Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Libertarian666 » Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:15 pm

flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by flyingpylon » Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:47 pm

But wait, there's more...

THE 15 DAY LIE: DON'T BE STUPID
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Smith1776 » Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:07 pm

flyingpylon wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:47 pm
But wait, there's more...

THE 15 DAY LIE: DON'T BE STUPID
Interesting and, of course, alarming...

I am no epidemiologist, and have no idea whether this guy is right or wrong, but interesting nonetheless.

All I can think about is how the PP would fair if the 18 month scenario really played out how this guys says it would.... stock portion to be worthless, but bonds, cash, and gold to still be worth something?
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
Tyler
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Tyler » Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:29 pm

I've gotta be honest. Even if the author makes good points, the overuse of bold and all caps lessens his credibility. It reads just like any number of fringe doom porn newsletters I've seen over the years (all fear and blame with no real solutions), and frankly I don't think it's helpful right now.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Smith1776 » Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:30 pm

Tyler wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:29 pm
I've gotta be honest. Even if the author makes good points, the overuse of bold and all caps lessens his credibility. It reads just like any number of fringe doom porn newsletters I've seen over the years (all fear and blame with no real solutions), and frankly I don't think it's helpful right now.
It reads like a biology version of Zero Hedge.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Libertarian666 » Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:42 pm

Tyler wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:29 pm
I've gotta be honest. Even if the author makes good points, the overuse of bold and all caps lessens his credibility. It reads just like any number of fringe doom porn newsletters I've seen over the years (all fear and blame with no real solutions), and frankly I don't think it's helpful right now.
Yes I wish he wouldn’t do that. But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:32 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:06 pm
As I said in the other thread where this link was posted, this makes the most sense to me of any opinion piece on CV that I have read.
I just read it ONCE. Totally scary. I'm now going to read it again more slowly and then pass it on to many others.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:56 pm

flyingpylon wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:47 pm
But wait, there's more...

THE 15 DAY LIE: DON'T BE STUPID
Just sent the following to those in my organization:

"Just read this extremely lengthy piece TWICE. It puts into question what we and the rest of the country are doing. For the last several days I kept wondering how is everyone going to continue to get paid when economic activity just spirals downward, when organizations have such depressed revenues. A key line from the article:

"Our choice now is whether we destroy our economy at the same time we take the hit from this virus."


What Trump Is Doing WILL Fail

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3519966"

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Cortopassi » Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:58 pm

I have read Market Ticker on and off for 10+ years. I keep on doing it because it is entertaining, but at this point, he is such a blowhard and know it all (he truly does seem to know a lot about everything) that he takes his own opinion as gospel, and I roll my eyes more and more.

Vinny, you especially, if you haven't read him, go back and digest the past few years of his writings. He is not a guy I'd like to have a beer with. He's condescending, generally calls everyone idiots, and if he is right on some of his more major stuff, his timelines have mostly been off. **But I am a big picture generalities guy, and I am likely glossing over some stuff he's gotten right.**

And I'm not saying at all that any of his math is wrong. He's just got the personality that pisses a lot of people off, whether he is dead on right or not.

And, in my opinion, it won't be allowed to go that far. If it gets that bad, I am going to believe the government says we can't do this anymore, we have to let it run it's course, we are lifting all restrictions. It is possibly a death sentence for a lot of people, but between that and the destruction of the economy, I think the former is chosen.

Also, whether true or not, it seems China has slowed it drastically, so that is a real world (not math on paper) datapoint.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:11 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:58 pm
I have read Market Ticker on and off for 10+ years. I keep on doing it because it is entertaining, but at this point, he is such a blowhard and know it all (he truly does seem to know a lot about everything) that he takes his own opinion as gospel, and I roll my eyes more and more.

Vinny, you especially, if you haven't read him, go back and digest the past few years of his writings. He is not a guy I'd like to have a beer with. He's condescending, generally calls everyone idiots, and if he is right on some of his more major stuff, his timelines have mostly been off. **But I am a big picture generalities guy, and I am likely glossing over some stuff he's gotten right.**

And I'm not saying at all that any of his math is wrong. He's just got the personality that pisses a lot of people off, whether he is dead on right or not.

And, in my opinion, it won't be allowed to go that far. If it gets that bad, I am going to believe the government says we can't do this anymore, we have to let it run it's course, we are lifting all restrictions. It is possibly a death sentence for a lot of people, but between that and the destruction of the economy, I think the former is chosen.

