George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[albrecht]

Thanks for looking for me, I would have got back to you sooner, but I hadn't taken the time to look over your links.  I don't think that's what she's referring to because the second link anyway is referring to debtor and creditor nations in regards to international trade, whereas as far as I can tell Fitts is referring to moving from an economy based on bank lending (debtor economy) to something else that would be a 'creditor economy.'

I don't know what she means and, given how lending has has helped finance economies around the world from the industrial revolution to the present, I don't see the need to move away from it.  Certainly there are problems with debt financing from predatory loans (loans to '3rd world nations', loans to family farmers, payday loans set at usury rates to poor working class citizens) to large loans made by lenders that they have no incentive to vet (mortgage backed securities), but with interest rates being at all times lows there has probably never been a better time for a 'debtor nation.'

I realize that the Federal Reserve interest rates can't remain below inflation forever, but given this historical process there is no reason to believe that interest rates can't remain low for essentially forever:
1.Federal Reserve set up in 1913

2.U.S effectively moves off the 'gold standard' under President Franklin Roosevelt early in his Presidency (Roosevelt sets the price of gold at a fixed rate.)

3.U.S officially moves off the 'gold standard' under President Richard Nixon.

4.Economist Milton Friedman shows the principle cause of stagflation is a result of the Federal Reserve misunderstanding of the 'Phillips Curve.'

5.Federal Reserve over this time gains practically complete independence from political interference.  Probably the most famous example of this is when Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan told George H W Bush who was pleading with him to lower interest rates in early 1992 that setting interest rates was strictly the responsibility of the Federal Reserve, and that he had no intention of doing what Bush wanted.

With additional fine tuning since this time, if you check the CPI statistics, you'll see that inflation has been running at an annual rate of roughly 1.5-2.5% per annum for the last 25 years or so with the exception of 2006 when the sharp rise in oil prices caused CPI that year to be 3.8%.

Given this track record, I don't see any reason why short term interest rates should go above 4-5%.  I suppose the large U.S budget deficits and debt could alter this, but that would actually likely effect the various long term interest rates much more, although for borrowers of major purchases the long term rates are more important.

I'm not sure what her theory is precisely but she does mention foreign debt and foreigners buying up US companies, land, and assets. Who knows? I think, not sure, she wants more of a "local" or State based lending and insurance system in which the owners/beneficiaries are not foreign or international banks but like State banks (like N.Dakota has), local CO-OPs, Credit Unions, Fraternal Orders, etc. The profit off the loans are given to some banker in NYC but kept "in house."

[PB the Deplorable]

In George's 'news' segment on last night's show he referred to the X-Box and he said "X-Box counsel."  I had no idea what he was referring to until it dawned on me he meant to say "X-Box console."  I don't think George knows what an X-Box is.

Imagine how bad he'd be if he didn't do show prep

[Zetaspeak]

That was one shit full of an interview with the 3 I mean 2 headed person.Some callers actually believed that one died.The last caller was in tears.Noory's real listeners and his paid callers.You can always tell who they are.Then on the start of the next interview snoory starts talking about how pranks can go bad on April fools day. What a child like mentality noory has.

I didn't listen to the show. But I will never understand the purpose or the motivation for making your audience sound stupid, especially a show that relies on open lines so much.

So next time they have a "political open lines" why on earth would anybody care what these mouth-breathers think if they couldn't even figure out the 3-headed April fools joke is a fraud. Or an audience is critical thinking enough about alternative" critical health news" being pushed toward them if they are even willing to believe the 3-headed person.

It seems to counter-productive

[zeebo]

Imagine how bad he'd be if he didn't do show prep

George's prep is reading through Tommy's 3x5 cards to see if they contain any funny doodles.

[Mizak]

I didn't listen to the show. But I will never understand the purpose or the motivation for making your audience sound stupid, especially a show that relies on open lines so much.

