Dan Tohatan

Windows 7 on Older PCs

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:24:58 GMT

I would like to take this opportunity to encourage users of old PCs (pre-2005) to take extra precautionary steps before installing Windows 7.

Otherwise, you could end up baking your hardware. Yes, baking, in the oven.

How I ended up baking my laptop:

I installed Windows 7 on an older Toshiba laptop (from 2004) with a GeForce Go 5200 graphics card. First, it was not recognized - Windows 7 actually decided to use the Standard VGA Adapter driver for the card, which forced me down to 1024x768 resolution and extremely slow rendering. Well, I decided to look for a driver. Toshiba didn't have one on their site, NVIDIA no longer supports the 5xxx series, so I ended up finding a shaky third-party (modded) driver and modded it a bit myself to get it to actually recognize my card.

So after all that, I installed the custom modded driver and it seemed to work great at first: I even had Aero Glass! But little did I know there was a major problem lurking in the shadows... A few days after installing the new driver, I start up the laptop and it starts displaying columns of random flashing characters (at the BIOS screen). Immediately I concluded that this was a video card problem - it had happened to me before, with a GeForce 4 Ti4200 card.

Great, so now I had a dead video card. I looked around the web for people who had experienced the same problem, and found one who took his laptop to a repair shop and the technicians there diagnosed it as a "BGA failure." So I looked for BGA-related problems and found what seemed to be a re-occurring theme on various forums: "bake at 375*F for 5-10 mins". Surprisingly, those who tried it said it actually worked!

But how does it work? The BGA (Ball Grid Array) is what a video chip is most often connected to. This thing is just an array of tiny balls of solder that can melt at very low temperatures (even 120*C). When the video chip gets insanely hot (like over 100*C), it can warp the BGA so much that the chip disconnects from the balls and you end up with the problem I had (random characters at the BIOS screen). The solution, apparently, is to heat up the entire PCB (in this case the motherboard) evenly at a high temperature, so that the solder melts and reattaches itself to the chip. The prescription, in my case, was to bake at 375*F for 7 minutes.

Of course, I had to remove anything that might melt or explode - like batteries. I made sure to remove even the CMOS battery and remove all attachable parts (RAM, hard drive, etc.). I only baked the actual motherboard. But at the end, it worked! The video is fixed now, thanks to BGA baking!

The problem was caused by Aero Glass overheating my card. I'm 99.9% sure of it. And I'm also 99.9% sure that's why NVIDIA doesn't have any official Vista / 7 drivers for it. So immediately when I booted up my laptop after baking, I booted straight into Safe Mode, removed the graphics driver, and rebooted into Windows 7. Then, I reinstalled the graphics driver and made sure I was on the Windows 7 Basic theme, without Aero Glass. I also disabled the DWM service, so that there is no freak occurrence where Aero Glass gets re-enabled.

Precautionary steps that would've saved my behind:

Like I was saying, with Windows 7 on older hardware it's very important to take a few extra precautionary steps:

Run the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor. Ensure that your essential hardware (the stuff you can't boot up without) is supported.
Take an inventory of your hardware. For me, the easiest way to do this was to just run Dacris Benchmarks (version 8.0) and create an HTML report under the System Information tab. This makes it much easier to find drivers online when everything in Device Manager is listed as "Unknown." But, if you have perfect memory, you don't need to do this.
Make sure you download any necessary network adapter drivers before you install Windows 7. Otherwise, you won't have Internet access. Usually the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor will tell you if you need to do this, but do it even if it doesn't tell you - just in case - unless you have another PC connected to the Internet and a USB key.
For hardware that is shown as not compatible in Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor, try to find official Windows Vista drivers for it. If no official Windows Vista drivers exist, and the device is essential, you may want to reconsider upgrading to Windows 7.
For software that is shown as not compatible in Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor, try to find a newer version online that supports Windows Vista. If no such version exists, and the software is essential, you can still upgrade to Windows 7 but the software will probably need to be run in XP Mode. While XP mode is great, there are some things it can't do - like Direct3D. So if the software in question is a game, you may want to keep Windows XP. In that case, I would recommend dual-booting Windows 7 and Windows XP.

Now, in fairness, I couldn't have run the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor on that Toshiba laptop I mentioned, because it had no working OS at the time (the reason I installed Windows 7 was because XP died). I should've really just reinstalled XP and then run the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor.

A side note - hardware manufacturers (especially NVIDIA) have failed us:

While I was thinking about baking my graphics card, I had a thought: was it really the fact that Vista had such a different driver model that caused hardware manufacturers to produce unreliable drivers? Did hardware manufacturers really not have enough time to adapt to Vista? I remember Microsoft in 2005 mentioned that any PC made in 2005 or later would be able to run Windows Vista. So hardware manufacturers in fact had 2 years to produce Vista drivers. The Vista development cycle lasted 5 years. Plenty of time for IHVs to get involved, learn the Vista driver model, and develop drivers in consultation with Microsoft.

So who really failed here? Microsoft? Was NVIDIA's discontinuation of support for the GeForce 5xxx line a Microsoft decision? Who is to blame for NVIDIA's inability to produce drivers? I would say it's NVIDIA that's to blame here. I've had so many NVIDIA cards fail on me: I witnessed a friend's NVIDIA card go up in flames, literally, then my own NVIDIA card did the same thing! Then, I had an older NVIDIA GeForce 4 Ti card that died with the classic BGA failure, then I had this latest failure: another NVIDIA card. That's four NVIDIA cards, three of which were mine. So out of all the NVIDIA cards I've ever had (about 5), only two remain. Now, I've had my share of ATI cards (roughly 5) and not a single one has ever failed. Not one.

Sorry NVIDIA, but I'm afraid I must buy ATI cards from now on. Sure, NVIDIA's drivers are more polished, and sometimes NVIDIA wins in terms of performance, but the cards rarely last very long. I would urge anyone who is thinking of purchasing an NVIDIA card to think twice and consider the ATI alternative, and think of which card you'd most likely have to bake. Now, of course, if you like baking, NVIDIA is your friend. :)

Windows 7 Smartphone to be Revealed at Mobile World Congress

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 04:26:41 GMT

Microsoft is keeping unusually quiet about their mobile strategy these days. From the various stories I've been reading on the Internets, it looks like MSFT is set to announce a major breakthrough at the Mobile World Congress next month that has the potential to be an iPhone killer.

My prediction: The first Windows 7 smartphone will be announced at the Mobile World Congress, along with APIs for smartphone programming on Windows 7 that match the APIs provided by Apple for the iPhone.

But, we'll just have to see...

Technology Innovations of the Last Decade

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 05:28:05 GMT

KEY TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS OF THE 2000s THAT MOST OF US USE EVERY DAY:
- LCD monitors and TVs
- Solid State Drives (SSDs)
- Cloud computing
- Wireless networking (WiFi/802.11g)
- Multi-core processors
- USB flash drives
- Streaming audio / video
- Torrents
- Online game consoles
- Touch screens
- Bluetooth

KEY TECHNOLOGIES THAT DIED IN THE 2000s:
- Floppy disks
- CRT displays
- Modems
- DOS games
- VHS tapes

PREDICTED TRENDS FOR 2010s:
- Software development re-focuses on hardware limitations & performance optimization (yes, hardware is still very limited!)
- Streaming 3D - enormous worlds with terabytes of content loaded from the web in real-time on your mobile phone or gaming console
- Pen-like computers & 3D glasses - this is the next logical combination of input/output devices overtaking the old PC & monitor
- Popular novels become 3D-ified - entertainment now puts YOU in an immersive 3D world of fantasy - be on Mars battling aliens
- Enhanced vision - while you wear 3D glasses, your PC will see the real world for you in many ways: real, infrared, X-ray, and so on
- The OpenWorld3D project: a perfect online replica of the entire Earth as a 3D world (with buildings, streets, cars, weather, etc.)
- Collaborative 3D modeling online - 3D model wikis are born: allowing the online community to build 3D models collaboratively, online
- 3D will be THE buzzword of the decade, like "online" was for the last decade; expect highly immersive & realistic 3D worlds
- Flexible paperlike screens allow creation of rollable (and maybe even foldable) tablet PCs and phones - OLED will make this happen
- The data web: a computer-friendly version of the entire world wide web, allowing greater sharing of data between sites
- The Internet goes 3D: toward the end of the decade, expect more and more websites to be full-blown 3D worlds

Quick! How many times did I mention 3D?

Savings = Power

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 01:56:55 GMT

It was about 4 years ago when I started saving money for the first time. I opened an ING Direct savings account. Didn't know what I was going to do with it all, but I knew one thing: nobody was saving their money. There had to be a reason. Not only that, but saving was frowned upon. It still is. "Live your life, man!" is what everybody would say. But no. I was saving every penny.

At times, I found it somewhat absurd. Why should I keep saving? What's the point? Why not live for today? Life is short, after all. But I kept saving. I decided to treat it like an experiment. I wanted to find out where it would take me. What advantages would I gain (if any) from saving as much as I can?

Mind you, 4 years ago I was 19 years old and was just becoming acquainted with the vastly complex world of finance. I didn't even know where exactly to put my savings. CDs? GICs? RRSPs? What does it all mean?

So 3 years ago I started researching finance, in depth. I started reading online materials on stocks, bonds, GICs, money markets, and everything else. Basically, I wanted to become aware of all the options I had.

A few months passed, it was July of 2007, and I was observing the stock market. I observed one thing: stocks had been rising since 2002. So, it had been 5 years of continuous rise. If I put my money in stocks now, I reasoned, I would probably lose a whole bunch of it when the stock market crashes (at the time I figured it was a matter of months before the next crash).

So I decided to hold off on buying stocks and keep exploring. Maybe there was something I could put my money into that wasn't just a plain vanilla savings account. I turned my eyes toward inflation. At that point, my only recollection of inflation was the disastrous hyperinflation that my parents experienced in Romania during the 1990s. I remembered clearly that there was a time when every week the price of bread would double. I wondered if something like that could happen again, in North America.

After doing a bit of research on the CPI and noticing that inflation had been going on, though at a slower pace, in the western world as well, I realized there was really no difference between Canada and Romania in terms of currency. Fundamentally, the currency system was exactly the same. So, technically, even though my savings account was CDIC ensured, the purchasing power of that money was not.

I decided to look for ways of protecting against inflation. Initially, my idea was to actually start an inflation insurance firm. Yes, I was determined to sell inflation insurance!

But there already was inflation insurance - and in October, 2007, I finally found out what it was. Gold. My research quickly took me on the path of precious metals, which had been inflation-proof for thousands of years. A good enough track record, I figured.

Great, so I decided to move some of my savings into gold. Of course, I realized it must not be too much, because gold is extremely volatile. Not only that, but gold had been going up for 6 years - longer than the stock market. Surely it was due for a correction. I started small, and moved slowly, making sure that my bullion position never exceeded the "safe" limit that I had set for myself.

But how did we end up talking about gold? The topic was savings. In general. And why it's important to have savings.

Well, first I must make it clear that gold is the only true form of savings. Paper depreciates, and is vulnerable to political turmoil. Stocks are risky - companies go under all the time. Real estate also depreciates and is vulnerable to political turmoil. If you want something that can withstand many generations and has a track record of preserving value through time (which is what savings is), that something is gold, and silver. Precious metals.

Now we can talk about why savings is power. What does it mean to have savings? It means you have the power to readily take on adversity, for a prolonged period of time, in the hope of achieving a greater income. For the individual, it means you can go without a job longer, so you have the latitude to negotiate higher pay in full view of the risk of remaining unemployed, because that doesn't bother you, because you have savings. It means you can explore new business ideas and have no fear of failure, because you know you have savings.

But this applies not only to individuals. Savings is power for countries as well. You see, the country that is able to take on the greatest adversity for the longest period of time will come out on top. Wars are won by those countries that have accumulated the greatest savings. In World War II, the US had the most gold of any country in the world. The US won the war and continued to dominate the world for decades thereafter. Remember: gold is savings, and savings is gold.

Now, 4 years after I started saving, I think I can finally appreciate the power of savings. I see now that debt is servitude, and savings is power. For you see, those who are in debt are subservient to those who have the savings. This has always been the case for all of time. Which side are you on?

