The Dancing Bears

By Jeff Thomas

In the early 2000s, I recommended to associates that we were in for a major gold boom. Most thought that this was a ridiculous suggestion and didn’t buy a single ounce. I continued to recommend the purchase of gold regularly over the ensuing years, and the price continued to rise. Only in 2011 did they start to buy, at a time when gold was peaking. We were due for a correction and in late 2011, it arrived. For several years, the price has remained in the neighbourhood of $1,200—roughly the price it needs to be to bother removing it from the ground.

During that time, gold has periodically risen a bit, then gotten knocked down again. It’s understandable that this should happen. Central banks have a stake in holding down the gold price, since a rising gold price makes it appear more attractive than storing cash in banks. We’ve reached the point that the central banks have run out of tricks to float the economy and we’re already past due for a crash.

But crashes don’t always occur as soon as they become logical. As long as the public can be fooled into remaining confident in the system, a doomed economy can limp along for a bit before toppling. Statistics on unemployment and inflation can be fudged (and they have been). The stock market can be falsely pumped up (and it has been) in order to create the illusion that all is well. These factors, taken together with knocking down the price of gold periodically, helps to convince people that they should keep their money in cash and their cash in the bank, not in gold.

Just as in 2000, the number of people who understand that gold is not the equivalent of a stock but a store of wealth during dramatically changing times is quite small—certainly less than 1% and more likely less than 1/10th of 1%. Those that possess this understanding tend to hold gold long-term and are relatively unconcerned about fluctuations—even if they’re over $100 in a given month. They’re in it for the long haul and believe that, eventually, gold will rise dramatically and may well be the only safe haven after a crash.

But let’s go back to those speculators that waited until gold had risen dramatically before jumping on board the gold train. During the last four-year period, whenever gold rose as a result of economic and political developments, many of them would buy in once more, after it had risen significantly. Then, when it had been knocked down again, they tended to sell—often at the new bottom.

Of course, this behaviour is not limited just to the purchase of gold. In fact, a very high percentage of investors “play” the stock market in this way. They wait until everyone and his dog is buying in and the price is peaking, often buying on margin in order to maximize their positions. Then, when the bubble pops, they tend to ride the market down, hoping in vain that the price will return at least to what it was when they bought in. In essence, they tend to buy high and sell low almost every time.

The gold bears—those investors who don’t truly understand that gold is a very different animal from stocks—typically dislike gold but buy high when it becomes trendy to do so and sell low after it’s been knocked down. This dance is guaranteed to cause the gold bears to lose money time after time.

The dance is sometimes described as “chasing the market,” or “following the trends.” Brokers keep the dance going by advising their clients of established trends, telling them that they’re “missing out if they don’t get in now.” They serve as the market’s equivalent of a caller in a square dance: “Swing your client to and fro—watch his investment dollars go.”

Just as few investors understand the economic nature of gold, they also tend to overlook the fact that the broker doesn’t benefit from the success of the client—he makes his money when the client buys and sells frequently. So, of course his advice is going to be for the client to keep dancing.

So, will this dance go on as it is, ad infinitum? Well, no. There will be a dramatic change following a crash in the markets. Following any major crash, a panic occurs and whatever money is left on the table scrambles to find a new (hopefully safe) home. Following the coming crash, a portion of that money will head into gold. The price will rise dramatically, very possibly to such a degree that it can no longer be easily knocked down by the central banks.

At first the gold bears will assume that it’s an anomaly. Then, as gold passes $1,500, some will dip their toes in. As it passes $1,800, some will wade in. Beyond $2,000, this trend will strengthen quite a bit. As the crash deepens, stocks will tumble further. The bond bubble may also pop, increasing gold’s shine. At some point, bankers may begin to freeze accounts, create bank holidays, and/or confiscate deposits. At that point, gold will head into its long-predicted mania phase and the bears will be falling over each other, chasing the buying trend.

Gold will rise to a logical price in keeping with its value as a hedge against a collapsing economy. At that point, it would make sense for it to stop, but that’s not what will happen. Those who understand gold will cease their purchases and sit on what they have. But then a new dance will begin. The bears will become decidedly bullish. It’s important to note that, at this point, they will not fully understand why gold is rising so dramatically; they’ll just know that it is. They’ll want to get in on the gold rush and will do whatever they have to in order to keep buying.