So next time they have a "political open lines" why on earth would anybody care what these mouth-breathers think if they couldn't even figure out the 3-headed April fools joke is a fraud. Or an audience is critical thinking enough about alternative" critical health news" being pushed toward them if they are even willing to believe the 3-headed person.

It seems to counter-productive

EXACTLY!!! I only listen when I have insomnia which lately  unfortunately I did.Thank the gods that I was able to sleep pretty much of last night.Right at the beginning of last night show snoory starts talking about Kim Jong-un threatening to use Nukes and how he hates that and how the U.S. never threatened to use Nukes even though we HAD to use them to win WWII LOLLOL.I can't remember How many times Noory has called to Nuke the middle east.I just hope I never run into a regular listener or the fool himself.

[136 or 142]

EXACTLY!!! I only listen when I have insomnia which lately  unfortunately I did.Thank the gods that I was able to sleep pretty much of last night.Right at the beginning of last night show snoory starts talking about Kim Jong-un threatening to use Nukes and how he hates that and how the U.S. never threatened to use Nukes even though we HAD to use them to win WWII LOLLOL.I can't remember How many times Noory has called to Nuke the middle east.I just hope I never run into a regular listener or the fool himself.

Last night was a good show even with the idiot Noory as host.  I actually agree with him that were drugs to be legalized that their usage would not go up much if at all.  There are a variety of sound reasons to believe this.  The only risk is that use of harder drugs would increase for people below the age of around 18, which is the main reason why I'm hesitant to support legalization of harder drugs.

[Little Hater]

So at least one other Bellgabber heard Noory misquote the lyrics of the Sinatra (Sinatra!) tune, 'I Get a Kick Out of You'. Cocaine appears in the second verse - the one our dolt tried to quote is 'I get no kick from champagne'. This after lecturing the co-founder of High Times magazine about drug legalization.

Both guests last night would have made for great radio if interviewed by George Knapp, or better, John Batchelor. All Noory wanted to ask the first guy was about his crime and imprisonment. Both guests were cool and seemed to have been warned about Noory's incompetence.

[albrecht]

Last night was a good show even with the idiot Noory as host.  I actually agree with him that were drugs to be legalized that their usage would not go up much if at all.  There are a variety of sound reasons to believe this.  The only risk is that use of harder drugs would increase for people below the age of around 18, which is the main reason why I'm hesitant to support legalization of harder drugs.

Every society is different but places like Portugal has really decriminalized even 'hard drugs' and it hasn't caused an epidemic of drug use and actually crime went down, as did associated things like certain diseases. The Netherlands has looked the other way at marijuana and there is no major problems (except by tourists) and drug usage is lower than in countries, like us, where it is banned (mostly.) There are other examples. Criminalization only helps cartels and causes a health problem (mental or physical) into a criminal one and causes more crimes, diseases, addiction, overdoses, etc.

[WOTR]

I hate to say it, because as bad as he still is...Jorch has been stepping his game up in the past few months...coincidentally since Art quit...

You did read the post immediately above yours, right?

Anyone that's curious:  Yes, George asked "What if Einstein had a computer?"

It sounds to me like George may have added a few more 3X5's to the rotation to make it sound better...  Maybe Tommie even bought an automatic vegas style shuffler to randomize them and prevent the same one from appearing more than twice each night- but all of the old ones are still in the rotation.

I'm sorry... George is not getting better.  If you listen to him too often your brain begins to degrade and he actually sounds like he is improving until you take a long enough break for the healing process to start.  Neuroplasticity is a wonderful thing. 

[zeebo]

...I'm sorry... George is not getting better.  If you listen to him too often your brain begins to degrade and he actually sounds like he is improving ...

It's funny, something happened to me over time, which is I built up a kind of immunity to the Nooronic annoyances that used to drive me batty.  It's like my brain in an act of self-preservation unconsiously tunes him out, like listening to white noise.  Thanks, brain.

