Adapt or Perish


“Do not overbid for assets – especially at the top of a real estate cycle.” You can’t really argue with that, can you? The big question is, where are we in the cycle?

The opening line above came from our friend Phillip J. Anderson. Phil was speaking to a packed room in a building on Flinders Lane Tuesday night. He first came to our attention a few years ago when one of his readers hand-delivered us a copy of his book, “The Secret Life of Real Estate: How it Moves and Why.”

His talk Tuesday night was fascinating. It was good to get out of our lair on Fitzroy Street and hear a different perspective on the market and the world. We won’t give away all of Phil’s observations since the event was for paid up readers. But if you’re interested in his book or his study of historical cycles, you can check out his website.

Unlike your editor, Phil’s research tells him the U.S. and U.K. property markets have already made a low. If you use the past as a guide, he says, “When bad real estate news is coupled with higher stock market lows, it’s generally a bullish sign. As the stock market goes up, the productive capacity of the economy is increasing.”

Phil reckons that if the Aussie stock market doesn’t take out the July lows by the end of the first week of September, “it’s an exceedingly bullish sign.” That kind of price action in the midst of an increasingly bearish turn in sentiment would be remarkable. Phil says it would also tell you that the Global Financial Crisis is effectively over.

These are certainly not the sort of arguments were used to hearing (or making) at the DR Australia headquarters. But Phil doesn’t make them lightly. And he makes a good point – students of the market’s price action don’t rely on opinions. The price action, he says, is “unambiguous” and the weight of money argument dictates the direction of markets.

We were impressed and even a bit sympathetic with the contrarian nature of the call. Phil even picked a day – September 7th. If new lows aren’t in by then, he reckons, look out above! And though we can’t go into a lot of detail here, there is an enormous amount of study of previous economic and real estate cycles that goes into Phil’s forecasts.

We even detected a bit of Dawes in the way Phil applies the “big picture” understanding of asset markets to trading. His trading philosophy is to buy stocks when they “break out” of a trading range. This is somewhat counterintuitive. It requires you to buy stocks making new highs. How can something be cheap or good value if it’s making new highs?

Well, the price action is what it is. And Phil is right that understanding where you are in a cycle is crucial to figuring out whether you should be a buyer or a seller of a particular asset. What made his talk so interesting is that the 18.6 year cycle that figures so much in his work derives, ultimately, from the value of land – the ultimate tangible asset the basis of much bank collateral.

If you’re into cycles, you won’t be surprised to learn that Kondratieff cycles figure in Phil’s work. A Kondratieff cycle is a 50-60 year cycle (or about three 18.6 year cycles) of expansion, stagnation, and recession in an economy. The theory was based on a study done by the Russian Nickolai Kondratieff. Kondratieff was asked by the communist Russian dictator Josef Stalin to study the economy and figure out when the internal contradictions of the capitalist system would cause its destruction and pave the way for the linear march of the Marxist system to worker’s world paradise.

When Kondratieff’s work didn’t show any kind of inevitable decline and fall of the West – but instead showed a cyclical process of growth and contraction – Stalin had him banished to the Gulag where he died. So much for science and dissent.

This, by the way, shows you the insidious nature of outcome-based policy making. Policy can’t guarantee outcomes, which are usually driven by idealistic or naive political goals. Good policy can only guarantee that the conditions in which everyone operates are fair and equal, leaving the outcome up to your own effort, or luck, or fate, or God’s will, if you prefer.

Many people study Kondratieff. Fewer still understand him. And using his work as a forecasting tool is pretty tough. After all, Kondratieff’s study of commodity prices was based on analysis of 19th and early 20th century commodity prices, and mostly grains at that, from what we understand. A model is only as good as the data that goes into it. So you wonder how good the data was.

Further, it’s one thing for real scientists conducting experiments to use a model. But it’s quite another thing for social scientists to do the same and then claim it predicts what should or must happen. This is probably our main beef with the cyclical view of history or markets. Though it makes sense and conforms to your personal experience of the world – birth, adolescence, adulthood, parenting, old age, death – it may not be true economically. Why?

Every story and every life is a kind of closed system. They each have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Some are long. Some are short. Some are memorable. Most are forgotten. But they all look like a line or a distinctive arc through time that is unique to your life.

But neither the economy nor the natural world itself are closed systems. They are not finite lines. They are infinite. This is important because it means you can never predict how an open system will ultimately behave or evolve. There’s always one variable beyond your control, like the crazy Uncle at the Christmas dinner who is capable of unleashing drunken chaos at any moment or the asteroid that could crash into the Earth tomorrow.

