Bad news for pessimists – but isn’t everything?
Many years before I stated blogging, I used to write little essays on this and that. I had no reliable venue for distributing them, but I wrote them anyway.
One was based on some article I’d read that reported on a research finding that optimists lived longer and healthier lives than pessimists. Just what a pessimist wants to hear, right? I called my essay on the subject, “Bad News For Pessimists – But Isn’t Everything?”
That title came to me again when I read this article about a week ago:
Got a naturally sunny disposition? It might protect you from dementia as the years advance, new research shows.
A team at Northwestern University in Chicago report that certain personality traits — being conscientious, outgoing and positive — appear to lower a person’s odds for a dementia diagnosis.
On the other hand, being neurotic and more negative in outlook and behavior was tied to a higher risk for mental decline, the same study found.
Great. Hunky-dory. Fabulous.
I’m not totally sure that I’m a pessimist, though. I find that I have somewhat unpredictable pockets of optimism. So I’ll optimistically cling to that idea.
The thing about being a pessimist is that it’s a win-win situation. If you’re right, you have that satisfaction of being right. If you’re wrong, you’re pleasantly surprised.
Hard not to be a Pessimist if you are on the Right.
Of course those on the Left are too, but because they think what they really want will not happen.
I’m definitely a pessimist. As windbag states well, it’s a win-win philosophy. My wife, and her family in general, always think everything will always work out in the end. When it doesn’t, they make a convenient excuse. I tend to annoy them with my outlook so much I’ve been referred to as Eeyore for many decades now.
“Wherefore and hence, therefore and ergo . . .”: https://youtu.be/5DTl7x-uHZw?si=PGryq4dg1bcSw7pQ
it wasn’t till I read it some years later, that I realized what a dark satire it is, about Liebnitz philosophy
I try to be neither pessimist nor optimist.
I aim to walk on the hope side of being realistic about life.
I take seriously “No one is righteous — not even one.” while looking forward to “Then He who sat on the throne said, ‘Behold, I make all things new.'”
We’re a colossal mess…but He who is Sovereign has our mess in hand, and gives us a role to carry out in the meantime.
I do volunteer work with the elderly. There are two things I’ve noticed in people that live into their 90s. One is they aren’t over weight. The other is they have a naturally sunny disposition. I can think of just 2 people that were exceptions to this.
Windbag said:
The thing about being a pessimist is that it’s a win-win situation. If you’re right, you have that satisfaction of being right. If you’re wrong, you’re pleasantly surprised.
A corollary to that is that the advantage of being a doomsday profit is that, if you’re wrong, it’s not the end of the world.
On the other hand, not all the recent news about optimists is positive. Check out the findings of this recent study from the University of Bath:
“While optimism is often celebrated, a new study reveals that excessive optimism can lead to poor decision-making, particularly in financial matters. The research shows that individuals with high cognitive ability tend to be more realistic and pessimistic in their future expectations, while those with lower cognitive ability lean towards excessive optimism.
This optimistic bias can result in risky financial behaviors, inadequate savings, and poor choices, especially in situations involving uncertainty.”
https://neurosciencenews.com/optimism-cognition-decision-making-25307/
Tony Robbins gives participants a simple exercise. He asks everyone to look around the room for a minute and notice everything that is brown.
Then he asks people to list everything that is green. The moral is that if one is always looking for the brown, one won’t notice the green.
Obviously, one must pay attention to those things not working. Tony is not saying otherwise. However, there are so many things happening in the world and not all of them bad.
What one focuses of has an impact on one’s psychological state and ultimately one’s health. When I was depressed, I was mostly focusing on the bad things in my life and in the world.
Now I notice the brown bad stuff, but I’m also looking for the green, growing part of life. I’m a saner, happier person for it.
Nonetheless, I wouldn’t say I’m an optimist. I sure don’t expect things will always work out. I do see frightening things in today’s world that give me serious pause. I don’t know how we find our way out. I have faith that I can meet whatever comes as best I can.
‘Twas ever thus.
Heavy recently survived (barely) three simultaneously occurring catastrophic health events, I guess I’m obliged to be an optimist.
So, okay, I’ll take the win.
You all seem to have bought a pile of psychologic nonsense. Personality types defined by psychologists, a profession peopled by fakes and doo-doos who lace their titles as “Doctors”?? Optimists vs pessimists ? Who gets the higher batting average? How is that borne out over time?
Psychologists are wonderful at generating phony nonsense like pretending they can read brain MRIs, but radiologists take much more time in MRI training than these bozos. Code word on title of an MRI paper that includes”Functional MRI”is the authors are always exclusively psychologists and these papers never appear in radiologic or MRI journals.
Sorry if I offend anyone.
Cicero:
This post is meant to be rather tongue-in-cheek, mostly a springboard for discussing optimism and pessimism.
I like the articles for insomniacs warning about the dire consequences of not getting enough sleep.
I planned to be an optimist once, but I knew it would be a disaster.
You all seem to have bought a pile of psychologic nonsense.
Cicero:
Psychology has more than its share of fools and charlatans, granted, but that doesn’t mean it’s entirely unreliable. There is been good work, or so it seems to me, involving optimism, pessimism, MRI scans, right vs. left brain hemispheres.