Also, whether true or not, it seems China has slowed it drastically, so that is a real world (not math on paper) datapoint.
I had never prior heard of him prior to tonight. As I stated I twice read what he wrote. And, then went on to read the follow up piece. And, sent both on to many people. I was even moved to spent nearly $30 on the hard cover version of his new book but saw it was not going to be here until Monday. What was up with Amazon Prime? Did investigations on that and found an article that stated that due to the virus the delivery is no longer two days but six or seven. That made me just buy the Kindle version for $20, which means I have it now. Will start reading it at some point tomorrow. And, if compelling enough, will read the whole thing tomorrow.

Reading his article did provoke me to send the following to a friend in an email earlier tonight:

"I don't know if you have yet read the totally scary piece I sent out.

But here is the big question for you ....I know that in the past you told me that our going to war is justified if it protects our source of oil. I believe you may have said this to me in the context of the first Iraq War in 1990. And, the clear statement from you was anything that jeopardizes our way of life is worth going to war over. Now at that time, neither you or I were in the military, were in no danger of being in the military nor had family that was in the military. Therefore we would have reaped all the benefits at no costs.

Now would you be willing to do the following...

Line up ALL the over 50 people in this country (obviously me and you included). Expose each and every one of those people to the virus. Those who live live and those who don't die. From almost all reports few under 50 years old and healthy suffer any severe effects, let alone die. Kevin Durant has just tested positive and he has NO effects.

Isn't that saying that this virus is preying on the weak and not a concern to either the healthy or young or both?

Therefore to save our economy for ALL this people of our country, especially for the young who have not lived as long as us, would you be willing to support that measure?"

Reading his piece led me to thinking and writing something like that!

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Kriegsspiel » Wed Mar 18, 2020 6:20 am

vnatale wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:11 pm
Now would you be willing to do the following...

Line up ALL the over 50 people in this country (obviously me and you included). Expose each and every one of those people to the virus. Those who live live and those who don't die. From almost all reports few under 50 years old and healthy suffer any severe effects, let alone die. Kevin Durant has just tested positive and he has NO effects.

Isn't that saying that this virus is preying on the weak and not a concern to either the healthy or young or both?

Therefore to save our economy for ALL this people of our country, especially for the young who have not lived as long as us, would you be willing to support that measure?"

Reading his piece led me to thinking and writing something like that!

Vinny
Why line them up and infect them? Just advise them all to stay home and self-quarantine if they don't want to get sick. Us young 'uns shouldn't be forced to. I agree with you in spirit.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:52 pm

I am just starting to read his book now. Since I'm just starting it at this time of night (9:51) I will most likely NOT finish it tonight unless it turns into a real page turner! Anyone else already read it?

Vinny
Attachments
Capture.JPG
Capture.JPG (45.74 KiB) Viewed 5109 times
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:22 pm

Started reading his book the other night and only got up to reading about 25% of it.

Was initially disappointed that the book was so old - 2011. But it' standing up fairly well other then wishing, of course, information was more up to date.

Started reading it again a short while ago and am now at 36%.

So far it's getting an A from me. I've been passing on excerpts from it to others. And, since I've already got the one below all set up, I'll also put it here.

I assume that almost all here will agree with it (as do I)?

Vinny


Turning to postsecondary education, we have all heard that success in life is reached through a college degree. This mantra is drummed into us from childhood, and like most of what we?re spoon-fed when it comes to matters that have a financial component, the foundation of the claim is largely true. It?s the omissions that are troublesome.


Before and into the 1970s and 1980s, it was quite possible to work your way through school with a part-time job at most state colleges. Dormitories were cinderblock-wall affairs with a Formica-topped plank at desk height and a shelf above for your books, along with a pair of beds. There was no air conditioning or cable TV service in the room, and heat was typically provided through central hot water or steam radiators. Food was school cafeteria standard and served in what would be described as a mess hall. Educational buildings were relatively utilitarian affairs, with the money spent in places where it counted, primarily in the labs for the hard sciences.


This is no longer true. Universities have gone on a building spree, constructing housing better thought of as luxury apartments and various emoluments to the educational process that are extraordinarily expensive. Staffing levels have been dramatically increased. Has the quality of education improved? The former environment was sufficient to produce graduates that were behind NASA landing men on the moon, among the many other accomplishments of that time.