Yet life remains constant, whether it’s a cockroach or a member of the Federal Parliament (with one being a sophisticated and evolved piece of natural engineering and the other managing to be predator, parasite, and scavenger). It’s odd that life endures when even geography does not. In the natural world, mountain ranges come and go.

What’s more, the Earth is not a closed system. For one, energy in form of solar radiation rains down on the Earth every minute of the day, creating opportunities for all kinds of life and work. More importantly, through the genius of its un-designed design, DNA manages to replicate itself time after time and survive in many different forms. Life persists as the physical world changes.

And life doesn’t just persist in the same state. It changes constantly. Nature produces an immense variety of life. The forms best adapted for the conditions which exist survive and reproduce. The rest don’t. Entropy – the tendency of things to fall from order into disorder – is only defeated by life’s relentless effort, through DNA, to replicate itself in as many different survivable forms as possible.

What does any of this have to do with Kondratieff and the share market?

An economy is not a closed system, either. It does not behave in a linear way. That means you can’t really predict how it’s going to turn out. And importing a linear or cyclical theory into a complex adaptive system like the economy means you are going to be confounded in your understanding and your forecast. You will not predict what you can’t know. The unknown unknowns will get you every time.

The key variables that we do know about in any economy – land, labour, energy, and innovation – are always changing and changing the way they interact and producing new possibilities (not always good, of course). For example the role of technology in the Kondratieff cycles is, as far as we know, unexplored. When Kondratieff wrote, the industrial revolution was increasing crop yields. Human population was on the verge on productivity explosion – both physically and economically.

As people moved out of the country and into the city, labour and capital were freed up to harness the power of coal and oil to make entirely new systems of transportation and. It really was a new frontier in terms of productive possibilities. You went from cows and washing boards to refrigerated milk and milkshakes.

By the way, these new frontiers (space, the final) always make some people nervous. These nervous people are the ones who could have the most to lose from a change in the status quo. Or, they could be genuinely and quite negatively affected by the change – the proverbial buggy whip maker watching a Model T roll down the street. Or they could be type of conservative person, psychologically and emotionally speaking, who reacts to a changing world by pining for the “old days” when things were more certain and didn’t change.

This is why far right conservatives and the Greens will find they have more and more in common in coming years – both pine for a world that doesn’t change much. The traditional Right defines that world in moral and religious terms. The new Left defines it in environmental and resource terms. But both are essentially backward looking and want the State to interfere in private life to keep things as they were, or as they should be again.

What the Kondratieff cycle may not accommodate is what you can never predict: the future. But at the risk of making a major ass of ourselves we’ll make a prediction: the current system has been fatally compromised by the world improvers and the backward lookers. Three hundred years of improvement in the general living conditions of man are at risk.

The first major improvement in standards of living came with an increase in calories. When hunter gatherers became settled farmers, excess calories became a kind of credit humanity could spend on other things, like developing technology.

With the development of industrial technology, powered by coal-fired steam engines, the next great leap came in the amount of time people had to spend growing food and the number of people required to grow it. Industrialisation meant fewer people had to be employed growing food. More could be employed making things. The variety of technology and durable and finished goods exploded in the 19th and 20th centuries.

The further concentration of labour in cities made more and subtler variety possible, this time in the form of leisure and entertainment. You got the Jazz Age, Sinclair Lewis, George Bernard Shaw, the Charleston, and the Blitzkrieg.

But then – and we think it started to happen in about 1914 but really picked up pace in the 1970s – we hit the limits of the frontier of this previously stable system. With the advantage of creating money from nothing – fiat money and fractional reserve lending – a huge global credit boom accelerated the use and abuse of scarce real resources (land, labour, and capital). It also accelerated the use of energy.

More importantly, an already-complex system produced by a few simples rules – private property, sound money, low taxes, and free trade, the rule of law – became even more complex and fragile and stagnant as those rules were tinkered with to produce designed outcomes cherished by the political class.

Here we are today. Our prediction is that that great complexity and prosperity produced by the 19th and early 20th century is being destroyed by the tinkering and the tinkerers. They have created something that cannot sustain itself – a model of asset-based private and corporate wealth creation that is not based on sound money or honest work or the rule of law (the corporations and the financiers and the politicians make the law to protect their interests now).