Here’s an article going into such details. Below is its Summary:
_______________________________
Optimism and pessimism are both necessary for our survival and wellness. As in many areas of life, the ‘golden mean’ – the middle between the two extremes of excess and deficiency – is the desirable optimum. This classic notion is widely accepted in both Western and Eastern cultures which were traditionally influenced by the ideas of Aristotle and Confucius. These philosophers discussed the concepts of symmetry, proportion, harmony, balance and stability, and emphasized the benefits of applying these principles in personal life and social relationships. Nonetheless, the empirical literature suggests that, in regard to one’s general attitude, being in the middle of the optimism-pessimism continuum (i.e. practicing ‘realism’) is not necessarily the best. A moderate dose of optimism, although it distorts one’s perception of reality to some extent, can be advantageous. Studies that investigated the correlation between optimism and health suggest that optimists generally have better physical health [317], less cardiovascular diseases [318] and improved immunological functioning [319]. Furthermore, optimists and their romantic partners indicated greater satisfaction in their relationship.
–“The Neural Basis of Optimism and Pessimism”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807005/
A moderate dose of optimism, although it distorts one’s perception of reality to some extent, can be advantageous.
That sentence jumped out at me. As a committed self-learner, French being the latest, I’ve noticed I always exaggerate my progress to myself.
Yes, I had distorted the reality of my progress. But it kept me motivated to push on.
And that optimism was advantageous, because had I realized how much further I had to go, I might have become discouraged and given up.
I learned early on to plan for the worst but hope my planning and preparation would allow for the best.
To climb a mountain, you have to plan the route, take proper equipment, take heed of the weather forecast, be physically fit, and hope that rockfalls, avalanches, icy holds, and more don’t come your way. To prepare for the worst is wisdom, to expect to succeed is optimism that your preparations and efforts will see you through.
When I was in Navy training, I learned they had a word for this. It’s “forehanded.” Be prepared for the worst and then execute in spite of the difficulties.
This has been more or less the theme of my life – a pessimistic optimist.
The Otter is gonna be OK?
HUZZAH!
HUZZAH!
HUZZAH!
Optomist, pessimist… I wonder how the “don’t give a shitists” did? Or maybe, it’s pragmatists w/o a plan.
Recall, as I posted here I almost croaked in June. If you reread my post, you’ll see I wasn’t all that concerned about it, during or after.
That wasn’t the first time I’d come close, but the fourth. I’ve always been a danger junkie and part and parcel of that is knowing not just that I’m mortal but that I will without doubt visit Chippek’s dinner table, as will we all. Don’t conflate that with seeking death, it’s just not being afraid of it.
I’ve been dirt-ass poor and fairly wealthy and I don’t recall either one being better than the other overall so I don’t really concern myself with tomorrow.
If it comes, I’ll experience whatever it brings. If it doesn’t, I won’t know.
@ J J > “I learned early on to plan for the worst but hope my planning and preparation would allow for the best.”
I’ve heard the maxim as “hope for the best but plan for the worst.”
It is neither solely optimistic nor solely pessimistic; it is realistic.
Israeli’s Intel & political leaders could have used a refresher on that earlier this year.
A couple of days ago, these two posts were cited (I didn’t get to them until today.)
The contrast in the headlines was confirmed in the body of each, but they seem to exemplify realistic pessimism vs unjustified optimism.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120307030323/https://www.nationalreview.com/articles/258419/fear-muslim-brotherhood-andrew-c-mccarthy/
JANUARY 31, 2011
Fear the Muslim Brotherhood
By Andrew C. McCarthy
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/feb/03/us-fear-muslim-brotherhood
Thu 3 Feb 2011
Time to end US fear of the Muslim Brotherhood
by Richard Bulliet
And just another day at the ballot box office….
(For all you optimists out there!)
‘At least 5,600 federal-only ballots cast in Arizona 2020 election without US citizenship proof;
‘Arizona is “one of the only states to have bifurcated elections,” said former Arizona Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Wright.’—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/least-5600-federal-only-ballots-cast-az-2020-general-election-without-us
“…bifurcated elections…”???
Say what???
More like “…bif***ed…”
(But that just seems par for the course whenever the Democrats need a “win”)…
File under: “Arizona! where the votes come sweeping down the plain…”
Interesting discussion.
When I was young I was a pessimist, but reasoned myself into being an optimist. I’m realistic that things ultimately rarely work out, but I’m hopeful that they will. It’s a lot easier to get out of bed when one is hopeful. And, to huxley’s point, one needs to continuously work to bring forth positive change. That’s unlikely to happen if one is convinced positive change is not possible.
Listening to Andrew Klavan has made me aware of just how important and essential “narrative” is to our existence. Everyday we are all writing a story we tell ourselves about what we are experiencing. The more one aligns that narrative with the truth the more joy one will have in one’s life. Not happiness, joy. Two seemingly similar, but quite different things.
J.J.’s comment about rock climbing is a great example of this. The more honest he is with himself about the narrative of the climb that will unfold before him, including his preparedness, the greater the odds of success.
This aspect of human nature, the daily narratives we tell ourselves to explain the world around us, is a significant factor in so much of the unrest we observe in modern society. Many people believe in narratives that are far out of line with the truth and are struggling mightily to alter truth to fit their narratives.
