- Professional Investor?
- Favorite Stock Tickers
- GPR, FR, AZX
- Vancouver, B.C.
- About me
My background is in economics and law. I studied economics for four years at the University of British Columbia, before moving on to the Faculty of Law (at that same institution). I obtained my law degree in 1989.
I became seriously attracted to the precious metal sector around the middle of this decade - through my own, personal investing. After publishing an amateur blog for about a year, I became acquainted with C.J. McNamara and we decided to form Bullion Bulls Canada at the end of 2008.
- Profile Video
- My Profile Video
- Member since
- Saturday, 11 July 2009 20:47
- Last online
- 2 hours 12 minutes ago
- Profile views
- 225949 views
Eric Dubin – They Could Conceivably Kill the COMEX
Join us as we take a look at the silver market since the US Mint sold out of American Silver Eagles. We review what has happened and the possibilities that loom around the corner.
600 Metric Tons of Gold Does Not Exist at Current Prices – Eric Dubin
This is part 2 of my interview with Eric Dubin
We conclude our discussion of the current state of affairs at the COMEX which leads us to discuss how the true physical market, the Shanghai Gold Exchange, is impacting the markets and the flow of metal in and out of the market.
Had it not been for a few geniuses in science, mechanics and in all fields of service except economics and politics, the profiteer system would have reduced the majority of us to mere beasts. The world has made wonderful progress in everything – except politics and economics.
I'm sure it's no mystery to regular readers why someone who singles out the politicians and economists (i.e. the "Traitors" and the "Charlatans") as the principal Failures of our societies is my new, personal hero.
...Now you DO disapppont me. My husband goes by many names, so I tell people, "You can call him whatever you wish, but don't call him late for dinner."
I didn't realize that was a common phrase, I thought I was the author LOL
I think the first time I heard that line (long ago) was in some TV comedy, or perhaps a stand-up routine:
"You can call me ________, or call me _______; just don't call me late for dinner."
P.S. There are a few lines in my own, standard repertoire which I've been using for so long that I can't remember if I made-up the line myself -- or "borrowed it" from someone else.
Leaders are like petted and pampered children – spoiled and no good unless by our intelligence we force them to be good.
If you want to know who did say/write this; here's where to look.
This trader goes into detail explaining how the Fed is able to manipulate the markets from within and outside the USA. Again, it is lengthy but IMO certainly worth reading.
This could be frightening to some, but I understand this life is only a journey … I believe we can only protect our assets for our children and grandchildren. Evil will NOT prevail.
A Zero Hedge reader, and long-time futures trader, shares his views on the evolution of the "market", where it was, where it is, and where it may be going.
* * *
I have been an independent trader for 23 years, starting at the CBOT in grains and CME in the S&P 500 futures markets long ago while they were auction outcry markets, and have stayed in the alternative investment space ever since, and now run a small fund.
I understand better than most I would think, the "mechanics" of the markets and how they have evolved over time from the auction market to 'upstairs". I am a self-taught, top down global macro economist, and historian of "money" and the Fed and all economic and governmental structures in the world. One thing so many managers don't understand is that the markets take away the most amounts of money from the most amounts of people, and do so non-linearly. Most sophisticated investors know to be successful, one must be a contrarian, and this philosophy is in parallel. Markets will, o`n all time scales, through exponential decay (fat tails, or black swans, on longer term scales), or exponential growth of price itself. Why was I so bearish on gold at its peak a few years back for instance? Because of the ascent of non-linearity of price, and the massive consensus buildup of bulls. Didier Sornette, author of "Why Stock Markets Crash", I believe correctly summarizes how Power Law Behavior, or exponential consensus, and how it lead to crashes. The buildup of buyers' zeal, and the squeezing of shorts, leads to that "complex system" popping. I have traded as a contrarian with these philosophies for some time.
The point here is, our general indices have been at that critical point now for a year, without "normal" reactions post critical points in time, from longer term time scales to intraday. This suggests that many times, there is only an audience of one buyer, and as price goes up to certain levels, that buyer extracts all sellers. After this year and especially this last 1900 point Dow run up in October, and post non-reaction, that I am 100 percent confident that that one buyer is our own Federal Reserve or other central banks with a goal to "stimulate" our economy by directly buying stock index futures. Talking about a perpetual fat finger! I guess "don't fight the Fed" truly exists, without fluctuation, in this situation. Its important to note the mechanics; the Fed buys futures and the actual underlying constituents that make up the general indices will align by opportunistic spread arbitragers who sell the futures and buy the actual equities, thus, the Fed could use the con, if asked, that they aren't actually buying equities.
They also consistently use events through their controlled media, whether bad or good price altering news, to create investment behavior. The "ending" QE 3, and the immediate Bank of Japan QE news that night, and thus the ability to not quit QE using them as their front, and then propping our markets on Globex, like this is suppose to be good news, free markets totally dependent on QE, is one example. Last night, Obama passing the amnesty bill, and the more great news about how Europe and now China are also printing money out of thin air and "stimulating" their economies with QE too, which in turn prompts the Fed to prop up overnight futures markets on Globex to make that look like great news as well. I guess this is suppose to create a behavioral pattern for investors, that dependency on government gives us positive feedback and is good, much like Pavlov's dog and the ringing of the bell.
Why would the Fed prop up our stock market to begin with? Weren't they just supposed to "stimulate" the treasuries market only, to keep interest rates low, indirectly, by an eventual direct purchase in secondary markets, keeping them propped up (for five years now!)? Well, first of all as it relates to equities and utilizing the "Plunge Protection" mandate, why not just bypass the "plunge" altogether. Can't the definition of Plunge Protection be just that? Protection against a plunge instead of during a plunge? Doesn't propping the market equate to "Plunge Protection" since propping alleviates plunge and "protects" us? Does it depend on what the definition of "is" is? And really, doesn't the Fed buying futures directly alleviate those bankers who take their money in TARP or however means and then this money doesn't make its way into the very heart of what the public deems as its consumption motivator, higher stocks and real estate? Plus, buying futures is a means of then delivering fiat cash upon every expiration, therefore, "stimulus" to someone who receives it.
The Fed boasts about having a printing press, and I guess this allows them to "fix" everything. They "print money out of thin air" we keep hearing (which is true by the way) and with US taxpayer backing (fiat currency (always fails throughout history)), (perhaps post QE 3 there is an Executive Order for QE infinity), they sit on the actual bid and hold our treasury markets steady, and by buying out big sellers as they arise like Russia and China via their Belgium central bank franchise as an example, propping our dollar and then staying on that bid by other franchises, having constant bid flow into equity futures in real time hours and Globex overnite, all in order to retain US consumer confidence (since that is what we are suppose to continue to do) and the image of global strength to keep the dollar from losing its reserve status. Their obsession of stopping a deflationary depression, has headfaked people like Bill Gross, formerly of PIMCO, and known to have started hedging long bond positions five years ago with the assumptions that Fed printing would be inflationary, and rates would move higher, but without the assumption of the perpetual direct bid in the market place by the Fed creating, "price discovery". For now, that is.
