Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Submit Your Q&A For Chris & Adam

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   25 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 25 total)
  • Mon, Feb 18, 2019 - 07:07pm

    #1

    Adam Taggart

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 25 2009

    Posts: 2580

    count placeholder

    Submit Your Q&A For Chris & Adam

Every so often, we’ll use our podcast as an open Q&A platform, where Chris and I address questions submitted by Peak Properity readers.

It’s been a while since the last one and a few requests have come in recently for us to record a session like this — so let’s do this!

Ask your question in the Comments section below. 

Chris and I will sit down in a few days and do our best to go through as many of these as we can.

Ask away!

cheers,

A

  • Mon, Feb 18, 2019 - 09:00pm

    #2
    Belmontl

    Belmontl

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 23 2009

    Posts: 19

    count placeholder

    Dry powder ready

Greetings

   There is always talk about having one’s Wish list/buy list ready …

I’m already fairly diversified….no debt, resiliency, gold, silver, crypto, treasuries,  New Harbor financial, commercial real estate…and cash

 

But what sectors (durables?) And other investment sectors?, local community ? 10 forms capital working on

https://www.metaintegral.com

Thanks 

  • Mon, Feb 18, 2019 - 09:40pm

    #3
    Geedard

    Geedard

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 13 2014

    Posts: 59

    count placeholder

    Disconnect of paper metals v real metal

If manipulated price of paper silver and gold will one day disconnect from price of physical silver and gold (fear driven by financial crisis or whatever)…how would we know it‘s disconnecting and by how much?

Who or what would report that?

Thanks in advance for the answer or a speculation.

  • Mon, Feb 18, 2019 - 10:21pm

    #4

    sebastian

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 08 2010

    Posts: 3

    count placeholder

    Morality vs pragmatism

Hi Adam & Chris. 

I’ve been struggling to answer this for myself for quite a while so I’m very glad you guys may take a swing at it.

So here it goes:

How do we move forward into a sustainably resilient life without harming the biosphere or causing harm to other fellow beings in the process? 

Seems a tall order no? 180 degrees from what humanity has  to varying amounts been doing for millennia. I can’t imagine that it looks at all like anything we are doing now? 

Some combination of simple tech, permaculture and living like folks did 200 years ago… that is a tough sell to just about everyone. I’m currently working on all the different forms of capital but it seems like I’m trying to extend the comfort of this unsustainable paradigm.  I guess it will answer itself over mine and my children’s lifetimes as we revert to the mean, but it would be nice to have a rough framework. 

 

Seb. 

 

 

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 02:56am

    #5

    Brunel

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2015

    Posts: 32

    count placeholder

    Peak expansion :)

How much further can Central Banks blow the credit bubble?

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 04:31am

    #6

    nickbert

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2009

    Posts: 260

    count placeholder

    Blockchain

My question:

Do you see the emergence of blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies significantly changing the way governments and central banks will respond to the next major financial crisis?

Is it likely they attempt to ban independent cryptocurrencies? Introduce an international central-bank-implemented blockchain currency to take over the role of world reserve currency? Or something different altogether?

Thanks!

– Nick

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 08:02am

    #7

    travissidelinger

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 17 2010

    Posts: 45

    count placeholder

    What Is A Sustainable Population

So here is the ultimate question, what would a sustainable human population look like?  Is it even possible?

First we probably need to define “sustainable”.  There is the Webster definition.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sustainable

Specifically here I might suggest we mean “sustainable to 10,000 years”.  Of course predicting things out that far can be problematic.  But if we think a process has a good chance of sustaining for 10,000 years, then it’s probably splitting hairs whether it is actually plus or minus a few thousand years.

Here are some basic properties I would recommend:

* Sustainability must be a basic human right enforceable by counts that supersedes individual freedoms.

* Scientific consensus much be able legally trump non scientific consensus’, or at least require that a practise is halted until more research is completed.

* The money system used should be based on a fixed resource, (such as gold), and fully transparent.

* All voting citizens must meet minimum education level standards.

* Successful members of the population must have a birth to death ratio greater then 1

* Unsuccessful members of the population must have a birth to death ratio less then 1

* All other human populations must maintain contained population levels, else their population must undergo forced population controls. (I don’t think there is any way around this.  If another population grows larger and/or builds a military large enough to protect their non sustainable interests, then the sustainable system fails.)

 

So these are just some ideas.  What other ideas could I be missing?  I would love to see this topic debatted.  Is a sustainable human population even possible?   Or are we doomed to repeat growth and collapse cycles until the end of time.

-Travis

 

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 09:30am   (Reply to #7)

    #8
    Yoxa

    Yoxa

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 20 2011

    Posts: 286

    count placeholder

    Definition, please

Quote:

 Successful members of the population must have a birth to death ratio greater then 1 … Unsuccessful members of the population must have a birth to death ratio less then 1

The way many people would define “successful” these days is anything but sustainable so I assume that you’d have something different in mind. Please clarify what you’d mean by “successful”.

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 10:06am

    #9
    brushhog

    brushhog

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 06 2015

    Posts: 53

    count placeholder

    How about…

Best spots in the US to practice sustainble/self reliant lifestyle, and WHY?? Also WORST spots, and why?

  • Tue, Feb 19, 2019 - 10:18am   (Reply to #7)

    #10

    travissidelinger

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 17 2010

    Posts: 45

    count placeholder

    I would steer clear of any

I would steer clear of any hard definitions for successful an unsuccessful.  Those should only be guiding principles.  Examples where they would come into practise might be, say our taxation system.  Currently our taxation rules tax you less with the more children you have.  The inverse, for example, would require you pay more taxes for having more children, which would also infer that you are one of the more successful members of the population.  What if instead you get a tax break on the first child only, would that be a fair compromise?

As for the unsuccessful, I’m in favor of welfare, up to a point.  But, if 9 out of 10 heads in a room would say there is little to no possible positive future outcome for a giving situation, then why not let nature take it’s course.  Why does our current culture find it so difficult to simply “let nature take its course”  It’s not a bad thing.

Do we need to go as far as preventing the mentally ill or convicted felons from having children, and maybe even require that Nobel prise winters to have more children?  Nature and nurture are both important.  Maybe that convicted felon is now one wise cookie full of life sessions to share, and maybe that Nobel prise winner would be a crappy parent.  But on average, the input does have a significant effect on the output.  It use to be the norm that your parents had to okay the relationship before you were “married”.  Maybe that idea was simply born out of practicality of the times.

Sorta related, but this week’s This American LIfe has a story about mothers competing to have the most babies.  That story is a great example of how much this is a hot button topic.    https://www.thisamericanlife.org/668/the-long-fuse

Maybe all of this is just an artefact of pre-peak-oil and high surplus energy.  Once we return to living within our means, people simply won’t have the resources to deal with this nonsense, and the simpler solutions will prevail.

 

-Travis

 

 

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 25 total)

Login or Register to post comments