Predictions for 2010

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:02:46 GMT

My 10 predictions for 2010:

Inflation will surprise everybody. Watch prices carefully. Everything will be up 10-15% by summer. Your lunch will no longer be $7, but $10, and soon $12. Your bus ticket will no longer be $3, but $4 and soon $5. All in 2010.
Revolution will surprise the powers that be. The US is ripe for a revolution. Especially when it becomes perfectly clear that Obama has done nothing but lie, and that the propaganda machine around Obama is more powerful and more terrifying than what Bush could've ever dreamed of.
The big important theme for 2010: Cost cutting. The words "budget" and "low cost" will be what keep most businesses alive. It'll be about stretching every dollar, stretching every penny, despite the growing unacknowledged inflation.
China will be a big story in 2010, specifically recognition that China is now the world's dominant economic superpower and that US treasuries will soon be liquidated en masse. Furthermore, China will be a story because all of the inflation we'll be seeing will be originating directly from China!
Not to be outdone, mobile phones will go big in 2010 (or rather, small). There will be a surprise in the mobile market that neither Google nor Apple will appear to have prepared for - and that will come from Microsoft. Google, Apple, you have been warned! Yes, we're talking about Windows 7 phones.
Steorn, and a few others, will surprise the oil companies. Yes, free energy will arrive in 2010, if you know where to look. Steorn will be doing a demo early in the year, so it's pretty much a foregone conclusion. The human race has reason to celebrate, and reason to rise up!
Electric cars will reach power parity with gas-powered cars. Range will be hundreds of miles on a single tank. Batteries will charge in seconds! You have been warned...
Government will expand to take over every aspect of our lives. Yes, this is a sad one, but as private sector jobs disappear due to income tax bracket creep caused by inflation, government will expand to take over nearly every aspect of industry. We could see 90% of jobs becoming government-run or government-backed in some way.
Masses will be waking up, in a surprising way. TV will have a decreasing influence in everyday life, and you will become surprised to know that your next-door neighbor knows as much about the New World Order as you do, plus a lot of other things about free energy, UFOs, and other "black-listed" knowledge.
Wage inflation, yes wage inflation, will begin. Your salary will probably be up 50% by the end of the year, but inflation in everything else will have been closer to 100%.

Overall themes for 2010: surprise, reform, and revolution! Change will come, but not because of Obama.

Philosophical Bull and Gnostic Brain Flatulence

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 09:38:11 GMT

Is time linear?
Does every interval of time contain the same amount of information?
What does time contain anyway?

Time is a container for change. Time contains the delta between one state of the cosmos and another. Each finite interval of time contains within it the amount of change that has occurred from the beginning of that interval to the end of that interval.

In a sense, change is novelty and novelty is change. Novelty is merely a synonym for change. So when we think about novelty theory, to refer back to the work of Terence McKenna, we're really analyzing the content of time.

We know that the content of space is matter, and energy. But what is the content of time? It's a perplexing question for those who cannot see the logical conclusion that time in fact contains information. For it is information that informs change. Information is nothing other than change, and change is information. Novelty is therefore information. We're running around in circles describing the same phenomenon with different words, each word trying to out-grandiose the others.

But the fact is simple and yet stunning: Time contains information, much like how space contains matter.

Now, we know another interesting fact from basic observation of the world around us, and that is that information is cumulative. You never lose information. This has been elaborated by Terence McKenna as well. Essentially, the fabric of time itself is cumulative. At every stage in the evolution of the universe, we have gone from a state of low complexity to a state of higher complexity. We've never "devolved" into a state of lower complexity. Complexity has always increased.

Well, what is complexity? First, it helps to understand how we obtain complexity. At the start of our universe, if we accept the big bang theory, the highest level of complexity in the universe was characterized by a primordial soup of electrons and elementary particles. From that evolved the first atom, clearly a structure with an order far more advanced than what had existed prior to its emergence out of the primordial ontos.

Now, this first atom, the hydrogen atom, contained a whole lot more information than its parts, or even the sum of its parts. Because the hydrogen atom has a logical structure far more elaborate than the logical structure which represents an electron. Indeed, it is this logical structure that we must talk about when we're talking about complexity and information. The hydrogen atom is an entity which requires far more information to describe than the electron or the proton alone. So basically, the primordial soup required a very small amount of meta-data (meta-information, or logical structure) to describe, compared to what followed (i.e. the hydrogen atom). This is where we get the notion of increasing complexity. Complexity is the measure of the quantity of information required to produce the simplest possible explanation of a particular physical phenomenon.

As the universe evolved further, we got more and more complex structures. We got other atoms, molecules, organic compounds, and then biological life, and finally social life; intelligent life. Each of these complexities builds on the previous level of complexity. Molecules build on atoms. Social life (cultural or intelligent life) builds on acultural, biological life. Microbial life builds on essential organic compounds. In essence, each new level of complexity contains within it all existing levels of complexity.

Thus, complexity is conserved. We can in fact emphatically state that complexity is never destroyed. It is strictly conserved.

So what does this all imply for the nature of time? Well, time contains within it descriptions of changes within entities of varying complexity. At the beginning of the universe, each second of time contained a only a very minute description of changes, because only a minute description was needed for the level of complexity at which the universe had arrived at that time. Basically, God only needed a handful of bits of information to describe a change in the state of the universe when the universe was still in its primordial soup state.

As the universe complexified, necessarily the amount of information contained within each second of time needed to increase, in order to completely describe the more complex universe that was emerging. Basically, each level of complexity required more information about the changes within that level of complexity.

Thus, as the universe cooled and complexified, time became more and more burdened with information, so that each moment of passing time contained within it more information than the previous moment.

This process continued to this day. With every passing moment, time "expands" to contain more information than any previous moment that has ever existed. This is a profound concept to grasp, with profound consequences for our perception of time. It means that our linear time assumption, the assumption that time is isotropic and linear - that each moment is the same as every other moment, and that each interval of time is qualitatively and quantitatively the same as every other interval - is absolutely patently false and misleading.

We have to ditch the idea that time is somehow plain, linear, and uninteresting. Time is extremely interesting, and ought to be studied by science like nothing else, because we don't have a sufficiently clear understanding of the nature of time.

But the interesting implications of this "expanding time" theory are many. This theory actually validates intuitively-derived beliefs in many cultures that time is accelerating, or that time is heading towards an ultimate end. In fact, even modern science has managed to create a theory mainly involving human culture and cultural progress which indicates that there may be a point in the not too distant future where all of our knowledge, having been preserved thanks to the law of conservation of complexity, leads to a point of infinite temporal acceleration - a point of asymptotic discovery and asymptotic change, putting an end to time itself. Indeed, this very idea has been prophesied by others, including the ancient Mayans with their apocalyptic 2012 prophecy, or the Christians, or even modern-day prophets like Terence McKenna, although I'm sure he would despise being called a "prophet."

We must challenge all of our dearly-held assumptions about time or else we will not proceed to make true scientific discoveries. Today, we carry notions about time that are akin to believing that the Earth is flat or that it sits atop the backs of four turtles. For example, we believe that causal connections can only exist from the past to the future. We have established one predetermined direction for causality. Yet, we can clearly observe retrocausal effects all around us that seem to defy the laws of physics and all too often get classed as mere coincidences or worse, paranormal phenomena. In fact, such occurrences should be observed experimentally and we should try to develop a theory for explaining such retrocausal phenomena as the appearance of 9-11 as a motif in various artifacts well in advance of the actual event which occurred on 9-11-2001. Other retrocausal phenomena include such cases as the flight of animals to safety prior to a devastating tsunami or earthquake. Anything that is often classed as premonition or prophecy ought to be investigated as a potential candidate for retrocausality - events from the future having causal links to events in the past. It's crazy to think that the future could have a causal influence on the past, as it means that the past is now just as malleable or perhaps more malleable than the future!

Anyway, I hope I've been able to shed some light on the strange nature of time and why what we humans often think is obvious is really not so.

I could probably talk further here but instead I think I need to actually summarize what I described:

Time is a container for... change in information, also known as novelty. Necessarily, then, time has at least two dimensions.
Complexity is conserved. Each new level of complexity builds on lower levels. Complexity is never destroyed or reduced.
Time is non-linear and quite probably anisotropic.
Time is expanding, with each one-second interval containing more information than any previous one-second interval. This is subjectively perceived as an acceleration.
There may be an endpoint for time, consisting of an asymptotic acceleration of the rate of progress toward infinite complexity.
Causality probably works both ways, even if it seems odd to us. Retrocausality seems to explain perfectly the phenomenon of prescience in some organisms.

Bend your mind, but be careful not to break it!

A Little Seasonal Spirit

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:57:04 GMT

Spring Solstice

‘Tis the season to be jolly, as the sun begins to dawn.
Spring hath right now just begun.

The solstice ends the sun’s decline.
Soon the snow will melt, the sun will shine.

The sun will burn, high in the sky...
Just like your love did, last July.

Dan's Gold & Silver Alert

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:17:58 GMT

Dan's Gold & Silver Recommendation: Buy (with caution)

We've now corrected 10% in both gold and silver, from the top reached a few weeks ago.

I think it's time, given the speed and severity of the correction, to start buying again.

However, I do think that further downside is possible. So cautious buying is advised.

I will try to have this segment at every major turn in the market so that you can stay up to date with the latest market movements.

So stay tuned for more of "Dan's Gold & Silver Alert."

IE 9: Will it be enough to make me switch from Firefox?

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:22:47 GMT

Internet Explorer 9 will be coming out soon. It is going to have hardware-accelerated rendering of web pages. In essence, it will use the video card (instead of the CPU) to render web pages. This means much faster performance, awesome effects (even 3D), and less CPU usage.

Channel 9 has posted a demo of IE 9. The video shows some of the awesomeness of this new version of IE.

So here are some highlights of what's coming:

Web page rendering on the GPU (instead of CPU)
Better standards support
New JavaScript engine, with performance similar to Firefox

Here is a comparison of browser performance, from Ars Technica:

As you can see, IE 9 is now on par with Firefox and Chrome.

Not good news for Firefox. Or is it?

It seems the Firefox people aren't sitting idly by. They're busy implementing hardware accelerated rendering in Firefox 3.7.

So it's certainly going to be an interesting competition between IE and Firefox. It looks like the browser wars are on again.

Windows 7 Phones: Addendum

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 01:26:35 GMT

Not long after I posted my first topic outlining the idea of Windows 7 smart phones, I found this...

Razorfone: A Conceptual Windows 7 & WPF-powered Multi-Touch Phone Retail Experience

It looks like the idea of a Windows 7 phone is alive & well. While the "Razorfone" is a concept for retail environments (a kind of kiosk), it's nice to see others considering the idea of putting Windows 7 on phones.

One more piece of good news on the mobile phone front:

WIND Mobile Takes Off - National Post

WIND Mobile - www.windmobile.ca - has finally been given the green light in Canada. No longer will we be limited to the triopoly of Rogers/Bell/Telus. Hopefully, this means no more 3-year contracts and lower prices in general. Canada is the most backward country in the world when it comes to mobile phones, largely because of Rogers & Bell's huge political influence.

I urge all who are upset about Rogers or Bell to check out WIND Mobile and consider switching over. Actually, I urge all to check out WIND Mobile. From what I can see, their plans are quite cheap and straightforward.

64-bit Windows: The Definitive Guide

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:20:09 GMT

1. How much memory does 32-bit Windows support?

I'll try to explain this as simply as I possibly can...

You can have as much as 64 GB of RAM with 32-bit Windows, but there will be a hole between 3 GB and 4 GB.

64 GB? Yes. How is that possible? Well, Intel processors for a long time have had a feature called PAE (Physical Address Extension) that adds another 4 bits to the 32-bit limit of Windows, making it effectively 36 bit.

But...
A few caveats:
- If you have only 4 GB of RAM, you'll see just 3 GB because of the hole between 3 GB and 4 GB.

- If your CPU doesn't have PAE, you're stuck with 3 GB as the limit. Go to My Computer - Properties (in XP) to verify you have "Physical Address Extension" listed in your system information.

Also, processes in 32-bit Windows will see 2 GB of memory. But they won't see the same 2 GB. They'll be moved around by Windows so that all of your memory gets used (it's called multitasking!). So there is no "2 GB limit" as some might have you believe. The real limit is 3 GB, or even more if you have PAE.

2. What is different in 64-bit Windows?

The first thing that's different, you can access up to 16 EB (exabytes) of RAM! That's 8 million 2-TB hard drives!

But there are a few more things you need to be aware of:
- 64-bit Windows uses up 60% more memory and disk space than 32-bit Windows due to the doubling of pointer size
- You may have trouble finding 64-bit drivers for older hardware
- 32-bit software will still run perfectly on 64-bit Windows, thanks to WoW (Windows on Windows) emulation
- 64-bit Windows allows you to access all 4 GB of memory when you have 4 GB installed (not just 3 GB like 32-bit Windows)
- There is no memory hole in 64-bit Windows
- Each process can use more than 2 GB of memory
- Some CPU-intensive operations will complete faster if they take advantage of 64 bits (up to 5 times faster!)

Overall, if you have 4 GB of RAM or more, you should install 64-bit Windows to get rid of the memory hole. If you have 3 GB or less, you should stick with 32-bit Windows, because 64-bit Windows will eat up 60% more of your precious RAM.