In the end, which they know exactly when that is, the ultimate con is exposed through mass theft. Americans finally find out what those guys on CNBC are talking about when they mention "inflation" and how it destroys buying power over time. The end reflects the Fed stepping away from the bid in all markets. Prior to this, of course, they prep their offshore fund accounts to take the other side and short dollar, short global equities, and short fixed income, with mass leverage for maximum gain. I mean, why wouldn't they? They are a private entity and are composed of non-US citizens with no accountability or oversight and they seem to be globalist humanists with a depopulation bent (Rockefeller Foundation). Why wouldn't they use our money to prop, their money to take other side in a massive global short play, then let it all crash by simply stepping off the bid of these markets. They can then use the controlled talking heads who can relay the complexities of fiat money, index arbitrage, money velocity, currency and CDO swaps, with some geopolitical China worries, whatever, but really emphasize that the whole capitalistic system and constitution was flawed to begin with anyways, and that perhaps totalitarian fascism would be best for the country at this point since everyone's wealth is destroyed overnight and are literally hungry. Perhaps Obama is just that person! Maybe Dinesh D'souza was right about Obama. This is the way to destroy us, or "equal" the playing field globally by taking us down to third world status, is it not? Leverage the American people's money by trillions of dollars at the tops of capital markets, then bury them in a death spiral? Maybe Thomas Jefferson knew what he was saying' "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered."
Why wouldn't anyone believe these words written here? Perhaps you can't imagine someone being so evil? Wasn't the Federal Reserve Bank concept initially funded by a Rothschild in the 1800s, who used the media to deceive the public and sway the London Stock Market down negatively, who then speculated against that panicking public's sell orders by taking long positions in stocks, then making a fortune when everyone found out that the news was wrong and positive? Then later another Rothschild founded our Federal Reserve in 1913, and others like JP Morgan who supposedly bought the US stock market in a banking panic and "saved" America in 1909? Aren't all of these Fed owners Fabian Socialists?
Details of this last market move:
This last 1900 point Dow Jones push upwards - and the Ebola events leading into it - it was so orchestrated and heightened at critical points but the ascent and push straight up in price, and sideways nonreaction after was completely unlike anything I've seen before. After going up for a record breaking amount of time the last five or so years, in a nonlinear exponential mania type of ascent, there should normally be tremendous volatility that follows. But, this isn't a tech-like mania! There aren't any buyers here other then the Fed. The shorts were all squeezed in 2009, 2010, 11, 12, and everyone who has ever wanted to buy stocks is in!
Modern Portfolio Theory has reached it's pinnacle, leading 55% of the American public who partake in that "diversified" portfolio theory off an eventual cliff. The market acts more like a penny stock that has been pumped up and is "boxed" (boxed, meaning, the whole float is buying and holding and held with the promoter, one broker dealer, and thus this one broker dealer can control price "discovery"(regardless of actual fundamentals and using "press releases" to sway and create order flow they want and need from naive clients)) , and less like a free market. The Dow runs up that much that quickly, then on Globex its down .02 percent at the most over night, multiple days in a row? No pullback? Are you kidding me!? Then the actual trading days have very little volume, and the peaks in price intraday also exhibit nonreactions sideways, just a couple of tics from the highs. This price manipulation reflects that they want to expunge all shorts on all time scales, to the point that there will be no point to try, and at the very end, there will be very few. This also reflects that a group of very smart prop trader types, experienced behavioralists, perhaps off of a prior prop desk like a Goldman, are controlling this game, and not some government treasury/cftc/sec "plunge protect" type who doesn't understand this game.
With the indoctrination of Modern Portfolio Theory, and the masses' epistemology from experience and from "experts" to never ever get out because "it always comes back", and from corporate buybacks, the actual intraday trading float has disappeared, thus, easier and cheaper to manipulate and find the perfect "price discovery" for every situation to control investor behavior, especially during off hours on Globex. This past situation, during the break and runup, there would be thousands of opportunities for the Fed insiders using different variations of ways to front run (without using the focus dump then pump futures contract itself), making the HFT guys front running for pennies look like complete chumps. Can you imagine all the different ways to bet the global markets at the height of the ebola scare, which just happened to be the height of the mass media hammering the public with fear about it(haven't heard a word since!), which happened to be the exact moment of a very large Dow Jones 600 points intraday range after falling 1000 points in 9 days, which also happened to be at the height of put option premiums expanding and call option premiums eroding quickly, by knowing that the Fed is now going to prop it back up, way back up, and quickly! Shorting put premium globally for expiration in 7 or 37 days? Buying way out of the money cheap calls, buying the underlying equities, shorting interest rates, buying inflation, buying emerging markets and all of their liquid securities, options plays etc... on and on. That prior knowledge ts worth trillions, is it not? We all know that investment bank broker dealer desks take the other side of trades, and inventory the other side opportunistically. Why wouldn't this "bank" too, especially now that they are intertwined with investment banks thus have gained their intellectual property in trading? And why wouldn't they influence our idiot sheepish politicians to mandate the Fed Reserve, to encourage the Fed Reserve, to stimulate, whereas our Fed could use that for "the people", while at the same time, for themselves take the other side based on their offshore opportunistic mandate? Today's current markets are completely manipulated, every market, all the time, with our money and political Keynesian (control) mandate doing the manipulation in order for their money to front run and profit from there opportunistic mandate.
So if I am right, and my 23 years of experience trading equities, during manias enables me to know with certainty that I am, that they are allowed to directly be involved and have a perpetual standing bid in the secondary derivatives markets, they can then take the other side when they want (no need to publicly announce this, but to justify in their own heads). So when they take the other side in the public markets upon themselves pulling the prior US citizen backed bids in all markets for the ultimate 80 year cyclical "end game" (btw, about 23 years past the Kondratief Cycle deadline which is one way to describe the inevitable delay in this ongoing natural economic system reset) of the US fiat backed paper print con capped off by mass leverage, wouldn't they make trillions on the bubble pop on the way down? Wouldn't they also end up eventually owning the whole US since commerce would halt immediately, everyone would lose their jobs causing mass deflation (and hyperinflation due to our currency being booted as reserve currency, and imports becoming expensive overnight) causing mass defaults on their home loan obligations? Where do our mortgages end up now post 2008, 2009 financial collapse? Our governments coffers via FHA, FNMA, GNMA? And who will place a lien on our government when they default on it's loans? Wouldn't they be able to foreclose on America?
The US mandate on allowing Plunge Protection enabling the Fed to stick their noses directly in the equities markets was written in 1988 and is public knowledge and found in the public forum. And the attached "memo" shows incentives from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange for Central Bankers to use their equity futures markets.
Write me if you have any questions or comments, or if you need me to join in your efforts help to expose this Ponzi scam.
Everyone here knows I frequently rely upon thoughts, posts and questions from readers/Members as inspiration for my commentaries. But this is a first: I just drafted the title for a future commentary before even reading what was posted (lol):
The Working Poor: Welcome to Walmart!
Scraping the bottom!
The parasites get it all, honest industry and honest business must be grateful for a few crumbs only.
This is what is known to economists (and every good Right-Winger) as "trickle-down economics".
