This article was originally published by Michael Snyder at The Economic Collapse Blog.

Stock prices are not going to stay this high.  Everyone can see that we are in a stock market bubble that does not have any parallel in all of U.S. history, and everyone can see that the end of that bubble is approaching.

The only debate is about how fast and how far the eventual fall will be.  For the first time ever, the ratio of U.S. stock prices to U.S. GDP has reached 200 percent.  In other words, the total value of U.S. stocks is now twice as high as the value of all U.S. economic output for an entire year.  To get an idea of how crazy this is, just check out this chart.  Historically, the ratio of U.S. stock prices to U.S. GDP is normally under 100 percent, and so if all stock prices were cut in half U.S. stocks would still be overvalued.  That is how extreme this bubble has become.

Other key valuation measures also indicate that stock prices have gotten wildly out of balance.  The following example comes from a Motley Fool article entitled “Here’s Why You Should Expect a 20% Stock Market Crash in 2021”…

Looking back 150 years, the S&P 500 has averaged a Shiller P/E of 16.78. Admittedly, the Shiller P/E ratio has been a lot higher over the past 25 years. The advent of the internet has broken down information barriers for retail investors, and historically low lending rates for more than a decade have fueled borrowing and lit a fire under growth stocks.

But as of Feb. 3, the Shiller P/E for the S&P 500 was knocking on the door of 35 — more than double the long-term average. To put this figure into some context, there have only been five periods in history where the Shiller P/E ratio topped 30 and stayed there during a bull market run. Two of these events — the Great Depression and dot-com bubble — led to some of the biggest pullbacks ever witnessed in equities. Two other events (not counting the current move) occurred within the past three years, delivering declines of 20% and 34%, respectively, in the S&P 500.

Basically what this is saying is that if stock prices fell by half, the Shiller P/E for the S&P 500 would still be above the long-term average.

So if the market only falls by 20 percent this year as that Motley Fool article is suggesting, we should consider ourselves to be extremely fortunate.

We have never seen anything like this before.  The bubble that we are in now absolutely dwarfs the epic stock market bubbles of 1929 and 2000.  Stock market mania has gripped the entire nation, and all sorts of people have been getting rich, at least on paper.

But many Wall Street veterans that have been watching all of this transpire have become extremely concerned.  The following comes from a Forbes article entitled “Is The Stock Market About To Crash?”…

‘Very, very concerning’ echoes of the 90s dot-com bubble are being heard loud and clear by nervous market experts. A 12-year-old bull market; SPAC mania; IPOs that more than double on the first trading day; an army of amateur traders and GameStop mania. It certainly feels like irrational exuberance–and it triggers alarms for those who remember the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s. “The parallels we have today are historically very, very concerning,” notes Jim Stack, president of Whitefish, Montana’s InvesTech Research and Stack Financial Management. “The current froth is the icing on the cake, and when you look through it, you see a lot of other underlying issues.”

In this sort of environment, videos by kids on YouTube showing people how to make a million dollars by day trading stocks get hundreds of thousands of views.

If you have been able to make a lot of money by playing the stock market, good for you.

Just make sure that you get out in time.

Every other stock market bubble in U.S. history has ended badly, and as John Hussman recently noted, this is our generation’s moment of peak financial insanity…

Nothing so animates a speculative herd as a parabolic price advance in an asset detached from any standard of value. I am convinced that future generations will use the present moment to define the concept of a reckless speculative extreme, in the same way our generation uses “1929” and “2000.”

So just how far does Hussman think the market could ultimately fall?

Well, he believes that stock prices would have to drop 65 to 70 percent just to get back to historical norms…

Understand how extreme current valuations have become. In order to simply touch run-of-the-mill historical valuation norms, the S&P 500 would have to lose somewhere in the range of 65-70% over the completion of this cycle.

Stock prices always, always, always get back to their historical averages eventually.

It is just a matter of time.

However, we should hope that a stock market crash can be put off for as long as possible because a truly catastrophic stock market crash would cause far more economic pain than we have experienced so far.