They’ll find that physical gold is in short supply, as traditional holders are unwilling to sell, seemingly at any price. Potential buyers will offer $50 above spot, then $100 above spot, then more. They’ll additionally buy on margin in order to increase their position. It will be at this point that the mania will take hold. Irrationally high prices will become the new norm. How high will it go? $10,000? $20,000? Impossible to say. It will rise as high as desperation makes it rise, and we cannot now determine what that level of desperation will be.

A new bubble will be created, but this time, it won’t be in stocks or bonds. It’ll be in gold and, like all bubbles, it will eventually pop. This will occur when those who understand the nature of gold recognize that the price has far exceeded what’s logical and, as much as they value gold, they’ll sell a portion of their holdings and use the proceeds to invest in whatever assets have already bottomed and have nowhere to go but up.

They’re likely to retain a portion of their gold holdings for the same reason they always have, but will be happy to release a portion when it becomes significantly overvalued. This will cause the gold bubble to pop and the gold bears, who have recently become bulls, will wonder where it all went wrong. At this point, they still won’t understand gold; they’ll simply have chased yet another trend and lost.

So, is there a moral here? Well, if so, it’s simply that an investor should not become involved in a market that he doesn’t understand. Nor should he trust his broker to understand it for him. Ironically, as long as there have been markets, there have been those who go out on the dance floor without first learning the dance. A great deal of profit will be made by some gold investors, but the majority are likely to leave the floor with empty dance cards.

Regards,
Jeff Thomas

Editor’s Note: Gold is crisis insurance. Without it, you’re highly vulnerable. And there’s a good chance the next financial crisis could wipe you out.

New York Times best selling author Doug Casey thinks that crisis is coming soon. He shares all the details in this urgent video. Click here to watch it now.

The article The Dancing Bears was originally published at caseyresearch.com

A Chicken in Every Pot

By Jeff Thomas

That’s a pretty powerful statement. Is it historically supportable? Let’s visit a current example – Venezuela – to examine the overall process of collectivism, then look at a few other historical cases and see what we can learn.  Collectivism will always eventually destroy the economy of any nation, no matter how great it may be.

Venezuela – 17 Years of Collectivism
In 1980, Venezuela was deemed to be the fourteenth most economically free country in the world. Today, it’s a veritable train wreck, having failed in every conceivable way. How did this happen? Was it just bad luck? No, quite the contrary.

Venezuela’s prosperity was fueled primarily by the export of oil. The downward spiral began in the 1980s as a result of a drop in the world oil price. Until that time, there had been strong public support for the free market, but diminished oil receipts resulted in a decline in living standards for most all Venezuelans, which left them open to claims by collectivist political candidates that the whole problem was the free market. In 1999, they elected Hugo Chávez, who promised to solve the problem through collectivism – the promise of a chicken in every pot.

Mister Chávez began to take from the “haves” and provide largesse for the “have-nots.” Not surprisingly, he was highly praised by the have-nots. So, he went further. He nationalized many of Venezuela’s industries. Industry became less and less profitable, so less and less money flowed through the system each year. Eventually, the revenue to the government was insufficient to pay for the promised largesse. The leader then died and the new leader, Nicolás Maduro, inherited a zombie economy. In desperation, he introduced capital controls and increased nationalization and regulations, hoping to squeeze as much as possible from the economy before it went off the cliff. The result was a fully dysfunctional economy, replete with massive job losses, increasing shortages, and, finally, starvation.

Again, having once been number fourteen on the list of economically free countries, Venezuela is now at the very bottom – at number 152 – as a direct result of collectivism. As Margaret Thatcher once said, “The trouble with socialism is that, eventually, you run out of other people’s money.” Quite so. It does take a while, however. A newly collectivist state at first appears to be solving problems. What it’s really doing is feeding off of past profits. It gobbles up the economy’s store of nuts, but when these nuts are gone, that’s it – there’s no more, and the economy collapses. People starve.