My Experience - Going from 2 GB to 4 GB

I'm running 64-bit Windows 7 on my machine, with 4 GB RAM. It runs much more smoothly than it did on 2 GB of RAM. I installed 64-bit Windows 7 on 2 GB of RAM. Don't do it. It caused my memory usage to go up from 50% to 80%. Now, with 4 GB, my memory usage is down to 40%.

So, if you have 3 GB or less RAM and aren't planning to upgrade it right away after installing 64-bit Windows, don't install 64-bit Windows. It will eat up too much of your RAM.

D3: Free WPF Data Visualization

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:37:26 GMT

Today I just discovered a neat little WPF graphing library called D3 (DynamicDataDisplay).

It's amazingly architected so that it's fast and extensible. Although it requires .NET 3.5, I was able to downgrade it to .NET 3.0 by using LinqBridge, a free library that emulates 99% of Linq without requiring .NET 3.5.

Actually, LinqBridge deserves a topic on its own - there is literally no reason for you to require .NET 3.5 in your apps, unless you use Linq-to-SQL. Linq-to-Objects is 99% emulated by LinqBridge.

To .NET library developers: start distributing .NET 3.0 versions of your libraries using LinqBridge, so that my Vista users don't have to download .NET 3.5. Saves me a boatload of headache as an ISV.

So, back to the main topic. If you're looking for a WPF line plot library that's free or simply want an example of how to build a WPF control library the right way, just take a look at D3.

Those are my findings for today. I guess it's been an exciting day!

Windows 7 Phones: Coming Next Year!

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:50:03 GMT

So, it seems Moore's Law is at it again. And those who are not aware of it (by now) will be left in the dust. Read this article and you'll know what I mean.

First, I must warn you that you may be offended by reading this article. If you are an ardent fan of Google or Apple and/or a hater of Microsoft, you may not like what I'm about to tell you. That's fine. Just be prepared, if you do plan to read on.

Yesterday I installed Windows 7 on a 5-year-old laptop with 512 MB RAM and only 7 GB of free disk space. It installed (surprise!) and ran flawlessly! It even ran smoother than the XP installation I had on it before. Probably because with all the service packs, XP has actually become more bloated than Windows 7.

Now, I want you to note the specs: 512 MB RAM, 7 GB of disk space. Impressive. A high-end PC from 10 years ago would've had these specs. So literally, Windows 7 supports a decade of computers!

But what's more fascinating is the mobile arena. Currently, Apple is still dominant and yet still afraid to lose its iron grip on the iPhone. On the surface, Apple appears to be very friendly to developers, but behind the scenes they are the control freaks they've always been - I'm looking at you, Steve!

Anyway, there are quite a few frustrating things about the iPhone. First, you can only sell your app through Apple's app store and it has to be approved by Apple. Second, there is no Flash on the iPhone, and no web browser other than Safari. This ought to raise eyebrows and even get Apple into legal trouble like Microsoft got into trouble with IE and Windows, for supposedly abusing their monopoly. But it seems only Microsoft is the unlucky one.

Next we have Google's Android OS, which is a commendable OS. It has everything. It is, for mobile devices, like Windows is for PCs. It is open to developers and developers can share & sell their applications without Google's approval. The only "problem" with Android is that there are too many variants of it. I wouldn't really call this a problem. It's a natural drawback of having to support a wide variety of devices. I mean, look at Windows: Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, and do you hear Windows developers complaining about it? No. They've adapted to it. They expect it. Only Apple fanboys complain about "too many variants" of Android because they don't understand it.

Next, we have Windows Mobile. Or do we? Windows Mobile is laughably dated and limited. Microsoft seems to have lost it completely on the mobile front. But have they? Or are we all missing something that's actually staring us in the face? Are we missing the elephant in the room?

Yes.

Let me introduce you all to the elephant in the room. It's Windows 7. Yup. And it's moving to smart phones. Remember, I installed Windows 7 on a PC with 512 MB RAM and 7 GB of disk space. Why do you think Microsoft decided to actually support old devices this time, and not raise hardware requirements like before? Why do you think Microsoft developed multi-touch capabilities in Windows 7? Is it for all those giant useless tablets out there? Is it for all the giant useless netbooks out there? No! It's for MOBILE PHONES!

Suddenly it all makes sense. But wait, I hear you say, how can Windows 7 ever fit on a phone? Simple: There are smart phones today that have 512 MB of memory. There are smart phones today that are extensible (via microSD card) to as much as 32 GB of storage. Last but not least, is Intel's Atom processor. It's an x86 processor (just like the desktop ones) with speeds of nearly 2 GHz! But the best thing about Atom is, it's extremely low-power and low-heat.

So the situation is now ripe for Windows 7 to start transitioning onto smaller and smaller mobile devices. There are MIDs / UMPCs currently available with screens of 4.8" which is about as small as a PSP. They fit in your pocket. And they run Windows 7. The leap from here to mobile phones is tiny. There is no leap. It's a baby step.

In conclusion, if you thought Microsoft lost the mobile space, you are totally mistaken, and you'll be in for a shock next year. All the Android and Apple fans out there won't know what hit them. Better get on for the ride.

As for what I'm doing to prepare, I'm back developing client-side Windows applications. I use WPF and .NET. They are extremely easy and fun to work with. Microsoft has always had the best support for developers, which is what helped them gain (and maintain) a monopoly for so long. Windows has more software than any other OS, and will continue to do so for many years thanks to Windows 7.

Dacris Benchmarks 8 Beta

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:35:38 GMT

Normally I don't blog about Dacris Software here, but I just got word of the following:

Beta testers will get a free copy of Dacris Benchmarks 8

Only 3 weeks until beta 1!

DoEvents really is evil!

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:15:46 GMT

Apparently some of my older blog articles were really quite popular, because today I stumbled upon something I wrote 5 years ago:

Application.DoEvents() - The call of the devil.
DoEvents messes up the normal flow of your application. If I recall correctly, DoEvents is asynchronous which means it terminates before the application has actually processed any outstanding events, so if you're using it in a procedure with many sequential statements, calling DoEvents causes a huge disturbance whenever it's called. Basically, if you find yourself needing to call DoEvents anywhere, think about starting another thread instead, or using asynchronous delegates.

Imagine this if you will: You have a button on your form that, when clicked, does some complex processing. During the complex processing it also intermittently calls DoEvents to keep the application's user interface "responsive" -- not the best method, I would have used async delegates, but we're talking about a mediocre programmer here. Anyhow, the user sees the application still responding and no indication that there's some processing going on. So the user clicks that button again WHILE the processing is going on! The button responds to the event and starts another processing thread but it isn't actually a thread here, I hope you get what I'm saying. So, like I said earlier, DoEvents screws up the flow of the application too easily.

I want to comment on this further, because I don't think I was really clear at the time.

DoEvents really is evil. Horribly, horribly evil.

In fact, the whole Windows Forms threading model is deficient. The fact that you can set a Label's Text property from any thread is a clear warning sign that something is wrong. This is only now becoming evident to me after having worked for a few months with WPF, which doesn't allow any such nonsense. It will throw an exception if you try to execute UI code on a non-UI thread.

DoEvents should have never been included in the .NET Framework, because it gives a programmer the illusion that you can get by without worker threads. You can't. If a programmer wants to keep the UI responsive while another task is executing, that programmer should use a background worker thread. To update the UI from that thread (to show changing progress), the programmer should call Invoke on the appropriate control and pass in a delegate that will be executed on that control's UI thread. Not only does this serve to keep things consistent, but it also reduces the chances of odd bugs related to threading (which are always difficult to troubleshoot).

So, in short, avoid DoEvents and do what good programmers do: use worker threads. WPF makes it easy (and dare I say fun?) to create & use worker threads, and it's perfectly safe. Windows Forms has a somewhat sketchy UI threading model, mainly because it still has to deal with Win32 API behind the scenes. This is also a reason why you should migrate to WPF and stop releasing production software built with Windows Forms. The sooner Windows Forms dies, the better.

Call of the Devil: System.Diagnostics.Process.Start

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:54:34 GMT

So today will be the last time I use System.Diagnostics.Process.Start without explicitly setting UseShellExecute to true.

Why?

Oh, it started out innocently enough - I was building a simple load testing tool in C# to load-test a custom ASP.NET HTTP handler I was implementing. The tool would basically run wget many times to simulate HTTP requests. Don't know why I didn't just use System.Net.WebClient (because I certainly could've), but I guess I just had wget on my mind.

Anyway, so the tool ran fine but it slowly leaked away memory and handles. Initially I thought it was my HTTP handler. So I ran it with an invalid URL, just to test if maybe the load testing tool itself had a memory leak. Sure enough, it did!

The leak seemed to be coming from my call to System.Diagnostics.Process.Start.

So I did a quick Googling and it turns out that System.Diagnostics.Process.Start causes the child process to inherit handles from the parent process. That means, whatever process you spawn (e.g. Internet Explorer), that process gets all of the handles owned by your process! So even if you free up handles in your process, if the process you spawned is still running, your handles won't really be freed because the child process is supposedly using them. A more detailed explanation can be found here.

As it turns out, the CreateProcess call in System.Diagnostics.Process.Start has a certain parameter that is hard-coded: the bInheritHandles parameter is hard-coded to true. Well, that's a shame now isn't it?

So what can we do instead?

I would prefer any solution except calling the CreateProcess API directly, since API calls are ugly. One option is to set ProcessStartInfo.UseShellExecute to true before calling Process.Start. However, you won't be able to redirect stdio. In fact, if you want to redirect stdio you either have to accept MS's buggy implementation or roll your own with pipes, API, and all that funky stuff.

One last thing...

With the Process class, be sure to explicitly Close the process object (not just Dispose) after starting the process or after you're done using it, because otherwise the process handle may leak.

Visual Studio 2010 is a .NET App

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 03:09:39 GMT

Not even two months after I wrote this article, where I described why desktop .NET is finally ready for take-off, the news is out that Visual Studio 2010 is a managed (.NET) application. Finally, Microsoft are setting an example.

What does this mean to you, the developer? It means that if you've been sitting on the sidelines regarding .NET and are still coding with *gasp* MFC, or Win32 API, it's finally time to move to .NET.

This also means that WPF is here to stay, unlike its predecessor - Windows Forms. Many early adopters of .NET were under the impression that Windows Forms would be supported and actively developed for many years. As it turned out, Windows Forms was a dead end.

The good news: WPF is now fully endorsed by Microsoft through Visual Studio 2010. This means WPF is finally mature enough for adoption. Plus, it's included in Windows 7 and Windows Vista. You don't even have to distribute the .NET Framework (provided you target version 3.0 and not 3.5 or 4.0). Visual Studio now makes it easy to target a specific version of the .NET Framework, unlike some of the early versions (VS 2003/2005).

Personally, I think we're going to start seeing an explosion of new WPF apps in the coming months. It could be like the explosion that happened with the iPhone (and I'm not talking about the screen).

These are the most exciting times for Windows developers since Windows 95.

Where's Bob Prechter Now?

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:41:47 GMT

So gold just shot up above $1090 today - a new all-time high, oil is up above $80 a barrel again, and I'm getting emails in my inbox about contract opportunities with rates of $60+ an hour. So what does all of this have to do with Bob Prechter?

Who is Bob Prechter anyway? For those who don't know, Robert Prechter is a semi-popular financial analyst who occasionally pops out of his wooden shed to warn us all about the impending danger of deflation. Much like Mike "Mish" Shedlock of globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com, he was right in the fall of 2008, when the price of everything collapsed spectacularly. However, most prices have pretty much recovered since then and some (like gold) are actually making new highs!

Robert Prechter has an interesting theory, however: that short-term market movements are entirely random - influenced by a recurring cycle known as the "Elliott Wave," which is based on the Fibonacci ratio of 1.618. In short, markets are irrational, but predictably so - they can be predicted by applying this Elliott Wave theory.

I agree with Robert Prechter on the "markets are irrational" bit. I even think he might be on to something with the Elliott Wave theory. But as far as deflation goes, I am strongly against it. I do not believe deflation can happen in a system of fiat currency (where money is created out of thin air).

One example that deflationistas often like to bring up is the case of Japan in the 1990s, and how allegedly Japan experienced deflation from 1990 to now. That is just totally wrong. Japan experienced roughly -0.5% inflation for 3 years. That's it. That's all the "deflation" it ever experienced. Japan is not a valid example of deflation.

One other example some deflationistas hearken back to as a last resort is the Great Depression. However, during the Great Depression the US was still on a gold standard, so that example is totally invalid in today's fiat world.

So given the track record of these "deflation" predictions, why does Robert Prechter think that "this time is different"? And where is he now, when his predictions appear to be falling apart by the day?

Making Bad Ass-umptions

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:33:58 GMT

Let's talk a bit about assumptions and what can happen if you make wrong ones and never bother to correct them. The example in this article will, fittingly enough, be Microsoft - and specifically .NET.