As the old saying goes; call me anything you want, "just don't call me late for dinner."
So the question is what's gonna happen to the gold price over the next 10 days?
My thought was that it would be bounced up and down like a yoyo to "demonstrate" to the the Swiss that its an erratic barbarous relic. The steady rise over the last week or so has me worried that it might be getting away from them. The Dutch repatriation announcement is an interesting twist. Its not too late to acquire phys but I feel a tonne better buying after the dips (rather than chasing it up).
Do they smash it on the weekends an let it rise during the week? Let it rise with a huge smash just before the vote?
WorkinStiff, the ever-increasing lack of transparency in our (corrupt) world forces me to a little more humble -- at least some of the time (lol).
With these psychopaths having so MANY different schemes at work (and "targets" they're attacking); I'm having more and more problems trying to connect SPECIFIC events with specific plans.
In this particular case; I'm going to offer a piece of advice which I usually forget myself (lol): we must remember not to think about "the price of gold" (or silver) exclusively denominated in USD's. The USD has (absurdly) been rising against ALL "currencies" lately --and gold is a currency.
Thus if we looked at a gold chart of the last few weeks in rupees, or pounds, or euros; I suspect it would look significantly different.
Conveniently; this was also recently posted on the Forum.
Will Putin play the gold card?
I was somewhat skeptical about that plan, but had to acknowledge that it was at least feasible that it could happen. And if Russia was planning to "back the rouble with gold"; that would be an even bigger reason for the Psychopaths to start whacking-around the price of gold (yet again).
With respect to your own theory; I think it's probability (again) depends on something which we cannot know with reliability. Recent STORIES (from the propaganda machine) indicate that the gold-referendum looks certain to be defeated. If that's true; then there is less of a need for the strategy you suggest.
Conversely, if they're LYING about Swiss support for the referendum (and lying is always possible); then that increases the motive to use the price of gold as a tool to shake the confidence of the Swiss people.
Jeff, you are an economist. Do you think this would work? What would happen to gold?
If Putin plays this card and the dollar "dies', the USA has only themselves to blame for "pushing" Putin into the corner with their unrelenting sanctions.
While reading this I cam to realize some of the problems experienced by Spain, Greece, Portugal, and Italy are a direct result of the declining value of the the euro, as these are importing countries, not exporters as Germany and Poland.
As The "Sanctions War" Heats Up, Will Putin Play His 'Gold Card'?
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CURRENCY WAR
“We’re in the midst of an international currency war. This threatens us because it takes away our competitiveness.” Brazilian Finance Minister Mantega uttered these words in September 2010, about two years after the spectacular global financial crisis of late 2008. During and following the crisis, the euro declined by around 25% versus the dollar. The pound sterling declined by nearly 30%. And while the Brazilian real also declined initially, it subsequently regained these losses in less than a year, unlike either the euro or pound. Dramatic swings in currency values can have a material impact on relative rates of economic growth. And when global economic growth is weak, the temptation to devalue and take some global market share from competitors is strong. “The advanced countries are seeking to devalue their currencies,” claimed Mantega.
The decline in the value of the euro in 2008-11 was of special importance because it exposed a key fault-line across the euro-area: That between the competitive exporters of the North, such as Germany, Poland and the Czech and Slovak Republics; and the less competitive importers of the South, such as Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece. With the euro weaker, the exporters’ economies were booming. Yet the fallout from the financial crisis fell hardest on the least competitive euro members, threatening the solvency of their banks and, by extension, the sustainability of their governments’ finances.
Thus there emerged a ‘civil currency war’ in the euro-area, which is still being fought at the ECB in Frankfurt and in the national capitals. The South is facing default and multiple countries have considered withdrawing from the euro, threatening the entire project. The North remains reluctant to provide bail-outs without a substantial quid-pro-quo in the form of a meaningful restructuring of the chronically uncompetitive southern economies.
Although the crisis remains unresolved to this day, various compromises were reached in 2012 that have bought an unknown amount of time. Whether that time has been used wisely is highly debatable, and one or more rounds of bail-outs and possibly another acute crisis (or multiple crises) lies ahead.
A dramatic escalation in the global currency war took place in Japan in 2012, following the election of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who campaigned on a platform of proposed radical measures to get the Japanese economy moving again. Thus he wasted no time in deploying the most obvious weapon: currency devaluation. From October 2012 to February 2013, the yen devalued by some 25%.
While this did have the result of providing some short-term stimulus, the overall effect was smaller and shorter-lived than hoped. Thus the Bank of Japan took additional measures recently to weaken the yen further. As of this writing, the yen has fallen by a further 15%. And that’s not all: Abe is now promising to halt a planned increase in sales tax and has called a snap election as a de facto referendum on his radical economic policies. Further yen weakness following this announcement suggests that the financial markets expect that Abe will prevail and follow-through accordingly.
This large cumulative yen devaluation is an attack on Japan’s competitors in the global export markets, in particular those for technologically advanced manufactured goods. Germany, Poland, South Korea, Taiwan and Brazil are in this group and no doubt the weaker yen is one reason why growth in these countries has been slowing of late.
Germany and Poland, however, now find they are fighting a three-front currency war: Versus Japan for export market share; versus the US, EU and NATO over the issue of economic sanctions against Russia; and on the continuing front within the euro-area itself, where recently both countries dissented from a recent ECB quantitative easing (QE) initiative to purchase asset-backed securities. How Germany, Poland and other countries caught in the crossfire of the currency and sanctions wars react will in turn have an impact on their trading partners, and so on. The associated negative consequences for global financial markets could be substantial.
RUSSIA, NATO AND THE ‘SANCTIONS WAR’
In recent years, there has been a series of increasingly serious confrontations between US allies and Russia, beginning with the Georgian war of 2008, continuing with the Syrian crisis of 2013 and then, most recently, in Ukraine. While each of these crises has been serious in its own way, not until now have they had an overt international economic dimension. This is because the Ukraine crisis has unleashed a ‘sanctions war’ that has escalated to the point of doing real economic damage not only to Russia, but to Germany and Poland, two of Russia’s largest trading partners.
So far, the Russian economy has held up reasonably well, but recent developments suggest that a deep recession is on the way. Lower prices for oil—Russia is a huge exporter—will hit the Russian economy hard. Moreover, with the Russian currency plunging by over 30% in recent months, consumer price inflation is going to rise sharply.
So what is Russia to do? Putin is rumoured to be preparing a major programme to reduce corruption and improve economic efficiency, but even if this is successful, it is going to take time, and it can’t be expected to fully offset the effect of sanctions. Unless they are lifted soon, Russia is facing a period of economic misery.
For the US and NATO, Russian economic misery is precisely what the sanctions war is all about: Cause enough pain, so the thinking goes, and Putin will allow Ukraine to crush the rebellion in the eastern part of the country and possibly re-annex the Crimea. While I am not an expert in these matters, it strikes me as highly unlikely that Putin will give in under the pressure. He is popular in Russia, not only because, up to now, he has overseen a prolonged period of strong economic growth but also because he is regarded by Russians as a strong leader standing up for Russia’s national interests. Ordinary Russians support their ethnic bretheren in eastern Ukraine and Crimea. They would be horrified if Russia allowed Ukraine to crush the rebels. Also, because of the sanctions, Russians will blame the US and NATO for the coming economic downturn, not Putin.
