Why are Robots Changing the Future?

Posted Aug 30, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Do you think that robots will eliminate a lot of jobs in the future?

EH

ANSWER: Yes. But you have to understand WHY are we even turning to robots. The answer to that question is TAXES & SOCIALISM! The bottom line is rather blunt. Any routine job that can be replaced by allowing the consumer to choose their own order to be it at a fast-food store or the internet will be at risk along with jobs that are easily be defined by a mathematical or logic equation will be at risk in the future. Many companies are now limiting workers to 33 hours per week or less to simply avoid having to provide benefits and pensions.

Health reform is ABSOLUTELY vital for the future. To be able to provide REASONABLE health care at a reasonable cost DEMANDS tort reform. This is what is driving the cost of medicine really high because the doctors have to pay huge insurance fees because of the lawyers. Turn on the radio and you hear ads for lawyers all the time. They are the NUMBER ONE occupation among those in Congress so you can bet they will NEVER provide tort reform against their own industry. This idea of universal health care is a real joke. They will make comparisons to Europe, but fail to explain that doctors work for the government in most cases.

Obamacare really escalated the entire problem. What Obama pulled off was the idea that forcing the youth to buy insurance would reduce the cost for those who really needed it. There were ZERO reforms and just more bureaucracy. You cannot get the benefits without reforming the system.

Then throw in the pension crisis. This is leading to growing part-time employment and makes robots VERY attractive to replace jobs because they do not require benefits and salaries. As for universal income, here we go again. This is another ploy where we keep trying to come up with schemes that support a system that is failing. Deal with the heart of the issue and just maybe we might get somewhere.

Let’s eliminate the income tax and adopt a new system which will not make labor outrageously expensive.

Connecting the Dots Behind the Curtain? - Like a Thriller novel !

Posted Aug 24, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

There is an interesting piece running around the internet that someone has put together. Indeed, the characters in the play are all incredibly connected and it certainly appears that there is a deep and dark conspiracy against Trump. But this is not against Trump simply because they do not like him personally. This is about removing an outsider from Washington. These are just the tip of the iceberg. There is a lot more going on behind the curtain. Don’t forget, it was Lois Lerner who abused the IRSto target conservative groups who wanted to drain the swamp before Trump. She argued that her testimony should be sealed and that she feared for her life if everyone she targeted using the IRS found out. She was given full paid leave from the IRS on May 23, 2013. In May 2014, Lerner was declared in contempt of Congress in connection with the invocation of her Fifth Amendment not to testify on the matter before a congressional committee. So she took the 5th claiming it might criminally expose here, and then Comey declares she committed no crime and would not prosecute her.

---

Connecting some dots

Here’s what it looks like when all the pieces are sewn together. It smells like conspiracy and treason. Everyone needs to read this. Slowly, and patiently, because it’s very important……

From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

A Grand Jury had been impaneled.  Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”. Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.

Look who took over this investigation in 2005: None other than James Comey; Coincidence? Guess who was transferred into the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? None other than, Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner. Isn’t that interesting? But this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right?

Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005?

No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.

Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame?

Another coincidence (just an anomaly in statistics and chances), but it was Robert Mueller.

What do all four casting characters have in common?  They all were briefed and/or were front-line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation. Another coincidence, right?

Fast forward to 2009….

James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin.

Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, official government business, on her own personal email server. The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of the Hillary. Like all good public servants do, supposedly looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.

Now you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t, America got absolutely nothing out of it. However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow gets paid 500K for a one-hour speech; then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours.

Ok, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.

Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during this time frame? Yep, He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009.

Who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland? None other than, Rod Rosenstein. And what happened to the informant?

The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.

How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise? Very soon after; the sale was approved $145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal.

Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division? None other than, – Lois Lerner. Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences, nothing to see here, right?

Let’s fast forward to 2015.

Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that the Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server. He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email.

Sparing you the State Departments cover-up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

Now, this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013? None other than James Comey; who secured 17 no-bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer? Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh?

Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and he exonerates her. Nope…. couldn’t find any crimes there.

In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy. They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury!

Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 8th of 2016, and exonerates the Hillary from any wrongdoing. Do you see the pattern?

It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.

FISA Abuse, political espionage….. pick a crime, any crime, chances are…… this group and a few others did it:

• All the same players.
• All compromised and conflicted.
• All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves
• All connected in one way or another to the Clinton’s.

They are like battery acid; they corrode and corrupt everything they touch. How many lives have these two destroyed?

As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.  Let us not forget that Comey’s brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes.

The person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies? Yep, that would be Hillary R. Clinton.

Now, who is LISA BARSOOMIAN? Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background.

Lisa H. Barsoomian, an Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protégé of James Comeyand Robert Mueller. Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998. Lawrence also represented:

• Robert Mueller three times;
• James Comey five times;
• Barack Obama 45 times;
• Kathleen Sebelius 56 times;
• Bill Clinton 40 times; and
• Hillary Clinton 17 times.

Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.

You may be saying to yourself, OK, who cares? Who cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman?