.NET is supposed to be an OS-independent API. It was designed to hide most of the OS behind a convenient, consistent API that does not expose any underlying OS details. That's what I mean by "OS-independent API." But it turns out, Microsoft is still a little confused about what "OS-independent API" really means.

Starting with .NET 1.0, Microsoft has continually made the assumption that the less unmanaged code they had in their implementation of .NET, the better. This is best evidenced on this web page - called "Is .NET a Win32 Wrapper?"

In reality, an OS-independent API does not have to be entirely OS-independent. Only the API - the part that the programmer sees - is OS-independent, hence "OS-independent API". The implementation need not be OS-independent, and should not be.

The developer does not care how many unmanaged calls are happening behind the scenes. The only thing the developer cares about is the API, because the only thing the developer sees is the API. As long as the API is OS-independent, the implementation of the API does not matter.

So why is Microsoft reinventing the wheel by reimplementing basic controls like buttons in Windows Forms, and then again in WPF? Why not just create a thin wrapper around Windows API, like SWT? (SWT, by the way, is a thin Java wrapper around standard OS controls like Button, TextBox, etc.)

Right now, .NET is completely lacking a thin wrapper for Win32 API. WinForms and WPF are both thick wrappers. They only call the Windows API for extremely low-level tasks like GDI. They are more like Java Swing than SWT. The trouble is, when you build a thick wrapper, you inevitably run into performance issues and UI inconsistencies. You're also reinventing the wheel, often unnecessarily.

Another issue you run into when building a thick wrapper is size. SWT is 2 MB (small enough to fit into the L2 cache of a Core 2 processor!) because it's a thin wrapper. You also have the issue of maintainability: a thick wrapper is more complex and therefore harder to maintain than a thin wrapper.

Sure, there are advantages to thick wrappers. I'm not sure exactly what they are, but there probably are some. However, developers often prefer simple, clean, and small applications. And so do users. So, Microsoft, where is the SWT for .NET?

Desktop .NET Finally Ready for Take-Off

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 06:46:10 GMT

It was 2002. I had just finished developing Dacris Benchmarks 4.9 using pure Win32 API. I was proud of myself. It was the first 100% Windows API application I had developed. No more Borland OWL crutches. It was a clean start. The application went on to become a phenomenal success. But something was not quite right in the land of Windows development. A major new player was just entering the arena. Its name was ".NET", previously known as NGWS, and it promised to change everything.

From the beginning it was clear that this .NET thing was not going to be popular right away. It was a gigantic change at a time when the world was still trying to recover from the collapse of the dot-com bubble. It was, furthermore, a behemoth in the days when broadband Internet was still a rare commodity. Weighing in at a hefty 23 MB, the .NET redistributable was just too much of a penalty to pay for the convenience of developing "managed" applications with a truly object-oriented language.

From the developer's perspective, .NET was amazing from day one. Sure it still had some kinks which ultimately led me to develop NetXP, but as a development paradigm it completely overshadowed the archaic Windows API. It was a dream come true - garbage collection, Windows Forms, remoting, and a whole bunch of other goodies.

.NET immediately took off on the web. Within one year, nearly every major company was developing ASP.NET web apps with .NET 1.1. The release of Windows Server 2003 only served to accelerate that trend even further. .NET web development soon reached a frenzy as the advantages of ASP.NET over other technologies (PHP, JSP) became evident.

However, something was wrong on the desktop. Three years after .NET came out, virtually no .NET desktop applications were being developed. The reason? Most ISVs, especially the small ones, saw the gigantic size of the .NET framework and the support headache associated with its deployment as a major roadblock to adoption. Even though .NET was great for developers, it was not so great for end users.

The fact that Windows XP SP2 and SP3 did not include the .NET Framework only made the situation worse. For most ISVs, it was clear that if they wanted to develop Windows apps, they would have to continue using Windows API, until something better came along.

Well, something better finally did come along in 2007. It was called .NET 3.0 (or WinFX), and it was embedded in Windows Vista. Suddenly, the deployment obstacle to .NET adoption was removed. Now, there was really no reason for ISVs not to adopt .NET. Or was there?

The reason was one word: "Vista." This word soon came to be reviled among the Windows community. Nobody wanted to touch Vista with a ten-foot pole. The truth is, Vista was plagued with problems for at least a year after its RTM. Finally, in 2008, the initial Vista problems started getting resolved and users started adopting Vista at a more rapid pace.

Today, there is a two-word reason why .NET adoption on the desktop finally makes sense: "Windows 7." Windows 7, which includes .NET 3.5 by default, is leaner and meaner than its predecessor. Every PC that can run Vista can run Windows 7 and do so with better performance. In a few months, the combined market share of Windows 7 and Windows Vista will exceed 35%. It's practically there right now.

From an ISV's perspective, however, it is not only market share that counts. It is also the value per customer within that segment of the market. For example, a Mac user typically has 4 times more value than a Windows user because Mac users tend to buy applications more readily than Windows users. Now when it comes to Windows XP versus Windows Vista/7, the Windows XP user at this point is basically stuck in the stone age. The odds of a Windows XP user purchasing a new application are much lower than the odds of a Windows Vista/7 user purchasing a new application. The Windows XP user generally runs old applications on old hardware, and is very conservative when it comes to making new purchases. The result is that the value of a Windows XP user is (sorry XP users) generally lower than the value of a Windows Vista/7 user from the point of view of an ISV.

Anyway, to make a long story short, despite a market share of "only" 35%, Windows Vista/7 users are now actually a more important market for ISVs than Windows XP users. This is only now starting to happen, after about 8 years of XP dominance.

What does this mean for ISVs and the software industry as a whole? It means that .NET will finally be adopted on the desktop. .NET makes development much easier, there is no question about that. However, for a long time there was a question about whether Microsoft would embrace or at least continue to support .NET. That question has finally been answered. .NET is here to stay and the future for Windows applications is .NET. Windows API has finally come to the end of its life. It's an exciting time to be a Windows developer.

I was wrong

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 03:00:14 GMT

OK, remember this article?
"Imminent Stock Market Crash"

On August 24, I warned that a stock market crash is "imminent" and that the "coming weeks" would be "turbulent to say the least."

Well, I was wrong.

The market did dip on August 28 and fell a few hundred points but has since rallied to a new 2009 high.

Where did I go wrong?

I got the timing wrong. That's all. The crash is still coming. The Dow is still going to 2000.

At this point, I think the Dow will probably reach 11,000 before the crash begins. The peak will come in October.

Only suckers are buying now.

That's all I'm going to say.

Inflation? Deflation? It don't matter.

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 02:15:45 GMT

I want to draw your attention away from the talking heads on CNN/FOX/CNBC (who are all shouting "recovery") and toward a recent video by TheModernMystic:

Apparently, M3 - a measure of US money supply - has been declining now for over a year.
Credit as well as money has been declining at an annual rate of at least 5%!
In other words, we are in deflation (in the US) since March of 2008.

Banks are being paid to hold money in reserve and NOT lend. Why is the Fed doing this?
Could it be that China now has enough power over US monetary policy to prevent inflation (and thus devaluation of their dollar assets)?

Additionally, consumer attitudes toward credit & spending have changed dramatically. This has been pointed out by Mish on his blog many times.
High & rising unemployment has forced people to save (US savings rate now 7%) and has driven salaries lower (people taking 30%-50% pay cuts).

The big question is whether deflation can/will continue.
I believe that it can, and it will. It all has to do with what is in the interest of those who control the money supply.

Let's look at it this way. If you're a bank, and you've given out $5 billion in loans,
you would ideally want to be paid back in full (with interest) on those loans. What happens if there is a sudden 50% inflation?
You get 50% less than what you gave out in loans. That is, you are not paid in full, because the dollar has lost 50% of its value.
So, given this reality, you would ideally want the dollar to maintain its purchasing power or even gain in purchasing power.
In other words, the ideal condition for banks (and other lenders) is deflation!

Now, let's look at China. China has at least $1 trillion in US bonds. They've lent out $1 trillion to the US. They would ideally
want to be paid back in strong dollars so that they can purchase US assets on the cheap. They want to maximize the bang for their buck!
China wants deflation. How much control does China have over US monetary policy? I would argue that, since they are the biggest exporter to the US
and the biggest supplier of cheap labour to US companies, they have at least a tangible influence over what Ben Bernanke decides to do at the Fed.

Clearly, US banks and China want deflation. The US government, however, wants inflation because they have no way of paying their gigantic debt burden.
How much say does the US government have in monetary policy? None. That is just a fact. The Federal Reserve is a private institution, independent of the
US government. The US government has no control over monetary policy. No matter how much inflation they want, they aren't in charge of the printing press.

Now a clearer picture starts to emerge. The picture is a little shocking for those who have been led to believe that the US dollar is headed for hyperinflation.
The picture shows what is likely to happen for the next 5-10 years, and it ain't pretty. The US dollar is likely to maintain its purchasing power or even gain
purchasing power. What is likely to unfold is another depression, similar in magnitude and character to the Great Depression. Prices of all non-essential items
will fall or remain stagnant. Wages will fall or remain stagnant. The stock market & real estate market will collapse.

So what can you do to come out ahead? First, if you have a job and can save some money, save it in gold. Have enough dollars to get by on for a few weeks but
beyond that all savings should be in gold. Why gold? Gold maintains its purchasing power. The likelihood that the dollar will gain significantly in purchasing
power is very low, simply because it's a fiat currency - its supply can be increased arbitrarily. Even if the dollar does not inflate over the coming years, you
will not have lost anything by owning gold, because gold never loses its value. Additionally, gold has no counterparty risk. It's not a loan or a promise to pay.

Secondly, get out of stocks and real estate. Real estate prices are going to continue to collapse. The Dow will go to 2000. Real estate will probably go back to
1980s price levels - $100,000 for a house. The time to buy these assets for the long haul will be in 3-5 years when the lows have been hit. However, these assets
will not perform well for the next 10+ years, so you have plenty of time to wait before getting back into "the market."

Third, bonds are going to be problematic. In a deflationary depression, first comes the stock collapse, then the bond collapse. The bond market collapse will be
far more painful than the stock market collapse. US treasury bonds are in a bubble. Bonds are the last thing to peak after a speculative mania. 0% yields are not
sustainable for more than 2 or 3 years. I've said it before and I'll say it again: owning US treasuries now is like owning dot-com stocks in 1999.

Finally, consider owning some silver. It's more risky than gold but has the potential for higher returns over the long term. Silver outperformed gold from 1932
to 1979 by a significant margin. If gold is your rainy-day fund, silver is your 401k. Regardless of whether there is inflation or not, silver will gain in value
relative to every other asset. That's what's important.

Again, let me emphasize that the inflation/deflation debate has no bearing on whether precious metals will continue to gain in value over the coming decades.
That question is answered by looking at supply & demand over the long term. The same goes for stocks, bonds, and real estate. What matters is the relative
performance of one asset compared to another.

The future of the dollar only concerns those who hold dollars and those who owe dollars. It concerns China and US banks. They wish for deflation.
The Federal Reserve, being in bed with US banks like Goldman Sachs, will probably grant them that wish. The US government will probably continue to borrow and hope for inflation. They will probably just default, like Russia in 1997.

A One-Pic Summary of the Health Care Debate

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 20:28:58 GMT

Weekend Summary - IRS Panic; Washington March; Gold

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:30:48 GMT

Here are some stories I found very interesting:

Rich people panic over new IRS rules
"2 million" march in Washington, DC
Barrick Gold will cut its short position in gold

My comments:

The first story explains the rise in the gold price. If companies can't keep dollar-denominated assets in foreign offshore bank accounts, they will just move those assets into gold in undisclosed locations. If it can't be audited, it can't be taxed. Problem solved.

Barrick Gold is reducing its short position in gold, which it has been keeping for at least the past 5 years. This is short-term very bullish for gold. In addition to this, many central banks have stopped selling gold and China wants to get out of the dollar.

If you are a gold investor, I think it's time to seriously consider "selling the news" after buying the rumour for the past 10 years. This gold bull market is about to come to an end, or at least cool off for the next 3 years. Take advantage of the big gold rally coming this fall to liquidate some longs.

Update:

I have to comment on the Washington march story, because apparently there were nowhere near 2 million people at the march. Regardless of how many people there were, the fact that many signs praised FOX News is a giveaway that this rally was staged by FOX News and its minions. Edit: BBC confirms "tens of thousands" attended the protest, not millions.

Sadly, a legitimate point of view about the importance of the US constitution has been hijacked and turned into a freak show of uninformed "morans" who can't even put together a coherent thought. It's a fake revolution. All efforts toward an intelligent debate about the role of the US constitution have been stifled by the controlled corporate media.

I'm still waiting for the REAL revolution.

