Posts Tagged ‘dot-com 3.0’

Looking Forward To The Dot-Com 3.0 Crash And Recession

Saturday, May 27th, 2017

Without strong leadership, humans act as a herd. They constantly look for what is new so that they can participate, and as soon as that becomes clear to them, they rush toward it.

Nature however is not binary because it has introduced time. What is new is recognized by a gradually increasing group of people, and as they crowd it, the original participants get out and watch the formerly new thing crash as the herd converts it into the same old stuff.

You can see this with monkeys in the wild. One monkey finds a tree with lots of fruit, and starts screeching. The others then rush over, afraid of missing out and hoping to capitalize on this new popularity, and strip the tree bare.

In the meantime, some of the monkeys who found that tree earlier have moved on to new trees, and are keeping mum about it. The monkeys who screech depend for their popularity on being recognized as those who find new things, even if they find them after the really good opportunities are gone. They get their power from introducing the clueless to better options, not good ones.

Humans play the market the same way. Whatever succeeds immediately finds a whole herd of people who are very excited about it, and they invest in it, bloating it to the point where the consequences between intelligent acts and repetition of the past is blurred, so it repeats itself until it crashes and then the herd moves on to a new fascination, like a crowd at an amusement park.

As mentioned here before, our current economy is a fragile mess based on tech companies selling gadgets to morons who are subsidized by the state, in order to make our current appear “in demand” so that we can borrow and tax even more.

Now it becomes clear that the post-1990s Silicon Valley boom may be fragile and ready to pop:

During rising stock markets you can use an indicator like the advance-decline line to confirm that the uptrend is still in place. When the overall stock market is rising but more individual securities are declining than rising,, that can be a signal that the market is not “acting right” and the uptrend could be in trouble. It could be signaling that there could be a change in direction coming.

…The advance-decline line was crashing beginning in early-1999, while stocks continued to rise for another year or so. The fact that so few stocks were carrying the market higher with a falling advance-decline line was a big warning sign for the coming dotcom crash.

As we watch the leaders of the market separate from the rest, it becomes clear that we live in a house on stilts where a few of those stilts are carrying most of the weight. If anything happens to them — as seems likely as history repeats itself — we are in for a big crash.

Rumors Of Dot-Com 3.0 Implosion Spreading

Wednesday, May 24th, 2017

You may have heard it here first, but rumors are starting to spread about the collapse of the Dot-Com 3.0 bubble which is based on social media and other entertainment products. Unfortunately the Obama economy was based upon it, so expect rough times ahead.

Others are starting to notice that the market is totally overvalued, which is a precursor to crash:

What truly puts the stamp of reality on what it says today, is the fact, that even as the “markets” have since (once again) risen to never before seen in history all time highs since that post some 3 months ago. The above have done nothing but either vacillate right where they stood, or worse, have lost even more value.

…Isn’t it funny when it comes to anything involving “The Valley” it always seems it’s about the next big “buy” that’ll be the reason why some insane P/E or valuation will be, “So worth it!” Never the core product that is/was supposedly its raison d’être. And it’s always just around the corner, or as close as the shareholders checkbook. Funny how that works.

Social media is dying primarily because its audience consists of people who are not responsive to advertising. It also suffers from a scourge of bots, fake accounts, manipulative SEO technicians and generally, the bad behavior of the “daytime television” audience that Dot-Com 3.0 salvaged in order to overcome the mass exodus of people when the second internet trend boom ended.

In addition, people are wary of the visibility of social media and the manipulative nature of these companies. Who wants employers looking through a Facebook profile, or to be shown only what the filters allow? With European states demanding that Facebook and Twitter censor controversial topics, social media is no longer the Wild West it once seemed to be.

The result is a shift that the numbers do not reveal. There may be just as many people using social media, but who are they? These are no longer the middle class brand-conscious consumers, but an army of baristas and cubicle slaves who have no money and would not spend it on advertising products anyway. No wonder the dying trend shows signs of instability.