Apparently, someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets (?). Someone out there cares so much that even the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian.

Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing the Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. Although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa Barsoomian at NIH which is a .gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities. Is Barsoomian a possible CIA operative?

It’s a cover, no big deal right? What does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?  It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix …. and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and-the Russians. Clapper and Comey admitted that they were even spying on Trump during the election.

Why does Barsoomian, possible CIA operative, merit any mention?

BECAUSE….

She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s WIFE!

Will Impeachment Make the Market Decline?

Posted Aug 24, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

Trump has said that if he left office, the stock market would decline. Those who are against Trump have actually made comments like: “It’s a ridiculous remark — the kind of thing a Latin American dictator or a Middle Eastern strongman would say to keep supporters in line.” This was carried by CNBC and all this is, is opinion and they then market that as fact. We cannot address such issues from a personal opinion perspective. Why have I said it would create volatility and disrupt the world economy? Simply said, history repeats.

It is pointless to offer my opinion and then say it is better than anyone else. The famous saying in politics is that Everyone has an opinion the same as an asshole. That is probably the bluntest statement on the subject I have ever heard. The only thing we can do is look at what happened when Nixon was subjected to impeachment. Taking down Nixon had a profound impact and created the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. Paul Volcker commented economically on what happened with the Nixon impeachment – “[I]t was not until the events of 1974 and 1975, when a recession sprung on an unsuspecting world with an intensity unmatched in the post-World War II period, that the lessons of the ‘New Economics’ were seriously challenged.” (see Rediscovery of the Business Cycle)

So will the impeachment of Donald Trump really screw up the world economy? Absolutely!!!!! Pence as President would reversal just about every policy. World trade would go into turmoil. Taxes would start to rise again. The reason the market would DECLINE is rather simple – CONFIDENCE would decline!!!!!!!! Anyone who pretends you can remove any president by impeachment without disruption to the economy is plain and simple not someone who understand history, markets, or the economy. The Clinton impeachment was more of a slap on the rist. Nobody expected him to actually be removed from office.

The Clinton Impeachment they held off as to not impact the elections, which is not the case right now. They are pushing this to undermine the Republicans so the Democrats can take charge and then remove Trump. Nobody expected Clinton to be removed from office so it was more of a sideshow. The attempt to go after Trump is entirely different. This is the Deep State trying to take back control. Even the Nixon impeachment was about the Rule of Law and a coverup. Clinton committed perjury which was a crime he actually did before a Grand Jury for which prison would be imposed. Even Martha Stewart was sent to prison for lying to a government agent not even under oath.

What we are dealing here is the confidence in government as a whole. The only thing Trump can do is ride it out and go to the Supreme Court. So buckle up is this is what they try to put together now.

Life-insurance is always paying back with a cheaper dollar.

Real Estate & Understanding The Role of Debt

Posted Aug 22, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you so much for what you all do.

I was just reading today’s Blog 17-08-2018 –  ‘ Real Estate – Leverage – Transition to the Reset ‘.   The bit I did not understand was where it was written  ‘ Keep in mind that as the currency declines, then the repayment cost of a mortgage declines. One the one hand, mortgages will be unavailable but those who hold the mortgage lose the most ‘

My question is when the Reset happens in which way will the mortgage holders lose the most even if the repayment cost of a mortgage declines ?  I live in the UK

thank you so much

ANSWER: Since I posted that chart from Socrates that illustrates real estate, many people have written in to ask where can they find that on Socrates. This is part of the pro-version that will be release WE HOPE for the WEC this year. Here are the real estate markets covered by Socrates at this time.

What I mean when I say that those who hold mortgages lose in such a situation of a decline in the purchasing power of a currency is basic. The city of Detroit suspended its payments on bonds in 1937. They resumed in 1963. Now they say they never defaulted. However, they paid back with cheaper dollars. The holder of a mortgage or a bond charges interest which is supposed to be more than the inflation rate. When inflation exceeds the interest rate, then you are paying back with cheaper dollars.

Take a life-insurance policy. If you bought one in the 1940s and it was for the huge amount of $5,000, after funeral costs of say $1,500, you left your heirs a sizable chunk of money. Today, that is nothing and will cover at best 20% of the cost of a funeral. Life-insurance is always paying back with a cheaper dollar. This is the problem in Europe. Greece, Italy, and Spain were accustomed to paying their past debts with a cheaper currency. When they converted their debts to the Euro and the Euro doubled in value, suddenly they went into deflation and cannot pay their debts and survive.

The borrower always benefits over the long-run because they are traditionally paying back with cheaper currency. If you took out a mortgage in 2007 when the pound hit 2.11 and you paid it off in 2016 when the pound was 1.18, you saved 44% in real terms of currency. This is what was behind the real estate boom that government and the vast majority of people do not understand. One of the reasons I have been blamed for creating the take over boom back in the 1980s, was that I had shown some of the takeover playing how to use currency. In the case of Alan Bond who bought all the Courage Pubs back then, we were borrowing in a currency that was declining against the pound. I showed him and others how to take debt and convert it into a performing asset. They were the fun times.