Please remember:
“Pessimist” is the name an Optimist gives to a Realist.
“…struggling mightily to alter truth to fit their narrative…”
Indeed, which is why there MUST be so much denial.
And so much covering up.
And so much rationalization.
And so much prevarication.
And so much projection.
And so much lawlessness.
And so much hypocrisy.
And so many distractions.
And so much dishonesty.
(And WHY there MUST be someone—tailor-made by the powers that be—to blame….)
Even until the very onset of that “Russians-at-the-gates-of-Berlin” moment…and perhaps not even then…
Now WHAT might that “gradually-and-then-suddenly” moment be?
War? National bankruptcy? Total societal breakdown? No doubt some kind of combination, thereof.
And WHEN might that “gradually-and-then-suddenly” moment take place?
And WHO will be that “tailor-made” person and/or group that will Bear the Brunt of the Blame in “Biden”‘s carefully choreographed dystopic dance to perdition?
We’re watching that slow-motion train wreck take shape before our very eyes (in spite of the best efforts of “Biden” and his faithful media truth-thugs to hide it).
File under: “Biden”-topia….
SCOTTtheBADGER:
Thanks! Means a lot to me.
Don’t know for sure just how “okay” I will be. I’m told I suffered massive damage to my heart and significant damage to one of my kidneys. Which means there’s lots of rehab in store. But the prognosis for an eventual full recovery is quite hopeful. I’m told I have a 70 percent chance of completely repairing all damage. I think those are pretty good odds.
Thanks again.
(P.S.: Badgers and Otters gotta stick together!)
First of all, my study of economic history since, say, the late 1700’s leads me to be an incurable OPTIMIST about life, humanity and the world.
Second, Northwestern University, highly overrated IMHO, is in Evanston Illinois and not Chicago.
what caused the damage if you can say,
the problem with studying how economics actually works, and what abomination is being practice, and the mariannas type trench between them,
I can’t remember where I read it, but my favorite quote on this subject is, “An optimist is a guy who hasn’t been paying attention.” Summarizes my attitude pretty well.
“what caused the damage…”
Oh that’s easy: the thugs and grifters—the subverters and perverters—are in charge, with huge grins on their faces and the pretense of earnestness.
But the only thing they are earnest about is the destruction of the country (and lining their own pockets).
For them…
Crime is “The Law”.
Lying is “Truth”.
Hate is “Love”.
Destruction is “Patriotism”.
Bankruptcy is “Financial Growth”.
Criminal negligence is “Responsible Government”.
All this, while they maniacally pursue their political opponents, who of course must be labeled as ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE, ENEMIES OF THE STATE.
But of course….
And while they terrorize these political opponents, they are sacking the nation from within, eating away at its foundations. Warping its essence, spreading hopelessness, destroying trust, perverting justice, promoting despair.
A government of crooks and gangsters that has the allegiance of the media and most levers of government, such as it is.
FWIW…
“Rudy Giuliani…: Hunter ‘Indictment Is a Sucker Indictment’ “—
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/rudy-giuliani-hunter-biden-indictment/2023/12/09/id/1145342/
“NY Post: State Dept Paid NewsGuard to Tar Conservative Media”—
https://www.newsmax.com/us/newsguard-censorship-bias-against-conservatives/2023/12/09/id/1145353/
And from the “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up” File….
‘Al Gore Warns: People Having Access To Non-Mainstream Information “Threatens Democracy” ‘—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/al-gore-warns-people-having-access-non-mainstream-information-threatens-democracy
Merely more proof that Covid has made everyone (or most everyone) totally insane….? Pushed ’em right over the edge…
(Or maybe merely proof that Gore’s a Democrat…)
Barry, Larry kudlow discussed this in detail on his weekend show.
Barry, Larry kudlow discussed the indictment in detail on his weekend show.
Thanks. (At least there’s a few sensible people out there…)
The Angel of destruction steamrolls on….
(Make of it what ye’ will.)
“Petrodollar Endgame Moves Even Closer”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/petrodollar-endgame-moves-even-closer
Klaus Schwab must be wondering, with tingling anticipation, how much longer now…how much longer…
More government-initiated goring of free-speech (AKA squelching the truth)…
In fact, this is how “subtly” shutting down free speech works (with a cameo by Mollie Hemingway):
“How The Federal-Private Speech Police Operated In Election 2020: With Radar Highly Attuned To The Right”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/how-federal-private-speech-police-operated-election-2020-radar-highly-attuned-right
Key blurb:
“…The censorship-industrial complex in this country clearly views free speech as its enemy and will do anything to shut it down, including spreading lies and using intimidation to coerce private companies to censor factual, legal speech on behalf of the regime….”
Look away folks. And if you do insist on looking, then don’t believe yer lying eyes. Cuz there’s absolutely NOTHING to see here.
Because…TRUMP!!!
+ Bonus:
“The Atlantic Melts Down At A Second Trump Term”—
https://blazingcatfur.ca/2023/12/10/the-atlantic-melts-down-at-a-second-trump-term/
Insanity on stilts.
They don’t call him “President Fentanyl” for nothing…
“Families of victims lost to fentanyl plead with Congress to step up and address crisis”—
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/wkd-family-members-victims-lost-fentanyl-call-dc-lawmakers-step-and-address
They just don’t realize that this is “Biden” policy.