Venezuela now has increasing shortages of food, hyperinflation has set in, the government is totally corrupt, the government is running out of funds for entitlements, and government healthcare is overburdened and failing. Like Cuba in the 1980s, there are no longer any dogs or cats on the streets of Caracas, and for the same reason as in Cuba – they’re being eaten by those with no other source of protein.

USSR – 74 Years
Vladimir Lenin introduced collectivism to Russia in 1917. He was able to do so because a revolution had just been completed by the people of Russia as a result of their dissatisfaction with a decline in the standard of living of most Russians. For decades thereafter, capitalism existed within the primarily communist system, but eventually, the parasite sucked the host dry. The USSR collapsed in 1991 for the same reason Venezuela is collapsing today.

China – 29 Years
Mao Tse-tung took over China in 1949 with a collectivist regime. But the 10,000-year rule he promised fell a bit short. It ended in 1978 in an economic dead-end. It followed the same path as the USSR, but the process was quicker.

Cuba – 57+ Years
Cuba lasted a bit longer. In the 1950s Cubans had become dissatisfied, due to the decline in the standard of living for the majority of Cubans, and were ripe targets for collectivist promises. They welcomed Fidel Castro in 1959. Cuba limped along for decades, but in recent years, the coffers of the state have dried up and the only hope to keep paying the salaries to government leaders lies in the grassroots cuentapropista movement – a rebirth of the free market. Collectivism in Cuba is nearing its end.

In each of the above countries, the pattern has been roughly the same.

• A formerly prosperous country experiences a period in which the standard of living for the majority of citizens drops significantly.
  
• The voters react by electing a new leader who promises a chicken in every pot (in essence, collectivism, although it is not always called that at the time of the election).
  
• The new leader begins to rob the producers of wealth to provide largesse for those with less. This has a direct positive benefit for those with less, resulting in an increase in voters supporting collectivist promises over a period of years.
  
• Over time, the free market experiences a permanent loss of wealth, resulting in diminished largesse for those who are now dependent upon it.
  
• The government imposes increasing capital controls and other regulations, which deteriorate the free market more severely, causing inflation, shortages of goods, loss of jobs, and eventually starvation and systemic collapse.
  
• The voters choose a new leader who promises fiscal responsibility.
  
• With a return to a freer market, prosperity slowly reappears.
  

The pattern is a predictable one because it’s based on human nature. An economic downturn occurs. The voters become suckers for false promises. The new collectivist government appears successful at first, because it’s feeding off the remains of the free market. But, eventually, it destroys the free market and collectivism crashes and burns.

So what does the above review tell us? Has the world learned its lesson? Not at all. What we can surmise from the above is that, whenever the standard of living for the majority of citizens drops significantly in a jurisdiction, the voters will be ripe for empty promises. In every such case, collectivism will appear to be the best solution.

Collectivism is by its very nature a parasitical system that creates nothing. It therefore will always eventually destroy the economy of any nation where it’s implemented, no matter how great that nation may be. The only uncertainty is the number of years required for destruction.

Today we’re witnessing the collapse of the primary jurisdictions of the former “free” world. They’re operating on a quasi-capitalist system that has been eroded by repeated injections of collectivism (primarily socialism and fascism). Increasingly, voters in each of these jurisdictions are becoming convinced that the promises made by collectivist candidates “just make sense.” As the system continues to spiral downward, as it inevitably will, the scales are likely to tip, not in the direction of a return to the free market, but in the direction of full-on collectivism.

Editor’s Note: Socialism often leads to economic and societal collapse, hyperinflation, shortages, and shrinking personal freedom. This has happened most recently in Venezuela.

The truth is, it can happen anywhere. The U.S. is not immune. In fact, it’s extremely vulnerable.
Increasing socialism, bad financial decisions, and massive debt levels will cause another financial crisis sooner rather than later.

We believe the coming crash is going to be much worse, much longer, and very different than what we saw in 2008 and 2009. Unfortunately, most people have no idea what really happens when an economy collapses, let alone how to prepare….

That’s exactly why Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video.

It also reveals how financial shock far greater than 2008 could strike America by the end of the year. And how it could either wipe out a big part of your savings... or be the fortune-building opportunity of a lifetime.

Click here to watch now

The article A Chicken in Every Pot was originally published at caseyresearch.com.