Charlie Sheen Seeks 9/11 Truth

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 06:02:59 GMT

Article:
Infowars.com - Twenty Minutes with the President

Some 9/11 smoking guns:

NORAD standing down
Operation Northwoods
Memo on "Bin Laden determined to attack inside US"
Saudis flown out while nobody else could fly
PNAC
Blacking out of "Saudi Arabia" in 9/11 [C]omission Report
Omission of Building 7 in 9/11 [C]omission Report
WTC buildings falling down at free-fall speed
Larry Silverstein insurance policy & "pull it" comment
Record level of put options on airlines prior to 9/11
Giuliani knowing WTC was going to collapse
BBC knowing that Building 7 was going to collapse before it actually did
Bin Laden was a CIA asset, known as Tim Osman

Time to wake up!

> > >

Some Recommended Reading

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:12:23 GMT

The following articles discuss (in different ways) the demise of the dollar:

1. TIME - America and Its Deficits

2. Bloomberg - UN Says New Currency Is Needed

3. iStockAnalyst - China Now Net Seller of US Treasuries

Still bullish on the dollar?

Americans Getting Fooled...Again

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:39:23 GMT

Article: Up to $3,800 fine for failure to get health insurance

"WASHINGTON (AP) - A top senator is calling for fines of up to $3,800 on families who fail to get medical insurance after a health care overhaul goes into effect."
...
"The plan from Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana would make health insurance mandatory, just like auto coverage."

I'm not going to comment too much other than to say that this just another example of fascism in the US. Public-private partnerships. Government subsidizing private industry. And guess who gets stuck with the bill? The dumbed-down American people, that's who.

The American people lost their country in 1913, when the government took over the financial industry via the Federal Reserve and declared a monopoly on money creation. The US at that point became a fascist state. Ever since 1913, America has been nothing but a banana republic, ruled by brute force rather than law.

I will leave you with this alleged quote from Woodrow Wilson:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

Pseudo-Random Thoughts

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 06:05:05 GMT

I'm going to get a little more personal in this post and tell you all about my latest insights into life. Seems like while everyone is starting school again, I'm here looking for work trying to forge a new path into an uncertain (and increasingly bleak) future.

I graduated from Waterloo Software Engineering in June with no job, and no idea what to do with my life. That much hasn't changed -- yet. But what has changed is my level of knowledge of the so-called "real world."

A major economic depression started in 2008, along with a gigantic paradigm shift in people's attitudes towards spending. Regardless of why or how that shift happened, it's now certain that it happened and it won't be reversed. It's here to stay. How did this affect me personally? Well, the place I was working at before I graduated basically went into a hiring freeze in November, 2008 and so I lost the full-time job I may have been offered otherwise. I ended up graduating without a job.

Following an enlightening trip to Romania, where I witnessed some rather spectacular things which I might describe in more detail in a future post, I came back with a somewhat revised outlook on life. Specifically, I realized that in order to make it in the "real world" I had to be far more easy-going and roll with the punches as it were.

I'm gaining even more insights every day. It's as if years of uncertainty are finally meshing into a coherent mass of wisdom. It's hard to describe, but it's as if the hormonal fog through which I was trying to navigate during my teenage years is finally lifting. So I will now share with you some of the pearls of wisdom that have formed inside my brain recently.

1. Reality is Negotiable
There's a lot more flexibility in everything than you might at first believe there is. An example of this is with respect to lifestyle. It's amazing to me how people in Romania can live on as little as 500 euros per month and afford all the modern aspects of American life, including cell phones, cars, travel, and of course lots of alcohol & partying. There's flexibility wherever you choose to look for it. Never be afraid to negotiate. You have nothing to lose.

2. Eliminate Expectations
When I started university in 2004, I had some pretty lofty ideals of what my life would be like after graduation. I envisioned a steady income of $60,000 or more per year, I saw myself driving a European car, living in a stylish condo downtown, and being able to travel to interesting places. Of course, I still have those visions. I still want that lifestyle, but I've come to terms with the fact that I probably won't have it for many more years to come, if ever. The party is over. What I've found is that if life does not match your expectations, you'll be unhappy. Happiness is often found when you eliminate expectations as they relate to status, wealth, and other materialistic desires. The frugal lifestyle doesn't have to be a depressing lifestyle. It's just different. It's still life.

3. Take Advantage of Black Swans
Building on wisdom from the "Black Swan," there can be both positive black swans and negative black swans. Try to minimize your exposure to negative black swans but maximize your exposure to positive black swans. They say that luck favors the well-prepared. Take risks whenever you have little to lose and much to gain. Go all-in on a good hand, to use a poker analogy. It's extremely important, and I can't stress this enough. It is extremely important to recognize the situations where you have nothing to lose and something to gain. A lot of businesses fail because they focus too much time on reducing minute losses instead of actively looking for large gains.

4. Disarm Weaknesses
The most uncomfortable (i.e. scary) things are the things from which you'll learn the most. As a well-known philosopher once said, "do something that scares you everyday." Recognize what scares you the most, and approach it, confront it, and disarm it. Not only that, but why not go on and master it? Why let fears be your master, when you can master your fears? Talk about the things you'd rather not talk about. The only way to grow is by recognizing your insecurities and disarming them. By "disarming," I mean dealing with them in any way you feel is most efficient. Don't try to become a master in something you have no interest in. But just recognize what it is that makes you uncomfortable and find a way to disarm it. If you're afraid of dogs, recognize that fact (stop denying it), and disarm it by exposing yourself to that which you fear.

5. Stop Seeking External Validation
The world is a brutal place. Nobody is going to appreciate you, hold your hand, or treat you in a special way just because you think you're special. A lot of people have incredibly fragile egos which are based purely around what other people think of them. Some will go as far as to create false impressions, manage their public appearance, and hide any weaknesses that they might have. This is suicide. If you do this, you might as well kill yourself because the same objective is achieved - your personal life, your life as an individual, ends at that point. Recognize situations where you are seeking validation and disarm those situations. Your self-esteem should not be dependent on what others think of you. Try to humiliate yourself at least once a day.

6. Loss of Control is an Illusion
Control freaks will often run into situations in which they feel that they have no control, and typically they will feel very uncomfortable -- even terrified. The loss of control may feel complete, but it's not. Typically, in an unfamiliar situation you feel the most sense of "loss of control." Again, you have more control than you think. So just chill. If you think more deeply you'll realize just how much control you actually have.

7. Always Test Assumptions
I have to give credit to the author of "The 4-Hour Workweek" for this golden piece of advice. Left-brained people always love to read books and follow prescriptions (instructions) for everything. I hate this approach, because I have to know WHY a certain step has to be taken, and what the alternatives are. I guess that's why I'm an engineer. But really, following assumptions (blindly) is akin to following a religion. Also, just because an assumption is socially prevalent doesn't mean it's right. It's often easy to overlook this reality and say that, well, the masses are always right. The masses are seldom right. And even if they were, what does it matter to you? You should be looking at assumptions as if they were hypotheses, and try to test them by experimentation.

8. Only You Can Establish Boundaries
People seldom establish their own boundaries. Sad but true. There are many boundary-pushers out there. These are the bullies of middle school, the bosses that belittle their employees, the abusive girlfriends or boyfriends, the students who tease the inexperienced supply teacher, the children who bankrupt their parents. If you do not assert your boundaries, people will assume that there are no boundaries there. I've had experience with this all my life and I always hate it when my personal boundaries are violated, and I make it clear that it's not cool. You have to be willing to say "no," in a reasonable way and be prepared to make enemies. That's life.

9. Ignore the Inconsequential
There's far too much information (and entertainment) in the world today. A lot of it is totally inconsequential relative to your own life. A lot of it is a complete waste of time. You can spend a lot of time worrying about minutiae. I've been there. I know what it's like. A lot of people with OCD probably know what I'm talking about. Spending countless hours doing something totally meaningless because you don't want to get started on that massive Anthropology assignment. You just sit there surfing the net aimlessly. You don't even go out, you don't do anything productive. Procrastinators actually have a form of OCD. Worrying about a major undertaking is pretty normal, but just don't let it consume too much of your time.

Why 9 points? I like 9. It's a very complete number. It's the highest single-digit number. How many 9s are there from 1 to 100? Google it, I won't give you the answer. I won't hold your hand. Nobody will. It's time to grow up and do things on your own. Just like you have in the past.

The next 10 years of my life will certainly be more fun than the last 10 years of my life. Maybe it's time to say goodbye to this lost decade for good. It's time to embrace the real world, free of school, free of the left-brain prison where you must accept assumptions and regurgitate them on command. It's time to enter an enlightened state of mind.

Another Shocking Chart

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:46:00 GMT

Malcolm Gladwell: Genius Takes 10,000 Hours!

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 06:20:15 GMT

Fascinating video:

Cut my pay... all the way to slavery!

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:53:44 GMT

"Cut My Pay" Nonsense

Inquiring minds may want to read the following article:
Cut my pay... please! - CNN Money

Apparently workers in the US are taking 30-50% cuts in salary in order to get jobs. This is grim, folks. Really grim.

"Rebecca Eason, who used to make a comfortable $33,000-a-year living in Tennessee."

Hmm... $33,000 was a comfortable living? I wonder how that's possible. If you just take rent, add food and electricity, and sprinkle a dash of transportation costs on top of all that, you can easily get up to $1800 a month in living expenses! Now suppose you want your "comfortable" lifestyle to include some savings for retirement ($400 a month), plus a few nights out ($100 a month), a small vacation ($300 a month) and a very limited clothing budget ($200 a month) and you get to $2800 a month necessary for a comfortable lifestyle. $33,600 in annual cost. Assuming a very modest tax rate of 15%, you would need almost $40,000 for a comfortable lifestyle.

But now Rebecca isn't even making $33,000. Apparently she's making $18,000/yr in a temporary position! You can't even survive on that kind of salary. Or if you do, it's in a very compromised lifestyle. The economic situation in the US must be extremely dire for people to resort to such madness!

Downsizing of the American Lifestyle

It's now become quite clear that the American dream is finished. The US is rapidly devolving into a third-world country. That has been the plan all along, at least since the 1970s when manufacturing jobs started moving to China. Slowly, the US became a hollowed out consumer-driven "service" economy (in reality, the vast majority of wealth was concentrated in the financial sector, which was just a money-laundering front for the arms & drug trade).

But no matter how it happened, it's clear that the American lifestyle has been downsized. In the 1960s, the average salary for 2 years was enough to afford a house. Now, it takes at least 6 years worth of the average salary to buy a house. The real wage has declined to a third of what it was in the 1960s! No wonder it takes 3 salaries nowadays to support a household!

The average CEO makes up to 500 times what the average worker makes. The difference was 10 times smaller in 1980! Times have changed. The rich have gotten richer while the poor have gotten poorer.

Power Corrupts: US as the Lone Superpower

The only reason why US society was so equitable, just, and civilized 30+ years ago, post World War II, was because of the cold war. The cold war was the main reason why the US maintained such an elevated standard of living for its citizens. Social decline could not happen in the US, as it would immediately show the "weakness" of the capitalist system and, as a result, give credence to the socialist system. As long as these two rival systems fought for supremacy, the US had to maintain an image of prosperity and fairness.

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 for economic reasons, and since then the US has been the lone superpower in the world. As the old saying goes, power corrupts. No longer charged with maintaining an image of prosperity, the US gradually declined into a society of poverty and inequality, which is the typical outcome of a capitalist system. Capital concentrates increasingly into the hands of the few, the well-connected, the corrupt few who have absolutely no morals and total self-interest. Power begets power. Money begets more money. Influence begets more influence.

To give credence to this theory all you have to do is look at the evidence: the decline in US standard of living from 1969 (the peak of US-Soviet rivalry as exemplified by the moon landing) to today. Nothing could be clearer than the steady downward trend in real wages and upward trend in income inequality that started in the 1970s.

The Future: Economic Crisis, Followed by Revolution

The US will follow the path of the Soviet Union in its final decline from its throne of global superpower. The first signs are already occurring. The economic crisis that the US is now seeing is far different from previous recessions. There is a deep, fundamental problem with the US economy that was caused by 30 years of easy credit, corruption, and out-of-control unproductive spending.

This economic crisis will only deepen, and it will deepen as a result of present policies being put in place to "stimulate" the economy. The current policies only serve to increase government spending, expand military operations, and continue the unsustainable American empire. The collapse of Empire America is what is necessary for the US to begin recovery.

There will come a point when Americans will become so sick of the injustice which is currently occurring that they will rise up in a new American revolution. This time, it will be a revolt against every single unconstitutional policy that has served to destroy the foundation upon which America was built. America was once a land of opportunity, and there was great prosperity because the government adhered to the US constitution and was not in bed with giant multinational corporations or hostile faraway nations.

Silver: The Opportunity of a Century

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 06:42:21 GMT

A Look Back

Go back to 1932 and imagine that you saved a year's salary ($600) worth of silver, a total of 2400 oz. Now suppose you did not touch your stash of 2400 oz until 1979, when you decided to sell it all for $30 an ounce. How much money would you have earned?