Anatomy Of A Fragile Market Bubble

Wednesday, May 17th, 2017

Modern society possesses a fragile duality: people depend on its power and wealth, but simultaneously are existentially miserable.

Their existential misery comes from the fact that civilization is in decline, social order is failing, and so all meaning and purpose is removed from their lives because whatever they do is futile and will be destroyed once the raging herd gets ahold of it. At the same time, we all must survive, and so they are dependent on this abusive system for paychecks and enough stability for grocery stores.

What happens if the money runs out? All Western governments are heavily in debt, consumers are heavily leveraged, and our industries are massively interdependent.

On top of that, we have the makings of a brutal tech bubble:

Yesterday afternoon, the S&P 500 closed at a record high, and is up over $1.5 trillion since the start of 2017. “And the companies doing the most to drive that rally are all tech firms,” reports The Verge. “Apple, Alphabet, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft make up a whopping 37 percent of the total gains.” From the report:

All of these companies saw their share prices touch record highs in recent months. This is in stark contrast to the rest of the U.S. economy, which grew at a rate of less than 1 percent during the first three months of this year. That divide is the culmination of a long-term trend, according to a recent report featured in The Wall Street Journal: “In digital industries — technology, communications, media, software, finance and professional services — productivity grew 2.7% annually over the past 15 years…The slowdown is concentrated in physical industries — health care, transportation, education, manufacturing, retail — where productivity grew a mere 0.7% annually over the same period.” There is no industry where these players aren’t competing. Music, movies, shipping, delivery, transportation, energy — the list goes on and on. As these companies continue to scale, the network effects bolstering their business are strengthening. Facebook and Google accounted for over three-quarters of the growth in the digital advertising industry in 2016, leaving the rest to be divided among small fry like Twitter, Snapchat, and the entire American media industry. Meanwhile Apple and Alphabet have achieved a virtual duopoly on mobile operating systems, with only a tiny sliver of consumers choosing an alternative for their smartphones and tablets.

As mentioned here before, the tech sector is primed for a crash because it is overvalued and yet is selling a product that is increasingly less relevant to middle America, the group that forms the base of the conventional consumer economy.

To counter this, the tech companies are trying to cultivate the conventional media audience, who lean Left and consume more media than others but may not actually be as relevant as consumers except for luxury goods.

In order to bolster that process, Western governments have created a capitalism-socialism hybrid which consists of heavily taxing citizens and corporations, and then dumping that money on the working classes so that they can purchase more consumer goods, creating a circular Ponzi scheme which will eventually run out of money.

On top of that, Western governments have accumulated enough debt that when their taxes fall short, they will be in a tough position where they will be unable to acquire new debt cheaply enough to justify it, and these governments will head toward default at the same time their economies cave in and the social consequences of Leftist policies culminate in crashes.

Internet Collapse May Be Consumerism Collapse

Friday, April 28th, 2017

Consumerism had a good thing going. We invented all of these cool gadgets for the home and personal care back in the 1950s, and as long as we had people, we could sell them and make a tidy profit.

But then consumerism took over the culture, as it always seems to do. Planned obsolescence became a thing; so did low-cost junk made abroad. And then people slowed down in buying because when everything is sort of worthless, why care much about what you buy?

No matter what option you choose — unless you have real luxury spending dollars like a billionaire — it will perform adequately and die within a few years, so there is no point investing much effort into the choice. Sort of like how the Soviet system faded away into heat death…

This follows a pattern we see in most business, and in fact everything in life: it starts out as a new idea that few understand, then gets accepted and the load of humans that it supports grows, which requires it to raise more money, which happens simultaneously with the acceptance of the new idea as part of normal life and thus a lowering of its margins. At that point, the business is in a death cycle.

As Plato pointed out, the same thing happens to civilizations. They start out idealistic, then deviate into materialism, at which point they cycle through aristocracy, military rule, business rule and finally democracy before self-destructing in tyranny. The point is that a new innovation cannot be expected to maintain itself, but requires an active pressure to enforce quality, in a Darwinian sense, or it bloats and self-destructs.