Nature punishes the inefficient and destroys the wasteful. And so do markets, when we let them. We take the amount of surplus in the world – calories, time, leisure – for granted. In fact, we even begin to call it a right.

What we forget is that all those calories and all that time and all that leisure were the by-products of a system based on simple rules. With those rules being broken, twisted, and disfigured to meet other ends, we shouldn’t expect the system to produce the same kind of surplus we are used to. And now we see, it’s not.

Of course without all the theory most people know intuitively that things aren’t working anymore. That’s because most people have already begun to adapt to a world where big institutions have trouble delivering on promises they’ve made and where the rules constantly change. Some people prefer not to think about this and would rather eat Cheesy Puffs instead. Woe unto them!

What we think the Kondratieff cycle doesn’t show is that the history of the natural world is punctuated by extinction events – events which so radically changed the landscape or the habitat that most species didn’t survive. And in the financial world?

We have seen a series of minor extinction events in the finacial world beginning with the Mexican devaluation in 1995. The Asian Tigers, Russia, LTCM, the tech bubble, and then Bear Stearns, Lehman, Greece and beyond. And beyond?

All of these financial events are steadily concentrating risk in a smaller and smaller number of assets into which a greater and greater number of people are congregating: namely bonds and especially U.S. bonds. This concentration is made of refugees from other bubbles that have faith that central bankers can keep a few bubbles going.

But oh ye of little faith, ye reckoners, what do you reckon? Will the counterfeiters running the world’s central banks pull of the greatest confidence trick of all time that you can create wealth by printing money and solve a debt problem with more debt? Or will they fail?

They’ll probably fail. Will it be before September 7th? Will it be in a few years? Stay tuned. And in the meantime, adapt or perish!

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

Dan Denning
Dan Denning examines the geopolitical and economic events that can affect your investments domestically. He raises the questions you need to answer, in order to survive financially in these turbulent times.


  1. The next up cycle will be years away. It won’t start until wages catch up to property prices. It is unrealistic to see house prices at so many multiples of the average salary moving higher until wages are heading north first. Good luck with your prediction but on the 7th of September I believe we will be seeing new lows on the ASX. Cheers, Bruce

    Bruce Brymer
    August 27, 2010
  2. People intrinsically know the old system is and is being broken apart, but few see the link with that system and the wealth they have right now, as most our measuring their wealth in terms of money, rather than the assets, goods, and services that that same money can purchase, or the civic structures, level of service, or risk of crime.

    Probably the biggest factor to the distortion of the truth lies with the monopoly manipulative media. Most people are making there decisions based upon distorted facts, spun, and illogically correct facts that are at variance to the real world, real life experience, and empirical data.

    On a summers day it hard to stir from a comfy seat to chop and stack wood for winter, but as you know from experience that winter comes around as regally as a turn wheel, and so to most people do take action. However, for the sublime building destroying event of an earth quake, few are agitated or troubled, as it is to the past and to others that hold the memories and experience of hurt and disorder caused.

    So too it is to the past and to others that we rely on to have even the smallest idea, other than our cognitive fear, of what the financial extension event might be like, and the sudden sweeping social and possibly violent changes, erstwhile unimaginable, that might be unleashed along with it. And because we have no living experience of these extreme possibilities few prepare, but those that do will be in an immensely stronger position than those who don’t (assuming that they survive at all).

    Chris Ashley
    August 27, 2010
  3. Interesting to see Bill Bonner’s switch in terms in todays DR (US). Initially Bill talked of a capital D Depression, then switched to Great Correction. Today it’s “depression/Great Recession”.

    Bill claims this state of affairs will be ‘permanent’.

    If Bonner is correct, the US will _never_ emerge from this reduced state (but perhaps the states will not remain ‘united’!)

    Makes our situation look Utopian in comparison, doesn’t it?!~

  4. As for discussion of Krondatrieff cycles, I’ve seen a study (I could never locate it now) which showed that the cycle didn’t work anymore. However, if you took out the effects of currency debasement via inflation, it showed a remarkable return to the original cycle.

    For his part I think there are a lot of natural rhythyms in the economic cycle which are just a macro-view of human learning (and forgetting when it comes to history). There’s also the cycle of trying to do better than one’s parents generation, until the margin utility of improving your generational lot becomes too low, and output starts to fall. You could argue that that’s where the USA and Australia are : after two generations of steadily improving living conditions, it’s hard to improve much more and so less effort is expended by the young. A sort of nationwide 3rd generation blows the inheritance type theory. You could also argue that the young in China and India are on the upswing.

