of it.

Your point is valid, but there is more to it than this, economically speaking.

However, I must say that turning the argument to the old "race" saw is a FAIL... something I'd expect from a Jesse Jackson.

I would also note that in the old days, and I mean prior to the Civil War, both blacks and other "minorities" who were not slaves held significantly stronger recognition under the law than they did post-bellum. It was not until the rise of the raging federalism and the Southern Democrats that blacks, for example, began really coming under the thumb of The Man. This is not to say their lives were as free as those of their white counterparts, ante-bellum, for surely they were not equals then, either. But post-bellum was when the heat was really turned up on them at the hands of the Democrats, what with the rise of the Klan, lynchings, Jim Crow, etc. This is simple and plain historical note. Therefore, it behooves the honest man to make a more correct depiction of times and events, which you fail to do here in some non-trivial measure and through implication. Perhaps this is innocent laziness, or maybe you have an agenda of your own. I don't know and don't care that much, save enough to point this out.

 

[Warlord]

Zippyjuan is a paid troll

 

[TheCount]

Are you saying that a survivalist would have more opportunity to live off the land today than in 1900?

Never said that.

As for moving to a place that doesn't require a car/phone and all that. I don't have a phone. Problem is I am married and have 2 teenage kids, not to mention 2 adult kids and a couple of grand kids. There is more to the equation than what I want or would do.

Sounds like you made your choices, and you're not happy with the results.

 

[NACBA]

Zippyjuan is a paid troll

LOL

 

[cubical]

Like the one he predicted for 2009? And 2010? And 2011? And 2012? And 2013? And 2014? Coming soon! He promises!

When did he gives exact dates or even years as you say?

 

[oyarde]

Well , so far , 2015 is looking grim .

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Well , so far , 2015 is looking grim .

Boy, the Central Planners, Racketeers, and Riggers, sure have made a mess of the economy and nation, eh?

 

[TheCount]

When did he gives exact dates or even years as you say?

This argument again?