Consumerism has bloated and self-destructed. Refrigerators are so bad now that you need to purchase a ten-year warranty to get five years out of them; in the 1950s, they made refrigerators that lasted for decades. We have clearly degenerated, and the latest victim is the internet.

When the internet was new, it gave us all these new capabilities. But over the next twenty years, it became clear that some were actually useful and the rest hype. However, the hype got the most focus from the media, because it was most like their own business model.

Now ad payments are falling because the people watching the ads are not actual consumers but cube slaves time wasting at their McJobs. As a result, the internet economy is imploding. Today, Paul Joseph Watson sees his business model collapse; tomorrow, Twitter or Facebook will.

This collapse follows the same pattern as consumerism. An initially high-value product attracted the herd, got overburdened with expenses to support all those people, and then folded inward as its relevance declined with its novelty.

We are seeing the convergence of internet and consumerism collapses already:

In March, MarketWatch estimated that Amazon will destroy 1.5 million retail jobs in the next five years. And with its push into self-driving trucks, drone delivery, automated grocery stores and more, the site said the total number of lost jobs would likely be more than 2 million, concluding, “Could Amazon actually kill more American jobs than China did? It’s quite likely.”

…Critics are beginning to wonder if Amazon — with such control over retail sales, jobs, ad dollars and more — is good for America.

…“Retail always evolves and reflects society, and right now, consumers are getting more value for their money,” said Richard Kestenbaum, a partner in Triangle Capital. “That makes our society stronger and it forces other retailers to be more creative and competitive.”

In other words, Amazon has become more efficient, and so is displacing most of the rest of the market. However, this will cause collapse by crushing margins on these products, which will in turn mean that they will be of less quality in the future. Soviet-style.

The worst case scenario is that Amazon gobbles up a bunch of smaller industries and then finds its own margins falling, and then goes down with a mighty crash, leaving the consumers with no options.

Looking at this, it makes sense to advance a theory of economy inefficiency. In contrast to the idea that lower price is always better, this theory states that there is a “sweet spot” in cost where a product is cheap enough for the upper half of society to afford it, but still expensive enough that there is incentive to compete on the basis of quality.

Consumerism fails this test, and the internet has as well. In their greed to increase shareholder prices, these companies destroy more than they create, and leave behind mediocre substitutes. This cannot last, like Soviet product entropy, and will cascade in failure together, leaving a void.

Over-Hyped Dot-Com 3.0 Elites Head Toward Collapse

Sunday, April 23rd, 2017

Every new business idea goes through a life cycle. When it is new and demonstrates how useful it is, people sell it at high prices and pay a lot of attention to it.

However, as time passes, the cost is expected to drop and people want to pay less attention to it. Consider the telephone: once cutting-edge, now humdrum. Or radio. Or desktop computers.

Now it is time for the third wave of internet companies to face this part of the business cycle. They are no longer cutting-edge; they are mundane services. But they grew too large and need more money to keep their staffs, stockholders and empires afloat.

At this point, the Dot-Com 3.0 crowd are zombie businesses. They gobble up anything they can in order to make this quarter profitable, but have no actual plan, and the value of the services they provide is declining. Crash imminent.

Some are starting to notice how abusive these new monopolists have become:

The upshot here is that both Google’s overwhelming search dominance and their profitable exploitation thereof are almost wholly unmerited in terms of their actual product. Google is a fine tool, but what defines the company is luck. Its profits come from a largely unearned strategic position within a socially-created communication medium. Devouring a small business that provided Google and the internet writ large with quality research simply to keep people fenced onto their own portion of the internet is just one particularly egregious example how this position can be abused.

The technology behind search engines is now well-understood. The real challenges are having enough machines to make a search engine comprehensive, and the “network effects” that arise from having many other people in the market using the product as a kind of de facto standard.

