Trend Analyst: “Yes, There Will Be Riots In Major Cities”

If you’ve watched a documentary about America’s economic situation in recent years there is a strong chance it was produced by Daniel Ameduri of Future Money Trends. He’s covered topics that include everything from the massive college debt bubble and the future of real estate,  to water wars and what it will look like on the day the U.S. dollar finally crashes.

In the following interview Daniel shares a wealth of knowledge and takes a practical approach for how to thrive personally and financially during an economic collapse.

This is a must-watch guide from an extremely well informed source and delves into a wide range of scenarios such as what happens with our currency and our systems of commerce within two weeks of a collapse, as well as the months that follow.

As highlighted in the video, preparing for a worst-case scenario isn’t just about putting food in your pantry, but involves a dynamic strategy depending on your specific circumstances, capabilities and needs.

Yes, there will be riots in major cities… Yes, the U.S. is going to lose its dominance in the world…

In 2008… I think that was just the beginning… That was scratching the surface of what’s to come… the truth was almost revealed.

Within the next five, not later than ten years, I think the truth is going to come out… It’s fraudonomics… Everything is built on fraud and manipulation… and I think once this thing hits and once it comes out, and the U.S. dollar loses its reserve status, or at least there’s a change in the global currency system, I think Americans are in for a huge shock. 

(Watch at Future Money Trends)

If the U.S. does poorly and the economy goes into some type of monetary crisis these things [hard assets and resources] are going to be dramatically risen because people will be looking for value. Just like Warren Buffet buys railroad companies… he’s getting rid of those dollars and buying assets.

The first thing I would get [if a collapse were imminent and days away]… hopefully, number one, I’m at home… of course last minute food… fresh foods… it might be the last time you’re getting apples for a few weeks, depending on how bad it is…

What’s the currency in two weeks? This is a tough one. If it gets really bad the currency in some cities could be sex, alcohol, tobacco, food certainly, water certainly…

In a general sense, what would the government do? The government will have to come out with a new currency… I don’t think the free market’s going to supply the new currency only because the government won’t let it.

… For sure silver will be used… ammunition… and again, the collapse could be on so many levels. The worst case scenario would be where there’s a complete breakdown… and that wouldn’t probably come from an economic collapse… that would probably be more like somebody striking at our energy… our utility system… and EMP.

I think if we had a lack of power in major cities, and all of a sudden the millions of people in Los Angeles aren’t able to feed their children, or turn the stove on… that’s when you have a major crisis.

Will this last for two or three weeks? That’s very possible.

Will it last for months? Much less likely, unless we’re talking about a global event.

As we’ve discussed in detail over many years, there are a whole host of scenarios that could lead to a complete meltdown in our infrastructure and systems of commerce. The bottom line is that whatever happens, should supply lines be disrupted for even a few days on a national level, there would be widespread panic across this entire country.

Those are the worst case scenarios and they are certainly plausible.

Other possibilities include what we’re already seeing happen in the United States right here and now – a continued degradation of the middle class. That trend is likely to continue unabated and may require a slightly different approach than preparing for a post-Apocalyptic scenario:

I think it’s definitely in their [government] interest for us not to be smart, well thought out thinkers out there. Because then you’re a Libertarian and an anarchist and that’s the last thing you want.

They want you to feel good about the government pointing a gun at somebody else’s head, taking their money and taking their stuff and redistributing it to everybody else.

Is it their goal for us to be impoverished? Probably not too much.

They don’t want us to be too poor to where we have revolution. But they also don’t want us to be too wealthy and smart to where there’s a revolution or the realization that we don’t need the government or the bureaucrats regulating our daily activities.

I’m very optimistic, but I have to admit I’m very realistic.

When this shock happens, I definitely see a situation where there could be rioting in the streets… so even though I want people to thrive, I think the first thing we do is we prepare.

I tell people, ‘you prepare for the worst, but then you’ve got to look at the next twenty or thirty years.

For years I identified with being a ‘Doomsday Prepper,’ and I would bet everyone in my life would call me a Doomsday Prepper because of what I’ve done… But, the thing is you don’t want to get stuck on it.