Our system simply would not be able to handle a decline of 50 percent or more in stock prices.  It would essentially mean the end of our financial system as we know it today, and that is something that nobody should want.

The good news is that I do not expect a stock market crash within the next 30 days unless some sort of major “trigger event” comes along.

Stocks may go down, but for the moment I expect at least a short-term period of relative stability.

But that short-term period of relative stability will not last very long at all, and I fully expect 2021 as a whole to be a very, very painful year.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on Amazon.com.  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on Amazon.com including The Beginning Of The End, Get Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream, and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial, or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on Facebook, Twitter, and Parler, and anyway that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

A peer-reviewed study has concluded that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention violated federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers. The study states that the figures were inflated by at least 1,600%!

According to the Public Health Initiative of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge, which published the study, titled “COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective,” the COVID numbers were to push a narrative of fear and compliance. In doing so, the study also asserts that the CDC willfully violated multiple federal laws, including the Information Quality Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and Administrative Procedures Act, reported the National File.

In January, as WND reported, the World Health Organization admitted the “gold-standard” PCR tests used to determine whether or not a person is infected with COVID-19 are not reliable on the first try and a second test might be needed.

That fact, the National File notes, corresponds with the CDC’s “quiet admission that it blended viral and antibody test results for its case numbers and that people can test positive on an antibody test if they have antibodies from a family of viruses that cause the common cold.”

Among the notable findings in the study is the conclusion that the CDC “illegally enacted new rules for data collection and reporting exclusively for COVID-19 that resulted in a 1,600% inflation of current COVID-19 fatality totals,” the watchdog group All Concerned Citizens said in a statement provided to National File. –WND

This isn’t news to anyone who has been following along.  Several agendas are at play here and mass impoverishment was necessary to achieve the New World Order using the Great Reset.

Whistleblowers were coming out in the spring of last year, only to be silenced and censored.

Another COVID-19 Whistleblower: A Montana Dr. Says Government Is Drastically Overstating Deaths

COVID-19 was to be listed in Part I of death certificates as a definitive cause of death, regardless of confirmatory evidence, rather than in Part II as a contributor to death in the presence of pre-existing conditions.

On its website, the CDC says, just 6% of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone.

The researchers estimated the COVID-19 recorded fatalities “are inflated nationwide by as much as 1600% above what they would be had the CDC used the 2003 handbooks,” said All Concerned Citizens. –WND

The mainstream media and social media continue to lambast and censor anyone who can put two and two together to get four.  The ruling class is truly at the end of their rope.  It’s up to us now to make sure we no longer accept slavery in any form ever again. We knew this.  It was and has always been about fear. Those living in fear afraid to die are the easiest to enslave.

The Science of Fear: How The Elitists Use it to Control Us & How to Break Free

Another day, and another tyrant that wants the ruling class to tell everyone what the government-approved truth is. We are already living in a dystopic slave state where people are silenced for disagreeing with their masters, but it could still get worse.

We already know the mainstream media is ready to propagate the enhanced slave state for the ruling class, but now, government officials are not hiding the fact that they think they own you. And that includes your thoughts, reasoning, and emotions.

Calls For Censorship & A 1984-Style “Ministry of Truth” Coming From MSM

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-California) has suggested a “truth commission” to tackle “racial injustice” and “white supremacy” in the US, as well as holding “far-right media” and others accountable for the US Capitol riot.

Rep. @SaraJacobsCA tells @brianstelter that America now needs a “Truth Commission”

Stelter: “Do you think the House and Senate leadership have the stomach for that?”

Jacobs: “I think so.” pic.twitter.com/7c27KI2OXy

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 14, 2021

As for what exactly this truth commission would look like, the California Democrat described it as “communities all the way up to the national level having conversations about the gory and glory of our history,” including the January 6 riot at the center of the impeachment trial, and these bodies ultimately creating a “common narrative of what we want our country to be.”

They fully intend to manipulate, brainwash, and ensure your compliance to the slave state. Wake up. We need to ask ourselves if these people have a higher claim over our life or property than we do.  They sure think they do and they want use to serve them.  It’s obvious.