If Google kept itself to 500 employees and a relative stable, blue chip style stock price, it would not have these problems. However, Silicon Valley was always about getting rich quick and the winner taking it all, which has produced a relentlessly self-promoting culture that has destroyed the very thing from which it profits.

Wikipedia, Amazon, Google, Apple and Reddit (WAGAR) are companies that centralize the internet. Instead of being decentralized as originally envisioned, the internet is now used as a means of reaching the big sites where network effects mean that the audience is lurking there. This essentially excludes the actual breadth and depth of information on the internet.

Sane minds fear a repetition of history, which is what happens when “gold rush” style thinking results in massive overvaluation of an industry, which then requires a brutal industry correction to remove the false wealth so that other sectors can function normally:

The tech bubble of the mid-90s was inflated by lies that sent the NASDAQ on a vertiginous downward spike that eviscerated the life savings of thousands of retirees and Americans who believed in the hype. This time around, it seems that some of these business may be real, but the people running them are still as tone deaf regarding how their actions affect other people. Silicon Valley has indeed created some amazing things. One can only hope these people don’t erase it with their hubris.

During the 1990s, the Bill Clinton administration urged more development in tech as a means of replacing the economy which was collapsing under the weight of expensive union labor, too much regulation and lawsuit costs, and inbound immigration which was removing traditional sources of work and forcing all sorts of underqualified people into office jobs.

Now we repeat this process. Politicians hate to point out that the new cash boom is false and we should hold back. Voters, like stockholders, like those bottom lines and really do not think beyond the next quarter.

And yet, history shows us this is a problem. The great postwar wealth boom of the stock market ended in tears with the Great Depression; the huge housing boom collapsed in misery when supply far exceeded demand. The same is happening to Silicon Valley.

Its once-innovative gadgets are now as common as telephones were in the 1990s, and people want them to just work, be very cheap and unobtrusive. All of those things mean reduced profit and importance, which destroys Silicon Valley and its mythos as well.

Even more, it seems that the replacement for the internet, or the centralized form of content browsing known as “social media,” is no longer the hot item it once was:

[Vkontakte founder Pavel Durov] explained his decision to purge: “Everyone a person needs has long been on messengers. It’s pointless and time-consuming to maintain increasingly obsolete friend lists on public networks. Reading other people’s news is brain clutter. To clear out room for the new, one shouldn’t fear getting rid of old baggage.”

Durov is right when he says everyone is on messengers these days.

Back in 2015, messengers overtook social networks in terms of total active users. And back in 2014, when Facebook separated Messenger from its main offering, Zuckerberg himself acknowledged the trend, saying that “messaging is one of the few things people do more than social networking”.

The problem for Silicon Valley is that internet advertising represents a shrinking pool of dollars, and this means that the big companies need to take the majority share in order to stay afloat.

As internet old-timers like myself warned in the early 1990s, advertising is not a stable model for the internet. The audience is not captive, as with newspapers or television, but capable of flitting off or filtering out the nonsense.

To combat this, the industry first tried to make the internet into video. When that failed, they put more ads on every page, which decreased the power of each. Then they tried social media, or making browsing more like passively watching television.

All have failed. A large correction is coming. Grab ahold of your seat and get ready for the crash.

Dot-Com 3.0 Collapse Picks Up Speed As Twitter Burns

Tuesday, March 21st, 2017

Watching negative contributors burn provides the only realistic pleasure in a time when most things are corrupt. As noted here before, Dot-Com 3.0 is going bust because its advertising model prioritizes true believers who use the net a lot but are not large financial contributors to the economy, thus its advertising is declining in value.

Currently, Twitter is on the chopping block because in an effort to appeal to true believers, it has sacrificed the more interesting parts of its userbase:

The company shut down a total of 376,890 accounts in the last six months of 2016, Twitter said in its latest transparency report.