We’re going into the depression. The U.S. is going to change dramatically… how we make our money… how we save for later in life… how we teach our children… It’s all going to change… I don’t want to wait for it to change.

I’m changing now.

The winds of change are all around us. There are a wide array of potential scenarios that every concerned person should be looking at and preparing for. But that doesn’t mean we have to live our lives in a constant state of fear of the unknown.

It’s got to be more than just preparing for the worst and being stuck in that state… The new economy that’s out there… you’ve got to choose your own destiny. 

Daniel Ameduri
Future Money Trends


SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You

BUMMER FOR CLIMATE KOOKS: Final Keystone XL Pipeline Report Reveals No Major Boost in Greenhouse Gas

Guest post by Deena Winter

LINCOLN, Neb. — The U.S. State Department’s final environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline mirrors earlier conclusions that the pipeline wouldn’t significantly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.

The report reiterated last year’s draft report conclusion that the pipeline is unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction of oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil in the U.S.

Now that the State Department’s environmental review of TransCanada’s application for a federal permit to build the pipeline is complete, a 90-day review by various federal agencies will commence to determine whether the pipeline is in the national interest, since it crosses a national border. The final decision is expected to be made by Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama.

Canadian pipeline company TransCanada first applied for permission to build the pipeline in late 2008, but it ran into a wall of opposition in Nebraska. Nebraska pipeline fighters have taken part in and helped organize protests from the governor’s mansion to Washington, D.C., even as most of the Republican statewide public officials have pushed for approval.

The Keystone XL pipeline would bisect Nebraska, with nearly 200 miles of pipe buried in a dozen counties. A grassroots group called Bold Nebraska has battled against a foreign company having the power to take land from landowners and possible contamination of the massive Ogallala Aquifer by oil spills.

Pipeline opponents successfully lobbied Obama to reject TransCanada’s initial application in late 2011 and forced the company to reroute the pipeline around the ecologically fragile Sandhills. That’s the route reviewed in the latest State Department reports.

The new report noted that most pipeline spills are small: of the 1,692 incidents between 2002 and 2012, 79 percent were small (up to 2,100 gallons) and just 4 percent were large spills where the oil would migrate away from the release site. It also said modeling indicates “aquifer characteristics would inhibit the spread of released oil, and impacts from a release on water quality would be limited.”

Pipeline opponents in Nebraska have questioned why TransCanada didn’t build the pipeline parallel to its existing Keystone One pipeline that crosses eastern Nebraska, away from the Sandhills and aquifer. The report noted this, but concluded it wasn’t a reasonable alternative because it wouldn’t meet Keystone’s contractual obligations to transport 100,000 barrels per day of crude oil from the Bakken oil play in North Dakota. Also, the corridor would be longer, increasing the risk of spills.

The proposed pipeline has put Obama in a difficult position where he must decide whether to live up to his promises to combat climate change or appease labor unions that generally support the pipeline and jobs it would bring. Obama said last year the pipeline should only be built if it doesn’t increase carbon emissions.

Russ Girling, TransCanada president and chief executive officer, told reporters Friday that while opponents will continue to make noise, “The science continues to show that this pipeline can and will be built safety.”

“This pipeline certainly is in the national interest of the United States,” he said.

Bold Nebraska Executive Director Jane Kleeb saw victories in the fact that the report acknowledged the revised route still crosses the Sandhills, which she called a “big shift” from earlier reports. Environmental groups vowed to keep the pressure on Obama to reject the project.

“Our side continues to gain ground because landowners and environmentalists are now working together,” Kleeb said Friday.

Regardless of the president’s final verdict, a Nebraska lawsuit could still throw another obstacle in the path of the proposed 1,179-mile pipeline. Landowners who oppose the pipeline sued the state, challenging the constitutionality of a law that changed the pipeline route approval process, giving the governor and state environmental regulators the authority to approve or deny the revised route through Nebraska, rather than the Public Service Commission.

If the route review process is deemed unconstitutional, TransCanada would have to go back to square one with siting. A district judge hasn’t yet made a ruling after a one-day trial in September.

Contact Deena Winter at

Doug Ross @ Journal