If I’m right that Putin stands his ground in Ukraine and remains highly popular notwithstanding the inevitable recession, then what does this imply for the currency wars generally? First, it implies that Germany, Poland, Slovakia and most other Russian trading partners are going to face a sharp economic deterioration as well. In all cases, this is going to have some political effects. In those countries with weak governments and unpopular leaders, the opposition may support ending the sanctions as an expedient way of gaining power. Indeed, in Slovakia the government has already voiced opposition to further sanctions.
Second, it implies that, rather than just sit back and take the pain, Russia is going to seek to reduce its economic dependence on the West. This is already in evidence, with Putin having signed major deals in the energy and defense industries with China and India, among other countries. Stronger Russian ties with the other BRICS, or other countries for that matter, may be of some concern to the US, but in most cases there isn’t much the US can do about it.
One crucial aspect of Russia’s dependence on the West is the global use of the US dollar as the primary international transaction and reserve currency. It is thus no surprise that the recent Russian energy deal with China—involving the construction of a large gas pipeline between the two countries—is to be financed and transacted in the Chinese yuan rather than the dollar.
Not only Russia, but the BRICS in general have regularly expressed their dissatisfaction with the dollar-centric global monetary conventions, including the Bretton-Woods legacy institutions of the IMF and the World Bank. Hence the BRICS have set about building their own parallel institutions and have signed a number of bilateral currency-swap deals with each other and non-BRICS trading partners in order to reduce dollar dependence. While all these initiatives nudge the BRICS and, by implication, the global economy generally, away from the dollar, the process is slow and, absent an international monetary crisis, is likely to take years.
For Russia, however, the need to shore up the economy and the currency is exigent. It cannot wait for the gradual evolution of the international monetary system to reduce the impact of sanctions. So what else might Russia do in the near-term?
A GOLDEN ROUBLE?
One intriguing possibility is one which Russia has, in fact, contemplated before: Backing the currency with Russia’s gold reserves. In the late 1980s, as the Soviet Union was breaking up, the rouble was in free-fall and inflation was soaring. Russia had essentially zero access to global capital markets and relied on oil exports for hard currency with which to trade with other nations. In 1989, Premier Gorbachev invited two prominent US economists to Russia, where they met with senior economic policy officials and recommended precisely this as the best way to stabilise the rouble. One of the two was former Fed governor Wayne Angell; the other, Jude Wanniski of ‘supply-side’ economic fame. In 1998, Mr Wanniski wrote that he “became alarmed about the financial collapse in Russia,” and decided to “write a piece on how to fix Russia right away, before it was in complete chaos.” In the Wall Street Journal editorial that followed, Mr Wanniski explained the longer history of the gold-backed rouble idea:
In September 1989, the Soviet government of Mikhail Gorbachev invited me to Moscow for nine days to discuss my unorthodox views on how the U.S.S.R. could make the conversion to a market economy. I’d been arguing that the process had to begin by fixing the ruble price of gold at a credible rate of exchange, which I believed then would be a relatively easy thing to do. I still believe that.
Last week, the former U.S. vice-presidential candidate for the Republican Party, Jack Kemp, wrote a letter to President Bill Clinton. In it he urged him to ask Mr. Yeltsin and his prime-minister nominee, Viktor Chernomyrdin, to consider the gold solution as the quickest and easiest way to end the financial crisis without more suffering by the Russian people.
But gold is preferable in this situation because the Russian government could announce that it will defend the ruble in terms of gold at a rate of 2,000 rubles per ounce and because it has control of the ruble but not the foreign currencies of a currency board. That is, Russia need not have gold ingots backing every last ruble in circulation in order to keep the gold-ruble price stable. It can do so by managing the supply of ruble liquidity, which the government can do easily by buying and selling ruble interest-bearing bonds to Russian banks. It should also make an unlimited amount of the gold-ruble bonds available to ordinary people.
This is how Alexander Hamilton solved the financial crisis that faced the administration of George Washington in 1791. America’s first Treasury Secretary fixed the dollar to gold and promised creditors they would be paid all they were owed at par, with interest. In 1947, West German Finance Minister Ludwig Erhard ended a similar financial crisis by pegging the Deutsche mark to gold. At these times, neither the U.S. nor the German government had any gold. The gold promise worked because their own people understood that their governments were not insolvent, but simply faced a short-term cash crisis. In the same way, the Russian state today has small liabilities, perhaps $200 billion, compared to the assets it possesses, which easily amount to $10 trillion. The state, after all, owns almost everything in 11 time zones, which it acquired in the 1917 revolution. All of these assets can be used to back up the exchange rate by converting them at the ruble price of gold.
On hearing that their government promises to pay ruble debt at a 2,000-to-one gold price — which implies a dollar/gold rate of 7 to 1 at the moment — the Russian people would have to decide if the promise was credible. Would they rather have a gold-ruble bond paying interest at a hard rate of 7 to 1, or a ruble note paying no interest at a collapsing rate of 17 to 1? The question suggests the people would rush to convert ruble notes into ruble bonds.
As it is, the Russian people are transacting among themselves using $40 billion in U.S. currency, while the value of the ruble money supply implodes toward zero. A government gold/ruble peg would quickly bring the people to their banks with dollars, asking for the now more valuable rubles. In short order, the government would have enough dollars to pay Western banks the interest they are owed. As the Russian government creates new ruble liquidity to meet increased demand, the problems with insolvency at Russian banks also are resolved. And as domestic commerce now would flow through ruble tax gates instead of dollar barter, Mr. Yeltsin would be able to pay all back wages in tax rubles instead of fiat money. By fixing to gold instead of a currency-board basket, Russia would be able to collect a bonanza in seigniorage.
If President Clinton wished to follow through on his promise to help President Yeltsin, he could ask his Treasury department to buy $3 billion to $4 billion of the gold-ruble bonds from its Exchange Stabilization Fund. If this happened tomorrow, Russia could meet its dollar obligations this week. If there were any further doubts among Russians about the credibility of a gold ruble, they would dissolve upon seeing the U.S. government actually buying their sovereign ruble debt.
The Russian government would soon be able to hasten an economic expansion through supply-side tax reforms. But first things first. A ruble as good as gold is what Dr. Angell ordered in 1989 and it is what the doctor orders now.
The situation back in 1989 or 1998 was, thus, similar to if even more serious than that faced by Russia today. But if the sanctions war escalates? Things could get worse. Is Mr Putin or his senior advisers aware of what was contemplated above? That gold could provide a workable solution to stabilise the currency and economy? A distinct possibility. How likely is it that they will make this move?