But what these increases in spending have done is drive up the cost of postsecondary education to ridiculous levels. And once again, the financial industry and government stepped in to offer a solution to ever-escalating costs via loan programs that can be reasonably described as predatory and abusive.


The first step was, as with housing finance, to petition the government. After all, financial firms wouldn?t want young Americans to figure out that they could take out a huge student loan and then default on it! The student?s credit would be ruined, and the graduate might have to file bankruptcy, but how could the bank repossess a degree? The answer to that problem was to get Congress to pass a law so that student loan debt was nearly impossible to discharge in bankruptcy. In fact, the only other type of debt that holds the same status in the law as a student loan is child support. Of course, in the case of child support, there?s an actual child that requires food, shelter, clothing, and medical care. For student loans, it?s just a bank or the government that requires that feeding.


With banks and the government smug in the knowledge that they could hound students forever, cheap, below-market interest rate loans showed up literally everywhere, including direct government-subsidized programs, such as the Stafford student loan. The flood of cheap money caused more people to apply to go to college than there were slots in colleges for incoming freshmen. That shortage of available student capacity led colleges to construct new buildings, renovate dorms, and, of course, raise prices. The basic economics of supply and demand asserted themselves as the creation of artificial demand through cheap-money policies drove tuition and fees higher. This was all to everyone?s benefit, since we now had more students going to college, right?


Not quite.


Median family incomes, despite more and more kids going to college, did not rise in inflation-adjusted terms. In fact, the entire 2000?2009 decade was spent with median household income right near $50,000.11 But colleges were happy to sell you an education that was rising in price at 10, 15, 20 percent or more a year, and it wasn?t just tuition and fees that were skyrocketing. Books, housing, food, and everything college related went up in price at outrageous rates. Behind it all were banks and the federal government willing and able to give Junior a ticket to a great education. Whether Junior graduated with tens of thousands or even over $100,000 in debt, and in many cases was unable to find a job upon graduation, didn?t matter to them at all.


Part and parcel of this abuse is what is known as the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). This document demands not only information of the would-be student but also of their parents! Without full disclosure of parental income and assets, the student is effectively cut off from all grants, scholarships, on-campus work opportunities and federal student loans. Although our youth in college are typically legal adults, if their parents make too much money, there?s no aid forthcoming for that student, only debt.


High school and college counselors still claim that college is a good investment. For some people, it is, even at today?s ridiculously bloated price, especially if you can qualify for an academic scholarship. But for other students, it is not a good investment at all; graduating with $100,000 in debt when your job pays $50,000 a year and you have to pay off those loans within 10 years is a serious problem. Remember the rule of 72: For most student loans and a 10-year repayment period, it is not uncommon to pay a 30 percent premium for your education once you include the interest charges. If your blended interest rate includes some subsidized Stafford loans and some unsubsidized or private loans, the interest rate charged may be 6 percent or more. On a 10-year amortization schedule, $100,000 in debt costs about $1,100 a month, and on a $50,000 annual salary, you gross only $4,167 a month before taxes. Any hope such a graduate had of buying a house and starting a family is gone instantly with this debt load, as the student loans alone consume a quarter of their income. It?s quite easy to wind up destitute in this situation, especially if the graduate has trouble finding a job, and many graduates these days do.


Why did this happen in the market? First, if you have more people getting degrees, there will be more competition for the available jobs when you graduate. Basic economics tells us that if there is more supply than demand, the price, in this case the wage offered, goes down. Second, our corporations started importing people like crazy from foreign lands via H-1B visas and offshoring whatever labor they could to parts of the world with lower costs of living, driving labor demand and salaries in this country even lower. As a result, not only did the expense of an education go up but also the available return on that investment decreased dramatically.


In the general sense, student loans are never a good idea. Those who are academically talented should be incentivized to go to school with scholarships and other forms of noncash aid from endowments and private sources of assistance. But for the student who is just average, loan programs, especially where the student intends to study in a field where quick and certain salary advances are not realistic, are financial suicide. Our young people are frequently deceived by counselors, and there?s no evidence that the high schools in this nation spend any amount of time on this subject or speak to the cost-benefit analysis that any prospective college student should engage in before attending school. There is no clear disclosure in the various financial aid packages explaining how to work the financial ratios that apply to these loan programs, what happens to you when you graduate with a mountain of student debt, and the likely salary range you will have to pay it back with. There is even less disclosure about the fact that such a debt load will make you instantly ineligible for a standard home mortgage. Finally, some private educational institutions are under investigation over allegedly misleading their students with overly rosy claims of salaries earned and successful college completion statistics.