[136 or 142]

Every society is different but places like Portugal has really decriminalized even 'hard drugs' and it hasn't caused an epidemic of drug use and actually crime went down, as did associated things like certain diseases. The Netherlands has looked the other way at marijuana and there is no major problems (except by tourists) and drug usage is lower than in countries, like us, where it is banned (mostly.) There are other examples. Criminalization only helps cartels and causes a health problem (mental or physical) into a criminal one and causes more crimes, diseases, addiction, overdoses, etc.

Yes, i completely agree with you.

[zeebo]

...Criminalization only helps cartels and causes a health problem (mental or physical) into a criminal one and causes more crimes, diseases, addiction, overdoses, etc.

Good post.  An observation I'd make is the decades of criminalizing cannabis only created an incentive for ever more powerful strains on the black market, while simultaneously suppressing research into it's potential medical uses.  Thus ironically it has been the easing of criminality in recent years, which has brought back from near extinction certain strains which are milder in effect and are more balanced with other non-psychoactive cannabinoids having therepeudic qualities. 

[21st Century Man]

What station plays the "best of george noory"?

The best of George Noory usually features LMH as guest. 

[136 or 142]

I've heard the first hour on the repeat, the guest who was supposed to be discussing reasons for returning to the Gold Standard has pretty much barely commented on it, so far.  I think the Gold Standard is pseudo-economics but he sounds like an intelligent guy and I would have liked to have heard his arguments.  Maybe they're coming up.  I disagree with his take that a negative interest rate would get people to pull their money out of the bank if only they could access cash, but that's minor compared to the new Nooryism:

in the first half hour George Noory referred to the movie "The Big Short"  as "The Short Sellers," but that's also minor.

In the second half hour the guest was explaining how the Swiss bought Nazi gold during the end of World War II with hard currency and the hard currency made it much simpler for the Nazi's to buy weapons.  And George said "So they were basically washing gold."  Of course, George meant 'laundering gold.'

[136 or 142]

Listening to the second half I'm not sure this guy is so smart. He said the Obama Administration wanted to replace Ben Bernanke as Federal Reserve Chair with Larry Summers (which is true) but the academic elite insisted on Janet Yellin because she was part of their club.  The academic elite has political power ?  That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.  The Obama Administration had to give up on Summers because the U.S Senate votes to approve the nomination and a number of left wing Democrats opposed the choice and the Administration realized Summers wouldn't get a majority in the Republican majority Senate (not without giving in to Republican demands on a whole bunch of other issues anyway) : http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/how-a-small-team-of-democrats-defeated-larry-summers-and-obama/279688/

I'm not sure why the guest went after this fictitious powerful 'academic elite' rather than just state what really happened, but it does suggest he is a lot more loopy than he first sounded.


Just for clarification purposes: there is an 'academic elite' but they're only elite or have 'power' in academia, at least in the social sciences.  There also are people in academia who have power in political circles, but that's just the presidents of major universities.

[PB the Deplorable]

I've heard the first hour on the repeat, the guest who was supposed to be discussing reasons for returning to the Gold Standard has pretty much barely commented on it, so far.  I think the Gold Standard is pseudo-economics but he sounds like an intelligent guy and I would have liked to have heard his arguments.  Maybe they're coming up.  I disagree with his take that a negative interest rate would get people to pull their money out of the bank if only they could access cash, but that's minor compared to the new Nooryism:

in the first half hour George Noory referred to the movie "The Big Short"  as "The Short Sellers," but that's also minor.

In the second half hour the guest was explaining how the Swiss bought Nazi gold during the end of World War II with hard currency and the hard currency made it much simpler for the Nazi's to buy weapons.  And George said "So they were basically washing gold."  Of course, George meant 'laundering gold.'

The problem with currency not backed by anything is it encourages deficit spending by the people who print it up, and also encourages them to flat out increase the amount in circulation (beyond what is normally created by a growing economy) by simply creating more.  Both of which are inflationary. 

In addition to that, each country is competing on exports, and each countries' policy tends to be to lower their own currency against other countries' currencies in order to make their own goods 'cheaper' to foreigners and thus sell more goods abroad - a race to the bottom, each intentionally devaluing their own currencies over time.

