Had a great subscriber email come in this weekend and I wanted to share it because a lot will fall into place for you, I think. Here’s what he said…
“George, Just heard an interview with Danielle DiMartino Booth on the Federal Reserve. I ordered the book. Her point was, as is yours, the economy is heading back to 1929. She said her marker is the volume of new car sales. Your thoughts. Thanks, “
Oh boy…is that a “wind me up” or what? (more…)
Here’s my answer to him:
I am not as worried about that one, since the problem with new tech is the old problem in sales.
When I was in the high tech world, I made the mistake of telling a customer of a new product we would have out shortly….
Owner of the company took me aside and reamed me good: “You don’t EVER mention our next product!” he screams. “Sell what we have in stock!!!”
Point is that all this talk about self-driving cars (soon come) will drive a nail into new car sales until they get here. If the automakers were really smart (and they aren’t by all accounts), they would announce a migration path so the car you buy today will never go obsolete. But like I said, they ain’t so bright.
Point 2 is that you can’t judge a long wave economic depression unless you take a fairly stable TECH and look at how it’s doing.
One of my consigliere’s favorite metrics of the real economy?
He called me this weekend to advise that all of a sudden, a LOT of single engine pressurized go fast planes for the business execs of smaller companies have come up on the market suddenly and prices have fallen like a safe. Things like Piper Malibu’s.
He figures this is a more meaningful metric. Also, since he’s in farm country, he notes ag land prices are higher than even the 2007-2008 bubble top.
The Ag value of our joint out here in the woods is now north of $300K, too…
I don’t know as I have been terribly candid with the public, but I will share this on Monday on Urban (without your last name of course) the REAL reason that Elaine and I are looking to move to the mountains north of Phoenix. I mean in addition to being nearer friends and relatives.
We are even willing to rent or lease for a year or two and park the bulk of our dough in Treasuries and stocks, since we will do just fine in a falling market. I’m not afraid of going short… made more money there than long over the years.
So if we sell our home in the next six months, then lease for two years, I figure it will be akin to selling at the top of 1929 and then coming back in – with LOTS of ready cash – in 1931 and buying at the bottom.
People think we’re stupid to even consider leaving what we have – and that may be – but remember we can lever up to a super-house n nearer kids…and if I have the angle of the dangle right (and with enough left over to not need Social Security which I figure will be dialed back in the coming Depressionary Slide), and we’re in agreement it is a worthy strategy to pursue. So we are asking $329K for the well-prepped 28.82 acres complete, furnished, equipped and outfitted; spares and all.
If it all sells, fine, we’re golden. Go ahead with Plan A.
If it doesn’t sell at full price, then Plan B and we’re golden, too.
And that’s how one should try to arrange affairs in this kind of world. Try to set everything up so that no matter what happens you have a chance to win.
Thanks for the question – great one! It is also the topic (in depth with scenarios, inflation data from the 1930’s Depression and some “what-ifs”) on our www.peoplenomics.com site Wednesday…
Around the Ranch: For the Birds?
Here’s something that caught Elaine’s eye Friday afternoon. She’s always watching and feeding “her birds” and we get all kinds of wonderful birds coming through the property.
There was a bright red Cardinal on the lawn under the bird feeder he was “in the company” of a female Cardinal, as their color of the hen is a speckled color about like some of the tree bark around here.
They were inseparable. The female would peck on the ground, the male would wander a few “bird-lengths” away – 12-inches or so – and then come back and “nuzzle” the female a bit.
Then the most amazing thing happened: The male found something – could have been an insect or a piece of grain overlooked, but he picked it up with his beak, brought it over to the female, tapped her beak, then gently placed it in her beak.
She ate it. And then they nuzzled some more.
Elaine came into the studio where I was using a computer with one of those huge UHD screens and told me about it, quite emotional about it. Partly because it was so kind and partly because it’s so rare that the “up food chain” species is so thoughtful. Especially in today’s world.
I was kind of taken by it, too.
Sure, animals will feed one another, but this was more than like when Zeus-the-Cat brings us the remains of some kill to share because we feed him.
No, this was a marriage in the wild among small birds.
We’d heard, of course, that Canadian Geese mate for life, but Elaine had never had seen this kind of behavior here among the wildlife.
All weekend a thought kept rolling around:
If male birds in the wild can help look after their mates, how is it that the so-called advanced upright apes can’t model better behavior for their young? And why doesn’t government policy encourage it? I mean in government policies (that split up families due to welfare/income thresholds) and the failure of education to keep a firm hold on modeling “normal” for the wee ones.
It was a depressing, balanced off only by the realization that humans still have lots of room for improvement. NSS.
We’ve made remarkably little progress in the past 5,000 years when you think about it. At least compared to a couple of Cardinals at Uretopia out here in the East Texas Outback.
Write when you get rich,