Arguably the worst problem in this regard is that our youth in high school, as they approach the college decision, are not informed clearly and unambiguously of the traps that await them in the financial aid office. We should not accept their remaining uninformed of the fact that if they go into debt for their college education, that debt is not dischargeable in bankruptcy due to those very lenders and schools demanding special status under the law.


There are exceptions, of course, to the general rule that student debt is a bad idea. Owing $5,000 coming out of college after four years with a job paying $50,000 won?t break the bank. The payments on that loan total about $60 a month. But as soon as you start talking about financing more than $20,000 or so for a four-year degree, beware. The required payments are real, and they don?t go away; if you default, the lenders sell your loan to a collection agency that will immediately hit you with penalties you can?t negotiate away, nor can you file bankruptcy to avoid them.


For many students in high school today, learning a trade makes much more sense than a college education. A trade returns income immediately and typically does not involve taking on any debt at all. It is quite difficult to offshore many trade skills, as they must be performed for the customer at the point where that service is purchased. While trades may not be prestigious vocations, they do pay a decent living wage and, wisely chosen, will always be in demand in some form or fashion. In the 1970s, it was common to have a required shop class in which one learned how to work wood and metal, including welding and the operation of a lathe, as early as junior high. Those students who showed desire and aptitude in these classes were encouraged to pursue their passions, whether in woodworking and fine carpentry, auto repair, or metal fabrication. These classes and facilities have largely disappeared over the last 20 years in favor of pushing every child toward college. There are also many trade skills that have grown out of the technology revolution, such as web design and computer repair, along with the traditional trades such as plumbing. When considering the allegedly better salary prospects that come with a college education, students must include not only the cost of the education itself but also the financing, if necessary, to attend, along with the student?s aptitude and love of the field of study. While there are many well-paying professional careers that do in fact require a college education, a student should always keep in mind that a job you hate, even if you make good money doing it, will never be something you look forward to when the sun rises in the morning.


If college makes sense for you or your children, after careful consideration of the options, find a way to achieve that goal without the use of debt and save your financial future.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sun Mar 22, 2020 8:53 am

vnatale wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:22 pm
  • High school and college counselors still claim that college is a good investment. For some people, it is, even at today?s ridiculously bloated price, especially if you can qualify for an academic scholarship. But for other students, it is not a good investment at all; graduating with $100,000 in debt when your job pays $50,000 a year and you have to pay off those loans within 10 years is a serious problem.
  • if you have more people getting degrees, there will be more competition for the available jobs when you graduate. Basic economics tells us that if there is more supply than demand, the price, in this case the wage offered, goes down. Second, our corporations started importing people like crazy from foreign lands via H-1B visas and offshoring whatever labor they could to parts of the world with lower costs of living, driving labor demand and salaries in this country even lower. As a result, not only did the expense of an education go up but also the available return on that investment decreased dramatically.
  • In the general sense, student loans are never a good idea. Those who are academically talented should be incentivized to go to school with scholarships and other forms of noncash aid from endowments and private sources of assistance. But for the student who is just average, loan programs, especially where the student intends to study in a field where quick and certain salary advances are not realistic, are financial suicide. Our young people are frequently deceived by counselors, and there?s no evidence that the high schools in this nation spend any amount of time on this subject or speak to the cost-benefit analysis that any prospective college student should engage in before attending school.
  • There are exceptions, of course, to the general rule that student debt is a bad idea. Owing $5,000 coming out of college after four years with a job paying $50,000 won?t break the bank. The payments on that loan total about $60 a month.
  • For many students in high school today, learning a trade makes much more sense than a college education. A trade returns income immediately and typically does not involve taking on any debt at all. It is quite difficult to offshore many trade skills, as they must be performed for the customer at the point where that service is purchased. While trades may not be prestigious vocations, they do pay a decent living wage and, wisely chosen, will always be in demand in some form or fashion. In the 1970s, it was common to have a required shop class in which one learned how to work wood and metal, including welding and the operation of a lathe, as early as junior high. Those students who showed desire and aptitude in these classes were encouraged to pursue their passions, whether in woodworking and fine carpentry, auto repair, or metal fabrication. These classes and facilities have largely disappeared over the last 20 years in favor of pushing every child toward college. There are also many trade skills that have grown out of the technology revolution, such as web design and computer repair, along with the traditional trades such as plumbing. When considering the allegedly better salary prospects that come with a college education, students must include not only the cost of the education itself but also the financing, if necessary, to attend, along with the student?s aptitude and love of the field of study. While there are many well-paying professional careers that do in fact require a college education, a student should always keep in mind that a job you hate, even if you make good money doing it, will never be something you look forward to when the sun rises in the morning.
  • If college makes sense for you or your children, after careful consideration of the options, find a way to achieve that goal without the use of debt and save your financial future.
God damn, me and this dude share extremely similar ideas. I was going to say "especially about the scholarship part," but really, with everything.

