It appears that even posters in the right-leaning neo-reactionary community are starting to call out these doom and gloomers like Peter Schiff, Karl Denninger, and Nicholas Nassim Taleb for crying wolf too many times.
Well she’s right, of course, and Santelli is, at the deepest level, wrong. Consider Argentina under the currency board in the 90s: They tried their damnedest to keep the Argentine peso, fixed at 1 to 1 with the US dollar, as a store of value. But they couldn’t do it. The reason is that currency is simply non-interesting-paying DEBT of the government. If the government can’t service the debts, the currency can’t continue at its pre-existing level. That’s what happened in Argentina (and why the peso is now about 13 to the dollar in the streets of Buenos Aires).
As has been noted before, if you want a currency that is as good as gold, you simply have to do away with democracy and the pressures it creates on government fiscal policy, both on spending (too much) and taxation (too high).
Anyway the dollar has been rising against gold for the last 2-3 years so there’s no imminent risk of the dollar becoming confetti. Dollar holders have plenty of time to buy all the gold and silver they want! Santelli can take his paycheck to the local coin dealer every other friday and convert it all into gold with no problems. I doubt he does that though …
Santelli was right about homeowners, but wrong about the dollar, which has proven to be a pretty good store of value. Pretty much anything that isn’t denominated in dollars or yuan has lost a lot of value since 2011 when converted back into dollars. US stocks, the US dollar, and the US economy have trounced their foreign peers (with the exception, again, of China). Time and time again, and recent years no exception, those who preach doom and gloom are with very few exceptions, wrong.
As further evidence of this backlash, blogger Libertarian Realist takes aim at Peter Schiff and his wrong predictions.
Unlike a religion or a cult, rather than being beholden to a specific party or person, an important part of the neoreaction/HBD/alt-right movement is seeking truth and reality in a world of political correctness, and when you have human equivalent of a blow horn habitually blaring the same doom and gloom crap that doesn’t agree with the empirical data and evidence, it is perfectly justified to criticize and finally ignore him – even if he’s technically a member of the same ‘party’. Peter Schiff’s unhinged rants don’t agree with the empirical evidence; he is so blinded by this leftist desire to see America and the fed fail, he’s not only wrong all the time, but he’s losing credibility among the very people he’s targeting.