In doing so, it has pared down its constituents to include a group that may be artificially inflated by a large number of spam bots, upon which the service has based its user figures and the presumed value of its (flailing) advertising:

Twitter was last week hit by a report from professors at the University of Southern California and the University of Indiana that estimated that as many as 15% of the social media site’s 319m users were not human. That is nearly twice the company’s own estimate that up to 8.5% of its accounts are managed by “bots”.

The charge is particularly damaging for Twitter because it is already struggling to convince advertisers to return to its platform.

As illusions fall, a void is created into which new(er) media rushes, in particular the voices of individuals. The net may be overcoming the centralized caused by social media, which has not delivered the content or community that people desire. In particular, few trust their dot-com overlords to be anything but conniving, manipulative little Utopians hell-bent on control.

Social media, in response to flagging sales, went after the True Believers who tend to be employed in dead-end positions where they have a lot of time to waste on social media and therefore, represent the bulk of the traffic, despite being a relative minority in the world and having little social, cultural, political or economic influence.

This tendency overstated the importance of groups of these life failures such as SJWs, who seem to be losers in the dating and marriage marketplace as well as in the quest to do something useful with their lives. That in turn through a compliant media gave a boost to these views, but as their insanity emerged, the bulk of normal people fled from them, removing their power.

The upshot is that smaller blogs like this one may have greater importance in the future as people realize that wherever the herd is can be found only lies, and wherever exclusive groups gather, information of actual value is being transacted. The hierarchy of nature restores itself in the vacuum created by the failure of grandiose human designs.

Dot-Com 3.0 Collapse Goes Mainstream

Thursday, January 26th, 2017

As reported here before several times, the third revision of the internet boom is about to collapse because its advertising value is based on warm bodies, not specific customers, and so it is selling ads to debt-strapped cubicle slaves instead of viable consumers.

The industry has finally begun to formally recognize the failure of dot-com 3.0 by noting that advertising is not working, which explains the declining relevance and profitability of social media and other nu-web entities:

“I think the advertising world going forward is going to be filled with fewer, better ads,” Deep Focus CEO Ian Schafer said on the latest episode of Recode Media. “The display advertising market is going to crater. By giving away stuff for free for so long, we’ve created an ad economy that is bigger than it should be,” he added. Schafer says there’s a untapped value in “nonstandard” ads, meaning branded content and other forms of advertising on platforms such as Snapchat, Musical.ly, WeHeartIt and Imgur.

As the advertising industry recognizes that selling ads by the pound through services which appeal to bored workers and other people without power, influence or abilities, it will turn instead toward the bedrock of advertising in America: the (hopefully soon again) prosperous middle class. Social media, blog and video advertising is great for capturing bored office workers but useless for selling anything bigger than mugs and tshirts.

In the bigger picture, the dot-com 3.0 crash shows us the economic pitfalls of transition from a Leftist demand-based economy to a Rightist supply-based one: the Leftist method increases demand for currency, inflating it but creating phantom value, and return to a supply-side approach then forces a recalculation of value based on production, at which point all the ephemeral wealth disappears.

Trump is managing this process by carefully introducing economy boosters for every change he makes that subtracts away false economy, including cheap immigrant labor and federal hiring, so that the transition is gradual. While most are crowing over the Dow hitting 20,000 today, what this may signal is the market re-organization in anticipation of some rocky thresholds on the way back to production-based money.

Dot-Com 3.0 Crash Gains Momentum

Tuesday, January 10th, 2017

As the ad revenues fall because people realize that a dot-com 3.0 collapse is coming because the advertising numbers are fake and the customers not buyers, the industry is waking up and taking notice of the grim fact that the internet industry is moribund and will soon fall as the markets devalue fake assets:

There’s a peculiar tone emanating from the social media space. It’s a little hard to hear, but if you listen closely, it’s there none the less. That sound is the sudden gasp of realization that the most dominating reasoning and defense that encompassed the entire social media space may in fact being laid-to-waste right before their screens. That horror?

The eyeballs for ads model doesn’t work.