Precious Metals Take Center Stage....Let's Follow the Yellow Brick Road

By Jeff Thomas

For over a hundred years, it’s been theorised that author L. Frank Baum wrote his 1900 book, “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz”, as a fanciful way to explain the economic situation at the time and that the Yellow Brick Road was a reference to the path created by gold ownership. Whether or not the theory is correct, for many people today, “Follow the Yellow Brick Road” might serve as a mantra for alleviating economic woes.

What will happen is that one day, gold will suddenly be up $100 per ounce, then the next day, $200 per ounce. At first the pundits will be claiming that it’s an anomaly, but as it continues rising, a point will be reached when the average person says to himself, “This seems to be a trend. I’d better buy some gold.” 

Unfortunately, once the trend is underway, the price that day will have no bearing on whether gold is available. Your local coin shop may be sold out. If you go online, the mints may say that demand is exceeding supply. Large entities will be buying all they can get and the smaller buyers will be way down on the order list, unlikely to take delivery of even a single ounce.

These Are the Good Old Days

Gold has experienced a four year bear market and only recently has begun to rise again. But is it in reality a barbarous relic? Not by a long shot. For over 5,000 years, whenever people have experienced erratic economic periods, they’ve bought gold in order to stabilise their economic position. This has particularly been true whenever fiat currencies have been on the rise and were in danger of hyper-inflating, as in recent years. Most currencies are in decline against the U.S. dollar—a currency which, itself, is very much in danger of collapse in the not-too-distant future.

In the ’70s, I was buying gold in London, as it rose from $35. It reached a high of $850 in January, 1980, then crashed. When gold dropped below $400, I began buying Krugerrands. Sounds like a bargain, and yet, word on the street was that gold was headed further south. But I was buying long. I was not playing the market; I was building my economic insurance policy. I wasn’t too fussed over price fluctuations, as my gold holdings were meant to cover me if my other investments proved to be a mistake.

At present, gold is well above the high of 1989, but, if we adjust for inflation, we see that gold is actually a bargain at present. This excellent Casey Research chart from 2014 explains it better than mere words:

This tells us that $8,800 would not be an unreasonable level for gold today, if conditions were as dire as they were in 1980. However, conditions are far more dire—debt levels are far beyond any historical levels and markets are in a bubble, just waiting for the arrival of a pin.

A decade ago, when gold topped $700, I predicted $1,500 at some point and even my closest colleagues wondered what I’d been smoking. But it turned out that my prediction was, if anything, conservative. Over the last four years, some of the world’s most informed prognosticators—Eric Sprott, Peter Schiff, Jim Rickards, and Jim Sinclair—have all predicted gold to rise to between $5,000 and $7,000, and some have suggested numbers as high as $50,000. But this hasn’t happened. Are they wrong? No, it just hasn’t happened as of yet.

Conversely, Harry Dent has predicted a drop to $750. So, who’s right? Well, actually, they may all be right. After a crash in the markets, deflation is a certainty, as brokers and investors dump investments of every type in order to cover margin losses. This panic sell off will most assuredly include gold, even though the holders will not wish to sell their gold. This panic promises to create an immediate and possibly very dramatic downward spike in gold.

However, large numbers of long term investors already have their orders in for any price below $1,000. If the spike drops below that number, it will therefore be brief, as every ounce that hits the market at $999 is scooped up. In addition, the Federal Reserve will make good on its decades-long promise to roll the printing presses to counter any sudden deflation. That very act will light the fuse on the gold rocket and send it skyward.

Will the Sun Rise in the Morning or Set in the Evening?

The argument over whether gold will drop to $750 or rise to $5,000 is a pointless one. Any understanding of basic economics assures us that we shall see both sudden deflation and dramatic inflation. It’s as natural and inevitable as sunrise and sunset. (By the way, several of the above individuals have standing bets with each other as to the $750 number. The prize? An ounce of gold.)

But it matters little who will win the bets. What matters is the overview. Rickety economic times are now upon us and they will soon morph into crisis times. In such times, precious metals always return to centre stage, as paper currencies and electronic currencies return to their intrinsic worth of zero. Gold does not so much rise against fiat currencies, as fiat currencies collapse against gold.