Unfortunately, there is not enough gold in the world to back up to amount of currency we now have in circulation.  The economy and size of population have simply grown too large.


As far as 'negative' interest rates, my understanding is that's a bit of a misnomer.  What the media is talking about mostly applies to corporations parking huge amounts of cash in banks.  They are charged certain service fees, and are paid interest.  In a 'negative interest' environment, the various fees they are charged are somewhat more than the tiny amount of interest they are paid.  It's not an actual negative interest rate, but a net effect.  Individual customers have been subjected to that for years, for example a non-interest bearing checking account subject to fees.

[ItsOver]

...In the second half hour the guest was explaining how the Swiss bought Nazi gold during the end of World War II with hard currency and the hard currency made it much simpler for the Nazi's to buy weapons.  And George said "So they were basically washing gold."  Of course, George meant 'laundering gold.'

I wouldn't be too sure about what Jorch ever means.

[136 or 142]

The problem with currency not backed by anything is it encourages deficit spending by the people who print it up, and also encourages them to flat out increase the amount in circulation (beyond what is normally created by a growing economy) by simply creating more.  Both of which are inflationary. 

In addition to that, each country is competing on exports, and each countries' policy tends to be to lower their own currency against other countries' currencies in order to make their own goods 'cheaper' to foreigners and thus sell more goods abroad - a race to the bottom, each intentionally devaluing their own currencies over time.

Unfortunately, there is not enough gold in the world to back up to amount of currency we now have in circulation.  The economy and size of population have simply grown too large.


As far as 'negative' interest rates, my understanding is that's a bit of a misnomer.  What the media is talking about mostly applies to corporations parking huge amounts of cash in banks.  They are charged certain service fees, and are paid interest.  In a 'negative interest' environment, the various fees they are charged are somewhat more than the tiny amount of interest they are paid.  It's not an actual negative interest rate, but a net effect.  Individual customers have been subjected to that for years, for example a non-interest bearing checking account subject to fees.

1.This is the position from mainstream economists of why they don't take the Gold Standard seriously. I understand that since that textbook was written in the early 2000s that with the rise of gold prices over the last decade or so that there is now a great deal more gold that comes from the U.S, so his comment on the price of gold being partly dependent on how much gold South Africa and Russia find or extract is no longer quite accurate.  That said, I also understand that compared to South Africa or Russia that U.S gold is much more expensive to mine, so at lower gold prices the U.S financial system would once again become subject to gold findings in South Africa or Russia, which is just one of the reasons why no mainstream economist regards the Gold Standard as a sound basis for a currency.   I agree with you on the importance of preventing governments from simply printing money, but the way to prevent this is by giving central banks independence and not through any form of specie currency.  While the Federal Reserve did print up a great deal of money in their 'quantitative easing' program, the fact is is that pretty much all of that money is deposited in their accounts now in the form of 'dead money' and has never circulated.  If this money does begin to circulate to the point where there is 'too much money chasing too few goods' and leads to inflation, given that the Federal Reserve has independence they can and certainly will either hike up interest rates or sell bonds to buy back currency in a 'money destruction' process.  Quantitative easing was a response to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and it should, in my opinion, be regarded as a unique situation.  I've already posted how the Federal Reserve proved its independence from political interference when then Fed Chair Alan Greenspan refused to lower interest rates in early 1992 despite pleas from then President George H W Bush. 

2.I'm not sure what is meant by 'negative interest rates' either, but the example you gave that the average citizen doesn't simply hold cash even though there returns are a net negative is why I wrote that I didn't think that there would be much money pulled out of the banks even in a negative interest rate environment. There is simply too much convenience when it comes to having a checking account versus paying for everything with cash to given up the checking account, and in regards to a savings account, the risk of losing all one's money from theft is simply too great versus keeping the money in the savings account.  I suppose people could have a small bank vault in their own home installed, but I think that would be more of a hassle for most people than anything else.

[136 or 142]

I wouldn't be too sure about what Jorch ever means.