Answer: $72,000

You could have bought a decent house with that money in 1979. $72,000 was 9 yearly salaries in 1979. Good investment, I'd say.

Now suppose you did the same thing, but with gold. So, you would've bought $600 worth of gold in 1932 (29 oz) and then sold it in 1979 for $800 an ounce. How much would you have pocketed?

Answer: $23,200

OK. Still a decent investment. I mean, that was 3 average salaries back then, but certainly not as good as silver.

Now imagine you did the same thing, but with the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which you would've bought at the rock-bottom price of $40 a share. That's 15 shares. How much would you have gotten for your investment in 1979?

Answer: $13,500

That's still a bit above the average salary. Certainly not as stellar as gold or silver though. And you had to get the market timing exactly right to snap up 15 shares at precisely the all-time low in 1932.

My point should be evident by now. Over a period of 47 years (almost an entire adult life) in the last century, starting in 1932, the best-performing asset class as an investment was silver. The worst-performing was the Dow!

A Multi-Decade Trend is Ending

The last 29 years have been exceptionally good for stock market investors, and exceptionally awful for precious metals investors. This trend will change, just as it has in the past.

Already, the metals have been outperforming the Dow for the past 8 years. However, they are still very cheap by historical standards. Silver is just $0.28 in 1930s dollars, which is close to the actual low of $0.25/oz in 1932.

Even after going up 3-fold in the last 7 years, silver is still undervalued!

The Future Looks Bright for Silver

In 1979, silver hit a high of $50/oz which it has yet to surpass. That high, adjusted for inflation, is $153. However, if I use M3 money supply growth and adjust it for net silver supply growth, I get about $250. Considering that I see gold hitting $5000 and the gold:silver ratio has been as low as 12:1 in the recent past, I don't see why silver can't even go above $400 when the real speculative mania sets in.

Assuming the odds of hitting $8 are about the same as the odds of hitting $500, the midpoint falls around $60/oz. That means, to properly balance out the downside risk & upside potential, the price of silver should be $60/oz right now. That's over 4 times higher than today's actual price.

Warren Buffett, eat your heart out! Silver will likely have incredible returns for the next 40+ years, just as it did from 1932 to 1979. Forget about buying gold. Why not get the best returns? Why not buy silver?

Bank of Canada is Understating Inflation

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:37:25 GMT

I decided to use the Bank of Canada's Inflation Calculator to see what some prices from 1968 would amount to in today's dollars. I got the 1968 prices from http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1968.html

The average house in 1968 cost about $15,000. I challenge you to find me a house today (that isn't a dump) that sells for $91,000 (the price given by the Inflation Calculator).
The price of oil in 1968 was about $5 a barrel. Is oil anywhere near $30 today?
Gasoline was 35 cents a gallon (10 cents a litre). Is gas 60 cents a litre today?
A brand-new GM car was $2800 in 1968. Show me ONE new GM vehicle I can purchase for under $17,000 today and I'll buy it.

The CPI is understating inflation (since 1968) by anywhere from 50% to 200%. The CPI should be at least 200, not 114.7.

The consistent understatement of the CPI is causing major problems for savers, retirees, and tax payers. It is essential that this problem be rectified or else the Canadian standard of living will continue to decline.

Bank of Canada, if you keep adjusting the CPI downward (for whatever reason), there will come a time when the CPI will be so out of touch with reality that people will revolt and the corruption that has been going on will become evident for all to see. So I would say it is in your own interest (for the purpose of maintaining credibility) to provide a CPI that is as accurate as possible.

Or maybe I'm just mad that I'm only getting 1.2% interest on my savings account, while the Core CPI as reported by Bank of Canada itself is 1.8%!

Kiyosaki: Prepare for the Worst

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:17:10 GMT

Article:
Preparing for the Worst - Robert Kiyosaki

"
The stock market has been going up since March 9, 2009. Talk of "green shoots" fill the air. Yet, in spite of the more positive news, I continue to recommend that people prepare for the worst.
"

He then goes on to outline several reasons why the talk of green shoots is all baloney:

1. Market manipulation, with which I agree 100%. The correlations between the Dow, TSX, and other unrelated indices are just freaky. The mysterious uptick every Friday afternoon just before the close. The signs are there that there's something fishy going on.

2. The Fed caused the problems we are seeing now. I couldn't agree more. The policy of interest rate manipulation by an independent central bank interferes with the free market. This causes all sorts of bubbles and mal-investments leading to a fundamentally weak economy.

3. Demographics. Boomers are retiring, and in the process are becoming more frugal. This is a trend that will continue through the 2010s.

4. Social Security & Medicare are unsustainable and will slowly drive the US into bigger & bigger deficits.

"
Demographics show that we are entering a battle between young and old. I call it the "Age War." The young want to hang onto their money to grow their families, businesses, and wealth. The old want the tax and investment dollars of the young to sustain their old age.

This war is not coming...it is upon us now. This is one of many reasons why I remain cautious and say, "The worst is yet to come."
"

This is all the more reason to get out of the stock market now, while it's still high.

Imminent Stock Market Crash

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:03:49 GMT

This is an alert that a stock market crash is imminent in the TSX, Dow, and other global stock markets.

Get out now before it's too late! Safety can be found in gold, silver, and bonds.

It is imperative that you take cover now. The coming weeks will be turbulent to say the least. The crash will start Wednesday or Thursday of this week.

Get out of long positions. REPEAT: Get out of long positions! I don't care if you're invested for the long term.

The Dow is going to 2300. It will be a stomach-churning ride if you have any money in the stock market.

Forget all the rosy nonsensical predictions made by Bernanke & gang. The US is in a depression. 34 million are on food stamps. Dow 9500 just doesn't reflect that reality.

The FDIC went bankrupt on August 14, 2009!

You have been warned.

A Shocking Chart

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:18:13 GMT

Source: chartoftheday.com

Meanwhile Bernanke is talking about recovery. The same man who never saw this recession coming. Why hasn't he been fired yet?

Abolish the Fed.

The End of Dow Jones?

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 22:58:30 GMT

Story:
Dow Jones Mulling Sale of its Indexing Business - FOX Business

Did I not say a few months ago that there won't be anymore Dow Jones?

And I quote...

"There will be no Dow Jones anymore. This will be such a spectacular and catastrophic collapse that it will be talked about for GENERATIONS. It will be written about in the HISTORY BOOKS."

- March 9, 2009

Mark my words, there will be no Dow Jones just like there will be no dollar 10 years from now (probably sooner).

Nothing is forever.

It's Happening

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 07:32:31 GMT

China reduces holdings of US debt - BBC
"
China reduced its holdings of US government debt by the largest margin in nearly nine years in June, according to data from the US Treasury.

China holds more US government debt than any other country and cut its holdings of US securities by more that 3% in June, said the BBC's Chris Hogg.

"China has said it would like to establish an alternative to the US dollar as the world's favoured currency for foreign exchange reserves," said our correspondent.
"

Stiglitz sees risk to dollar - Bloomberg
"
The dollar’s role as a good store of value is “questionable” and the currency has a high degree of risk, said Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

“There is a need for a global reserve system,” Stiglitz, a Columbia University economics professor, said at a conference in Bangkok today. Support from countries like China should ensure orderly discussions on a new reserve system, he added.
"

And lastly, a sign of the times... Man Charged For Stealing Railroad Tracks!

So much for green shoots.

Buffett Warns of Dollar Collapse

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 05:43:17 GMT

Original Article:
The Greenback Effect - NY Times

"
An increase in federal debt can be financed in three ways: borrowing from foreigners, borrowing from our own citizens or, through a roundabout process, printing money. Let’s look at the prospects for each individually — and in combination.

The current account deficit — dollars that we force-feed to the rest of the world and that must then be invested — will be $400 billion or so this year. Assume, in a relatively benign scenario, that all of this is directed by the recipients — China leads the list — to purchases of United States debt. Never mind that this all-Treasuries allocation is no sure thing: some countries may decide that purchasing American stocks, real estate or entire companies makes more sense than soaking up dollar-denominated bonds. Rumblings to that effect have recently increased.

Then take the second element of the scenario — borrowing from our own citizens. Assume that Americans save $500 billion, far above what they’ve saved recently but perhaps consistent with the changing national mood. Finally, assume that these citizens opt to put all their savings into United States Treasuries (partly through intermediaries like banks).

Even with these heroic assumptions, the Treasury will be obliged to find another $900 billion to finance the remainder of the $1.8 trillion of debt it is issuing. Washington’s printing presses will need to work overtime.
"

My Comments:

To say that Warren Buffett's assumptions regarding demand for US treasury notes are optimistic is a MAJOR understatement. You'd have to live in fantasy land to imagine $900 billion in demand for US treasury bonds!

China doesn't want anymore US paper. And it's perfectly understandable. US bonds are currently a non-performing asset, just like US real estate and US stocks. In fact, the whole US stinks. It reeks of poverty and despair. The US lacks prospects for future economic growth. The US consumer, 70% of US GDP, is maxed out and won't be back for at least 20 years. Where am I going with all this? I don't see a single dollar worth of demand for US bonds coming from China.

What about US citizens? They should have some demand for US bonds. How much is a bond yielding these days anyway? 2%? 1%? HA! Even if US citizens HAD savings they surely wouldn't put them in bonds. Sorry Uncle Sam (US). I'm guessing there might be about $200 billion worth of sucker money AT BEST that might make it into bonds.

So, let's see... $1.8 trillion deficit, $200 billion in revenue... That means $1.6 trillion in brand spanking new money, hot off the printing presses! Yikes!

Brace yourselves for inflation.

I've Never Been More Bullish

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 06:16:53 GMT

Since 2007 when I first started tracking the price of gold, I have never been more bullish than I am right now.

Basically, I see no downside risk at all. Back in the fall of 2008, there was VERY STRONG buying pressure when gold fell below $900. I mean, so strong that there were gold shortages everywhere. Even the Indians were buying, and buying more than usual! So I can't possibly imagine gold going below $900 ever again.

According to my own research, the right price of gold is somewhere around 2000 current US dollars. That's where the upside potential equals the downside potential.

Basically, to calculate where the price of gold should top out, take the $850 price it was in January 1980, multiply by the change in money supply, and then multiply by the change in demand and divide by the change in supply. This calculation gives me $4700, using the supply & demand data from 1979.

The supply & demand data is available at Kitco's website, and M3 is available at nowandfutures.com.

Now I already identified $900 as a key support level. So now taking the geometric mean of $900 and $4700 I get just over $2000. That's the price necessary for the downside risk to equal the upside risk. Below that, gold is undervalued. Above that, gold is overvalued.

I'm pretty sure I can even put a date to when gold will go above $1000. Gold will be above $1000 by April of next year (2010). My guess is it will happen well before that date. Probably this summer.

Inflation vs. Deflation Debate

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:37:41 GMT

Let the debate begin!

Here's my 3-part YouTube video series:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

What .NET Should Have Been

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 25 May 2009 21:27:16 GMT

It was 2001 when I first started developing with Win32 API. Back then, Win32 API was the only way to develop a Windows application. Sure, you could use a variety of different wrappers, including MFC and Borland's OWL. However, the Win32 API was always at the core of the application. This resulted in applications having a very consistent look & feel. Every application looked like it belonged in Windows.

In 2002, a new phenomenon started, called the .NET Framework. The .NET Framework was supposed to be Microsoft's decision to improve developer's lives by replacing C++ with managed code (written in any language). At least that's what I hoped back in 2002. However, from the very beginning it became clear that Microsoft's intent was not to replace Win32 API with .NET but in fact to carry two separate development frameworks, and ultimately to confuse and alienate Windows users and Windows developers.

Let's look at what "mistakes" MS made with .NET that have been causing ongoing pain for Windows developers.

1. Not including .NET in Windows.

Microsoft has an ongoing policy of keeping .NET & Windows separate. For some bizarre reason, Microsoft will not distribute the latest version of .NET with the latest version of Windows. Windows XP SP1 could have included .NET 1.1. It didn't. Windows XP SP2 could have included .NET 2.0. It didn't. .NET should've been a required update from the very beginning. It should've been an inextricable component of Windows, just like IE. Though it's unclear which version of .NET will ship with Windows 7, what is clear is that when a later version is released, Microsoft will make damn sure that users won't even know about it.

2. Not making the Win32 API obsolete.

With Windows Vista, Microsoft could've made all new APIs available only to .NET developers. Why do that? To discourage Win32 API development. To make it clear to developers that .NET is the future. Starting with Vista, Microsoft should've moved all of its innovation into .NET. Instead, they added new features to Win32 API! Features that they didn't add to .NET! In other words, they showed that Win32 API is still the only way to develop Windows applications.