So can we say this is Orwellian now? Cause 1984 literally had a “Ministry of Truth”. https://t.co/UcuAN2f7ew

— Wildest Ride (@Wildest_Ride) February 14, 2021

We have to start uniting and standing up for each other because these tyrants want only one thing: power and control over as many as possible.  Hopefully, as humanity grows and continues to see the blatant slavery under the name of government that has crushed so many people worldwide, we can come together and unite without these ruthless psychopaths trying to dictate our every thought.

This is blatant. Government is slavery and democracy is mob rule. Wake up and start to understand that no one makes a rightful master and no one can vote you a slave. Government is illegitimate. It always has been and always will be because no one has any right to be a master and no one has the moral obligation to obey any other human.  The sooner we collectively figure this out, the sooner we can be free. It starts in the mind, which is why they are coming for that.

The mainstream media is doing their best to keep the American public in a panicked state of fear over the coronavirus.  The new fear-mongering campaign is centered around the mutations of the virus, that the authorities assure us will be concerning.

Don’t put anything past the elitists in the ruling class.  Could these variants be used to put the public through another more sinister lockdown? Could they be releasing something that is actually dangerous this time and not just the common cold? Could we be on the verge of something massive?

More COIVD-19 Vax Deaths: Think They’ll Blame This On COVID-21?

According to propaganda outlet, The New York Times, scientists are finding a number of new variants that seem to have originated in the United States — and many of them may pose the same kind of extra-contagious threat. In a study posted on Sunday, a team of researchers reported seven growing lineages of the coronavirus, spotted in states across the country. All have gained a mutation at the exact same spot in their genes.

Watch what they are saying in their own words. Whether these new mutations are worse or not is of no consequence to the ruling class.

“There’s clearly something going on with this mutation,” said Jeremy Kamil, a virologist at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center and a co-author of the new study. That means they will either make it deadlier or use it as an excuse to lockdown the slaves again. Possibly something else, but those seem like the two most likely scenarios as these stories unfold.

“It’s tough to know what these substitutions are doing,” he said of the mutations. “It really needs to be followed up with some additional experimental data.”

The article by The New York Times goes on with the intent to continue to push the fear.

But just as states are again lifting mask-wearing mandates and loosening restrictions, experts fear that more contagious variants could undo all that progress.

That threat seems only to grow as researchers learn more. British government scientists now believe the more contagious variant that is ravaging Britain is also “likely” to be deadlier than earlier versions of the virus, according to a document posted on a government website on Friday. An earlier assessment on a smaller scale warned last month that there was a “realistic possibility” the variant was more lethal.

The variant, also known as B.1.1.7, is spreading rapidly in the United States, doubling roughly every 10 days, another recent study found. –The New York Times

Something is going on with these mutations and the way they are being reported on in the mainstream media.  Stay alert and stay prepared.

This article was originally published by John Miltmore at The Foundation for Economic Education. 

The fact that even the New York Times is finally beginning to discuss unintended consequences of COVID-19 ‘hygiene theater’ is a sign we may be moving in the right direction.

The New York Times published an article on Friday under a simple headline: “Covid Absolutism.”

The article opens by noting that during public health emergencies, absolutism—the idea that people should cease any and all behavior that creates additional risk—is a tempting response. Times writer David Leonhardt gives various examples of this “absolutism” on display in America today.

“People continue to scream at joggers, walkers, and cyclists who are not wearing masks. The University of California, Berkeley, this week banned outdoor exercise, masked or not, saying, ‘The risk is real,’” he writes. “The University of Massachusetts Amherst has banned outdoor walks. It encouraged students to get exercise by ‘accessing food and participating in twice-weekly Covid testing.’”

Examples like these are virtually endless. They invite two key questions, Leonhardt notes: How effective are these behaviors in reducing the spread of the virus? And is there a downside?

The Rise of ‘Hygiene Theater’

As Leonhardt notes, many of these actions are essentially a kind of “hygiene theater,” the subject of a recent article in the Atlantic written by Derek Thompson.