Most assuredly, we shall see a dramatic rise in gold, but, just as in the ‘70s, the average person will fail to understand why and will simply chase the upward trend. When gold hits $2,000, but no one is willing to sell for under, say, $2,500, those who are chasing the trend will pay the $2,500 and that will become the new price across the board. Then it will leap higher—again and again, as monetary panic grips the investment world. The inflation-adjusted 1980 price of $8,800 should not be a surprise at all—in fact it would be low, as, in the coming years, conditions will be far more dire than in 1980. Gold may well blow through $10,000. Even the $50,000 figure is not impossible, as we shall be seeing a runaway bull market where those chasing the trend carry gold beyond any rational value.

But gold has an intrinsic value. 2,000 years ago, an ounce of gold could buy you a good suit of clothes. That’s still true today. A gold mania will fuel the gold price beyond anything logical, but a correction will be equally inevitable, dropping it to its intrinsic value. We shall see a gold rise for the record books. The wise investor should already have stocked up his supply of physical gold and gotten rid of gold ETFs. He should already have his seat belt fastened and ready for take off. We’re off to see the wizard.

Editor’s Note: Owning gold is the first step to protecting your wealth from stock market crashes, currency collapses or destructive government policies. But there are many other steps you can take to protect yourself during an economic collapse. We put together a free video to show you exactly how. 

Click here to watch this video now.

The article Follow the Yellow Brick Road was originally published at caseyresearch.com.

Get out latest FREE eBooK "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here

Prove You’re Not a Terrorist

By Jeff Thomas

Recently, France decided to crack down on those people who make cash payments and withdrawals and who hold small bank accounts. The reason given was, not surprisingly, to “fight terrorism,” the handy catchall justification for any new restriction governments wish to impose on their citizens. French Finance Minister Michel Sapin stated at the time, “terrorism feeds on fraud, money laundering, and petty trafficking.”

And so, in future, people in France will not be allowed to make cash payments exceeding €1,000 (down from €3,000). Additionally, cash deposits and withdrawals totaling more than €10,000 per month will be reported to Tracfin—an anti-fraud and money laundering agency. Currency exchange will also be further restricted. Anyone changing over €1,000 to another currency (down from €8,000) will be required to show an identity card.

Do you need to make a deposit on a car? That might be suspect. Did you just deposit a dividend you received? It might be a payment from a terrorist organisation. Planning a holiday and need some cash? You might need to be investigated for terrorism. And France is not alone. In the US, federal law requires banks to file a “suspicious activity report” (SAR) on their customers whenever a customer requests a suspicious transaction. (In 2013, 1.6 million SAR’s were submitted.)

As to what may be deemed “suspicious,” it may be any transaction of $5,000 or more, but it may also mean a series of transactions that, together, exceed $5,000. The reader may be saying to himself, “But that’s just normal, everyday banking business—that means anybody, any time, could be reported.” If so, he would be correct. Essentially, any banking activity the reader conducts could be regarded as suspect.

In Italy, in 2011, Prime Minister Mario Monti began working to end the right of landlords, tradesmen, and small businesses to perform large transactions in cash, which critics say help them evade taxation. In December of that year, his government reduced the maximum allowed cash payment from €2,500 euros to €1,000.

Spain has outlawed cash transactions over €2,500. The justification? “To crack down on the black market and tax evaders.”

In Sweden, the country where the first banknote was created in 1661, the use of cash is being steadily eliminated. Increasingly, expenses are paid and purchases made by cellphone text message, and many banks have stopped handling cash altogether.

Denmark’s central bank, Nationalbanken, has another justification for ending its use of banknotes—producing paper money and coinage is not cost effective.

Israel also seeks to end the use of cash. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s chief of staff has announced a three phase plan to “all but do away with cash transactions in Israel.”

Individuals and businesses would initially continue to be allowed to make small cash transactions, but eventually, all transactions would be converted to electronic forms of payment. The justification being used in Israel is that “cash is bad,” because it encourages an underground economy and enables tax evasion.