    I’ve read a lot of Krondatrieff explanations (and, as you say, might almost have understood it) – it’s all a bit too neat for the real world, yet seems to have some relative use as a forecasting tool.

    It’s poor cousin is the ‘economic clock’ – I know that one is rubbish because Real Estate agents have shown it to me in an attempt to twist my arm about a property sale. If a Real Estate agent ever shows me a Krondatrieff cycle then I’ll know the theory is well and truly discredited.

  5. “…after two generations of steadily improving living conditions, it’s hard to improve much more and so less effort is expended by the young.”

    That could explain what we’re seeing now, although we were surprised to see our kids’ assets eclipse ours at the same age/stage we were at over thirty years ago.

    “A sort of nationwide 3rd generation blows the inheritance type theory.”

    Not sure about that. Or perhaps I don’t understand the point you’re making here. I suspect inheritances may fuel the next quantum leap in asset wealth for at least a quarter of Australians.

  6. too much easy money for too many, too many excess calories, that have to be invested somewhere. if the excess was shared out more this would not be so much of an issue as they would be spent on basics. but after the third holiday property, second yacht, and endless parties, what would a capitalist miser do with it but buy excessively valued productive assets and squeeze out the real investors? just a subversive thought. it could be the plenty that creates an impression of scarcity.
    I loved one comment I saw when the US system was apparently crashing down…
    “I’ll know it’s a great depression when I see skinny homeless men begging on the streets”. then again, stay tuned.

  7. “I’ll know it’s a great depression when I see skinny homeless men begging on the streets”

    We’ve seen this in the US… in the mid-eighties. Contrasted with S E Asia, where we saw far fewer.

  8. “I suspect inheritances may fuel the next quantum leap in asset wealth for at least a quarter of Australians.
    Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)”

    Too long to wait, eh Steve?!~ ;)

  9. “after the third holiday property, second yacht, and endless parties, what would a capitalist miser do with it” – BB’s reckoned gold’s had a bit going for it for a while now. And Yes, I don’t get the feeling he’d see paying higher taxes so “the excess was shared out more” as his preferred solution Peter? ;)

    “Contrasted with S E Asia, where we saw far fewer” – Strongly family structures perhaps … BB seems to have done a half reasonable job on that one. Better than lots anyway.

    “Too long to wait” – May have heard the saying ‘Only the good die young’? And we seem to be expressing some doubts about bringing in lots more migrants to help carry the load too I see. At least partly because they do have strong family structures perhaps. Are we between a rock and a hard place? :)

  10. Y’know, Ned, I think the point of all this is sometimes missed.

    We set out to be:

    * Independent in retirement;

    * Insulated from the highs-and-lows of the stockmarket and interest rates;

    * Comfortable for the rest of our lives. Not rich. One boat. Good friends.
    One holiday property. No pensions (Worth stuff-all, anyway!)

    * Travellers: An asset base which allows us to drop everything…
    and travel a third-to-half a year abroad, every year… .

    I’m sure there are folk out there who have twenty times our assets…
    but who really gives a RA? If you saw our cars at a stoplight, you’d laugh. Same with our bikes, all of which are vintage, or near-vintage.

    And as far as empire-building, our kids just don’t need it.
    They did it on their own. (Thanks, guys!~)

    The objective was never about riches… it’s always been about independence, comfort, freedom, chilling-out, music and laughter.

    If your asset class can bring you all that, whatever it is, go for it.
    For us, it _remains_ property. :D

  11. “skinny homeless men begging on the streets” – I impressed a local once with my generosity by pressing loot into the palm of an obviously destitute old lady when OS. Thought about the skinny bloke who had only one leg – Nah, can’t get too soft – He still had the other leg. Get a job ya bum! Haven’t ya ever heard of one legged arse kicking competitions? ;) Yep, some of it is a bit sad alright …

  12. “BB seems to have done a half reasonable job on that one. Better than lots anyway.”

    Yes, the family discussions always strike a chord, Ned.

    I guess the difference may be that Bill’s kids are finding their feet.
    That’s the normal pattern. Fortunately we never had a daughter who wanted to be in movies!~ (Although one kid found himself on reality TV by default!) Maybe Bill has been _too_ successful: the hard-act-to-follow… .

