So, as with every Sunday afternoon, I had to do a google search.
Now, I think at lunch on Thursday, Jordan, ML ("Mister Lupaka"...? interesting!) and I blundered into the topic of how to decide what is news worth following. I think that if I even did manage to explain my own position, I did it poorly.
So here's an illustration of my methods right here:
Here's a short writeup on "crack-up boom".
Oh good, it's an idea from Ludwig von Mises. That explains a lot to me instantly. Warning sign #1.
Here's a longer writeup on "crack-up boom" from the Daily Reckoning.
It mentions "Zimbabwe", so there's warning sign #2.
It's on the Daily Reckoning. Warning sign #3.
Oh, it was written in June 2007. When the crack up boom had already begun. Supposedly. Thus warning sign #4: people have already been crowing about it forever.
And here's video of Marc Faber talking about the "crack up boom". From Feb 2011.
It's Marc Faber, darling of Zerohedge. Warning sign #5.
The video is linked from Zerohedge. Warning sign #6.
Here's Thorstein Pollett writing about "crack-up boom". From Jan 2010.
It's on mises.org. Warning sign #7.
The author was "awarded the 2012 O.P. Alford III Prize in Libertarian Scholarship". Oh god, not only does such a thing exist, but he is proud of winning this thing. Warning sign #8.
Add it up and what does it say?