3. Not setting an example.

Microsoft could have migrated all of its apps to .NET. Office 2007 should've been entirely written in .NET. Visual Studio .NET (first version) should've been written in .NET! Microsoft should've set an example, that .NET is the future. Instead, they keep writing apps in MFC or Win32 API. Clearly, MFC and Win32 API is still the future. I challenge you to find any major Microsoft application written in .NET.

4. Reinventing the wheel.

Rather than using native Win32 API controls in .NET WinForms applications, Microsoft instead decided to reinvent the wheel, coding an entire UI toolkit from scratch using managed code. What for? Sun already did that! It's called Java!

The inconsistencies in look & feel in .NET are hideous, but even worse are the inconsistencies in behaviour. .NET 1.1 was notorious for its non-standard controls. It's the reason I developed NetXP. It's the reason why I had to write a gigantic .NET wrapper around Win32 API. .NET itself should've been that wrapper. Here's an exercise: Try popping up a balloon tooltip (a feature of Win32 API in Windows XP) in .NET 1.1.

This is the biggest issue with .NET, and Microsoft still hasn't fixed it. Take the XAML menu for example. It's totally different from the standard WinAPI menu. Even the ClearType looks different in a XAML app! This decision by MS not to enforce OS UI conventions will lead to a wide range of UI variation on Windows, and will ultimately lead developers (and users) away from Windows, and toward Mac or even Linux.

Conclusion - My Message to Microsoft

It's painful to develop apps in Windows API (or MFC) in 2009. You (Microsoft) could've changed that. You had the opportunity, with .NET, to create a new way of programming Windows. You blew it. Until you fix the 4 issues above, I will be programming in Java. Java is everything .NET is and more. Java is cross-platform, free software, and has a wider user base. Why should I limit myself to Windows when the choice I have is between Windows API (a 25-year-old technology) and .NET (a clone of Java that runs only on Windows)?

To those out there who remember Visual Basic, .NET is another Visual Basic. VB was great for RAD (Rapid Application Development). So is .NET. But the problem with VB was that it was non-standard. It didn't wrap the Win32 API well enough. The same is true for .NET. Now, if .NET was going to be cross-platform, I'd understand. But it was never intended to be cross-platform. Microsoft totally blew it with .NET. Developing a Windows application in .NET is as ridiculous as developing a Windows application in Visual Basic.

Windows 7: A Review

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Sat, 23 May 2009 23:37:39 GMT

Windows 7: A Review

By Dan Tohatan

In 1994, Microsoft unveiled a user interface that was truly revolutionary at the time. Code-named "Cairo", it was to become the interface of the new Windows 95 operating system. When Windows 95 came along in July of 1995, the new shell (Windows Explorer) totally surpassed the old Program Manager / File Manager combination, which had been a staple of Windows since Windows 3.0. Windows 95's unparalleled multimedia capabilities became evident very quickly.

I remember how amazed I was when I first saw the Windows 95 boot-up screen, in all its 256-color beauty. Microsoft got it. The world was moving toward true color displays. No longer were UIs going to be boxed into the 16-color (or less) paradigm which had dominated displays since the 1980s. A revolution was beginning, and Windows 95 was going to lead it.

Fast-forward to the present, and a new revolution is beginning. This time, it's a move from bitmapped graphics to vector graphics. It's a move toward 3D-accelerated vector graphics. You can see it in the new Web 2.0 websites out there: smooth gradients, subtle 3D effects, animations, and heavy use of mouse-over events. You could call this the second UI revolution.

Windows Vista was supposed to bring in this new UI revolution. However, Microsoft bit off more than it could chew. Vista over-promised and under-delivered. The result was, as everyone now knows, a total disappointment. Today, almost 3 years after Vista's release, the market share held by Windows Vista is around 25%. The market share held by XP? 60%. What's even worse for Microsoft is that Mac OS X and Linux have been gaining feverishly thanks to Vista's lack of stability and incredibly slow performance.

Windows 7 is what Vista should have been. It is to Windows XP what Windows 95 was to Windows 3.1. I would encourage everyone reading this review to go out and download & install the Windows 7 Release Candidate. I have (so far) only used the OS for a day, and I am extremely impressed.

The most interesting thing about Windows 7 is that it's the first Windows OS to have lower system requirements compared to the previous version. While it has been demonstrated that Windows 7 can be installed on a system with only 512 MB RAM, it's not a realistic requirement if you want to run the latest applications. A system with 1 GB of RAM or more should be able to run Windows 7 at least as fast as it would run Windows XP. Also, while Windows 7 requires 16 GB of free disk space to install, it only ends up using about 9 GB, which is far better than Vista.

I'm going to start this review by looking under the hood - at how the OS performs. One of my biggest problems with Vista is the size of the WinSXS folder. Apparently, in order to solve "DLL hell", Microsoft decided to keep every single version of every DLL forever. Before I installed Windows 7, my Vista SP1 WinSXS folder was 7 GB, with no apps installed. This was after I ran the SP1 clean-up tool. Before that, it was over 10 GB. With Windows 7, it's only 4 GB. Seems MS was able to cut out a whole 3 GB from the WinSXS folder, which is excellent.

Another thing that MS improved with Windows 7 is the speed of shutdown. While boot-up is about the same as Windows Vista, shutdown is noticeably faster. Also, the speed of installation (if you're doing clean install) is much faster than a comparable Vista installation. I remember when I installed Vista that it seemed to take longer than an equivalent XP install. Windows 7 actually installs faster than XP.

I remember with Vista having issues with the TrustedInstaller. It would just start up randomly and my hard drive would start thrashing, and my system would slow to a crawl. Windows 7 seems much more quiet (in terms of hard disk activity) and CPU usage is actually at 0% most of the time! It's incredible how Windows 7 release candidate (not even final release) outperforms Vista so much. The final release will probably be even better.

Moving on to the UI, the first thing you notice about Windows 7 is how much cleaner it is compared to Vista. Gone are the incessant notification popups or the glaring UI inconsistencies that made Windows Vista such a pain to use. UAC is totally gone. In Vista, just about everything you did would pop up a UAC dialog. It was extremely annoying. In Windows 7, the UAC prompts, even where you would obviously expect them (e.g. Task Manager), are totally gone. It's a mystery what MS did here, but it's a really good thing. I really hope that this is permanent and that UAC doesn't come back in the final release.

The other pleasant surprise I had with Windows 7 was that MS added new accessories! This is the first time MS did something like this since (probably) Windows 95! Not only that, but the existing accessories (Wordpad, Paint) have been totally revamped. You will also notice the UI consistency in Windows 7 (versus Vista). Finally, I'm pleased to announce that MS has finally removed the "Install New Font" dialog that still had a Windows 3.0-like UI. This calls for a major celebration! This dialog existed in Windows - unchanged - since 1990! Now it's finally gone!

What I really like about Windows 7 is its new Libraries feature. A library is a special folder that is actually the aggregate of multiple folders. Libraries makes organizing files so much easier. Microsoft also implemented a fairly complete set of filters (or views) for each library. For example, you can view your music by artist or by album. The views are customized to fit each library type. For example, the Music library only has views that are relevant to music.

But it's the small things that make Windows 7 so impressive. For example, when copying files, the progress is shown in the taskbar as the background of the taskbar button, and it updates in real time. So you can just look at the taskbar to see the progress. You no longer have to Alt+Tab. Also, the extensive use of mouse-over effects really adds to the usability of the OS. For example, hovering over a taskbar button shows you a preview of the window that corresponds to that button.

Windows 7 is probably the first Windows OS for which screenshots aren't enough. This is because of the extensive use of mouse-over effects. Screenshots just don't do it justice. When I looked at various screenshots of Windows 7, I thought "what a bad UI design!" But in practice, the UI design is very usable. Not only is it usable - it's fun! This is the first time I'm having fun using Windows since Windows 95!

To conclude, you really have to use it to fully appreciate it. There are many pleasant surprises in this OS. When I switched to Ubuntu back in 2007, I never thought I'd see another version of Windows as great as Windows XP was. Well, it turns out I was wrong. Windows 7 is the new Windows 95. Windows XP was an evolutionary change. Windows 7 is a revolutionary change. Windows 7 leaves its competition in the dust. In the end, Microsoft still gets it.

"Mish" Recommends Buying Treasuries

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:37:08 GMT

Mike Shedlock is suggesting that US treasuries are a good buy at this point. Let's see if he's right...

Currently yields are at 4%. If yields drop to 2%, that means the price of 30-year treasuries would be double the current price. Could it happen? Short-term, based on this chart, it sure looks like a possibility.

Short-term (i.e. within the next 12-18 months), the outlook for US treasuries is quite bullish.

But let's look at the longer term. Since 1980, yields on US treasuries have been going down. We have a 29-year unbroken uptrend (bull market) in treasuries (downtrend in yields). The current bull market in treasuries seems just a tad ancient. When this trend finally reverses, look out below.

Fundamentally, you'd be mad to own US treasuries right now. The average rate of inflation in the US since 1971 has been 7% per year. A long-term yield of 4% makes absolutely no sense. Ignoring inflation when buying bonds is like ignoring P/E ratios when buying stocks.

Buying US treasuries now would be like buying dot-com stocks in 1999. Sure it might go up 100% in three months, but if you don't time the trade perfectly you'll be wiped out. You better get the timing exactly right, or else you could lose your money.

By 1999, the US stock market had been in an unbroken uptrend for 16 years. In 2000 the trend finally reversed, and all the suckers that got in after 1997 have yet to make any return on their investments.

Don't be a sucker.

Jim Rogers calls for currency crisis

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 12 May 2009 06:24:26 GMT

Right after I posted my "worst case scenario" calling for exchange controls by fall of 2009, Jim Rogers (in this Bloomberg article) is basically saying the same thing!

"
May 12 (Bloomberg) -- A rally in the U.S. dollar has run its course and a currency crisis may take place in the fall, investor Jim Rogers said.

“We’re going to have a currency crisis, probably this fall or the fall of 2010,” Rogers, 66, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in Singapore. “It’s been building up for a long time. We’ve had a huge rally in the dollar, an artificial rally in the dollar, so it’s time for a currency crisis.”

Rogers may consider buying the yen and prefers the euro to the dollar or the pound, he added.
"

Jim Rogers correctly predicted the dollar rally last fall.

Preparing for the Worst

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Mon, 11 May 2009 07:54:06 GMT

I've taken the time to compile a timeline of global economic stats for 2009. It will be an interesting year. I'm not ready to drink the kool-aid that the worst is over. The worst is yet to come. After a quiet summer, the next leg of the collapse will start at some point in August. I really hope what I say does not come true, because if it does, it will be a living nightmare.

Unemployment figures (officially) in the US will hit 10% by July. However - the government may massage the figures, keeping them under 10% until late September.
I'm expecting very little volatility in the markets over the summer, until early August when unemployment figures in the double-digits will be first released. I'm expecting the Dow to continue somewhere between 9000 and 10,000, and gold between $900 and $1000, until at least early August.
Watch out on August 8, 2009. This is exactly a year after the Georgia incident. Russia may again try to attack Europe, in retaliation to growing NATO influence over former Warsaw-pact territory. The men behind the curtain may give Russia the green light, in light of the horrendous economic stats coming out. In other words, to make a quick buck and prevent social unrest, the corrupt banksters may choose to start a third world war.
By fall it will become clear that the world is in total economic collapse. In September, 2009, the Dow will begin to crash violently, along with the US dollar. News will be coming out that US unemployment has just hit 12% and the US economy is expected to contract 15% in 2009.
From a high of 9000, the Dow will end up at 4000 by November. US treasuries will go into hyperinflation in October, 2009. The entire world will enter a World War II-like state economically starting in October.
In October, 2009 a dangerous new influenza virus begins to spread. It begins by claiming 200-300 lives every day. It is clear that it is a bioweapon, because it is spread by way of covert agents, appearing simultaneously on different continents. By December, this mystery flu is killing 1000-2000 people every single day. It has a kill rate of 40%. This means 40% of people who become infected die. The government encourages vaccination, not knowing that the vaccine also has a kill rate of 40%. It will turn out to be the worst pandemic the world has ever seen.
Somewhere in early October, gold will definitively cross the $1000 barrier while the Dow crosses 4000 on its way down. Shortly after that, the COMEX will be shut down and all markets in the US will be closed. All commodities will be declared illegal. The US will be under full martial law. No person will be allowed to own property, and all land will be seized by the US Federal Government. Movement will be strictly controlled with military checkpoints. UN peacekeeping forces will be deployed worldwide to contain civil unrest.
Although no longer reported, unemployment will continue to climb, reaching 16% by the end of 2009 (by official measures) or 30% according to shadowstats.
It will not be visible, but the US dollar will reach hyperinflationary collapse by November, 2009. The US dollar will only be exchangeable on the black market. Exchange controls will be in place worldwide. Gold will sell for over $4000 USD on the black market.
At some point in October, 2009, there will be a concerted effort to take down the Internet. ISPs will be forcefully shut down for allowing "subversive" material to be downloaded. If the attempt is successful, there will be mass riots. 70% of every city's population will be violently protesting. All economic activity will go underground. The Internet may be forced to go underground.
Be prepared for widespread long-lasting power outages starting in August, 2009. Remember what happened in 2003. It will be similar to that, but it will last longer. Blackouts may end up lasting for weeks. It's quite possible that by the end of 2009, reliable electricity service will be a thing of the past.
One also needs to prepare for food shortages and shortages of other essential goods. The government and corporations will hoard all food for themselves and possibly give some out in small rations (e.g. you are allowed 3 eggs per month). The blackouts will make it hard for supermarkets to continue operating. The fixed exchange rate and worthless fiat currency will mean that imports & exports will be impossible.
By November, 2009 nearly every country on the planet will have instated a total military draft. Every single citizen will be openly apprehended and forced into either military service or civilian service (forced labour).
The speed with which all this happens will make "shock & awe" seem like slow motion.