    But I suspect that Bill himself ‘found’ his way into his current situation, as most of us have. That’s one of the real strengths of the American system; that it _still_ remains the bastion of ‘pick-yourself-up/

    We incessantly knock the US for its (many) perceived failings, yet its potential to encourage individual achievement is quite admirable… . ;)

  13. “Independent in retirement” – That’s what it’s all about Biker. Either you fall over that line or you don’t. If a bloke bolts over the line and can afford to buy every new girlfriend he gets a great big diamond engagement ring then why would it worry me what he does with his dough?

    Heck, I’ll even settle for being ‘poor’ in retirement IF I’m independantly poor and the guv can see its way clear to leave me like that.

    I’d really rather just have as little to do with them as possible. Only really good thing they ever did in my lifetime was bring the boys home from ‘Nam. And that was just reversing an earlier government stuffup.

  14. “its potential to encourage individual achievement is quite admirable” – I get the suspicion they are losing that though Biker. And worry that we might have already lost it? The parallel just could be that they’ve had the USD as the global currency to bludge off. While we’ve had our minerals. Damned interesting to see how it all works out though hey? :)

  15. “never had a daughter who wanted to be in movies” – Part of the Western thing Biker – For any girls who reckon they look more like Fay Wray than King Kong perhaps? While all the smart young bloke were fantasizing about becoming Financial Engineers. Some things never change – And that’s just been a recent Western expression of it … :)

    I’m not at all PC I’m afraid Bear? While being PC might have a bit to recommend it to politicians, I still think honesty could potentially add some value to some discussions at some times? ;)

  16. Ned, that’s why I’ve found you so likeable. But it is an uncommon trait in my experience.
    Also, I think there is a dis-connect in awareness at times in the aussie ‘good-life’. People can say what they want, but if they look like sh*t then that speaks louder to me. e.g having a peak at your average pensioner in the supermarket can be sobering. You wonder what has life really given most of them, not much at all I’m sometimes afraid. Their faces can’t hide the truth anymore.

    August 29, 2010
  17. “People can say what they want, but if they look like sh*t then that speaks louder to me.”

    You’ll get over that, Bear. Around three decades from now, some young bloke will quickly sum you up as resembling excreta… and you’ll be perceptive enough to know _exactly_ what he’s thinking. :D

    And that’s what I like about you, son. ;)

    * Beauty is skin-deep, mate. Ugly is bad-to-the-bone. Speaks volumes… .

    Biker Pete
    August 29, 2010
  18. I must admit that when I see photos of Hugh Hefner with 20 yo twin nut-cases on each arm and say I wouldn’t want it, it could still actually be nice to have the option Bear? ;)

    PC – As they say, “I will be true to myself at all times unless I want to remain employable!” Yep, PC could be getting a bit overstated in this country.

    Cheers eh! :)

  19. Sort of emotional expression I mean. The face doesn’t lie at that age. It is rare don’t you think to see a genuinely peaceful older person, or joyous one (and I’m not talking about the thrill of seeing a Lamington)? I hope that’ll be me, but it sure won’t be if I keep going at this rate!! It’s just an observation on a way of life that doesn’t necessarily deliver.
    I’ve spent some time on Chinese Islands off coast of Shanghei and they can look remarkable to me. Yet they don’t have a lot of material wealth. They always seem to be sharing a simple meal and smiling frequently.
    One possession that seems to be on track (in our culture) is a boat. How many times have I seen that word on DR? I have a 4m cataraman by the way and share your enjoyment of boating. Stressed out as you know I get I try to find time to get out once or twice a fortnight. Get her up on one keel, lay out on the trapese and let her rip. Bloody great workout and you’re not worrying too much about anything. Oh, and a wee nip or two of JD in the small hold helps as well ;)

    August 29, 2010
  20. “I will be true to myself at all times unless I want to remain employable!”

    In a nutshell Ned!! My Dad is very outspoken and I’m a chip of the old block, trying not to be because I can see the efficiency in just playing the game. I remember he got a job at the local hospital and they handed him a name-tag. Without batting an eye he said:”Fu*k your name-tag, no-one calls me by my first name unless I say so”. Making an obvious point about the invasion of privacy, a prelude to reality shows. They didn’t sack him but that was a few years ago now.

    August 29, 2010
  21. on the chance of living independently in future (the last punch line in this video), heres a favorite of mine. Im sure DRA enthusiats will like it, except for the black arm band (anti elite, them and us) point of view perhaps.
    warning, course langage and bare naked truth.
    skip through to 1M40s for the relevant line.

    and that’s where I agree with the small government sects (including DRA).
    but then again, I also believe in imperfect but necessary governance and sharing the wealth to some degree (and the negatives of dog eat dog and no time for games and learning and consolidation and mental health and families and participative democracy and ….)