Well, let’s consider the international context. Were Russia to back the rouble with gold today, this would be a far more credible policy than it could ever have been back in 1989 or 1998, when Russia’s government was less stable and less popular, and Russia’s economy was less well-integrated with those of China, Germany and other major economies. Moreover, in recent years Russia has amassed a huge amount of gold reserves. Indeed, at current market prices, Russia’s gold reserves would back a whopping 27% of the narrow rouble money supply! That is a high ratio, far in excess of any other major country and also in excess of the US Fed’s original stipulated gold coverage minimum. Moreover, Russia is a large net exporter, notwithstanding the sanctions, so Russia’s gold reserves, by implication, are likely to continue to grow, rather than decline.
This credibility is also reinforced by the Russian economy’s relatively low debt. Without a large debt to service, there is little temptation or need to inflate the currency. Indeed, Russian interest rates are currently around 10%, implying a generous relative return on rouble cash balances. Imagine the rouble were to be convertible into gold, AND rouble interest rates remained at 10%. This implies a nearly risk-free arbitrage of 10% between the rouble and gold. You can bet than a large number of international investors would quickly sell some gold, dollars, or other currencies, and acquire some roubles, pocketing the hefty interest rate differential. That would support the rouble, possibly leading to a large re-appreciation vis-à-vis the dollar and other currencies left unbacked by gold. Rouble interest rates could then decline, perhaps to quite low levels, where an equilibrium would eventually be reached. It could have worked in 1989, or 1998. It is far more likely to work today.
COULD A GOLDEN ROUBLE CATALYSE A GLOBAL REMONETISATION OF GOLD?
There is another aspect to consider, however, which is the possible impact this policy would have on the dollar and the international monetary system. Recall that, as the primary global reserve currency, the dollar circulates in vast quantities abroad, where it forms the bulk of the monetary reserves of central banks. This is in part what allows the US government and economy generally to finance themselves at such low interest rates. But other factors equal, if the dollar suddenly faces competition from a credible, gold-backed currency, it is likely that, at a minimum, central banks are likely to diversify at least some of their dollar reserves into interest-bearing, gold-backed roubles. Countries importing oil from Russia would have an additional incentive to do so as they would be able to pay for Russian oil imports in roubles and avoid sanctions. Speculators (or investors) anticipating an eventual internationalisation of the rouble would front-run these developments, pocketing a nice return over time.
The implied upward pressure on US interest rates would be perhaps small initially, but even a small rise in US interest rates would spell trouble for a US economy that is so highly leveraged to low rates. Growth would slow. The Fed could try to offset this by engaging in renewed QE, but that could add fuel to the fire, resulting in aggressive selling of dollars in the foreign exchange markets. In an extreme but hardly impossible scenario, the dollar could lose reserve status entirely, something that would be devastating for the US economy. While a sharply weaker dollar would help US competitiveness and exports over time, it would crush the dollar’s effective international purchasing power (eg for oil and other resources) and result in soaring consumer price inflation. The combined negative impact of higher interest rates on growth and rising consumer prices on inflation would make the stagflationary 1970s look like a picnic.
As I argue in my book, THE GOLDEN REVOLUTION, a loss of reserve status for the dollar would have vast repercussions for the international monetary system. While a gold-backed rouble could challenge the dollar to a certain extent, it is unrealistic to think that an economy the size of Russia’s could back the dominant global reserve currency. No, as the dollar’s share declines, most probably multiple alternative currencies begin to serve as reserves. This is where things get interesting, however. Other factors equal, as a currency is used as a reserve, it strengthens that currency. That might be unwelcome in some economies heavily geared toward exports.
Thus dethroning the dollar does not end the currency wars but rather could escalate them further instead as one country after another tried to offset dollar weakness by weakening their own currencies. This sort of ‘race to the bottom’ was seen in the 1920s and 1930s, culminating in US President Roosevelt’s executive decision to devalue the dollar by some 60% in 1934. In that instance, however, the dollar remained backed by gold and by what was by far the largest global economy at that time.
Not so today. The global economy has become increasingly multipolar, with both the euro-area and China roughly as large as the US. Moreover, the US has a huge accumulated and external debt, implying a growing risk of debasement and devaluation in future. As it stands today, only 2.3% of the narrow US money supply is backed by gold. Thus the US is simply no longer in a position to be a ‘monetary hegemon’, providing the global reserve currency.
But as all large economies have their own debt or other financial issues with which to deal, no major currency is in a position to replace the dollar as the pre-eminent reserve. This implies that the global monetary system is highly unstable. The dollar is hardly the only currency at risk of debasement and devaluation. Game theory implies that a race to the bottom is distinct possibility and it is unclear whether the dollar would lead or follow in that race.
As I further argue in my book, this combination of economic multipolarity and the instability of the current global monetary equilibrium is highly likely to result in at least a partial if not full remonetisation of gold, with an associated, large rise in price. Gold is the ideal way for countries to settle their trade imbalances in a world in which trust in currency stability is lacking. Accumulating reserves that can be summarily devalued by trading partners in a currency war is not a rational policy. Yet something must function as a reserve asset if trade is to take place at all. Gold provides that ‘something’ as supply is stable and it cannot be arbitrarily devalued. Backing currencies by gold would thus greatly increase trust and, thereby, facilitate international trade.
Those familiar with the 1870s will note that there are now strong parallels with that important decade. Following German unification and the US recovery from the Civil War, both of these economies were catching up rapidly with Britain. Japan had begun to industrialise. Under these multipolar conditions arose spontaneously, absent formal diplomacy, the classical gold standard system that would underpin decades of arguably the fastest sustained global economic growth ever experienced in history.
SO, WILL PUTIN PLAY THE ‘GOLD CARD’?
Let’s now return to Russia and leave aside a biased western perspective for the moment. Putin has arguably accomplished more for Russia than has any other contemporary leader of a major country. Yes, he may be something of an autocrat, but please show me one major developed country that has never been ruled by an autocrat. (The USA began its life under George III and borrowed the bulk of its legal code and political culture from the UK.) Under Putin’s leadership, Russia has maintained its territorial integrity, something that had been left in question following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and Russia retains a formidable military capable of defending its vast frontiers (although not capable of policing the world). The economy has grown rapidly and, while still resource-dependent, has begun to diversify in various ways. (Keep in mind the young USA was regarded by Europeans as a largely resource-dependent economy.) Russia has built strong economic and political ties not only with the BRICS but also many smaller economies in Eurasia and elsewhere around the world. Russia has only a small accumulated national debt, implying that this will not be a drag on future growth, as is likely to be the case in the US, EU and Japan. Russia also has an advantageous tax system, with a top 13% rate of income tax. Yes, Russia remains an economically unequal society, but we know what has happened to inequality throughout the developed economies in recent decades, not just following the 2008 global financial crisis.
Given these achievements, Putin is not a leader to be taken lightly and we should pay attention when he says it it his desire to end the ‘dictatorship of the dollar’, as he did just this week.  Perhaps he will indeed play the gold card he has hidden up his sleeve and thus kill two birds with one stone: shore up the rouble and Russian economy on the one hand; dethrone the dollar on the other. A period of international monetary and associated economic chaos might ensue, but with Russia suffering already under unwelcome sanctions and thus with relatively less to lose, Putin might calculate that now is the time to make his move. He may have already achieved his place in the Russian history books but imagine how he will be regarded in world history books if he sets in motion that which culminates ultimately in the return to some form of global gold standard.