I remember a discussion with one friend about the market aspects he talks about. I likened it to the Prisoner's Dilemma. Right now, it seems that people want the generalist white collar corporate/non-profit type jobs, which all advertise their jobs as requiring a bachelors degree (some of them even specify what type! lulz).

The defect-defect choice, where both prisoners lose, would look like what we see now, with all those people getting college degrees at a needless detriment to themselves.

Defect-cooperate is probably also happening, but the cooperate people just get screened out by HR without a look.

A lot of those jobs don't require a college degree for the work they want you to do, so if everyone "agreed" to stop going to college, those places would just take people they could get. That's the cooperate-cooperate scenario for the prisoners.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Libertarian666 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:21 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 8:53 am
vnatale wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 10:22 pm
  • High school and college counselors still claim that college is a good investment. For some people, it is, even at today?s ridiculously bloated price, especially if you can qualify for an academic scholarship. But for other students, it is not a good investment at all; graduating with $100,000 in debt when your job pays $50,000 a year and you have to pay off those loans within 10 years is a serious problem.
  • if you have more people getting degrees, there will be more competition for the available jobs when you graduate. Basic economics tells us that if there is more supply than demand, the price, in this case the wage offered, goes down. Second, our corporations started importing people like crazy from foreign lands via H-1B visas and offshoring whatever labor they could to parts of the world with lower costs of living, driving labor demand and salaries in this country even lower. As a result, not only did the expense of an education go up but also the available return on that investment decreased dramatically.
  • In the general sense, student loans are never a good idea. Those who are academically talented should be incentivized to go to school with scholarships and other forms of noncash aid from endowments and private sources of assistance. But for the student who is just average, loan programs, especially where the student intends to study in a field where quick and certain salary advances are not realistic, are financial suicide. Our young people are frequently deceived by counselors, and there?s no evidence that the high schools in this nation spend any amount of time on this subject or speak to the cost-benefit analysis that any prospective college student should engage in before attending school.
  • There are exceptions, of course, to the general rule that student debt is a bad idea. Owing $5,000 coming out of college after four years with a job paying $50,000 won?t break the bank. The payments on that loan total about $60 a month.
  • For many students in high school today, learning a trade makes much more sense than a college education. A trade returns income immediately and typically does not involve taking on any debt at all. It is quite difficult to offshore many trade skills, as they must be performed for the customer at the point where that service is purchased. While trades may not be prestigious vocations, they do pay a decent living wage and, wisely chosen, will always be in demand in some form or fashion. In the 1970s, it was common to have a required shop class in which one learned how to work wood and metal, including welding and the operation of a lathe, as early as junior high. Those students who showed desire and aptitude in these classes were encouraged to pursue their passions, whether in woodworking and fine carpentry, auto repair, or metal fabrication. These classes and facilities have largely disappeared over the last 20 years in favor of pushing every child toward college. There are also many trade skills that have grown out of the technology revolution, such as web design and computer repair, along with the traditional trades such as plumbing. When considering the allegedly better salary prospects that come with a college education, students must include not only the cost of the education itself but also the financing, if necessary, to attend, along with the student?s aptitude and love of the field of study. While there are many well-paying professional careers that do in fact require a college education, a student should always keep in mind that a job you hate, even if you make good money doing it, will never be something you look forward to when the sun rises in the morning.
  • If college makes sense for you or your children, after careful consideration of the options, find a way to achieve that goal without the use of debt and save your financial future.
God damn, me and this dude share extremely similar ideas. I was going to say "especially about the scholarship part," but really, with everything.

I remember a discussion with one friend about the market aspects he talks about. I likened it to the Prisoner's Dilemma. Right now, it seems that people want the generalist white collar corporate/non-profit type jobs, which all advertise their jobs as requiring a bachelors degree (some of them even specify what type! lulz).