I looked up Gold Laundering and it apparently is a real term that is distinct from money laundering and it refers to, I think, the process of replacing real gold with pyrite.  Given that Noory fancies himself as something as a gold bug, it's possible he may be familiar with the meaning of the term 'gold laundering.'  However, there is no term 'gold washing' so, given that he was referring to the equivalent of money laundering it would have made a great deal more sense for him to say 'gold laundering' and be safe in the knowledge that everybody would know exactly what he was talking about.

Of course, I also find it incredibly hard that George Noory can think quickly enough to think to himself "I want to say gold laundering but I know that isn't the equivalent of money laundering so what other term can I use that is similar to 'gold laundering'... I know, 'gold washing.'"

[Zetaspeak]

EXACTLY!!! I only listen when I have insomnia which lately  unfortunately I did.Thank the gods that I was able to sleep pretty much of last night.Right at the beginning of last night show snoory starts talking about Kim Jong-un threatening to use Nukes and how he hates that and how the U.S. never threatened to use Nukes even though we HAD to use them to win WWII LOLLOL.I can't remember How many times Noory has called to Nuke the middle east.I just hope I never run into a regular listener or the fool himself.

LOL exactly, I wonder if the German equivalent of Jorch Norryschmidt will talk about how "Hitler was bad, but........ it had to be done" I thought it was so weird that he took a such a hard stance against it, and said we would never do such a thing, but then quickly add in "well we did but we had to, so it's okay" lol

I'm personally not taking a stand on Hiroshima, but Noory just double talks the whole thing.

[VtaGeezer]

I thought James Rickard was one Noory's better guests on gold and international currency games.  Too bad Noory didn't have him for the whole show instead of going to the f'ing idiot on talking to the dead in the second half.  Rickard was interviewed on Bloomberg TV this morning; they don't suffer many promoters and it gives him credibility.  Can't say I've ever heard any other C2C guest on Bloomberg.  He recommends just 10% od assets in gold...not exactly a raving gold bug position. I may order his book.  If anyone can recommend a good book on gold/precious metals basics, I'd appreciate it.  Looking at the atrocious election choices we're going to have, we're headed for a bad time either way.  Wall St is heavier into derivatives than in '08.  Liquidity and security are on my mind more and more these days. Been meaning to get some gold or silver for a while since they came down, and its already 20% off the low early in the year.

[136 or 142]

I thought James Rickard was one Noory's better guests on gold and international currency games.  Too bad Noory didn't have him for the whole show instead of going to the f'ing idiot on talking to the dead in the second half.  Rickard was interviewed on Bloomberg TV this morning; they don't suffer many promoters and it gives him credibility.  Can't say I've ever heard any other C2C guest on Bloomberg.  He recommends just 10% od assets in gold...not exactly a raving gold bug position. I may order his book.  If anyone can recommend a good book on gold/precious metals basics, I'd appreciate it.  Looking at the atrocious election choices we're going to have, we're headed for a bad time either way.  Wall St is heavier into derivatives than in '08.  Liquidity and security are on my mind more and more these days. Been meaning to get some gold or silver for a while since they came down, and its already 20% off the low early in the year.

In the short term gold may be a good investment however prior to the financial meltdown of 2007/2008 gold was trading at historic lows because it was finally regarded by most traders as what it is: just another commodity and one with very few uses.  My personal view is that with the meltdown increasingly in the rear view mirror and with the U.S economy growing at a slow but steady 2% rate year over year for several years now, gold will slowly go back to being seen as just another commodity and will fall back to around $300-500 an ounce.  I realize that uncertainties like the ones you mention would prevent that from fully happening but I've never understood why gold is seen as the best asset for market hedging.