The Iranian Revolution of 1979 will be followed by another counter-revolution probably in 2022.

TRUTH is so precious that she should Always be attended by a Bodyguard of Lies

Posted Aug 21, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Do you support the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Iran deal?

ANSWER: Iran has no intention of actually conforming with that agreement. But that is really a side issue. There is a significant displeasure with the religious government in Iran. This is indeed been rising since the Arab Spring. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 will be followed by another counter-revolution probably in 2022. Iran has suppressed its people for far too long and it will rise up in yet another revolution. The government is at war in the Middle East against Saudi Arabia because of a political-religious philosophy. They seek to export their beliefs to others and that is the problem. If they would just adopt live-and-let-live policy things would be much calmer.

I do not support the USA sticking its nose into everything. This is the inherent problem when you have military establishments. As I have said before, the days of Empire Building are gone. China, Russia, and the USA have no desire to occupy each other. Both Erdogan and Iran are still clinging to this idea of reestablishing Empires. The major powers are engaged in proxy wars. It really makes no sense to intervene for it only inspires hatred.

Franklin Roosevelt lied to the people because Americans were isolationists. You have to understand that you MUST always separate the PEOPLE from the Government and its POLITICIANS. The Americans fled Europe and wanted no part of the political nonsense there. FDR appeared in Boston and said he wanted to send arms to Britain but not troops. Boston was predominantly Irish. They did not want to go to war to defend Britain when they view that Britain supposed the Irish. FDR lied to the people and claimed ending the embargo and shipping arms to Britain would KEEP America at peace. He said:

Let no group assume the exclusive label of the “peace bloc.” We all belong to it … I give you my deep and unalterable conviction, based on years of experience as a worker in the field of international peace, that by the repeal of the embargo the United States will more probably remain at peace than if the law remains as it stands today … Our acts must be guided by one single, hardheaded thought — keeping America out of the war.

Governments have ALWAYS lied about every war to justify it. It is the people who pay the price of war while the politicians reap only the glory and not the hardship. Even if we look at the civil war between Octavian and Marc Antony, he always distanced himself from making it outright appear as a civil war against Antony. His victory coin simply stated Egypt was Captured – not Antony. In this manner, he always managed to keep it as a war between himself and Cleopatra.

If Marc Antony did not commit suicide as the story is told, Octavian surely would have killed him anyway. There was just no circumstance in where he could proclaim a victory over a Roman who had at least been a friend of Julis Caesar and a Roman of distinction. The image of the war had to be against Cleopatra politically. Antony was simply portrayed as being delusional and under her spell. Hence, he was not really culpable for his actions.

So how we portray war and an enemy has always been subject to manipulation. I would NEVER accept what is said by any side as being the truth. Winston Churchill said: “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.

Modern Love – Internet – Changing Patterns in Marriage/Divorce

Posted Aug 21, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: I enjoyed your article on gold and how trends change with the generations. I find it very true that my children looked at me with my silver bars and just asked so what can you really do with it? I have watched the youtube video when people choose the chocolate bar over a bar of silver. Things do change and we should ask if we are judging the world only by own own beliefs rather than trying to see what others think.

Thank you for the food for thought. The world is not always black and white.

BDV

REPLY: The Economist just published a piece on how the internet has changed the dating scene among the youth.  How people now meet is almost 70% online. A church is the lowest, primary schools are #2, college #3, bars #4, and introductions among friends #1. How people are meeting has changed and even how marriage has evolved over the centuries is even more interesting from a cyclical perspective. The Economist stated that the first personal advertisement for marriage took place back in 1695. Traditionally, the man was twice the age going into the 19th century because he first had to establish himself and then prove he could support a wife and family. As the industrial revolution began to mature, the age difference declined by the end of the 19th century as men were able to support a family at an earlier age. It was common up until the Great Depression for the man to be 15 years older before he could afford a wife.

It was the birth of Socialism where society was drastically changed. The age difference collapsed nearly the same age as socialism expanded but the divorce rate soared. No longer did the boy have to prove he could afford a wife, government social programs filled the gap. However, not only did Socialism change marriage, it also changed the family structure. No longer did you have several children because that was your retirement. The average family size declined and children no longer saved to take care of their parents. Now we have the internet changing dating but what is really interesting is that the cycle has changed and the age difference is back on the rise. It seems that boys do not become men until at least 10 years after a girl becomes a woman. This difference in maturity is making itself known once again. Younger women are now seeking older men especially in Europe where unemployment among the youth is at 60% in the southern regions.

What does have the women upset is that studies show that men live longer with younger wives who probably keep them more active. Yet, when a woman marries a younger man, the opposite takes place and her life-span declines. Perhaps because she had to take care of a grown child. These studies in themselves have caused a lot of controversies. Perhaps everything is just returning to what it was before socialism. Young women expect boys to be men and thus that has been the challenge post-1930. I can say from my personal experience, my father was 15 years older than my mother. It was nice that after he died in 1983, she was still with us until 2018 with her mind intact