Neither would I, in normal times…but this is NOT a normal administration.
File under: The Wages of Transformation… (AKA, Someone’s Got to Pay the Price.)
Well played, Yancey Ward!
But although I’ve been pretty pessimistic about US and world support for Israel, I’d like to give an optimistic shout-out to the IDF. At last count that I saw, 98 IDF soldiers have died in Gaza. Given the opportunities for concealment for Hamas defenders, I would have thought IDF losses would have been FAR higher.
So there’s something to be optimistic about! The IDF has far higher training, tactics, and equipment than Hamas, and I sense that they are very close to certain military victory.
Back to being a pessimist: The more the IDF is victorious, the worse the world will work to undermine the fruits of victory. Look at how the media is playing the shirtless potential suiciders. Oh the inhumanity!
@Barry Meislin
I haven’t seen the latter two links though I imagine they are broadly accurate, but the Petrodollar Bullshit Yuan Chesthumping caught my eye and irritated me, especially when I should be enjoying some free weekends for a couple video games and
The problem as we’re going to cover is that the latter is of dubious existence to begin with, especially since as I’m going to cover not only do those that subscribe to the importance (to say nothing of the existence) of “the petrodollar” tend not to have a coherent idea of economics, why the sale of a commodity (let alone a very specific commodity) in USD would be so important, or even how the alleged Petrodollar came to be. Especially not explanations that line up with the evidence available to people like “Casuals that do vague research on commodity markets in the 1920s for stuff like flavor or to look not completely ignorant.”
The sovereign debt is a very real issue. The USD is also suffering from some issues in competitiveness (though it is still easily the healthiest of the sick men in terms of global currency) but nowhere near enough to salve its likely competitors.
To say the least.
Which indicates we are due for another Bubble. Thanks Obama, Thanks Joe. But also points to some important things.
Namely, that the world generally trusts the US Stock Market. Certainly moreso than it does the likes of Shanghai or Moscow. Arguably it SHOULDN’T trust us quite as much but the investors took a rational look and figured we are still by far the least worst option for their output in terms of volume of trade, transparency, and accountability. You don’t see many foreign born Tech Bros or Wall Street/Fleet Street Sharks upping stakes to go to Shanghai or even Mumbai in the way we see the continuous trickle of it to New York and its ilk to this day, and you certainly don’t see them going to Shanghai today.
Firstly: It’s BRICS, Durden, not BRIC. Or at least it has not been for a long time.
Secondly: Why on God’s Green Earth people expected a united BRICS currency to “combat the dollar” would work any time soon when it would entail New Dehli, Moscow, and Beijing all submitting to a single fiscal control and jurisdiction is absolutely BEYOND me, since all three jurisdictions are famously protectionist (especially the CCP, who have engaged in their typical totalitarian shenanigans.
Thirdly: BRICS isn’t an “alliance”. It isn’t even a proper Trading Bloc like say the EEC or the EU (which I note already have their own massive problems). It’s essentially a political or diplomatic forum with little in the way of unity or obligations to one another, and this is particularly evident if we study how India (doesn’t) fit in with China but runs the gamut.
Indeed, the India Card has a way of trashing a lot of attempts by Russia, the PRC, the Mullahs, and others to form a convenient umbrella organization to oppose the West, such as the SCO largely breaking down with Indian observer status and especially entry. In large part because the members can’t agree on their agendas or trust each other. And while this is certainly true elsewhere to some degree (like the rather epic Polish-Ukrainian slap fights over agricultural products and tariffs going on now) it is exacerbated with the SCO and especially BRICS.
Because that’d involve ruinously intensive gold purchases that might not be on the market, as well as transfers (some of which are going to be purely on trust due to the way much of the interstate gold trading goes due to the heavy role of the US), and also not be so reliable. Especially when we have open discussions of massively expanding the gold supply with near Earth mining operations in the near future.
But above all because gold currency backing would be controversial and difficult enough for one government to do (no matter how good it might be) but in the case of BRICS would require almost all members to do it. Which again goes back to Russian and Red Chinese obsession with control and attempts to micromanage their currency Turkey style.
Gold backing is something I am agnostic to but have warmed to recently. However, it is difficult and no silver bullet for a host of other issues, starting with if you can’t buy up enough gold due to pre-existing economic issues or if nobody wants to trade with you for various reasons (like you’re an egotistical totalitarian state with limited accountability). Both are what brought down the much balleyhooed “Golden Dinar” of Gaddafi’s long before the Civil War did.
As we’re going to see, this particular Mr. Durden is being overly generous since timing isn’t proving him right on some issues at all.
Maybe because it isn’t so important.
In order for you to support that contention, Mr. Durden, you’d first have to show the Petrodollar ever lived. Which is dubious for a host of levels.
This is what I call abject bullshit.