Across the Atlantic, banks and governments are on a similar campaign. A 2012 law in Mexico bans large cash transactions, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

In August 2014, Uruguay passed the Financial Inclusion Law, which limits cash transactions to US$5,000. In future, all transactions over that amount will be required to be performed electronically. The crying need for such a law? The stated reason was to improve the country’s credit ratings.

The Elimination of Paper Currency

In recent years, in commenting on the inevitability of currency collapse in those countries that are indebted beyond the possibility of repayment, I’ve made the prediction that governments and banks would jointly resort to the elimination of paper currency and replace it with an electronic one.

Some readers have understandably regarded the prediction as “alarmist.” After all, the idea is so farfetched—paper currency may be conceptually flawed, but it’s been around for a long time. But banks and governments seek total control of money, and this can only be achieved if they possess a monopoly on the flow of money.

If a worldwide system can be implemented in which currency transactions can only take place electronically through banking institutions, the banks will then have total power over the ability of a people to function economically. But why would any government allow the banks such dictatorial monetary control? The answer is that governments would then realise a long held, but heretofore impossible dream: to have access to a record of every monetary transaction that takes place for every single individual.

Governments have been both more proactive and bolder than I had anticipated and are simply imposing the restrictions worldwide under the justifications previously stated. As yet, there hasn’t been any backlash, and it may be that people worldwide may simply swallow the pill, not understanding what it means to their economic liberty.

If the public are not treating the new system as serious business, governments most assuredly are. Bankers on both sides of the Atlantic have forcibly become unpaid government spies. If they don’t comply, they can be fined and/or lose their banking charter. Directors can be imprisoned.

The US Justice Department already wants to take this overreach even further. Banks are now being asked to call the authorities whenever something “suspicious” occurs, presumably so that immediate action may be taken. What we are witnessing is the creation of totalitarian control of your finances. The implication that you may have some sort of terrorist involvement is a smokescreen.

As the above information attests, if for any reason you object to any of these measures, you have already been forewarned—you may be suspected of money laundering, tax evasion, or even terrorism. If you use cash for any reason—to pay your rent, to buy a used car, or (soon) to pay for your lunch—you may trigger an investigation. (The onus of proof that you are not guilty good will be on you.)

The take away from this discussion? Totalitarian control of currency is an inevitability, and it will take place sooner rather than later. The only question is whether the reader can retain some control of his wealth. Fortunately, wealth may still be held in land and precious metals, but these are only safe if they’re held outside a country that seeks totalitarian rule over its people. The ability to retain wealth still exists and, as always, internationalisation remains a key element to its continuation.

Editor’s Note: The ultimate way to diversify your savings internationally is to transfer it out of the immediate reach of your home government. And we've put together an in depth video presentation to help you do just that. It's called, "Internationalizing Your Assets."

Our all star panel of experts, with Doug Casey and Peter Schiff, provide low cost options for international diversification that anyone can implement - including how to safely set up foreign storage for your gold and silver bullion and how to move your savings abroad without triggering invasive reporting requirements. This is a must watch video for any investor and it's completely free.

Click here to watch Internationalizing Your Assets right now.

The article was originally published at internationalman.com

Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

A Glimpse into the Coming Collapse

By Jeff Thomas, International Man

Beginning in 1999, we predicted a systemic economic collapse that would take place in the First World and would impact all other economies. We began to list some of the "dominoes" that would fall as the collapse evolved and described that the "Great Unravelling," as we termed it, would take roughly ten years. At that time, we guesstimated that the first two of the dominoes, a real estate crash and subsequent stock market crash in the US, would begin in about 2005.


We were premature in this prediction, as the first of the crashes did not occur until 2007. And, truth be told, we have frequently been incorrect in the timing of the other dominoes. Whilst the actual events have been predicted correctly, our timing has often been incorrect. In every such case, the prediction has been premature.

Sadly, however, the prediction of the events of the collapse have been almost entirely correct.

We also predicted that, just as a ball of string speeds up its rotation as it rolls along unravelling, so, too, the events of the Great Unravelling would occur more quickly as the situation worsened. Additionally, the severity of the events would increase concurrently with the increase in velocity.

