Russian Predicts Collapse of USA

Well! I did not know that. I guess that the the Chinese WILL be the cockroaches that survive this nuclear holocost.

 

Er...Sniper-66?

 

There is a simple solution. The x-box generation must be sacrificed at the alter. We have witnessed the death of consumerism and now the answer is in becoming the provider once more. If we return to making instead of taking, most of the problems will solve themselves. Millions of us are making our own ammunition; do you think we'll keep it all or trade some of it to the plumber to come fix the sink? We look around like a deer in the head-lights when someone or something threatens Walmart suppliers but do we really need Walmart? I will trade cast bullets for some masonary work or carpentry. I will reload my neighbors brass for brass or lead or powder or soap. I will cut your grass if you will fix my fence. Need help butchering that beef? We can redefine third world here; Number one in a third-world economy is still number one. Trailers do not need satellite dishes or SUVs parked out front. WIves do not need diamond rings. Children do not need X-box. How much of the "Stuff" that you have worked for so hard actually is needed or improved your life? Come over and fix my broke window and I'll give you lots of "Stuff".

 

That's not TFH, TFH would be me saying that the Dems are doing this so that we can have the Chinese as our masters.

 

Oh! Well! finally there's something I can take to the bank!...

 

Apparently, it's something of an urban legend in Russia that Alaska was just "leased" to the US. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/571936.html Apart from that, this Russia economist is saying what a lot of Western economists (and also ordinary folks) are saying.

 

I guess I'm a little sceptical on the source. While I'm not delusional that the country is in trouble, the author has some pretty easily researched facts wrong. The national debt in 1980 was $994 billion, not the zero debt cited. Furthermore, the debt in 1998 was $5.4 trillion, not the $2 trillion cited. If the article is that wrong on easily checked facts like that, is he really an expert?

 

What difference does that make? He makes a prediction and we'll see if he's right or wrong.