The USD has been the dominant oil trade currency for the vast majority of the time oil has been a commodity. However I can’t think of ANY time even with OPEC where it was the ONLY currency. Even in times when Eurodollars* (that is, Dollars outside of the US whether in Europe or elsewhere) made up well North of 90% of the exchanges, there were important secondary markets. Chief among them in British Pounds (the world’s previous dominant reserve currency and one of those) with first French Francs and then Euros coming up as thirds (with honorable mentions to Indian Rupees for a few different reasons, originally because of the influence of the British Raj on the Middle East and the odd British system there, and now Indian financial adventurism and investment in trying to build up the Rupee as a competitor, something that unlike a lot of this fantasy nonsense MIGHT actually work).
Moreover, Mr. Durden “Conveniently” puts the chariot before the horse. USD and earlier UK Pound Sterling dominance of the Oil Market came AS A RESULT of those currencies’ immensely powerful, attractive status, the latter did not come as a result of dominance on the oil market. This is a big stake through the heart of the Petrodollar Fetishist Argument. It is one they really have little good explanation or argument for, which is why they keep getting bodied.
Because the truth is that currency dominance isn’t about being able to enforce terms about trading in only a single currency (if it was, we’d all be speaking a mixture of Spanish and Mandarin Chinese starting longingly at silver Thalers as serfs of the Celestrial Hispano-Chinese Holy Roman Empire of All Under Heaven). It isn’t even necessarily having an objectively GOOD currency.
It’s about having a currency that is better or more competitive than the alternatives. Even a cursory look at Late Roman History would show this, and it isn’t the only one. And as we’re going to see, there really is no better or more competitive alternative, either on the market or coming up.
Mr. Durden offers fuckall sourcing or evidence for this, which is odd considering you’d THINK he’d be happy to link to what reporting was done on this issue. So I had to double check. My results were hasty and unsatisfyingly vague, but still much better than Mr. Durden’s track record here.
And it seems that Mr. Durden is “rashly” (some might say dishonestly) conflating a few Sino-Saudi agreements centering around trade and a currency swap to allege that the Saudis are now trading oil in RMB/Yuan.
But I haven’t actually been able to find any evidence of this. Whatsoever. And I’ve looked. Moreover, much of the little evidence I have seen of this implicitly mitigates against this, with the articles about the currency swap agreement (even those touting Muh DeDollarization) making no mention of an agreement to trade in RMB in oil.
Which while I’d view as a mildly concerning event, but which is quite literally the center of Mr. Durden’s thesis.
https://www.scmp.com/business/banking-finance/article/3242221/china-and-saudi-arabia-sign-currency-swap-accord-foster-bilateral-commerce-giving-boost-yuans
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/dedollarization-china-yuan-dollar-currency-swap-renminbi-saudi-arabia-oil-2023-11
https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/china-saudi-arabia-central-banks-sign-local-currency-swap-agreement-2023-11-20/
The closest any of the sources I saw on this was Reuters (and I know, it’s Reuters the dishonest hacks here, but still).
Who said, and I quote:
“Expand the use of local currencies” COULD mean buying oil in RMB/Yuan, but it also might not.
But the really damning thing here is this.
Now, this is singularly unimpressive on all counts and from all sides. On one hand you have the typical Reuters/MSM dodge of “Sources said”. But
A: That manages to somehow be less weak than what Mr. Durden provides on this case, since he does not even ALLEGE a source for his claim that the Saudis are now trading oil in Yuan, he just asserts it (probably inaccurately).
B: “Would work to buy” is hardly reassuring for those arguing this is already happening.
C: The article and its “traders” sources pointedly and explicitly reject the idea that the Chinese are buying oil in Yuan.
So until and unless Mr. Durden can provide actual sources that check out, I’m inclined to file this under typical overhyped Bullshit.
“Appears”
“Appears.”
That word is incredibly weak and weasel-y, but nevertheless is being asked to carry this entire claim of Durden’s like Atlas holding up the Sky. As for what evidence Mr. Durden has for this? He only offers one link… to himself. In an article that is paywalled.
I might at some point try digging this up, but for now I’m inclined to discard this. Mr. Durden here is the columnist. He is the one making claims. It is his job to expressly provide evidence to prove that his claims are true. If he is not willing to do that, I have no reason to trust him, especially given the previous hot takes. If he wants to put what I imagine is supposedly definitive proof behind a paywall, I am under no obligation to take said evidence into account without the ability to even check it.
Again, “Potential.” As in Possible-to-Probable stuff that Hasn’t Happened Yet. And may in fact not happen.
Except that’s not working out. Indeed, Oil is more dollarized now than it was back during the heydays of Chavismo when Gaddafi still had his head.
Moreover, Durden is conveniently ignoring Dollarization or “potential” (see? I can play the game to) indications of Dollarization, particularly with the election of President Millei to Argentina’s highest office over the entrenched Peronista bureaucracy and his discussions of putting Argentina’s currency on hold in favor of the dollar.
Now, I’m going to do what Mr. Durden won’t do and underline that THIS HASN’T HAPPENED YET AND MAY NOT HAPPEN AT ALL, but it sure as hell is quite the signal flare showing the USD’s continued importance and attractiveness. It’s also a hell of a lot more likely to happen than a united BRICS Currency backed by Gold.
Except among other things, BRICS isn’t an alliance, as I pointed out. It isn’t even a coherent economic bloc.
There’s literally nothing Durden has said in this article thus far TO take into account. Merely weasel word allegations “without proof”, and where ironically Reuters pulling the “Sources say” card counts as a step UP.