P.S. This piece also borrows heavily from the insights of my new "hero", Charles Lindbergh Sr...
The New Federation
In previous commentaries; readers have seen scoffs of derision with respect to (arguably) the two, most-important propaganda myths of the 21st century: the New Normal, and the New World Order. The gist of that criticism is that we rarely see anything truly “new” in our lives, in conceptual terms.
The declaration (through propaganda and/or disinformation) that we have two all-encompassing, new paradigms which supposedly comprise our current reality is patently ludicrous, on its surface. Context changes. Principles are immutable...
Yet again; it makes it very clear (in case it wasn't clear enough already) that Edward Snowden was a HERO not (as the Liars claim) "a traitor". After Snowden's revelations that NSA spying was grossly excessive (not to mention illegal/unconstitutional); the Fascists have been given the chance to FIX what is obviously out-of-control "Big Brother" surveillance.
And what have they done (via the ultra-fascist Republican majority)? They have ENDORSED this Orwellian society -- and left absolutely no doubt that all this is intentional, and not merely cloak-and-dagger Bureaucrats running amok.
P.S. Note the source of this scathing editorial: the Corporate media. When even the corrupt mainstream media finds fault with our Traitor Governments, we know they have done something especially despicable.
Bill to Restrict N.S.A. Data Collection Blocked in Vote by Senate Republicans
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked a sweeping overhaul of the once-secret National Security Agency program that collects records of Americans’ phone calls in bulk.
Democrats and a handful of Republicans who supported the measure failed to secure the 60 votes they needed to take up the legislation. The vote was 58 to 42 for consideration.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who drafted the bill, blamed what he said was fear-mongering by the bill’s opponents for its defeat. “Fomenting fear stifles serious debate and constructive solutions,” he said. “This nation deserves more than that.”
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, worked hard to defeat the bill, which had the support of the Obama administration and a coalition of technology companies including Apple, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo...
But the purpose with quoting this excerpt, and the purpose of most of the Lindbergh excerpts I'm presenting here is not simply to verify what I describe in my own writing today, but to demonstrate (via Lindbergh) that even 100 YEARS AGO, these criticisms were already dominant realities in our societies...
All things demonstrate what happens when we accept the kept press falsehoods for truth, believe in the adroit schemes of the wealthy and listen with open mouths to the speeches of Congressmen whose statesmanship consists of sacrificing their constituents in return for kept press support and good committee appointments, and having the privilege of naming their political chums to fat office – these in turn for telling us whom and what to vote for.
We see the national catastrophe when we measure the work of these Congressmen – some of them called “Grand Old Men.” They have served grandly and long the demands of the profiteers. The misfortunes of the people and the peril of the nation are too solemn for jest; but in spite of catastrophe the pretended wise and good Congressmen, their pompous parade for our votes and our blind following, make us look like jokes when we analyze THEIR acts and measure them by OUR votes.
P.S. Note how Lindbergh describes the slack-jawed Zombies of his own era:
[They]...listen with open mouths to the speeches of Congressmen whose statesmanship consists of sacrificing their own constituents.
Phantom Gold Inventories: Has The Comex Already Defaulted?
Gold Market Secretly Decoupling
Decoupling In Precious Metals Markets
Economic Rape of Europe Nearly Complete, Part II
If there IS a "surprise" here, it's that the Fascists were sloppy enough to allow this news to slip out. (As far as I know) there has been no public acknowledgements (by their respective governments) that the gold of Iraq, Libya, and Greece is all gone/stolen. For other nations which still have large quantities of gold, even (supposed) "allies" of the U.S. (like Greece); the message here is clear: WATCH YOUR BACK.
Further indicating how desperate the One Bank is getting -- again -- is news that it's once again pressuring India's government to RE-IMPOSE tight restrictions on gold imports. This is laughable, for two reasons.
First of all; all the empirical evidence from the the FIRST time it engaged in this economic blackmail indicates that the move CAUSED more problems for the Banksters than it solved. Secondly, there is no reason to believe that (official) restrictions on Indian gold imports will do ANYTHING to slow down the (unofficial) flow of gold into that nation -- via smuggling.
How India Evaded The One Bank’s Gold-Embargo
Gold-Squeeze In India Stokes Silver Demand
There are several conclusions which we can draw from all of this:
1) The One Bank is becoming increasingly concerned/desperate with respect to the issue of inventory default in the gold market (and likely the silver market as well).
2) It has ran out of (original) schemes/ideas to delay implosion in the gold market, and now just repeats old schemes.
3) It is RUNNING OUT of gold which can/could still be stolen.
The Countdown continues...
Ukraine Admits Its Gold Is Gone: "There Is Almost No Gold Left In The Central Bank Vault"
Back in March, at a time when the IMF reported that Ukraine's official gold holdings as of the end of February, so just as the State Department-facilitated coup against former president Victor Yanukovich was concluding, amounted to 42.3 tonnes or 8% of reserves...
India readies draconian gold import rules
Long the top importer of gold, India fell behind China in 2013.
The decline in gold consumption came after bullion import duties were pushed up tenfold – from 1% at the start of 2012 to 10% – and other rules such as mandatory re-export of 20% of imports, transaction taxes and even curbs on ETF buying stymied India's gold industry.
The measures worked as intended, bringing down the country's current account deficit and shoring up the rupee. But optimism after the election of business-friendly prime minister Narendra Modi and after the government allowed certain jewellery trading houses to start importing again saw imports surge.
In October Indian jewellers and traders imported 150 tonnes from just 25 tonnes this time last year worth reports Reuters:
"We are working on it. The measures to slow gold imports are almost ready and may be announced today or tomorrow," said the source, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter.
Officials from the finance ministry and Reserve Bank of India (RBI) were considering whether to reimpose import restrictions on "star trading houses" that were eased earlier this year, the source said.
The new measure could be imposing new restrictions on these trading houses, tightening the import-export ratio to 70:30 or even 60:40, and raising the import duties again, but making the rules too draconian only encourages increased smuggling...
It's certainly possible that some readers/Members may find my characterization of Israel's political/military policies as "slow genocide" to be hyperbolic. However, those people may want to re-think their position after reading this article (from an Israel newspaper) "explaining" how/when/why genocide is NECESSARY, titled...
When Genocide Is PERMISSIBLE
Naturally this culture of Murderers wouldn't come right out and advocate the slaughter of the last, few million Palestinians. Rather, they frame this plotted, mass crime-against-humanity rhetorically:
I will conclude with a question for all the humanitarians out there. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clearly stated at the outset of this incursion that his objective is to restore a sustainable quiet for the citizens of Israel. We have already established that it is the responsibility of every government to ensure the safety and security of its people. If political leaders and military experts determine that the only way to achieve its goal of sustaining quiet is through genocide is it then permissible to achieve those responsible goals?
All of those well-respected Terrorists who comprise Israel's apartheid regime don't want people to think (know) that they WANT to perpetrate genocide against the captive, defenseless Palestinian population. Rather, these demented Psychopaths want to frame their crime-against-humanity as being something they are "forced to do".