I suggest to everyone (including myself) to prepare for all of these possibilities. What do you do if your city's power goes out for 2 weeks? Or if the Internet is shut down? What if all the local grocery stores close down for 3 weeks? What if all your paper currency becomes worthless, or you're no longer allowed to withdraw money from your bank account? And lastly, what are you gonna do... when they come for you?

Peace. Love. Understanding.
Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst.

Precious Metals Investing

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 07 May 2009 04:37:19 GMT

It's tax refund time, and my suggestion to you all (especially US citizens) would be to spend 50% of your tax refund on precious metals. Here's a little known fact: The average rate of inflation in the US over the past 40 years has been 7% per year. This means in 10 years you lose half your money.

The case for precious metals as an inflation hedge really doesn't need to be re-stated. But before you get into precious metals, here are some important things to know:

1. The COMEX price means nothing. Be prepared to set your own price.
The COMEX is just one of many markets for precious metals. Other markets are eBay and Craigslist. The COMEX is in fact a very small market. Use the COMEX price (like all other prices) to your advantage. When the COMEX price is the lowest, buy from the COMEX (or from dealers who base their price on the COMEX price). The primary objective here is to always buy low and sell high.

2. For buying, coin shops and bullion dealers are the most reliable & usually the cheapest.
eBay is very expensive these days, mainly because of cash-back. If you're in the US, take advantage of the cash-back offer. Otherwise, forget about eBay. Craigslist rarely has bullion up for sale and if it is, it's usually local pickup and quite expensive (because the seller knows how valuable bullion really is).

3. Always tally up all your costs (shipping, exchange rates, and other fees) before determining price.
It's often easy to forget about shipping costs, customs fees, eBay fees (for selling), or exchange rate arbitrage. Typically, exchange rate arbitrage is 3% of the price (if you're paying in a currency other than your bank's).

4. Always prefer domestic dealers over foreign. But not necessarily local.
There's certainly more risk involved in sending precious metals across international borders. You could be hit with customs fees or run into some kind of draconian restriction on imports. Now, in Canada, if you choose a dealer within your own province, you'll have to pay provincial sales taxes. So it's usually better to buy from dealers outside of your province (or other regional jurisdiction) to avoid taxes.

5. Do not sell anything unless you must.
Given the uncertainty of a fiat monetary system, you never know if something is a bubble or if it's hyperinflation. There's really no way to judge if precious metals have become overvalued. The best exit strategy is to never sell. However, there are those cases where you desperately need some money. In such a case, you are forced to sell. There are also situations where you may find a better investment (e.g. a stock or a piece of property) but don't have enough money to invest in it. In that case, again, you are effectively forced to sell to raise cash.

6. There is such a thing as having too much.
Keep enough cash lying around so that you won't be forced to sell in the event of some minor setback (e.g. losing your job). The problem with selling precious metals is that in many cases you are hit with taxes & fees, on top of the premiums you paid originally to purchase the metals. Therefore, too much buying & selling will cause you to lose all your money.

7. Keep yourself busy.
Sometimes it's tempting to obsess about the daily spot prices or constantly second-guess your investment decisions. To avoid such foolishness, you should keep your mind occupied. Basically, forget about the fact that you have precious metals and go on with your life.

There is another question precious metals investors struggle with, and that is, "Which metals should I buy?" My belief in this regard is that the oldest metals, those that have been money for thousands of years, need to be given priority. You should have a much larger proportion of gold & silver relative to platinum & palladium.

Deciding between platinum & palladium is quite easy. Palladium can be substituted for just about every use of platinum and it's much cheaper. Plus, Russia controls much of the palladium supply, meaning it could create artificial scarcity quite easily, raising prices dramatically. Palladium can be used to produce the cold fusion effect observed in 1989 by Fleischmann & Pons. There's also a growing palladium jewellery market in Asia. I would recommend palladium over platinum any day of the week.

Now, deciding between gold & silver is more tricky. On the one hand, gold is owned by central banks and is therefore more capitalized. It's more liquid & less volatile. The problem with silver is it's a wild ride. If you don't like wild rides, you should keep more gold than silver. However, silver has the potential to go much much much much higher than gold. Silver can be substituted for all other precious metals, and there's less silver bullion out there than gold bullion! So if you want maximum upside, you should go with silver. And because silver is correlated with gold, you won't miss out on gold's upside by owning silver. However, I would recommend holding some gold because of its low volatility. In cases where you need to sell something, you would sell the gold & keep the silver.

Historically, the best performing portfolio is 50% gold, 20% silver, 5% platinum, and 25% palladium. However, it's also very volatile & illiquid because of palladium and not very well exposed to silver. So instead, I would recommend a portfolio of 40% gold, 40% silver, 5% platinum, and 15% palladium.

In the end it's up to you. Remember: DYODD (Do Your Own Due Diligence).

My word is not gospel. Amen.

Spreading FUD?

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 05 May 2009 03:51:22 GMT

I love how ignorant people often accuse bearers of bad news of spreading "FUD" (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt). Let me just address this by saying, FUD is the only way to find truth. It's the only way to learn new things. Were it not for FUD, we'd still believe the Earth is flat. All of science is based on FUD. Ignorance is caused by the absence (or opposite) of FUD.

What's the opposite of FUD anyway? It's gotta be TCB (Trust, Certainty, and Belief). Trust, certainty, and belief are the three fundamental pillars of religion. You must TRUST that the preacher is honest, you must be CERTAIN that there's a God. You must always BELIEVE that there is a God. No questioning. There's no room for FUD in religion.

So let me just finish this by saying, I will ALWAYS promote & encourage FUD. We have too much TCB in this world. Obama and his Wall Street crooks keep spreading TCB about everything. Hope. Faith. Trust. Confidence. I have a better word for it: CONTROL!

Update On Latest Events

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Tue, 05 May 2009 01:24:23 GMT

Haven't had much time to update the blog lately, but here's my take on the latest events...

Swine flu: Dry run for martial law. Mexico was on the verge of financial & social collapse. Obama just finished 100 days in office. US treasuries were in trouble. In a prior secret meeting in 2008, the US congress discussed the imminent collapse of US finances by May of 2009. How convenient then to have a "pandemic" at this point. It's a total diversion from more important issues at best, and at worst a pretext for governments to launch full-blown martial law. No more talk about torture or prosecuting Bush admin officials. WHO is at level 5 now. Level 6 means the US government has the authority to apprehend any individual and detain him/her indefinitely and seize his/her property without warrant. This authority was given by a piece of legislation passed in the summer of 2008 which specificially mentions "threat of influenza pandemic" as a potential event that would trigger martial law. All of this is documented on infowars.com.
Do not panic, yet: Although governments around the world have full authority now to do whatever they want, it doesn't necessarily mean that they will. Just because I can jump off a bridge doesn't mean I will. At this point, it's a matter of wait & see. In the meantime, we must all do our best to inform our fellow citizens in any way possible that the government is not on our side. The government is owned by individuals who want to see the world's population reduced to 500 million. Does this mean they will? Maybe, maybe not. But their stated intent is clear. It's like living next door to a person who has threatened to kill you. It's only a matter of time.
Anthropogenic global warming is a convenient lie: I have to throw this in here because of all the nonsense I keep hearing about anthropogenic global warming. It's false. It's a politically-motivated lie. The world is warming, but your car is not causing it. If anything, we should be putting more CO2 into the atmosphere. Plants need CO2 to grow. Studies have shown that trees grow bigger if their supply of CO2 is greater. The greatest limiting factor on plant growth is lack of CO2. Plants produce oxygen and clean out toxins from the air. If you want to support a greener planet, put more CO2 into the air. Lastly, CO2 is not a pollutant. It's what humans breathe out. Do you want a tax on breathing? Oh right, I forgot, you're a sheep! BAAAAH!

Well I'm done. Not much time to blog these days but I'll be back in about a week with another summary of this kind. I find it fun to rant as long as it's a meaningful rant.

Why Real-Estate Will Not Recover

Dan Tohatan (Admin) — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:09:58 GMT

The people who believe the worst is over in terms of real estate are completely delusional.

The people who believe real-estate in Canada will continue to appreciate are lunatics.

The truth is simply this: Real estate prices will go to zero. Capitalism is finished.

Suppose you're looking to buy a shitty-ass single-bedroom apartment for $140,000. First of all, good luck finding such a low-priced apartment. However, if you do, what will your monthly mortgage payment be (supposing you take out a $140,000 mortgage)?

A simple calculation using ING's mortgage calculator yields $740 / month (with 4% interest rate). Let's suppose for simplicity that mortgage payments are 0.5% of an asset's price with today's low interest rates. For instance, if you took out a $140,000 mortgage, you'd be paying $700 / month.

Now let's add utilities, property taxes, and condo fees, totaling $400 / month.

Total now is $1100 / month in the "expenses" category of your balance sheet.

In order to be in the black marginally you need to rent out your apartment at a minimum of $1100 per month. Now, considering that you actually want to make a decent profit, let's say you want to make $400 in profit per month, so let's go for $1500 per month rental cost.

Who in their right mind pays $1500 rent for a shitty-ass single-bedroom apartment? The rent would be more like $600 at best. But if I rented out my apartment at $600 I would be losing $500 every month! Clearly not a good investment.

So how much do real estate prices have to fall before real estate is a profitable investment again? Let's see... Supposing you'd be happy with even $1 in profit per month, we're looking at mortgage payments of $200 per month (maximum). This means the apartment would have to cost $40,000.

Bottom line is real estate prices need to fall into 5 digits again. It's also not impossible for real estate prices to go to zero or negative. Suppose you have a property that costs $500 per month to maintain (not counting mortgage payments) but only returns $400 per month in rent revenue. How much would you sell this for? Wouldn't it make sense for the price to be negative? You would be willing to pay someone to take the property off your hands. This is already happening in Detroit.

The broader reality is that capitalism is finished. Property taxes have eaten away all incentives to own real estate. Unemployment just puts the final nail in the coffin. Banks can lower rates to 0% and it won't do any good. It's over. We are all slaves. The people who own the government now own everything.

Dan Tohatan

Windows 7 on Older PCs

Windows 7 Smartphone to be Revealed at Mobile World Congress

Technology Innovations of the Last Decade

Savings = Power

Predictions for 2010

Philosophical Bull and Gnostic Brain Flatulence

A Little Seasonal Spirit

Dan's Gold & Silver Alert

IE 9: Will it be enough to make me switch from Firefox?

Windows 7 Phones: Addendum

64-bit Windows: The Definitive Guide

D3: Free WPF Data Visualization

Windows 7 Phones: Coming Next Year!

Dacris Benchmarks 8 Beta

DoEvents really *is* evil!

Call of the Devil: System.Diagnostics.Process.Start

Visual Studio 2010 is a .NET App

Where's Bob Prechter Now?

Making Bad Ass-umptions

Desktop .NET Finally Ready for Take-Off

I was wrong

Inflation? Deflation? It don't matter.

A One-Pic Summary of the Health Care Debate

Weekend Summary - IRS Panic; Washington March; Gold

Charlie Sheen Seeks 9/11 Truth

Some Recommended Reading

Americans Getting Fooled...Again

Pseudo-Random Thoughts

Another Shocking Chart

Malcolm Gladwell: Genius Takes 10,000 Hours!

Cut my pay... all the way to slavery!

Silver: The Opportunity of a Century

Bank of Canada is Understating Inflation

Kiyosaki: Prepare for the Worst

Imminent Stock Market Crash

A Shocking Chart

The End of Dow Jones?

It's Happening

Buffett Warns of Dollar Collapse

I've Never Been More Bullish

Inflation vs. Deflation Debate

What .NET Should Have Been

Windows 7: A Review

Windows 7: A Review

"Mish" Recommends Buying Treasuries

Jim Rogers calls for currency crisis

Preparing for the Worst

Precious Metals Investing

Spreading FUD?

Update On Latest Events

Why Real-Estate Will Not Recover

DoEvents really is evil!