True.
More dubious for reasons we’ll cover.
No Mr. Durden, it’s just tough for you to think in general.
Not surprising because oil prices have gotten so high it is starting to impact demand and risk flight of the market towards alternative suppliers like the US, Norway, Guyana, Britain, and so on.
As we’re going to see shortly, the fact that Mr. Schectman is one of the smartest people Mr. Durden knows “when it comes to understanding the dollar globally” is downright GODDAMN SAD considering Schechtman felt confident enough to make – and Mr. Durden felt confident enough to post – utter, easily disprovable bullshit.
You should have HEARD the sound of me screaming Bullshit about this.
Firstly: I’d take the existence of the Petrodollar a hell of a lot more seriously if the spastics wasting valuable internet space and time wall of texting about it *HAD ANY KIND OF COHERENT EXPLANATION FOR WHEN IT STARTED OR WHAT IT IS.* Maybe some of them do, but Schechtman sure as hell Does Not.
Schechtman wants to claim that the 1973-1974 period is when “the Petrodollar System got its start.” The problem is this is provable bullshit because oil was ALREADY BEING OVERWHELMINGLY PRICED IN USD and had been for DECADES beforehand.
This is not subject to dispute by people who actually work in the field for a living or regularly study it. Whether it is people like me or Paul Kennedy’s Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, the heavy presence and usually outright dominance of the USD on the oil market goes back about as long as there has been an oil market.
Nor should this be SURPRISING, considering how oil research and development was largely a Western thing, and particularly one where the US was strong in. That the US was not merely one of the largest customers for oil, but in fact one of the largest producers of it (as angry Japanese Fascists in 1941 could attest).
Secondly: Much like the prior point, the US had ALREADY BEEN PROVIDING military protection to much of the OPEC Nations for years beforehand, as 1958 in Lebanon and the Amero-Iranian Alliance showed. So Durden is trying to pretend this is a seminal and new development.
C: 1973-1974 was indeed a pivotal moment in relations between the US and OPEC, but NOT FOR THE REASONS THIS CLOWN WANTS US TO BELIEVE but because THAT IS THE TIME OF THE OIL EMBARGO BY OPEC IN RETALIATION FOR THE US SUPPORT OF ISRAEL IN THE YOM KIPPUR WAR. Something that still stands tall in the memories of a lot of older people today.
A: What the fuck is “synthetic” demand for the dollar supposed to be and why are we supposed to care about it?
B: In what way is this alleged grand bargain responsible for more “Synthetic demand” than the CCP and Putin’s Russia desperately trying to force, charm, or coerce people to transacting in Rubles and RMB/Yuan? While in the case of Red China it is quite literally inflating its own stock market to the point of delusion by things like excessive and phony infrastructure and construction spending?
“….and in doing so proving both of us to be historically illiterate idiots.”
The US Dollar was already a benchmark (not THE benchmark but A one) by the late 19th century. It became THE Benchmark for trade during WWII and especially the immediate aftermath of it. Indeed, it was well established as such by the early 1950s at the latest, as shown by heavy COMBLOC attempts to get Western hard currency and the shift in prioritization towards USD by them.
So Mr. Durden and Mr. Schechtman are, to put it in technical terms, incredibly dumbass historically illiterate motherfuckers who cannot answer the question of “What was the Global Benchmark Currency of 1950?” Or at least not do so HONESTLY without ripping the back out of their argument.
It’s also worth noting that by this point in time the world had ALREADY gone through its first wave of Dedollarization with the collapse of Bretton-Woods, with the US ending convertibility to Gold in 1971 as part of a fiscal mutiny led by the French against pegging their currencies to the USD.
So we’re not only supposed to be as stupid and ignorant as these two people are by ignoring history up to 1973, but we’re supposed to not ask why OPEC would choose 1973-4 of all times to peg their futures to the US.
The problem is that if Mr. Durden and Mr. Schechtman acknowledge history as it exists prior to 1973, they would have to acknowledge that the “Petrodollar System” – to the extent it even exists- was not the cause of US financial Dominance but a product of it, and that there was already loco demand for USD even among our enemies. Which would devastate their case and force them to back up to try and argue how while USD near-monopoly on oil trades was not crucial to the power of the USD before, it now has become so.
And they’re not going to do that. Frankly I don’t think they have the capability to, since again we are dealing with people who haven’t read a freaking timeline.
Agreed, but not for the reasons Schechtman is going to state. Chalking this up to broken clock syndrome.
By using sanctions and other forms of coercion, we have turned the US currency and the SWIFT system into weapons
I’m sorry, but are you DAFT Mr. Schechtman? They always were tools for coercion, and have been practiced for a long time, both in the US and elsewhere. Indeed, one problem classical and pre-classical economics faced was over-emphasis on that aspect of finances. The US continued to use Dollar Diplomacy and Sanctions as tools of persuasion and coercion throughout its history, and while those could periodically blow up in its face it was not because of the act of using them as weapons.
Russia and North Korea aren’t that large a portion of the global population, and they can and do engage with the market in their own ways, they just tend to suck at it.
Citation Needed.
Especially since Mr. Schechtman can’t address the backlash to the backlash, with Millei’s election and Guyanese and African rapprochement with the USD.
NEW?!?!