The defect-defect choice, where both prisoners lose, would look like what we see now, with all those people getting college degrees at a needless detriment to themselves.

Defect-cooperate is probably also happening, but the cooperate people just get screened out by HR without a look.

A lot of those jobs don't require a college degree for the work they want you to do, so if everyone "agreed" to stop going to college, those places would just take people they could get. That's the cooperate-cooperate scenario for the prisoners.
There's another plan that would fix this issue in no time.
1. No federal guarantees for student loans
2. Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy after a waiting period, say 7 years.
(The waiting period is to prevent doctors and the like from graduating from their professional schools and immediately declaring bankruptcy, which was the supposed reason for the bankruptcy bar in the first place)

Voila!
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by WiseOne » Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:45 am

Great ideas, tech.

Student loans are truly a scourge. I've been wondering if the shift to online learning is really going to reverse completely after all this is over. Once students have been introduced to it, I can see a new cottage industry in online universities - at a fraction of the cost of the real thing - cropping up. Plus, there's nothing like a recession/depression to get people to question whether these astronomical tuition bills and loans are worth it.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by shekels » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:11 am

Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:21 am


There's another plan that would fix this issue in no time.
1. No federal guarantees for student loans
2. Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy after a waiting period, say 7 years.
(The waiting period is to prevent doctors and the like from graduating from their professional schools and immediately declaring bankruptcy, which was the supposed reason for the bankruptcy bar in the first place)

Voila!
Maybe also
Zero interest.
If paid off within a set number of Years, depending on the amount owed.
Say 50,000 or less 10 yrs.
100,000 or less 15 yrs.
The unintended consequence from Doctors filing Bankruptcy has crippled many people with a student debt burden.
If that is the reason.
They could of just as easily suspended the License of the Doctors for a period of time.
Last edited by shekels on Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:13 am

WiseOne wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:45 am
Great ideas, tech.

Student loans are truly a scourge.
Student loans are a great example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. It makes great sense for a government to incentivize student loans. It wants to increase the education of its citizens. The rub is that you can't financialize intelligence. A sub-rub (mmmm) is that a high school education really is good enough for most people.
I've been wondering if the shift to online learning is really going to reverse completely after all this is over. Once students have been introduced to it, I can see a new cottage industry in online universities - at a fraction of the cost of the real thing - cropping up. Plus, there's nothing like a recession/depression to get people to question whether these astronomical tuition bills and loans are worth it.
We can hope.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by shekels » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:43 am

MangoMan wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:26 am
shekels wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:11 am
Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:21 am


There's another plan that would fix this issue in no time.
1. No federal guarantees for student loans
2. Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy after a waiting period, say 7 years.
(The waiting period is to prevent doctors and the like from graduating from their professional schools and immediately declaring bankruptcy, which was the supposed reason for the bankruptcy bar in the first place)

Voila!
Maybe also
Zero interest.
If paid off within a set number of Years, depending on the amount owed.
Say 50,000 or less 10 yrs.
100,000 or less 15 yrs.
The unintended consequence from Doctors filing Bankruptcy has crippled many people with a student debt burden.
If that is the reason.
They could of just as easily suspended the License of the Doctors for a period of time.
What would that accomplish? No license -> can't work -> can't pay bills including loan.
Also, how would you extend that to people who don't require a license to do their job? Or would this great rule only apply to professionals such as doctors, lawyers, CPAs, teachers, etc.?
Yes it should be extended to all Professionals if you file bankruptcy immediately after finishing school.
Harsh i know.
But it just means if you are filing bankruptcy the debt will be discharged.
So you will need to find other employment.
Edit to add .
This may not be the best solution but look what we have now with People in debt Peonage.
Last edited by shekels on Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:45 am

MangoMan wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:32 am
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:13 am
WiseOne wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:45 am
I've been wondering if the shift to online learning is really going to reverse completely after all this is over. Once students have been introduced to it, I can see a new cottage industry in online universities - at a fraction of the cost of the real thing - cropping up. Plus, there's nothing like a recession/depression to get people to question whether these astronomical tuition bills and loans are worth it.
We can hope.
I have been reading several bloggers who several years ago already had proposed that higher education would be almost exclusively online within a decade or two. There are probably some things that require physical presence (anatomy lab, chem lab, etc), but the vast majority can already be done this way. Jeez, my ex-wife got her masters degree (education) online around 20 years ago. Although archaic compared to technology now, it was quite doable even back then. They mostly used some IMAP feature in Outlook Express to have 'group conversations'.
I studied for the CFP (Certified Financial Planner) designation from 1985 to 1988. Obviously way before any form of online access for ANYTHING!