The Slow-Genocide will continue...
Times of Israel Article: "When Genocide is Permissible" - Just a Little Too Honest
On August 1st, 2014, The Times of Israel posted one of their most honest articles to date. In it, the author openly made the case that in certain circumstances genocide may not only be permissible, but in fact a necessary component of government policy...
This is even MORE disturbing than the other "globalization" trade pacts which have come before this. This becomes immediately apparent when we view what is the reported AGENDA of this so-called "trade agreement".
The following list of issues addressed by this treaty is from a Malaysian news source...
• domestic court decisions and international legal standards (e.g., overriding domestic laws on both trade and nontrade matters, foreign investors’ right to sue governments in international tribunals that would overrule the national sovereignty)
• environmental regulations (e.g., nuclear energy, pollution, sustainability)
• financial deregulation (e.g., more power and privileges to the bankers and financiers)
• food safety (e.g., lowering food self-sufficiency, prohibition of mandatory labeling of genetically modified products, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease)
• Government procurement (e.g., no more buy locally produced/grown)
• Internet freedom (e.g., monitoring and policing user activity)
• labour (e.g., welfare regulation, workplace safety, relocating domestic jobs abroad)
• patent protection, copyrights (e.g., decrease access to affordable medicine)
• public access to essential services may be restricted due to investment rules (e.g., water, electricity, and gas)
Now (on the one hand) if we could actually TRUST our Traitor Governments to negotiate for our benefit rather than for our enslavement, this is the only way to draw-up a proper "free trade" agreement. We must harmonize our economies so that we are all playing on a level field.
However, having DECADES of proof that our Traitor Governments do nothing but conspire against us (and for the Banksters they serve); we know in advance that any "comprehensive" treaty of this nature would be solely for the purpose of completing the destruction of our societies -- and not elevating the societies of less-advanced cultures.
This is GLOBAL FEUDALISM, plain and simple -- turning our planet into a hovel for 7 billion Serfs...and a paradise for a few thousand (hundred?) Oligarchs.
He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
He fights with missiles and with spears.
He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
Been a soldier for a thousand years.
He'a a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
And he knows he shouldn't kill,
And he knows he always will,
Kill you for me my friend and me for you.
And he's fighting for Canada,
He's fighting for France,
He's fighting for the USA,
And he's fighting for the Russians,
And he's fighting for Japan,
And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.
And he's fighting for Democracy,
He's fighting for the Reds,
He says it's for the peace of all.
He's the one who must decide,
Who's to live and who's to die,
And he never sees the writing on the wall.
But without him,
How would Hitler have condemned them at Dachau?
Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
He's the one who gives his body
As a weapon of the war,
And without him all this killing can't go on.
He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
His orders come from far away no more,
They come from here and there and you and me,
And brothers can't you see,
This is not the way we put the end to war.
Definitely some classic verse there, Dylan. One of the unfortunate consequences of the loss of our prosperity is the devolution of "the arts", and music, in particular.
There simply AREN'T any Neil Youngs or Bonos or Dylans or other NEW minstrel/poets who are able to put the outrages of our era to music -- and thus alert (some of) the masses.
"... we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States, that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."
- Rowan Gaither, President of the Ford Foundation speaking to Norman Dodd in his Congressional Special Committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations, 1954
There is no material difference now in the old political parties, except which shall control patronage.
1) He has a superb comprehension of economic dynamics.
2) He has a passion for social and economic justice.
3) He is very clear/eloquent in expressing these dynamics and injustices.
4) As someone who died nearly a century ago; the views he expresses are eerily/explicitly PROPHETIC of what we now see very clearly in our own era.
One year before he died; he published The Economic Pinch (aka "Lindbergh on the Federal Reserve"). It is a brilliant and precise description of everything that is wrong with our economies today, why it is wrong, and how we can reclaim the wealth/prosperity which WE, THE PEOPLE produce but "the Profiteers" now (endlessly) steal from us.
As you see Lindbergh describe in extensive detail the evils of our current economic oppression (and the Oppressors who created this economic yoke); never forget that everything you read here was written nearly 100 years ago. For those not (previously) familiar with the name "Charles Lindbergh" (except for his son, the much-hyped aviator); Lindbergh Sr. is attributed with being the source for The Bankers' Manifesto of 1892.
The Bankers’ Manifesto of 1892
Most of the following quotes will be taken fro The Economic Pinch, but there will be some quotes taken from his earlier speeches/observations, since (fortunately) he was extensively quoted in his own era.
First of all; when Russia buys gold aggressively, this not only increases its own economic power, it really annoys the banksters -- Russia's real enemy. So it's a policy which provides a lot of bang-for-the-ruble. The second point to note here is that Russia is also a major producer of gold.
So (like China) we must suspect that little if any of its domestically mined gold ever leaves the country. And thus (like China) we must suspect that Russia's actual gold reserves are considerably higher than what it officially declares.
For those not aware of this point, let me make it one more time. When nations add to their gold reserves from a domestic source (any domestic source); they are not required to officially report such transactions, and thus not required to DECLARE any gold they have added from domestic sources. Conversely, all gold purchased in international markets must be reported in a timely manner.
Russia's "official" gold reserves are about 1,000 tonnes. But it could easily have double that amount, depending on when it began to add gold from domestic sources. In the case of China, it's much easier to see when their "gold rush" began, because in 2004 China suddenly/radically began ramping-up its gold production.
This is all just an extension of the Golden Rule:
He who has the gold makes the rules.
P.S. Note the next biggest buyers of gold: former satellite states of the Soviet Union, who still have close ties to Moscow.
Putin stockpiles gold as Russia prepares for economic war
Russia's central bank added to its reserves of bullion in the third quarter, according to the latest report from the World Gold Council
Russia has taken advantage of lower gold prices to pack the vaults of its central bank with bullion as it prepares for the possibility of a long, drawn-out economic war with the West.
The latest research from the World Gold Council reveals that the Kremlin snapped up 55 tonnes of the precious metal - far more than any other nation - in the three months to the end of September as prices began to weaken.
Vladimir Putin's government is understood to be hoarding vast quantities of gold, having tripled stocks to around 1,150 tonnes in the last decade. These reserves could provide the Kremlin with vital firepower to try and offset the sharp declines in the rouble.
Russia's currency has come under intense pressure since US and European sanctions and falling oil prices started to hurt the economy. Revenues from the sale of oil and gas account for about 45pc of the Russian government's budget receipts.
The biggest buyers of gold after Russia are other countries from the Commonwealth of Independent States, led by Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan...
According to the information coming out from Sierra Leone, around 500 Ebola patients are now recovering from treatment with nano-silver.
When you consider that in the last 7 months or so there have been around 1700 cases of Ebola and 900 deaths in the whole of W.Africa with a population of 250 million.
It is certainly not a pandemic at present and if nano-silver takes off it isn`t ever likely to be.
Those are the numbers? Lol!
Certainly this indicates that the Ebola scare is being exaggerated by the Western media. It also further increases suspicions about the U.S. cases.