The phrase basically speaks for itself. According to Leonhardt, these actions are not rooted in science and are primarily a form of theatrical presentation that will have little or no actual impact.

Taking every possible precaution is unrealistic. Human beings are social creatures who crave connection and pleasure and who cannot minimize danger at all times.

“Prohibiting outdoor activity is unlikely to reduce the spread of the virus, nor is urging people always to wear a mask outdoors,” he writes. “Worldwide, scientists have not documented any instances of outdoor transmission unless people were in close conversation, Dr. Muge Cevik, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, told me.”

Have there been any documented instances of transmission among unmasked people who are outdoors and *not* in close conversation with each other?

Eg joggers, walkers, bikers, beachgoers, etc. https://t.co/zTo2ddQ5pz

— David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) February 10, 2021

So the answer to Leonhardt’s first question—How effective are they at reducing the spread of the virus?— is not difficult to answer: they’re not effective.

The second question, and its answer, is more interesting.

Unintended Consequences of ‘Hygiene Theater’

One might be tempted to argue that these theatrics still produce positive outcomes since they are likely to make people more conscious of the pandemic and slow the spread of the virus.

Taking extreme precautions is simply “playing it safe.” What’s the harm in that?

The answer is, “plenty.” First, Leonhardt argues it’s not part of human nature to live in a perpetual state of extreme caution.

“Taking every possible precaution is unrealistic,” he writes. “Human beings are social creatures who crave connection and pleasure and who cannot minimize danger at all times.”

Perhaps more importantly, he argues that extreme caution can backfire and produce outcomes that have the opposite of their desired effect. He uses the AIDS crisis as an example, pointing out that demonizing sexual intercourse and trying to frighten people away from it had the unintended consequence of increasing unsafe sex.

A similar phenomenon appears to be at work today.

“Telling Americans to wear masks when they’re unnecessary undermines efforts to persuade more people to wear masks where they are vital,” Leonhardt writes.

For many, this statement probably doesn’t sound particularly noteworthy. It basically has the ring of common sense, a variation of The Boy Who Cried Wolf, one of Aesop’s famous parables, which taught that false alarms can harm humans by inhibiting their ability to detect actual danger.

The Timeless Lesson of Unintended Consequences

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a case study in “unintended consequences,” a term popularized by American sociologist Robert K. Merton in the twentieth century. Basically, it’s the idea that virtually every action comes with outcomes that are not foreseen or intended.

The French economist Frédéric Bastiat alluded to this concept in his famous essay, “That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen.”

“In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect but to a series of effects,” Bastiat wrote.

The problem, he noted, is that humans rarely pay attention to the unseen or unintended effects of a given action or policy. Ignoring these outcomes is one of the great mistakes in public policy, the Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman once observed.

Unfortunately, ignoring unintended consequences and focusing on intentions is precisely what we saw in 2020, and nobody has been more guilty of this than the Times.

No one is served by ignoring unintended consequences. And the adverse unintended consequences of lockdowns are legion.

If you search for articles discussing the unintended consequences of COVID-19 policies, which are boundless, you’ll find virtually nothing on their site. I was able to find two articles using the phrase “unintended consequences” of COVID lockdowns.

One article, published in September, is a profile of Dr. Bonnie Henry, a Canadian physician and British Columbia’s top doctor who spoke of minimizing the unintended consequences of government interventions. The other is an article in May that discussed how lockdowns could result in a surge of mental illness.

This dearth of coverage is unfortunate. The Times is one of the most influential papers in the world. It has an immense reach and a news staff of 1,300 people. And yet—our tiny writing team at FEE has produced more articles on the unintended consequences of lockdowns than the Grey Lady.

No one is served by ignoring unintended consequences. (Well, maybe politicians.) If we’re to understand the damage wrought in 2020 and prevent it in the future, lockdowns must be judged by their actual consequences, not what they were designed to achieve.

And the adverse unintended consequences of lockdowns are legion.

The fact that even the New York Times is finally beginning to discuss the unintended consequences of COVID-19-inspired actions is a sign that we may be, however belatedly, moving in the right direction.