Rickard actually doesn't seem to believe in this himself, but most people who comment on 'market cycles' are usually referring to nonsense like the long term Kondratieff Wave.  The economy is a function of human beings in aggregate making individual decisions and does not operate like the solar system, and anybody who tells you otherwise is either a liar, a fool, or an idiot who thinks they're so smart they've noticed patterns that nobody else has picked up on (like those idiots with that moronic 'time track' devise.)  For instance, even the 'business cycles' that are usually taken as fact have been increasing in distance apart and, except for the great recession of 2007-2008 caused by the financial meltdown the previous two recessions before that in 1991-1992 and 2000-2001 were both shorter and far milder than many previous recessions.

Virtually every mainstream economist acknowledges that long run economic growth is a result of improved technologies, improved techniques or expanded output capacity.  Given this 'quickening' that both George Noory and Art Bell speak about that is mostly related to the rapid increase in improvements in technology there is actually no reason that recessions need occur in the future if speculative bubbles can be either prevented or dealt with successfully after they occur (the so called idea of an economic 'soft landing.')

[albrecht]

In the short term gold may be a good investment however prior to the financial meltdown of 2007/2008 gold was trading at historic lows because it was finally regarded by most traders as what it is: just another commodity and one with very few uses.  My personal view is that with the meltdown increasingly in the rear view mirror and with the U.S economy growing at a slow but steady 2% rate year over year for several years now, gold will slowly go back to being seen as just another commodity and will fall back to around $300-500 an ounce.  I realize that uncertainties like the ones you mention would prevent that from fully happening but I've never understood why gold is seen as the best asset for market hedging.


Rickard actually doesn't seem to believe in this himself, but most people who comment on 'market cycles' are usually referring to nonsense like the long term Kondratieff Wave.  The economy is a function of human beings in aggregate making individual decisions and does not operate like the solar system, and anybody who tells you otherwise is either a liar, a fool, or an idiot who thinks they're so smart they've noticed patterns that nobody else has picked up on (like those idiots with that moronic 'time track' devise.)  For instance, even the 'business cycles' that are usually taken as fact have been increasing in distance apart and, except for the great recession of 2007-2008 caused by the financial meltdown the previous two recessions before that in 1991-1992 and 2000-2001 were both shorter and far milder than many previous recessions.

Virtually every mainstream economist acknowledges that long run economic growth is a result of improved technologies, improved techniques or expanded output capacity.  Given this 'quickening' that both George Noory and Art Bell speak about that is mostly related to the rapid increase in improvements in technology there is actually no reason that recessions need occur in the future if speculative bubbles can be either prevented or dealt with successfully after they occur (the so called idea of an economic 'soft landing.')

I did find his "theory" of the Jubilee Year to be a pre-modern attempt at eliminating financial crashes interesting by, effectively, causing it but since everyone knows it is coming people are prepared for it. And, for the most part, he seemed credible- though I'm not saying I buy into, or even understand, all of his macro-theory but he wasn't the usual C2C Gold-salesman, he only said maybe up to 10% and also considered other investments, real estate, silver, etc and to be diversified which makes common-sense.

[Ted Baxter]

Jimmy Church interviewing George Noory on FADE2BLACK. I switched over to GROUND ZERO with Cldye Lewis...Man Noory is sooooooooooooooooooooo Boooooring to listen too !

[136 or 142]

I did find his "theory" of the Jubilee Year to be a pre-modern attempt at eliminating financial crashes interesting by, effectively, causing it but since everyone knows it is coming people are prepared for it. And, for the most part, he seemed credible- though I'm not saying I buy into, or even understand, all of his macro-theory but he wasn't the usual C2C Gold-salesman, he only said maybe up to 10% and also considered other investments, real estate, silver, etc and to be diversified which makes common-sense.

Diversification does make some sense.  However if you become so diversified, you end up basically just doing what the market does in general. I write 'market' in a general sense as it could refer to any number of different types of markets that a person could invest in.  So, rather than investing into those things, all of which entail some effort, it's far easier and likely far cheaper to simply invest in an index fund or several index funds of different types of markets.