  22. Where Carlin makes his best point is in regard to powerful lobby groups calling the political shots for business in the US.

    Simplifying the message, we know that:

    * No-one cares as more about your future than you do;

    * Living independently in the future has little to do with
    government pensions, whether they exist or not;

    * Information used wisely _now_ may mean future independence;

    * We _tend_ to play a more defensive game as we age.
    Makes sense when you consider that there’s less time/capital
    to recover from mi$take$.

    You know, peterg, misguided politicians and economists might argue that no-doc, lo-doc and NINJA loans _were_ attempts to ‘share the wealth’.
    Giving people re$ponsibilitie$ they could never fulfill gave them nothing;
    and because non-recourse loans mean that the keys could just be mailed back to the banks, this ‘sharing’ was _never_ going to work.

    I’m not sure that ‘sharing the wealth’ really is the answer. Far more powerful may be the principle of sharing the information. It’s extremely difficult to get good answers. The really good information is not readily available, it’s often costly to obtain… and, even then, it may be bia$ed towards the needs of the advisor. (That’s our most common experience… .)

    Sharing the information, the ‘good stuff’, may be the real value of the internet in future, providing we’ve got the skill to separate the wheat from the chaff… .

    Biker Pete
    August 30, 2010
  23. BP, thanks for sharing the information, but I cannot if I am starvin Marvin (South Park) eat information or for that matter gold. my main harp is the bottom line, coincidentally around the $230 a week that I live on. and we know countries are invaded to free them (destroy the village), but I can still filter out to a “fair and reasonable” and relative view. of course if I were a WA miner and I couldnt find a chimney sweep on east coast or west, then I might complain, but I also know that they aint taking on apprentices like they used to and they demand the easy pre-fab skilled worker. a lot of BS in that too I suspect as who couldnt be trained quickly to operate some machinery.

    as for your travels and my other harp, greenhouse gases, I would excuse you for not having the information at the time (no excuses now unless youre an unbeliever), but catch the ABC sciene show this week , 35 years ago, the first episode, and talking aboout pollution and how to change the weather. “is this trip really necessary” should be the chant. I hope its all BS, but doubt that it is. I wonder if Dick Smith was listening to it at the time when he was starting up his new store in York St Sydney.

  24. Thanks for that, Pete.

    No question that air travel is the largest toe of my (our) carbon footprint. It’s probably one of two areas in which our household errs, in a family of four. One or more of us is nearly always in the air.
    The other is the four fireplaces we operate in winter. That’s probably it.

    If you’re living on $230 per week and you’re stuck in that situation, you may need to take inventory. It’s not a lot to survive on, but I don’t need to tell you that. In your situation, I’d be growing fruit, veges and chooks. I’d be fishing and hunting. (We do ALL those things, BTW.)
    You have some land, so in that respect, you’re better off than most.
    Make it more productive… .

    This is primarily an investment site. I probably forget that more often than most here. I can’t help you with a revolution (as John said); because I’m busy trying to influence those things I can, within my own reach here.

    As you say, you can’t eat information, or gold. You either need to move, or develop what you can change, where you can change it. Hoping for a world-changing event just ain’t-gonna-cut-it, mate.

    Biker Pete
    August 30, 2010
  25. BP, Im fine, and was doing all that. 75 year old knees and a good sense prevent me at present. I can retire legitimately in the manner I am accustomed right now, if there were some place to keep money safe as land. I think this place will go up in value over the next 10 years, relative to urban bungalows, and it sucks but thats capitalism for you, money for nothing.

    anway, dont worry about the fire, trees absorb CO2 and fires give it back, its a cycle I am comfortable about, Asthma sufferers in cities notwithstanding.

    and yes, this is an investment site, and if 60,000 are reading it daily, maybe I shouldnt be so off topic. but if the climate goes to crap, what of it? space ships to invest in?

    see you on the next round.

  26. Jeez, pete, you don’t _look_ a day over fifty!~

  27. One item I read in June concerning Geopolitics was that Afghani insurgents were accessing the latest high powered Russian sniper rifles. Might be some truth here considering record casualties in July.

    August 30, 2010
  28. Fully suspect they have hold of the latest in Russian knives and forks and spoons plus the latest in British, German, French, Czech and Swiss sniper rifles as well Bear? That’s life in a globalized world maybe? :)


Leave a Reply

Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to