…A 300% increase in readership didn’t mean squat to paying advertisers because – all they were getting was the bill for more “ad sales” and no sales. So they in-turn are now stating: Thanks, but no thanks.

The “ads for eyeballs” model reveals the core weakness of capitalism: it can be captured by commerce itself through the idea of consumerism, which is that it does not matter who the consumers are so long as there are enough of them. If a company needs 5% of the market to survive, under this theory, it needs only a certain number of warm bodies.

However, industry is discovering that not all warm bodies are the same. The ideal audience remains the American middle class, who shop carefully for good values and are loyal to brands. The new urban audience of beige people buying trendy products because of a media blitz is not working because their tastes are fickle and their loyalty non-existent. Companies will go to their graves for the mistake of choosing this audience.

In the meantime, the businesses that thrive are as always those who hit that sweet spot with the valued consumers, which means that who matters more than raw numbers. As in philosophy and politics, a wave of realization is hitting the West that “equality” is a denial of reality and will lead to our doom.

Dot-Com 3.0 Collapse Inbound

Sunday, January 8th, 2017

More signs that the dot-com people who we are supposed to respect as “geniuses” are in fact drudges who got lucky: Google’s new big news is a minivan and virtual reality continues to bore everyone except the nerds.

Silicon Valley has forgotten how to add utility to its products. Self-driving cars are great for avoiding both tiresome commutes and the types of people we find on public transportation. Otherwise, no one really cares. VR is great if you use it as a way to create a virtual office so we can all stay at home and avoid society. Both of these are not “fun” technologies, but mitigations of social problems caused by decline.

Even more, they are pathetic. Minivans are a symbol of how boring America was in the 1990s, and the apparent nostalgia that Google has for them is creepy at best. Virtual Reality is like the satire of every geek in history: living in a world of tedious details, fascinated by the obvious, and yet missing the bigger picture.

The lack of immediate utility to either of them suggests that Silicon Valley remains out of ideas, vision and realistic thinking and so will soon make a large flushing sound and leave a lingering smell of digestion.

America 2016: Where Everything Is Fake

Sunday, September 25th, 2016

everything_is_fake

The West has fallen apart. For years, possibly even centuries, this fact has been hidden by compliant “intellectuals” who distract, deflect and conceal whenever cracks appear in the façade of our Potemkin village.

Since The Renaissance™ and The Enlightenment™, it has been common for truthful thinkers to die paupers and be resurrected only later, slowly and with much resistance.

For some time the balancing factor of the many genetically- and morally-good people in the West has kept the decay at bay, which ironically, has made the infection stronger. With the demographic change starting in the 1970s, this balance began to slip.

This culminate in 2008 in the election of our least-qualified president ever, Barack Obama, who like Bill Clinton before him was elected mostly to try to make racial problems go away. People wanted an appeaser, because appeasement is always easier than conflict, and the scared media sheep want easy answers.

In doing so however the voters handed the henhouse keys to the fox and then went into eight years of oblivion. As they wake up, they see a ruined world which is nearly covered up by counter-propaganda telling us how good it is and how competent our leaders are.

The most recent sign of the collapse is that not only is our leading presidential candidate lying about how she attempted to hide her emails from oversight, but our president is lying about his own participation in this activity.

In an April 5, 2016 interview with the FBI, Abedin was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama, but the longtime Clinton aide did not recognize the name of the sender.

“Once informed that the sender’s name is believed to be a pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: ‘How is this not classified?'” the report says. “Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email.”

Use of a pseudonym shows not only that he knew the server was designed to hide evidence, but that he wanted to hide his own communications in the same way by using an unofficial (read: unmonitored) address. Contrast this to Obama’s own statements about the scandal, in which he claims not to have known about it until the media broke the story:

President Obama only learned of Hillary Clinton’s private email address use for official State Department business after a New York Times report, he told CBS News in an interview.