BRICS was founded in 2010. The SCO was founded in 2001. That isn’t yesterday on the grand scale of things but it is also not New in the time scales of Current Year, and as Mr. Durden has been forced to concede the developments they expected them to do were going slowly, and that’s WHILE almost-certainly-misstating (ie Lying) about the actual developments to fit more into his pet thesis.
No, they weren’t. They were invited to join on January 1st, 2024, but they haven’t actually done so yet. Now it’s unlikely they will ALL refuse (though not impossible), but “Andy” is quite literally counting chickens before they hatched. And this is without going back to the issue that BRICS is more of a diplomatic forum than any kind of economic bloc, let alone a united alliance.
“It appears” that Andy is full of shit.
See, I can play the “it appears” game too. The difference is, my evidence tends to be better. Now to be fair, there is some indication of interest in at least opening discussions with BRICS and cooperation, but that’s a far cry from a “Union” as Andy likes portraying it as, for the reasons I’ve mentioned. It also shows how Durden and Schechtman are so desperate for things to validate their thesis they are misstating events.
It also ignores the key issues with the “union” gaining “Traction” in general and especially financially: the incompatibility of a lot of its members’ interests. Especially India and Brazil vis a vis the PRC and Russia, and the lack of trust regarding their currencies.
This is what we call Abject Nonsense.
The largest nuclear weapons arsenals on Earth go:
US/Russia (for 1st and second spot, depending on what thesis you go).
France (3rd Place)
PRC (4th Place, assuming we go with their stated warhead amounts, which is both questionable and ignores the lack of delivery systems).
UK (5th Place)
India/Pakistan (competing for 6th).
To be fair, if we close our eyes and pretend that BRICS is an alliance while including in both India and Pakistan into it, this would give “BRICS” 4 of the 7 most powerful nuclear powers, and either 1 of the three or two of the three largest nuclear arsenals. Which is impressive.
But it starts to break down when you take the arcane step of *remembering what the hell India and Pakistan’s nuclear arsenals are meant to counter.* Namely, each other (and in India’s case the PRC).
It also ignores the fact that it looks like Schectman is just going with declared warhead numbers while ignoring things like probable warhead numbers, YIELD, and ability to deploy them. Which is a problem and also why frankly France and Britain are stronger nuclear powers than the PRC is.
To which I would counter inviting people to check out the actual dispositions of all of those, because Schechtman ]isn’t even keeping with the basic issue of there’s a difference between KNOWN supplies of X and the ACTUAL supplies of X, especially given the recent discoveries in Western-friendly countries.
(And leaving aside how the likes of India, Brazil, and Argentina probably count as those).
This is a level of political and economies savvy below that of your average Axis and Allies player.
The fact that dumbass thinks Saudi Arabia is “the cornerstone of the dollar hegemony” underlines what I have said about these people having no way to explain how the USD got the hegemony that made it attractive to the Saudis in the first place, and also how they can’t explain the Buyer’s Remorse regarding the Belt and Road initiative or the continued failure to turn BRICS or the SCO into some kind of new Pact of Steel or Comintern capable of sweeping the Pigdog AmericanRunning dogs of Wall Street Imperialism out of power.
Going to need a citation for that given the Oil in Euro things.
If you ignore the teensy tiny point that the UAE Dirham is…. *DRUMROLL* Pegged to the USD.
https://gulfnews.com/business/analysis/pros-and-cons-of-dirhams-peg-to-the-dollar-1.1493644
And still is.
So in effect this is supposed to be a “hugely significant event” because the UAE making a press release ENCOURAGING (but not demanding, because the market would reject it) people doing business with the UAE to price oil not in USD but…. in another commodity priced by USD.
“Hugely Significant.”
Now, one MIGHT be able to argue this might be a step towards glacial disentanglement with the USD, since by pricing the oil in UAE Dirhams the UAE might then decouple the Dirham from the USD at some later point. And I’d be inclined to agree, it might be that.
But
A: That’s a MIGHT, as in a Hypothetical, as in something that hasn’t happened yet but May or May Not.
B: It underlines the absolute stupidity, ignorance, and folly of these people supposedly lauding this as a seismic event in world politics by elevating the “Petrodollar” as the heart of US Power….. while ignoring the fact that this means that the UAE still defacto prices oil in USD, it just has rolled out a new potential pricing system.
The problem is they’re not looking at the converse of that, especially with the likes of Argentina and Ukraine and India signaling greater interest in that.
And none of this would address the weaknesses of the pricing alternatives such as Yuan and Rubles and even Rupees.
Imagine not knowing why it became so popular to price oil in USD. If someone thinks that the only reason the nations of the world had to hoard USD for the past 50 years (again, what about the 1950s? The 1920s? 1890s?) was because they were “Forced to” in order to “buy oil” (Because apparently we’re pretending the Pound Sterling, Franc, and Ruble Markets weren’t a thing) they’re either very ignorant or very stupid. Or both.
THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!
Dedollarization waxes and wanes and has for decades. Again, it’s particularly telling when you remember that Bretton-Woods broke down in the 1960s and especially 1970-1, and they don’t even ACKNOWLEDGE it (even as part of some kind of conspiratorial hocus pocus about a dark deal between the US and OPEC). The USD has proven remarkably reliable IN SPITE of some truly epic mismanagement for the simple facts that it is much less mismanaged than most major currencies, is widely available (I’d argue TOO Widely available given inflation), and at least is perceived to not be at the hands of capricious, opaque authoritarians like the RMB/Yuan and Ruble are.
