(02-11-2017, 05:28 PM)Mikebert Wrote:Quote:We could end up with a situation like the Gilded Age in the next 1T as well.
Sure.
Quote:Or high tax rates could be applied in wartime as a "special" measure.
WW I did have high taxes (73%) as a special measure.
Quote:Or not, and you could have a depression in the late Pence administration that brings in a Gabbard or someone else who builds off the policies pursued previously (massive investment in [military] industry and infrastructure) by adding in the policies you propose.
Yes, and that depression would itself be an important crisis event, and dealing with it would be part of the 4T. And if Trump (who apparently didn't solve the problem is we have a depression) can start three a 12 year Republican era, then so can Gabbard. So we would have 2028-2040 included in the 4T. I see no reason to start a 4T in 2008. Better might be 2024, when the ill-fated Pence (Hoover) comes in. I cannot see any scenario in which Trump is successful and 2008 is the 4T start. I don't think it will ever make sense to add Obama era as an organic addition to a later Trump-Pence era in which all the 4T stuff happens. Obama and Trump are like oil and water, they don't mix.
Quote:It would also be worthwhile to look at what a conflict with East Asia, with mass nationalization of Western investments there, an interruption of the flow of goods from the region, and cyberattacks would do to asset values here, particularly if coupled with massive domestic investment and high inflation.
Don’t the Chinese have more US investments than the US has Chinese investments? Hasn’t the US run trade deficits with China for a long time? Trade imbalances in one direction have to be offset by investment imbalances in the other, otherwise the yuan would soar in value, making Chinese imports uncompetitive. Surely China must have more investments here than we there.
With the 4T don´t starting before 2024, we would have a 40 years 3T. Basicly it would mean the theory is obsolet.
Trump is no Harding/Coolidge "back to normality"-president. If his kind of right wing populism stays in power for 12 years or more, it would definitly shift the whole pardigmen of american. The next democratic president would just be an Eisenhower.
If Bannon really wants to radical destroy Globalisation , a nice little naval war in the Westpac would be a good way for it. Then it would allow to blocade China and cut it of from world trade