Foreign health-care providers have been on the scene for previous Ebola outbreaks. There were never any occurrences of the disease after they had returned home (and with ridiculously lax quarantine procedures on top of it).
TA, I was wildly enthusiastic about some parts of this article, so I'll post that excerpt first:
[After quoting all the pseudo-experts who laughed at the possibility of a "crash" in 1929)
[quote]I hear nearly identical statements from pro-mainstream, pro-dollar skeptics all the time. And all of their assertions rest solely on the illusion of the Dow and the dollar index, not to mention statistics that are sourced from the very government that has much to gain by fooling the public into believing all is well.
In 2009, Paul Krugman, perhaps the worst and most famous economist of our age, lamented on the fact that no one in mainstream finance saw the derivatives and credit crash coming. Yet it is the same kinds of manipulative policies that Krugman champions that caused this collective ignorance in mainstream circles to begin with.
What the past proves, time and time again, is that establishment trained and educated economists are perhaps the most useless of all analysts. They are perpetually wrong. Only independent analysts have ever been able to predict anything of value as far as our economic future — not because they are psychic, but because they have the advantage of standing outside the foggy propaganda of brainwashed financial academia.
It also proves that the appearance of prosperity means nothing if the fundamentals do not support the optimism. That is to say, a bullish stock market, a high dollar index and a low unemployment percentage mean nothing if such stats are generated by false methods and fiat. The fundamentals ALWAYS matter. As we saw during the Great Depression, the markets cannot hide from reality forever.[/quote]
This is all bang-on, especially the middle paragraph. However, after that (in my opinion) this analyst goes astray:
The plan is to introduce a basket currency system as an alternative to the dollar as world reserve, then slowly but surely phase out all sovereign currencies until the basket becomes a currency itself - the ONLY currency. Former World Bank Chief Economist Justin Yifu Lin seems to agree with this ideology, arguing that national currencies must be replaced with a supranational currency, and pointing out that no single currency has the strength to stand alone as world reserve...
Yes, Western banksters would very much like to cobble together another, totally fraudulent "currency" to replace their worthless/debauched Western currencies -- and call it "reserve currency". The problem is that China (and the Rest of the World) won't allow this.
Now some might argue that it's me who is "reading the tea leaves" incorrectly here. However, because I was interested in what this guy had to say, I did some more reading -- another one of his commentaries which was linked to in this one.
And this is what I found:
With the end of the Federal Reserve taper now complete, and questions circling as to when interest rates will be raised, a market volatility not seen since 2008-2009 is returning.
This is all, entirely delusional.
1) There has been no "tapering". Every dollar which the Fed Liars have pretended to "taper" they have replaced with counterfeiting.
Federal Reserve Increases Counterfeiting
Debunking Tapering Mythology
2) Western governments (and their central bank Masters) can/will NEVER "raise interest rates", because doing so would quickly bankrupt all these Deadbeat regimes with higher interest payments.
Thus we have yet another commentator with good reasoning skills, and a good grasp of economic fundamentals, and even a partial knowledge of all the scams/lies/frauds taking place. But because he still lives inside the Wonderland Matrix, what he says is basically worthless -- because it's almost impossible to tell where the "sound analysis" ends and the delusions begin.
There was another excerpt (which I can't find at the moment) where he referred to Western bond markets as being legitimate -- and even talked about these worthless bonds (already priced at the highest levels in history) "increasing in value".
When viewing the thoughts of (especially) commentators in the Alternative Media we can never allow ourselves to be "cheerleaders". What I mean by that is we must ALWAYS begin with our focus on the parts of an analysis which are weak/flawed. It is only if we fail to find such flaws/weaknesses, or we are able to dismiss the flaws/weaknesses as "minor" that we can extract any value from the good parts of these analyses.
Conversely, with any/every commentary which does contain some major flaw (even only one), this generally invalidates the ENTIRE piece.
Will be interesting to keep an eye on events to see how they harmonise with the above. Meantime, some food for thought in reply to your comments
On the existence of God: - St Thomas
God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel. He added his commandments and precepts.
If thou wilt keep the commandments and perform acceptable fidelity for ever, they shall preserve thee. He hath set water and fire before thee: stretch forth thy hand to which thou wilt. Before man is life and death, good and evil, that which he shall choose shall be given him: For the wisdom of God is great, and he is strong in power, seeing all men without ceasing. The eyes of the Lord are towards them that fear him, and he knoweth all the work of man."
"For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him."
And I understand your sentiments entirely: the "Enemy of my Enemy" is not necessarily my friend. We can applaud another move to undermine the USD (and the One Bank's whole, fraudulent system) without applauding the entity which is engaging in this move. It's very similar to how I commend the actions of China (frequently), then add the caveat that China's government only appears "benign" when stacked against our own traitorous, wholly corrupt regimes.
I also agree with you that this is one possible "reason" why the U.S. has stopped supporting/funding/arming ISIS, and made it the new Boogeyman. However, I would suggest different causality.
As pointed out in the wonderfully documented clip at SCGNews.com; creating nasty "terrorist" entities, and then demonizing/attacking them is one of the oldest "plays" in the U.S. Playbook. Thus ISIS didn't need to engage in any provocative move in order to become the new Boogeyman -- it was always "in the cards".
Rather, I see as much more likely that this is a REACTION by ISIS to the betrayal by their (former) Benefactor -- the U.S. government. How do you strike back at these back-stabbers, when you (obviously) can't confront them militarily? By an economic attack.
Obvioiusly ISIS knows (as well as anyone) that Gaddhafi's plan (in Libya) to create a "gold-backed African currency" is what got him killed -- as being the proverbial "stake through the heart" of this Vampire. Obviously nothing they can do (really do) can make them more of an Enemy, so why not do what they can to strike back at the U.S.??
|Thursday, 20 November 2014 11:58|
|Monday, 17 November 2014 14:10|
|Monday, 10 November 2014 13:49|
|Monday, 03 November 2014 13:20|
|Monday, 27 October 2014 12:40|
|Sunday, 19 October 2014 13:44|
|Saturday, 11 October 2014 14:50|
|Monday, 06 October 2014 13:06|
|Tuesday, 30 September 2014 23:46|
|Monday, 29 September 2014 15:53|
My twitter updates
My kunena updates
Eric Dubin – They Could Conceivably Kill the COMEX in Gold & Silver Talk on Saturday, 22 November 2014 16:44
http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National Office/2012/04/Big Banks Big Secret.pdf
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
I have felt very fortunate to have been a research...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
I have felt very fortunate to have been a research...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
Editor's note: Let me add another caveat here, sin...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
[quote]Thanks Jeff, We try to present the real i...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
Thanks Jeff, We try to present the real informati...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
[quote]Jeff: too broad a brush on alternative medi...
Disinformation Unmasked: The Alternative Media Exposed
Jeff: too broad a brush on alternative media; the...
Death of the Dollar
Jeff: Obama's history is rife with Marxist ideolog...
Death of the Dollar
Jeff: Obama's history is rife with Marxist ideolo...
Death of the Dollar
[quote]Jeff: the only part of your excellent post ...