Then look toward the proof that Clinton intended to conceal her identity and remove emails when she moved her email to her private server:

Assuming that “Stonetear” was discussing Hillary Clinton’s emails, these finds appear to be the smoking gun in the Clinton email scandal. The posts prove intent to obstruct the production of evidence to Congress, either through deception or deletion, and that these events took place after the evidence was requested. There is no legitimate reason for anyone to act this way if the emails merely contained information about yoga poses and wedding invitations.

Now we know that our democratic leaders are liars who intend to deceive us. This has always been a tendency of democracy, apparently held in check by a steady stream of genetically-qualified leaders in the past, and possibly better quality of political writers and artists.

With the replacement of that group with another, we are getting the dregs of our tribe as candidates and they are being elected by ersatz media, an affirmative action administrative hierarchy, and an electorate which has no better angels to guide it and nothing in common, so lunges for illusions.

This condition is consistent across the West, with the rest of the world following, as we can see when we realize that our leaders have barely any knowledge of what is going on out there.

Heads of state and government representing the world’s largest economies used words like “fear,” “uncertainty,” “risk,” and “terror” 87 percent more often on average than during last year’s gathering, according to an analysis by Adam Tiouririne, a leadership communication adviser at Logos Consulting Group.

The people who are supposed to be leading us are expressing their fears for the future, as if admitting that they cannot control the situation, which for a leader is tantamount to affirming his own incompetence. They watch these problems arise, and either their hands are tied or they have no ability to come up with a plan, so they emote instead of taking action.

They have created a global economy which is itself fake, based on the willingness of others to purchase debt as an asset:

In the U.S. alone, there’s more than $63 trillion in combined public and private debt. In stark contrast, there are only $3.8 trillion total dollars in circulation, and each of these dollars has been lent and borrowed more than 16 times. The amount of leverage continues to climb.

This debt-driven approach mirrors the Clinton years theory, which “worked” because it allowed us to sell houses to those who could not afford them, and by outsourcing our labor to China, lower costs. The problem with that approach is the hangover, which happens when all that fake money cannot perform under duress as well as it did under easy boom markets, so there is a massive crash such as the one we have been living through since 2000 (right after the Clinton 90s ended and when the results of their policies became manifest).

Not only that, but our fake economy is propped up by fake value, namely the internet advertising industry, which has been steadily paying less per ad over the years and has resulted in a web that is coated in advertising, as if the spammers went legit and took over. As predicted here before, the dot-com collapse that is coming will occur because of market recognition that internet advertising is fake and mostly useless for reaching actual customers:

Revelations that Facebook Inc. overestimated by up to 80% the average time people spent watching video ads on its platform shocked the media and marketing world.

Meanwhile, Japanese ad giant Dentsu Inc. admitted on Friday it overcharged at least 111 companies for internet ads. The mea culpa was prompted by a complaint from Toyota Motor Corp. that its internet ads weren’t having the promised impact.

In saner times, we would call this what it is: fraud. Businesses that make false promises that cause other people to experience loss are fraudulent, and schemes which rely on a one-step-removed version of that approach are also fraud, even if no one in our apparently also fake law enforcement apparatus seems to think so.

More importantly however, this means that the basis of our future is also fraudulent. The internet economy is based on false activity, and this fits into a larger pattern of advertising collapse as the consumers who care about the differences between products are replaced by the thoughtless. You cannot have an economy when most people buy randomly.

The future of America seems based on the hope that Google, Amazon, Apple and Twitter can keep selling ads and overhyped products long enough to keep the dot-com “circular Ponzi scheme” going, where we create activity and use that to claim value, and then sell interest in that activity to others. This parallels our monetary debt-selling scheme, which is also fraudulent.

The West has become a fraud. Our presumed value is based on deeds long in the past, our leaders are inept and apathetic, the voters are clueless and every aspect of public life is corrupt and fake. This is somewhat typical of democracy, which requires that complex problems be twisted into easy slogans so the masses — which cannot understand those problems — feel empowered. As a result, everything must be fraudulent. But the bill is coming due.