I also disagree with his idea of buying physical gold.  Of course, he may be right and I may be wrong, but in the scenario that he suggested whereby currency can't be used because the economic structure has been brought down, I think the inability to use money would be among the least of people's concerns.  Also, contrary to what he said that small barter economies have never been successful, I've read that up until the industrial revolution that in small communities bartering was pretty much all that was ever done. So, in England  which prior to the industrial revolution was already a city of 800,000 people and the next biggest cities that had populations of between 20,000 and 30,000 people (I think there were three cities of this size, one or two were 'large' mining and mine processing centers and the other was an agriculture processing and export trade center) I don't doubt that bartering would have been impractical, but in the rural towns where most British people lived, I can't imagine that people would have done anything other than barter.   So, in today's American context, in contrast to what he said, I think in the  scenario that he outlined the prevailing view would be "what good is gold? I can't eat it or do anything else with it.  It's completely useless."

[pate]

Break, break, break.

DAVE, ALLCON:  DICK NOW REFERS TO HISSELF AS "frank"

THAT IS ALL

endtrans

[136 or 142]

George Noory actually got annoyed for a few minutes with Judy Wood and tried to pin her down and be specific.  Is this part of the end times?

[pate]

Dave Nouri is still on air overnight?

I thought the 18-26 demographics were out of the non-local demographic food for dead-of-night adverts.

Nourishment Supplements indeed, apparently BoBo, Dave and I weren't on the same page.

What is tomorrow?  Friday?  I smells a meating...

[diowulf]

I posted this in the Art Bell forum on accident a few days ago:

Did anyone notice on Friday night open lines, a blind woman called in and said she couldn't smell. George said "That's terrible" or something to that effect and the woman replied "That's ok, if we all hung out and Tommy farted, I wouldn't be able to smell it *giggle*". George didn't acknowledge it and rolled right on, or else he didn't hear it but it was bizarre and pretty comical.

Also, on last night's show, a woman called in about the three headed person on the April Fool's Show. She said she wasn't sure about it, but then Tommy assured her it was legitimate. She asked several questions, even got into X and Y chromosomes. George mentioned a few times that it was April Fool's Day show, but she never picked up on it. George asked her if she told anyone and she said "Yes, my neighbor, they thought it was I prank, so did I really...I didn't believe it I'm sorry" But she was apologizing for her lack of faith and because she had been corrected. She also mentioned that she had fallen for his April Fool's Day pranks before. People like this are why we get the numbers lady, alternative medicine, etc....

[albrecht]

Diversification does make some sense.  However if you become so diversified, you end up basically just doing what the market does in general. I write 'market' in a general sense as it could refer to any number of different types of markets that a person could invest in.  So, rather than investing into those things, all of which entail some effort, it's far easier and likely far cheaper to simply invest in an index fund or several index funds of different types of markets.

I also disagree with his idea of buying physical gold.  Of course, he may be right and I may be wrong, but in the scenario that he suggested whereby currency can't be used because the economic structure has been brought down, I think the inability to use money would be among the least of people's concerns.  Also, contrary to what he said that small barter economies have never been successful, I've read that up until the industrial revolution that in small communities bartering was pretty much all that was ever done. So, in England  which prior to the industrial revolution was already a city of 800,000 people and the next biggest cities that had populations of between 20,000 and 30,000 people (I think there were three cities of this size, one or two were 'large' mining and mine processing centers and the other was an agriculture processing and export trade center) I don't doubt that bartering would have been impractical, but in the rural towns where most British people lived, I can't imagine that people would have done anything other than barter.   So, in today's American context, in contrast to what he said, I think in the  scenario that he outlined the prevailing view would be "what good is gold? I can't eat it or do anything else with it.  It's completely useless."

I think at various times in history people (Jews, people in the Middle East now, Vikings, folks in communist lands, etc) would tell you it is nice to have a tangible, moveable commodity that is worth something everywhere and can be hidden, moved, sold, etc. Even when a "system" collapses, or turns against you, and if you are able to flee you have something worthwhile to buy bribes, transport, food, settlement in new lands, etc. Or bury/hide and get back later.
myth of the barter economy:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2802221?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/barter-society-myth/471051/