That won’t change because the UAE has decided to price oil in “USD but through a filter”. It won’t change if the Saudis actually agree to open up more options for purchasing oil priced in others. This is totemistic catastrophism not that different from the “Climate Change” crowd.
Which says little about what track is right and more on how neither of you can read a basic history book.
Fair, we’ll see how it goes.
Take a chill pill and research it.
The problem is that this ignores market research in orbital mining (which is still a ways away) but also counter issues.
Finally, Mr. Durden ends with a lengthy disclaimer that is at least well worth reading and shows a humility that we can all unironically learn from, and which I hoped he studied more.
But it begins
Yes, Mr. Durden, I can certainly believe that.
Now, the USD has issues. BIG issues. And they are adding up over the time frame. It is being mismanaged and suffering from excessive sovereign debt, and it is much less trustworthy than the market is likely to believe due to the Fed and the Leftists. It badly needs help.
But it is still a hell of a lot healthier than those proposed as alternatives. Take a look at the RMB or Ruble and tell me how they do not need even more help than the USD. Ironically the Rupee is the most likely to preform well in the long term because it rests on more solid, trustworthy foundations and is less likely to get screwed over by impending demographic and economic crisis in the PRC and Russia. And that’s before we talk about the problems with South Africa and Hispanic American including Brazil, or the Middle East.
Hey Turtler, got time on your hands? 🙂
But I hear Indians are really into gold jewelry as a store of wealth, so there’s that.
Cute headline, Neo.
Wow, that was very impressive.
Short version? That you’re extremely pessimistic about their pessimism?
So Turtler….don’t short the $ ….yet?
Nice contrary analysis. I enjoyed that.
@Barry Meislin
Not really, more that “Mr. Durden” and his “smart friend” aren’t that smart and don’t understand how the USD came to be so powerful, especially in the oil market. Their “Petrodollar’ stuff reads like CCP or Kremlin propaganda that is even less economically illiterate than I am, which is saying something. And while the layperson may not understand this offhand, they probably will when you point to some crucial points such as Bretton-Woods and when it imploded. They also are dependent on extremely dubious if not outright false readings of several events and claims.
I can imagine their other points like with the surveillance state might have merit, but I’d need to check.
@Xylourgos
I don’t know. I am not a financial wiz and make no pretentions to being one, and in any case I am far more of a historian than I am an economist. Which is why I noticed several very obvious, bloody holes in the thesis.
I’ll generally say seek good counsel and see whether it makes sense for you to short the USD or not. It might in your position. It might not. But that decision needs to be made on the basis of accurate grasp of the facts and good analysis.
An article that wants us to pretend the USD only came to dominance over the oil market in 1973 or that the UAE trying to incentivize people to go from transacting oil in USD to transacting oil in….. a different good pegged to the USD being a seismic and epic history making shift? That provides neither.
Thank you kindly.
Seconding Xylourgos.
I always look forward to your comments, very educational.
The interesting thing about psychological “conclusions” such as these is that they have no way of confirming cause and effect.
They can link things together (which might very well be coincidence and, if the findings aren’t replicable, definitely are) but they have no way of determining which is cart and which is horse.
Is an introverted, pessimistic outlook a predictor of increased risk of cognitive decline? Is it the cause of an increased risk of cognitive decline? Or is it just another symptom of the underlying cause of increased risk of cognitive decline?
They can’t tell you. So if there was some way to fundamentally change a personality and an introverted pessimist (like me) is able to just magically transform themselves into an extroverted optimist, would that reduce their risk of cognitive decline?
Maybe, maybe not.
Of course the drug companies will be happy to create some drug to artificially change your personality, but will the artificial change actually reduce the risk of cognitive decline or is that just masking the “symptoms” without actually affecting the underlying cause or impacting the outcome?
Who knows? They sure as heck don’t.
I’ve had many people in my life who’ve struggled with emotional distress and the doc’s first solution is drugs. “It’s caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, so when we get the chemicals back into balance, things will get better”.
I asked one of those docs directly once “Is it really that the distress is caused by the chemical imbalance, or is it possible that the chemical imbalance is caused by the distress?” He freely admitted that they simply don’t know. His contention was that it doesn’t matter, as long as artificially forcing the chemicals back into balance relieves the symptoms.
But that’s basically the same thing as taking pain killers when you have a broken leg. Take enough drugs you can mask the pain, but the broken leg is still broken, and if you mask the pain enough you can still walk on the leg, you end up doing even more damage.
When a person’s emotional distress is caused by an underlying issue, until that underlying issue is addressed, treating the symptom by masking the distress is not curing anything…just creating another person dependent upon an array of mood altering drugs for the rest of their life.
But I digress. My point is: I’m all for them continuing research into these types of things and looking for cures, but “news” like this is rarely the breakthrough they make it out to be…and more often than not it turns out to be utter BS in the long run.
At least I hope so because I’m pretty damn pessimistic most of the time and I don’t see that changing any time soon.