There were six course and for each one had to go on a designated day (along with all the other CFP aspirants) to a testing location to take a test(s) on each course we were testing for.

Since during that time period I was always working full-time (sometimes more than full-time) I'd only study for one course at a time. I remember one time at a test I heard one woman say to another, "I had to study two days for this one!" Like that was a lot! For me since I was not in the field and each course of study was all new to me (except for the taxes one) I'd spend 70 to 80 hours of studying in preparing for each exam.

For each course I'd get via the mail one binder full of al the paper and a book. I needed to study both and master the material so as to pass the exam for that course.

It perfectly fit my preferred style of learning (kinesthetic with aural being by far my least style). So many times in high school I'd complain, "Why do I have to go to these classes (in which I learn nothing!). Why can't they just give me the book??!!"

I learned in the self-study for the CFP in one of the modules they had about how to deal with clients and their preferred learning styles and best ways to take in information why I hated classes so much. They were primarily aural, which is as I stated by far my least preferred mode of listening.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Libertarian666 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:23 pm

WiseOne wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:45 am
Great ideas, tech.

Student loans are truly a scourge. I've been wondering if the shift to online learning is really going to reverse completely after all this is over. Once students have been introduced to it, I can see a new cottage industry in online universities - at a fraction of the cost of the real thing - cropping up. Plus, there's nothing like a recession/depression to get people to question whether these astronomical tuition bills and loans are worth it.
Yep.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Libertarian666 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:24 pm

shekels wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:11 am
Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:21 am


There's another plan that would fix this issue in no time.
1. No federal guarantees for student loans
2. Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy after a waiting period, say 7 years.
(The waiting period is to prevent doctors and the like from graduating from their professional schools and immediately declaring bankruptcy, which was the supposed reason for the bankruptcy bar in the first place)

Voila!
Maybe also
Zero interest.
If paid off within a set number of Years, depending on the amount owed.
Say 50,000 or less 10 yrs.
100,000 or less 15 yrs.
The unintended consequence from Doctors filing Bankruptcy has crippled many people with a student debt burden.
If that is the reason.
They could of just as easily suspended the License of the Doctors for a period of time.
Zero interest would make the problem worse, not better.
The reason why college is so expensive is because of the ready availability of student loans.
Anything that makes them cheaper or more abundant will force prices even higher.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by shekels » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:04 pm

Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:24 pm
shekels wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:11 am
Libertarian666 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:21 am


There's another plan that would fix this issue in no time.
1. No federal guarantees for student loans
2. Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy after a waiting period, say 7 years.
(The waiting period is to prevent doctors and the like from graduating from their professional schools and immediately declaring bankruptcy, which was the supposed reason for the bankruptcy bar in the first place)

Voila!
Maybe also
Zero interest.
If paid off within a set number of Years, depending on the amount owed.
Say 50,000 or less 10 yrs.
100,000 or less 15 yrs.
The unintended consequence from Doctors filing Bankruptcy has crippled many people with a student debt burden.
If that is the reason.
They could of just as easily suspended the License of the Doctors for a period of time.
Zero interest would make the problem worse, not better.
The reason why college is so expensive is because of the ready availability of student loans.
Anything that makes them cheaper or more abundant will force prices even higher.
I meant to say Zero interest on the Loans outstanding now, if they were repaid within the allotted time.
This would be for only those who can not discharge the debt.
I see this as a better option than Student Loan Forgiveness.

Going forward I agree allow Bankruptcy as a option.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by Smith1776 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:27 pm

My first college degree started in the year 2006. About a decade later tuition for certain courses in my second degree has increased by as much as 50%.

I am so glad to be done formal education this year. It's gettin' bad! Monnneeeeehhhh!
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Is Denninger right about the coronavirus?

Post by vnatale » Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:37 pm

Smith1776 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:27 pm
My first college degree started in the year 2006. About a decade later tuition for certain courses in my second degree has increased by as much as 50%.

I am so glad to be done formal education this year. It's gettin' bad! Monnneeeeehhhh!

Wouldn't that be a fairly low rate of increase for education expenses? Less than 4% compounded?


Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Post Reply