>>Thanks for proving my point. You weren't even capable of inventing a new one, you had to paraphrase.
>>
>>Shall we just agree that you are not in the mood for serious talk this week (-year-decade-century)?
>
>You provide someone with someone with good economic credentials
I don't know any of these guys. I pick my company carefully.
The guys with good economic credentials are exactly those who are handsomely paid to tell you that it's excellent as it is.
>predicting the imminent collapse of the U.S., and I'll consider your talk to be serious.
Did I say "imminent"? If you took care to read my messages upstream of this, you'd see that I mentioned long haul in several ways. It will not break, it will erode. Erosion is slow by definition. And the process has begun decades ago.
If you run up a debt larger that two of your annual incomes, you're - what? Either about to become homeless, or you are a country where nothing bad can happen and prosperity will continue ad infinitum, right?
> Until then, I'll largely file away predictions under the same category as I do:
>- There won't be any oil in 10 years!
>- Sea levels will rise by 20 feet by the end of the century!
>- Claims by VB programmers who never worked with VFP that VB was great for working with data.
Let me scare you in the same manner: next year, straw man argument will merit capital punishment.