However, none of the above was the result of gypsy fortune telling, nor did it require the brightest of minds to work out. It is mostly based on the simple assumption that history repeats itself—that the world's leaders make the same mistakes in every era, because human nature never changes. Anyone who is willing to expend the effort to study history diligently and to be prepared to think in contrarian terms, may develop a meaningful insight into the events of the future.

Back in 1999, of course, the very idea that the world was headed for serious economic calamity was considered ridiculous by most. The unfortunate fact is, most people do truly deal in the present, rarely questioning the future beyond what they consider to be the very next event. The truth of this statement is borne out by the fact that the great majority of people, who have already seen the first half of the Great Unravelling come to pass, still somehow cannot imagine the second half—the more disastrous half—as being in any way possible. Surely, somehow, the governments of the world will fix things.

However, the number of people whose eyes have been opened seems to be growing, and many of them are asking what the collapse will look like as it unfolds. What will the symptoms be?

Well, the primary events are fairly predictable: they would include major collapses in the bond and stock markets and possible sudden deflation (primarily of assets), followed by dramatic inflation, if not hyperinflation (primarily of commodities), followed by a crash of several major currencies, particularly the euro and the US dollar.

The secondary events will be less certain, but likely: increased unemployment, currency controls, protective tariffs, severe depression, etc.

But, along the way, there will be numerous surprises—actions taken by governments that may be as unprecedented as they would be unlawful. Why? Because, again, such actions are the norm when a government finds itself losing its grip over the people it perceives as its minions. Here are a few:

• Travel Restrictions. This will begin with restrictions on foreign travel, including suspension/removal of passports. (This has begun in a small way in both the EU and US.) Later, travel restrictions will be extended within the boundaries of countries (highway checkpoints, etc.)

• Confiscation of wealth. The EU has instituted the confiscation of bank accounts, which can be expected to become an international form of governmental theft. This does not automatically mean that other assets, such as precious metals and real estate will also be confiscated, but it does mean that the barrier for confiscation has been eliminated. There is therefore no reason to assume that any asset is safe from any government that approves theft through bail-ins.

• Food Shortages. The food industry operates on very small profit margins and survives only as a result of quick payment of invoices. With dramatic inflation, marginal businesses (suppliers, wholesalers, and retailers) will fall by the wayside. The percentage of failing businesses will be dependent upon the duration and severity of the inflationary trend.

• Squatters Rebellions. A dramatic increase in the number of home and business foreclosures will result in homelessness for anyone whose debt exceeds his ability to pay—even those who presently appear to be well-off. As numbers rise significantly, a new homeless class will be created amongst the former middle class. As they become more numerous, large scale ownership of property may give way to large scale "possession" of property.

• Riots. These will likely happen spontaneously due to the above conditions, but if not, governments will create them to justify their desire for greater control of the masses.

• Martial Law. The US has already prepared for this, with the passing of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which many interpret as declaring the US to be a "battlefield." The NDAA allows the suspension of habeas corpus, indefinite detention, and the assumption that any resident may be considered an enemy combatant. Similar legislation may be expected in other countries that perceive martial law as a solution to civil unrest.

The above list is purposely brief—a sampling of eventualities that, should they occur, will almost definitely come unannounced. As the decline unfolds, they will surely happen with greater frequency.

But the value in projecting what the collapsing governments may do to their citizens is not merely an exercise in speculation. By anticipating the likelihood of any of the above, the individual may find that it would be prudent to turn off the game on television tonight and spend his time musing on the possibility of what he would do if any of the above events were to take place. (And, again, these projections are not mere fancy; they are actions typically taken by governments as their declines play out.)

Most importantly, if the reader concludes that there is a significant percentage of likelihood that any of the above are coming his way, he would be well-advised to assess whether they are developments that he feels he could live with. If not, he might wish to assess how much time he has before these events become a reality and what he may do to sidestep their impact on him.

Whilst, throughout the First World, the comment, "The whole world is going to Hell," is becoming common, in fact, this is not the case. Although some countries are in decline, others are on the rise. It is left to the reader to decide whether he will fall victim to coming events, or will use them as an opportunity to internationalise himself.

Editor’s Note: You can find Casey Research’s A-Z guide on internationalization here.


Still a few seats left for next weeks Free Trading webinar. Sign up here and now!